Update Nov 2nd 2016: A public beta version is available:
---> viewtopic.php?p=6603621 <---
Update May 2nd 2016: Our solution & conclusion available in a geeky little PDF:
http://www.u-he.com/downloads/UrsBlog/R ... veiled.pdf
As predicted during Superbooth and elsewhere, today we're unleashing a new Researchware plug-in, RePro-Alpha.
It is an excessively CPU hungry anti-optimized monophonic synthesizer, in essence a stripped down version of the Sequential Circuits Pro-One we're currently modeling.
The research part is, we have implemented the same pretty extreme model of the CEM3320 Curtis filter chip in our vintage Pro-One using 5 different numerical methods, each costing a very different amount of CPU. We wish for you to spot the "most analogue" sounding method. By that we wish to see if it is worth spending a lot of CPU or if we could get away with something cheaper. Furthermore we wish to discuss the following questions:
- what differences do you spot between the models?
- when do these differences become audible, i.e. which settings promote these differences?
Also, we're happy to discuss further questions about RePro-1 in our company forum, we would like to concentrate on just the filter differences in this thread. I.e. if your Pro-One (or Synthex whatever uses CEM3320) sounds "utterly different", we'll be happy to request audio examples from you, but this isn't the focus of this thread.
Note: We are sorry if some of you can not run this plug-in due to CPU consumption. This isn't an indicator to the final version being CPU hungry as well, it is just a necessity for the trial - several filter algorithms are always run in parallel so that one can not spot the most accurate one by CPU hunger.