Cherry Audio Teaser - November 21, 2023

[ElmerJFudd]

 

[johnchop]

ARP Pro Soloist?

[jerrythek]

10 hours ago, johnchop said:

ARP Pro Soloist?

That’s my guess… based on their “prog-rock legend” hinting. I’m hoping so. 

[Tusker]

Ha! Colony of Slippermen. I'm in! Now where's my Tony Banks pastel sweater? 😄

 

 

[Konnector]

According to the sticker on the flight case, it's a camel.

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, Konnector said:

According to the sticker on the flight case, it's a camel.

I wonder how good the filters are? 
 

 

[David Emm]

I wouldn't be disappointed for it to be a Pro Soloist. I've always felt that it would be killer with some added sounds and a touch of FX. Its a bit hard to think of a synth as a "soloing" instrument, because any of them can serve in that capacity. This one came right when TONY needed it, so it will always have his excellent imprint on it. I like the idea that it could help players think more as soloists. Not just for wailing, but serious solos. I'm enjoying being a Cherry Audio nerd. 

[Motif88]

8 hours ago, jerrythek said:

That’s my guess… based on their “prog-rock legend” hinting. I’m hoping so. 

If so, I'm in...

[David Emm]

1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:

I wonder how good the filters are?

 

 

You are one low-quality guy!   That one was so bad, it stained the carpet.

 

 

[ElmerJFudd]

51 minutes ago, David Emm said:

 

You are one low-quality guy!   That one was so bad, it stained the carpet.

 

 

😊 Thank you!  

[Bill W]

I'm really hoping for a Pro Soloist too.

[Mark Schmieder]

Maybe it's because I've been recording a lot of my saxophone parts this week, but for the first time ever, it occurred to me that I would like that "Slippermen" part much better on sax than on synth!

[Mark Schmieder]

6 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

I wonder how good the filters are? 
 

 

 

So was the band Camel known for using the ARP Soloist?

[ElmerJFudd]

32 minutes ago, Mark Schmieder said:

 

So was the band Camel known for using the ARP Soloist?

What’s not in this rig? 
 

 

[Jim Alfredson]

12 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

What’s not in this rig? 
 

 

My man liked his Phase 90 pedals.

[StickMan393]

I don't think we can read that much into the stickers. What hardware is famously associated with ELP, Genesis, Camel, and Rush? Assuming it's not a Minimoog there isn't much else, or am I missing something?

 

So I'm guessing it is something Prog familiar. They've already done Taurus Pedals. Maybe a mellotron?

or... a B3 ?

[David Emm]

It'll be that old Thomas organ with the Moog Satellite built into the top, like an octogenarian's Geddy Lee stack.

[Mark Schmieder]

22 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

What’s not in this rig? 
 

 

 

A greatly underrated keyboardist, always musical and melodic.

 

Also great to hear Mel Collins in that set! I forgot that he played with Camel in between King Crimson stints.

[Jim Alfredson]

Looks like you guys were correct.

https://www.gearnews.com/cherry-audio-pro-soloist-arp-inspiration-plus-new-synth-stack-4/

[David Emm]

Tim Shoebridge's video told me what I mostly expected: you have to live with the Pro Soloist's original sound waves. I was hoping for an additional bank of more modern ones, but hey, its a 70s analog synth, so no complaint. Providing a fuller breakout control panel helps immensely, probably getting you to a slightly more sample-quality sound here & there.

 

By the time you layer a couple of instances, it may end up sounding like a "Soloist X." Its hard to imagine Korg releasing this as hardware, so Cherry Audio hit a good mark. I like prog, but not just 70s prog. I think I'll try the demo and consider the overall voice for a while. I'm a likely buyer, though. It sounds downright pretty, which is not a term I'd normally apply. With so much Oberheim talk going on lately, its nice to see CA address one of the last few un-emulated classics.        

[Dave Bryce]

...and, as usual, it's available in the MPN Shop. 😎

 

dB

[Mark Schmieder]

Do you think they'll send notices to loyal customers?

 

Maybe I'll see something in my email box tomorrow. Being near the end of the alphabet, I'm usually one of the last in line.

[Jose EB5AGV]

 

[CyberGene]

Are Cherry Audio plugins any good? Listening to their different demos they sound all too similar, like they used one and same underlying synth engine with a few tweaks. 

[ElmerJFudd]

4 hours ago, CyberGene said:

Are Cherry Audio plugins any good? Listening to their different demos they sound all too similar, like they used one and same underlying synth engine with a few tweaks. 

Arturia gave me that impression for the longest time.  It might be due to patch design style and demo style.   I'm not sure.  

 

However, yes, I've found Cherry Audio plugins to both sound quite authentic and work as expected, as opposed to being bug laden.  

[RABid]

12 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Arturia gave me that impression for the longest time.

I had the same thought when I got the Cherry Audio Synth Stack 2 collection. Early Arturia synths had a sameness and seemed a bit low-fi. Over the years they have greatly improved. Cherry Audio seems to be at that same early stage. There seems to be a sameness and low-fi aspect to the sound. I have hopes they they follow the same path and improve the sound of their synths. The PS-3300 gives me hope and the sound quality of that release seems to be a breakthrough for CA. What CA does have is a nostalgic quality. Offerings like the Quadra can be a lot of fun and bring back memories of playing those old synths. The price is definitely right. I am hoping that at some point they focus on updates rather than pushing out a new synth every month. 

[CyberGene]

10 minutes ago, RABid said:

Early Arturia synths had a sameness and seemed a bit low-fi. Over the years they have greatly improved.

Indeed, some years ago I also found that Arturia emulations were all a variation of the same synth, and not really close to the original, however they upped their game somehow, not sure, maybe a proprietary algorithms, analysis, more workforce, better CPU-s nowadays or all of the above but their recent emulations are excellent. Not everything in the Arturia suite is good though, but they have been consistently updating their models.

[Mike Martin]

The only elements that would be the “same” across multiple Cherry Audio plugins are the effects. They’re all quite different and unique. 

[ElmerJFudd]

I’m certain all software developers share code between their plugins for many things - including gui elements and functions, midi functions, frameworks and other things that don’t relate to the sound.  They re-use FX of course, like certain types of filters used in many synths, chorus, delay, etc. that they’ve found sound good.  
 

However, any recreation of a classic synth we find these days is going to be based on new IRs and samples created from the original hardware’s oscillators, wave forms, etc.  And they all know the moment they release a plug-in popular YouTube reviewers are going to A/B with the real hardware within hours.  They’ve never been more successful mimicking hardware than they are right now, and that’s only going to improve.  

[RABid]

1 hour ago, Mike Martin said:

The only elements that would be the “same” across multiple Cherry Audio plugins are the effects. They’re all quite different and unique. 

Coding a virtual instrument actually parallels building one with circuits in many respects. With circuits you take a standard chip designed for audio and add components. Those components can vary in spec and quality. Different combinations produce different sound. We have seen popular chips used in different major brands who manage to sound unique, yet, the chips' character manages to come through.That is why some chips are more popular. Same with code. There are standard code routines available for oscillators, filters, etc. You tweak the code to try and match a sound you are trying to mimic. There are a lot of variables such as bit rate, cross mod, etc... But programmers start with textbook code and individualize it. Some focus on processor efficiency and try to get by lowering the computation rate for some routines. It is a balancing act between getting the best sound and not overloading the cpu. Every now and then someone comes up with something new, but I can guarantee that if a company has 20 virtual synths on the market, they did not write the oscillator and filter code from scratch each time.