John Bowen Synth Design

John Bowen wrote:... I hope to ... incorporate a number of the Flexor modules.

An EXCELLENT choice John.
My track Danjerine Scream is built on FleXor modules.

Yes, I think the Flexor modules are excellent, and an ideal choice for the first expansion set, however, we have yet to test any conversion of the modules to see how they sound in the new hardware, and so I cannot promise yet that this will be an absolute certainty...but I don't expect there to be any significant issues.

-john b.

John Bowen wrote:The hardware Solaris has the equivalent of approximately 6 Scope boards (the 14 DSP cards), so 6 x 14 = 84 Scope generation DSPs - but remember, you would have to be running your Scope Project at 96 kHz as well...

regards,
john b.

wow, that's exciting! I'm still hoping the price can be kept just under three grand, but there's no denying the relative value of the system.

I'd love to use some of that horsepower for audio processing too.... thinking Vinco and such... maybe it would be asking too much that every scope bell and whistle makes it to Solaris hardware synth, but one can dream!

Does it already have audio inputs (i.e. for vocoding etc.)

Being able to use the Solaris filtering on external audio would be great! I think mastering might be a step too far

I think it is important that we don't see this as a Scope system. AFAIK it just happens to use some bits from it (dsp atoms?) under license.

Firstly because Scope isn't a flawless system (yet - though I have high hopes with SC) and secondly because John is John IYKWIM.
Thirdly because I assume that SonicCore (if they have any sense) will make a klang box Scope over firewire/usb/esata. They almost did it with Noah - but didn't get the concept correct. Team that up with a Jazz Mutant and AFAIC you have a winning concept (subject to price).
Similarly SC need to do tactile mini dedicated devices. The half way house between those won't work IMHO. Who wants a klang box prohet5? A prophet5 complete with knobs is a whole different ball game imho.

Solaris is the other end of the concept. A tactile dedicated "beast"

BTW is Adern up for sub licensing it? I guess any extra sales for version 3 would be useful...

John, what is the "likely" answer about it being bi-timberal, multi-timberal, zonable, etc.. ?? I appreciate it may be unrealistic!

But I'm keen that at least the keyboard itself and the oscillator types are zoneable. I don't think one can afford to underplay the use for LIVE performance. AYK although live performance isn't that large a market in itself, it has killed previous products.

JMTCW.

Hi,

Straight to your questions:

1) Yes, there are Left and Right analog inputs for signal processing, just as in the plug-in! (Unlike the plug-in, there will be a Vocoder, as well as a variable filter bank, in the FX section.)

2) Yes, Adern is willing to sub-license. We've already discussed this.

3) Yes, I believe there can be some mode of bi-timberal or multi-timberality, but maybe not for the first release.

regards,
john b.

John Bowen wrote: you can get fairly sophisticated layering just by using the 4 mixer/filter sections, each which has its own VCA as well (although all the VCAs share the same ADSR control, at least for now.)
regards,
john b.

I'd like to have seperate ADSR controls for each mixer/filter section,
that would make a good substuitue for multitimbral functions.
Tho I agree a split feature for at least two layers would be great.
I still have an AN1x where I use it frequently.

Would it be possible to have an incoming audio signal treated as an oscillator like the synthi aks?

Yes, as mentioned above, there are Left and Right audio inputs, which you treat like any oscillator source.

-jb

rsmus7 wrote:I'd like to have separate ADSR controls for each mixer/filter section, that would make a good substitute for multitimbral functions. Tho I agree a split feature for at least two layers would be great. I still have an AN1x where I use it frequently.

But you do have separate ADSRs for each mixer/filter section! That's one of the reasons there are 6 ADSRs in there...(plus 2 looping envelopes).

-john b.

oops, sorry my mistake ( I just wrote it wrong) , I meant the VCAs, to have seperate ADSRs, sure the mixer/filter have seperate ADSRs.

Someone mentioned the Synthi AKS. The EMS has a very individual sounding 18dB filter and sounds different to anything else I've heard. Especially when you pile on the resonanace it knocks the socks of everything.

If you could get permission to emulate it, and of course get the algorithms to do it, I'm sure folks would love the quircky "glassy/froggy" type sound that it makes.

That of course (if poss.) could be added in an update, but I wanted to mention it as yet another filter type with great character.

rsmus7 wrote:..., I meant the VCAs to have separate ADSRs, sure the mixer/filter have separate ADSRs.

This means the Solaris would have 10 ADSRs (the 6 in there already, plus 1 for each mixer/filter channel's VCA)!!

And then, when you want it in 'regular' mode, you'd have a switch to run all VCAs from the same ADSR...??

ok, I see, it could be confusing to have too many evelopes.

but maybe the mixer ADSRs could have a function to be routed to the VCAs?

and yes it would be usefull imho to have a switch to set the ADSR to global( all VCAs).

or is it already possible?

and are the ADSRs mono or poly? or selectable?


but maybe this all doesn't make much sense to many other users?
I'm always looking for as much modulation sources as possible
(and I know that some people find these only confusing).

All of the envelopes are freely assignable as modulation sources. This also includes two 8-point looping envelopes, for a total of 8 envelopes in the system. There is one ADSR permanently tied to the final VCAs, but it is also still selectable as a mod source. Thinking about this further, that means 9 envelopes, not 10, for the ADSRs, to do what you were asking, since the Amp ADSR is always handling at least 1 VCA.
However, I think what people are looking for is a way to take a complete patch and use it with another complete patch simultaneously. In this case, it would be better to be using less modules per patch, since the overall dsp load is going to be greater when running 2 patches at the same time.

-john b.