[MBTC]

Originally Posted by Timo

In terms of sound, how much is the Ultranova like the original Supernova? Can you tell, from hearing them, that they are from the same family (like the Virus A, B, C are to the TI), or are they totally new synth engines? How does it fit in compared against the K-Station series, too, given they have similar feature sets?

Unfortunately it's been a while (long time actually) since I've heard a Supernova, so it's hard for me to compare actual sound. Instinctually I think the characteristics of the Ultranova remind me of the Supernova.
Supposedly the Ultranova's engine is not exactly the same as the Supernova II but architecturally similar and supposedly much more powerful. Some folks claim to notice a more digital sound out of the Ultranova.

Originally Posted by Timo

Reason being, I checked out a few Ultranova audio demos and reviews on youtube and unfortunately I was disappointed with all of them. To me sounds like it has a kinda plasticky, digital, thin, phasey sound to it. I did however like the K-Station demos from a few years ago.

For example on the Sonic State overview...

I think some of the default sounds are kind of thin but with a little experimentation I was able to get things to my liking, although your mileage may vary. When playing a synth like this, I can't help being biased by the overall price, so if I have to tweak a little more to get the sound I want, the price makes that less painful. Whereas if I pay five times the price for a Virus I have very high expectations for even default sounds and if I have to get deep under the hood to make something sound good to my ears it tends to tick me off.

Originally Posted by Timo

... the supersaw at 2:57 onwards on the Ultranova sounds horribly phasey and weak when dialing in the detune and hitting new keys

Well one thing to keep in mind is that around that point in the demo, he has only dialed up a single oscillator and detuned it. To start approaching something that sounds more like a thick supersaw, take what he did, set Unison x 4, then detune unison... But...wait, you still have two more free oscillators to use plus a noise osc. So bring those next two osc in, detune each to maybe +/- 7 and maybe put one on a different octave, etc., then add some reverb, delay etc and you're going to have a much different sound, something like a proper dreamtrance supersaw that way.

Originally Posted by Timo

(more specifically it resets the trig phase of all the multiple detuned saws at note-on each time, so you get a "peeow, peeow" sound every time you press a key as they all start in phase then detune away from each other, rather than starting them as free-running entities to begin with, regardless of detune amount) and I've noticed this undesirable artefact effect is common in other people's Ultranova demos too. My Korg Radias does the same thing and I hate it. Furthermore, there appears to be no compensation for the change in volume that is heard when all the saw waves are being phased triggered at note-on (i.e. when they're all summed, creating a large spike in volume at note-on, then decaying away as the individual saws separate), compared to whether they were all free running phase wise (always a more consistent, average level). Same problem with the Radias, so unfortunately I end up never using the supersaw oscillator type.

I'm not 100% sure if I can properly address this other than to say that in that demo he probably left the OscPhase param set to default which is 0 degrees. If you set it to "free" it removes that quality that I think you're talking about. The range is 0 to 357. It is one of those params that would is somewhat obscure and could be overlooked in many demos. You need to hit the Oscillator button, and use Next to get to the screen. I duplicated what the guy in the video did with one Osc, and set it to free and the initial click disappeared. Hope that helps?

Originally Posted by Timo

You say the Ultranova fairs better at supersaws than the TI|2?

Oh, no I didn't Please read what I wrote again, I was afraid I was giving that impression and opening myself up a can of worms. I was just describing an overall initial impression of a couple of weeks I spent working with the Ti2. For all I know I may not have had something configured properly. It was just a comment about the out of box experience. The Virus started giving up the ghost on polyphony in rediculous places like Roland D50-ish bell sounds, which (again at the price point) left me disappointed.

Originally Posted by Timo

The original TI|1 had 80 voices of poly using the hypersaw, whereas the Ultranova has upto 18 note poly, so not sure how you figured that?

Again I will refer to comment above and previous post, but one thing I noticed about the Ti2 is that it seemed every little thing I did seemed to affect "patch complexity", which was indicated by a small meter on the display. Once you introduce any level of complexity, it started robbing notes out of the patch left and right. I may be sticking my neck out here for the chopping block here, because I do not have specs available, but I honestly feel that the DSP in the Ultranova is roughly on a par, if not faster than that in the Ti2, based on very subjective and non-scientific evaluation that took place several years apart Not sure how to say it any more wishy washy than that... hehe

Originally Posted by Timo

Monotimbrality is a bit disappointing.

Agreed, that could be an issue for some folks, it was considered prior to my purchase and is not an issue for my particular needs.

Originally Posted by Timo

However I really liked the idea of the extended LFO waveforms, some effectively as mini step sequencers. No idea why most synth companies fail to add more musical, creative LFO shapes like these, and instead restrict themselves to just the Sin/Tri/Sq/Saw waveforms (useful though they are, it would be nice to have more creativity and variety).

Yes, one thing about the LFO sequence-type waveforms, I can't see that those are editable. I know most hardware probably wouldn't have them at all, but if you're used to working with softsynths like Zebra where you can literally implement any sort of modulation you could possibly draw with a mouse, the limitations of hardware are stifling to say the least, and I'm still unconvinced there is any real sound benefit to a hardware VA synth vs a good quality softsynth.

Originally Posted by Timo

I do like the touch sensitive knobs, that's a good performance feature for triggering multiple modulations on cue.

Yep, they are awesome.

Originally Posted by Timo

Overall very good for the price, though. The price of Virus in comparison is ridiculous.

Definitely. One reason I got this synth is to sort of dabble with "well integrated" hardware, to stick my foot back in the hardware synth water and decide how much of a financial commitment I want to make toward it. I've been somewhat spoiled with the ultra smooth workflow of softsynths, not having cables everywhere, not having to jump through hoops to get midi clocks sync'ed up and volume levels right and so forth. I think these synths are a phenomenal value. May or may not be for everyone's needs but it is certainly scratching the itch I bought it to scratch.