Wavetable: Software / Hardware - Result in Pro 3

[lvbeethoven]

Wavetable imported into Pro 3

Generation of the wavetable by Xfer Serum

The 1st audible audio sample comes from the Xfer Serum plugin. The function used to generate the audio result is Warp> FMformB.

Converting the FMfromB function to a wavetable

The 2nd sample is obtained from a resample of the FMfrom B function.
In this sample of 256 wave cycles, we can hear some parasitic "clicks".

Reduction of the number of cycles to 16

In the 3rd sample, a cycle reduction is applied. This reduces the quality of audio resolution.

Reinterpretation of the 16 cycles by the Pro 3

The 4th audio sample exposes the sound rendering once the 16 cycles have been processed in 48Khz 16 bits, converted into a “.syx” file in the Pro 3


Conclusion

Xfer Serum software is the best wave table virtual synthesizer available today. It is used by thousands of users, which is why I choose it to generate a wavetable.

After reducing cycles, converting to a ".syx" file and importing into Pro 3. Unfortunately, the sound result is ridiculous.
About 70% of the overall sound information.
So the question is, what's the point of having a wavetable in a synthesizer if it doesn't perform well?

Sequential should, I think revisit its "marketing" approach, it is important to understand that "software" competition provides excellent wavetable solutions. Wanting to offer OSC to a wavetable in a hardware synthesizer is great, but for it to be great, you have to adapt to the competition. That is to say, offering qualitative and technical functions capable of meeting the expectations of those concerned but also technically responding to the competition.

I bought this synth mostly for the wavetable and unfortunately I am not at all happy with it. You might as well use software for 150 euros ... if you want to use a wavetable.

Look qualitatively at the chosen one? The Pro 3's wavetable is ridiculous. It's a bit like having a 4k video and another side having a black and white TV.

I am going to put together an explanatory file with Sequential to try to focus their attention on the importance of a usable wavetable compared to the software competition. "

Thank you for your attention.

__FR
Table d’onde importée dans le Pro 3

Generation de la table d’onde par Xfer Serum

Le 1er echantillon audio audible est issu du plugin Xfer Serum. La fonction utilisée pour générer le résultat audio est Warp> FMformB.

Conversion de la fonction FMfromB en Table d’onde

Le 2eme échantillon est obtenu à partir d’un resample de la fonction FMfrom B.
Dans cet échantillon de 256 cycles d’ondes, on peut entendre quelques « clics » parasites.

Réduction du nombre de Cycle à 16

Dans le 3eme échantillon, une réduction de cycle est appliquée. Ce qui réduit la qualité de résolution audio.

Réinterprétation des 16 cycles par le Pro 3

Le 4eme échantillon audio expose le rendu sonore une fois les 16 cycles traités en 48Khz 16 bits, convertis en fichier « .syx » dans le Pro 3


Conclusion

Le software Xfer Serum est à l’heure actuelle le meilleur synthétiseur virtuel à table d’onde. Il est utilisé par des milliers d’utilisateurs, c’est pourquoi je le choisis pour générer une table d’onde.

Une fois la réduction de cycles, la conversion en fichier « .syx » et l’import dans le Pro 3. Le résultat sonore est malheureusement ridicule.
On pert 70% de l’information sonore globale.
Alors la question à quoi bon avoir une table d’onde dans un synthétiseur si celui-ci n’offre pas de bonne performance ?

Sequential devrait, je pense revoir son approche « marketing », il est important de comprendre que la concurrence « software » apporte des solutions de tables d’ondes excellente. Vouloir offrir un OSC à table d’onde dans un synthétiseurs hardware est excellent, mais pour que celui-ci soit excellent, il faut l’adapter à la concurrence. C’est-à-dire offrir des fonctions qualitative et technique capable de répondre aux attentes des intéressés mais aussi répondre techniquement à la concurrence.

J’ai acheté ce synthétiseur en grande partie pour la table d’onde et j’en suis malheureusement pas du tout satisfait. Autant utiliser un software à 150 euros… si on veut utiliser une table d’onde.

Regardez qualitativement la chose ? La table d’onde du Pro 3 est ridicule. C’est un peu comme avoir une vidéo en 4k et d’un autre coté avoir une télé en noir et blanc.

Je vais monter un dossier explicatif auprès de Sequential pour tenter de porter leur attention sur l’importance d’une table d’onde exploitable en comparaison à la concurrence software.`

Merci de votre attention.

[chysn]

Hey, can you kindly attach the Pro 3 sysex file for the fourth audio clip? I’d like to have a look at the waves inside it.

[lvbeethoven]

Hi chysn 


Here is the file.

Do you think the wavetable OSC is accessible by computer?

If, yes, it would be possible to modify the codes?

I don't think Sequential improves on anything disappointed.

I plan to ask GitHub for an opinion on the computer access system of the synth.


"Improve the Pro 3" 

[chysn]

The beginning of your Pro 3 clip sounds so thin and reedy because some of the data is either unsigned, or has a bad offset. The attached image is of your sixteen reference waveforms in Audacity. Each waveform is represented once as 1024-sample PCM, and then 11 more times down-sampled.



If you look at the first eight waveforms, you can see that the values are clumped almost entirely in the negative (for the first) and positive (for the second-through-eighth) range. This isn't going to sound very good.

The next thing I'd do is ask for the WAV files that you're uploading to the wavetable generator. Based on your apparent Serum originals, at some point a sign change or offset is being introduced, or the waveforms are only partially represented.

[lvbeethoven]

Interesting!

To tell you, I'm doing the best I can. Yet I end up with an "exploded" file. It is still very problematic.

Synthesizer users are mostly musicians.

It's very complicated to import into the pro 3. If even more, the quality in the end is bad ... you might as well go back to a wavetable VST as a serum.

To answer you, I no longer have the 16-cycle sources of the file I sent you.

However, I can send you separate cycles on another table.

In any case, Sequential should really review their wavetable design, taking into account what is already being done.

Because there, the wavetable of the Pro 3 is qualitatively very low compared to what is offered on the market.

Thank you for your attention, I know that you are very invested and that is quite respectable. I fully support you.

[chysn]

Thank you for your attention, I know that you are very invested and that is quite respectable. I fully support you.

I'm happy to hear about your experiences with it, because it gives me ideas about how the process can be improved once I get my Pro 3.

[lvbeethoven]

ABOUT OSC 3
The Pro 3 at a wavetable, only sequential didn't finish the job perfectly.

Providing a wavetable is great. Only it lacks functions. We are very limited in the use of the table. We should be able to go further than that.

Imagine advanced users producing very sophisticated sound concepts. The Pro 3 wavetable will have a hard time standing out among these wavetable users. They will prefer to turn to Xfer Serum or Kiloheart Phase Plant.

The Pro 3 wavetable should have the following features:

Unison and Detune: This would make it possible to have at least 3 or 4 voices in unison and hence detuning the number of voices that are in unison. This function is applied on the Ssaw wavetable but not the others. While this is an important function.

Warp Menu: This is a menu found on Xfer Serum, this one offers various "warp." »Sync, bend +, bend-, PWM, Asym +, Asym-, Flip, Mirror, Quantize, FM from. This kind of deformation is unique to wavetables.


The resolution of the table: 16 wave cycles. This is little. I really feel like


Wavetable synths (software): Are very advanced. The modulation possibilities, the resolution and the final quality are also remarkable at a reasonable price.
The Pro 3 has a wavetable that is not at all what is currently being done.

The value of developing a powerful wavetable OSC in a hardware synth is a great challenge. So why does Sequential, the inventor of the 1st real Polyphonic synth, not take up the challenge?

I'm going to do some more wavetable testing to try new tones, OSC3 really needs improvement in my opinion.

__FR

CONERNANT L OSC 3
Le Pro 3 à une table d'onde, seulement sequential n’ont pas achevé le travail parfaitement.

Proposer une table d’onde est génial. Seulement elle manque de fonctions. On est très limité dans l’utilisation de la table. On devrait pouvoir aller plus loin que ça.

Imaginez des utilisateurs avancés produisant des concepts sonores très sophistiqués. La table d’onde du Pro 3 aura du mal à se faire remarquer auprès de ces utilisateurs de tables d’ondes. Cela préféreront se tourner vers Xfer Serum ou encore Kiloheart Phase Plant.

La table d’onde du Pro 3 devrait disposé des fonctions suivantes :

Unisson et Detune : Ce qui permettrait d’avoir au moins 3 ou 4 voix à l’unisson et de là, de detuner le nombre de voix qui sont à l’unisson. Cette fonctione est appliqué sur la table d’onde Ssaw mais pas les autres. Tandis que c’est une fonction importante.

Warp Menu : C’est un menu que l’on retrouve sur Xfer Serum, celui-ci propose diverses fonctions de « déformation. » Sync, bend+, bend-, PWM, Asym+, Asym-, Flip, Mirror, Quantize, FM from. Ce genre de deformation est propre aux table d’onde.


La résolution de la table : 16 cycles d’ondes. C’est peu. J’ai vraiment l’impression


Les synthé à table d’onde (software) : Sont très évolués. Les possibilités de modulation, la résolution et la qualité finale sont remarquable de plus à un prix raisonnable.
Le Pro 3 à une table d’onde qui ne correspond pas du tout à ce qui se fait actuellement.

L’interet de développer un OSC à table d’onde puissant dans un synthé hardware est un défi génial. Alors pourquoi Sequential qui est l’inventeur du 1er synthé Polyphonique réel ne relève pas le défis ?

Je vais faire de nouveaux essais sur la tables d’ondes pour essayer de nouvelles sonorité, l’OSC3 nécessite vraiment de l’amélioration selon moi.

[chysn]

The way I see it, one expects different things of hardware and software; and you have to consider that the Pro 3's wavetable oscillator does things that you can't do with Serum, like using it as a modulation source for the other oscillators.

[guyaguy]

The way I see it, one expects different things of hardware and software; and you have to consider that the Pro 3's wavetable oscillator does things that you can't do with Serum, like using it as a modulation source for the other oscillators.

Well, maybe not the best example because you actually CAN do that! But it's definitely a hybrid with limitations based on that. Pym and others from Sequential have mentioned they like making things fun and immediate, and sometimes that means fewer features. But then there are lots of features a VST doesn't have--VCFs and VCOs, CV routing, performance sequencer, etc.

That said, it would be nice if making the waves were easier with less trial and error.

[lvbeethoven]

I had time to spend a good hour on it.

An instrument takes time to understand it and to reason intelligently around these functions. An instrument of this type can take a long time to learn to obtain sophisticated results.

The modulation matrix, for example, is a huge modulator that sculpts sound sources. It can be long and complex to learn it well.

In any case, Wavetable or not, you have to learn and understand this machine as a whole to get all the sounds.

Like a guitar!

Note: It is true that preparing and importing a wavetable into the instrument is tedious.
In addition, we are not sure of the quality. In the hope that OSC 3 will improve.

__FR
J’ai eu le temps de passer une bonne heure dessus.

Un instrument demande du temps pour le comprendre et raisonner intelligement autour de ces fonctions. Un instrument de ce type peut demander beaucoup de temps d’apprentissage pour en tirer des résultats sophistiqués.

La matrice de modulation par exemple, est un énorme modulateur qui sculpte les sources sonores. Il peut être long et complexe de bien l’assimiler.

En tous cas, Wavetable ou pas, il faut apprendre et comprendre cette machine dans son ensemble pour en tirer les toutes les sonorités.

Comme une guitare !

Note : C’est vrai que préparer et importer une wavetable dans l’instrument est fastidieux.
De plus, on est pas sur de la qualité. Dans l’espoir de voir l’OSC 3 s’améliorer.

[lvbeethoven]

 return to the thread of this discussion to share audio files of wave cycles.
As the conversion occurs in a dysfunctional way. Here are the files that are supposed to be problematic.

So here are 16 wave cycles converted to 48khz 16bits.
These audio files will then be sent to the wavetable generator "sequential waves"

I also put the SYX file which groups together the 16 cycles once the conversion is done.

THE REST OF THE FILES ARE ON THE COMMENTS BELOW

__FR
Je reviens sur le fil de cette discussion pour partager des fichiers audio de cycles d'ondes.
Comme la conversion se réalise de manière dysfonctionnelle. Voici les fichiers qui sont censés poser problème.

Donc voici 16 cycles d'ondes converties en 48khz 16bits.
Se sont ces fichiers audio qui seront ensuite envoyé dans le wavetable generator: sequential waves

I also put the SYX file which groups together the 16 cycles once the conversion is done.

THE REST OF THE FILES ARE ON THE COMMENTS BELOW

[lvbeethoven]

additional files

[lvbeethoven]

additional files 2: fichier .syx

[chysn]

OK, thanks, this is helpful.

First off, check out the sysex file attached. This is what I get when I put your 16 waveforms into Sequential's waveform generator tool. It's not quite right, and we'll get to that, but the syx file you attached, 47_bclamiro.syx, can't have come from those waveforms, as far as I can tell. There's no negative data there, it's all positive.

Now, as to the syx file that I generated with your waveforms using Sequential's tool: it'll function in a Pro 3, but it doesn't represent your waveforms accurately. Here are the first two reference waves:



You can see here that the waveform is truncated instead of downsampled, so that you're getting a little more than half of each waveform cycle. For this system, you probably need to provide exactly what they're asking for, a 1024-sample WAV file.

[lvbeethoven]

It is very difficult for me in my conversion process to have 16 cycles of 1024 samples in 48Khz 16bit.
It's a headache.


From Serum I can create 16 cycles and exporters. Then I have to go through Audacity to get them at 48khz, but I don't know how to get just 1024 samples per cycle.

Thanks for your comments

Do you have any idea to get 1024 samples?

[chysn]

Do you have any idea to get 1024 samples?

Yeah, you can open the file in Audacity, and then

(1) At the bottom of the window, there's a drop-down on the right side. It probably already says "samples." If not, you can switch it to samples
(2) Now, move the selector to the end of the waveform. The line will turn yellow when you're exactly at the end. Take note of how many samples are in this waveform (for your Buchla waves here, it'll be 1882 samples)
(3) You have to do some math. You've got 1882 samples at 44100 samples per second, so how many samples per second to play this waveform with 1024 samples? It's a proportion calculation:

1024 / s * 44100

So for your 1882-sample Buchla waveform, that's (1024/1882)*44100 = 23994.89904

(4) Also at the bottom of the window, there's a box that says "Project Rate (Hz)". Change this from 44100 to 23994. The "samples" box should change from 1882 to 1024.
(5) Finally, use File > Export to export a 16-bit signed WAV file. This is what you'll feed to Sequential's tool

Now, honestly, it's 2020 and Sequential's tool should do all this junk for you. wav2evolver automatically converts WAVs from anything to the proper format, and my own Pro 3 system will do the same. But that's a couple months off yet, and a little earlier if you'd like to be a tester.

[lvbeethoven]

Thank you chysn for these precise explanations.

Indeed it is possible to know the number of samples per sample in Audacity. I couldn't find the adoption!

From my side when I import a wave cycle that comes from Xfer Serum, in Audacity, I get the following info:
441Khz, 16 bits, 2048 samples.

By converting the file to 96Khz, it then has 1024 samples! Finally ...
Then just export it in 48Khz 16 bits. Once the processing is done, I want to check the integrity of the file by importing it into Audacity, which is 1024 samples, 48000Khz 32 bits.

Why does it switch to 32 bits, when the export is 16 bits PCM. No idea.

it going ...

Indeed as you say, the process should be done more easily. We are in 2020: D


Following that, I therefore prepare 16 cycles normally in 48khz 16 bits 1024 samples, of which here is the final file in .syx.
Maybe they are 32 bit. After exporting from Audacity they are noted in 16 bits. It is only when I then import it into Audacity that they are rated 32 bit.

I joined in the post a cycle in wav format, 16 bits, 48Khz 1024 samples.

__FR
Merci chysn pour ces explications précises.

Effectivement il est possible de connaitre le nombre d'échantillons par samples dans Audacity. Je ne trouvais pas l'option !

De mon coté lorsque j'importe un cycle d'onde qui vient d'Xfer Serum, dans Audacity, j'obtiens les infos suivantes:
441Khz, 16 bits, 2048 échantillons.

En convertissant le fichier en 96Khz, celui si dispose ensuite de 1024 échantillons ! Enfin...
Suffit ensuite de l'exporter en 48Khz 16 bits. Une fois le traitement réalisé, je souhaite vérifier l'intégrité du fichier en l'important dans Audacity, celui si fait 1024 échantillons, 48000Khz 32 bits.

Pourquoi passe t'il en 32 bits, alors qu'a l'export il est en 16 bits PCM. Aucune idée.

ça avance...

Effectivement comme vous dites, le processus devrait se faire plus facilement. On est en 2020 


Suite à ça, je prépare donc 16 cycles normalement en 48khz 16 bits 1024 échantillons, dont voici le fichier final en .syx.
Peut-être qu'ils sont en 32 bits. Après export d'Audacity ils sont notés en 16 bits. C'est seulement quand je l'importe ensuite dans Audacity qu'ils sont noté 32 bits.

Je joins au post un cycle au format wav, 16 bits, 48Khz 1024 samples.

[chysn]

Why does it switch to 32 bits, when the export is 16 bits PCM. No idea.

This just indicates how Audacity's engine is storing the data internally, and is relevant when you edit the track. You can change this in Preferences>Quality, but there's not really any reason to do so.

[lvbeethoven]

I come back to the post,

It is very difficult to add 48khz 16bits 1024 samples all with good wave cycles.
Serum offers a good possibility, really.

I found a solution to make the addition successful.

By outputting the 16 cycles from Xfer Serum, I obtain 16 files in 2048 samples 44100Hz.

After importing into Audacity and converting to 48Khz, the 16 files make 1882 samples. Problem!

The solution is to export them in 48khz, 1882 16-bit samples and then send them back to Audacity. So when the new 16 cycles import in 1882 samples format ... as if by magic, they end up in 2048 samples !?

Then just convert them to 96Khz to convert them to 1024 samples.
The final export of Audacity in 48khz keeps the number of samples at 1024.

For verification I open the files again in Audacity and now they are in 1024, 48Khz 16 bits.


So once in the Pro 3, the result is much cleaner. Finally!
The method is laborious. I do not understand why so many complications.

I would like to know how Sequential we managed the trick to have 48Khz 16 bits and 1024 samples.

Finally, I'm happy, I'll do another test.

Anyway chysn, if you need a tester for your system, i would gladly volunteer.

[chysn]

I would like to know how Sequential we managed the trick to have 48Khz 16 bits and 1024 samples.

Keep in mind that the sample rate is irrelevant for Pro 3 wavetables. All you care about is 1024 samples at 16 bits. You need to change the sample rate in Audacity to get to 1024 samples, but that's guided purely by arithmetic. The final sample rate doesn't matter one bit.

Anyway chysn, if you need a tester for your system, i would gladly volunteer.

Awesome! I'll be in touch in probably January. My own Pro 3 should be here in a few days, so it'll get this stuff out the theoretical realm for me.