Korg R3 Vs Novation Ultranova Synth.
Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
ok, morshu, really, you are lying, or you don't know what are you talking about. The micron and the miniak are the same synth, they are identical and sound identical (i have one, tested both and an ion). The miniak is more solid than the micron (famous for losing pots and feeling very plastic) and it has a built in goose neck mic. Some of the presets are not the same, but the engine is. So, you can make your micron sound exactly like your miniak, and the same thing goes the other way.
--GEAR--AKAI Miniak, KORG Nanokontrol, nanoPad 2, KP3
--Past Gear-- NOVATION Xio, ENSONIQ ASR-10, YAMAHA SY35, SY77
--Past Gear-- NOVATION Xio, ENSONIQ ASR-10, YAMAHA SY35, SY77
-
SanderXpander
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:23 am
See Morshu this is what I'm talking about. You're giving someone advice on how to spend his money and you don't even know something as basic as this yourself?
I know that RichardW won't base his decision purely on your posts but if you're new into the synth world it can be pretty daunting and you come to a forum hoping for good advice from experienced users. You having jammed on a few of them for a couple of hours does NOT make you experienced. And that's fine, really, but please have a care when you advise others where to invest their money.
I know that RichardW won't base his decision purely on your posts but if you're new into the synth world it can be pretty daunting and you come to a forum hoping for good advice from experienced users. You having jammed on a few of them for a couple of hours does NOT make you experienced. And that's fine, really, but please have a care when you advise others where to invest their money.
i said in my post that they were similar, but that the ion/micron was easier to program
I said those were both not the best choice of synth.
The micron sounded better to my ear, i made a supersaw on the micron and on the akai, and the micron sounded better.
Maybe it was the speakers they were hooked up to? idk, but just saying the micron sounded better.
sorry if i gave incorrect info.
I said those were both not the best choice of synth.
The micron sounded better to my ear, i made a supersaw on the micron and on the akai, and the micron sounded better.
Maybe it was the speakers they were hooked up to? idk, but just saying the micron sounded better.
sorry if i gave incorrect info.
GuitarCenter and Sam Ash are the worst places to evaluate synths. All of their monitors ar crappy to start, then they get abused and "adjusted" beyond recognition. Half they time they run them through crappy keyboard amps. None of the synths are hooked up to a good PA with a soundman, which is how they should be used to hear what they can do in real-life gigs scenarios. None of them are hooked up with computer editors, USB-midi, and through audio I/O boxes. The showrooms are extremely loud with lots of distractions, and most of the time I can't wait to get out of the store so I can set the gear up to hear it properly at home/studio/gig.
Morshu, one of the reasons why people like these forums is so that they can get the opinions of people who have actually owned the gear for a substantial amount of time. After all, you can always go to the GC and SamAsh websites to get all of the reviews from people like you, who merely repeat what they've read elsewhere (usually poorly translated like in the telephone game), or who base their opinions about synths on how they like the presets - even though they couldn't build those presets if their lives depended on it. On these websites, crap is rated 5 stars with rave reviews (from ignorant yahoos) and great gear is dismissed for stupid and ridiculous reasons. I've owned my R3 for about 5 years now, and I already knew how to program synths before I bought it, so I didn't have much of a learning curve. Many of us own a lot of keyboards and synths. I don't like to put my gear in my signature, since I don't want to be defined as a person/musician by the gear I own. I started learning and using synths in the late 70's.
So if you haven't owned the gear yourself for at least a month and used it under a wide range of situations, then you're just going to expose yourself for the newb you are. You've lost any credibility you thought you had around here, so your best chance is to STFU about giving advice about anything you haven't bought, you know, by actually laying down that hard earned currency and putting your money where your mouth is to see how the purchases works out. The Ion/Micron/MiniAK have the identical synth architecture inside. The M-Audio venom was designed by the same team members from Alesis who worked on the Ion/Micron, and the similarities between the synth structures are not coincidental. Basically it's the same synth engine that they've been recycling for the last 15 years.
Morshu, one of the reasons why people like these forums is so that they can get the opinions of people who have actually owned the gear for a substantial amount of time. After all, you can always go to the GC and SamAsh websites to get all of the reviews from people like you, who merely repeat what they've read elsewhere (usually poorly translated like in the telephone game), or who base their opinions about synths on how they like the presets - even though they couldn't build those presets if their lives depended on it. On these websites, crap is rated 5 stars with rave reviews (from ignorant yahoos) and great gear is dismissed for stupid and ridiculous reasons. I've owned my R3 for about 5 years now, and I already knew how to program synths before I bought it, so I didn't have much of a learning curve. Many of us own a lot of keyboards and synths. I don't like to put my gear in my signature, since I don't want to be defined as a person/musician by the gear I own. I started learning and using synths in the late 70's.
So if you haven't owned the gear yourself for at least a month and used it under a wide range of situations, then you're just going to expose yourself for the newb you are. You've lost any credibility you thought you had around here, so your best chance is to STFU about giving advice about anything you haven't bought, you know, by actually laying down that hard earned currency and putting your money where your mouth is to see how the purchases works out. The Ion/Micron/MiniAK have the identical synth architecture inside. The M-Audio venom was designed by the same team members from Alesis who worked on the Ion/Micron, and the similarities between the synth structures are not coincidental. Basically it's the same synth engine that they've been recycling for the last 15 years.
i'm just saying that i dont really like them that much. The only plus to the ion/micron/miniak/venom is all the features you get.
The synths themselves sound terrible, but because you have so many effects and a sequencer and rhythm control and drum sequence thing, it makes it ideal for some things.
If you want a good synth go look at the top 10 synths of all time on sonicstate.
only the best of the best are in that.
I'm gonna hold my ground and say that the Korg M1 is the best choice for you.
The synths themselves sound terrible, but because you have so many effects and a sequencer and rhythm control and drum sequence thing, it makes it ideal for some things.
If you want a good synth go look at the top 10 synths of all time on sonicstate.
only the best of the best are in that.
I'm gonna hold my ground and say that the Korg M1 is the best choice for you.
-
SanderXpander
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:23 am
That is an interesting point actually, the OP didn't actually specify he wants a VA. He just mentioned two of them and we've been talking about them and other VAs ever since. If that's not necessarily what he's looking for, the M1 could be a nice starter board.
If he's looking for a VA though, the M1 is obviously not what he wants.
If he's looking for a VA though, the M1 is obviously not what he wants.
The Ion/Micron/MiniAK/Venom sound good. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't know s**t. There are plenty of signed bands that use them on tours. The problem is not with the sound quality of them, it's that the capability of the synth structure was great for the late 1990's, but not so great compared to the R3/Radias.
The biggest problem with the Alesis synth architecture is their lack of wavetables on the oscillators. It's very limiting to only use basic sine, saw, and pulse/square waves. The R3 has a much greater range of sounds possible on its two timbres because of the DWGS and other more complex waveforms available on OSC1. The Venom has added a few wavetables, but they overcount the number in the specs because they count combinations of waves, not individual waves. The R3 has a lot more waves than any of them, and more than the Novation products too.
Another problem with the Alesis architecture is that only certain effects can be inserted into the chain at certain positions. The R3 can put any effect type into any IFX1, IFX2, or MFX slot, except for the few 'double FX' that take up two slots. The R3 also has a parametric EQ independent of an FX slot. The R3 has many more effects, and each effect is typically much more powerful and configurable than other synths. For the most part, the R3 has the full effects engine of the Radias. Effects make a huge difference in the capability of the synth.
The vocoder on the R3/Radias is also much more powerful. It's the only one that can record vocodes with formant motion. It also doesn't use the vocoder as an effect, using up an FX slot, since the vocoder puts the synth into a different mode that rearranges the synth architecture. See the block diagrams in the manual to see how it changes between vocoder mode and regular mode.
The biggest problem with the Alesis synth architecture is their lack of wavetables on the oscillators. It's very limiting to only use basic sine, saw, and pulse/square waves. The R3 has a much greater range of sounds possible on its two timbres because of the DWGS and other more complex waveforms available on OSC1. The Venom has added a few wavetables, but they overcount the number in the specs because they count combinations of waves, not individual waves. The R3 has a lot more waves than any of them, and more than the Novation products too.
Another problem with the Alesis architecture is that only certain effects can be inserted into the chain at certain positions. The R3 can put any effect type into any IFX1, IFX2, or MFX slot, except for the few 'double FX' that take up two slots. The R3 also has a parametric EQ independent of an FX slot. The R3 has many more effects, and each effect is typically much more powerful and configurable than other synths. For the most part, the R3 has the full effects engine of the Radias. Effects make a huge difference in the capability of the synth.
The vocoder on the R3/Radias is also much more powerful. It's the only one that can record vocodes with formant motion. It also doesn't use the vocoder as an effect, using up an FX slot, since the vocoder puts the synth into a different mode that rearranges the synth architecture. See the block diagrams in the manual to see how it changes between vocoder mode and regular mode.
I want to thank everybody for all the input on this topic. Reading these comments is educational because I am starting to realize how large, actually HUGE, the field of synthesis is. I have been doing research on the types of synthesis: additive, subtractive, wavetables, etc. This is a science all in itself. As of now, I am leaning toward the purchase of an R3. For me, it's probably the best all-round starter synth. However Morshu posted photos of older equipment that would be available on the used market, and that has me thinking about getting a higher end used synth later on (once I know more what I'm doing and where I am going with it).
Anyway, thank's again for the comments. This is all very good information for a beginner.
Anyway, thank's again for the comments. This is all very good information for a beginner.
RW
-
CharlesFerraro
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:15 am
- Location: California
Considering the R3 and the Ultranova are about the same price Richard, I think you'll be happier with the Ultranova. The technology is newer and the synth is still getting active support from Novation. You wont see any official updates or preset packs for the R3 in the future. Ultranova is a pretty hands-on, tactical piece of kit what with the touch-knob function and aftertouch. I was wrong about streaming audio too apparently, you wont need an audio interface with the Ultranova. Plus the editor works as a VST which means you can sequence and automate the synth in your DAW. This gives you visual feedback which I think is really important for a newby.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3_LL0ee8UA
You can of course automate the R3 but you don't get the benefit of seeing the automation. In fact the editor doesn't even receive midi from the unit, only to the unit. And as discussed many times on these message boards the R3 does not have a built in audio interface.
Voice count is a killer when it comes to comparing these synths. 8 for the R3 vs 18 on the Ultranova. Layering the other timbre on the R3 eats up that polyphony real quick.
Theres a humongous difference in mod capability between the two as well. 20 virtual patches on the Ultra with 66 destinations compared to 6 virtual patches (+mod sequencer) with 15 destinations on the R3...
The Ultranova has an extra LFO and twice the amount of envelopes too. Layering two timbres on the R3 partially compensates it's numbers.
Both synths have 5 effects slots. The Ultranova lets you route the FX signal path in any order. R3 limits two inserts per timbre plus a master. So the difference just depends on what you're after. For instance you may not want to have a bunch of global parameters and instead use a layered timbre patch on the R3 to apply separate effects to different parts of your sound. Or maybe you do want to route a bunch of effects in a chain (e.g. Distortion>Compression>EQ>Delay>Reverb) in which case you'll need the Ultranova. The R3 however has some nifty effects not present in the Ultranova such as a grainshifter, pitch shifter, wah-wah and more. Lots of fun to be had there!
Aside from features though, whether you get the MINIAK, R3, UltraNova or Venom... Its how you use the engine. Sometimes less is more too. A limited amount of options on a synthesizer forces you to use its capabilities in creative ways. Forces you to intimately understand the architecture of the model you're working with. Just look at the whole chiptune scene, those guys are doing craaazy stuff with a lo-fi noise channel, two pulse's and a wave oscillator with software running on a freaking gameboy. LSDJ kids make great music because they obsess over their medium which is an important lesson for any synthesist or gear-head.
https://8bc.org/music/-12insomnia-/ZERO/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3_LL0ee8UA
You can of course automate the R3 but you don't get the benefit of seeing the automation. In fact the editor doesn't even receive midi from the unit, only to the unit. And as discussed many times on these message boards the R3 does not have a built in audio interface.
Voice count is a killer when it comes to comparing these synths. 8 for the R3 vs 18 on the Ultranova. Layering the other timbre on the R3 eats up that polyphony real quick.
Theres a humongous difference in mod capability between the two as well. 20 virtual patches on the Ultra with 66 destinations compared to 6 virtual patches (+mod sequencer) with 15 destinations on the R3...
The Ultranova has an extra LFO and twice the amount of envelopes too. Layering two timbres on the R3 partially compensates it's numbers.
Both synths have 5 effects slots. The Ultranova lets you route the FX signal path in any order. R3 limits two inserts per timbre plus a master. So the difference just depends on what you're after. For instance you may not want to have a bunch of global parameters and instead use a layered timbre patch on the R3 to apply separate effects to different parts of your sound. Or maybe you do want to route a bunch of effects in a chain (e.g. Distortion>Compression>EQ>Delay>Reverb) in which case you'll need the Ultranova. The R3 however has some nifty effects not present in the Ultranova such as a grainshifter, pitch shifter, wah-wah and more. Lots of fun to be had there!
Aside from features though, whether you get the MINIAK, R3, UltraNova or Venom... Its how you use the engine. Sometimes less is more too. A limited amount of options on a synthesizer forces you to use its capabilities in creative ways. Forces you to intimately understand the architecture of the model you're working with. Just look at the whole chiptune scene, those guys are doing craaazy stuff with a lo-fi noise channel, two pulse's and a wave oscillator with software running on a freaking gameboy. LSDJ kids make great music because they obsess over their medium which is an important lesson for any synthesist or gear-head.
https://8bc.org/music/-12insomnia-/ZERO/
paypal.me/CharlesFerraro
-
CharlesFerraro
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 955
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:15 am
- Location: California
Actually the RADIAS editor works two-way as in when you turn a knob on the module it shows in the editor. Guessing it has something to do with CC's, don't know. Anyway that editor is from '06, assuming tech's just got lazy as you imagine..richardw wrote:To me it's a surprise that the comm between the R3 and its editor is just one way. I guess that is an example of technology from 2007. Perhaps the editor was just a minimal effort on Korg's part anyway.
Last edited by CharlesFerraro on Wed Oct 12, 2011 2:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
paypal.me/CharlesFerraro
you should start with either a super simple synth, or a higher end synth, I think that the MS2000 is the one for you if you want a fairly simple synth that is capable of unholy things.
If you dont like the ms2000, then there is the Nord lead 2x, and the Emu proteus, The Korg M1, JP8000, TB303- to name a few.
If you dont like the ms2000, then there is the Nord lead 2x, and the Emu proteus, The Korg M1, JP8000, TB303- to name a few.
-
SanderXpander
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 7860
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 7:23 am
Seriously, Morshu, you're all over the place again. You own exactly none of those synths, have likely not even played most of them, and at the very least don't understand how vastly different they all are.
The Proteus and M1 are romplers, from different ages. They are in no way like any of the synths that have so far been discussed. The MS2000 at least is a somewhat comparable VA, but the Nordlead 2x is at least twice the price of the other suggested options, and it has no built in fx. The JP8000 is again in the right direction, but then the TB303? What the hell? It's both extremely hard to get, very old, extremely limited and nothing like any of the other options?
I'm sorry to keep jumping on you but I figured by now you would have realized you need to tone down the bull$h!t.
The Proteus and M1 are romplers, from different ages. They are in no way like any of the synths that have so far been discussed. The MS2000 at least is a somewhat comparable VA, but the Nordlead 2x is at least twice the price of the other suggested options, and it has no built in fx. The JP8000 is again in the right direction, but then the TB303? What the hell? It's both extremely hard to get, very old, extremely limited and nothing like any of the other options?
I'm sorry to keep jumping on you but I figured by now you would have realized you need to tone down the bull$h!t.
i personally think the nord lead 2x isn't out of the question. its a powerful instrument, it may not have effects(well it has a few i thought) but it makes up for it with its grittyness. I probably should've said nord wave however... seeing how he loves wavetables, and the nord wave has superior everything. but it costs alot more.