Falcon = MachFive 4

[Michael Canavan]

Yes, the title is conjecture, so is this thread to a degree, but bear with me here.
Falcon is a "hybrid synth sampler".
http://www.uvi.net/en/software/falcon.html?lv=1
Falcon is in my opinion UVI's answer to MachFive 4, personally I think after looking at the demo videos that's blatantly obvious. I don't know exactly what MOTU would have to do to compete with it? it seems to have all the same functions as M53 plus advanced synthesis features. It looks exactly the same, and can load all the latest UVI libraries which currently M53 cannot do. It's obvious the same technology that's in M53 is being used in Falcon, Xpander filters, IRCAM, user interface, everything.

I don't think it's a Chicken Little thing to think that there's a lot more going on between UVI and MOTU than we know about, and it's I think obvious that it's very unlikely that MachFive 4 will happen. I don't think UVI would so blatantly go into MOTU M53 territory with such massive overlap if there wasn't a falling out.

I've already sent in a request via UVI customer support for a crossgrade offer asking for a discount for current M53 users. I think personally that the writing is on the wall with this one, even if as is typical with software companies neither party can really say anything concrete.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

My only question is this: How can it be an answer to something that does not yet exist in the marketplace?

[mikehalloran]

can load all the latest UVI libraries which currently M53 cannot do

So, which UVI libraries are you talking about?

If they don't load in MachFive3, do they load in the UVI player or are there some that only load in Falcon?

M53 loads all the ones I have purchased but that isn't a large number.

[Michael Canavan]

can load all the latest UVI libraries which currently M53 cannot do

So, which UVI libraries are you talking about?

If they don't load in MachFive3, do they load in the UVI player or are there some that only load in Falcon?

M53 loads all the ones I have purchased but that isn't a large number.

String Machines has serious issues with M53, and works fine in the UVI player for instance.

[Michael Canavan]

My only question is this: How can it be an answer to something that does not yet exist in the marketplace?

I'm not a gambling man, but before you poo poo me, take in the extreme amount of crossover between MachFive 3 and Falcon. I can't see a thing that M53 can do that Falcon can't, and it adds plenty of new features.

The same sort of logical precedent can be stated in a more specific way in terms of software here: name a case where two software companies shared technology, then one directly years later starts competing with the other and it wasn't due to a falling out? From a business perspective UVI can discontinue licensing their technology for future versions of M53 (which is apparently most of it if not the entire thing)..

The ubiquitousness of Kontakt is a factor here IMO, selling essentially the same product, Falcon as a mega synth and sampler player/manipulator does make commercial sense compared to competing directly with an established brand like Kontakt.

A gentlemans wager . I will unearth this thread in the coming years if Machfive 4 comes out, and concede your point but I would bet good money I'm right on this.

[mikehalloran]

@ $229, it certainly lowers the bar, pricewise. Apparently, that's the intro price. The "regular" price will be $349 after November 9, 2015. I, too, have emailed them asking about an upgrade path. It might be the same as the intro $ but ya don't know if you don't ask.

Pure speculation here: If there is a MachFive 4, I should think we'll be hearing about it as January NAMM gets near. I can wait till then.

Falcon does look pretty good. I'll give it that.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

As it's conjecture, there is no right or wrong, only facts and experience. In my experience, MOTU has always been extremely innovative, which is why anything is being compared to Mach 5 (past, present, or future) in the first place.

I didn't go into depth on all the aspects of Falcon, and they look pretty cool, I agree. Most of what I've seen I can do with Mach 5. What I can't, I can do with a host of other VIs. The price ain't bad and UVI is a good company, IMO. I'm not poo pooing anything, really.

What I am implying (I suppose) is that I see MOTU as a highly innovative company. If/when Mach 5-4 arrives, I'll surely upgrade and expect that MOTU will have equaled if not bypassed Falcon. If Falcon proves to be as innovative in a different way, I'll probably buy that too: you can never have too many useful tools.

Sorry, I couldn't resist the mashup...

[Michael Canavan]

Lol at your mashup. I would be willing to bet I'm right on this though. Everything as of right now points to a behind the scenes chilling of the relationship between MOTU and UVI, and the problems licensing wise that might entail on the next version of M53.

No new updates to M53 in over a year, despite many UVI libraries sometimes incompatible with M53.

Every bit of technology in M53 also in Falcon.

New granular synthesis engines in Falcon.

New synthesis engines (wavetable and additive etc.) in Falcon.

All newer UVI libraries compatible with Falcon.

They freaking look the same, they didn't change a thing that way.

Plus in the KVR thread content developers for the included presets have compared the functionality of Falcon directly to M53.

Plus it does explain why MOTU's sample library (UVI engines) based plug ins are dead in the water. It's been three years since updates on most, and two almost for M53.

This is so not unprecedented in software. I've lost a good amount of plug ins / software due to buyouts, new allegiances, or disbanding of partnerships:

Redmatica - Apple

Camel Audio - Apple

Pluggo - Cycling 74 partnered with Ableton to embed Max into Live, and discontinued their VST/AU plug in for Max devices.

Anyway, like I said, willing to bet I'm right on this, and all is not lost, Falcon does not come with the huge sample library that M53 does, and it doesn't have the initial cost that M53 does.

Personally I would be happy if MOTU was too busy working on DP to maintain M53, especially since Falcon virtually replaces it technologically

[billf]

I've only had time to skim the website, so I might be missing something. But at first glance it looks like MachFive.

[klamm]

Hello everyone,

I upgrarded to M5 4 ( ) yesterday...
After few hours testing it, here are the evolutions I noticed regarding Falcon :

- obviously the new sampling and synthesis engines. Ircam multi-granular & pluck are killers. The new Wavetable is a natural evolution of the existing one (ability to scan the waveform...), The unusual feature is that you can load images in the oscillator.
- The modulation section is almost exactly the same... EXCEPT... The ability to, finally, automate paramaters in your DAW (without using CC's). Now you can also draw your own LFO.
- FX section : the new dual effect is quite impressive (and really cute ), new convolver, new waveshaper... But the main improvement is the new Effect Rack. Now we can insert our filters in parallel (Wouhou ! I never figured it out how to do it in M5). The FX rack (and the FX chain you insert inside the racks) is full of promises...
- The new arpeggiator allows pitch arp and CC arp...
- 600 MO for the factory library but a good one. Some patch from Simon Stockhausen...
- As a M5 user, you can obviously use all the libraries included with Motu VI.

It is only a first look at Falcon. But I like the first impressions.
I am very curious what will be Motu's answer to this, as well...
UVI launched a product including all the features and technologies that made M53 appealing.
Falcon took flight, let's hope M5 doesn't crash...

[David Polich]

Falcon looks impressive, in fact it looks a lot like UVI wanted to address the market that Signal Output targets. The "does everything" market.

On the other hand, their video trailer soundtrack is poorly done. That analog synth horn sound
doesn't sell the product.

Here's the thing about these "do-everything" synths. They're "jack of all trades, masters of none"
synthesizers. And I have yet to hear a single one that does analog as well as my real analog synth (Dave Smith Prophet 6). The FM synth in Falcon is phase modulation FM, not classic algorithmic
DX7 style FM. It's not as capable. The Falcon "organ module" is just 9 sine waves, not a B3 or Vox Continental emulation which it needs to be.

The IRCAM time-stretching is attractive, might be worth the price alone.

[klamm]

Falcon looks impressive, in fact it looks a lot like UVI wanted to address the market that Signal Output targets. The "does everything" market.

On the other hand, their video trailer soundtrack is poorly done. That analog synth horn sound
doesn't sell the product.

Here's the thing about these "do-everything" synths. They're "jack of all trades, masters of none"
synthesizers. And I have yet to hear a single one that does analog as well as my real analog synth (Dave Smith Prophet 6). The FM synth in Falcon is phase modulation FM, not classic algorithmic
DX7 style FM. It's not as capable. The Falcon "organ module" is just 9 sine waves, not a B3 or Vox Continental emulation which it needs to be.

The IRCAM time-stretching is attractive, might be worth the price alone.

You're totally right. If you want to emulate classic synths, you should better look at other products (u-he diva...of course, hardware). However, the oscillators sound pretty good.
These kind of tools (M5, Falcon, Omnisphere...) doesn't aim at this purpose. You achieve totally different sonorities using them.
They are complementary.

[monkey man]

I paid a fortune for M5 down here in Jungleville; still feelin' the pain!

Hopefully MOTU will continue to make it worth my while...

[Michael Canavan]

I would say this is definitely more of an Omnisphere 2 competition than replacement for Kontakt, Diva or FM8 etc. Pretty much like M53 is.

To nail in the coffin on whether Falcon is MachFive 4, here's Sampleconstruct (stockhausen), who developed Patchpool libraries for M53:

No, all MachFive libraries are fully compatible with Falcon, they would have been stupid to break their own system.

[Basstrup]

From a marketing perspective I always thought it was horrible to have a product with two different name: Mach53 and UVI engine. From a technology point I never liked when a company is relying on another company's platform, specially an issue when the supplying company is also marketing the solution to the same market and regions. Looking at the past couple of years I found it a little odd that MOTU never really pushed UVI or Acoustic Samples libraries that extends the "value" of Mac53.

Buying software has always been kind of a "gamble" as noted above buyouts and more are know to happen, let me just add Bombfactory, bought their whole suite of plug ins and ran them perfectly in early versions of DP, then Digidesign snatch them up, then all of sudden only proprietary format and the original AU versions didn't work with upgraded os.

We can only speculate about what the future holds for Mach5, but we can do a little play here: What would you find reasonable MOTU should do? If MOTU can do nothing, what should UVI do? If we have reached EOL of Mach5, my personal feeling is UVI should expand their introductory price to current Mach53 licensees indefinitely - better yet make the upgrade $195 (the dollar value is high). I've noticed UVI offer a $100 Voucher when buying Falcon. I would not like to see UVI go to normal price and then come up with "oh let's give Mach53 users $200 voucher to sweeten the deal".

What say you?