PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Hi gang!

I'm really proud to announce the release (finally) of my new synth for SFP and XTC. I started working on the "europa" as a fun distraction from my other two more "involved" synth projects (still working on them...), but then really got carried away with this one. I decided to complete and release this one first because I was so impressed with the sounds I was able to get and how fun/ easy it was to make patches with. I hope you like it as much as I do! Here are some words that I put together for the release:

The europa looks back to the famous poly-synths of the 80s, while
bringing those amazing sounds into the present with better player
control and, of course, tuning stability (not to mention less weight!).

Classic "Jupiter" and "Juno" sounds were specifically what the europa
was created to emulate, but it grew into a synth capable of much more,
sonically. The 130 onboard presets should give you a good indication
of what the europa is capable of and how it functions. Here are a few
additional tips to help you get the most out of the europa:

1) Where possible, the europa employs potis, instead of on/off
switches, to modulate signals allowing better control over features
like oscillator mixing and modulation parameters.

2) New control parameters are featured on the europa, giving the
player more control and flexibility than previously possible on other
soft-synths. You will come to understand how these new parameters can
be useful, after experimenting with the synth for a while. The new
parameters include:

- Unison, featuring flexible voice control (all voices/off/1-16); in
the "all" position any selected polyphony for the europa will be
monophonically stacked on a single voice, allowing the "Unison Spread"
parameter to move the stacked frequencies away from each other, creating a very "fat" and distinctively "unison" sound; the "Off" position is self-explanatory (Unison Spread has no effect); Unison voices 2-16 allows the user to select, apart from the polyphony value, which voices get stacked, ie: if you have the europa's polyphony set to "4 voices" and the "Unison Voices" set to "2", you could play a two-note chord with each note having a unison stacked voice on it... very very fat when you increase the "Unison Spread". Unison voice setting “1” has no noticable effect.

- Restart Mode: "Restart Mode" Select is implemented. Values are 0 =
shutdown restart (envelopes are zeroed before being retriggered) and 1
= running restart ("Moog mode": envelopes are retriggered without being zeroed). This will appeal to those users who want a classic “Moog” feel for their note triggering.

- Legato Mode (Polyphonic): When a key is played and an unassigned
voice is available for it, the voice is assigned and started normally
(including envelope retriggering).

When a key is played and no unassigned voice is available for it, a
voice is stolen from a key which is still being held. This voice is
reassigned via a simple pitch update, without retriggering the
envelopes.

When a key to which a voice is assigned is released, and one or more
other keys whose voices have been stolen are still being held, the
voice belonging to the just-released key is reassigned to one of the
"voiceless" keys - likewise via a simple pitch update without envelope
retriggering.

When a key to which a voice is assigned is released and there are no
other keys being held which do not have voices assigned to them, the
voice goes into normal release (and becomes "unassigned" for legato
purposes).

When polyphony is set to 1, or when the module is set into mono mode
via the Unison function, legato works the same way it did in the original MVCs.

Since there is a separate Legato Control pad, it is possible to
activate legato without activating portamento/glissando. In this case,
when a voice is reassigned to a different note, the pitch jumps
instantly to its new value.

- Portamento & Glissando Select/ Mode/ Time: During a portamento or
glissando glide, the "from" pitch of a voice was previously determined
directly by the note number of the last MIDI note that was played or
released (prior to playing the current note). Among other things, this
had the effect that when chords were played, especially with one hand,
often only the note which got triggered first would do a noticeable
glide - the second note of the chord would glide only from the new
pitch of the first chord note, while the third note would glide from
the new pitch of the second note, and so on. (Try this yourself!)

This has been changed so that each voice now simply glides to its new
pitch from whatever pitch it had before (which is a more typical and
classic approach). The change is not noticeable when a synth is played
in monophonic mode, but is very noticeable when multiple voices are
available, especially when playing chords, as it is now possible to
have multiple voices gliding in parallel across a wide pitch range - or even in opposite directions - depending upon which notes were played previously.

One side effect of this is that "fingered" porta/gliss may appear to
not always "work" when playing in polyphonic mode, if you're used to
the way it worked before. Previously, when this option was activated,
glide would occur whenever you played a note, if one or more other keys
were already being held. In the new implementation of this option,
glide will occur only if a voice is stolen from a held key in order to
accommodate the new note. If the voice that gets assigned to the new
note wasn't currently assigned to a different note - no glide. If
polyphony is set to 1 (or when playing in mono mode via the Unison
Voice control), then there is no noticeable difference in "fingered"
operation compared to what it was previously.

- Low Note Priority Switch: Only notes lower than the currently
triggered note will be allowed to be triggered. This was a popular
control mode switch on many vintage analogue synths.

- Poly Level: Non-modulatable volume control, used to prevent
"clipping" when polyphony is increased, in regular or "Unison" modes

- Panning is controlled by the LFO, all other "Pan-Mod" sources (Free
Env/ Velocity/ Aftertouch) affect the gain of the LFO output to the Pan
position

- Free Env/ LFO: Each has two pages, one for Direct Controls and
another for the Send Destinations; "MIDI Clock" switch will disable
the LFO "Frequency" knob and send clock info instead

- ModWheel Control is independent from the "LFO"

- Pitch Follow parameters will now send glide info to the filter
cutoffs (great for squelchy, elastic sounds)


Please check it out and let me know what you think:

http://www.track0.com/wavelength/

Cheers,

Stephen

I've looked all over the site and can't find it ! Do you have a direct link ?

EDIT: OK, I see it in the devices section. I'm a big fan of the Jupiter series, so I'm looking forward to listening ! But is that the final GUI ?

_________________
Where I rest . . .

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Spirit on 2003-02-20 03:06 ]</font>

it's on the "shop" page... you might have to refresh your browser settings. I put it up a few hours ago and I've already downloaded it from the site myself, to make sure things are good to go. thanks for the interest!

-stephen

EDIT: cool! you found it.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2003-02-20 03:10 ]</font>

How long did u spent on surface-design?
10 minutes?
I don´t know how it zounds but it looks like....

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BlackSun on 2003-02-20 14:01 ]</font>

Wow BlacSun, that's really a good way to stimulate the 3rd party development for Creamware platforms

Seriously, I will agree with you it doesn't look very attractive, and I have also said the same thing about that new synth coming from Zarg, the Python (see other topic). As a graphic designer, I may be more sensitive to this sort of thing than others, but Wavelenght also did the beautiful surfaces for the Prophet synth from Zarg, so I expect to see some better looking surface for this synth sometime
Even so, I think it's kind of rude to kick in only a degrading comment about the look, without even a "thank you for spending your precious time developing new stuff for our platform at really low prices".

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-20 16:26 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-20 16:29 ]</font>

On 2003-02-20 13:59, BlackSun wrote:
How long did u spent on surface-design?
10 minutes?
I don´t know how it zounds but it looks like....

didn't yer mamma ever tell you that it's what's INSIDE that counts!?

; )

actually, the GUI took me a good two full days to put together. every graphical element has to be lined up to the pixel and arranged in a way that is clear and useful.

gimmicky GUIs do not make the device sound any better and these are musical instruments we are talking about here... the final product will only be heard.

my goal in developing a GUI for any device is to present its parameters in a way that inspires the clearest path from artist to function. I, personally, like to have as much as possible in front of me at one time, with everything laid-out clear and logically.

any comment that is based strictly on graphics for a soft-synth and that does not comment at all on the sonic quality of the said device seems rather ridiculous to me.

i have even had some "high-end" clients request that my GUIs be even more stripped-down and basic, with only HUGE faders and big bold text displays...

it is a balancing act, my friend.

If you had a comment or criticism that dealt with how the GUI impairs ones ability to use the device, then i would take it seriously.

On 2003-02-20 16:21, King of Snake wrote:
... but Wavelenght also did the beautiful surfaces for the Prophet synth from Zarg, so I expect to see some better looking surface for this synth sometime "...

the SCI stuff was set up to be "actual" SCI devices, with the licensed logos and everything, so the authentic look was important. the SCI device(s) parameter layout(s) also allowed more surface area for wood-effects, etc... without making the GUIs ultra-huge, or complicated.

with something like my europa i wanted to go with function over fashion. besides, i think it looks pretty good and i'm not sure where this GUI fetishism comes from. i'll never be able to please every type of client with the way a device looks, everybody wants something different from a design standpoint.

remember, the DX7 was revolutionary despite its tedious interface and could thus be sold at an amazing price-point, as a result (which, in turn, helped make it revolutionary).

I agree with you - functionality/useability is what counts (after sound quality, that is). I like the simple, clean look.

heh, let me be the first to comment on sound

Its frigging FABOLOUS

I love the evolving presets, and as i am kinda cheap, i totally fell for the "daft punk" one

i can just run a voice or two beeing a Luna user, but man, i like this GOOD WERK!!!

oh, and a BIIIIG thumbs up for functionality

On 2003-02-20 21:56, piddi wrote:

I love the evolving presets, and as i am kinda cheap, i totally fell for the "daft punk" one

cool! i worked hard to get some sounds onboard that users could recognize from classic tracks. i originally thought that doing a "Da Funk" sound would be kinda cheesy, but man was it fun to get results that close! i am particularly proud of the "Cars" and "Save a Prayer" presets...

cheers

-stephen

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: wavelength on 2003-02-20 22:40 ]</font>

On 2003-02-20 17:31, wavelength wrote:

the SCI stuff was set up to be "actual" SCI devices, with the licensed logos and everything, so the authentic look was important. the SCI device(s) parameter layout(s) also allowed more surface area for wood-effects, etc... without making the GUIs ultra-huge, or complicated.

Allright, I see where your coming from, but consider this. Some people might prefer something that actually looks and feels like a musical instrument, rather then just a big blue slab with lots of knobs and numbers on it. Also it doesn't present you with any graphical clues as to which function is what, only text, which for me is also a point of concern in any graphical interface. To be honest, two days is not a lot of time to spend on designing an interface! I think a good GUI is a compromise between aesthetics and workflow. The way it looks should also be in line with the character of the synth. Well, that's my opinion. Now I'll go check out the sound of it.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-21 06:57 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-21 07:10 ]</font>

[/quote]

...Some people might prefer something that actually looks and feels like a musical instrument, rather then just a big blue slab with lots of knobs and numbers on it... The way it looks should also be in line with the character of the synth...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-21 06:57 ]</font>
[/quote]

"a big blue slab" seems a bit cruel. by two days of work, I am saying a combined time of at least 48hrs on graphics, which is a lot of time for a synth that is already at a functional/ working stage by that point... one could fiddle endlessly with aesthetics, I think, and still not please everybody. i would rather invest my time in creating a great sounding instrument, easy to use, with useful presets to work from.

you have used words like "feel" and "character" to describe what a GUI should convey... but what truely is the character and feel of software? could not ones experience with a software device be even more drastically affected by the hardware controller keyboard and MIDI fader controller used? these are the truer hardware interfaces to the software device.

if one wants the actual true "feel" and "character" of a particular existing synth, then one should buy the original.

software now allows us to create very authentic synthesis models that can be sold for a relatively low price-point (compared to hardware equivalents). the more time spent on things like designing over-flashy GUIs (which many users hate, btw), the higher the price will go.

besides, i really think the GUI looks great! i didn't finish it thinking "too bad about my surface", it was what worked for me. the slab with knobs and numbers allowed me to get really efficient with my preset design because everything was right there in front of me. i would understand a gripe if it looked like a confusing and garish mess, but everything else is simply just a matter of taste.

cheers

-stephen

IMHO: That way the GUI is very clear to assign knobs from the Drehbank or Pocket Fader. So it is VERY convenient for the user. Cool feeling.

I didn't expect this at all, but what was mentioned in the intro
...and how fun/ easy it was to make patches with...
just happened to me. Lots of nice OSC tweaks and modulations.
I recently bought Vectron, Python and the ModIII update , so the Europa definetely had a difficult starting position
Great job Stephen ! You might consider a 'favourite surface color' switch though

cheers, Tom

The sound of the Europa is something really different for SFP devices.

I played a Jupiter-6 live for a few years, also owned a SuperJupiter and my first synth was a Korg MonoPoly. All these machines featured really powerful cross-modulation and hard sync. Unfortunately the power of the effect was completely lost on later synths - they really wimped out.

But I can say for sure that the Europa completely overpowers anything I ever got from my old analog gear.

It is mean and heavy.

No, REALLY MEAN AND HEAVY !

The preset list is very good, but still does not do justice to how hard this device can get. I don't think anything else comes close.

With the crossmodulation, sync and free envelope you get some nasty stuff happening. But the real killer is the overdrive and especially the ringmod with frequency control. By slight tweaking here you can change from plain heavy to bloody-eared industrial.

At first I thought the device had a slightly metallic feel and was a little concerned that it didn't do "nice" very well. But after hearing this thing grunt who cares ? Nice you can do plenty of other places.

I think it can be compared in passing to NI's revised Pro-53. That features slightly similar analog routings and does attempt to get the same sort of harder sound.

But it falls far short of the character and sonic detail of Europa. The Pro-53 sounds too smooth, almost woolly, in comparison - maybe a choirboy next to Mad Max.

Another strength of the Europa is sub-bass. It can go down, down, down and still hold together.

Perhaps I'm concentrating too much on the heavier aspects of this device, but that's what hooked me in and it instantly seemed to say to me: "Make me squeal like pig with a chainsaw". Other synths say things like: "Look Mother, angels!" Or sometimes: "I feel so weak and sick and thin."

I must comment on the GUI though.

Of course sound is what matters. But humans are also visual creatures and looks do count - you can see the evidence of that everywhere in any product you care to name.

I don't like two things about the GUI:

1) the little button tabs with the parameter values on them just overwhelm everything, they're all I see and I never pay any attention to them at all. I couldn't care less what the number is. Of course I know some people find these very valuable, so it's just my personal taste.
2) Poor geometry. For example, the knobs of osc-1 don't start at the same left-side margin as the amp envelope; the Pitch follow controls are in danger of floating away, and every panel is a different size.

With better layout I think ALL the knobs could have fitted onto the main screen which would be excellent.

I would have named the synth something nasty and industrial, made the base bitmap black metal or rusted metallic, and changed the knob layout.

Maybe, like Celmo's Supreme Synth we could have a GUI remix: just making the background black, the knob value rectangles dark grey, and moving a few things around would be something and maybe more in character, sort of a like a super DubsubII.

But hey, it's easy to say that when you're not doing all the hard work, so just tell me to shutup. (On the other hand I'd love to do a background bitmap for it )

And as everyone knows it's the sound that counts, and this sure delivers.

At the very least download the demo and have a listen - you'll probably get a big surprise and find yourself tweaking like a crazy man

And US$99 is a pretty good price. For the money you certainly won't find a VSTi this dark and gritty and grinding and mean.

Demo here:
http://www.track0.com/wavelength/shoppage.htm

Sorry to be annoying but I actually find it quite an interesting subject matter to discuss the functionality of aesthetic interface design!

"a big blue slab" seems a bit cruel.

well sorry but that the general feeling I get when looking at it.

by two days of work, I am saying a combined time of at least 48hrs on graphics, which is a lot of time for a synth that is already at a functional/ working stage by that point...

48 hours? Really? Why did it take so long then? Because to me it doesn't look like 48 hours of graphic work! (keep in mind I don't know anything about how the designing of the interface for a Scope synth works)

one could fiddle endlessly with aesthetics, I think, and still not please everybody. i would rather invest my time in creating a great sounding instrument, easy to use, with useful presets to work from.

Which is of course true, but as i said, for some people (including me) aesthetics form an important part in the interaction between user and instrument.

you have used words like "feel" and "character" to describe what a GUI should convey... but what truely is the character and feel of software? could not ones experience with a software device be even more drastically affected by the hardware controller keyboard and MIDI fader controller used? these are the truer hardware interfaces to the software device.

Well, then you're talking about the actual tactile feel of an instrument, which is of course absent in the case of a software synth. It's virtual so there's nothing to touch. Which, to me, actually kind of makes the design of the graphic interface even more important! Since there is no tactile feedback from the synth itself, you are left with only the GUI between the user and synth.

if one wants the actual true "feel" and "character" of a particular existing synth, then one should buy the original.

Well in the case of a software-only synth this is hardly an option now is it?
And to get back to the prophet interfaces, you show there that it's very possible to create a GUI with character in software too and although I'm not familiar with the actual hardware versions of the Prophet synths, I've heard from several people how closely the DSP versions resemble the real versions. But now we're getting into a hardware-software kind of debate, and that's not where I want to go!

software now allows us to create very authentic synthesis models that can be sold for a relatively low price-point (compared to hardware equivalents). the more time spent on things like designing over-flashy GUIs (which many users hate, btw), the higher the price will go.

Also true, but I never said anything about "over flashy GUIs". I specifically said "a compromise between aesthetics and workflow". I'd like to introduce an example of what I think is a good compromise:

http://www.harmony-central.com/Newp/2002/Albino-lg.jpg

...a nice looking interface that encourages the user to interact with it, and whilst being aesthetically pleasing (ok that's a purely subjective term of course, but still, pretty much everybody I hear about it thinks the same) but also very functional and well laid-out

besides, i really think the GUI looks great! i didn't finish it thinking "too bad about my surface", it was what worked for me. the slab with knobs and numbers allowed me to get really efficient with my preset design because everything was right there in front of me. i would understand a gripe if it looked like a confusing and garish mess, but everything else is simply just a matter of taste.

Well to me it looks very confusing, because everything looks the same. Which is my biggest concern with it. you have only text to see which knob does what. Of course it's very clear to you, because you built it!
You make it clear that efficiency was your prime goal for the interface, which is ok. But I'm just trying to defend my point that there are other aspects that are important, or at least worth thinking hard about, for an interface apart from efficiency, especially when we're talking musical instruments!
I'm not saying one is right and the other is wrong, but I'm trying to make clear some arguments for my side.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: King of Snake on 2003-02-21 10:49 ]</font>

gimmicky GUIs do not make the device sound any better...

Who is talking about gimmicks???
I´m glad with a fast-readable font!!
Your device looks like your site...
Too complex to find anything...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: BlackSun on 2003-02-21 10:57 ]</font>

Good points - but how much are you willing to spend for it. I am sure there is a cost issue when it comes to the time spent on design. Maybe the price goes up to $150 for a new design? Maybe Wavelength will offer two versions. I would probably stick with $99 version.

Yes, yes, but play it too ! What do you think of the sound ?

On 2003-02-21 12:55, Spirit wrote:
Yes, yes, but play it too ! What do you think of the sound ?

if only i could...

i wanted to have a go, but got denied... when i try to open the device, i get a message, something like 'can't find DSP file 'Midi Voice 16 MP'. Please check installation.'

never had something like this before... has it to do something with 3.1c? i'm still on 3.1a, at least for some weeks.
anyone care to send me this file, which you'll probably find in the DSP folder?

thanks in advance...


btw: didn't anyone notice the nice use of shades in the GUI?