[ANN] Repro-1

Official support for: u-he.com
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Urs wrote: I'm quite fascinated by it. Out of all the vintage mono synths I have with a fixed architecture, the Pro One is the most difficult to model. It's the only one that does frequency & pulsewidth crossmodulation, filter fm and hardsync (some say it's softsync, but the circuit corresponds with the hardsync layout of the datasheets).
You ever work with an Octave Cat? It has cross FM, where VCO1 can FM VCO2, and VCO2 can FM VCO1. Both oscillators have suboscillators that can be part of the FM mix, and VCO2 has 2 sorts of hard sync. Most chaotic fixed architecture synth I've ever worked with.

Post

valhallasound wrote:
Urs wrote: I'm quite fascinated by it. Out of all the vintage mono synths I have with a fixed architecture, the Pro One is the most difficult to model. It's the only one that does frequency & pulsewidth crossmodulation, filter fm and hardsync (some say it's softsync, but the circuit corresponds with the hardsync layout of the datasheets).
You ever work with an Octave Cat? It has cross FM, where VCO1 can FM VCO2, and VCO2 can FM VCO1. Both oscillators have suboscillators that can be part of the FM mix, and VCO2 has 2 sorts of hard sync. Most chaotic fixed architecture synth I've ever worked with.
Don't have a Cat... sounds difficult though, probably even harder to model than the Pro One or the Synthex.

Post

Urs, but why not later polyphonic prophet but monophonic?

will there be stacking or unison added? (sorry if you said this already). Will it be strictly mono?

Post

themachinelt wrote:Urs, but why not later polyphonic prophet but monophonic?

will there be stacking or unison added? (sorry if you said this already). Will it be strictly mono?
Strictly mono... we don't have any of the polyphonic ones. No reference, no emu ;-)

The filter of our Pro one opens up to 40kHz. In order to model this and avoid aliasing we'll have to run it at least at 320kHz internally. That is going to make it more expensive than Diva, but still maybe a tad less CPU intense as the recent Roland plug-ins. (Meaning: A poly version might not be a viable option on today's CPUs)

Post

I don't think that Roland optimized their code that well at all, really. And let's not talk about UI/UX crap their plugins are.

Post

EvilDragon wrote:(Roland) And let's not talk about UI/UX crap their plugins are.
Oh please let's talk about that! :hihi:

Post

I would love to see this in Diva (as paid update).

Post

alexpen wrote:I would love to see this in Diva (as paid update).
It is for Diva (Pro One filter chip is same as Synthex one), but making a "pure" mono synth version lets us do some stuff we can't do in Diva. I won't say much about out plans, but it is about giving users more control over part tolerances, among other things.

Post

It is for Diva (Pro One filter chip is same as Synthex one), but making a "pure" mono synth version lets us do some stuff we can't do in Diva. I won't say much about out plans, but it is about giving users more control over part tolerances, among other things.
Great! Sounds intriguing :-)

Post

Urs wrote:I won't say much about out plans, but it is about giving users more control over part tolerances, among other things.
Ooh yeah, an "Age/Condition" knob, where 0 is factory fresh new and shiny, working 100%, and 10 is "I found this flood damaged piece of crap rotting in the dumpster"... :D

Post

beely wrote:
Urs wrote:I won't say much about out plans, but it is about giving users more control over part tolerances, among other things.
Ooh yeah, an "Age/Condition" knob, where 0 is factory fresh new and shiny, working 100%, and 10 is "I found this flood damaged piece of crap rotting in the dumpster"... :D
Kind of... :clown:

Post

Interesting. This has been talked about for some time, devices where the component tolerances can be fiddled with in modelling.

There's something quite cool about having instruments that have their own unique quirks ("My Minimoog doesn't sound like any other MiniMoog I've played with" etc) - and I think there is something cool about buying software instruments with their own preset unique differences - so every copy doesn't sound quite the same as any other copy.

How practical this is I don't know (I mean, it can be technically done, but how much sense it would make to put out products like this I don't know - people like 100% recall on their systems) - but it's kind of fun to think someone out there one day might have a "golden" Diva instance or something... heh ;)

Anyway - whatever you do, I'm sure it will be interesting...

Post

beely wrote:Interesting. This has been talked about for some time, devices where the component tolerances can be fiddled with in modelling.

There's something quite cool about having instruments that have their own unique quirks ("My Minimoog doesn't sound like any other MiniMoog I've played with" etc) - and I think there is something cool about buying software instruments with their own preset unique differences - so every copy doesn't sound quite the same as any other copy.

How practical this is I don't know (I mean, it can be technically done, but how much sense it would make to put out products like this I don't know - people like 100% recall on their systems) - but it's kind of fun to think someone out there one day might have a "golden" Diva instance or something... heh ;)

Anyway - whatever you do, I'm sure it will be interesting...
I hope so ;)

Post

Urs is there much difference between the Pro One and Prophet 5 filter?
Presets for u-he Diva -> http://swanaudio.co.uk/

Post

analoguesamples909 wrote:Urs is there much difference between the Pro One and Prophet 5 filter?
Interesting question. And slightly related, I have the feeling that filters of mono synths are calibrated differently than their poly counterparts, but I may be delusional:)

Post Reply

Return to “u-he”