Virtual Vintage Analog

[ProfD]

I have yet to read or hear a reasonable explanation for "why" a musician would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound. 

 

I get the whole nostalgia trip from instruments to cars and everything in between especially among middle-aged men.  Great post above about it.🤣

 

Otherwise, pining for *old* sounds seems counter-productive to making *new* sounds and/or music. 😎

[AnotherScott]

6 minutes ago, ProfD said:

I have yet to read or hear a reasonable explanation for "why" a musician would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound. 

...pining for *old* sounds seems counter-productive to making *new* sounds and/or music. 

Not everyone is interested (or only interested) in making new sounds/music. Tons of players (most gigging players, I'd bet) do covers, and want the old sounds. Also, old sounds can still have a desirable character that can be used in new music as well. It's not like we've stopped using acoustic piano, rhodes, or B3 sounds just because they're been around for so long. The mellotron sounds have certainly made occasional comebacks, and not only in stuff that is supposed to sound "retro."

[ProfD]

16 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

Not everyone is interested (or only interested) in making new sounds/music. Tons of players (most gigging players, I'd bet) do covers, and want the old sounds. Also, old sounds can still have a desirable character that can be used in new music as well. It's not like we've stopped using acoustic piano, rhodes, or B3 sounds just because they're been around for so long.

Sure.  I have consider that there are some folks who want to authentically recreate the past. 

 

However, most players are not carting around vintage synths or a real acoustic piano or electromechanical in order to get that *old* sound. 

 

Even the living artists and musicians who made those records and still tour are using some type of facsimile KB(s) or software that sounds good enough.

 

As mentioned, some Virtual Analog synths, ROMplers and DPs get close enough that sonically the difference is negligible.

 

Also, the newer KBs incorporate more features and functionality that allows one to do even more if so inclined. 

 

In the future, I believe the ASM Hydrasynth will become the standard go to synth for those types of sounds. 😎

[BluMunk]

40 minutes ago, ProfD said:

I have yet to read or hear a reasonable explanation for "why" a musician would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound. 

 

I get the whole nostalgia trip from instruments to cars and everything in between especially among middle-aged men.  Great post above about it.🤣

 

Otherwise, pining for *old* sounds seems counter-productive to making *new* sounds and/or music. 😎

Because there's no reason why finding a new tone/timbre needs to be part of creating new music.

Like, one could just as easily ask: "why do people even play violins? It seems counter-productive to making *new* sounds and/or music."

One could think about particular combinations of timbres/features/mechanics as unique instruments. And so, there's no reason to, for example, stop using the Prophet sound just because the instrument is approaching 50 years old. If the instrument I connect with (or hear in my compositions) is the Prophet, then pursuing variations on that instrument to find the one that fits *me* makes sense. So, in that sense, it's reasonable for those looking for a particular sound to get particular about the details in the same way that an orchestral player might get really particular about the details of their specific violin or flute or whatever, and might spend lots of money chasing that perfect fit <i>for them</i>. There are plenty of options and variations to suit different sensibilities, as well as "pretty damned good" versions to be had for cheap(er) for those who don't care quite so much.

In the keyboard world, the big issue I see (as I judge folks with power and confidence anonymously from behind my monitor 😜 ) is that there is often a lot of discourse about how shitty option X is whenever the new thing comes out, pushing folks who really can't hear or don't care about the difference to keep trading "up" for something better. That sense of pursuing the perfect can edge into pro-audio-woo land pretty easily. And, we're notoriously indecisive- we often want <i>all</i> the sonic palate options. So, give me that authentic sound and feel of the Prophet 5, but also that low-fi 90s rompler version that was central to so many hits of the 90s and 2000s, and give me the clean hi-fidelity modern analog version, but also let me dial in some of the analog imperfections from the original version only when I want them, plus I want the VA version with routing and mod capabilities that didn't exist on the original, and, and, and, and . . . 
 

[ProfD]

6 minutes ago, BluMunk said:

Like, one could just as easily ask: "why do people even play violins? It seems counter-productive to making *new* sounds and/or music."

There is no reasonable facsimile of a violin. I doubt that most violinists are pining for a Stradivarius.😁

 

My posted was aimed at the subject of this thread and synth sounds. 

 

IOW, an Oberheim OB-Xa is not the only synth capable of recreating the "Jump" patch.😎

[AnotherScott]

24 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Sure.  I have consider that there are some folks who want to authentically recreate the past. 

 

However, most players are not carting around vintage synths or a real acoustic piano or electromechanical in order to get that *old* sound. 

Right, but as I read it, your question was not about carrying around actual vintage gear... you asked about why someone "would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound" by which I thought you meant a new instrument that could sound as much as possible like an old one. And many players DO use that kind of gear, which is what much of this thread has been about. Not too many people want to carry around a Jupiter 8, even if they're lucky enough to have one. But one of the modern Rolands that can closely emulate those sounds can be a desirable proposition. Really, I think there are users with different reasons for their interest in VA. They may want to duplicate old classic sounds to their level of satisfaction, or they may want to create new original sounds that still have the overall character/vibe associated with those old synths.

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

I have yet to read or hear a reasonable explanation for "why" a musician would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound. 

 

It depends on how you define "vintage." I define it as having imperfections associated with analog circuitry that add sonic variety. This variety is not an inherent part of digital sound generation and processing, but editing can emulate the imperfections.

 

That definition also means it's possible to add a "vintage" veneer to totally new sounds. The two are not necessarily incompatible.

[ProfD]

52 minutes ago, AnotherScott said:

Right, but as I read it, your question was not about carrying around actual vintage gear... you asked about why someone "would desire an exact copy of a vintage sound" by which I thought you meant a new instrument that could sound as much as possible like an old one.

I could have provided more context in my query.  But, I knew my fellow forumites would get the gist of it. 

 

The variety of tools available to us nowadays provide a myriad of possibilities when it comes to sounds and synthesis.😎

[Iconoclast]

I think we could debate what "vintage" actually means for a while. My opinion is that vintage, in terms of synthesizers, means capturing the inherent innacuracies that made these older instruments seem more alive than modern, more precise, instruments.

In my stable of instruments, if I really want something that sounds legit analog and vintage, in order of preference:

1. An actual analog machine, preferably a modern one with a vintage mode that adjusts not just the tuning, but also the looseness of envelopes and filters. This is noticeably better than anything I've heard from Nord, Kurz, Yamaha (the only romplers I have a lot of experience with)
2. Some of the more recent VSTs are doing a great job of this. I'm thinking specifically of the new Arturia synth models. Their recent OBX, Jupiter, Juno, Prophet models are very alive. In a blind test, some of these are too close to confidently call on a regular basis.

3. ASM Hydrasynth has a couple macro controls that make multiple parameters more/less tight.  But placed right next to the real analog machines, you'll hear the difference.
4. I'd probably put Kurzweil before any of my other Romplers I'm familiar with (Nord and Yamaha...but I have no experience with Korg or Roland) but honestly they're all a distant 4th and could probably be picked out in a blind test by a lot of us here.

I will sometimes try to get a typical well known sound out of several machines side to side just for fun and I've always found that the romplers come up with passible but kind of blase sounds. Try the standard Jump patch  across platforms that all purport to put out the same waveform through the same modelled or actual filter controlled by similar envelopes, yet the difference across a couple of synth engines can be really telling.
 

[Tusker]

We all make our trade-offs based on personal taste, budget and context.

 

In my journey, I've had to compromise, not in a "real versus fake" way (aka a Sugar versus Sucralose - great analogy Timwat!) but in a "complexity versus simplicity" way. I was first blown away by synths which were wielded by the likes of Keith Emerson and Isao Tomita so I have a natural preference toward the Moog character, but can I have some of the Moog character in an easy to use way? With occasional polyphony? And some creative sound-design?

 

After many years of gigging with hardware, I am almost completely "in the box". Even within the box there are trade-offs of complexity. I use Reaktor but it takes too long to patch something and Diva doesn't have all the variables I would like to add. The Moog emulations from GForce, Native Instruments and Synapse Audio are very good sounding but limited in scope. So I spend a lot of time in Zebra which is a middle ground. There are other fantastic synths in roughly the same space: Omnisphere, Pigments and Dune 3 come quickly to mind, but I clicked with Zebra.  Regardless of the tools used, I find that character emerges out of a few imprecisions. If you'll forgive my replaying some of the excellent points already made above (Iconoclast 👍), I'll list the things I do to create character simply in any modern synth.

 

1) Noise - just a bit of white noise running through the architecture adds a bit of character. Analog circuits are rarely silent.

2) Imperfect oscillators - Oscillators can sometimes jitter at audio rates. A bit of noise modulating an oscillator can create the "grungy oscillator" which sounds like those old synths with substandard voltage controls.

3) Imperfect pitch - Old oscillators don't have perfect intonation. Many of them tune better at high frequencies, so if you scale your drift toward the lower frequencies you can enjoy that detuned buzz when you are down low and a more precisely tuned sound up high which cuts through.

4) Imperfect waveforms - Many analog oscillator waveforms are more rounded so you can round them in a wavetable synth or roll-off the highs with a filter before the "VCF" if you want that warm sound.

5) Distortion - The Moog Modular Mixer (well replicated in the Grandmother and Matriarch) overdrives very musically. A little pre-filter distortion helps your vintage sound, but it's not just about adding frequencies. The mixer reinforces the fundamental frequency of the waveform when pushed. That is different from rolling off the highs. It's more like putting in a sine wave in addition to a saw wave to reinforce the fundamental. Doing this trick in most digital synths is tricky because you need to lock (sync) the sine and saw together so they don't turn to mush. This may conflict with your other goals for the patch. You can also add distortion to emulate the VCA behavior, but I find that pre-filter distortion yields character more conveniently. You can always add another amp simulation downstream if you are eager to emulate Jan Hammer's Kustom cabinets!

6) Imperfect envelopes and LFOs - Zebra has a ModMap with 128 random steps. I just patch a few of those into the architecture where it really matters (VCF-ADSR Attack and Decay times for example)

7) Envelope Slopes - This is a huge area to play in. You can use an MSEG instead of an ADSR for volume and filter, to emulate specific envelopes. For example, Don Buchla's LPG modules use vactrols to yield a very musical blip. It's a great envelope shape for percussion and plucked sounds. I find that an MSEG can imitate that LPG shape better than an ADSR can. (And you can modulate it precisely to seem as though you are damping the drum skin or palm muting a string. 👍)

 

Well, that's my seven most convenient tricks I love to use for character. These tricks also add organicity for sounds you would not readily find in most vintage analog synths. Sounds featuring DX FM, comb filtering and physical modeling can also benefit from imprecision. There is nothing sacred about imprecision. It's just a case of dialing it in according to your preference. We live in an amazing musical time when we can design our own voice. That's awesome isn't it? 😀

 

 

 

[CyberGene]

@Tusker these are all golden advices, much appreciated 👍🏻

[Stokely]

Tusker, hopefully Zebra 3 comes out in the next few years, because it's going to be a powerhouse from what I've read from Urs on u-he's kvr forum.   I bought Zebra 2 when it went on a rare sale partly for the reason that you get a major discount on Z3, in fact it's free if you own both Z2 and Dark Zebra.

I appreciate your info above, I'm not a great programmer but those are helpful tips!

One thing that being in the box makes easy is automating any number of fx plugins on your tracks, so you can completely change the sound in crazy ways.  Yes you could do that with hardware fx as well but not as quickly or easily, and automating parameters isn't as simple.   Granted, if you wanted the synth to modulate those fx plugin parameters that might not be possible and you'd do it within the synth (but then again, it just might if the DAW supports any inter-plugin stuff).  My needs tend to be simpler, I find a preset in the ballpark and tweak   

Speaking of "vintage", I'll freely admit that I enjoy making stuff that "brings me back".  While I'm not a "synthwave" expert and probably barely know what it means, I made a little tune the other night that sounded like it could have been on Miami vice, or Stranger Things for that matter!   Feel and sound-wise at least, not quality-wise      Mostly with Diva, which excels at those types of 80s sounds.

 

[Tusker]

23 hours ago, Stokely said:

Tusker, hopefully Zebra 3 comes out in the next few years, because it's going to be a powerhouse from what I've read from Urs on u-he's kvr forum. 
 

(OT) I too am super-stoked! Urs little video promises to offer new ways of morphing waveforms, MSEGS and modulation maps on the fly....

 

Phaseplant has something similar in it's LFO table which is also cool. These kinds of expression might get us to think beyond the classic sounds which first stirred our imaginations. ...

[Iconoclast]

When the OB-6 came out with it's "analog" mode in the last OS, I was amazed at how much better it sounded. Considering that it was already a copy of a vintage machine, I was a bit surprised at how much better it sounded. What's really cool is it has put it into a single knob so you can go from pristine tightness to being able to hear each individual envelope/filter in a sweep.  Things like Rush's Tom Sawyer filter sweep sound completely different when you are able to recreate this loosness. Try the same sound on a Kurzweil or Nord and you'll see how it quickly looses it's magic.  Using VAST, if you're a genius and have a ton of time, you might be able to program in varying curves etc. but on most true VA machines these days, this can be done with a single control that has a macro effect.

 

This has probably been shared before and it's in relation to the Prophet 6, but it's basically the same control by the same company demo'ed by a dude who really knows what he's doing.

 

[AROIOS]

On 8/17/2022 at 4:54 PM, Iconoclast said:

...

I will sometimes try to get a typical well known sound out of several machines side to side just for fun and I've always found that the romplers come up with passible but kind of blase sounds. Try the standard Jump patch  across platforms that all purport to put out the same waveform through the same modelled or actual filter controlled by similar envelopes, yet the difference across a couple of synth engines can be really telling.
 

Speaking of the OB Brass from "Jump", here's a sample of my attempt at it. I'll leave it to everyone to speculate which synth(s) was(were) used.

[Iconoclast]

Sounds pretty close. You got the growl/buzz and the reverb right. I can hear a tightness to the tuning and envelopes that makes me think it's digital. The crowd would go wild and no one in your band would look at you sideways. That's a way better Jump than what I have on my Forte or Nord Stage 3.

I tried to re-create it on my boards so here's a bunch of clips of a song we all hate. But the interesting thing is it's a terribly simple patch. Two saws slightly detuned. On some of my boards I blended in a little sub if it sounded thin and it didn't start sounding organ-like in the R hand.  There's a bit of envelope on the attack of amplitude and filter (though the filter is almost wide open depending on the board/program). The lineup is OB-6, Polybrute, Pigments, Arturia OBXa, Hydrasynth, Stage 3, Forte.  The Forte I did not program. The others...well, I'm sure I could do better if all I wanted to do all day was program Jump.  I think I got close with a couple, but the two analog machines just do it without much work.

The point being, not to hang yourself after listening to the Jump intro 7 times, but that even though these parameters are pretty simple, you can definitely hear the difference.

Would anyone care? eh, I dont know. But I know that once you get used to hearing the OB-6 do it, you can't unhear the difference.  

 

[Iconoclast]

If you made it through all 7, congrats: in order they are:

Kurze Forte, Nord Stage, Polybrute, Hydrasynth, Arturia OBxa (arturia's dry Jump Patch with my effects), Arturia Pigments (my patch), OB-6.

[CyberGene]

I’m surprised the Hydrasynth sounds so bad 😳 All others are more or less good. When I have time I’ll try if I can recreate that Jump patch on mine although I’ve never been interested in that cliched patch 😀

[Tusker]

3 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Kurze Forte, Nord Stage, Polybrute, Hydrasynth, Arturia OBxa (arturia's dry Jump Patch with my effects), Arturia Pigments (my patch), OB-6.

Thanks for sharing this. 👍

 

I was impressed with how well the basic tonal quality of the Forte held up.

[Iconoclast]

5 hours ago, CyberGene said:

I’m surprised the Hydrasynth sounds so bad 😳 All others are more or less good. When I have time I’ll try if I can recreate that Jump patch on mine although I’ve never been interested in that cliched patch 😀

After recording it, I have to agree with you. The fault might be with my programming; I have it panned too hard and the effects aren't quite right. But my Hydra is a 49 key version that makes it so you can't get the low C without transposing after you hit the first low C octave.  Also, one of my main problems with the hydra is that the "analog" control on it seems to put it out of tune more than effect the envelopes and filters, so that by the time you get those as sloppy as you want, the synth is more out of tune than you want.  I think this is one of the reasons that people say you can't get the "digital ness" out of it; a complaint that is somewhat justified...don't worry I'm not selling it.

One thing with the Hydra is you have so many modulation possibilities that, if you have the time, you could assign LFO's and envelopes galore to nudge parameters and get it to breathe a little more, in the manner that Tusker described above. However, who has time to do that for a simple Jump patch when there's other platforms that give you that live/vintage feeling with the adjustment of 1 or two settings?

This is something that, by the way, the OB-6 and the Polybrute seem to nail. The Polybrute has discrete controls for pitch vs envelope accuracy, and the OB just seems to do it right with a single knob...set it at around 30-40% and it's just wonderfully sloppy without sounding broken.

I understand the patch being cliche, but it's so simple that you'd think you could do it with any board...yet they all sound different.

[Iconoclast]

2 hours ago, Tusker said:

Thanks for sharing this. 👍

 

I was impressed with how well the basic tonal quality of the Forte held up.

I'll admit, it sounds better recorded than it does in the room. I actually think the Nord sounds a little better which surprised me. I was really disappointed in how the Hydra sounded and then also disappointed in the Arturia OBX, especially as that's their opening patch in that software. It's really not that close for a signature patch. So I tried it with Pigments and I think that's superior, although I'm cheating a little with some of the options that Pigments gives you; I think I have the voices stacked at 1.2. The Polybrute Patch is pretty low in volume in my demo, but sounds pretty awesome in the room and I think is one of the best. Obviously I think the OB-6 is the gold standard for this.

[CyberGene]

Here’s my attempt at Jump on my Hydrasynth. I haven’t tried too hard and haven’t compared it to the original recording though, just tried to make a sound that is as buzzy and powerful as possible. 
 

P.S. listening to the original record I think they stacked two recordings left and right to make that wide sound. I also think it was EQ-ed to sound brighter. And of course there’s reverb and probably chorus. I used reverb and chorus on mine but obviously way too lightly. 
 

[Al Coda]

5 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

also disappointed in the Arturia OBX

 

This is the software vs hardware dilemma always,- the balancing act between accurate modelling and consumption of CPU cycles.

I try Arturia since they appeared on the market w/ their vintage emulations and as much as I tried to love ´em (last but not least because of their photo-realistic GUIs) I didn´t pull the trigger up to now.

They got better and better,- no question, but their devices became more and more CPU hungry too,- comparable to TAL JP-8 and Uhe devices like Repro and Diva.

I also recognized I got better results w/ the discoDSP OBX-d and Sonic Projects OP-X Pro II vs. Arturia OBX-a.

 

And as much I wished it would,- not even their Matrix-12 is able to replace my Oberheim Xpander, nor does their Minimoog emulation replace my real Mini.

Cherry Audio Miniverse comes closer to the raw tone of my Minimoog D, even the envelopes of the real deal are still a bit snappier vs. the software (about 1ms vs 2ms w/ attack set to zero).

 

And we´re talkin´ about year 2022 while Creamware Minimax already in the early 2000s nailed it very good on a single ancient Analog Devices SHARC 60MHz DSP when used in monophonic mode (like the real deal) as did their polyphonic 3 OSC "Bluesynth", Pro12/ Profit-5 (Prophet 5), ProTone (Pro One) and Prodyssey (Arp Odyssey),- just only to mention the stock Creamware/ S|C devices.

 

Freerun OSCs w/ in every original hardware synth different "vintage shaped" waveforms, zero latency self resonating filter models, snappy ENVs w/ "vintage shaped" curves, freerun LFOs allowing audio rate modulaton and modelling of musical sounding non-linear distortion of OTAs and other components across a "vintage" circuit design costs substantial amount of CPU/DSP cycles and processor cache.

The latter is (not only) important for voicecount and consumates more power, consequently produces heat which both is the enemy of mobile devices.

And VST/ AU standard is also old already.

That´s why we see CLAP now.

 

And on both, the Intel-, AMD and whatelse consumer CPUs as also the more specialized DSPs, there´s the balancing act polyphony (voice count) vs. sonic quality always.

 

Anyway,- IMO the architecture and purpose of processors we find in windows PCs up today is not optimized for the music industry,- for the main part.

That ruled also for Apple´s "Intel" times and MIGHT change somewhat w/ the M1 / M2 (X) chips.

But I also have the impression these are primarily optimized for graphics and even they seem to run more plugins in a host than before.

But more features or devices running simultaneously doesn´t mean better sound.

 

I believe, when a good developer would be sure about the user is willing to sacrifice his machine for just only THAT virtual instrument in standalone mode,- we´d get better sound.

In most cases multiple oversampling improves already.

But then, you´d need a separate machine for each VI used in a live rig which rendered the virtual stuff obsolete and inefficient.

For that money, you can buy hardware !

 

And who can afford and needs that sound quality, should buy hardware.

 

It´s all out there,- Oberheim OBX-8, Sequential Prophet 5 (and 10) and digital toys like Roland´s Jupiter-X.

Alone w/ these and a quality DP (or workstation like Forte/ K2700) and organ clone,- you´d cover almost everything,- except you do hi track count movie scoring or such where you need a ot of specialized plugins.

 

Back to the "Jump" patch ...

It´s one of the most simple, if not the simplest patch being created on an analog synth ever,- and then these significant sonic differences in the audio examples above and across the palette of devices in use,- ouch !

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

[Tusker]

I think that in the right hands and with the right tools, the digital emulation of analog synths is largely solved.

 

People have made this claim since the early 2000s and we have always found differences, but the claim is much more robust today. Why? Moore's law has been hard at work for two decades and modeling has improved. Computational power is still a constraint of course. Computation constraints are one reason why many of us are willing to work with generalized topologies rather than specific emulations. However, authentic emulations like the Softube 72, Synapse Legend and Repro 5 direct the available resources at the most important issues to model a specific synth. The results are very musical and multi-dimensional. Let your ears be the judge. 

 

 

[Al Coda]

16 minutes ago, Tusker said:

I think that in the right hands and with the right tools, the digital emulation of analog synths is largely solved.

 

..., authentic emulations like ... and Repro 5 direct the available resources at the most important issues to model a specific synth. The results are very musical and multi-dimensional. Let your ears be the judge.

 

 

You might have recognized I considered TAL JP-8 and Uhe Repro (5) as well as Diva being top-emulations, but also very CPU hungry ones,- depending on how many voices  have to be calculated as also depending on which level of patch-complexity is in the ballpark.

With analog hardware, I don´t have to wrap my head about polyphony.

There´s a given voicecount I can use w/ every patch being programmable.

This is not the case w/ software, may it run on stock computers or DSP hardware.

 

Repro and JP-8, they both sound really good, but how many plugins will run on my laptop for gigging where I need a stable host, some FX plugins and lots of other devices as well,- p.ex a organ clone like IKM B3X and NI Kontakt Multi playing several sample sets in a song, EPs like Rhodes, Wurli and Clav, AP, strings, brass etc..

 

B.t.w.,- like many here, I like Zebra 2 a lot and in a real world scenario vintage emulations aren´t urgently necessary IMO.

It´s possible to get lots of these sounds from Zebra alone and I consider Zebra to be less CPU hungry than Repro, Diva and JP-8.

 

☺️

 

A.C.

 

[CyberGene]

Get an Apple Silicon equipped Mac and you would be able to stack as many instances of U-He plugins as you wish and play them in real-time without a single glitch. 
 

Here’s an arrangement of an excerpt from Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony I made entirely with U-He Diva in Logic Pro. I used close to 30 instance of Diva for each orchestral instrument there (even string section was made of multiple instances) and it could play in real-time with the maximum selected quality:

 

 

[Stokely]

That is really cool!

Were all those in "Divine" quality?  By default Diva and Repro both are on the next-to-best quality.  On most patches I don't hear much of a difference but before I export things out as audio* before mixing I do set each track to the highest quality.

*I do this mainly so that I'm not tempted to tweak the parts once I start mixing    They are audio, so you can't!   I kind of think of it as, the musicians have gone home, concentrate on mixing.    Also of course it makes it much, much easier on the computer if it's just playing back a bunch of audio tracks, and I tend to use a lot of mixing plugins.   You can of course freeze tracks to help with this.    All that said, if the computer can handle it all real time, that would be great (and I'd just have to use willpower to avoid rewriting things during a mix!)

[AROIOS]

On 8/20/2022 at 2:51 PM, Iconoclast said:

...I can hear a tightness to the tuning and envelopes that makes me think it's digital...

You've got great ears Iconoclast, it is indeed digital.
 

On 8/20/2022 at 2:51 PM, Iconoclast said:

...Would anyone care? eh, I dont know. But I know that once you get used to hearing the OB-6 do it, you can't unhear the difference.

Even though there seems to be some phase mismatch between the L/R channels, OB-6 is the most organic sounding out of the bunch. Arturia's OB-Xa is half way there, but lacks bite/growl in the lower register. Thanks for taking the time to record this comparison.

Edit: Didn't see the actual order of synths your posted separately. Turns out the "phasy" one I considered organic was actually from Forte.

[AROIOS]

16 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Get an Apple Silicon equipped Mac and you would be able to stack as many instances of U-He plugins as you wish and play them in real-time without a single glitch. 
 

Here’s an arrangement of an excerpt from Bruckner’s Eighth Symphony I made entirely with U-He Diva in Logic Pro. I used close to 30 instance of Diva for each orchestral instrument there (even string section was made of multiple instances) and it could play in real-time with the maximum selected quality:

30! That's some great endorsement for the M1 CPU. A PC that smoothly runs 5 instances at divine setting would be a decent machine.

[Tusker]

21 hours ago, Al Coda said:

 

You might have recognized I considered TAL JP-8 and Uhe Repro (5) as well as Diva being top-emulations, but also very CPU hungry ones,- depending on how many voices  have to be calculated as also depending on which level of patch-complexity is in the ballpark.

 

 

Al, I mean no disrespect to your views and I am sorry if it seemed I dismissed you. Your early adoption of the Creamware Pulsar/Sharc based modular environments (and our later conversations about Creamware and Bowen's Solaris) informed my growth. Your views influenced my early adoption of the Nord Modular platform which I enjoyed very much. 🙏

 

It's just that even in my not-new 8 core Intel I9 MacBook Pro with 32 Gigs of Ram, I am habitually running multiple Zebra HZ/Reaktor plugins and Orchestral Sample Libraries (Spitfire, Orchestral Tools, Strezov) without thinking about it. Some of my patches have additional instances of Softube, Liquidsonic and Valhalla plugins directly on these instruments. I have never tried to choke the MBP on purpose and I don't plan to. I only have two hands for live play. Generating a typical rig (piano, B3,  two or three polysynths, some horns and strings) is not a problem. For a MIDI mockup I may have forty to fifty tracks of which a half a dozen to a dozen might be synth-beds and the rest are sample libraries. I render to about two dozen audio tracks to free up memory around the time that I am loading up Izotope Neutron and Ozone for mixing. That's the point at which power becomes a constraint for me.

 

Urs has worried aloud about over-spec-ing Zebra 3 and that's his job. As a user, I am just making music. 👍