Kurzweil VAST experiences - 2021 Edition

[nadroj]

With the development of the K2700, I've gone down the Kurzweil rabbit hole again. I kinda love how small but dedicated/passionate Kurzweil users are. One thing that has always interested me is VAST synthesis.

 

The guys at GearslutzSpace have a few threads on it, and the Mastering VAST forum makes for some interesting reading, but other than some threads from the early 2000s I've not seen many dedicated threads talking about it here - at least, not since the Forte. It's generally well known that this forum has more "players" than tweakers (compared to GearSlutzSpace, for example) so I'd be particularly interested to hear people's latest perceptions and experiences in using VAST.

 

From what I've read, it's a stupidly powerful synthesis engine, but the 90s era workflow means that most people who use it hardly get much use out of it. I kind of get that: the latest MODX update gave us some amazing ways to create new sounds (I love creating my own FM sounds, then mashing them together and dragging my finger along the touch screen to grind out new sounds) but it did give me an idea of how "deep" doesn't always translate to being fun or even that musical.

 

Now, some of the VAST demos on YouTube sound huge and awesome, but those are mostly from companies who sell sound packs. I suppose the question I want to ask is: in 2021, what does VAST + KVA + the Kurz FM engine have to offer the average user that other modern keyboards/software don't? What makes it different, unique, or enjoyable? Why are Kurzweil VAST users so dedicated/passionate compared to some other synthheads?

[felis]

Honest opinion here. I find some of the DSP functions to be very weak and outdated.

Shelving filters, one and two pole filters with no resonance,

and all pass filters have always had minimal effect in my experience since the early K2000's on.

There's no modern types like comb or formant filters.

You could conceivably construct your own though with multiple layers and a lot of (imo) unnecessary futzing around.

 

Some of the dsp functions in the algorithms are unwieldy and time consuming to set up.

Envelopes are relatively slow, but that's not unique to Kurzweil.

You can't do things like modulate a filter with an oscillator either (audio rate modulation).

 

Got some of the negatives out of the way - on to the positives.

 

KVA sounds really good, but the square sync still needs to be set up.

It's still not as immediate to use as most dedicated VA's or analog synths,

but you can get more mileage from it than most others.

 

Some of the strong points of vast are the control source list, the FUNS,

the multi-zone setups, and the multi-channel and zone controller capabilities.

 

Programming good sounds can be done, but it will take more time and pre-planning than a lot of others.

I'm an outlier here, but a major reason I stick with Kurzweil

is because it can use release velocity as a mod source and programs respond properly to sustenuto (cc66).

I can generally program stuff to respond to my liking.

Kurzweil's not perfect, but for my uses, they're the best I've run across.

[timwat]

K2500 / K2600 / PC3 owner here.

 

Like many "players" (vs. "tweakers") I spend 80-90% of my time making changes to existing, and only 10-20% of my time starting from an initialized patch. Putting on my Captain Obvious cape, there are other engines that are faster / more intuitive to arrive at something that suits the needs of the gig - because they offer fewer options and those options are exposed to the user more obviously.

 

Add to that more and more powerful software options, and it seems to me VAST will always remain that incredibly powerful hardware framework that demanded more programming commitment than many players will able to invest. Sort of like the DX7.

[jeffincltnc]

I still think that VAST is implemented very well for "players" who need a logical and very easy-to-use set of tools for layers, splits, effects and building patches.

 

The area where I found VAST to be very difficult was in the depth of menu diving and navigation to find and change parameters. I think Kurzweil is building good instruments that sound great for players who need some level of tweaking and modifying deep paramters in VAST when you need to.

[Tom Williams]

I came for the pianos and strings. Discovered the KB3 organs and saved $1000 on getting an organ. Then discovered the programming, and realized that I can modulate almost any parameter with almost any controller. Now I have things like a steel guitar whose notes don't all bend the same amount, an electric guitar with fretted pitch bend and aftertouch vibrato(1), and a pipe organ with 16 ranks (including a mixture) played by two manuals. And I haven't even gotten the current generation with its FM engine yet.

 

(1) not an LFO vibrato -- aftertouch raises the pitch a fraction of a semitone, like stretching a string with your left hand...

[Theo Verelst]

Ahem

[Tom Williams]

Ahem

Well, Theo, at least no one's going to bitch about you being too wordy this time.

[Ockeghem]

Ahem

He"s getting ready to say something...I hope.

[nadroj]

Ahem

He"s getting ready to say something...I hope.

 

Probably still typing! On the other hand, I feel honoured that a post I made garnered a rare one word response from Theo.

[Al Coda]

Honest opinion here. I find some of the DSP functions to be very weak and outdated.

Shelving filters, one and two pole filters with no resonance,

and all pass filters have always had minimal effect in my experience since the early K2000's on.

 

 

Well,- other filters exist too and sound good.

 

It depends on what you do w/ the simple non-resonant filters.

I often use ´em to create band limited OSCs and minimize/remove aliasing when using VA DSP blocks.

 

There's no modern types like comb or formant filters.

You could conceivably construct your own though with multiple layers and a lot of (imo) unnecessary futzing around.

 

Everyone coming to VAST should have in mind that this synth "engine" is MODULAR !

I came very late to VAST and it´s modularity was the reason I did.

 

Some of the dsp functions in the algorithms are unwieldy and time consuming to set up.

Envelopes are relatively slow, but that's not unique to Kurzweil.

 

AFAIK, these already speeded up a bit since the more powerful LENA chip is in use.

And you can change envelope behaviour using FUNs,- change envelope rates from linear to exponential p.ex. !

I also prefer a dedicated layer for "the filter" and use that layer´s amp envelope modulating the filter.

I always found ENV2 and 3 being more lame than AMP ENV.

 

You can't do things like modulate a filter with an oscillator either (audio rate modulation).

 

 

 

It´s not like in analog world,- but VAST is digital and you can find other ways coming to comparable results.

 

KVA sounds really good, but the square sync still needs to be set up.

It's still not as immediate to use as most dedicated VA's or analog synths,

but you can get more mileage from it than most others.

 

I got that working for me, almost aliasing free.

It sounds different on my Oberheim Xpander though ...

 

Most, if not all of the factory patches using OSC sync alias like hell.

I dunno why the programmers realized the patches that way.

Mine don´t alias or it´s almost not audible.

 

Some of the strong points of vast are the control source list, the FUNS,

the multi-zone setups, and the multi-channel and zone controller capabilities.

 

I agree, and not only that ...

I appreciate it´s possible to create multi-layer patches, with different key ranges and individual DSP processing in PROGRAM MODE already and don´t have to use SETUP or MULTI modes to do so.

 

Just only compare what´s possible w/ a Kurzweil program vs a Roland "TONE" (p.ex. in Integra-7) or Yamaha´s subdevision of Multi,- or whatever it´s called.

 

Programming good sounds can be done, but it will take more time and pre-planning than a lot of others.

I'm an outlier here, but a major reason I stick with Kurzweil

is because it can use release velocity as a mod source and programs respond properly to sustenuto (cc66).

I can generally program stuff to respond to my liking.

Kurzweil's not perfect, but for my uses, they're the best I've run across.

 

Since I use the PC3, for me it´s hard to imagine not to have a Kurzweil VAST machine in my rig !

 

 

A.C.

[felis]

 

....Just only compare what´s possible w/ a Kurzweil program vs a Roland "TONE" (p.ex. in Integra-7) or Yamaha´s subdevision of Multi,- or whatever it´s called.

 

Since I use the PC3, for me it´s hard to imagine not to have a Kurzweil VAST machine in my rig !

 

 

A.C.

 

 

I've had stuff from most of the major manufacturers, and for how I like to program stuff, I found most of them pretty pathetic in comparison.

Had a Roland XV-5080, Korg Triton, and a lot of Yamaha stuff.

 

The Andromeda I had was pretty comprehensive in the programming department, as is some Waldorf stuff.

I've still got a Q, and a couple Blofelds.

Even some low budget Alesis stuff blew the doors off the Japanese stuff for programming options.

 

That said, I do prefer some of the stock Yamaha sounds over Kurzweil's.

The glitch comes in when I want to program them to respond to my input. Then it's frustration.

 

The title of the thread was "Kurzweil VAST experiences - 2021 Edition: so I responded accordingly.

I find Kurzweil to be the best of the bunch, but I won't let that blind me to what I think could be improved.

[Lady Gaia]

I was sold on VAST right from the original K2000. I traded it for a K2500XS when the time came, and when KDFX arrived I found little reason to look at anything else on the market. For a good long while everything seemed so primitive and limited by comparison, at least in the digital realm. I also got very busy professionally in my non music-related career, and didn't find a compelling reason to upgrade until movers damaged my baby when I relocated in 2017.

 

So I finally had an excuse to jump forward a few revisions with a Forte and I "love what they've done with the place" since the last time I dug around in the dark corners of the synthesis engine. I do miss the dedicated editing/sequencing/arpeggiation controls that have since been reintroduced on the PC4 and K2700, I realize that taking full advantage of what the instrument is capable of with 32 layer monster patches can be a painful process from the front panel, and I'd sure like to see modulations updated more frequently than the original pokey 50Hz update rate - but what's there is still unique and capable of some amazing sonic feats. The fact that there's a full 6-operator FM engine in the mix now, and that it can both take part in the cascaded layer scheme and be treated with KDFX keeps the instrument fresh and full of possibility for me.

[Dave Weiser]

Honest opinion here. I find some of the DSP functions to be very weak and outdated.

Shelving filters, one and two pole filters with no resonance,

and all pass filters have always had minimal effect in my experience since the early K2000's on.

There's no modern types like comb or formant filters.

You could conceivably construct your own though with multiple layers and a lot of (imo) unnecessary futzing around.

 

Some of the dsp functions in the algorithms are unwieldy and time consuming to set up.

Envelopes are relatively slow, but that's not unique to Kurzweil.

You can't do things like modulate a filter with an oscillator either (audio rate modulation).

 

Got some of the negatives out of the way - on to the positives.

 

KVA sounds really good, but the square sync still needs to be set up.

It's still not as immediate to use as most dedicated VA's or analog synths,

but you can get more mileage from it than most others.

 

Some of the strong points of vast are the control source list, the FUNS,

the multi-zone setups, and the multi-channel and zone controller capabilities.

 

Programming good sounds can be done, but it will take more time and pre-planning than a lot of others.

I'm an outlier here, but a major reason I stick with Kurzweil

is because it can use release velocity as a mod source and programs respond properly to sustenuto (cc66).

I can generally program stuff to respond to my liking.

Kurzweil's not perfect, but for my uses, they're the best I've run across.

 

 

I'm with you on the 1- and 2-pole filters with no res seeming kind of boring. At one point I even lobbied to remove them from the DSP list back when I was a Kurz, thinking that people might complain that they seemed old and boring! But...it turns out those little 1-pole filters can be useful, especially in acoustic type sounds. It's nice to have the option to tag on an "extra" filter in a layer where you might already have a 2-pole filter. I used the 1-pole high pass quite a bit to thin out EPs, strings and other assorted stuff, in layers where I already had quite a bit going on.

 

The DSP guys tried to strike a balance between practical and exciting, but always wanted to do more. I do quite like the "Mogue" 4-pole with feedback that they added for the PC3, as well as the shapers, wrap and quantizer (bit-crusher). Keep in mind that the DSP guys also had to devote a bunch of time to non-synthesis stuff like half-damper and string resonance, both of which they nailed.

 

The VAST envelopes are slow, and I always complained about it when I worked there... but I'm glad to see that the new FM engine has much faster envelopes (and can produce some very nice analog-flavored sounds!).

 

I'm with you on release velocity being useful! Assigning it (along with a randomizer FUN) to blast open the filter on my "squeak" release layers is one of my favorite secret programming weapons.

[Dave Weiser]

With the development of the K2700, I've gone down the Kurzweil rabbit hole again. I kinda love how small but dedicated/passionate Kurzweil users are. One thing that has always interested me is VAST synthesis.

 

The guys at GearslutzSpace have a few threads on it, and the Mastering VAST forum makes for some interesting reading, but other than some threads from the early 2000s I've not seen many dedicated threads talking about it here - at least, not since the Forte. It's generally well known that this forum has more "players" than tweakers (compared to GearSlutzSpace, for example) so I'd be particularly interested to hear people's latest perceptions and experiences in using VAST.

 

From what I've read, it's a stupidly powerful synthesis engine, but the 90s era workflow means that most people who use it hardly get much use out of it. I kind of get that: the latest MODX update gave us some amazing ways to create new sounds (I love creating my own FM sounds, then mashing them together and dragging my finger along the touch screen to grind out new sounds) but it did give me an idea of how "deep" doesn't always translate to being fun or even that musical.

 

Now, some of the VAST demos on YouTube sound huge and awesome, but those are mostly from companies who sell sound packs. I suppose the question I want to ask is: in 2021, what does VAST + KVA + the Kurz FM engine have to offer the average user that other modern keyboards/software don't? What makes it different, unique, or enjoyable? Why are Kurzweil VAST users so dedicated/passionate compared to some other synthheads?

 

While some of the workflow was designed in the 90s, lots was added, tweaked, improved and perfected over the years, and the biggest thing for me is that most of it was designed by musicians. On some other boards (and many VSTs) it's pretty easy to spot UIs and workflow that was designed by software guys, without musicians. I remember back in 2005 when I thought I was going to be laid off (during the bankruptcy), one of the big manufacturers sent me their big workstation and asked me to see what I could do with their EP samples. I created a preset and chose a two pole filter. The system allowed me to assign a single slider. Or velocity. Or Modwheel. It was so limited compared to the Kurz that it was felt non-programmable. To their credit, this particular manufacturer did have some nice samples. But even getting two control sources (one with depth control) for a filter, like you find VAST, was not possible.

 

If you're looking for a source of VAST programming insights and inspiration, ranging from cool to bonkers, I recommend perusing the many videos on the YouTube page of my buddy PoserP. Tons of interesting and clever tricks presented clearly.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRE_HYV3EgGsHAZz5BXk8ag

 

The tutorials on my Weisersound page are other end of the spectrum, not groundbreaking or experimental, focused more on practical stuff that players need to for GB and theater gigs. This one shows how to set up mapped chords, which is incredibly handy for theater players who have to conduct with one hand.

[bfields]

Does anyone have a pointer to an explanation of aliasing issues with VAST? (What exactly does it mean for oscillators to be anti-aliased? How do you recognize aliasing when you hear it? Etc.)

 

I've got some basic idea of the theory, but I'm very vague on the practice.

 

Asking partly because I was hearing some odd artifacts while fooling around the other day, and wondering if that was what I was running into.

 

(Actually, looking back at what I was doing, I realize on the sound that was misbehaving I accidentally used the 1-block aliased SAW when I meant to use the anti-aliased version. So, I may be answering my own question here. Still curious for any pointers, though.)

[Mighty Motif Max]

...

The tutorials on my Weisersound page are other end of the spectrum, not groundbreaking or experimental, focused more on practical stuff that players need to for GB and theater gigs. This one shows how to set up mapped chords, which is incredibly handy for theater players who have to conduct with one hand. ...

 

Oh my. That looks fantastic! And here I was used to doing chord mapping on something like my Motif, which would use multiple instances of one sound just to make one chord! I didn't realize that there were hardware boards that could do this, as I knew about a lot of players using Mainstage to do this with synth sounds etc for modern electronic-based music. Cool!

[StalledOtter]

How does the K2600 hold up in terms of build and sound quality these days? An XS showed up on the local craigslist for $600 and seems to be in good condition, which is a very tempting buy. Had been looking at something shiny and new (PC4 or K2700), but that's a super tempting price and I expect I wouldn't be making full use of a lot of the power anyway (and it seems like the majority of it is still there).

[Iconoclast]

I've had a Forte7 for 3 or 4 years and it was my first Kurzweil.

 

Vast for me is a black hole. I really tried hard for a long time to learn it, but in the end I realized it was, for me, a choice about whether I wanted to spend time being a musician or earn a Phd in Kurzweil.

 

If you just want to use the available sounds made by other people; there are a lot of them and they're darn good. Love the pianos and really love the EPs. Just live in the Multi Mode and maybe use the Patch Kreator templates to create anything from scratch. But I found that if you're in the Program-edit mode looking at the VAST layers and blocks etc...I was wasting a lot of time and not getting what I wanted. I got a lot more of satisfaction out of my Forte when I vowed to NOT to enter Program-edit mode.

 

I used to play in a band with another keyboard player who used a pc3 and he pulled a ton of great stuff out of it. Later when I got my Forte and started talking "Vast" with him, I realized that he didn't really know ANYTHING about Vast. So you can definitely get a lot out of the instrument without ever entering Program-Edit mode.

 

But in my opinion, VAST needs a huge overhaul based specifically on doing nothing but improving the user interface. Vast already sounds awesome and has more features than I can think of ever wanting...I just can't get my arms around it's 1990's interface. Until it does VAST will remain a niche product for people who don't mind remembering that the phasers are effects codes 250-269 or that the EQ's were in effects presets 350-355. Or the list of available mod sources was like 100 items long (awesome!), but they only display one at a time as you scroll a and lot of them are undecipherable abbreviations (bummer). Or what the difference is between keymap 999 and 998 is.

 

I seriously have to keep a 5 page cheat sheet next to me when I'm programming for a show.

[Tom Williams]

What's funny to me is how the current darling of the industry -- the Hydrasynth -- resembles a knobby VAST architecture when I watch the demo videos. Except they all talk about how easy it is. Simple -- select a wave, optionally put it through some mutants, add some filters and effects -- all doable in a Kurzweil VAST layer, more or less. Only we call them "pages" and "DSPs"

 

Although I've never done a 16 layer piano, I've made plenty of wonderful sounds with a saw or two going through a filter into a chorus. I've taken other people's voices -- guitars especially -- and tweaked the heck out of 'em until they were my own instrument.

 

VAST doesn't have to be hard, unless you want it to. (I get into some of the deep stuff too, but that's optional.)

 

P.S. I've just ordered my fifth Kurzweil -- and my first ever new one. So yeah, disclaimer time, I'm a bit of a fanboy.

[felis]

....

P.S. I've just ordered my fifth Kurzweil -- and my first ever new one. So yeah, disclaimer time, I'm a bit of a fanboy.

 

Is it the PC4-7 that you ordered?

[Tom Williams]

Is it the PC4-7 that you ordered?

Yup.

[hipogrito]

VAST doesn't have to be hard, unless you want it to. (I get into some of the deep stuff too, but that's optional.)

 

Nailed it!

 

Just because you can do crazy stuff doesn't mean you have to do crazy stuff. And with the K2700's 1500+ factory Programs and 700+ multis you can find sounds close enough to what you want that it's pretty easy to start from those.

 

Regards,

Fran

[Iconoclast]

What's funny to me is how the current darling of the industry -- the Hydrasynth -- resembles a knobby VAST architecture when I watch the demo videos. Except they all talk about how easy it is. Simple -- select a wave, optionally put it through some mutants, add some filters and effects -- all doable in a Kurzweil VAST layer, more or less. Only we call them "pages" and "DSPs"

 

Although I've never done a 16 layer piano, I've made plenty of wonderful sounds with a saw or two going through a filter into a chorus. I've taken other people's voices -- guitars especially -- and tweaked the heck out of 'em until they were my own instrument.

 

VAST doesn't have to be hard, unless you want it to. (I get into some of the deep stuff too, but that's optional.)

 

P.S. I've just ordered my fifth Kurzweil -- and my first ever new one. So yeah, disclaimer time, I'm a bit of a fanboy.

 

I have a Hydra-synth, and I have to agree: they did a fantastic job of blending menus with dedicated switches. They do have a fair number of hard wired buttons and switches on the thing, and to be honest there's a few "head-scratchers" about it's architecture, but I rarely find it a waste of time to deep dive. It's still a young product from a new company so I think some of that is to be expected and probably nothing that can't be fixed in future updates.

 

I just received an Arturia Polybrute, and the great thing about that very complicated piece of kit is the editor; Polybrute Connect. It is amazing, simple to use, and really leverages the product. Compare that with basically anything SoundTower touches. I think VAST could be made infinitely more usable with just a decent simple computer editor with dropdown menus, but the SoundTower Forte editor is worse than worthless. While on the subject of editors: a 3rd party just came out with a fully functional editor for Hydrasynth on his own and it appears to work just fine. Why is this so hard for SoundTower to do? I mean the OB-6 editor is about 70% functional and 30% trash-ware too.

 

I'm also a guitar player and another great example is the Line6 Helix. For as complicated as that thing is, it's dead easy to use and has the smartest thing ever: small "scribble strips" above the assignable controllers that tell you what you actually assigned to the controller. It was a terribly expensive jump in product price for them but fair to say that it's become the dominant player in the market. Every band that I play in (currently 5) has a player who uses a Line6 Helix. When you consider that the original price of a Helix was about half a Forte7, that was one expensive pedal board, but they guessed correctly that people would pay it if it sounded good and was easy to program. OBTW it has a very functional computer based editor librarian that they developed in-house only after the users pretty much revolted over the lack of one.

[jarrell]

It is unfortunate about the SoundTower editors for Kurzweils. I used the SoundTower PC3 editor about 10 years ago, and pretty sure it corrupted data sent to my PC3. So, I am leery of using their PC4 editor to send any data to my PC4, although I might use it to just look at patches or multis (being careful no edit buffer data was sent as well). Whether the editor is feature complete or well designed UI-wise is another matter, of course. The SoundTower PC4 and Forte editors may be fine, of course, but I do note that the PC4 editor is still at version 1.0.0 from April 2020. They are set to (or may have just released ) a corresponding editor for the iPad; don't know anything about that.

 

I agree with Fran that starting from an existing patch and tweaking it often accomplishes what you need, or at least what I need, and allows one to incrementally learn VAST. Sure, things can always be improved - for example, instead of effect codes having numbers, they could also have category tags like patch sounds do. That way without knowing the of ID numbers, you could quickly call up and choose from all phaser objects. But I have to say, coming from the K2000 and PC3 days, the new Forte and beyond generation's display and UI are so much better, Kurzweil definitely invested development time into providing a better onboard user editing experience.

[Jim Alfredson]

I would love to see someone make a computer editor or an iPad based editor for VAST. It is so deep (hence the name) and you can do so many amazing things with it but it can be a bit fiddly to wrap your head around and navigate through the menus. But it sounds really, really good and there's so much power under the hood of the PC4 (and the Forte... RIP) that I'm really excited to play with the new K2700.

[PianoMan51]

When MS Windows first came out the joke was that IBM now meant 'I"m Becoming a Mac".

 

I bought my K2500XS in the mid 90s and loved everything about it. Except carrying it and trying to remember where I was in the menu-diving maze.

 

Ever since then my impression of most every keyboard with 'exciting new features" is 'They are Becoming a Kurzweil".

[Lady Gaia]

I've certainly considered working on a VAST software editor from time to time. I think there are some creative ways to present it all that could drastically simplify matters. The biggest hurdles are that the user base is spread thin across different computing platforms and different iterations of VAST hardware and software, and that for many years the SoundTower software has been available for free so I'm not sure many people would see the software as something they'd consider paying for.

[mojkarma]

I would love to see someone make a computer editor or an iPad based editor for VAST.

 

Maybe I'm missing something here, but there already is a vast editor for practically every Kurzweil model from Soundtower and it is free. The problem is actually that Kurzweil and Soundtower don't cooperate very well together and the editors often have some very nasty bugs which can even destroy all your existing programs in the keyboard. Soundtower is also painfully slow in sorting out bugs or adapt the software to the actual state of the keyboard (does the editor still show only four parts in the multi mode for the Forte?) but a computer editor definitively exist.

[Lady Gaia]

It's impossible to dismiss reliability as major factor. Software which works 95% of the time is remembered vividly as software that goes wrong too often to be trusted. Look at the reputation of something like autocorrect!

 

So that's a part of it. The other aspect is that Soundtower makes their living by supporting everything on the planet with the least effort necessary. You can edit everything in a VAST program, but it's not like they've taken the time to make it easy. When I dream of an ideal editor for VAST instruments, I dream of something where I can lay out an arbitrary DSP block chain describing what I want, and the editor figures out how to split my complex flow into cascaded layers for me. I'd also want the ability to define a collection of layers by what they have in common and where they differ rather than trying to get one layer right, cloning it, and then making changes. Inevitably, I realize something I forgot to put in the original layer and I have to go back and add it to all the layers I've already cloned. It would also be nice to hide all the settings that aren't actually affecting the sound of a patch - until I decide to add them.

 

The goal of a good editor shouldn't just be to expose everything, but to make everything much more approachable.

[Stokely]

I'm resurrecting this thread, now that I have a Forte.   It's *exactly* relevant and I was about to post something very similar, so hopefully that is ok!

I've never been too much of a from-scratch programmer on any synth, I tend to find an "in the ballpark" program and go with that.  However, I had some issues trying to do this with my PC3 (almost everything I tried worsened the patch!) and am considering diving into VAST.   Iconoclast's post above kind of describes me, I get a bit frustrated with spending tons of time and getting nowhere--and I'm a database programmer by trade so logic is my business!  But in "music mode" my programming patience tends to be minimal.

My first basic question is about layers.  Layers on another synth would make me think multitimbral, a layering of existing programs.  Obviously here they are more building blocks, perhaps similar to Elements on the Montage/Modx?   I got a bit surprised when I took a simple-sounding mono lead and went to turn it into a Styx-inspired root-plus-5th Oberheim sound...there were 14 (!) layers in that program, and all of them appeared to be across the whole range of the keyboard.   I thought perhaps layers would be akin to oscillators, and perhaps they are, but I wasn't expecting to see so many that looked to be doing all the same thing!  

So certainly there is a learning curve.

I already grabbed DW's patches (thanks!)--any other good recommendations?   I may or may not become a from-scratch VAST expert so I won't turn my nose up at good suggestions!  My use case is a classic rock cover band, at home I use software so my sound needs are rather simple.  In the past I have fumbled at things as relatively simple as a good poly synth (think Loverboy, Simple minds or Rush subdivisions...)