OK in comparison to a real D-50 is sounds pretty good. Those idiots at Roland did forget a lot like swapping out partials. loading sysex., etc.
I am looking forward to then fixing these things. I have not experience the cpu hog with the D-50 but random crashes with promars and system-X. I have a 470k not over clocked.
Did anyone notice the second release was only X64 no 86 plugins?

 

A long fucking time ago someone left a D-50 in the studio that I was commisioned to create an hour of original music for a brilliant shadow puppet artist's new show. I was very excited to be able to be able to get my hands on it and dive in deep. But it was for me the completely wrong tool for the job, it not being clean enough for me to translate the sound in my head and kept getting in the way of my process. I instead recorded the entire hour, divided into eight segments (Native American creation myths) using my Rode Classic and Joe Meek VC2 to capture Foley and my playing of a Native American Flute. I as well as the client were thrilled with the work and it worked out well in my favor. So, if I can ever get the instruments to show up within the Concerto container it will be fun to continue my experiments, this time without timelines or a ticking clock.

 

So to emulate a 1975 Casio calculator you will need the world's most powerful computer, huh?

What an ass...

 

Last edited: Jun 24, 2017

D-50 will not show up in concert. It is a separate instrument.

 

this is one of the weirdest arguments i've ever seen on this forum. any real musician knows that it doesn't matter even one tiny bit whether the plug-in sounds 100% exactly like the original hardware. if you create a four-minute piece of music with this vst, some drums, a bass, a couple of guitars, a lead vocalist and some backing vocals, and then you play that song for 100,000 average listeners and ask for their general comments about the song, you will not have even one person say "i could tell that wasn't a real roland d-50 on that track and it ruined the whole song for me".

if it sounds good to you and fits in the context of your music, then use it. if it doesn't sound good, and doesn't inspire you, then don't use it.

 

Absolutely true dude

 

just to make clear, I did not say that, I quoted Ted Smithson, and added, that this is bs. As I already said, this plugin is spot on, which really is no rocket science. Roland just had to recompile the 80´s DSP custom chip code into x64 compatible code. There is no reason to think that this one sounds inferior to the hardware whatsoever. I owned a D50 for many years and know the sounds of the D50 very well. The only question is, who wants to use a D50 in 2017? I mean it´s cool to have those legendary sounds but would I use it today? The answer is probably no.

 

Ooops, sry bro, I quoted you by mistake . It's corrected now.

 

Last edited: Jun 24, 2017

THIS!
And the same argument goes for all the marketing bullshit deployed - in a very clever way - by Daft Punk around R.A.M, an album which was mainly listened on cellphones by an audience who had never heard a real minimoog nor any instrument recorded on AMPEX 456 before:
"For the record, analogue synth legend Giorgio Moroder, featured on track 3 of the album, is in no doubt which he prefers – it’s digital ! And actually, in my opinion the real secret of “analogue warmth” isn’t really saturation distortion at all, it’s balanced EQ – but that’s a whole other blog post." http://productionadvice.co.uk/daft-punk-mastering/

 

Here's a good direct comparison hardware/software.

 

...

 

Last edited by a moderator: Aug 6, 2017

You are the definition of a troll... in fact you might be borderline breaking the mold.

 

I am listening through a very good pair of Senheiser headphones and i can clearly hear a difference:
The soft version sound flatter than the hardware, less depth and robust.
It's a quite good emulation but surely not a 1:1.
Just my 2 cents.

 

Obviously there will be difference, Software are almost always flatter sounding(at least at this point of computer and programing knowledge)). Bits only carry/manipulate information, not the properties of physics law of material/infrastrucrture, where analog signal travel in analog gear. So this is not just something D-50 vst related. This is overall as you say one fine emulation, as good as any other top emulators and Roland did with this one best job to date.

 

Transients are completely different from the hardware, plugin sounds like crap, what the hell Roland? I thought d50 was an all digital synth. I wouldn't even call this an emulation, sounds like all the other plugouts with a couple of tweaks and presets from d50. Eh, didn't want it that much anyway. Not a fan of the 80's cheese.

 

Good thing d50 is digital, amirite?

 

Yes digital in source, but carefully chosen and matching digital, analog chips, with own internal filters and character, which is defined by physics law of chosen material and design, this is also something you can only emulate in computer domain.

 

It for sure a fine emulation, but as Kimikaze stated...

...so yea, as atm I guess it is as good as it will get. The differences are as plain as the lines on my face which are plain as the lines on my face.

 

I like the sound but I can't stand the GUI.

 

of course there is a difference. but that has to do with the AD conversion , sound cards just do not sound the same as synths output, but there you go , I challenge anyone to pick the real one out of a mixed track , I bet nobody could .

I did some further testing with the Jupiter 8 and the plugin , I must fairly say its nice and sounds very close but also misses the growl and punch of the lower end of the synth . but again would be hard to find out in a track .