Xils-Lab miniSyn'X [A new happy user : Mr Jean-Michel Jarre ]

[Lotuzia]

Thanks Lotuzia
Personally I must say, it would be nice to see more presets in the plugin.
What you can see also in my later video, the plugin is not very light on CPU. Some patches are quite heavy

Rellay enjoyed listening to it
I think there are around 260 presets in the MiniSyn'X.( There are much more in the Syn'X ) I was able to make tracks with up to 14 instances of the Mini + external reverbs + limiter etc without having to freeze anything. I'd say its much less CPU intensive than some comparable synths with similar uncompromised audio quality and analog sound signature. If the CPU is high for some patches you can try the following : Adjust the polyphony per layer to suit the part you played. Reduce the Release time and maybe compensate with reberb etc. This beeing said, its not a lightweight synth like NI FM8 or Largo

Also for patches, I think/hope a lot of people will make their own patches with the Smart Load/Random Load function. On Double ( Dual Layer sounds ) it can make wonders, and you're only a click far to some great patches.

[PatchAdamz]

More sound demos please!
Great one Mr. P Adamz!

I wanted to get close to a Jarre type Elka emulation with the miniSyn'X.
Here is one:

https://soundcloud.com/vintage-synth-pads/the-hardware

[Sendy]

Can someone explain zero delay feedback PWM to me please?

I can understand 0df filters, because filters need feedback to make resonance. But PWM is a change in duty cycle - it's a matter of timing relative to the period of the wave. Seemingly no feedback there to have zero delay of. I may be completely igonrant of something going on under the hood here, as my knowledge is just as an enduser, and a self-taught one at that.

Either way, I'm going to check this out, as I love PWM, and if this can deliver fresher sounding PWM then I'll be all over it!

Isn't 0dfb commonly used to mean topology-preserving ? Perhaps this is a case of that.

Yes. As I see it : In an analog synthesizer, everything happens, and interacts, instantaneously, and simultaneously. While code is sequential. Pulse Width Cross Modulation, Sync, and filters are some examples of these instantaneous/simultaneous interactive process more/less commonly found on analog synthesizers.

From the MiniSyn'X manual : 'PWM: Pulse Width Cross-Modulation (from the other Oscillator) select button. When ON, the width is controlled by the waveform of the other oscillator. This results in a very rapid change in harmonics, close to the ring modulation effect. If no other wave form are selected, when ON, this button let the oscillator to output a width controlled pulse with the same algorithm than the Synthex. '

As an audible result, afaic : On certain presets, and kind of sounds, the new algorithm makes a great difference.

Yeah, the cross-PWM does sound great. Actually, it's a great sounding synth! But we have synths with audio-rate control processing already. How is this any quicker? The value of wave a is read and added (via attenuation) to the duty cycle of wave b. How long does that take? One sample? Does this one sample really make a difference?

In the case of filters, I can see why instantaneous responses are vital - there is feedback, meaning small changes are magnified by the feedback loop. With cross PWM (from one wave to another) - there is no feedback, surely? So no reason to try to read into the future.

Perhaps this zero delay comes into it's own when both waves are x-PWM-ing eachother. THAT would definitely be a feedback loop, because instant changes to wave a would cause instant changes to wave b, and so on, back and fourth - and to be honest miniSyn'x really does excel at those sounds, so perhaps this is where the payoff is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock Xils-Lab's claims here, just understand them, and in which situations they pay off. For example, would it help with normal PWM with an LFO? There's no feedback going on here, nor is there feedback (to my knowledge) in one wave modulating the duty cycle of another at audio rate. So my guess is that mutual x-mod is where this really comes into play, because that involves instantaneous feedback ? But perhaps there's a small benefit to be had across the board by this new techology?

Anyway, I'm looking forwards to this synth's big brother. It really does sound good!

[tutomao]

miniSyn'x is so great, thanks.

[sfd]

Don't remember if anyone already posted this one.
Either way...its worth a second look !

[Kriminal]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock Xils-Lab's claims here, just understand them, and in which situations they pay off. For example, would it help with normal PWM with an LFO? There's no feedback going on here, nor is there feedback (to my knowledge) in one wave modulating the duty cycle of another at audio rate. So my guess is that mutual x-mod is where this really comes into play, because that involves instantaneous feedback ? But perhaps there's a small benefit to be had across the board by this new techology?

So its the osc output going into the PWM thats the 'new tech' in question here?

ie in a mod matrix it would be

source amt dest
osc1 50 osc2 pwm

edited to add question mark...

[Lotuzia]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock Xils-Lab's claims here, just understand them, and in which situations they pay off. For example, would it help with normal PWM with an LFO? There's no feedback going on here, nor is there feedback (to my knowledge) in one wave modulating the duty cycle of another at audio rate. So my guess is that mutual x-mod is where this really comes into play, because that involves instantaneous feedback ? But perhaps there's a small benefit to be had across the board by this new techology?

So its the osc output going into the PWM thats the 'new tech' in question here

ie in a mod matrix it would be

source amt dest
osc1 50 osc2 pwm

You just describe a modulation path - that already existed in the Syn'X 1.0 years ago btw-

[Kriminal]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock Xils-Lab's claims here, just understand them, and in which situations they pay off. For example, would it help with normal PWM with an LFO? There's no feedback going on here, nor is there feedback (to my knowledge) in one wave modulating the duty cycle of another at audio rate. So my guess is that mutual x-mod is where this really comes into play, because that involves instantaneous feedback ? But perhaps there's a small benefit to be had across the board by this new techology?

So its the osc output going into the PWM thats the 'new tech' in question here?

ie in a mod matrix it would be

source amt dest
osc1 50 osc2 pwm

You just describe a modulation path - that already existed in the Syn'X 1.0 years ago btw-

yes, im aware of what i described, i actually wrote it.

there is a question there, which you avoided.

[sfd]

@Kriminal - I believe Lotuzia gave an answer to that question.

[BasariStudios]

I think i should give the Demo of this synth a ride, sounds nice.

[Kriminal]

@Kriminal - I believe Lotuzia gave an answer to that question.

No, he didnt.

[Lotuzia]

@Kriminal - I believe Lotuzia gave an answer to that question.

The answer to his question is simply : No

[sfd]

@Kriminal - I believe Lotuzia gave an answer to that question.

No, he didnt.

Aaah, I thought that you asked if what you described is.. "the 'new tech' in question here?"

But if that wasn't your question. What was yoru question?

[sfd]

@Kriminal - I believe Lotuzia gave an answer to that question.

The answer to his question is simply : No

Yes, and the answer was already...in there..when you first commented his question

[Lotuzia]

Can someone explain zero delay feedback PWM to me please?

I can understand 0df filters, because filters need feedback to make resonance. But PWM is a change in duty cycle - it's a matter of timing relative to the period of the wave. Seemingly no feedback there to have zero delay of. I may be completely igonrant of something going on under the hood here, as my knowledge is just as an enduser, and a self-taught one at that.

Either way, I'm going to check this out, as I love PWM, and if this can deliver fresher sounding PWM then I'll be all over it!

Isn't 0dfb commonly used to mean topology-preserving ? Perhaps this is a case of that.

Yes. As I see it : In an analog synthesizer, everything happens, and interacts, instantaneously, and simultaneously. While code is sequential. Pulse Width Cross Modulation, Sync, and filters are some examples of these instantaneous/simultaneous interactive process more/less commonly found on analog synthesizers.

From the MiniSyn'X manual : 'PWM: Pulse Width Cross-Modulation (from the other Oscillator) select button. When ON, the width is controlled by the waveform of the other oscillator. This results in a very rapid change in harmonics, close to the ring modulation effect. If no other wave form are selected, when ON, this button let the oscillator to output a width controlled pulse with the same algorithm than the Synthex. '

As an audible result, afaic : On certain presets, and kind of sounds, the new algorithm makes a great difference.

Yeah, the cross-PWM does sound great. Actually, it's a great sounding synth! But we have synths with audio-rate control processing already. How is this any quicker? The value of wave a is read and added (via attenuation) to the duty cycle of wave b. How long does that take? One sample? Does this one sample really make a difference?

In the case of filters, I can see why instantaneous responses are vital - there is feedback, meaning small changes are magnified by the feedback loop. With cross PWM (from one wave to another) - there is no feedback, surely? So no reason to try to read into the future.

Perhaps this zero delay comes into it's own when both waves are x-PWM-ing eachother. THAT would definitely be a feedback loop, because instant changes to wave a would cause instant changes to wave b, and so on, back and fourth - and to be honest miniSyn'x really does excel at those sounds, so perhaps this is where the payoff is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to knock Xils-Lab's claims here, just understand them, and in which situations they pay off. For example, would it help with normal PWM with an LFO? There's no feedback going on here, nor is there feedback (to my knowledge) in one wave modulating the duty cycle of another at audio rate. So my guess is that mutual x-mod is where this really comes into play, because that involves instantaneous feedback ? But perhaps there's a small benefit to be had across the board by this new techology?

Anyway, I'm looking forwards to this synth's big brother. It really does sound good!

For simple Pwm by Lfo, actually no. But now add the Sync function in the loop to the cross-mod. With the glide or LFO modulating osc 2. And there its very usefull ( and it's the case of some presets like the 46 Harp Laser for example. Synthex was really a cool synth) Hope it answers your question.