![]() ![]() ![]() In other words, it is a superset of the old synths.Īnother way this manifests itself is that program names can now be long and in both upper and lower case. There are three ways to set up envelopes in place of Ensoniq’s one, an arpeggiator, new unison settings, and so on. It also incorporates elements of the VFX methods for sound engineering, that were not catered for in the early Ensoniq program sysex. It has a suite of effects, which can be saved as part of individual programs. The recoding is understandable when you consider that the SQ80 V is much more than the SQ-80. For some reason, just to be different, the envelope parameters stick to Ensoniq’s integers. The range of a DCA was, and is, encoded as 0 to 63, in increments of 1, whereas Arturia expresses it as 0.00 to 1.00 in increments of 0.004 or thereabouts. The other thing is that it looks like Arturia re-encode most parameters in decimal form, whereas ESQ-1 and SQ80 programs used integer values. Arturia’s proprietary file format is the only form of output I can see so far. So what I learnt from that was that once programs go into the SQ80 V, there is no getting them out again. Arturia support suggested deleting the temporary file C:\ProgramData\Arturia\Presets\db.db3, which apparently can obstruct program (Arturia call them presets) updates. Subsequent imports have behaved perfectly. The second time it happened I exported the bank to Arturia’s proprietary sysex format, deleted the offending bank, and reimported it without problems. The first time it happened I deleted what appeared to be duplicates by hand, only to find that I had one by one deleted every program in the bank. Twice the Arturia software appeared to duplicate every program in the bank, telling me there were 80 when I had uploaded only 40, but this problem seems to have gone away. I ran into some odd behaviour when I imported a bank of ESQ-1 programs. It should be though, as the old and free 32-bit SQ8L, which still works, is also close (even though it has some differences the developer deemed improvements). With their gains balanced, playing the same programs on the original 1986 hardware ESQ-1 and the new 2021 software SQ80 V, I am hard-pressed to tell them apart, so my verdict is that this is a faithful emulation. The SQ family were state of the art for ease of programming in the 1980s, but expectations and technology have changed since then. My first impression is that it is so much better all round to have graphical representations of synthesis parameters like envelopes and filters than just digital readouts. ![]() IK Clavitube is pretty cool and you can strum it on Triple Play and it responds well.Despite (or perhaps because of) owning a working Ensoniq ESQ-1 and copies of the now abandoned SQ8L and Krosswave software emulations of the ESQ-1’s successor, the SQ-80, this week I spent actual money on yet another emulation of the SQ-80, the Arturia SQ80 V. ![]() I just last night explored IK Miroslav Philharmonik 2 and Cinematic Percussion and those are fun, lots of great sounds. Like Mighty Max, I'm more interested in sample banks. I have some other Cherry Audio synths, the sounds are good but the idea of adjusting something like the 8 voice with so many knobs is not something I want to do. I dabble with an Xkey 25 but I suck at keyboards, again there are no knobs. Plus they have some great sounds available. Sliders are easy to parse visually and easy to adjust using a mouse, handy. I love the interfaces since they are all sliders and Triple Play has no knobs for adjusting parameters. I just got 2 synths from Noise Engineering, their Freequel bundle. I can't say too much about them because Triple Play allows up to 4 simultaneous "splits" and I tend to just choose preset sounds based on different ADSR parameters and see what happens. Some that are currently in my Fishman Triple Play arsenal: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |