Really? It's pretty clear here, put the resonance up and move the cut off slider (slowly so it's easier to hear) .. Then compare it to some analog synth filter or for example Diva .. It's not smooth like it should bekmonkey wrote:
I still can't hear "stepping". I hear filter going through various octaves just like in any other synth
LuSH-101
-
penguinfromdeep penguinfromdeep https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=193898
- KVRAF
- 1993 posts since 18 Nov, 2008
circuit modeling and 0-dfb filters are cool
-
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
Here we go. This file compares the basic oscillators: saw, square and square sub-oscillator and mostly focuses on the bass. Towards the end there are some filter sweeps using envelope to cutoff. With and without resonance.
http://soundcloud.com/zenpunkhippy/d16- ... -vs-sh-101
The 2 sounds at the start are both synths playing together to show that they're in tune. After that we alternate between each synth playing the same pattern. The SH-101 is sequenced via the CV inputs using the Sequentix Cirklon, which is sending the same pattern to Logic via USB MIDI. Parameters and volume matched as closely as possible.
Peace,
Andy.
http://soundcloud.com/zenpunkhippy/d16- ... -vs-sh-101
The 2 sounds at the start are both synths playing together to show that they're in tune. After that we alternate between each synth playing the same pattern. The SH-101 is sequenced via the CV inputs using the Sequentix Cirklon, which is sending the same pattern to Logic via USB MIDI. Parameters and volume matched as closely as possible.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
-
- KVRAF
- 13777 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Seattle
Nice ^^^ Andy. Thanks for that. Very interesting.
I'm not a musician, but I've designed sounds that others use to make music. http://soundcloud.com/obsidiananvil
-
penguinfromdeep penguinfromdeep https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=193898
- KVRAF
- 1993 posts since 18 Nov, 2008
Thanks for posting this. I can hear a difference especially the lower regions, to me the difference is quite big even in the low quality soundcloud file. When you add resonance the difference becomes more obvious.ZenPunkHippy wrote:Here we go. This file compares the basic oscillators: saw, square and square sub-oscillator and mostly focuses on the bass. Towards the end there are some filter sweeps using envelope to cutoff. With and without resonance.
http://soundcloud.com/zenpunkhippy/d16- ... -vs-sh-101
Ok on second listen I was mixing it up a bit ... Lush 101 first then real HW. The real deal has more presence somehow...
circuit modeling and 0-dfb filters are cool
-
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
Some things I noticed while setting this up ...
There is a little bit more punch at note on with the real SH-101. The bass is a little bit more present with certain settings, particularly the very low notes. The filter sweeps are pretty close but not perfectly accurate. WIth the resonance turned up the bass is more obvious with the real 101.
Worth noting that from the starting point I had to make minor adjustments the CV pitch amount sent to the SH-101 a total of 3 times to keep it in tune.
I also spent some time setting up Diva to see how close it could get. It's definitely capable of the same or very similar sounds and of course it sounds excellent. However, the interface is different enough to make copying sounds more time consuming.
The great thing about LuSH-101 is that it's basically a one-to-one copy of the SH-101 interface, so finding the same sound or just tweaking out while playing is very intuitive (for me, since I'm in familiar territory). As I mentioned earlier in the thread there are some minor differences e.g. the envelope decay and amount would be positioned slightly differently to get the same sound but it's hardly a complaint.
This might be because my SH-101 is in dire need of a service. The pulse width and PWM on the SH-101 has not worked since I purchased it 2nd hand.
@ penguinfromdeep - yes the real thing sounds a bit "phatter" and that is of course a nice thing to have, but it's not something that bothers me a lot. The plugin has proved itself to be more than capable of being an excellent SH-101 emulation. The extra features take it to another level altogether.
Peace,
Andy.
There is a little bit more punch at note on with the real SH-101. The bass is a little bit more present with certain settings, particularly the very low notes. The filter sweeps are pretty close but not perfectly accurate. WIth the resonance turned up the bass is more obvious with the real 101.
Worth noting that from the starting point I had to make minor adjustments the CV pitch amount sent to the SH-101 a total of 3 times to keep it in tune.
I also spent some time setting up Diva to see how close it could get. It's definitely capable of the same or very similar sounds and of course it sounds excellent. However, the interface is different enough to make copying sounds more time consuming.
The great thing about LuSH-101 is that it's basically a one-to-one copy of the SH-101 interface, so finding the same sound or just tweaking out while playing is very intuitive (for me, since I'm in familiar territory). As I mentioned earlier in the thread there are some minor differences e.g. the envelope decay and amount would be positioned slightly differently to get the same sound but it's hardly a complaint.
This might be because my SH-101 is in dire need of a service. The pulse width and PWM on the SH-101 has not worked since I purchased it 2nd hand.
@ penguinfromdeep - yes the real thing sounds a bit "phatter" and that is of course a nice thing to have, but it's not something that bothers me a lot. The plugin has proved itself to be more than capable of being an excellent SH-101 emulation. The extra features take it to another level altogether.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
-
penguinfromdeep penguinfromdeep https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=193898
- KVRAF
- 1993 posts since 18 Nov, 2008
Yes you are right, they are quite close anyways ... Lush sounds great in higher registers for sure, maybe with some eq one could add some bass and then it would be more ballsy
circuit modeling and 0-dfb filters are cool
-
- KVRAF
- 2802 posts since 31 Aug, 2011
OK, curiosity got the better of me so i gave it another try. Whilst doing so i kind of imbeciled on the fact that, contrary to what is stated in the demo notice, you can save your progress after all if you use the hosts preset manager and save into a bank. (.fxb)
So if you were, like me, massively put off by the fact that you would lose your progress after each timeout, this is how you can avoid that. Of course you will still have to restart the synth and reload the bank, but considering the alternative (back to square one) i think thats pretty acceptable.
Note: Of course i cannot guarantee that this will work with every host. It was pure coincidence that i found out that it works with mine (and i didnt try any other) so just try it and see if youre lucky.
Off to some tweaking...
So if you were, like me, massively put off by the fact that you would lose your progress after each timeout, this is how you can avoid that. Of course you will still have to restart the synth and reload the bank, but considering the alternative (back to square one) i think thats pretty acceptable.
Note: Of course i cannot guarantee that this will work with every host. It was pure coincidence that i found out that it works with mine (and i didnt try any other) so just try it and see if youre lucky.
Off to some tweaking...
-
- KVRist
- 191 posts since 12 Aug, 2004 from Niigata Japan and Santiago Chile
i've just compared this to cypher(synthsquad) these are my "fat soft synths" and lush sounds just "thin"
Who is this doing this synthetic type of alpha beta psychedelic funkin'?
-
- KVRAF
- 2973 posts since 10 Sep, 2003 from Karlskoga, Stockholm, Sweden
in what mode?ulozilla wrote:i've just compared this to cypher(synthsquad) these are my "fat soft synths" and lush sounds just "thin"
-
- KVRist
- 191 posts since 12 Aug, 2004 from Niigata Japan and Santiago Chile
High quality mode in Lush 101, is the low end what fails in lush thoCrackbaby wrote:in what mode?ulozilla wrote:i've just compared this to cypher(synthsquad) these are my "fat soft synths" and lush sounds just "thin"
Who is this doing this synthetic type of alpha beta psychedelic funkin'?
-
- KVRAF
- 15135 posts since 7 Sep, 2008
Wow thanks Andy.
EDIT: I'm an eediot. Listened quickly on headphones and thought the second test (the octave higher one) was the software
Numpty alert!
They are quite similar, so d16 will get a sale I'm happy to say
EDIT: I'm an eediot. Listened quickly on headphones and thought the second test (the octave higher one) was the software
Numpty alert!
They are quite similar, so d16 will get a sale I'm happy to say
Last edited by Mushy Mushy on Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I was wondering if you'd like to try Magic Mushrooms"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
-
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
I don't think the difference is that huge, and it wasn't my intention to show that Lush-101 sounds weak. This is a fairly extreme test, because the bass is usually the main complaint about soft synths. When tweaking this sucker out, it sounds pretty much identical.
Try playing the same acid line with notes alternating between hardware and software. Tweak the filter cutoff at the same rate - it's very easy to get lost as to which is which.
Plus the spacey strings I'm getting out of poly mode with FX make it worth the price alone. All IMHO of course.
Peace,
Andy.
Try playing the same acid line with notes alternating between hardware and software. Tweak the filter cutoff at the same rate - it's very easy to get lost as to which is which.
Plus the spacey strings I'm getting out of poly mode with FX make it worth the price alone. All IMHO of course.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
-
- KVRist
- 330 posts since 30 May, 2005
Andy that was great. You did an amazing job matching the two so precisely. It is very interesting to hear the differences, they are slight but substantial at the same time, in that the extra weight that the real thing has is, I feel, one of the key things that most people notice about the difference between analog and virtual. That click at the start of each note and thump in the bass along with an almost overdriven growly quality that is subtle but powerful.
It will be interesting to see if Lush can be tweaked with post processing to get a similar result, given that it is so nearly there now as it is.
It will be interesting to see if Lush can be tweaked with post processing to get a similar result, given that it is so nearly there now as it is.
-
- KVRAF
- 2488 posts since 2 Dec, 2004 from Sydney, Australia
-
- KVRAF
- 2973 posts since 10 Sep, 2003 from Karlskoga, Stockholm, Sweden
Andy, have you tried The Drop yet? With full resonance you can sweep the cutoff down to zero and you won't overload your output. Very few software synths work like this (lush does not unfortunately). It was a very long time since i worked with analog hardware and i can't remember how it was. Back then i used analog mixers and volume/gain was all over the place.
How is it with the real sh-101? Other synths you know? The drop is very pleasant this way as you don't have to fear for your ears and speakers!
How is it with the real sh-101? Other synths you know? The drop is very pleasant this way as you don't have to fear for your ears and speakers!