Virus TI2 pricing....

[Monobeat]

Back to the soft vs. hard thing. The composition phase of making music was the hard thing to switch up. I commit more easily to synthesized sounds, and keep midi and patch info on hand in the case of needing to retweak anything. That way, through using good converters, and committing to getting my audio on the sequencer, I can take advantage of both worlds, in a "quazi compromise" that seems to work well for my brain and studio flow.

[Timo]

Originally Posted by kuniklo

I suspect the main motivation behind the TI2 was that it was getter harder to source some of the original parts. It's not meant to be a big step forward, it's just a hardware refresh.

It was five years since the TI was released, the longest in Access history of producing follow ups. You'd expect a marked step up.

I guess it's because the DSP chips are so modular, the lines are blurred. Would've liked to have seen some expression controllers on the TI|2, though.

[microCharles]

Originally Posted by annikk.exe

Why would firewire be better? Firewire transmits at 400mbps but USB2.0 can go at 480MBPS..

My almost complete electrical engineering diploma tells me that Firewire has a dedicated DSP chip for transfert, while USB require the main host CPU intervention more often. This result in Firewire being around ~20% faster compared to USB, mostly for large transfers (Hard drives, Sound interfaces).

The 400/480Mbps (mega BITS per second, not BYTES) rate are the theorical electrical max speeds the specification would handle.

Imho, Firewire is far greater than USB 2.0 for many reason, architecture, speed, convinience and more. The only thing is that since Apple made Firewire, Microsoft obviously used its ugly marketing machine to promote USB instead, because they like cheaper, less reliable solutions (just like Windows!)

I love snow.

[LivePsy]

Was it 5 years since the TI was annouced, or delivered? Either way, it is a long time and I'm inclined to think that the Virus has gone about as far as it can go. What was the successor to the V-Synth? 2 of 'em in a GT and nothing startlingly different. The only thing that could be a next step for Access might be a G2 Nord modular type idea, has which merit but it has already been done. Production and development at Nord for the NM has apparently stopped with a lot of discouraged posters.

Some of the constraints on expanding the Virus is that the knob interface already cannot keep up with the parameters. So we're constantly jumping between a single knob twiddle and digging into the menus. A next step for Access should dispense with so much knobbage and perhaps free the architecture to be virtually patched, including audio frequency modulation routings.

Cheers,
B

[kuniklo]

Originally Posted by Timo

It was five years since the TI was released, the longest in Access history of producing follow ups. You'd expect a marked step up.

It puzzles me a bit that they didn't upgrade the USB interface, but since I intend to use mine over midi only I don't care much.

At least Access have made quite a few significant improvements to the firmware in the last five years. The granular stuff alone was a huge upgrade.

Now if they'd just add a comb filter...

[kuniklo]

Originally Posted by Monobeat

Back to the soft vs. hard thing. The composition phase of making music was the hard thing to switch up. I commit more easily to synthesized sounds, and keep midi and patch info on hand in the case of needing to retweak anything.

I think this is a smart way to work. You can push forward without worrying too much about patch storage and recall etc but if you really *need* that sound back you can probably call it back up.

[Joey]

Originally Posted by LivePsy

Was it 5 years since the TI was annouced, or delivered? Either way, it is a long time and I'm inclined to think that the Virus has gone about as far as it can go. What was the successor to the V-Synth? 2 of 'em in a GT and nothing startlingly different. The only thing that could be a next step for Access might be a G2 Nord modular type idea, has which merit but it has already been done. Production and development at Nord for the NM has apparently stopped with a lot of discouraged posters.

Some of the constraints on expanding the Virus is that the knob interface already cannot keep up with the parameters. So we're constantly jumping between a single knob twiddle and digging into the menus. A next step for Access should dispense with so much knobbage and perhaps free the architecture to be virtually patched, including audio frequency modulation routings.

Cheers,
B

There is A LOT that can be added to the virus...

more deep FM implementation

comb filters

more envelopes

more filter emulations

etc...

there is a lot of unexplored territory for the virus

[LivePsy]

Yes, those could be added but I don't think that does much for the branding of the Virus. The Virus is very successful, which is becoming uncommon in the hardware synth world. How many of the extra TI features not already in the Virus C are being used heavily? Not much I suspect. A flood of small extra features confuses the identity of the product and makes the interface more complex while Access already have a magic formula.

B

[Timo]

Originally Posted by LivePsy

How many of the extra TI features not already in the Virus C are being used heavily? Not much I suspect.

I don't know Psy, all the new oscillators from the TI mk1 are sure getting a workout.

And there's Atomizer that is being caned although, personally, I tend to think of the atomizer as being something separate to the Virus. Almost a foreign entity.

Unlike Atomizer, I think all the things Joey mentioned would be a natural extension to the Virus sound and architecture, adding more usability and depth to it. For example the Moog emulated filters of the Virus C are a mainstay, why not add to them, or add greater flexibility in the LFOs and envelopes, or add FM as a new oscillator type. These things certainly wouldn't damage what the Virus is. They'd enhance it, and carry it further.

That's one of the reasons I'm just surprised the TI|2 hardware hasn't taken a step forward. I thought Access had a prime opportunity not to rehash the same hardware interface, and add something like a step sequencer (like the Radias for example) to the user interface with 16 buttons/knobs or similar - just something to differentiate it from former Viruses yet enhance it at the same time.

If anyone wanted a simpler Virus then by all means they could grab a Virus B or C.

My 2¢.

[LivePsy]

Hi Timo. I won't disagree with you . Whatever our views are, its a luxury to be discussing this (like we own Access or something) rather than moaning about an unsupported product with unfixed bugs. I can understand if Access leave the TI2 as it is. However, a totally new product with modular flexibility and many choices of osc and filters would have a place alongside the TI and I wouldn't feel cheated for having a TI now and seeing such a behemoth announced in a year or two.

My feeling is that hardware synths are not the place to explore radical new synth technologies and boutique emulations. The production cycle is too long and the physical delivery adds costs which require the manufacturer to make a synth guaranteed to be popular. The original Virus was exactly that even though we didn't know it until we fell in love with it. But good ideas which don't get mass appeal are just another business loss. Software (with optional specialised hardware to plug into your USB port) is where the open ended versatility and experimental stuff can best succeed.

If the TI can turn into Reaktor with an OS update, I'm so there already. If not, I am still completely happy with it.

Cheers,
B