And besides fantastic sound TAL Software did a very good job with the interface that is lightweight and pleases your eyes

 

Now open the window and close the door, please.

 

It the same reason Acustica does every other emulation that has already been done, the reason being that its their own style / tech that is applied. Which to me, is closer / better sounding than the usual suspects. Thing has its problems, as with most acustica releases, but its sound is really good. Its got this extra layer of 'aliveness' or magic or whatever you want to call it, that even the best emulations are lacking.

If you are at all into synths, i reccommend trialing the synth. Wether or not you want to support acustica is another story, but they have been somewhat better since the witches did their thing. Removing bloat, better customer engagement etc.

 

If I was Mr. Acustica Marketing I would have gone for something like the Yamaha CS-80, only to make it interesting I'd have done the GX-1. Actually given the theme of hey, we sampled this wierd specific vintage thing I would try to do Hans Zimmer's which was owned by Keith Emerson and supposedly had the Yamaha filters taken out and replaced with Moog filters which makes it a one off.

 

It would be kind of fun to see if they can eventually come out with the One MiniMoog to rule them all...

 

Giancarlo Del Sordo approves this post

 

Last edited: Dec 5, 2024

thx for bringing this up , installed a trial and this thing bombs. TAL J8, one my favs just sounds like a gimp now. And the gui, when you see it it's jaw breaker. I think this thread is full of fools, just a warniing for those who might be interested in trying this. No, I don't think, I'm sure, for years now. The only abomination here is you calling yourself a musician. You are TONE DEAF

 

well, hello hello Giancarlo

 

That's what I say as well. There are not just many there are LOT'S. Some versions are better than others. We use the good ones if we want authenticity and leave the rest. Some acustica fans here have said this THING is better sounding than any of the rest. That may be but I will not be dropping ~200$ on something that I already have in plenty, that IMO works just as well or better.

That is because "acustica" doesn't "create" stuff, they just rip off sounds of already patented hardware and voice off the results as their own. They (acustica) are not unlike a lot of big "devs" these days.

 

Last edited: Dec 5, 2024

I dont know who do this picture but.....imposible more idiot face....

 

haha nice

The synth is awesome, but this comment is a bit harsh / tone deaf

Its 80$ during intro sale. And yah, the whole "rip off sounds" trope is so old at this point. Any hardware emulation is the same, but for some reason it only gets brought up in Acustica posts. Kontakt or other sample libraries? Ripoffs. Any dev that makes an emulation of API or SSL, Neve etc? Ripoff! TBT Deep Vintage Ai plugins?? Praised by users for their great sound!!! While in reality, its just a ripoff!!

 

Indeed. And people still buy the same nonsense over and over again just to play around with it until it gets boring like the human boy from toy story did.

 

The music communities worldwide are more discerning now than ever.

New products are always welcomed if that is what they are. Any company releasing something that many competitors have already released, either needs to make it more affordable than their competitors or at least the same price.
For any company to boast that theirs is better than any other, these days, that is a very tall order to fill because not all musicians will see it is better.

The wording often confuses a lot of people and justifiably too. Phrases like Authentic recreation, perfect recreation, sounds identical to the analog hardware, perfect emulation and similar phrases.... honestly, I think they'd be better off if they said how proud they are of their recreation of the original rather than wording it in such a way they can set themselves up for failure, even if their product is very good.

As someone said, they possibly should have considered creating something nobody else has thought of.

 

I prefer John Carpenter's technology

 

The biggest issue with Acustica is not their plugins, is their business model. Other devs also do their take on products that already exists (try to count the number of 1176's and Pultecs and you will be shocked), and people don't rant over that much.

But Acustica is on the expensive and bloated side of things and they don give a F to do a better implementation for the customers. Few upgrades, even for the best sellers. A lot of new products. And they know how to speculate their products with audiophile and scientifical language, so they can archieve a "cult" status for people that don't know shite about DSP.

I don't regret the fact that i spent money on Acustica, because i LOVE some of their products and do believe they do some unique stuff. And their stuff do sounds good. Apart from that, is up to you to decide if the things are worthy or not. A long time ago since i got impressed with a 'new' Acustica plugin. I'd never buy this synth. Or any other synth they release. Their tech has nothing new to add to synths. They should just assume they did something normal, give a regular pricing and stop talking on ads like all of us are fools.

 

That's the thing. Doing *yet another* version of the same thing is a way to show what it sounds like when it is "done perfectly using your new technology". That is where this one fails, because we all have already seen there is no "new technology". There was the appearance of such, by the implication of such enormous storage consumption/file sizes; created to fool those who spent their money on Acustica's plugins.

 

To be fair to Giancarlo and the gang, they do use technology that other dev's do not. Some are starting to use similar approaches, and theres the whole thing with AI, but their tech is its own thing. The file size / bloat was idiotic, but at least they are fixing it since the witches called them out.

They sampled the filters, chorus, oscillator drift, voices etc etc, which to my ears does add something new that i have not heard from other synths. Ive spent a solid week with it, and keep comparing it to UHE synths, G-force, arturia etc, and in every case, acustica's sounded best. G force and UHE come close to "realness" or alive or whatever you want to call it, super close actually, but acustica still held that extra few percent. Arturia stuff, not even close. Wether or not that extra few percent matters is another question. In the context of a pop or edm song, nah, who cares, it'll all be layered and crushed to death anyways. But for more subtle genre's, like ambient, or synth heavy trailer stuff, synthwave etc, I find it can make a significant difference. Its also priced at the same level of competitors, maybe a little more. Thats with the classic Acustica pricing tho, intro + a limited coupon. That whole thing is stupid, nobody is going to believe your synth is worth 200$, just price it where it'll always be on sale, and leave it there. Their marketing hyperbole is funny too, like ok, yah sounds good, just give me the demo and let me hear for myself.

 

If Acustica was a French company, and they used their "new technology" to take a $50 bottle of Champagne and inflated it to 10 times it's size and sold it for 10 times the price; they would throw his a$$ under the jail. It is very lucky for him that he did not rip off the wrong people.

In very few industries on this planet would this person be able to do business again. Do you see many VWs driving around anymore? I do not.

 

This is the thing. I'm not against someone inflating 10 times 50$ champagne bottles with their techs, as soon as the final price it's still 50$. The inflated prices of their products don't represent the value of their inflated tech. TBTech Deep Vintage plugins also use a unique tech, but they are not bloated and are very cheap products that can potentially sound better than a lot of Acustica stuff.

 

arent we all thinking the same ?
...Camon Witches, do your magic