Virus TI2 Desktop or Virus C?

Among other things, the C in comparison with the TI is missing:
- Advanced oscillator types
- Analog modelling filter
- A few more modulation routes
- Effects such as filterbank and character
- Dedicated delay/reverb for each part.
- Dynamic resource alloction, meaning the C has always an upper limit of a few dosens of voices.

Regarding the sound, the Ti uses the same algorithms for all the features ported from the C. The only difference is the D/A converters which have a flatter frequency response (or the total lack thereof when you use a USB connection). You can use EQ and the character effects to give the TI sound a more analog color if you want to.

Hope this helps.

Zitat von jontah

I've read alot about virus synthesizers lately, and many seem to prefer the virus C over the Virus TI. They say it sounds different. The Virus C sounds more beefed up and not as metallic as the virus ti2 desktop - more analogue, warm, fat.

here's some background info for you: the sound engine of the virus TI will not calculate a sound differently to what the Virus would do. it is both the same programming code. the only difference would be the D/A convertors but usually one says that those got better and better over time which would result in a a _less_ colored would. from what i can hear, there is close to zero difference in between both.
one reason why the virus TI can sound more metallic is that it offers a lot which is not based on virtual analog oscillator technology. for instance wavetables and formant table oscillators. those will sound cold by intention. but they do not replace the old oscillators, there are just additional options.
from a development point of view, there are years of development in between the C and the TI. i'd say the most interesting sounds in the TI you will never be able to do in a Virus C.
best, marc

Zitat von jontah

Hey,

I've read alot about virus synthesizers lately, and many seem to prefer the virus C over the Virus TI. They say it sounds different. The Virus C sounds more beefed up and not as metallic as the virus ti2 desktop - more analogue, warm, fat.

Is this true? I'm thinking about getting a new virus and switching from my virus ti2 snow to either ti2 desktop or virus c desktop.

Is it worth it? will it sound different?

What is missing on the Virus C compared to the Virus ti2 desktop? polyphony? effects? other stuff?

please, need this help in my decisions of getting another virus!

Thanks alot guys. appreciate it.

Alles anzeigen

jontah - a little story for you.

This summer I sold off my TI2 and bought an Indigo Redback (Virus Indigo II aka. Virus C). Previously I owned the original Virus TI desktop, the Virus TI2 keyboard and also a Snow. But, when it came down to it, I wanted the sound of the B & C series. To my ears, there is little difference between analogous patches on a B & C other than more clicking on the B due to its lower polyphony. The C has so much more power than the B and is more flexible (the line levels are much higher than any of the TIs).

There were a number of reasons that I sold off all of my TI's. Now, keep in mind, my first TI was a love interest!. I carried it with me on all of my travels. I am not a professional musician, but I can play, I am a software developer and I have a sensitive ear for voice character (probably from listening to Hearts Of Space for too many years). This love interest was a first, less sophisticated and tech specs influenced love. As a techie, I always falls in love with the specs first, then listen to the instrument. Now I am a more experienced man and with a more refined palette. I have learned to appreciate the synth first and then to look at the specs! - Feel free to extrapolate from this personal progress in other parts of my life.

The Virus C has a character that it emanates all the time, that can be emulated by the TI but not consistently reproduced. Each TI patch would need to be tweaked to get the character of a C. It is warmer and darker (with all Access synths being characterized generally as 'darker'). I like to think of this darkness as a deeper, fuller voice and not as a gothic mood! Now, the TI's are fantastic. And spec-wise they shame even most AU/VST synths (where no hardware limitations impose themselves on the designer). I believe that the TI's touted strength here is that it is in fact a AU/VST in a box rather than on your computer. And that is apparent on how it integrates with your computer. From this perspective, it is still way out in front of any other synth manufacturer.

The problem that I encountered as I grew up with the TI's is that they competed with my AU/VST synths and did not give me, out of the patch, the timbre I wanted. And recently, I purchased an AU that has character that outperformed the TI. I was using the A/D's on the TI only at this point! This AU in fact outperformed an analog synth I owned. (As a side note, I started sampling the analog synth I had in order to preserve it, once I decided to sell it. That sampling took forever until one day i decided to use this new, unnamed-AU-synth to emulate it. It worked perfectly and I bailed on the sampling). So, this set up a problem in my mind. I now wanted the character that the Virus' are known for, but did not need it to complete with my AU/VST's. While wandering off to sleep on night, it dawned on me. I needed to overhaul the way I construct my e-musician ensemble. AU/VST's are AU/VST's because of their design! Hardware synths are synths because of their hardware! Outboard effects are so because of their hardware! I sold off all of my TI's and the fussy analog synths and purchased a new rig that includes Hardware and AU/VST's based on their voice characteristics.
So now I own the Indigo Redback solely for its sound due to its hardware. This is also true for any other hardware I now buy. Also, because I own a virus C, I don't need to try and roll off extraneous overtones of my TI to get at the character I want from my sounds. They just come as part of the C's circuitry. There are a number of VA synths that are not produced that have the same sense of character that synths of 80's era had because of their hardware. I look for those characteristics. Not emulations of them. And all the AU's I buy are because of the characteristic sounds they can create. Not because they emulate a previous VA or digital synth. So the idea of buying Korg AU/VST of the M1 makes no sense to me at all.

Jontah, I thought this might be an interesting story for you as to why one might want to go with an older Access Virus rather than a new one.

One take away that I have for Access and any other manufacturer is this; If you are creating a hardware synth, it is because of the hardware. Otherwise I will buy a controller and an AU. So, look closely at the hardware you choose and the sound it creates. Emphasize that as to why you made it hardware! Get your supply chain set up so that you can get the specific discrete analog components reliably. Try not to vary from those as the sound will change. Maybe even create a synth that has several different hardware components that a musician can switch between. I bought a Struti synth. It generates digital waveforms but has discrete electronics for the filters and envelopes! I too can buy different hardware filters to change out the way its sounds. This is the value of the hardware. Sound generation and routing flexibility is now commodity. Your expertise with hardware is not. It is proprietary.

.m