Massive Vs. RADIAS test

rbbplmr · Post by **rbbplmr** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:10 am

is there much of a difference between a pulse wave and a square? because im trying to copy the parameters of the radias file and to acheive the sound it used a square wave in oscillator 1 and a saw wave in oscillator 2...

the sound editor does not give me the option of choosing a square wave...

what should i do?

tpantano · Post by **tpantano** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:12 am

A 'square' wave IS a pulse wave, at a 50:50 duty cycle (someone correct me if I'm wrong)

So, if you set the R3 to pulse and leave the pulse width at 0, you get a square.

rbbplmr · Post by **rbbplmr** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:14 am

wow, k thanks.. im learning so much through all this. im really new.

Thanks man

rbbplmr · Post by **rbbplmr** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:28 am

kk so what if i need to match a square wave with a wave length of 27.. what length would i have to set for a pulse wave in order to match that?

(sorry for all these questions, you are very helpful)

CharlesFerraro · Post by **CharlesFerraro** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:34 am

First off Robbie, you're changing the pulse width of the square wave with OSC 1 Control 1, not the wavelength. In other words, you're changing the harmonic structure of the waveform. The waveform will still cycle according the key(s) you press so the wavelength is unchanged by that parameter.

Note that the R3 and RADIAS both run off a sound engine that Korg has dubbed 'MMT'. They may refer to the same parameters with slightly different names, but they are de facto the same thing. There is the example you pointed out with Oscillator 1, its called a square on the RADIAS and a pulse on the R3 but they're both square (or pulse) waves. I came across another example with a friend who owns the MicroKORG XL, another synth that runs the MMT engine. Both of our synths have PCM waveforms, but his refered to some ambient samples as Noise1,2,3,4 and the RADIAS called them Spectrum1,2,3,4.

Why Korg decided to rename things I do not know. But its not uncommon for some synths, like our Korgs, to call Glide 'Portemento'. But the Moog Voyager calls Portemento 'Glide'. Likewise some synths, like the MS-20, refer to filter resonance as Peak, others refer to it as Resonance.

rbbplmr · Post by **rbbplmr** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:40 am

ah ok that makes a lot of sense. thanks

tpantano · Post by **tpantano** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:41 am

rbbplmr wrote:kk so what if i need to match a square wave with a wave length of 27.. what length would i have to set for a pulse wave in order to match that?

(sorry for all these questions, you are very helpful)

27.

Morshu · Post by **Morshu** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:54 pm

charles i understand that software is equivalent to a VA synth, but nonetheless, my only point was that I dont like software because its not a real synthesizer, and its contained within bits and bytes of data, its not a physical object. and that means you can't do as much with it, you can't bring it with you in physical form and connect it to a bunch of digital effects processors, you cant wire it through a mixer and a bunch of other hardware synths, you cant connect a kaosillator pro or any other korg device, and you cant put your synth through guitar pedals in software either. The reason i hate vsts, is that they are not physical objects, so you can't just put them inside a synth and say hey i brought NI massive with me, lets go!. And since they arn't physical objects, you cant bring them with you without putting them on a laptop or something, sometimes thats not a problem, but if you wanted to connect NI massive to your analog synth gear and your r3 and have them all wired through digital effects processors and guitar pedals and kaosillators and a mixer, you would most likely have some difficulty.
Sure you could be an a-hole and use a "virtual mixer, virtual kaossilator and virtual monotron and a virtual moogerfooger and a virtual digital effects processor" but, is it going to sound as good for live performance? NO. IT WONT UNLESS YOUR ALBERT EINSTEIN OR SOME BLOKE LIKE THAT.
The real gear can resonate a certain hi-fi quality that can only be created by real objects created by famed synth manufacturers. The day your VSTs can play themselves and have minds of their own tell me, i'd love to see those stupid vsts replace humanity. >:)

Pastor-of-Muppets · Post by **Pastor-of-Muppets** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 2:18 pm

Morshu wrote:The real gear can resonate a certain hi-fi quality that can only be created by real objects created by famed synth manufacturers. The day your VSTs can play themselves and have minds of their own tell me, i'd love to see those stupid vsts replace humanity. >:)

can a hardware synth play itself? what has that got to do with anything?

all your words make sense in isolation, but strung together in that order you've achieved a void where there is no meaning or sense at all. bravo

DaniH · Post by **DaniH** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 2:30 pm

Wow, just wow.

tpantano · Post by **tpantano** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:47 pm

Morshu wrote:charles i understand that software is equivalent to a VA synth, but nonetheless, my only point was that I dont like software because its not a real synthesizer, and its contained within bits and bytes of data, its not a physical object. and that means you can't do as much with it, you can't bring it with you in physical form and connect it to a bunch of digital effects processors, you cant wire it through a mixer and a bunch of other hardware synths, you cant connect a kaosillator pro or any other korg device, and you cant put your synth through guitar pedals in software either. The reason i hate vsts, is that they are not physical objects, so you can't just put them inside a synth and say hey i brought NI massive with me, lets go!. And since they arn't physical objects, you cant bring them with you without putting them on a laptop or something, sometimes thats not a problem, but if you wanted to connect NI massive to your analog synth gear and your r3 and have them all wired through digital effects processors and guitar pedals and kaosillators and a mixer, you would most likely have some difficulty.
Sure you could be an a-hole and use a "virtual mixer, virtual kaossilator and virtual monotron and a virtual moogerfooger and a virtual digital effects processor" but, is it going to sound as good for live performance? NO. IT WONT UNLESS YOUR ALBERT EINSTEIN OR SOME BLOKE LIKE THAT.
The real gear can resonate a certain hi-fi quality that can only be created by real objects created by famed synth manufacturers. The day your VSTs can play themselves and have minds of their own tell me, i'd love to see those stupid vsts replace humanity. >:)

Actually, buy a multi-output soundcard then use your DAW to run the VST out of an output not going to your speakers, then into your hardware processors.

Simple.

and its contained within bits and bytes of data

So is VA hardware.

Morshu · Post by **Morshu** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 3:57 pm

no VA synths contain bits and bytes of data

VST synths are bits and bytes, nothing else.

Re-Member · Post by **Re-Member** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 7:59 pm

Morshu wrote:The day your VSTs can play themselves and have minds of their own tell me, i'd love to see those stupid vsts replace humanity. >:)

Arturia actually took their VST synths and dumped them into the Origin. Likewise, the Korg Kronos has the MS-20 & Polysix VST software in it.

The fact that you don't even know how to route a computer or laptop to a mixer, amp or external effects, let alone consider it a possibility... sigh. Have you even been to a live performance within the past decade, and if so, how much more ignorant can you possibly be?

X-Trade · Post by **X-Trade** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:31 pm

Guys, I think we get Morshu's point. It may be a little poorly communicated but I can see where he is coming from.

I too prefer a nice piece of hardware over spending hundreds of pounds on a piece of software that doesn't even physically exist. perhaps slightly childish and materialistic, but there you go. And there are many benefits to a proper dedicated control surface for the instrument that you get with (most) hardware instruments. Additionally, setting up a PC or laptop to reliably make music can be a pain, particularly for the rigours of live use.

For example, Maschine - great product. But really it would need a dedicated computer anyway. In fact it is more unwieldy to set up with both the computer and the controller. I'd be interested to hear what morshu thinks of this.
And as Re-Member says, software can go the other way too - hardware products based on software products.

Point is, it is a complex situation and each person has their own needs and/or preferences. Just because you or I prefer hardware over software or vice versa, doesn't make either de-facto better than the other for all cases.

xmlguy · Post by **xmlguy** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:56 pm

Morshu wrote:no VA synths contain bits and bytes of data

VST synths are bits and bytes, nothing else.

Then you obviously have no idea what the word Virtual means in Virtual Analog. All VA synths are computers that only know bits and bytes of data. They are all exactly the same in design as VST softsynths. They just use proprietary CPUs and DSPs. The only thing analog in them are less than 1% of the electronics in front of the A/D converters and after the D/A converters. You have been fooled by appearances. Every control knob you turn to affect the patch/program is a digital control controlling a digital parameter in digital software that's emulating analog synthesis through programming that produces a digital audio stream that only gets converted to an analog signal at the very end of the process with a D/A converter.