If you teach me C++ and how to use JUCE in a few months then there will be a mac version ;) If not, I am stuck with FlowStone which is PC only

 

Maybe you could support running it inside Crossgridder. It is Audiogridder installed in a Crossover bottle, used to run Windows plugins on Mac. Many Windows plugins work already without modifications; but a developer might be able to easily fix the ones that don't for the purpose. If you already have a Mac.

 

One problem with that, is that the developer has to fix it against quickly changing WINE versions and DAWs.
yabridge (https://github.com/robbert-vdh/yabridge) has started doing this years ago with zillions of specific fixes and it's an never ending uphill battle. Pretty much all ilok R2R cracks I have used worked on Linux fully or with minor glitches. It's a more elegant way to use plugins without Crossover,Crossgridder,Audiogridder, because it just re-routes one Windows vst3 to a Linux vst3 one through wine and also looks like a native plugin to the DAW. Standalone might work without a bridge.

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2024

Yeah, but there would not be any of R2R's magic to deal with iLok. His plugin does not use iLok. No need for Linux at all, or you may as well just run it on the PC under Windows with that machine setup to dual boot. Like a project for a rainy day.

 

True dat. I phrased that a little confusing and mixed that word salad up with other things that the bridge can do. Linux isn't relevant for sure, just saying that bridge works well including ilok. That topic came up before.
The dev of Viper could test it against a version of wine , preferably the one that comes with current Crossover, and state it as a feature without giving gurantees, to make sure a customer doesn't buy it under the premise that it will work on any version and then it would also work with the "gridders".

Another thing: the dev could maybe test it in a VM and doesn't even need a Mac. It just has to run. I don't know what macOS version work on a PC Windows VM, but that might be an easy way to do that and get some extra Mac and Linux customers.

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 1, 2024

HAY WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN OSTIRUS AND OSIRUS ANY WAY??

 

Osirus emulates the Virus B and C and Ostirus emulates the Virus Ti. It's nice to have both versions, because they have a different sound and different patches.

 

yes I meant soundwise that is ?? there are quite a few versions of virus synths. ive only used viper personally is why I ask. :/

 

The sound is absolutely fantastic, definitely install it and listen.

We are The Usual Suspects, a group of people who are currently Reverse Engineering and Emulating the Motorola DSP563xx series of DSP processors. This DSP has been used in plenty of virtual analogue synthesizers and other musical gear that was released after around the mid 90s, such as Access Virus A, B, C, TI / Clavia Nord Lead 2X, 3, Modular / Waldorf Q, Microwave II / Novation Supernova, Nova and many others. https://dsp56300.wordpress.com

 

Am I understanding it correctly that Adam’s synthesizers are supposed to nail the architecture of the original hardware, but FlowStone, being just a visual construction toolkit, simply can’t provide the level of accurate modelling needed for that? If that’s the case, the filters end up pretty mediocre at best, and there’s no way this can compete with the originals…

 

winowwwwzzz only...? blah

 

Analog goes digital. Let's first look at the well-known company Arturia, specifically their Prophet V. It's a virtual synthesizer modeled after the original Sequential Prophet 5 hardware. It's an emulation of the original, but does it sound like the original? Unfortunately not; no emulation sounds exactly like the original, that much is clear. Some manufacturers, like GForce, go to great lengths to get as close as possible to the cloned originals.

The advantage of software is that it's affordable, portable, and doesn't require repair or maintenance. Furthermore, when you buy it, you have a new instrument to play, bringing the evolution of vintage synthesizers into your living room.

One more thing about Adam Szabo's synthesizers: the goal was never to create an exact copy, but rather to approximate the original as closely as technically possible. Adam Szabo once wrote a paper on "How to Emulate the Super Saw": www.adamszabo.com/internet/adam_szabo_how_to_emulate_the_super_saw.pdf, which means he has a lot of expertise, which is also reflected in his virtual synthesizers and effects. He's also a very good sound designer for presets. He also makes music: www.adamszabo.com/music/

Download the Airwave demo from www.adamszabo.com/vstplugins/airwave/ and test the filters for yourself. Trust your ears, not what you read.

Only one team delivers this level of accuracy: The Usual Suspects - JE-8086, a free Roland JP-8080 synthesizer is expected to be released towards the end of the year. They have created the Roland JP-8080 using a Toshiba chip.

The "SuperWave P8 --> www.superwavesynths.com/p8" is free and is made with SynthEdit, in case you ever want to hear the difference between Flowstone and SynthEdit.
This page contains patches and sound banks for Superwave P8 by Christopher Gill.
https://rekkerd.org/patches/plug-in/superwave-p8/

 

Last edited: Nov 22, 2025 at 9:59 AM

definitely worth selling your kidneys for Viper and Airwave!

 

There are differences, but as for which is better, that is opinion.
Some filters make it easier to produce certain tones and a big part of that how the ranges of control work in the knobs and sliders.

When people say "great-sounding" filters, I laugh, because I can make most of those produce no sound at all, or produce horrible ear-shattering screeches & whistles. Suddenly they don't sound "great". How can that be?

Having good sweet spots in the controls, where most of the travel in knob or slider is usable can make a big difference in how easy it is to get a certain sound. Limitations that prevent too much unusable sound are also designed in to most commercial synths.

Most software synths can produce nearly any filter sound.
The differences are mostly in how easy or difficult they are to produce.

 

@DoubleTake
"Horrible ear-shattering screeches & whistles" can really be a good thing, depending on the context of course. I love misbehaving filters and call them "great-sounding"

 

The oscillator is the sound generator; the sound then passes through the filter. See attached images from the VIPER manual:

 

Will you plan to make sales for yours plugins this year ?

 

@Citrik Acid,

Adam Szabo is a plugin developer; you can see and buy his work here:
www.kvraudio.com/developer/adam-szabo
www.adamszabo.com

 

Hopefully they say that about analog filters which are being recreated as digital ones. Surely you do not think a Moog transistor ladder filter sounds or behaves the same as a SEM state variable filter... because that would be pretty funny.

 

Of course there are differences in frequency content due to design, but I laugh because the main thing most people respond to is the BEHAVIOR.