Diva vs Analogue - a real world test

[Urs]

I must tell you, that although I am most definitely not siding with Mutant, I do find it odd that you can't simply name the patch as he has asked at least twice and you responded to just below his most recent time.
rsp

I don't think it wouldn't help much. I tried several times to capture the right moment, but it depends a lot on the start phase of the oscillators to get the right filter setting at the right moment of beating. Even if one has the same patch, it may take hundreds of attempts until things look exactly the same. Any common human being would give up after three or four attempts and say "it's not possible".

[Mutant]

Well, I showed two ways to create a similar waveform in Diva.

Except that:
1. The waveform you linked here a picture of was NOT similar at all, even taking into account the beating.
2. The OP said that he got that shape without even going close to your two ways.

Diva init patch.

Check.

Triple Osc, one oscillator volume to zero

Check.

two oscillators audible

One of them volume turned down about 20-30%

one on sawtooth, one slightly left of sawtooth

Nope, that gives a completely different shape.

a bit of detune. Uhbie filter, cutoff swept by envelope, resonance half way up.

Check, but for that short part of the sound i pasted above, this is not really relevant, because right at the start the filter is almost fully open anyway.

Alternatively, try Dual VCO, shape "analog1" or "analog2". Have one osc combine triangle and saw, the other osc just saw. After recording, invert the output to get a falling sawtooth.

Can you quote me where did the OP say that he got that shape with "one slightly left of sawtooth", "triangle and saw", "invert the output" ?
No ?
Because i can quote him saying that he said:

That patch you analyse has 2 saw detuned...the resultant waveform will be constantly changing due to drifting and detune...of course I didnt use any 'effects'...

See ? There goes your theory about left of saw and triangle wave shapes.
And about the inverted wave.


You can clearly see it is not inverted (if it was, the slopes would go up instead of down...) - just that something was done to the one on the top.

While I'm not a lawyer, I'm pretty sure that it's usually the one who makes the accusation who needs to produce a proof. It might be difficult in this case, which is why understand your demand of a proof from the other side, which is why I tried to help out. I was actually intrigued by the findings and wanted to know myself. So I spent an hour on this. It's frustrating that this courtesy is met with neglect, but d'oh - that's the internet.

While i am not a scientist, i know that the one who makes an extraordinary claim, needs to provide a proof.

[SWAN808]

I must tell you, that although I am most definitely not siding with Mutant, I do find it odd that you can't simply name the patch as he has asked at least twice and you responded to just below his most recent time.
rsp

its just because if you did the test like I did - you would find the whole thing stupid and perhaps even resent the suggestion based on such tenuous evidence. Bear in mind it was asked for the preset to be uploaded for me to 'prove' it. A funny looking waveform identified based on what appears to be quite an elementary understanding of waveforms....suddenly there is the suggestion of cheating or 'processing' and even a fairly accurate effort by the designer of the synth is not enough. Anyway - I think Im gonna do a screen cap video to show the sessions and maybe do some live comparisons...thought it might be of interest given that when these sorts of tests are made they appear out of nowhere which could breed this sort of conspiracy...

The preset used in the test became 'Classic Poly' in the set. There may have been a minor adjustment but that should produce the same waveform if anyone who bought the patch is interested.

[Mutant]

I don't think it wouldn't help much. I tried several times to capture the right moment, but it depends a lot on the start phase of the oscillators to get the right filter setting at the right moment of beating. Even if one has the same patch, it may take hundreds of attempts until things look exactly the same.

Dude...
Stop and think for a moment.
Why is it impossible to take the envelopes totally out of the picture, dial the correct filter setting by knobs and just make a long note, then just wait for the correct time ?
We are not talking about the whole sound here, but a small fragment of it.
And 2 oscillators beating usually doesn't take that much time to repeat itself.
Measure the distance between his 2 oscilaltors beating and my 2 oscillators beating which i captured at about the same zoom setting and reposted the picture of in my prevous post.
Is it that much different ?
Come on.
I respect you as a developer, but you are going way too far in your devils advocate act here.
Stop it and let the accused prove his innocence.

[Urs]

Why is it impossible to take the envelopes totally out of the picture, dial the correct filter setting by knobs and just make a long note, then just wait for the correct time ?

Nothing. Do it.

[Mutant]

its just because if you did the test like I did - you would find the whole thing stupid and perhaps even resent the suggestion based on such tenuous evidence.

The question was simple: What did you do to that sound to make the down slopes look like that.
You did not provide a way to reproduce that shape.
Urs tried, but then what you said invalidated his tries completely.
Then you avoided naming the preset for weeks.
What does that tell us ?

.suddenly there is the suggestion of cheating or 'processing' and even a fairly accurate effort by the designer of the synth is not enough.

Urs arrived at his shapes by using totally different methods, even some plainly wrong, like his "invert the wave" thing, or not using 2 saws - so yes that was not enough.

Bear in mind it was asked for the preset to be uploaded for me to 'prove' it.

And i did not ask you to just upload it, i provided an alternative way - naming the preset.
Which you just did:

The preset used in the test became 'Classic Poly' in the set. There may have been a minor adjustment but that should produce the same waveform if anyone who bought the patch is interested.

OK
EOT for me.

thought it might be of interest given that when these sorts of tests are made they appear out of nowhere which could breed this sort of conspiracy...

There would be no consipracy if you named the preset weeks ago.
Hmm... But then this thread would receive way less bumps from me.
Oh ! A new conspiracy !

[IncarnateX]

Stop it and let the accused prove his innocence.

So guilty untill proven otherwise? You have misunderstood something. Neither science nor court work this way. You are the one making extraordimary assumptions here and your "evidence" is circumstantial. You have to prove to us beyond doubt that the shape in question cannot be achieved by Anything but cheating. Good luck with that.

[SWAN808]

you can hear the Classic Poly preset in the demo but it has the Diva reverb and a dash of chorus in the preset. Of course this was absent in the test.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSQ6vzKMaKQ

[zvenx]

I must tell you, that although I am most definitely not siding with Mutant, I do find it odd that you can't simply name the patch as he has asked at least twice and you responded to just below his most recent time.
rsp

I don't think it wouldn't help much. I tried several times to capture the right moment, but it depends a lot on the start phase of the oscillators to get the right filter setting at the right moment of beating. Even if one has the same patch, it may take hundreds of attempts until things look exactly the same. Any common human being would give up after three or four attempts and say "it's not possible".

Got ya.
thanks
rsp

[Mutant]

Stop it and let the accused prove his innocence.

So guilty untill proven otherwise? You have misunderstood something. Neither science nor court work this way. You are the one making extraordimary assumptions here and your "evidence" is circumstantial. You have to prove to us beyond doubt that the shape in question cannot be achieved by Anything but cheating. Good luck with that.

I proved how real Diva saw shapes look right away, you can check them yourself if you don't believe me.
Then i asked what he did to make them look strange, there was no proper answer that could let me confirm it.
Thats all.

Also i said accused, not guilty.
There is a big difference.

And it happens a lot in courts all over the world, a prosecutor accuses based on some evidence, then the attorney uses his evidence and proves that his client is innocent, then the judge gives the verdict.

[fluffy_little_something]

Maybe he used two different types of saw wave that would modify each other that regularly when retrigger is on. Not sure Diva has different types of saw waves, though.

Or ring modulation or something like that

[Urs]

Urs arrived at his shapes by using totally different methods, even some plainly wrong, like his "invert the wave" thing, or not using 2 saws - so yes that was not enough.

Gosh. Obviously, some of Diva's oscillators have different polarity for sawtooth oscillators. Some ramp up, others ramp down. If you want to make a down ramping sawtooth look like an up ramping one, you have to invert the phase. It's a natural thing.

What I did was a quick attempt to give you an example, no more no less. I have no idea how the original patch was created. Now you're holding that against the OP. I regret trying to help you. It won't happen again.

[chk071]

I think what this topic needs is more drama.

[SWAN808]

there have been plenty of suitable answers - we even had the guy Urs who makes the synth chime in! It just depends if you don't want to believe the guy who made the synth with a built in scope-or the guy on KVR who saw a funny waveform. Never mind me...is it not obvious from Urs answers that there is a lot Mutant does not know about waveforms. Its an obvious Dunning Kruger situation - one in which the developer was practically insulted.

Urs - thanks for joining in on the thread!

[bftucker]

A bizarre response concerning a £19.99 soundset, eh? A strange world it is.