Arturia Forums
V Collection - Legacy versions => Modular V => Modular V Users Community => Topic started by: Tausendberg on May 08, 2016, 06:41:51 am
-
Is there a way to get something that behaves like LFO Retrigger in practice using the Modular V? I wish there was at least a way to force the Modular V's LFOs to reset when the song starts playing because I'm realizing when I render/export multiple mp3 sthe LFOs are in different positions and thus giving me quite varying results.
-
It would be nice if Modulars LFO's could Reset and retrigger. Would make some things easier. I don't think it's possible to force it. It looks like they are constantly running. for the moment i can't see a way to force it to reset and retrigger. For a lot of modern music it would be nice if Arturia made the reset and retrigger of the LFO's possible.
Perhaps someone else knows a way to do it.
Let us know if you find a way.
Using possibilities - like notes and automation and different kind of effects and tools - in your DAW might be a workaround to create the desired result.
-
I've been digging around but I haven't found it. At this point I'm gonna rely on the next update.
-
Yes.
In many ways the MIDI sync is useless without a reset and retrigger. So i don't know if it's a fault it's not working like that. Seems so to me.
-
Yeah, that's what tripped me up, when I saw that the LFOs have MIDI sync available then I just simply assumed that it would 'snap to grid' when I would press play but you know, all it really seems to do is just get the tempo information.
This seems like a really major oversight especially when considering that some of their other synths like the SEM V does have retrigger on their LFO, but you know, Modular V, I think I can say, is definitely the most versatile if not the most outright "powerful" synth in the entire collection...
Do you know if the ARP 2600 V has retrigger? I might start using that one a lot more if it does...
-
Unfortunately i think ARP 2600 do the same. I don't know if it has a workaround.
I hope Arturia have gone thru every detail in all applications and corrected everything and improoved where possible in the upcomming updates.
-
Hopefully, from what I saw of the minimoog, the next update is gonna be a big one.
-
Hey, I just got a crazy idea... I remember that the modular V can receive external signals... What if I used an external LFO? Any opinion on that process?
Edit: Seems like MidiShaper is the way to go...
I mean, I pretty much needed a 3rd party alternative because under closer inspection, I noticed that if I have both LFOs running, they don't even run in sync to each other. I mean, come on Arturia, forget historic authenticity, you know, I'm just trying to make music.
-
A emulation shall have the historic authenticity as an option. Then other things perhaps can be added as options. A LFO reset and retrigger option should be there, especially as there are a Midi sync option.
As i wrote:
Using possibilities - like notes and automation and different kind of effects and tools - in your DAW might be a workaround to create the desired result.
MidiShaper i would call a tool. So yes that's a possible workaround.
MidiShaper can be used on many synth, so a tool like that is useful if it's easy to use and you can save your patterns as templates.
-
The nice thing about Midishaper and Modular V working together is that the free/trial/demo version of Midishaper can run up to four LFOs simultaneously while Modular V has so thoughtfully provided those two joysticks that can output four simulated control voltages allowing for easy conversion from CC to CV essentially. The possibility of more than two LFOs is a really exciting prospect...
-
Yes.
Sounds like you are being creative and have a great time. Great.
Thanks for sharing your exploration. It can give inspiration.
-
Cheers! It's not an exaggeration to say that subtractive synthesis has changed my life. I mean, my awareness of sound and what sound is has expanded more in the past few months than in the nearly 10 years playing guitar and other instruments before that.
-
Yo, just want to give you a heads up if you decide to use MidiShaper...
I just looked at the spectral analysis and Modular V handles information from the XY Pads (or for that matter AT and MOD outputs) differently than a signal from an LFO.
I can go into more detail if you're interested but the crux of the matter is, and I never noticed it until I looked for it in the spectral analysis, but if a modulation input (like on a filter) gets a signal from a mod wheel or an xy pad then it only gives positive values, 0 to 1 basically. But I just noticed for the first time that a modulation input from an LFO will basically go under the filter's frequency setting and essentially oscillate between -1 to 1.
This is an important distinction because I'm finding that if I want to convert a patch from using Modular V's LFOs to using MIDIShaper, I have to lower the '0 point' to where Modular V's LFO's '-1 point' is and then extend the range of the modulation input to reach all the way to the original '1 point'.
Something that would be additionally convenient would be if Arturia would allow an option for the CV from the xy pads and mod wheel to allow negative values.
One more thing I'll add, in practice... The joysticks are very very useful visual indicators of the LFO when coupled with MIDIShaper. They're more useful than the Modular V's blinking light which only indicate the start of a new phase. When I first got Modular V, I thought Arturia's decision to have 'joysticks' was rather arbitrary but now I'm really grateful for them. Honestly, I find them kind of hypnotic now.
-
Hi, Thanks.
Great you are having so much fun.
I believe MidiShaper and other seperate tools can be very versatile, because they even can be used for things that lack features like that.
I for instance have NI Massive. That has a performer, a stepper and a LFO with many waveforms. Other synths like Serum also have some possibilties. But Arturia synths has a different sound that's not as hard and cold. The sound is vital to me and that's why the sound for me is the most important thing for Arturia to develope and improve. Also Arturias Jupiter has some features and also SEM - especially if just the reset and retrigger when using hold get fixed.
But if i need features like this on synths that lacks the feature, and i don't feel automation can do what i wan't, then it's good it's possible to use tools like MidiShaper f i don't have nother tool that can get the job done.
I find my LFO's work as they shall regarding the baseline in Modular. Get both positive and negative values.
But there are synths where you can set the LFO baseline as you wan't.
In Modular the X/Y pads can be set to the same parameter and then for instance have the X modulation given a negative value and the Y a positive value thru the way you set the modulation input.
Not sure i understand you about this. But the important thing is you get cretive and get some results you like.
About the x-y joystick, then it's authentic. You can read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moog_modular_synthesizer and here http://www.vintagesynth.com/moog/modular.php
It's module 959.
My keyboard controller has a X/Y pad control, and automap also support this. Studio One also has X/Y pad in control link. For some things it's a great control option.
Keep having fun.
Cheers.
-
Oh, well that's cool, I didn't know that was based off an official Moog Module.
Sorry, I didn't mean to confuse, yes you can set the modulation input that is fed from the X/Y to go into negative values...
What I meant to say was that unlike the Modular V LFO, a single axis on the joystick can't output negative and positive values at the same time, that's all. But I'm not really concerned about that because it's all a perfectly manageable situation once you know exactly what's happening.
If you ever get into MIDIShaper and want some perspectives, please let me know because there's a few steps to getting it to talk properly to Studio One and the documentation by CableGuys is somewhat minimal.
-
If you ever get into MIDIShaper and want some perspectives, please let me know because there's a few steps to getting it to talk properly to Studio One and the documentation by CableGuys is somewhat minimal.
Thanks. I'll try to remember that. Good to know.
I try to use the tools i have. I don't use a lot of this kind of things in my music. Mostly i can do what i need in this area, with the stuff i have.
But i think MidiShaper looks like a cool versataille tool. If you for instance make EDM music using things like this a lot, the i can see it can be a effective tool.
Just to clarify some things.
When i in my posts say Massive and many other synths sound cold, metallic, hard and noisy, then i don't mean that they are bad. That sound i also use, and some is amazing synths. I just like some special sounding sounds, that synths like that is not able to do.
Sometimes i wan't a old more soft and warm sound. Sounds like the hardware synths Arturia emulate can produce. The better Arturia can emulate this the better. I hope they improve further.
But i'm also open for Arturia synths emulations or a official Arturia synth that's not a emulation, that implement more modern features, as long as they make it sounding uniqe and not cold and metallic like so many other softsynths do. Keep it musical.
-
Just to clarify some things.
When i in my posts say Massive and many other synths sound cold, metallic, hard and noisy, then i don't mean that they are bad. That sound i also use, and some is amazing synths. I just like some special sounding sounds, that synths like that is not able to do.
Sometimes i wan't a old more soft and warm sound. Sounds like the hardware synths Arturia emulate can produce. The better Arturia can emulate this the better. I hope they improve further.
But i'm also open for Arturia synths emulations or a official Arturia synth that's not a emulation, that implement more modern features, as long as they make it sounding uniqe and not cold and metallic like so many other softsynths do. Keep it musical.
Oh no, I think I understood what you meant. They really did get the oscillators "right" with Modular V and their other synths. Especially if you look at it on an oscilloscope, you can see what the TAE oscillators do that other digital oscillators do not, you know, the subtle variances and instabilities. I thought TAE was just some marketing nonsense when I first saw it but nope, it is the real deal in that regard and I do appreciate it for that. That and the oscillators don't have aliasing. From what I can see Non-aliasing oscillators is becoming more and more common but Modular V was one of the first in softsynths...
Cheers!
-
Wow, looks like we just got a gigantic update.
-
I guess it's a good thing I got MIDIShaper...
I might be wrong but I just skimmed the manual for Modular V v.3 and though it looks pretty, it doesn't seem like an LFO retrigger has been included.
-
Thanks for your info Tausendberg.
We must see.
I first thought you had got all the updates, while i only had got Analog Lab 2. Reading other threads too i now understand you have'nt got them.
I'm not pleased right now. VC4 have nasty bugs.
I hope the new sound engines are better and even more authentic than the old ones, and not sounding like other softsynths on the market.
-
You are right there are no notes on the sale site about the lfo reset and retrigger. But it could be the MIDI sync actualy have that reset behavior now, as it should have had.
-
I won't be able to get V5 until next month, please let me know how it is.
-
I just tested it.
Nope, the LFOs still don't retrigger.
Honestly, Modular V3 is kind of disappointing me. It seems like it sounds a little better but in some ways it's a step back for me.
1) You can no longer assign MIDI commands to control the link 'switches' on the mixer, which seems like an arbitrary decision on Arturia's part. I have a MIDI Fighter Twister (a device with 16 encoder/switches) and I liked being able to use the encoder for the mixer knob and the corresponding switch for the link. My ideal goal is that I touch the mouse as little as possible when working on a patch.
2) For some reason they decided not to allow the entire VST to display on screen at once, which, it's like, what the hell? Why would they do that? They made the synth much prettier but I can't display it all at once.
3) The LFOs still don't sync.
On the plus side: The filters and oscillators do seem to sound much better; much finer and much fuller. Also, a subtle update that I appreciate is that now when you manipulate the cutoff frequency, you can no longer hear stepping. It's a subtle improvement but it does help to make it feel like I'm controlling an instrument and not a 12 year old VSTi.
-
Thanks Tausenberg.
That's a disapointment.
I hope you are right about the sound, but the presets and features in Analog Lab 2 can't tell me that. The sound is for me vital and about catching the unique sounds of the individual synths, so if i for instance wan't a certain unique Minimoog sound or CS80 sound, then i can get it. That's the reason to buy emulations. I hope the new synths can do that.
I'm beginning to think Arturia hav'nt fixed bugs and haven't tested things or improved any features. Reading the forums perhaps there even are new bugs in some synths.
I'm not happy right now.
-
I mean, overall, Modular V does seem like an improvement it's just I honestly don't know why it makes sense to take away a feature that previously existed.
But I found the Modular V3_gui.xml so I'm trying to "hack" it so that I can make the browser display the entire vst at once. I know it may sound crazy but that actually matters to me a lot because I like to feel like I have the actual instrument in front of me and having to scroll up and down constantly really removes from that feeling.
-
Yes it's important to have things in a way you work best.
According to the sales site, it should now be possible to move modules around to a certain degree. Do that help you?
-
Move modules around? I'm not quite sure I follow, it seems to behave like Modular V2 used to...
-
On the sales site - Detail page - you can read this among other things:
"New ergonomics:
One unique scrollable view to overlook the entire synth.
Some of the modules are now interchangeable, allowing to configure - to a certain extent - the Modular the desired way."
EDIT: Sorry. This might be the old features, as new modules also are old. That''s wrong advertizing if things is'nt new from VC4.
We apparantly have to be aware of what Arturia write and claim to be new etc...
-
I think they just didn't completely update the page.
-
Hey, I think I figured out how to get the modular v3 to show the entire window. It's not perfect, but all you have to do...
1) Find Modular V3_gui in your programdata folder and open it in a text editor or any program that can edit xml
2) Scroll down to " <resolution name="70%" path="80%" w="LARGE_WIDTH*0.35" h="(LARGE_HEIGHT+HEIGHT_TOOLBAR+HEIGHT_BOTTOM_TOOLBAR)*0.35"/> "
3) Change the second multiplier value (the 0.35) to 0.655 (For example: <resolution name="70%" path="80%" w="LARGE_WIDTH*0.35" h="(LARGE_HEIGHT+HEIGHT_TOOLBAR+HEIGHT_BOTTOM_TOOLBAR)*0.655"/> )
4) Open up Modular V in your DAW, or standalone should work too (I didn't try), click in the upper left hand corner, resize to 80% and then resize back to 70% and voila, you should now have the entire VST visible.
-
Hi Tausenberg,
Great for you. I can suggest you post about the VC5 applcations in the VC5 forums regarding VC5 stuff. Perhaps you'll get more respons there from Arturia.
I have bought VC5, even if i'm not happy with it. I'm still skeptical. Not sure about the new soundengine. Need to test more. Sounds like the sound is thiner and brighter and not so soft. More toy like. Lack of body. Not sure about the way sound respond to my playing yet. But as said i need to test more.
-
Well, when you get around to it, let me know what you think after you have some time with it. I'm fairly happy with the new Prophet.
-
I meant i was not happy with we is forced to pay for updates for known bugs in VC4. Apparantly VC4 is discontinued without a warning.
Spark 2 is even out of VC5, and therfore also taken out of VC4 as you apparantly won't get fixes and updates for it. That's very sudden this happens.
I'm aware that products get discontinuet. But not that fast and this way.
About the sound.
After spending some time i am alittle more positive about some things, but not to sure about others.
I like classic vintage sounds to be done on Classic vintage synths.
In Mini V3 it looks like when you get used to the Emphasis is working very different, then i can produce sounds like before. The brightness in sound etc. also seems to have a positive side. Looks like the sound is more defined in the low notes too.
The SEM is hard to tell as the filter has bugs.
Overall it looks like the new sound engines is more defined in the sound. I hope that will turn out to be a improvement. Can very well be so.
The new Digital Classic Synclavier i find very well sounding. But i don't have enough knowleadge right now about this, to tell how good the emulation of the original is. It do contribute with new sounds to the collection.
Also there seems to be quite a learning phase in Synclavier.
I like B3. It sound different from other organs i have to complement my organ sound arsenal.
Piano V i actually find having something real even if it also can sound very plastic like. In a production that might turn out to be good.
In general the new sound engines might turn out to be easier to place the sounds in a production.
I would like more punch and body sometimes, and emulations of certain soft characteristic vintage sounds don't seem to be easier to create. Time will tell. But i'm more positive about the sound now.
There are still applications i hav'nt checked, and i hav'nt checked the above that much either.
Unfortunately Prophet V3 crashes my DAW. Hav'nt tried it much. But perhaps you'r right. At first glance it seems it might benefit from the new sound engines.
Not to sure about CS80 V3. We'll see.
Not been much around Modular V3 and others. Takes time to check and experiment. Need to create sounds to tell for sure.
How do you decide if the sounding is good? Just that you like the sounding or if it's a precise emulation of the original?
How do you describe the sounding of the new engines?
Cheers.
-
"Overall it looks like the new sound engines is more defined in the sound."
I have more to say about the rest of your comment but I'll just say really quickly right now that I can see why they did that. One of the, in my opinion unfair, criticisms of Arturia is that many of the different subtractive synthesizers are all basically just different guis using the same oscillators and filters. I haven't played around with it too much but the ARP2600 V especially gets A LOT of criticism in that regard.
So, maybe they were trying to make the instruments more distinct so as to head off that criticism.
I know it's a tall order but something that would be cool would be if the Modular V could basically just use all of the oscillators from the rest of the v collection... although I guess you kind of can if you just have a clean oscillator output and just use the modular V as a VST insert.
Which reminds me, it hasn't really affected my workflow yet but do I understand correctly that they got rid of the Modular V as an effects plugin? Maybe I made a mistake in my installation or something...
-
When i say "defined" i mean the tone in the low end keep the timbre better in lower octaves. I still thing for instance Mini V can sound more like a moog, than it does. It do a fine job. But some sounds in could do better. That sayd, then i still think Mini V sound more like a moog than any other emulations even if other emulations also can have their good sides.
I wan't Mini V to supply certain sounds, that other synths can't do.
I'm not sure why you are right about why Arturia have done the defined sound as your understand it.
Yes Arturia has been giving much unfair criticisme. Some more factory presets that really showed the unique character of the synths, and some recreations of famous sounds could meet that criticisme.
And yes there is no FX versions of any synth in VC5. I have allready requested those, as i andd many others need FX versions to be able to route audio into them in their DAWs.
I hav'nt used ARP 2600 V3 yet. Also i hav'nt played a real one. I have played a real hardware minimoog (and also especially a Moog Prodigy), a real Jupiter 8, a real Solina, a real Hammond, a real Rhodes and wurli, real pianos and heard the Oberheims, Prophet and CS80 for real in private. But never a Moog Modular or a ARP 2600 in private.
I don't know what ARPs 2600 characteristic unique sound is. That's why i think it's important such sounds are in the presets for all synths. Off coarse we know some effects that was made on ARP 2600. And apparantly Depeche Mode has used it, but i don't know for what sounds. For now i only have the few sound examples i can find. But soundexamples is often not the sounds that is characteristic or unique for the synths. Often it's just a waveform or getting the synth to be as noisy or far out as possible instead of showing it's true unique sound character that really make it different from other synths.
That's also why i ask if you compare VC5 synths sounds with the original hardware synths?
Have tried Prophet V3 a little more in standalone mode. As said then i don't know it as much as other synths, but to me it sounds like it benefit from the new sound engines.
-
"How do you decide if the sounding is good? Just that you like the sounding or if it's a precise emulation of the original?
How do you describe the sounding of the new engines?"
Well, first off, it would be cool if, you know, the Prophet V sounds like having an actual Prophet 5, I mean, I do like the thought that patches I put together for the Prophet V could be dialed in on the Prophet 5 and sound perfectly alike.
But I'm not particularly a purist in that I am trying to get it to sound alike, that's not my priority. I mean, I never owned any of these instruments so it's not a big deal to me and I don't know if I ever will.
I do like the Prophet V though just because it's like the opposite of the Modular V in terms of complexity. Modular V is so many possibilities while a Prophet V is simple enough that I can fit all of the controls on my keylab 88. Sometimes I just want to play with something simple.
I don't really have a 'scientific' way of describing what makes me think it sounds better. I would say both the Prophet V and the Modular V3 sound 'fuller' and 'bigger'. Especially the Prophet V, when I first played it just now I was blown away by it, it sounded really "big" in the sense that it's almost like the reverb or a slight delay was on but it wasn't, it's just a very 'rich' harmonic tone that's both complex and nuanced.
I haven't tried out any of the other V Collection 5 but I'll definitely look at Synclavier and B3 if you think they're interesting. I'm lead to understand Synclavier is an additive synthesizer which is something that interest me. I mean, I recently rigged up six instances of Modular V2 as essentially an additive synthesizer because I really wanted to explore that concept.
Sorry to hear about Spark 2, I hope they just decouple it from V Collection because that would probably make more sense. I never touched Spark personally, at least not yet so I don't personally miss it but it causes a lot of misery, I've seen it over and over again, when a developer just drops a product line. They should at least patch any remaining bugs...
"And yes there is no FX versions of any synth in VC5. I have allready requested those, as i andd many others need FX versions to be able to route audio into them in their DAWs."
Ok, thank you for verifying that for me, I have to imagine that's a huge bug because, I mean, the Modular V3 still has the connections for external signals but, correct me if I'm wrong, but the only way in Studio One at least that a VSTi can have an audio signal sent into it is if the VSTi is placed as an effects insert.
Seems like Arturia's got some bugs on their hands, I really hope they don't take their usual six months to release a patch because being able to use a Modular V as an effects insert is supposed to be one of the main selling points. I mean, one of the first things I did when I found out the Modular V could be used to process external signals was I hooked up an electric guitar to it, which was nice, I liked that (although I didn't get very far back then because I didn't know at all what I was doing).
-
but the only way in Studio One at least that a VSTi can have an audio signal sent into it is if the VSTi is placed as an effects insert.
Yes. You can send some control signals from one instrument to another. For instance a synth can recieve a sequencer trigger. But you need a FX VST in Studio One other DAWs to be able to use the external audio input features,
----
To me a emulation should be able to sound like the real thing. As close as possible. Beside that i also just wan't sounds i like. But that don't have to be emulations then. But it's okay with other sounds in emulations too, as long as they can emulate the sounds it's supposed to. Else no need to create a emelation, then it could just be a new synth.
-----
Yes i like the Synclavier sounds. It should use additive synthsis too. It uses partials.
It's a good thing if you know about FM synthesis and Harmonics.
About harmonics then perhaps you find this a help down the road: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmonic_series_(music)
NB! you need to add the last ) after music to the link. for some reason it will not be a part of the link.
About the B3. I like i's a different sound. I think many will argue that it's not a B3. But i seem to have been hearing Hammonds sound in this direction too. And i have NI Kontakt Vintage Organs and other organs and rotors too. Studio One also have some organs and a rotor.
.----
Yes Arturia has got some bugs on their hands. It's a question if they will be fixed for free with the politic they have used actually not care about owners of VC4 product bugs. This is in my world wrong.
I have got a mail saying future updates will cost. Will they continue calling bugfixes for updates and trying to charge us for the same product once again?
ANd how many products will they take out next time? Will they charge for better readable GUI's for CS80 andsome other synths, even if that's what we have paid for in VC5, and/ or will they take those out? It's in some cases half done work in my opinion. I work with multimedia. This should have been stop in testing and made better.
Will Arturia charge us for the FX versions needed to use the features we allready have paid for?
I'm concerned about this.
There is something very wrong.
------
I actually like simple synths.
I have allways wondered why nearly all factory presets in for instance Modular V are quite simple in a way they could just as well have been done on a simple synths.
It has 9 OSC's a lot of filters etc... To me a Modular is for very complex sounds. Especially if it don't have a very characteristic sound i wan't.
I'm so tired of "Lucky" presets and presets simulating sounds made on other synths - often simpler synths.
I believe the new presets use the Modular system better, but i have not spend the needed time to say for sure.
.....
Cheers
-
I still need to read the article you linked me to and I have things to say to the rest of your comment but...
What do you think of the Synclavier V?
I've played around with it a bit and I am so blown away by it. You know, I can just pick up by ear that there is just so much going on and I look forward to learning about all the things that make it tick over the coming months.
-
Still same opinion as in my other threads. Like this:
The new Digital Classic Synclavier i find very well sounding. But i don't have enough knowleadge right now about this, to tell how good the emulation of the original is. It do contribute with new sounds to the collection.
Also there seems to be quite a learning phase in Synclavier.
-
Oh yeah, the synclavier looks to have a crazy learning curve but it seems worth it.
Compared to even a very complex Modular patch, some of the patches for the Synclavier are so much more complex. I feel like some of the patches for the synclavier, each note seems to tell a short story while a note out of a really complex Modular V patch is maybe like a sentence.
I looked around for how much it sounds like the original but because the Synclavier was so incredibly expensive (they spared no expense when making it) there don't appear to be a lot of people who played it. It seems like Arturia put a lot into making this, it might be the most developed VST in V Collection 5, so I'm gonna trust that they got close.
-
Yes.
This is a video demonstrating Synclavier 2.
jon appleton demonstrates the synclavier ii (1984): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikHtUq48rWE
Also i think for instance Michael Jackson, Tangerine Dream and Pet Shop Boys, Depeche Mode and many others did use Synclavier, even if most perhaps used the versions that you could put audio samples into.
But most perhaps rented it or used one a studio had.
There are other softsynths out there that are using FM synthesis, additive synthesis and or other forms of synthesis that's not substractive. And also synths where you can put your samples into.
You said you have thought about going into additive synthesis. NI Reaktor Razor for instance is a additive synth. Also NI Reaktor Prism uses additive synthesis.
In Synclavier you edit the individual partials it looks like. The above mentioned synth do it another way.
-
What do they do differently if I may ask?
-
I actually don't know. As said then i don't know much about synclavier.
However, then i understand it's about have many voice channels they had and also if they could use samples or not.
If voice channels is the same as partials as i also thought i had understood as differences, then the Arturia version perhaps is a late synclavier 1 or a synclavier 2 - but without the possibility of using samples as they should.
There is a thread in the VC5 section about this somewhere.
Just googled this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synclavier
This article say Frank Zappa actually used it extensively. I did'nt now that, but i have allways admired Frank Zappa especially for his instrumentation.
I you find out more, then please share.
EDIT: If you meant about Razor and Prism then you don't edit partials the same way and there are more partials You have to read about that and try it out.
-
If you have 40-something minutes... I strongly recommend you watch this tutorial series by Arturia about the Synclavier V.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYO55G959uc
From what I can see from your comment and from what I'm reading in that harmonic series article you linked me to there appears to be some trouble with the terms.
Synclavier is weird in that what it calls a 'timbre' is what most other synthesizers would call a 'patch'.
Also, what Synclavier calls a 'partial' isn't a harmonic partial but rather more like a sort of "internal channel" somewhat equivalent to how modular V has two main output VCAs.
-
Thanks for the video link. Will watch when i have time and wan't to see it.
If you go into Synclaviers SCR - Time Slices window (Not sure if that actually should be called Tinbre Slices.), then you see that each partial in Synclavier V can use different harmonics (to create waveforms. In theory you can create any waveform using harmonics if you know how i believe). The partials used - together create a Timbre (Partial Timbre). So the Timbre can be made of the 12 partials, and each partial can have it's own harmonics.
Harmonics in synclavier is used both with carriers and modulators.
Carriers and modulators is known in FM synthesis, The harmonics is the addditive synthesis for each partial in Synclavier V it looks like. But as said, i'm no technician, and i'm reaaly not the right to ask so technical questions. I usuallyy find out what i need. I learn a lot using harmonics in some other synths.
Also a organ use harmonics in the drawbars.
You can read abouth this in the Synclavier manual i believe.
This is a explanation of Timbre: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timbre
I'm not a technician but i believe a timbre is something that give colour and shape of the sound, but it perhaps do not include the pitch. A "Patch" like you talk about also include pitch and perhaps other parameters and/ or effects.
In a way allways have looked at a timbre like a full sound, Perhaps there are more than obe use of the term.
I can be wrong, so please study this yourself.
-
" To me a emulation should be able to sound like the real thing. As close as possible"
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree, especially when it comes to marketing. The page for the Farfisa V even goes so far as to say that you don't even need a Farfisa when you have a Farfisa V. So I can definitely see how emulation is important if I really wanted to go so far as imagining that I owned something big and heavy like an organ but I didn't want to drag it out to shows or something like that because I would want it to sound like what I'm replacing.
As for simplicity vs complex and the modular v. I think one of the things I find really charming about the modular v is that it really is up to me. Obviously the interface isn't optimized for simplicity but it doesn't matter too much to me, if I want I can spend several days trying to figure out a very specific patch perfectly or if I want, I can just connect a sine wave output to the VCA input, push sustain all the way to the top, and that's it, it's completely up to me.
Obviously back in the old days I wouldn't take a Moog Modular out of the studio and on tour just to output a sine wave but with VSTs, I don't really have to think about it in those terms.
I was thinking of one day eventually, instead of a laptop because laptops are always relatively weak, building a PC with a server case and then mounting the server case in a rack. Any thoughts on that?
-
I was thinking of one day eventually, instead of a laptop because laptops are always relatively weak, building a PC with a server case and then mounting the server case in a rack. Any thoughts on that?
I hav'nt thought that much about it for some years.
I guess you can do what works. It has to be a reliable solution for you. If the solution you think about works , then why not.
Packing things in the protection it's come in, can help.
You can get rackmouted PC cases to mount in a flightcase. Just browse for it. I guess you can find many solutions fitted for diferent kind of touring/ moving things often.
And use components that has no delicate mechanical moving parts. For instance SSD's instead of HD's. SSD's i prefere anyway because of the performance.
You can also get laptops with desktop processors, but i don't know how good they are. Especially compared to a desktop. I would believe there could be heating issues, but i don't know. Perhaps there is well working solutions.
Also there was "Muse Receptor" - a dedicated machine when using VST's on tour. But i think the sale is closed. Perhaps there are other similar solutions. Perhaps computers has become more reliable for lice use, so machines like that is not relevant anymore. I don't know.
You can browse for it to see what they are.
-
Thank you for the leads and thank you for that harmonic series link, it proved to be very educational!