arturia jupiter 8 v demo

JJarvis · Post by **JJarvis** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:25 pm

Has anyone noticed that the only thing you can't do with the demo is save and import presets? As nice as it is to save presets I could just be old school and write my patches on paper. It saves me a few bills.

J.Daniels · Post by **J.Daniels** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:19 am

Yeah, my main synth(moog opus 3) doesnt have presets so it ultimately works out as advantage, as it makes you learn the synth...

Although, I gotta admit that since i downloaded this demo when it was released, i do have the urge to buy it.... dunno, cant really explain. maybe for peace of mind....

3dot... · Post by **3dot...** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 12:46 pm

Just tried the Demo...

Soundz awesome!!!!

this thing IS A CPU HOG !!!!

Damn...

85% playing 2 voices 2 unison...

I wonder if it's just for the demo...

Naive Teen Idol · Post by **Naive Teen Idol** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:29 pm

3dot... wrote:Just tried the Demo...

Soundz awesome!!!!

this thing IS A CPU HOG !!!!

Damn...

85% playing 2 voices 2 unison...

I wonder if it's just for the demo...

Nope -- it's Arturia. I have the CS-80V, which I love -- but the thing seriously hogs CPU.

That said, as an owner of an actual Jupiter 6, this thing is very, very good. It makes me hope Arturia revamps the CS-80V and soon.

Robert Henke · Post by **Robert Henke** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:02 pm

hmm, ... sorry for the rant, but am I the only one who really hates their pseudo photrealistic layout? What is the point of this? Fake XLR jacks on the back, a giant waste of screen space, for useless air intakes, but on the other side, on my real Juno-6 no yellow tool tips pop up if i move a fader, to tell me its current value, but distroying the interface. And that absurd "secret pages" with a complete different layout, that does not have anything to do with the Roland design at all. I think the sound is okay but their interfaces are super tastless and do not encourage the user to play with it. But maybe it is just me and everyone else has no problem with it?

I downloaded the demo but the interface made me trashing it after 30 minutes.

Rant end

hambone1 · Post by **hambone1** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:08 pm

I don't know why interface designers feel compelled to patronize us with interfaces that look like phony hardware.

What a ridiculous waste of resources...

Naive Teen Idol · Post by **Naive Teen Idol** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:22 pm

Robert Henke wrote:hmm, ... sorry for the rant, but am I the only one who really hates their pseudo photrealistic layout? What is the point of this? Fake XLR jacks on the back, a giant waste of screen space, for useless air intakes, but on the other side, on my real Juno-6 no yellow tool tips pop up if i move a fader, to tell me its current value, but distroying the interface. And that absurd "secret pages" with a complete different layout, that does not have anything to do with the Roland design at all. I think the sound is okay but their interfaces are super tastless and do not encourage the user to play with it. But maybe it is just me and everyone else has no problem with it?

I downloaded the demo but the interface made me trashing it after 30 minutes.

Rant end

Robert, based on what I know of Arturia, I think their emulator synths are designed/marketed for fans/users of the originals -- for people who are familiar with the interface. That said, as much as I love the CS-80V, I wish they'd spend a little less time on the GUI and more on, say, preset library management, which is riddled with bugs (I mean, forget the XLR jacks -- how about the FANS on the CS-80V?! You can even turn them off!)

It is a little pander-y, I agree, and in a perfect world, there'd be two GUI's -- standard and "classic" for people who care about that sort of thing and feel it contributes to how you play the synth.

In the case of the CS-80V, the classic view makes sense in that the original was so performance oriented, but it might've been neat for Arturia to create a standard view that modernized the synth for today's world of MIDI controllers and whatnot. I suspect that's the approach an Ableton would've taken.

All that said, I like their sound quite a bit and am obsessed w/ my CS-80V...

leedsquietman · Post by **leedsquietman** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:47 pm

I see your point Robert but personally I like it's interface and it sounds really good, not totally authentic but you can get many similar sounds to the original and fool a big % of the listener.

I'm a fan of Arturia's products, own Analog Factory, Prophet V/VS and the JP8 is awesome, I have been playing with the full product on a 30 day limited trial (dongles aren't all bad, he he, giving me this trial). Their products are CPU hogs, but most softsynths are, thankfully Live 6 has awesome track freezing to make the most of this. (also turn up the CPU usage from 50% to maximum in preferences helps)

Robert Henke · Post by **Robert Henke** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:01 pm

Maybe i was not clear enough with my statement. I love machines like the original CS-80 or the Jupiter 8 and maybe this is why I am so disappointed by the way Arturia acts here. What do we like on those old machines? 1. Their sound. 2. Their phsyical, intuitive presence, their characteristics as unique instruments, 3. Their design as a driect result of functionality. Take the Jupiter 8: the internal structure of oscillators, filters and envelopes is reperesented by groups of physical faders, which you can operate blindly after a while and which can be adjusted super fine or in a rough gesture. Roland's chice of more expensive(!) faders over knobs was a decision guided by the aim to create the most pleasant user experience. The layout, the colors, the whole design, was the highly successful attempt to create a beautiful, unique instrument. To me, a photo of a Jupiter 8 with some odd extensions, like writing ASCII text into a former 7 segment LED display or placing additional buttons closer to knobs than possible in real hardware shows almost disrespect regards the real thing. Either you try to rebuild as good as possible the real machine, then i want no additional fancyness, and i do not need a step sequencer in there, or you find a way to transform the old user interface into a 2007 model and "just" keep the original sound. Give me a Jupiter 8 that is small on my screen, has dedicated and logically structured pages for different functions, numeric readout for all values and a vague graphical resemblance to the original by inspired usage of the original colors and fonts and I would spend 500 EUR or more for it.

But okay, i will try the Arturia thing again in six month...

R.

Naive Teen Idol · Post by **Naive Teen Idol** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:47 pm

Well, I think you're right with respect to things like the step sequencer and all that. Clearly, Arturia felt they needed to add some stuff on, for some reason -- not sure why, really given that most DAW's will have those features in there already.

Given that I own a Jupiter-6, the CS-80 (which I don't) was the more interesting emulator anyway -- and frankly, the harder one to replicate, as it has a TON of performance-based hardware (ribbon controller, expression pedals, polyphonic aftertouch) that obviously can't be duplicated on a softsynth.

That said, I like the approach Arturia tried with the CS-80V. Some purists complain that they included new things like a multitimbral mode, a matrix modulator and MIDI sync and things like that. But it seemed more like they were just trying to make the CS-80 fully-functional in a modern studio and expand it a little with things like extra LFO waveforms -- not redesign it completely. And if you do a little homework to determine how the original worked and sounded, you can adjust your hardware to emulate it accordingly.

Robert, you should check out the CS-80V -- I'd be interested to know if you prefer it to the Jupiter 6-V.

3dot... · Post by **3dot...** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:12 pm

CPU is Crazy..... its just silly...

ChiDJ · Post by **ChiDJ** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:26 pm

Love the Look

Love The Sound

By definition, It wouldn't be a "virtual Instrument" if it didn't resemble the original. IMHO

And.....I bought it. The presets are soooo juicy.

So is the M-Tron:

JJarvis · Post by **JJarvis** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:50 pm

I think robert has a good point. Most of these soft synths waste too much resources on the way they look. No one is ever going to see this instrument in a performance. I can care less how the thing is designed just as long as it is intuitive and sounds good.

I think the worst example of a bad gui would have to be that plugin for protools, the moogerfooger. I'm sure the thing sounds good, but for only having a few knobs, it sure takes up a lot of screen space.

When I use plugins like the jupiter, I just spend some time with it taking up the whole screen. I program my sounds and save or in this case (using the demo) I might record my patch into sampler. I hope no one from Arturia is reading this post lol.

JJarvis · Post by **JJarvis** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:50 pm

I think robert has a good point. Most of these soft synths waste too much resources on the way they look. No one is ever going to see this instrument in a performance. I can care less how the thing is designed just as long as it is intuitive and sounds good.

I think the worst example of a bad gui would have to be that plugin for protools, the moogerfooger. I'm sure the thing sounds good, but for only having a few knobs, it sure takes up a lot of screen space.

When I use plugins like the jupiter, I just spend some time with it taking up the whole screen. I program my sounds and save or in this case (using the demo) I might record my patch into sampler. I hope no one from Arturia is reading this post lol.

hambone1 · Post by **hambone1** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:16 pm

Efficient, intuitive, and ergonomic software interfaces can go a long way in enhancing the use of any software. There are SO many advantages a software interface can have over simply trying to copy the hardware interface.