I get that reference - classic lols!

 

What I am impressed with is that it is free. And I am grateful for that.

 

Because 99% of the plugins or vst instruments use the exact same filters.. the same oscillators... the same modulations.. the same effects... the same shit... the same math formulas, simple or complex... the same theorems...
Of course, at the end, the plugin or instrument will output the exact same crap. Basically, only the GUIs do differ !

In over 20 years, the only big revolution was... melodyne. The 'crazy' German guy, (crazy meaning genius) and his big white beard, did what everybody thought was impossible: separate notes from chords.
Another smaller innovation, IMHO, was Pigments modulations...that modulate other modulations.. that modulate other modulations..and allow sounds to keep evolving for hours and hours..

Maybe everything sounds the same, because the maths used are well known, and available to all devs to implement.
Maybe because the nyquist stuff... and the fft stuff are the basics of all sounds and audio, everything sounds the same.

Maybe one day, a guy like melodyne will invent new theorems... new concepts... totally different from the FFT...totally different from the nyquist stuff... and that day, new sounds will be created...

Because computers have become so powerful, it allows analog- like stuff as Diva to exist, and run in real time. Just a few decades ago, it would take 50..or even 100 pentium 266MHz-based computers, to play one single note of a Diva patch.

Until someone creates a new oscillator type, or a synthesis type, all sounds will sound the same.
Additive synthesis.. substractive...granular... super saw... sample based...for, etc etc... everything has been created.
It is very hard to innovate, when everybody can have access to the exact same ingredients as you...!

That's probably why the Virus TI is what..18-20 yo...?
What could access music create, as a hardware synth, in 2022, that costs under 3'000 euros, that tens of millions of artists, musicians, etc, will be buying, for the next 10+ years ?
Can they make a synth that will sound as good as a Diva? 3000 euros for that ?
Can they make a hardware synth that looks and plays like omnisphere ?
Can they make a synth, with the exact same crazy modulations, as Pigments ?
Can they make a hardware synth, with features from Vital... from pigments... from omnisphere...from Diva, zebra and bazille...from avenger... from Largo...from Fm8... from Padshop.... with tons of effects, and 100+ sharc dsps to power the whole beast?

No, they can't. And if access music can't release a 2000-3000 euros synth that can do at least as good as all these know vst instruments...why would they bother building it ?
And if they were going to make a hardware synth that plays like Diva and zebra...why not using a laptop with Diva, and a master keyboard...?

I don't think access music will ever release a new synth. Pretty much everything that could be made with the current tech, algorithms, etc, has ALREADY been made. It is almost impossible to innovate.

 

word man, I'm tired of this thin sound all over the place

 

You pretty much nailed it. Exactly my thoughts aswell.

 

I didn't know Arturia invented modular synthesis!

 

I can't speak for Falcon, but the problem with UVI's stuff is the lack of variety. They really need better sound designers. It doesn't matter if you sample a Rhodes Chroma, an Ensoniq ESQ-1, an Akai AX-80 or an Oberheim if you do all the exact same sounds on each machine. The same poly brasses, the same digital clavinets, the same bell-type sounds (there are always LOTS of these...why?), the same Tangerine Dream arpeggiated patches, generic string patches.

And this is coming from someone who has bought several of their libraries, including Vintage Vault and Synth Anthology 3.

To my knowledge Falcon "opens up" these libs for mangling and editing, whereas the free Workstation only serves as a player. So that might make them more useful.

Their UI's are gorgeous, though. I would argue it's a big selling point for them. Something Kontakt often lacks.

 

how big is the overlap between these two?

 

Well, apart from the similar sound programming problem I mentioned - not really. They are different products. SA3 is a compilation pack of different hardware synths under one single-GUI library-type plug-in whereas VV is a bundle of their various dedicated plug-ins.

Even though they share some of the same synths as source material, the sampling seems "deeper" in the dedicated libraries, which can also be reflected in the price difference. SA3 also includes a lot of synths and samplers that weren't sampled for VV.

 

Thats because i like Falcon very much.
I think it sounds very warm and 3D.
I wrote in a other thread that i get some sounds like in my old Virus TI1 (Depth, warmth...)
I cannot get this results with kontakt Libs or Nexus or Omnisphere.

The Falcon stuff sounds good and warm for me and keeps a lot of space for mixing

 

It is obvious that you can recreate those sounds with a good virtual FM synth. But how much time it will take, even for a synth guru?
A lot.
Moreover, how can you reproduce a sound that you didn't hear before... or don't have to compare?

 

Last edited: Dec 1, 2021

Well, falcon is a sampler with very basic synth options.
You don't have free phase mode for osc modules. You can emulate this with applying "soft random" on "phase start" button , but you will notice some obvious phase cancelation artifacts.
You have pretty poor fm possibilities. You have fm module, but it's DX like fm. You can't switch wave type. Only sines. In case you want to modulate sine with white noise - forget it, because you don't have cross osc fm. It means that you can't do stuff with fm between two or more osc modules.
You have global unison, but you can't detune each voice.
You have granular module, but you can't make it stereo wide.
And much more. It's limited in every it's aspect.
Comparing synth possibilities:
Avenger > Falcon
Phase Plant > Falcon
Comparing granular possibilities:
Pad shop 2 > Falcon
Comparing fm:
ableton operator > Falcon.
It's not worth 350$. UVI should implement some basic stuff to make it competitive instead of doing shitty sample based libraries.
Just ask a question:
If falcon is such a powerful synth, why all banks are sample based?

But, in my own practice:
falcon > Omnisphere

 

Last edited: Dec 1, 2021

use the dsp56300 emulator and the virus b binary. load TI patches and midi in daw. bounce in place in daw. Drag to falcon. Add Shade anyway. should sound better than virus export via usb? no. damn close enough 1 patch at a time.

 

HA HA HA HA! !!
FALCON THE BEST ROM_SINTH EVER!

 

I have been waiting for an opportunity to try Falcon for at least three years.

During this time, I was sometimes wondering about the price of this soft synth but now that I have had the opportunity to try it, I can understand why.

Even if the UI is a bit clumsy and takes time to get used to, this is a real powerhouse that can easily replace some hardware units.

AFAIK, the only other soft synth with a similar price tag is Omnisphere and for me, Falcon is in a totally different league: I know that a lot of people here love Omnisphere but for me it's basically a ROMpler disguised as a synth, unlike Falcon which is first and foremost a synth.

Bottom line, I was surprised by this synth, and in a good way. And it looks like, there are also many high quality sample libs that are made for this synth. Kontakt is no longer the only player in town.

 

Say what you will about Falcon. But UVI Ravenscroft is hands down the best grand piano when playing a gig

 

synths are ok.. for me any synth will do... i prefer strings.. play REAL strings.. nothing like the strings for me.. played with the hands.. not with a "piano".. the real thing.. i tired of this SYNTH WAVE. all is synths synths.. and more SYNTHS:. everyone is on SYNTHS.. all songs..made with synths.. boring.. all I read it's about synths.. and more synths.. this and that.. i think they "feel" they are in a "star trek ship" or something.. hahaha.. more and more.. presets.. and more synths.. 600 GB of recorded synths.. better use 50 mg of any synth... that all you need .. focus on the SONG.. on the MUSIC...
on YOU .. don't expect the computer to do it for you.. or 300 gb of strings.. you don't need that much.. any eq will do.. any comp will do.. any reverb will do.. music it's about YOU expressing something.. so.. amazing songs have been made with 1 core.. and 2 gb or ram.. HA ¡ ... this NEW musicians are too HOOKED to Consume MORE and more.. thinking they are going to express their feeling better with the NEW synth.. or EQ.. etc.. or the NEW thing.. everybody is talking about..error.

 

Last edited: Dec 1, 2021

I like some UVI packs. Very good sounding stuff.

 

atari st 1 mega. I had a sampler cartridge.