Something interesting happening at Access Music

[ctank909]

Hello,

Just noticed following ad on Access Music website:

• Du hast gute Kenntnisse mindestens einer der folgenden Plattformen: Windows, Mac OS X,
Linux auf ARM-Prozessoren, iOS?

So, they are looking for software developer with c/c++ language, prominent in at least on of the following : Mac, Windows, Linux (with arm processor), iOS. Also they are asking experience in large software development projects.

Now, iOS is self explanatory, and ARM processors are used by most of Android tablets and phones, also with Linux OS.

So we can expect something definately happening in at least in phone/tab world regarding Virus. Hopefully NAMM January will reveal something even bigger..

[MBTC]

Indeed an interesting find. I hate gossip unless it is substantiated by some interesting news and well-aligned like this post is :)

One possibility that came to my mind at first is that maybe Access is considering creating a new generation of Viruses that move away from the Freescale DSPs and onto an ARM instruction based chip. I have not researched and honestly don't know how these compare in terms of synth-processing capability to the Freescale chips in the Virus, but given the growth in mobile over the last few years, I'm fairly sure the advancements in ARM chips dwarf the capabilities of those old formerly Motorola chips. Many times I've thought to myself that the fact that Freescale doesn't offer anything more powerful could be one of the reasons Kemper isn't moving the product line forward -- nowhere to go if faster chips aren't available (and apparently perfecting the existing integration is either too challenging or just not interesting enough to invest in). Also Kemper cut his programming chops on Motorola chips supposedly, so that combined with the ongoing sales of the current Virus and his interest in modeling amps may be contributing to lack of product refresh.

So, maybe the Ti3 will be an ARM-based beast that does things the DSPs of yesteryear could not. In some ways that would make a lot of sense, the collective developer pool and knowledge base for modern mobile chips is certainly much better than embedded systems for obscure DSPs like Freescale. Much better future for it. I would think the market for devices that use those old Freescale chips is probably shrinking rapidly in the wake of mobile progress, which would mean that Access could be crapping their pants and wondering if these chips will even be available in the future.

Lots of good possibilities, however, let me play devil's advocate for a second. When I put on my recruiter hat (because I often work as a development director and have a lot of experience recruiting developers so I've written these job requirements many times in the past), and I read that requirement, assuming your English translation is accurate, it sounds to me like they just want a general c/c++ developer who has worked on any one of those platforms, and the ARM qualification after Linux is simply to address the fragmented nature of the operating system, and the fact that iOS is sorted as the last platform is an indication that it is lowest in priority. That would tell me that the iOS experience is a nice to have but not directly relevant to the hiring goals -- that would certainly not be the case if they were working on a mobile app, the iPhone/iPad would be their lead platform and Android secondary. So, being a little pessimistic and realistic at the same time I would say this sounds more like a support role to work on Virus control than it does to do OS work on the Virus itself. I fear this may just be looking to supplement the existing Virus Control team, or worst case scenario replace a developer who is leaving.

Like you said though, maybe we will learn something from NAMM. I cross my fingers on that every year. The floorplan shows a booth rental that's the same size they have every year, but of course that means nothing by itself, there could still be a big announcement.

[nutrinoland]

Maybe they are thinking of doing something like the Modulus 002. Cloud storage, network, sharing etc... Wifi/Bluetooth remote through tablet...

[MBTC]

Maybe they are thinking of doing something like the Modulus 002. Cloud storage, network, sharing etc... Wifi/Bluetooth remote through tablet...

That's starting to sound like a Virus that will cost $5,200 US and aspires to let me connect to Facebook and Soundcloud right there on the synth so I can browse slobbering babies and bad tunes but will take a few years of updates to actually catch up with PCs and Macs and phones and enable the promised capability :)

I don't see cloud storage, sharing or whatever as adding much that a computer can't already do better. In a hardware instrument I just need it to work with the computer better. I still think they should focus on that.

[nutrinoland]

Are They aware of the integration and timing/clock issues users have been facing ? Have they acknowledged these issues over the last few years ? or do They claim that its all working fine and the issue is on the users end ?

[MBTC]

Are They aware of the integration and timing/clock issues users have been facing ? Have they acknowledged these issues over the last few years ? or do They claim that its all working fine and the issue is on the users end ?

I'm not quite sure of the current status of the issues, actually. There have been a lot of posts here about it over the years. Admittedly I don't hear much complaining about it lately, but I've thought that has more to do with folks getting used to the current state of things, making tradeoffs where needed, etc. rather than an OS update that just fixed everything. And it's been a while since I had a Virus in my hands, so I can only observe the struggles or successes of others. I've seen some folks that rave about their support, others say attempts have been unproductive.

[nutrinoland]

I definitely run into timing issues with the Arpeggiator and Delays too. they both kinda jump and skip around at times.
Not sure if it only happens when using the virus over USB.
I have never tried the analog outs for Audio or used it stand alone, so not sure.
I guess they really gotta correct these issues, if they plan to release a new Virus Ti 3 . Most SOft synths these days can do everything a Virus can do, and are very stable... so They really have to offer something very stable next time.
I am finding that hardware synths are kinda falling behind....Even Nord synths are kinda lagging behind Softsynths. The New Nord 4 has only now got LFO and Arpeggiator clock Sync. Its Oscillators only offer free running and no retrigger. Basic features for most soft synths.
Why would anyone buy VA synths anymore ?

[TweakHead]

Best thread in a long long time!

[TweakHead]

Why? Because they don't suck resources out of your main computer. Because they're instruments, with their own physical interface that's better and surely more inspiring then fiddling around with a mouse or controlling it with cheap plastic controller. Then, it's arguably better because it's a dedicated system that does not have to share its resources with the rest of the tasks a computer has to run under the hood.

The Nord Lead doesn't allow you to lock initial phase position for their oscillators, but let's remember that Virtual Analogue was first thought as a replacement for real analogue machines, giving you more polyphony and options then most of them, while still allowing you the same level of interaction with it! The last part is of course important, since they also appeal to live usage and they can easily beat any software synth on that department!

In the studio, something like the Virus can be thought of like a bread and butter thing. But you can also throw big fat poly sounds or unison patches to a mix without seeing the cpu meter go up a notch, while having perfect control to tweak when recording while you're at it - contributing to a more organic feel overall, that's the main advantage of hardware vs software btw (to my mind at least). Then, software synths are getting a lot better lately, but I still love the sound!

[TweakHead]

And the Nord only looks basic until you start messing with its morph feature! ;)

[MBTC]

Why? Because they don't suck resources out of your main computer. Because they're instruments, with their own physical interface that's better and surely more inspiring then fiddling around with a mouse or controlling it with cheap plastic controller. Then, it's arguably better because it's a dedicated system that does not have to share its resources with the rest of the tasks a computer has to run under the hood.

The Nord Lead doesn't allow you to lock initial phase position for their oscillators, but let's remember that Virtual Analogue was first thought as a replacement for real analogue machines, giving you more polyphony and options then most of them, while still allowing you the same level of interaction with it! The last part is of course important, since they also appeal to live usage and they can easily beat any software synth on that department!

In the studio, something like the Virus can be thought of like a bread and butter thing. But you can also throw big fat poly sounds or unison patches to a mix without seeing the cpu meter go up a notch, while having perfect control to tweak when recording while you're at it - contributing to a more organic feel overall, that's the main advantage of hardware vs software btw (to my mind at least). Then, software synths are getting a lot better lately, but I still love the sound!

There was a time when I could not quite get that "hardware tweaking" feel out of software, but these days with the quality of the knobs on the MK II Remote SL, and the ease of mapping each one to various controls (i.e. either just with MIDI learn or Automap, both work well), the overall feel of for example tweaking knobs on the Virus is replicated perfectly. In most respects it is actually better, because I am not limited by the physical placement of the knob on the unit (I can change where the knob is based on what type of piece I'm playing). Sitting right next to this of course is a true analog Leipzig with analog knobs (and a knob for every function), and the overall experience is actually better. On the MKII I have pots that feel as good as the pots on the Virus, or tactile knobs that are great too. Or, sliders if I want to use them for filters or the mixer.

More and more, I've come to believe that the functional gap between hardware and software was bridged a long time ago, but has since grown -- in the opposite direction. Software has surpassed hardware in a big way and hardware is struggling to catch up.

However, the limitations of hardware actually remain one of it's biggest selling points! Let me explain what I mean.

Since the early days of synths, there have always been limitations that the user of the synth must accept. Those limitations are what encouraged exploration of and experimentation of the instrument. They encouraged the user to spend so much time fiddling with the synth itself, so that after a few months the user ate/slept/breathed that particular synth's user interface (no matter how horrible) and could do things use it instinctively and effectively. When that bonding between hardware and user took place is when the really musically interesting stuff would happen.

So, that's one thing we kind of lose with software -- it's a little TOO good at times. It makes getting from point A to B so efficient, that the bonding process I mentioned above never gets the chance to occur.

I do get a "retro feeling" of bonding with my Leipzig-S for example -- it's so weird and quirky and has a mind of it's own as analog gear does, and sounds so great when it speaks it's mind. But these days are busy days, and I'm glad I have software to help achieve my goals where something like creating a substantial track with the Leipzig-S would require time I simply do not have anymore.

[Timo]

Aside from the sporadic recent pockets of analogue here and there, you could say just about every other synth in the last 15-20 years has simply been software attached to a hardware UI. They could all effectively run as VSTi's on a computer given the more than adequate CPU DSP thesedays.

Hardware synths still appeal to me as they can be run standalone. Instead of having to lug a computer, soundcard, MIDI keyboard controller and cables around and have to interact with an OS on-screen via mouse (or touchpad, God forbid), all you need is a hardware synth with its own UI. Switches on in seconds, has full instant patch recall, a UI that matches its intended use, no (measurable) latency, and hopefully no software crashes.

There's something appealing about being disconnected from a computer screen and mouse, and instead tweak a dedicated UI and connecting directly with the sound. That is unless you have an DX7, Wavestation, FS1R or similar, where old skool hardware UI was a hindrance.

However the fact also remains that, unless you have a large onboard screen or similar, there are some things that hardware can never do (easily). Other than programming the arpeggiator, the Virus has done pretty well to be able to still edit and do everything from the hardware that you can from within VC.

To keep up with competition from other VSTs, I personally wouldn't necessarily mind if Virus Control went further still and allowed more things to be done in the studio via VC that can't necessarily be done via the hardware itself - such as graphically editing oscillator or LFO waveforms akin to Z3ta+, or enabling more flexible step sequencing like Massive, or even modular editing like the Nord G2, etc. - allowing you to save such edits back onto the hardware as selectable presets to be taken on the road.

Of course a touchscreen would be awesome and plug this gap, but there's more chance of me walking on the moon...

... Virus Control via iPad/Android on the other hand would be pretty funky, neatly offloading the cost of a touchscreen elsewhere and also allowing for iPad sequencer functionality. Maybe this is the iOS/mobile reference? However if they're only just running the advert, I doubt they'd have something ready in time for NAMM.

Kemper Digital (inc. Access) are a smaller company than I thought they were, little more than a dozen or so employees in total, and they've seemingly been been putting all their energy and manpower into Kemper Amps the last few years.

Maybe the iOS reference is for Kemper Amp modelling natively on the iPad (like Amplitube has done with its iPad guitar amp suite (http://www.ikmultimedia.com/products/amplitubeipad/)), rather than the Virus? Would sound more plausible commercially, especially as there would be no hardware costs involved, unlike the Virus where iOS functionality would likely be an added-on freebie to the purchase of Virus hardware, rather than a commercially expandable tool (with further purchasable upgrades, etc.). In this sense, Kemper Amps potentially has fresh legs and a whole new market to tap into.

That said, they could do that with the Virus, turn it into a native iOS synth and charge for upgrades (unlike the free OS's we usually get) to monetize it. Actually I doubt this would ever happen, everyone with a hardware Virus would be pretty damn pissed off if it suddenly appeared on iOS for a fiver.

[TweakHead]

Yes, I think the appeal isn't just in its stand alone capabilities! It's also on the fact that it spares your main system from any stress involved in the creation and manipulation of sounds - that's still one main advantage hardware has over software.

Totally on the same page about the suggested new features! Those are exactly the ones I'd like to see implemented. Only thing to add is audio rate capable lfos, which would then be selectable as FM sources to. In fact, filter FM would also kill to. So, audio rate modulations throughout would kill!

But I've thought a little about the other, slightly more daring one, about Virus Control deviating a bit from the constraints of the hardware and enabling some added features. I think Virus Control acts mainly as some sort of hub between the "daw world" and the hardware, right? So including some features on it that wouldn't be present on the hardware, due to understandable limits of a physical interface, would mean one of two things: it would either include some sort of native generative sound features, where the plug-in would still act as a hub for the hardware, plus it would also have some things of its own up its sleeve, presumably only accessible with the hardware connection - sort like the way an ilok works. The second option would be that some features would be out of the physical interface, due to their complexity, but they'd also use the available dsp engine on the hardware. The second seems much more likely and, in a way, it's something that's happened already with the programmable arp/sequencer on the ti range.

[nutrinoland]

Clean Audio rate LFO's .... Oscillators as Mod Source.... Custom Waveforms / wavetables .... Sample and Granular synth engine..... 1 additional Real Analog Multimode Filter.... Multi segment Envelopes .... Proper adjustable Envelope Curves...Convolution/ Impulse Response Reverb...Built in Vaporizer for My Herb , Flux Capacitor for Time travel :)

Merry Christmas !

[TweakHead]

Convolution Reverbs take quite a lot of resources and so do Vaporizers ;)

Clean Audio rate LFO's and Oscillators as Mod Source is the same thing! Cheers!

[nutrinoland]

Audio Rate LFO's can go up into the Audio rate like an Oscillator can...But to Get Harmonic sounds, You need Ratios or at least Semitone increments. LFO's generally have only Hz increments. They require lots of adjusting by Ear to hit the right Ratios, that result in Harmonic tones....You would also have to Keytrack the LFO rate so it stays Harmonic across all notes....and they also have limited Waveforms compared to an Oscillator. Oscillators are more flexible too, with stuff like detuning, unison etc....

[TweakHead]

^full range, broadband oscillators can do both - like you're likely to find on many euro rack modules. That's what I meant, since the implementation of both would be somehow redundant, as far as the programming goes. ;) cheers

[Berni]

Well seeing as development of the virus ground to a halt years ago I think a VST/iOS version of the TI is definitely going to happen. As others have said, hardware synths just cannot compete with software one's anymore & will probably go the same way as the hardware sampler (remember them?)
Access are bound to cash in on the virus rep. & lucrative iOS market, it just makes plain business sense. Of course it will piss off a lot of existing virus owners but that has never bothered them before ; )

[TweakHead]

Yeah, it does make sense from a business perspective!

But it's a tricky road, that one! They also have in mind, presumably, that it would become the most wanted plug-in of all time - I'm sure most will agree on this; and piracy would be a great concern...

I get your point, but still feel like there's some uses for hardware digital to this very day! Even for studio work, there's still some uses for it! One advantage is the immediacy of the editing, the physical tweaking - which contributes to better, more inspired sounds. I'm among those who don't feel that's subjective at all! The other quite obvious advantage is saving computer's resources for demanding sounds, using unison for example.

With a good editor (and there's good ones out there now!), you can run it all smoothly without worrying about latency or timing problems, using good old midi and the audio outs. I like how Ableton has the driver error compensation feature, really useful for recording, managed to get sample accurate timing with that thing!

(for those in need of proper midi sync, check Expert Sleepers' stuff btw)

I don't think the sound is outdated to, nor its features... I mean, those old samplers had much less resolution then you get now, their memory just a breeze, some even used old formats that don't easily get by these days, or old converters - some are even praised for them, like the MPC 60, but a lot of that is just plain hype of course. But honestly don't see it happening like that for VA hardware, at least not this soon. I could easily see more manufacturer's doing something similar to Roland's Aira System 1 with its plug-out thing, allowing the same synth to incorporate a lot of different engines with their corresponding editors on screen. But then, I didn't even like that one, but still think it's a cool idea.

The way I see it, performance does matter (check new features on Cubase 8, for example) in a world where track counts can get huge! I'm always looking out for solutions to improve on this, and having some hardware does help indeed, as does stuff like Universal Audio, for example.

Think they may just go ahead and release the TI3 and keep things as they are! Clavia has done well with their new Nord Leads (A1 and 4), there's still demand for some sort of modern replacement for the Nord Modular (if only NI would listen and do some sort of Reaktor maschine when they go v6), Novation has also done well with their Ultra. Waldorf's Blofeld is another great one! Capable of very peculiar sounds. All of these combine very well with the Virus in a mix, or you can feed them to other hardware, specially euro rack stuff - much easier to do then with software plug-ins. Cheers!!

[TweakHead]

@MBTC I own the SL MK2 and to some extent I agree with you. Automap is a great software, but can't quite get the same feeling unless I edit the templates myself, special attention to the number of points per knob - so as to get the reaction speed I expect, sort like the Virus. I can't possibly engage with them with the regular templates. But all it takes is loosing some time tweaking the template and then "saving as default" for a given instrument! Then it's a bliss! I still think it beats other solutions on the market easily! ;)

[syncerely]

....Proper adjustable Envelope Curves...

This one really surprises me.
Context: I've been maniacally programming Ultranova/Mininova for a year and a half and I've had a TI2 keyboard for two weeks.
I know about the envelope modulating the envelope trick but it takes a mod slot.
The Ultranova has 16 parameters each for its 6 envelopes including attack and decay slopes.
Honestly I like many things about the Ultranova operating system more but that said I love the Virus. It sounds so sweet. The Ultranova and Virus do really go great together.

[MBTC]

@MBTC I own the SL MK2 and to some extent I agree with you. Automap is a great software, but can't quite get the same feeling unless I edit the templates myself, special attention to the number of points per knob - so as to get the reaction speed I expect, sort like the Virus. I can't possibly engage with them with the regular templates. But all it takes is loosing some time tweaking the template and then "saving as default" for a given instrument! Then it's a bliss! I still think it beats other solutions on the market easily! ;)

Sometimes in a haste I won't even bother with Automap, I will just use the midi learn of the plug-in itself and put the board out of Automap mode. The main reason is that for whatever reason I just seem to get a better knob response going direct from knob to plugin. I think like you said that is probably more due to default settings of Automap templates than any other factor. But yeah, Automap is definitely the way to go if consistency of knob placement and function is important. It also comes in handy for using the sliders with mixer mode, etc.

[MBTC]

This one really surprises me.
Context: I've been maniacally programming Ultranova/Mininova for a year and a half and I've had a TI2 keyboard for two weeks.
I know about the envelope modulating the envelope trick but it takes a mod slot.
The Ultranova has 16 parameters each for its 6 envelopes including attack and decay slopes.
Honestly I like many things about the Ultranova operating system more but that said I love the Virus. It sounds so sweet. The Ultranova and Virus do really go great together.

I too have an Ultranova, and love it. The value it provides at the price point still seems unmatched. The Virus is more powerful of course because the multi-timbrality, but the Nova synths are worthy competitors, especially when dealing with a single patch. The disappointing aspect of the Ultranova is that not many third party sound libraries for it, whereas the Virus has a massive amount to choose from.

Are you finding the USB integration from both synths to be equally reliable? Also curious what DAW you use?

[syncerely]

I too have an Ultranova, and love it. The value it provides at the price point still seems unmatched. The Virus is more powerful of course because the multi-timbrality, but the Nova synths are worthy competitors, especially when dealing with a single patch. The disappointing aspect of the Ultranova is that not many third party sound libraries for it, whereas the Virus has a massive amount to choose from.

Are you finding the USB integration from both synths to be equally reliable? Also curious what DAW you use?

I've been using Cubase Artist 7.5. Honestly the Ultranova can still be flakey sometimes following MIDI clock connected with USB. The latest operating system was an improvement and I've had it where it was not following and restarted everything and suddenly it was locked on so...

I have some experience with the Virus and Cubase but still not a lot. I have found the end of polyphony on the Virus which was pretty disappointing but I've been used to the Ultranova single timbrality so its not really that big a deal. Besides I've been rendering everything to individual tracks lately so I can really dial in the mix.

If the Virus and the Ultranova got married and had kids it would be the synth of dreams.

The Virus has so much more to remember. This oscillator syncs to that one. This oscillator hardly does anything. This LFO has a connection to X. That LFO has a connection to Y.

On the Ultranova all the oscillators, LFOs, filters, etc. are identical.

Maybe I should start another thread or something.

I know what's worse than the Virus not having envelope slope control... the number of poles on the filters are dependent on the routing and there are like 3 routing choices. oops. 4. Kinda.

6 filter routing choices on the Ultranova. Poles entirely independent. 2 24db lowpass filters in series = 1 48db filter (pretty much)

I have a big list of things the Virus can do that the Ultranova can't too so...
Its really nice to have both of them sitting here.

[MBTC]

I've been using Cubase Artist 7.5. Honestly the Ultranova can still be flakey sometimes following MIDI clock connected with USB. The latest operating system was an improvement and I've had it where it was not following and restarted everything and suddenly it was locked on so...

I have some experience with the Virus and Cubase but still not a lot. I have found the end of polyphony on the Virus which was pretty disappointing but I've been used to the Ultranova single timbrality so its not really that big a deal. Besides I've been rendering everything to individual tracks lately so I can really dial in the mix.

If the Virus and the Ultranova got married and had kids it would be the synth of dreams.

The Virus has so much more to remember. This oscillator syncs to that one. This oscillator hardly does anything. This LFO has a connection to X. That LFO has a connection to Y.

On the Ultranova all the oscillators, LFOs, filters, etc. are identical.

Maybe I should start another thread or something.



There is an Ultranova thread here I started once upon a time, or if you'd like to start a new thread discussing the UN and TI side by side I think there would be a lot of value in that actually.

http://www.infekted.org/virus/showthread.php?t=33510

I'm using Cubase 8 Pro currently btw. I haven't owned a Virus in several years, but my experience was that the Ultranova played nicer with the DAW overall than the TI2 desktop. The Virus OS has had several revisions since then, and I did not try the Virus with Cubase (I was using FLStudio at the time which I'm not sure is an officially supported DAW). I'm not sure of the current state of things, so your experience with the latest and greatest will be of tremendous interest to me.

About USB MIDI synchronization on the Nova, have you checked pg. 38 of the user guide about most sequencers sending midi clock signal in play/record mode only? Curious if you're seeing something different than that. I think MIDI sync with pretty much any hardware and the DAW can be flaky because of this.

Also, like you I found the polyphony limits of the Virus to be troubling on such an expensive synth. The Ultranova has its limits too, but at the price point of the Ultranova I feel much more forgiving about polyphony.

[TweakHead]

@MBTC

off topic: how are you liking cubase pro 8? have you noticed the acclaimed boost in performance and stability?

[MBTC]

@MBTC

off topic: how are you liking cubase pro 8? have you noticed the acclaimed boost in performance and stability?

I liked it better, instantly. I did notice the overall loading time speed increased, which was welcome because I always thought prior version of Cubase were a pig in that regard. Not only on large projects but even starting new projects, etc.

I have not yet done benchmarking on large numbers of instruments between Cubase 7.5 and 8.0 to see how my own results compare to their marketing claims. With small numbers of instruments that are CPU-heavy, I would say I saw maybe a 10-15% increase overall with the same audio buffer size, but to me CPU efficiency is everything, so I would consider a 10-15% boost per instrument substantial. What I notice more than anything is that the CPU meter seems to peak less -- meaning spiking is reduced more than a direct consistent performance increase applied to each instrument, if that makes sense. I already thought Cubase was more CPU efficient than other hosts I had tried, but every little bit helps. There are other usability improvements that just make the overall workflow feel cleaner.

Basically it's getting better and better. The track versioning of 7.5 over 7.0 was big for me, and I've never regretted switching to it as my primary host.

The only thing is that it's clear to me that I'm forever caught in the upgrade price loop with them, so I just have to accept that it's going to cost me $100 bucks a year to use their software. Nobody is twisting my arm to upgrade but it doesn't make sense to get two or three versions behind. That is something that's a bit of a bitter pill to swallow compared to FLS where I still get free upgrades from originally buying the DAW maybe 8 years ago, and add-ons are optional.

One thing -- if you haven't already, you must get the upgrade from Padshop to Padshop Pro. The upgrade for Cubase users is only ten bucks, and you need the Pro version to import your own samples. Fucking AMAZING plug-in, the way you can grind up samples and make pads with it so easily.

[TweakHead]

I'm mainly working on the mac now, but used Cubase 5 some time ago and would like to jump at it again 'cause apple seems to have some agenda of their own, concerning pro audio - which envolves ditching the cd, making the interface on Logic X look clumsy on "non retina" screens, forcing everyone to move to 64 bit, having to ditch some of their favourite plug-ins along the way, so forth and so on. Seems like Steinberg is actually focused on improving things for the musician, and I've always felt that Cubase is way better then the competition when it comes to performance and stability to. But I'd have to pay the big buck for it, but have this on the back of my mind after reading it's actually improved performance from earlier version to a newer one - something you can only dream about when talking about Logic, even for the legacy plug-ins.

Performance matters a lot to me, and the fact it's not a "mac only" thing, that I could finally share projects (mainly psytrance) with other people without having to worry about getting a new OS installed on another partition is another big point to make! Thanks for the reply! ;)

[MBTC]

I'm mainly working on the mac now, but used Cubase 5 some time ago and would like to jump at it again 'cause apple seems to have some agenda of their own, concerning pro audio - which envolves ditching the cd, making the interface on Logic X look clumsy on "non retina" screens, forcing everyone to move to 64 bit, having to ditch some of their favourite plug-ins along the way, so forth and so on. Seems like Steinberg is actually focused on improving things for the musician, and I've always felt that Cubase is way better then the competition when it comes to performance and stability to. But I'd have to pay the big buck for it, but have this on the back of my mind after reading it's actually improved performance from earlier version to a newer one - something you can only dream about when talking about Logic, even for the legacy plug-ins.

Performance matters a lot to me, and the fact it's not a "mac only" thing, that I could finally share projects (mainly psytrance) with other people without having to worry about getting a new OS installed on another partition is another big point to make! Thanks for the reply! ;)

Some of your concerns are exactly while I bailed on Logic Pro as a DAW and even on Mac for hardware. Everything Apple has an agenda, like you said, which results in a never ending purchase cycle of expensive hardware from them. Using Windows is much more liberating IMO and provides more bang for the buck. That said, I still wanted to start getting used to a DAW that was committed to being available on both platforms, which was mostly narrowing it down to Cubase or Ableton.

[MBTC]

Also earlier when I mentioned Padshop I was assuming you were already a Cubase 7.x user Tweak. For those completely unfamiliar with it -- Padshop is included with Cubase (I'm not sure which version they started including it with, maybe 6.5). There are a lot of other good high quality plugins that come with Cubase but Padshop really stands out IMO. The upgrade to the pro version is only $10, but for the longest time I didn't know the upgrade was even an option - it seems stupid that they don't just include Pro with Cubase or raise the price by $10.

You can create way more than just pads with it, too. Highly recommended. I think its $80 if purchased without Cubase, but requires a USB dongle (something Cubase owners already have anyway).

[syncerely]

There is an Ultranova thread here I started once upon a time, or if you'd like to start a new thread discussing the UN and TI side by side I think there would be a lot of value in that actually.

http://www.infekted.org/virus/showthread.php?t=33510

I'm using Cubase 8 Pro currently btw.

I read this thread when I was thinking about buying the Ultranova. I'll reread it.
I upped to Padshop Pro right away way back when. Its a great synth.
I'm wondering if Cubase 8 works on Vista. It probably does.
I just bought the Virus and then the more expensive than I'd like Yamaha FC7 pedal so my discretionary music spending is about tapped out for a while.
A quick note on the Ultranova and its digital "phasyness". Each oscillator has its own nonresonant lowpass filter on it so if you dial that down to about 62 your digital phasiness goes away.

[Synthtoast]

try this for timing/arp problems....it seems access will never fix it so i found my own way

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58R0vjT579g