New Cherry Audio synth plugin Sept. 16th

[beely]

Maybe Jupiter 80 or MKS-80?

Jupiter 80? The digital rompler? Seems unlikely, Roland own the copyright to all the samples for a start...

[Examigan]

Actually you're right... maybe the MKS-80 then.

[briefcasemanx]

If it's a Jupiter 4 I hope they get a good square wave. No one ever gets the square wave right. Whenever I talk about Roland square waves, people who have zero experience with Roland analog gear say "it's just an oscillator, those are dead simple to program, the easiest thing to get right" and they are so, sooooooo wrong. The square wave sounds like some sort of sorcery.

I don't have my hopes up that they'll beat every single other VA emulations square wave, but a boy can dream.

[Tj Shredder]

If it's a Jupiter 4 I hope they get a good square wave. No one ever gets the square wave right. Whenever I talk about Roland square waves, people who have zero experience with Roland analog gear say "it's just an oscillator, those are dead simple to program, the easiest thing to get right" and they are so, sooooooo wrong. The square wave sounds like some sort of sorcery.

They are dead simple, but you have to do it right… Sample the original waveforms, put them in a 2D wavetable (for pulse width and frequency). That would have the additional advantage to have them easily without any aliasing… Done… way more complicated is the filter… Especially if there are non-linearities in the schematic. But the zero-delay technology is comparable to the way easier method of simply looking up waveforms of an oscillator… You compare the results…

[briefcasemanx]

If it's a Jupiter 4 I hope they get a good square wave. No one ever gets the square wave right. Whenever I talk about Roland square waves, people who have zero experience with Roland analog gear say "it's just an oscillator, those are dead simple to program, the easiest thing to get right" and they are so, sooooooo wrong. The square wave sounds like some sort of sorcery.

They are dead simple, but you have to do it right… Sample the original waveforms, put them in a 2D wavetable (for pulse width and frequency). That would have the additional advantage to have them easily without any aliasing… Done… way more complicated is the filter… Especially if there are non-linearities in the schematic. But the zero-delay technology is comparable to the way easier method of simply looking up waveforms of an oscillator… You compare the results…

Meh, if you can point me to the synth that can reproduce the Jupiter 4 or any comparable square wave sound I'd appreciate it. I own almost every popular VA synth and none of them capture the magic.

The new Korg minikorg is actually somewhat decent in that area but still not quite there (compared to an old Roland at least, maybe it's perfectly faithful to the minikorg it's emulating but I haven't ever heard the hardware so I wouldn't know).

[BeeDog]

I'm really impressed with the speed they are developing their software. How is it possible?

I wonder if they use the same codebase/engine from Modular underneath, chain specifically-tuned/configured modules and slap a new GUI on top of it. If that would be the case, not a dumb idea at all either way!

[Tj Shredder]

Meh, if you can point me to the synth that can reproduce the Jupiter 4 or any comparable square wave sound I'd appreciate it. I own almost every popular VA synth and none of them capture the magic.

This gives at least some information how the JP4 oscillators are different, but its hardware.
https://amsynths.co.uk/home/products/os ... ter-4-vco/
If you have a Jupiter 4, record the pure oscillator signal along its range. Its seems also the saw is special. Then create a wave table out of them and modulate it with the pitch. Depending how the analog waveform differs you determine the number of tables you need…

[briefcasemanx]

Meh, if you can point me to the synth that can reproduce the Jupiter 4 or any comparable square wave sound I'd appreciate it. I own almost every popular VA synth and none of them capture the magic.

This gives at least some information how the JP4 oscillators are different, but its hardware.
https://amsynths.co.uk/home/products/os ... ter-4-vco/
If you have a Jupiter 4, record the pure oscillator signal along its range. Its seems also the saw is special. Then create a wave table out of them and modulate it with the pitch. Depending how the analog waveform differs you determine the number of tables you need…

I'll try to find some Jupiter 4 wavetables for serum I guess and see.

[Niowiad]

My bets are on Jupiter-4

[Synth Master Jedi]

Since we're all guessing, mine is that it will be called Mercury 4 and it will of course be an emulation of Jupiter 4.

They called their Juno 106 for DCO 106. So, they will keep the number 4 and replace Jupiter with Mercury or another planet. That's my wild guess.

[Arashi]

Since we're all guessing, mine is that it will be called Mercury 4 and it will of course be an emulation of Jupiter 4.

They called their Juno 106 for DCO 106. So, they will keep the number 4 and replace Jupiter with Mercury or another planet. That's my wild guess.

[Examigan]

I think Synth Master Jedi may be correct.

[beely]

All you'se people guessing the JP4 need to realise you can't have it, the JP4 guess was taken myself in post #2 in this thread.

Yes, I'm declaring this is a draft.

You can have a guess at a modern version of the TC Mercury 1 though, that's still available:
http://www.vintagesynth.com/misc/mercury.php

(Anyway, they'll obvs called it the "Chupiter-4"... )

[anttimaatteri]

The symbols in the video seem to be for Mercury, Jupiter and Air. I get what the first two might relate to, but the Air part.. ?

the air symbol is also related to planet jupiter.
looks like its the j4 renamed into m4.
the question is just, why they even mention this symbol, unless its meant to be an acronym for the number 4.

[starflakeprj]

I'm really impressed with the speed they are developing their software. How is it possible?

I wonder if they use the same codebase/engine from Modular underneath, chain specifically-tuned/configured modules and slap a new GUI on top of it. If that would be the case, not a dumb idea at all either way!

I'm convinced that's what they do. There is no way they, with the limited no. coders they have, have time to really model these synths 100% from scratch.

Looks and feel is also enough for many people to trick their minds on how 1:1 the sound really is. I am one of them. If an emulation of a synth doesn't have a perfectly sonical 1:1, I can look through that as long as the looks and feel are near enough. And of course, it needs to sound good still.

Also, analog synths (same model) don't sound 100% identical due to small differencies in the components, and analog components also wear out with time, making the synths vary more sound wise.