PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

http://matrixsynth.blogspot.com/2006/10 ... about.html

Enjoy!

Feel Blessed?........I am BLESSESD!! I anxiously await the FM beast. It will cover much of the audio spectrum. I would love to see John Bowen play sometime. There is no way that a person could create such beautiful instruments and not perform.

if his performance skills are on the same level as his designs, then it's hard to believe he's from this world...
I truely enjoyed his series for Keyboards, The J-Files

cheers, Tom
...but first of all, are you experienced ? (Jimmy H.)

I still listen to that album as it was my first guitar solos I ever learned, and of course Oh Suzy Q, baby I luv you, ol' Suzy Q.

Brazda lui Novac wrote:http://matrixsynth.blogspot.com/2006/10 ... about.html

Enjoy!

thank you, interesting stuff!

I wonder what the consensus of the 1:1 comparison of the different P5's and the Creamware Pro~12 was.

We Germans always want it to be PRECISE

kybernaut_01 wrote:
thank you, interesting stuff!

I wonder what the consensus of the 1:1 comparison of the different P5's and the Creamware Pro~12 was.

We Germans always want it to be PRECISE

Hi,
Yeah, sorry about that, but the fellow in question really did fit the image - VERY nice guy, but insistent on precision.

As for the comparison - since the Pro-12's filter is supposed to be modeled after the SSM (Rev 1) filter, I proceeded to set up similar settings, and, although the speaker system in use was quite small, the Pro-12 held up amazingly well to the Rev 1! I think most everyone who heard it agreed - the Pro-12 sounded EXTREMELY close in filter character, and represented a real viable option for hardware users.

cheers,
john b.

Thanks, john.

There certainly is some truth in that image, though. Those engineers did a great job. Too bad that CW had to let them go...

cheers,


kybernaut

kybernaut_01 wrote:Thanks, john.

There certainly is some truth in that image, though. Those engineers did a great job. Too bad that CW had to let them go...

cheers,
kybernaut

Hi again,
Some more clarification - what the video doesn't quite explain at that point is that I was talking about my version of the Pro One software versus what Creamware's guy had found in their later investigation of things for their Pro One plugin (once they had a real Pro One in house), and it was brought to me almost as an accusation that I hadn't done a good job. One of the issues (keyboard glide routed to the filter), I had simply overlooked, plus I had no way of creating that (Creamware had to code a new module for that specific function). For another example (which I give in the video), I had selected a lower filter cutoff and longer envelope times than were present on the real Pro One, simply because I felt the revised parameter values would be more musically useful.
I think what bothered me most about the conversation was that I felt I was put on the defensive, along the lines of, "You are supposed to be the expert, yet you didn't do it right."

For the Creamware version, I understand the assignment was to create as close an exact emulation of the Pro One as possible. Regarding the need to be precise - I think this is especially true for a larger manufacturer, as compared to a 3rd party developer, when involved in these kinds of products, because they know they are going to come under a different kind of scrutiny and expectation. Certainly, the DSP work done there had been excellent, especially towards the end of development. It is, indeed, unfortunate they had to be let go.

cheers,
john b.

well, obviously this is a subject on which one can never succeed - whatever you do, someone always knows better...

I remember a review about various emulations of vintage analog synths in one of the German mags, where CWA's Prophet One was 'criticized' as '...but the original doesn't have THAT much of punch at all...'

cheers, Tom
(awaiting the FM monster)