Page 4 of 6

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 3:48 pm
by forge
dr.wackler wrote:
forge wrote:are you sure no FX are present?
Absolutely sure. I first thought it might be a not 1:1 translation of the parameter settings, so I did the test with the plain oscillators - and even there you can easily hear the difference.
ok - this is hardly scientific as it is 1.46 am and I am ready for sleep, but I just d/led the demo and loaded some presets side by side that shared names and I have to say there were quite a few where the names were the same where I couldnt tell any difference on Beyerdynamic DT 250 headphones

edit: yes trying som emore and they sound the same to me

maybe this is because I cant apparently hear above 15.9kHz any more, 8O but for me the flaw of Analog is only in the interface

edit edit: yes - I am more convinced now that the only problem I have with analog is the interface, I think it actually sounds great - just the presets are really good, but I want to be able to program it more easily, and Pro53 kills it dead here

after playing with the demo of UA-1 I dont even think it is that much better in the interface (it is better, but not as good as others) it's still pokey - the knobs and labels need to be bigger - it looks like a synth edit or reaktor synth

the thing is, it's great having the flexibility to have all your synths ITB - but pokey little interfaces that require a lot of mousing around are just annoying

in reality I would actually like a full screen mode where the synth takes up the whole monitor while you program it then fucks off when you aren't

i really, really can not be arsed squinting and carrying on to program my own sounds

this is why i really like Simpler - the knobs are really big

nighty night

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:36 pm
by Winston
Like I said before, a fold out window like samplers sample map window for a bigger view of parameters would fix this.

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:58 pm
by Tarekith
+1 on the this, I hate the little midi "TV" window Ableton has used on their synths, so difficult to see and control things that way.

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:20 pm
by Martyn
Winston wrote:Like I said before, a fold out window like samplers sample map window for a bigger view of parameters would fix this.
I'd like to see this for Tension too.

Come to think of it, a customisable fold out controller panel would be better, right click to add knobs, sliders, joysticks etc, it could be under a button available from any rack.

Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:34 pm
by Winston
Come to think of it, I think operator and sampler could really benefit from a parameter fold out view as well. Although I think the interfaces of both of those are well laid out, there are still lots of times that you want to see everything at once. Like operator's oscillators. It would be nice to see the middle window parameters (envelopes etc.) all at once to see how they interact. And although sampler already folds out for the sample map, samplers tabs would also be good to see at once folded out. And it would be much nicer for sound design in general. Then when you don't need to see it all, it folds back to how it is now. I think this would follow ableton's aesthetic quite well, similar to how racks and effects fold in and out already.

On another note though, back to analog, I'd have to agree with forge that Ultra analog sounds identical except for when effects are used. I did a hell of a lot of A/B'ing when it first came out. I could manage to duplicate the reverb (mostly) with a bit of work, but not the chorus even close. The ultra analog one just s works well with the synth and there is good use of it in the presets.

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:19 am
by Khazul
Hmm - tried it and uitterly hated it. TBH the interface just completely put me off and the sounds where not exactly characterful in a way that encouraged me to keep tweaking it...

By about 15 mins its at the stage of fukit, Ive had it with doing keyhole surgery with a mouse and its back to the Virus/Radias/V-Synth etc - proper knobbage etc...

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:44 am
by Angstrom
Khazul wrote:Hmm - tried it and uitterly hated it. TBH the interface just completely put me off and the sounds where not exactly characterful in a way that encouraged me to keep tweaking it...

By about 15 mins its at the stage of fukit, Ive had it with doing keyhole surgery with a mouse and its back to the Virus/Radias/V-Synth etc - proper knobbage etc...
yep,

in a way it's highly ironic.
Analogue synths of the kind that it emulates are actually quite limited in their sonic palette, but what makes them fun to use is the immediacy of their interface.
All software synths lose out to the real thing there, whether you are controlling softsynths with a mouse or a controller its much hard to grasp the whole thing and manipulate it in that same way.

and in this case (Analog) ... it's like doing a crossword puzzle!

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:50 am
by forge
Angstrom wrote: in a way it's highly ironic.
the thing I think is most Ironic is that this is supposed to be a LIVE application - how the hell could you use something like this Live?

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:55 am
by Angstrom
forge wrote:
Angstrom wrote: in a way it's highly ironic.
the thing I think is most Ironic is that this is supposed to be a LIVE application - how the hell could you use something like this Live?
I'm going to rename the Default of Analog to "Ironic" ;)


Actually, to answer your question - you are meant to assign macros to it for that case. I mean : does anyone go into Sampler and edit the modulation routings live? I doubt it. Most softsynths are not directly editable in a Live context.

Macros are our very limited version of a 'performance screen' , perhaps they will expand on that idea.

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:07 am
by b0unce
:!:

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:37 am
by dr.wackler
forge wrote:ok - this is hardly scientific as it is 1.46 am and I am ready for sleep, but I just d/led the demo and loaded some presets side by side that shared names and I have to say there were quite a few where the names were the same where I couldnt tell any difference on Beyerdynamic DT 250 headphones
I'm using the DT990, if that matters.
Tip: Load the preset "Bright" from the "Pad" folder in both Analog and Ultra Analog, and disable Chorus and Reverb in both. You'll clearly hear that the beats of the oscillators are much more rich and complex in Ultra Analog.


Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:05 am
by forge
Angstrom wrote: Macros are our very limited version of a 'performance screen' , perhaps they will expand on that idea.
hopefully - that is basically what I do, but 8 macros is very limiting

Macros like this:

Image


where the device and the view selector were MIDI/KEY assignable and each block of 8 macros was instantly mapped (so you could use a MIDI/KEY command to scroll to different blocks of 8 and have it auto mapped like the pads in drum rack) would come pretty close to solving everything actually for me - I would just make some racks where everything was assigned the way I wanted and always use that

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 7:07 am
by forge
dr.wackler wrote:
forge wrote:ok - this is hardly scientific as it is 1.46 am and I am ready for sleep, but I just d/led the demo and loaded some presets side by side that shared names and I have to say there were quite a few where the names were the same where I couldnt tell any difference on Beyerdynamic DT 250 headphones
I'm using the DT990, if that matters.
Tip: Load the preset "Bright" from the "Pad" folder in both Analog and Ultra Analog, and disable Chorus and Reverb in both. You'll clearly hear that the beats of the oscillators are much more rich and complex in Ultra Analog.
I wonder why? if other presets sound the same then something must be the same in there, so there must be some other thing making it different

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:50 pm
by dr.wackler
forge wrote:I wonder why? if other presets sound the same then something must be the same in there, so there must be some other thing making it different
Not every patch relies so heavily on the beats of the oscillators, that's the difference. Thought I'd just point you to an example where it is very obvious. The parameter settings are the same in both.

Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:26 pm
by forge
dr.wackler wrote:
forge wrote:I wonder why? if other presets sound the same then something must be the same in there, so there must be some other thing making it different
Not every patch relies so heavily on the beats of the oscillators, that's the difference. Thought I'd just point you to an example where it is very obvious. The parameter settings are the same in both.
so is this something that can't be achieved at all in the Ableton one? I mean for me ultimately I think Analog sounds good, and it might be something I use, but with Pro-53 being so easy and immediate I'd probably just go for that first (I can record my controller CCs too!! Another IRONY of Analog vs UA-1)

Yes I think they should rename it Ableton Irony