Something interesting happening at Access Music

[syncerely]

Originally Posted by nutrinoland

....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]

Originally Posted by 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!

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]

Originally Posted by syncerely

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]

Originally Posted by MBTC

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]

Originally Posted by syncerely

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]

Originally Posted by TweakHead

@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]

Originally Posted by 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!

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).