KVR Audio

stillshaded · Post by **stillshaded** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 4:48 pm

A huge mistake if they didn't make this thing multi-timbral.

Drives me nuts when synth designers get so close to knocking it out of the park and then leave out something crucial. Like when Dave Smith made the prophet 12 with digital oscillators, but didn't do any of the cool stuff you can do with digital oscillators, like wavetables and bend modes. Just think of what a legendary synth it would've been if he had given it massive-esque oscillators.

If this is multi-timbral with dynamic voice count on each channel, it would be amazing. You could make entire tracks with it. Maybe if they realize they should've put it in there, the software will be flexible enough to add it in.

Uncle E · Post by **Uncle E** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 4:55 pm

It seems to only have stereo outs so multitimbrality wouldn't be so great, anyway. The Andromeda and Tetra have dedicated outputs for each voice.

stillshaded · Post by **stillshaded** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 4:57 pm

Uncle E wrote:It seems to only have stereo outs so multitimbrality wouldn't be so great, anyway. The Andromeda and Tetra have dedicated outputs for each voice.

I disagree.

It's dead easy to write a track and then record each track individually.

Hell it actually keeps me from going to crazy with the processing before I write the track.

Daags · Post by **Daags** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:24 pm

Uncle E wrote:It seems to only have stereo outs so multitimbrality wouldn't be so great, anyway.

exactly. it's doubtful they thought of everything else, built an analogue synth entirely out discrete components, but then deliver multitimbrality on a single stereo output pair. I mean, it's possible... but then that would be delivering a type of multitimbrality for the purposes of making a single complex patch... rather than as separate components to be sequenced/recorded/mixed individually...

at any rate, all we've seen so far is a single stereo output. and no other audio outputs anywhere near it. so that really doesn't bode well for multitimbrality ... and probably doesn't say much one way or the other re: bi-timbrality.

treebeard · Post by **treebeard** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:32 pm

Daags wrote:
Mushy Mushy wrote:
masterhiggins wrote:Ah, Behringer. A name synonymous with quality.
Ah, Midas. A name synonymous with quality.

Ah. Daags. A name synonymous with vigorous masturbation.

Daags · Post by **Daags** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:51 pm

treebeard wrote:
Daags wrote:
Mushy Mushy wrote:
masterhiggins wrote:Ah, Behringer. A name synonymous with quality.
Ah, Midas. A name synonymous with quality.

Ah. Daags. A name synonymous with vigorous masturbation.

Ah. treebeard. A name synonymous with taking my hot stringy loads to the face.

Glyn Darby · Post by **Glyn Darby** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:20 pm

Maybe multis could be via USB as in the access virus, they did say the editor had some tricks up its sleeve in the video.

AnX · Post by **AnX** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:33 pm

No interest in multitimbral analogs.... waste of potential

IncarnateX · Post by **IncarnateX** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:41 pm

Guys! You are of course free to play your Willies as much as you like, but "multitimbrality"? Come on, man. The article says "Kein Split, Layer oder Multimode". Don't you think that covers it? Choose another wet dream.

tehlord · Post by **tehlord** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:51 pm

I hope the screen is blue like the photos, not orange like the video.

stillshaded · Post by **stillshaded** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:52 pm

AnX wrote:No interest in multitimbral analogs.... waste of potential

are you saying that you have no interest in multitimbral analogs because it's a waste of potential, or that (behringer) having no interest in multitimbral analogs is a waste of potential? lol

Well, to me this seems another one of those "people who fart around with keyboards vs. people who make music" situations. Yea, if you can never finish a track and you just want to play around, multitimbral is not a big deal. But if you are interested in making music with an efficient workflow and without spending a ridiculous amount of money, multi-timbrality is a big deal.

And lack of more outs is not a big deal. If you had 4 parts to going and your track was 4 minutes long, that's 16 minutes of recording. Go relax for a spell, or tweak the knobs as they record.

Excluding it would just seem odd. I mean, it already has a friggin cpu in it. The amount of coding that it would take to create multitibrality has got to be relatively small compared to everything else.

I just don't have the money or the space to buy much analog gear so I'll keep my fingers crossed.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:21 pm

stillshaded wrote:
Excluding it would just seem odd. I mean, it already has a friggin cpu in it. The amount of coding that it would take to create multitibrality has got to be relatively small compared to everything else.

Doesn't multi-timbral need more hardware too?

My guess regarding the price is $1499

deastman · Post by **deastman** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 9:19 pm

Multitimbral only interests me in the sense of layers for a more complex sound. I don't need to have this one synth playing multiple parts on different midi channels simultaneously. I haven't felt the need to do that since the 90s. If I want two synth parts, I'll just record one and then the other.

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 9:23 pm

IncarnateX wrote:
transmetropolitan wrote:Minilogue can do some awesome bass sounds, but the filter isn't bass friendly. You lose a lot of low end with resonance.
You do that with just any -24 db filter if the res is any good, imo. There are several ways of dealing with this:

1) Send it through a compressor, so that volume of the overall sound stays the same, when you turn up the resonance (my first choice)

2) If you just want a static high res sound, use an eq and turn up the lows

3) If recorded, normalize it all, and then the parts where you turn up res

4) If static, why not make use of Minilogue's voice mode debth? Have you noticed that you can control both the amount of subs (1 or 2) and the volume of the subs this way?

5) Try using the -12 db filter instead. It is awesome for more dirty and agressive bass sounds.

zerocrossing wrote:Well, if it has 12 voices, then that's a decent indication that it would be at least duo timbral, no? That's how I used to deal with not having sub oscs on the Prophet 08. Not quite the same... But in some ways better.
I use this method with my JP8000, since it doesn't have a sub either in addition to it's two osc. It is more cumbersome though, and to really make it work for tweaking, your synth has to be able to e.g. control both layer's filter, amp, env etc. simultanously. Fortunately JP8000 can do exactly that but not all synths can. But the "but in some ways better" I have to disagree about. I prefer three oscs compared to that venture.

Thanks for the interests and responses guys Sometimes it is hard to know whether you write into the blue air or not

By "better" I mean you can make those extra EGs and LFOs work for you. For instance, on one layer have the LFO modulating your amp volume, but on your "sub" layer, don't. Give your main layer some sustain, but on your sub layer, make it a snappy thump with little or no sustain. You can get very interesting sounds this way. Of course, having sub oscs is nice, no doubt. One of my bass tricks is to modulate the filter an octave down from the second oscillator, and use the other layer to put down a triangle wave down. Beef galore, if DM12 allows for using the oscs as a modulation source like the Bass Station 2 does.

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Sat Jul 30, 2016 9:27 pm

deastman wrote:Multitimbral only interests me in the sense of layers for a more complex sound. I don't need to have this one synth playing multiple parts on different midi channels simultaneously. I haven't felt the need to do that since the 90s. If I want two synth parts, I'll just record one and then the other.

I agree. For the short time I had my Virus, I never used it to create more than one sound at a time even if it used more than one layer. These days, with software and a decent complement of inexpensive hardware synths, it's nice to have variety.

Behringer Analog Synth