MOTUnation.com

Does anyone know of a User Forum for UVI Falcon users?

I'm creating my first instrument in Falcon and definitely have a few questions. I couldn't find a user forum on the UVI site, and am not having much luck googling. Thought maybe someone here might be able to point me in the right direction...

Definitely loving this instrument, and seeing several things I like about it better over Konkakt, but I'm too noob to know if some of the troubles I'm seeing are bugs, my own lack of experience, or what...

Thanks,
Babz

Babz wrote:Does anyone know of a User Forum for UVI Falcon users?

I'm creating my first instrument in Falcon and definitely have a few questions. I couldn't find a user forum on the UVI site, and am not having much luck googling. Thought maybe someone here might be able to point me in the right direction...

Definitely loving this instrument, and seeing several things I like about it better over Konkakt, but I'm too noob to know if some of the troubles I'm seeing are bugs, my own lack of experience, or what...

Thanks,
Babz

What? You think every app has cool user groups like this one? Lol

Not an official forum, but there's a lot (247 pages of it!) of Q&A here, along with developers answering questions

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 1&t=449200

Robert Randolph wrote:Not an official forum, but there's a lot (247 pages of it!) of Q&A here, along with developers answering questions

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 1&t=449200

OK, thanks. I guess that's about as official as I'm going to find.

I'm getting all kinds of spinning beachballs and freezes. I need to talk to someone with experience creating sampled instruments from scratch in Falcon.

Best,
Babz

OK, just as an update, in case anyone is interested ....

Yes, that KVR forum with 200+ posts under one heading, is evidently the only real forum for Falcon at this point. Seems like there should really be something better for such an complex instrument, but...

Also, my issues had to do with the IRCAM Stretch engine. It is apparently WAY more processor demanding than anything I've ever seen. It was able to bring my quad-core i7 Mac to its knees with just a 5-6 voices at 256 buffer. And if you choose all the highest quality settings, fuggetabout.

UVI should really alert the user to this. They do emphasize it is more processor intensive than the regular Stretch sample engine, but it is really only something for processing one clip at a time and then rendering immediately. I had mistakenly thought it was just a more high quality version of say, Kontakt's sample stretching engine. But it is nothing like that. It is not an engine that you can use to build a whole stretched sampled instrument.

I'm now thinking a dedicated program like the IRCAM Lab TS would make more sense for this type of processing power. It's super high quality stretching, but more for a utility function than an instrument.

Best,
Babz

I'm now thinking a dedicated plugin like the IRCAM Tool TS plugin would make more sense for this type of processing power. It's super high quality stretching, but more for a utility function than an instrument.

Hmmmm... I thought that is essentially what comes with MachFive 3 and Falcon. I almost bought it a few years ago and figured it was redundant.

Surely, someone has both and knows if there's a difference (besides the fact that you can use IRCAM TS outside of Falcon or MV3). Let us know what you find out.

Yes, as far as I know, IRCAM Lab TS, Falcon, and M5 all use the same basic Transpose and Stretch engine. And I assume it is equally high quality and processor demanding in all 3 situations.

Back when Falcon came out and was available for introductory pricing, IRCAM Lab TS was also on sale, but I went for Falcon because I figured I get basically the same IRCAM engine, plus all of the other things you get with an instrument like Falcon.

I don't regret the decision, because I am LOVING Falcon, and it is different enough from Kontakt that I think it is worth owning both. I have created my own sample-based instruments in Kontakt, but this is my first time trying it with Falcon. I wanted the best possible transpose quality, and I was dealing with 4-part harmony vocals, so I thought I'd give Falcon a try. However, I had no idea how demanding the IRCAM Stretch engine would be on resources.

In terms of comparing the two... There seems to be remarkably little information about IRCAM Lab TS online -- only one video and it uses very strange music as an example, but here is what I can tell you based on owning Falcon and researching IRCAM Lab TS.

IRCAM Lab TS is a stand alone application, not a plugin. Transpose is done in cts. Stretch is done by "amount," unfortunately not by bpm. I'm not sure how that correlates to bpm or how you work that out. You can then export your results.

To use IRCAM stretch in Falcon, you drag a sample in and assign it to a key on the keyboard. You transpose by playing higher or lower on the keyboard. You can stretch by telling Falcon the bpm of your sample and then it will lock to the bpm of your DAW. You can't export your transposed/stretched file directly. Rather you have to play a MIDI note into DP and then bounce the audio like you would with any software sampler.

Those are the main difference as far as I can tell. I'm thinking it might be worth owning the IRCAM Lab TS application as well as Falcon, just because a different workflow might be better for certain situations. However, the lack of bpm support gives me some pause.

Would love to hear from anyone who has worked with both programs.

Best,
Babz

I've never done more than one track at a time in M5.3 using IRCAM stretch. I wasn't aware of the CPU, but assumed that it was pretty much taking all the power just for that. I also assumed that's why they didn't make it simple just to select all your audio in DP and say "stretch!" That, or possibly licensing issues.

Maybe it's going to take quantum computing to make this happen someday.

Shooshie

I tested various time stretch products awhile back, I believe IRCM was one of them. I found the best to be “time and pitch “ inside of iZotope RX 1,2,and now 3.
If you need serious time stretch and pitch, I recommend you try a trial version and compare for yourself.

toodamnhip wrote:I tested various time stretch products awhile back, I believe IRCM was one of them. I found the best to be “time and pitch “ inside of iZotope RX 1,2,and now 3.
If you need serious time stretch and pitch, I recommend you try a trial version and compare for yourself.

Thank you! RX does so many amazing things. I totally forgot about Time and Pitch! (BTW, RX is up to v 5 now. )

Best,
Babz

Shooshie wrote:I've never done more than one track at a time in M5.3 using IRCAM stretch. I wasn't aware of the CPU, but assumed that it was pretty much taking all the power just for that. I also assumed that's why they didn't make it simple just to select all your audio in DP and say "stretch!" That, or possibly licensing issues.

Maybe it's going to take quantum computing to make this happen someday.

Shooshie

Yes, during discussions when people have complained that DP's transpose and stretch is not quite up to where some other DAWs are currently at, I often wondered about about why MOTU didn't incorporate into DP the IRCAM TS engine they were already licensing and offering as part of M5. Now I get why. A few tracks of IRCAM TS would bring DP to its knees. Let's hope another solution is in the works.

Best,
Babz

Robert Randolph wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2016 3:13 pm Not an official forum, but there's a lot (247 pages of it!) of Q&A here, along with developers answering questions

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 1&t=449200

BLESS YOU !

There's also this!
https://falcontinuum.com