Hi man.....

Just want to pick your brains over a few points. Dont be offended.... 8)

Sure, if you have the time to persue something futile :lol: :wink:

Anyone trying to achieve acoustic sounds from a synthesizer should have bought a ?79 yamaha 'learn to play piano in 24 different styles' and not listened to some slimely salesman

Interesting

Ok, I hear ya.....but the reality is.....me suggesting people not to bother is unlikely to have much influence on their decision to do something. Id like to think im influential....but im not!

Im not sure m8. Any synth can make a fuzzy sawtooth lead.....but does that warrant people saying it can emulate an Oberheim? Any synth can make a Moogy style bass.....even my DX7....so what does this tell you? Grab a sawtooth......tinker around with a 24db filter....adjust the EG accordingly (very important for convincing moog sounds) and hey presto.....but still....in my mind..the VA you've just done that on is not emulating anything but a specific osc/filt/eg configuration....not the soul of a classic synth.

I find it ironic that there seems to be great emphasis on recreating classic analog sounds when people who own the originals often get lambasted for being analog elitist/purist.......its as if people are jealous or something. This has happened to me many times.....

I dont know man.....who is 'everyone else?' The pill popping junkies who are about to down some Dr Moog adorned acid tabs?


Yes, I agree. Ultimately this exercise is not totally pointless....but you have to accept that from the point of view of an experienced sound designer(s) that no matter how long one spends on trying to emulate another synth....your never going to get 100%. Ive made Moog style bases on a Prophet 5 and upon closer inspection I know its probably only 25% of the way to being truly authentic. As I said before...you can adopt specific osc/filt/eg configurations that give you the impression that you've just emualted a classic synth...but upon closer inspection you are still waaaayyyy off from making a clone. The question back to you is....why should people who know this, invest time and effort into something they know they can't satisfactorily achieve?

And so would I m8.....but I wouldnt pass it off as a SuperSaw emulation.....id post it for those who want to know what a hypersaw sounds like and give an idea as to what it can do. I think the emphasis of this thread means well but is slightly misguided :wink:

Additionally....I dont think Access or TI users particularly want the hyper saw to become known as a Supersaw wannabe. Its important in this early stage that the hypersaw develops its own following....otherwise it will forever be the bitch slave on the dark side of the force.... :lol:

Hurrayyyyyy 8) !

DS :wink:

'Everyone else' is most people who listen to a lot of electronic music and everyone who doesn't. People on this board are well and truly the exception. 'Everyone Else' would pretty much class all synth noises in the one bracket, "What instrument is that?" "That's a synthesizer!"

Maybe a few will know about the 303, and heard of a moog but wouldn't be able to accurately pick one out.

Your attempts at recreating that classic moog sound will fool almost everyone :)

No one yet has seemed to set the records straight in the comparison/original question of this thread so hopefully I will be able to.

I've owned alot of VA's- Including a JP8080 rack, a JP8000, a virus a, virus rack, virus rack xl, virus indigo b, virus indigo 2, and currently we have 2 ti desktops- so I've got enough experience with both synths to make a proper comparison.

The JP80x0 Supersaw waveform is just 7 saws stacked, but have a different tonal characteristic for some reason- it just sounds cleaner when the JP stacks 7 saws. Using the Hypersaw on the Ti, you can acheive a similar sound, its not the exact same obviously but its close enough. Plus with the hypersaw and the Ti's sound engine, you can create alot more dynamic results with the Hypersaw than the Supersaw...

to make a long story short, for fat saw leads, I find (and with experience with both units) the virus Ti's Hypersaw to be much more effective.

I'm not trying anything special with this clip, just trying to do a semi decent emulation of a fat-saw-trance-pad. That clip of ATRC that the original poster uploaded is the JP being fully used, both parts running 2 supersaws and probably an additional 2 saws in the classic oscillators...with about 4 voices max polyphony. This clip is using 1 patch on the virus Ti...also with lower quality filter routing because the JP's suck.

edit: had to switch to yousendit hosting: Regular link (for all web browsers):
http://s18.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=1...K13OMXAIXWIZJ1

Hopefully thats what you're looking for,

Andrew

oh DS i can see totally where you are coming from and you dont have to worry about me not taking constructive criticism well - after all thats what discussion forums are for right? to get all of these issues out in the open ;)

but let me counter riposte...

i agree. but you have to understand that a large proportion of the human race wont really know what an oberheim is, let alone what an OB-1 sounds like.

sound design and music production in general is a very very subtle thing. i like to think that i am very familiar with how an access virus b sounds but i have been consistantly fooled by other producers into thinking it was another synth. it depends on so many things from how you program it to how much air you leave on, to how you process it both during and after production. ive near enough studied the difference between a real tb303 and an audiorealism's 303 emulation, bassline. and although there is definitely a difference on both saw and square (square more than saw) it is minute enough that most people wont be able to tell the difference.

what is the soul of a classic synth? do instruments have a soul or is it the instrumentalist that gives it a soul? are synths nothing but discrete electronic modules? are you talking about the random subtlties of analog? the subtle changes in pitch over time? the fact some of them have have quirky characteristics and flaws?

the virus is an interesting synth because it doesnt make it difficult to add a degree of randomness to a patch in order to make it sound...more 'alive'. mod matrix. source: random. detination: oscdetune or oscpitch. or whatever. with meticulous post processing you can get very very close.

this is a generalisation and you know it. i can only speak for myself of course but i am not jealous that someone out there has a real 303 and i only have a software clone. audiorealism bassline gives you 95% of the sound of the real thing at 1/10th of the cost of buying a second hand teebee. its also infinitely more convenient in every day use. you do the math. in fact, i am very satisfied with my digital clone and do not begrudge those that own and can afford to pay for analogue instruments.

but like i said, being able to recreate certain aspects of the sound of real acoustic and real analogue instruments shows just how versatile a synth is.

ive made acoustic cello sounds on my virus b. do they sound like real cellos? hell no. are they fairly close? apart from not being able to simulate the sound of bowing action and the resonances caused by specific types of hollow wood and the complex harmonic serieses, i would say they had most other bases covered. they certainly sound better than any acoustic cello sound i have made on any other VA. if access expanded the virus to include some of the technology as featured in, say, AAS string studio or synful orchestral would i get even closer? damn straight, and i would know how to program everything except the new modules.

its the same for analogue clones. the technology is always improving and our knowledge is provisional. but dont rule out the fact that we will never *be able* to perfectly clone analogue instruments. until the technology catches up (and the software devs get closer and closer with every revision), i am glad to spend my time trying to see and recreate some of the details in the sounds of synths i cannot afford. at the same time, the results quite often just make me even more glad i bought a virus b.

i wont speculate as to what access 'want' their customers to use their technology for. but sable dont specify what strokes you have to use with their paint brushes.

look at the situation though: access builds a new oscillator into their synth which simulates the sound of multiple saw waves detuned and panspread against each other. and they call it the 'hypersaw'? well. lets just say that the first comments i heard when the news broke over a year ago was 'supersaw killer.' on every forum i read news on the subject. even non trance forums.

it was always going to incite comparison with a name and function so similar. and if it sells virus TIs - then pat on the back for access. they did good. ultimately it is just a tool that increases the flexibility of an already very flexible synth. people knew the virus TI was every bit as much a virus as any other iteration. only with bells and whistles. and besides, the trance hobbyist market is huge. the number of people that i know bought virus TIs practically on impulse for the hypersaw ALONE is staggering. access just managed to tap into a very healthy sector of the market and i hope they continue to reap the benefits.

its more a case of thinking outside of the box. our knowledge of production and sound design in on going. in my opinion we are all undergoing a pretty much constant learning process. we are always learning new things or refining and re evaulating what we already know in light of new knowledge.

but to suggest that you buy a virtual analogue instrument to only create virtual analogue stock sounds is such a narrow approach. i will try to emulate any sound i hear that i find compelling and interesting enough to warrant the excercise. in the end i will at least learn something new about how that sound is made. or how it is definitely not made if i should not be way off the mark. but look at the presets on your virus - how many presets are oberheim emulations? moog emulations? 303 emulations? how many flute and violin and cello sounds do you see on it?

pseudo303 and all the univov patches are 303 clones. the univov ones are wayyy wayyyy off the mark. they sound nothing like 303s in my opinion. but they nevertheless sound good.

and this brings me onto my final point about derivation in art. it is common in any learning process to copy the work of a master before you feel confident enough to create your own work. and it is also common, that in the process of copying someone else's work, (or sound in this case) that you will not get it quite right.

that your copy will be imperfect. but sometimes, and this happen alot for me, there is something about the sound of my copy that i like, that isnt necessarily what i like about the original sound. so i will keep reiterating this and incorporating/deriving new ideas from other original sounds. and over time, this will become *my* sound.

in my opinion you should not be so quick to condemn attempts at understanding/emulating and copying because the process of making sound and music is just like any other art, largely derivative of what came before.

andrewbayer: You nailed it pretty close :)

Good work!

Yeh - good job - maybe add a bit of analog boost at about 1-2k to nail it exactly :)

I was messing around on my v-synth with this as well - *very* easy to reproduce on that - in fact one of the presets is quite close with a little tweaking. I wonder if its "megasaw" is modelled after the jp supersaw.

the latest OS of the v-synth and the v-synth xt have the entire JP8000 engine built into it. so it should be able to recreate supersaws easily - it has supersaw oscillators.

either way - this is a supersaw i built from scratch on my virus b:

http://media.putfile.com/Virus-B-Supersaw

second attempt. note that this does have the following external effects on it:

fruity chorus (you can use any chorus as long as it has an EQ)
fruity delay 2
SIR reverb (PCM91 concert hall impulse)

also, weirdly enough, mr crosland is right. you can get close to the sound of the supersaw oscillator by high shelfing the bog standard saw oscillators. i noticed that the supersaw oscillator has alot of top end and alot of bassy weight but the mids get drowned out. that patch has an EQ on it with a high shelf above 10 khz and a low shelf below 200 hz.

i imagine it is even easier to replicate on a virus TI because the hypersaw oscillator is more suited to the task. and you have the 3 band EQ from the VC.

Andy's Hypersaw is great. I actually prefer that over the JP8000 clip. It sounds meatier (the JP8K clip sounds bass-light), but I must admit I prefer the filter cutoff action on the JP8K when the filter's nearing being opened up wide/fully.

Btw, how many poles do the JP8000 filter(s) have? Sounds like the JP8K clip has a subtle, wide-Q boost (ie. a subtle wide-bandwidth resonance) at the cutoff frequency point, as opposed to it sounding already "flat" when it's nearly fully opened (like the Virus, a bit).

Aaaaarrrrrrrggggggghhhhhhh.

You don't buy a Ford Fiesta and then try and turn it into a Vauxhall Corsa or buy an apple and then try and turn it into an orange. (and don't start me on bananas!)

Just buy/borrow a bloody JP8000 and enough already.

And to be fair I am sure most people on here have got better things to do than create and post sound files for you - repeatedly. Maybe we can also cut your grass and perhaps wash your car while we are at it...

If you are that desperate borrow/hire one and multisample it into a decent bit of PC/MAC software. Try these guys www.fxgroup.net I am sure they will get you one.

finds dummy on floor

Where did this come from? :D

No, I understand entirely where you're coming from. But, on the other hand, the truth is that Access are cashing in on the supersaw legend, so you can appreciate that people will naturally want to compare the two in order to discern the differences.