burningbusch

Yes, I will make a strong case that the OP is not entitled to claim "Fair Use." In fact, fair use has NOTHING to do with an individual accessing copyrighted material without compensation to the owner. It is about the re-publication of typical snippets or small segments of copyrighted material. And the courts are most accepting if it is nonprofit education or non-commercial use. Think research papers, classrooms, documentaries, etc. https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/more-info.html If the OP were able to claim fair use, then any/all musicians would have full access to all recorded music under the guise of "scholarship, research." And any actress wannabe, all movies, using the same rationale. It doesn't work that way and everyone knows that or should know that. Besides, "fair use" isn't carte blanc. It is simply legal protection in a few, specific cases and there's no guarantee the court will grant you the exception under "fair use." The best option is still to go the copyright owner and ask permission to include their work in yours. Theft, copyright protection, it's mincing words IMO. The FBI puts it under the umbrella of "theft of IP." "Theft of IP" is a common phrase, so Mike's use is not not out of line. IP, obviously, is a unique type of property but it is considered property under the law nonetheless. But if calling it copyright infringement helps you sleep at night, knock yourself out. IMO, the best approach would have been for the OP to simply say: "it's nobody's business how I plan on using these utilities." It isn't my business how he uses this stuff. Funny, there are youtube videos that are in fact PD or CC, but that didn't seem to be in anyone's thinking. Though I try very hard to be a good citizen in this IP space, I'm not perfect. But I'm not going to rationalize that either. I'm not going to rationalize special case exemptions for myself. We play fast and loose with these laws because it's easy to do and chances of getting caught are slim to none. It's that simple. Busch.

What I really like about those stands is that the height and angle of both tiers appear to be completely adjustable. Is that the case? Busch.

I was told a few things regarding the GS/Vox under NDA. I wasn't told whether they're general-purpose CPU or ASIC based, so I can speculate. I suspect they are the later. The boot time of the GS is ~40 seconds which puts it in the same ballpark as ASIC synths. My Forte requires the same ~40 seconds to boot while my Integra-7 takes 25 seconds. This is a far cry from the 2+ minutes on the Kronos. Also, consider the GS is loading six large pianos plus other sounds--FAR larger libraries than other ASIC synths. I would guess one reason a manufacturer would choose Linux and a general-purpose CPU is that they could exploit the built-in functionality: APIs for GUI, file management, and I/O as well as USB and SATA for expansion options. How much Korg did this with the Kronos I can't say, but it seems plausible. The GS/Vox have no large touchscreen GUI and include only rudimentary file management. They have the look, feel and functionality of an ASIC keyboard. In the end, I don't think this matters much. ASIC does not guarantee low latency or consistent latency. The new Roland TR-8S has an issue when you move sliders while playing a pattern, the timing is completely out of whack. They will undoubtedly fix this, but does that not give you pause to think the timing might still not be ROCK SOLID? I've used hardware sequencers with obvious timing issues. There was that keyboard, might have been a Roland, which would develop laughable lag when doing a pedal-down glissando. Is that something that that's only triggered when played at the extremes or does latency become less consistent when polyphony increases? Even today it's not uncommon to find laggy interfaces with ASIC synths. 15-20 years ago, Keyboard Magazine did latency testing of a variety of synths and modules and the results were all over the place. Also, latency is not always a hardware issue. It can be found in the sample. It's not uncommon to find some space between the start of the sample and the actual attack of the sound. The Piano in Blue library had this to an extreme and they modified this based on user complaints. But others do this to add "air" or provide space for attack sample elements. Not all samples are slammed up against the start point. This translates to perceived latency by the player. Busch.

Ben covers them nicely in his demo. [video:youtube] Busch.

http://www.orbmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/BEHRI.jpg Busch.

If they nail the sound (and they probably will), this could be better than the original in that the Pro One plastic case was really pretty bad. The Behringer should, at the very least, look and feel better than the original. Busch.

I agree. Another way to introduce something similar is PARAM_DRIFT which adds randomness to a number of key parameters. In this example, I have it set on max 255. Each time you hear a note in the arp it will be different. When used subtly, it really helps to take make a static patch sound more interesting. Disturbing Past Busch.

At first sight, the NOISE GATE is an odd addition to the FXs, but it is very useful as for attack transients. Set the THRESHOLD low and the RANGE high (maybe 0.0). Set the ATTACK to something very quick and PUNCH to +1 to 3 (PUNCH determines attack level). Now set the MODE to TRANSIENT. It's only going to work with a sound that already has a quick attack. Busch.

Another tip. Often when using PWM for a string, pad sound it becomes too warbly in the bass and too thin in the upper octaves. You can use the MOD MATRIX to scale the speed of the LFO based on NOTE NUMBER. It will now be faster in the upper octaves and slower in the lows. Busch.

Thanks Prof, Menu diving on the DM12 is handled quite nicely. There's an EDIT button in each section, e.g. OSC, FILTER, VCA, etc. that gives you access to deeper functionality. Usually, these are a single page. So easier to maneuver than the more common single edit button and then a menu subsystem. While all synths provide a good deal of sonic variety, it's my contention that the DM12 is fairly unique among analogs and has some key features that are rare in synths in general. What sets the DM12 apart for me is: - Variety and quality of FX - Variety of FX routing - Ability to modulate FX parameters from good sized list of sources If a person is not interested in using FXs as an extension of sound-design and only wants to hear raw waveforms and filter, buy something else. There are better options available. Busch.

Just found out that you can have multiple envelope buttons pressed concurrently for those time when you want to exactly match EGs. Nice feature. Busch.

Another example. This is a sound I've been trying to program for some time. It's somewhat similar to the pad example above but uses a different technique to get the interaction with the reverb in a way that I like. DM12 - Infinite Busch.

Here are a couple of fun examples. Upright Piano. Thanks to Behringer for including: a) Inverted filter option b) Envelopes that can be scaled to note number (shorter at top, long at bottom) c) Fine tuning of the Tone Mod and Pitch while in sync. d) Several detuning options e) EQ f) The ability to reset the phase of the oscillators when the key is pressed (critical for sounds like this) DM12 - Old Upright Organ. Great to have a decent enough Leslie sim in an analog synth. I don't think the old Juno could do as well in this category. DM12 - Hammond Busch.

Thanks much. I know some people feel trying to emulate acoustic instruments is cheesy. I don't care. It's one thing to nail a sound using samples, but I think it's cool creating something that sounds close out of thin air. Busch.

Yeah, I've played with the PC software a bit. All of the editors are really the same, AFAIK. I prefer programming on the synth. But I'll probably use the blender at some point for ideas. I always start off with a clean initialized patch. Here's a chamber string program. Spent an inordinate amount of time getting the expressiveness the way I wanted. It plays really nice. Chamber Strings Busch.

On most synths, using LFOs for vibrato effects is pretty basic. With the DM12 you have access to a few helpful options. On something like a Minimoog, when LFO is applied to pitch it oscillates equally +/-. This gives an organ-like sound. With acoustic instruments, "vibrato" can mean +/- pitch, + pitch (guitar) and more subtle combinations of subtle pitch, amplitude and timbre variations. On the DM12, you can get pitch oscillation in a single direction by using LFO (uni). This is available in the MOD MATRIX. You would assign LFO (uni) to the pitch of Osc 1/2 (for subtle vibrato, use Osc fine) with zero depth in slot #1, for example. To have the mod wheel control this, assign MOD WHEEL to slot #2 in the matrix with a destination of MOD 1 DEPTH. Enter a value in the DEPTH, plus or minus. This is a nice option if organ-style vibrato is striking you as a bit much in your sound. BTW, if you're creating a sound using UNISON-2 or any other polyphony assignment that's staking voices, switch your LFO to MONO. In POLY mode, the LFOs are going to be all over the place rather than a single, unified LFO. POLY is a cool effect in the right place. Busch.

Here's a short Jazz Guitar example. The thing can sound pretty organic, natural maybe. Let me add. People complain about DCOs and software-based LFOs and envelopes, but there are some real, significant advantages to going this route vs. pure analog. When I was working with this guitar, the filter EG creates the pick or attack but I was finding it too percussive at 0. The fader wouldn't let me dial it into where I wanted it but using the screen I could dial in the attack with extreme precision so that it sounds more like a strum. A setting of 5 (29ms) out of a scale of 255 gave me the sound I was looking for. Four was too percussive and 7 too soft, but six (35 ms) also works. DM12 - Jazz Guitar Busch.

Thanks guys! You can't make dynamic and expressive sounds if you can't control the detail of the sound with your fingers. Here I used NOTE VELOCITY to decrease the attack and decay envelopes on the filter, while also increasing the sustain section of the filter. Add to this NOTE VELOCITY affecting the amplitude and overall filter frequency, plus aftertouch. To be able to individually control each element of the envelopes is REALLY nice. I'm playing this in real-time, but if you sequenced it and got those accents very precise I think it would sound quite nice. http://www.purgatorycreek.com/PCS-xtras/downloads/DM12/DM12-sc.jpg DM12 Brass Section Busch.

The effects section and the routing took me a little while to understand. Should have read the manual, yes? At the top-right of the FX screen, you can switch between INSERT, SEND and BYPASS. At first, this didn't make a lot of sense as the FX algorithms clearly show serial and parallel configurations, and how were you suppose to use these given the insert and send options? Maybe this is obvious to others but not to me. Anyhow, BYPASS completely bypasses the digital FX and ADCs/DACs (no effects possible). With INSERT, it completely bypasses the analog path and sends 100% of the signal through the digital FX section. SEND divides the signal between the analog and digital FX paths. You use the last LVL control at the bottom of the FX page to control balance. BTW, this level can be set to 150. So, you would use INSERT when you want to process the sound through EQ, compressor, enhancer, etc. It can be used for everything of course. You just use the mix/levels to balance everything out. SEND makes sense for traditional send effects (reverbs/delays). You would want to keep the MIX levels at 100 and use the final LVL to balance between the dry sound. If you set the MIX levels to less than 100, you will be introducing the dry sound which is going to create phasing with the analog dry signal. You might actually like this phasing (there are no wrong answers when creating sounds). Do note, you would not want to run M-9 or M-10 FX algorithm when using INSERT (painful feedback will likely result). Busch.

Yes, I very often use it as a six-voice. Busch.

Here's another example. Different program but using some of the same ideas. Here I'm using aftertouch to control the bending or detuning, so it's easier to hear and is a bit more dramatic. Fad Pad - aftertouch detuning/bend Busch.

I've been working with the DM12 for the better part of the week and am starting to get a handle on it. Well, at least a start. I hope to post more examples and observations, kind of keeping a running tab of what I encounter. Hope others join in. This uses a huge amount of reverb but I'm also doing tricks to the sound as it enters the reverb. Using the third EG I'm significantly increasing the detuning of the oscillators on release. This creates an "excitement" to what would normally be a standard reverb effect. DeepMind 12 Strings in Space IMO, this is an exceptional synth. I love it when people dismiss it out of hand based on a few demos. Busch.

Thanks man. I will stop in and talk with these people at NAMM. SF2 is a decent format for bringing samples. It supports multiple layers and the standard tuning and levels of samples. I would use it a bit on the Kronos, but there you have all the editing ability once the samples are trandered. I have no idea as to what's available in this engine. Busch.

Don't know if this was posted earlier, but there's a discounted crossgrade to Studio One Pro available right now. http://blog.presonus.com/index.php/2018/01/15/limited-time-crossgrade-discount-studio-one/ Busch.

A) That mockup photo was posted by another user, not Behringer. B) They are at the initial stages of development, this is going to take a while. C) Uli is starting to sound more like Elon Musk. Busch.