Posts by bctracks

    My issue is this - how do I back up my Multi bank so that I can restore a single Multi to the virus afterwards without affecting the rest of the bank?


    I'd like to be able to back up the entire Multi bank, then completely wipe the instrument and create an entirely new set of Multis. Then, I would like to take some of the Multis from the backup and put them back on the Virus to create a combined Multi set. Does that make sense?


    Thanks!

    Yeah, this is just what I was thinking - it would be great if the next version had a dedicated 'master section' DSP to handle routing and master effects. It would be a worthy addition to the series, rather than just slapping more voice power in there and calling it a day.


    There's a huge range of things they could do with a master effects section - multiband dynamics, a more natural home for the surround settings and atomizer, even open up the possibility of sequenced effects a la Roland's new mixer ... thing.


    But of course, I understand I'm firmly in fantasy land here.

    Yeah, I see, there's really no way to bring it back in the current model then. Maybe the snow, since it's got only 1 chip? :D


    It's a shame, I felt the C was more well-thought in it's implementation of multi-timbrality than any other synth. Because what you'd do if you had each timbre as an individual instrument would be to plug them all into a mixer, and with the C, you got a well-featured mixer, with auxiliary send and returns, etc... inside already!


    So... if anything comes of this, please don't skimp on the TI3! All the good stuff of the TI2 would be well-served with soild mixer implementation! And then, hey... you can sell a Kemper digital mixer out of the deal, too ;)

    interesting
      bctracks , not played with a C , so not seen the aux buses...


    ? don't get you on that, is this on the C ?
    on the TI with external input, there is no "voice"


    It's just a different paradigm on the C - I'm saying 'voice' because there
    is an extensive section in the manual on interpreting how many 'voices'
    of the synth's 32 activating each feature uses (osc3, analog LPF,
    etc...), it boils down to effectively the same thing - input parts
    aren't free, they use DSP too :) There wasn't an easy view of a patch's
    complexity, so it was important to keep this in mind when programming.


    Quote


    with a mixer, you decide on the mixer how much wet/dry and feedback you want
    to happen, so thats a not an issue, (as you use say out1/2 as dry, and
    out 3/4 as wet)


    It's true, the distinction between using a mixer to loop back and using the
    internal auxes is pretty small. With the auxes you get the dry output of
    the input channel without delay, but with the virus's filters,
    distortion, etc. With a mixer, you can get the dry output without any of
    the virus's effects (from the mixer). In the end, it requires another
    piece of equipment which should really not be necessary. I've sketched
    out the two feedback implementations for the C (top) and TI (bottom)
    below...


    http://www.brendanclarke.com/files/20150321_205327.jpg


    In an ideal world, the TI would have an output select for each part's
    delay/reverb block in addition to the part output but again, I doubt
    that's going to happen with all the changes that would mean to the
    summing structure

    I vote for bringing internal aux'es back... or reimplementing it - whatever is easier to do. This is something I would gladly exchange a number of voices for.


    In all honesty I have zero hope this will ever happen - they clearly redid all the code for Multi Mode on the TI to make way for per-part effects, so it's far from a trivial addition. It would also mean significant changes to how multis are represented in the TI plugin. Would be cool though, it meant that multis could be programmed to be more than just a sum of their parts.

    ... but in this case aux sends would actually help increase voice count...no? since having an fx (e.g. reverb) on 16 separate channels is much less efficient than having a single fx that N channels use.


    I think Marc was talking more from a marketing standpoint - I imagine that most people who use the virus as a stage synth or integrated with their computer never missed the auxes, either because they're too esoteric, or having the option to route audio in a daw made up for it, respectively.


    Using an input part reserves one voice for each channel (ie 2 is it's a stereo input) *all the time*, so you can eat up voices pretty quick with the routing.


    I've considered using a mixer with the TI, but even with, you don't quite get the same functionality because the auxes on the C let you route wet signal from the delay/reverb and dry signals separately - presumably to help with mixing down, but it also lets you process the effects in a feedback loop. For example, in the video below (sorry it may not be my best, it was early days), I have delay/reverb routed back through an input channel so the 'FX send' on that channel becomes additional feedback control, and lets me use the filters on that part to 'sweep' the feedback (best heard at the end of the video).



    The additions to the delays on the TI are nice, you can do similar things with the modeled tape delays by adjusting frequency and bandwidth (which is technically mislabeled, because increasing this actually reduces bandwidth of the filter, but whatevs), but if you try to sweep it, the feedback drops off unnaturally sharply. You have to move the filter control *very* slowly to get the same effect.


    For now, I think I'm resigned to keeping the TI2 around for a little while - I considered selling for an indigo2 and TI snow (I do really like the new oscillator models and the drive/distortion from the kemper amps are quite spectacular), but keeping 2 virus synths and all their compatible/non-compatible patches straight in my head might be more than I can bear. Definitely going to grab a Jomox T-resonator though, which should largely let me add back the delay sweeps I had before. Who knows, thought - watching that video and pulling the old bitstream out makes me super nostalgic for that old C magic :)

    Thanks for the reply Marc!
    I don't follow your logic - neither integration nor higher voice count let you do the sounds that you could do with the C but that you can't with the TI - unless there's something I'm missing? If Ferrari released a new car that had a better engine, but only gave the transmission two gears, some of their drivers might find that decision odd.


    I find this decision by access odd. Having an internal aux, even if most people don't use it, was an extremely powerful option. Consider how much more powerful the TI would be with it - you could, for example set up a multi with a pad sound being sent to an atomizer - and then set key splits so you could play the pad and the atomizer glitch at the same time. Or do the same with the vocoder going to the atomizer.


    It's a frustrating omission to me because it's a programming, not a hardware deficiency. There's no reason the option couldn't be re-enabled (It's the same series of DSP chips as the C, no?). Sure, using that option would cost some voices, just as it did on the C, but why not give your customers the choice?

    I recently went from a Virus C to a TI. Auxes were something I used frequently - they let you do some very powerful things with feedback that wouldn't be otherwise possible. I couldn't find the auxes on the TI, so I emailed support:



    So no, virus models are definitely not backwards compatible. Single patches might be. Multi setups are definitely not.

    Or get a C instead, because this was something you could totally do on the previous versions with the internal auxes. These were simply removed from the TI because... reasons? They all use the same series of Motorola chips, so why this feature simply got left out is beyond me.

    This option absolutely does exist on the versions before TI. Why Access chose to leave it off the TI is honestly incomprehensible to me. On the C you could, for example, route the output of the delay to two additional left and right parts, then cross-pan those, and feed them back to the delay unit, creating a cross-panned feedback loop. Add filter, ring mod, and distortion to taste. Madness.


    You absolutely cannot do this on the TI.

    I've just had this heartbreaking response from Access Support:



    Now pondering the question of whether to sell the ti polar and go back to an indigo 2... :(

    Hi All!
    I just switched from a Virus C to a TI and I'm having trouble figuring out how to do something. On the C, In Multi Mode, I could route the output of one part to the input of another by setting the output to one of the internal auxes, and then setting the input of the next part to that aux. This was extremely useful for certain effects chains like (audio input>chorus>filter) or routing the delay/reverb block to a post filter.


    On the TI, If I go into Multi Edit for a part, all I see under 'Output' are the hardware outs - where are the internal auxes hiding?


    Thanks!
    Brendan