trying to recreate the minimonsta (minimoog ) sound

[gentleclockdivider]

Been bussy all night trying to recreate a simple minimoogesque sound sound here with zebra ...still no luck ..a simple saw wave , xmf set to analogue and 4p low pass ....
I know that zebra is not trying to emulate anything and it's a wonderfull synth in all it's aspects , but it's very difficult to get that balance right between cutoff and reso for that typical minimoog sound .
I think the cutoff/resonance in the xmf filter needs a different scaling , that sweetspot is hard to pin .
Things get even harder when assigning an envelope to the cut off , just a minor tweak on the envelope amount and the filters opens to much ....decreasing cutoff lowers it too much ...Let's make the filter decay a bit longer ...to no avail I just can't find the right balance .
I know that on most analogue synths increasing the reso brings down the overall filter gain ..but with the xmf filter it is really too much ...so I turn up the overload switch which results in a overall louder filter gain but you lose the resonance .
Drives me crazy

[mcnoone]

Maybe you can post a mp3 example?
So others can have a go.

[Howard]

Maybe you can post a mp3 example? So others can have a go.

...and tell us which Minimonsta patch you're trying to recreate? (I have Minimonsta)

[gentleclockdivider]

It's a verry simple standard 1 osc patch , It's not about the complexity of the patch but more about the filter behaviour/response in zebra.
For ex. the fifth patch 'bassofacid ' simple saw and a bit of filter modulation from the env. ...o
Really simple , but I just can't get that nice sounding resonance from the xmf filter , I get closer to it when using the standard filters in zebra but then I miss the fm options .

[gentleclockdivider]

AAAAhhhh I nailed the sound with the standard filter set to old drive

[jupiter8]

I think the cutoff/resonance in the xmf filter needs a different scaling , that sweetspot is hard to pin .
Things get even harder when assigning an envelope to the cut off , just a minor tweak on the envelope amount and the filters opens to much ....decreasing cutoff lowers it too much ...Let's make the filter decay a bit longer ...to no avail I just can't find the right balance .

Try and hold down shift when tweaking. That way it works in much finer increments. The parameter ranges are intentionally very large for more flexibility.

Could be you just don't like the sound of the XMF filter,it's such a personal preference. Or it's just the wrong tool for this particular job.

[Howard]

Could be you just don't like the sound of the XMF filter,it's such a personal preference. Or it's just the wrong tool for this particular job.

It's likely to be the latter. The XMFs can go to a lot of (too many?) places...

[gentleclockdivider]

I think the cutoff/resonance in the xmf filter needs a different scaling , that sweetspot is hard to pin .
Things get even harder when assigning an envelope to the cut off , just a minor tweak on the envelope amount and the filters opens to much ....decreasing cutoff lowers it too much ...Let's make the filter decay a bit longer ...to no avail I just can't find the right balance .

Try and hold down shift when tweaking. That way it works in much finer increments. The parameter ranges are intentionally very large for more flexibility.

Could be you just don't like the sound of the XMF filter,it's such a personal preference. Or it's just the wrong tool for this particular job.

I'm aware of the shift thing , I guess I just prefer the sound of the standard filter ...less options but I think it sounds much more pleasing .
DIfferent strokes for different folks

[gentleclockdivider]

yep , me again I don't want to start a new thread for this .
Does anyone one what the actual filter range is , when setting a linear decay (50 percent, no sustain ) to filter freq ( range 50) ,and the filt .env . amount fully open , it takes a while for the filter envelope to start decaying the cutoff ,first you hear full cutoff freq without any decaying , then it gradually decreases to the initial cutoff point .

so I guess the range of the filter (env .amount ) must be quite huge .
Reason why I am all asking this is because I'm in non musical mode right now and just compare filter behaviour of some vst's ( in other words lack of inspiration