M-Audio Venom Synthesizer

[U&I]

Originally Posted by Anderton

The filter has a Prefilter boost so you can overload it, and it can also self-oscillate (I love this kind of thing...I was always the type of guy who cranked up the gain on rotating speaker preamps). The six filter types are:

• Lowpass 12dB/octave
• Bandpass 12dB/octave
• Highpass 12dB/octave
• Lowpass 24dB/octave
• Bandpass 24dB/octave
• Highpass 24dB/octave

This isn't particularly adventurous; there's no notch response, comb filtering, etc. It looks to me like the design philosophy behind timbre changes was to rely more on sync, ring modulation, distortion, effects, etc. than filtering per se.

Quite surprised by that filter list - thought it might have had at the very least notch and comb modes or a couple of dual filter modes (ala MS20 styled filters or the wonderful dual filters on some Yamaha products) and a formant filter.
By no means a deal breaker this as it does had ring mod, sync etc but they would add to the overall sonic palette available.
Looking forward to more of this review as the synth does look very tempting and great value for money none the less.

[Anderton]

Originally Posted by U&I

Quite surprised by that filter list - thought it might have had at the very least notch and comb modes or a couple of dual filter modes (ala MS20 styled filters or the wonderful dual filters on some Yamaha products) and a formant filter.
By no means a deal breaker this as it does had ring mod, sync etc but they would add to the overall sonic palette available.
Looking forward to more of this review as the synth does look very tempting and great value for money none the less.

I think E-Mu really set the standard years ago with their Z-Plane filters - now that was some collection. What was it, 50 different filter types?

That said, I was hoping for more filter options but for dual filters, remember that we haven't gotten into Multi mode yet. You can use Multi to have four different things going on at once, but you can also use it to create more complex "single" patches.

I would say that if Taiho had come to me and said "Hey Craig, we only have so much space left in the ROM. You can have 20 different filter types and no sync/ring mod/FM, or six filters but then you'd have sync, FM, and ring mod. It's up to you."

Well, you know which one I'd take But I would ask for a phase reverse switch in the filter path so I could duplicate patches in two slots of a multi and do weirdnesses.

Anyway, back to the review but even with just what I know so far, this is a sweet piece o' gear, especially for the bucks. A lot of that is because this instrument has a personality, just as guitars have their own personalities. It does NOT seem like it was designed by looking through a DSP manufacturer's cookbook

[Anderton]

There are four LFOs – 3 general-purpose, and one dedicated to amplitude/panning. All of them offer Sync to Tempo and Rate controls, as they should

The choice of waveforms for the first three will delight a synth tweaker’s heart:

• Sine
• Sine (unipolar, alternates between 0 and positive values)
• Triangle
• Sawtooth
• Square
• Sample and Hold
• Linear Sample and Hold
• Log Sample and Hold
• Exponential Square
• Log Square
• Log Up Sawtooth
• Exponential Up Sawtooth

If you’re used to “triangle and sawtooth,” some of these waveforms may be unfamiliar. So, look at the screen shot...



LFO 1 shows the log version of the sawtooth wave. You can see that the rising ramp, instead of being linear, is concave. LFO 2 shows an exponential sawtooth, where the ramp is convex. LFO 3 shows the characteristic, standard sample & hold waveform; the linear version replaces the straight up-and-down changes with linear ramps (like the difference between a square wave and a triangle wave). The log sample & hold replaces the linear ramps with curved ones. LFO 4 is more conventional, as you can see by the choice of waveforms.

LFOs 1 and 2 have Delay (sets the amount of time after key-down before the LFO kicks in), Attack (fades in the LFO, starting at key-down), and Start Phase, which varies from 0 to 359 degrees. If you’re not familiar with this concept, it allows for effects like setting two LFOs for the same waveform, but 180 degrees out of phase, so the two control signals can make their assigned parameters move “oppositely.” LFO 3 lacks these options, acting more like a standard LFO with its single Rate control.

There’s a not-so-obvious difference among the LFOs: LFO 3 applies the same waveform across all keys, like the vibrato on old combo organs. LFOs 1 and 2 are polyphonic, i.e., they calculate the waveform independently for each key you trigger. Note that with the amplitude modulation LFO, tremolo and auto pan are available simultaneously, and driven by the same LFO waveform and frequency.

Also note that the LFOs have their own row of performance controls: LFO 1 and LFO 2 rate, and LFO 2 shape. The latter is not a duty cycle control, but selects among the various waveforms. Of course pretty much everything can be controlled by MIDI continuous controller messages as well.

The Glide Time and Glide On/Off controls relate to Portamento, and don’t have anything to do with the LFOs.

And that’s it for the LFO section, although of course the LFOs, like other modulation sources, work in tandem with a modulation matrix that we’ll describe later.

[U&I]

Originally Posted by Anderton

I think E-Mu really set the standard years ago with their Z-Plane filters - now that was some collection. What was it, 50 different filter types?

That said, I was hoping for more filter options but for dual filters, remember that we haven't gotten into Multi mode yet. You can use Multi to have four different things going on at once, but you can also use it to create more complex "single" patches.

I would say that if Taiho had come to me and said "Hey Craig, we only have so much space left in the ROM. You can have 20 different filter types and no sync/ring mod/FM, or six filters but then you'd have sync, FM, and ring mod. It's up to you."

Well, you know which one I'd take But I would ask for a phase reverse switch in the filter path so I could duplicate patches in two slots of a multi and do weirdnesses.

Anyway, back to the review but even with just what I know so far, this is a sweet piece o' gear, especially for the bucks. A lot of that is because this instrument has a personality, just as guitars have their own personalities. It does NOT seem like it was designed by looking through a DSP manufacturer's cookbook

I agree on that front - I'd rather sacrifice the filter types for Sync, Ringmod and FM.
The LFO list looks pretty comprehensive.
Are they audio rate LFO's and can one LFO Modulate another.
If I might add I own an EMU Ultraproteus - which has filters up the wazoo and then some so I am more than covered on that front and it looks like one could use Venom as an Audio Processor too which is a bonus right there.
Basically my set up is Reason + Record, EMu Ultraproteus, Electribes EMX & ESX with an Analog Solutions Telemark and a Korg Prophecy - I quite like the tonal footprint of the Venom and it definitely adds a certain something I don't have right about now.
Though I am eyeing off the Sequentix Cirklon as a worthy edition but quite like some of the features on the Tenori On also.
That said I have had massive gear bloat before and am mindful of what it is I really need for the sort of music I write.

[U&I]

Originally Posted by Anderton

There are four LFOs – 3 general-purpose, and one dedicated to amplitude/panning. All of them offer Sync to Tempo and Rate controls, as they should

The choice of waveforms for the first three will delight a synth tweaker’s heart:

• Sine
• Sine (unipolar, alternates between 0 and positive values)
• Triangle
• Sawtooth
• Square
• Sample and Hold
• Linear Sample and Hold
• Log Sample and Hold
• Exponential Square
• Log Square
• Log Up Sawtooth
• Exponential Up Sawtooth

If you’re used to “triangle and sawtooth,” some of these waveforms may be unfamiliar. So, look at the screen shot...



LFO 1 shows the log version of the sawtooth wave. You can see that the rising ramp, instead of being linear, is concave. LFO 2 shows an exponential sawtooth, where the ramp is convex. LFO 3 shows the characteristic, standard sample & hold waveform; the linear version replaces the straight up-and-down changes with linear ramps (like the difference between a square wave and a triangle wave). The log sample & hold replaces the linear ramps with curved ones. LFO 4 is more conventional, as you can see by the choice of waveforms.

LFOs 1 and 2 have Delay (sets the amount of time after key-down before the LFO kicks in), Attack (fades in the LFO, starting at key-down), and Start Phase, which varies from 0 to 359 degrees. If you’re not familiar with this concept, it allows for effects like setting two LFOs for the same waveform, but 180 degrees out of phase, so the two control signals can make their assigned parameters move “oppositely.” LFO 3 lacks these options, acting more like a standard LFO with its single Rate control.

There’s a not-so-obvious difference among the LFOs: LFO 3 applies the same waveform across all keys, like the vibrato on old combo organs. LFOs 1 and 2 are polyphonic, i.e., they calculate the waveform independently for each key you trigger. Note that with the amplitude modulation LFO, tremolo and auto pan are available simultaneously, and driven by the same LFO waveform and frequency.

Also note that the LFOs have their own row of performance controls: LFO 1 and LFO 2 rate, and LFO 2 shape. The latter is not a duty cycle control, but selects among the various waveforms. Of course pretty much everything can be controlled by MIDI continuous controller messages as well.

The Glide Time and Glide On/Off controls relate to Portamento, and don’t have anything to do with the LFOs.

And that’s it for the LFO section, although of course the LFOs, like other modulation sources, work in tandem with a modulation matrix that we’ll describe later.

Looking good so far .
The Mod Matrix will be the thing I am most eager to view.

[Anderton]

The “LFO” page actually has five other functional blocks, and another set of Performance controls for Mix functions. Let’s go through these, starting at the top and heading down.



Starting with Insert FX, each Single program allows for a single insert effect, but also includes sends for two aux effects. There is no master effect (i.e., you can’t apply, say, Delay to the entire mixed output) other than EQ, which we’ll cover shortly.

The insert effects are:

• EQ Bandpass. This is a single parametric EQ stage with Frequency, Q, and Gain.
• Compressor. Includes the usual controls – Attack, Release, Threshold, Ratio, and Makeup Gain.
• Auto-Wah. Controls are Cutoff, Resonance, Sensitivity, Attack, and Release, with a choice of lowpass or highpass filter type.
• Distortion. This has three distortion types—overdrive, distortion, and fuzz—along with Depth, Pre Gain, Post Gain, and High Cutoff.
• Reducer. Your basic lo-fi effect, with variable Bit resolution and Sample Rate.

The Channel section is a sort of “submaster” control section. Here you can set Volume, Pan, and the two Aux Send levels to the aux effects. You can also mix in a parallel path of Direct, non-processed sound to go along with whatever processed sound you’re using. Channel also includes a section for choosing the Insert FX, which I don’t really “get” as it duplicates the same function as the effects chooser in the Insert FX section, which is only a few knobs away.

The Master section has high and low shelf EQ, each with a boost/cut control and frequency control. There’s also a quasi-parametric mid, with Frequency (the ever-helpful “0-127”) and Gain, and a Master volume control. Given the Channel Volume control, this may seem redundant but in a Multi patch, which of consists of multiple Single patches, you can use the Channel control to balance the levels of the Single patches while the Master volume controls the overall, final output level.

The EQ section for each Single patch is basic—high shelf and low shelf, each with a boost/cut and frequency control. Again, in a Multi situation, you can vary the tone for Single patches while using the Multi to control the overall tone.

Finally, we have the Aux FX section. You can choose the two Aux FX types (all of which are time-based effects) and enable them—remember, the Send controls themselves are in the Channel section. We’ll have more to say about the Aux FX when we get to the Aux section.

As to the Performance Controls, you access these as the Mix row. The controls are a subset of the Channel (Volume, Pan, Aux Sends, and Insert FX type).

All of this is relatively straightforward, and while the effects aren't unusual or novel, they're very useful in terms of being able to warp the sound - particularly with options like Auto Wah, Distortion, and Reducer. I have a feeling these are also going to come in handy when inputting external audio...

My only complaint is that while the pan knobs have meaningful calibrations, as with the LFO section everything is pretty much calibrated in "M-Audio Arbitrary Number Units." You don't know if you're, for example, boosting the low frequencies by +1dB or +10dB, or the frequency at which this is occurring. Yes, you should use your ears and yes, it doesn't really matter - except that having real calibrations is a great ear-training tool, as you have precise visual confirmation of what your ears are hearing. After a while you start to recognize what boosting or cutting at specific frequencies sounds like, and this is data you can translate to studio EQs and other gear.

[Anderton]

Originally Posted by U&I

Are they audio rate LFO's and can one LFO Modulate another.

The LFOs go from 0-110, but that's not Hz Actually according to the manual, the range is 0.01 to 30Hz. So they go into the audio range, but just barely. If you're looking for that type of effect, you're better off using FM.

You can modulate one LFO with another using the matrix modulation - you can even modulate, say, the LFO 2 rate with LFO 1, and then modulate LFO 1's rate with LFO 2. However, LFO 3 is available only as a modulation source, not a destination. [Edit: Actually, it can be, but there are conditions under which it can be hidden and apparently, I was in one of them - see post #60, and post #37 for an explanation of the contextual nature of the modulation matrix.]

[Anderton]

 

Originally Posted by U&I

The Mod Matrix will be the thing I am most eager to view.

 

That's next

[Psicraft]

Originally Posted by Anderton

Channel also includes a section for choosing the Insert FX, which I don’t really “get” as it duplicates the same function as the effects chooser in the Insert FX section, which is only a few knobs away.

Hi Craig - All should become clear when you revisit the VOICE page in Multi Mode and see the Channel block in that context... I don't want to disrupt the flow of your tour of the Single mode GUI with captures from the Multi mode GUI and the discussion it would generate. Instead I'll wait for you to get to it in the normal course of your review - We can discuss the pros and cons of the Multi Mode source block system and how the editor presents these details to the sound designer then.

I am really enjoying the review, by the way!

Cheers,

Tony

[U&I]

Great stuff Craig.
Very informative to boot .

[Anderton]

Originally Posted by Psicraft

Hi Craig - All should become clear when you revisit the VOICE page in Multi Mode and see the Channel block in that context... I don't want to disrupt the flow of your tour of the Single mode GUI with captures from the Multi mode GUI and the discussion it would generate. Instead I'll wait for you to get to it in the normal course of your review - We can discuss the pros and cons of the Multi Mode source block system and how the editor presents these details to the sound designer then

Ah, that makes sense. We'll get there soon enough and thanks for the heads-up.

I am really enjoying the review, by the way!

Well I'm really enjoying Venom, so I'm glad it's a two-way street.

[Anderton]

The modulation matrix is conventional. There are 16 modulation routings to assign a modulation source to a modulation destination, with a control that determines the amount (positive or negative).



Modulation sources, as shown in the above screen shot, are:

• The three envelopes (unipolar – the excursion goes positive from the baseline)
• The three envelopes, but operating in a bipolar way (i.e., the excursion goes positive and negative with respect to the baseline)
• The three LFOs, each with three options: unipolar wide, bipolar wide, unipolar fine, unipolar wide. The wide settings are for large amounts of modulation, whereas the narrow settings are for more subtle modulation amounts (e.g., vibrato).
• Positive velocity
• Negative velocity
• Positive keytrack
• Negative keytrack
• Positive mod wheel
• Negative mod wheel
• Pitch bend wheel
• Positive channel aftertouch
• Negative channel aftertouch
• Positive expression pedal
• Negative expression pedal
• Positive sustain
• Negative sustain

And here are the modulation destinations.

• Master pitch
• Individual pitch for each oscillator
• Individual level for each oscillator
• Osc 1 waveshaper
• Oscillator detune
• Filter cutoff
• Individual rate for each LFO
• Amplitude
• Filter resonance
• Ring modulation
• External input level
• FM Amount
• Amount for each modulation routing (1-16)

Note that not all source/destinations are valid, as you can’t apply a polyphonic source to a monophonic destination. If this happens, the options are hidden so you can’t try to modulate something that can’t be modulated (fair enough!).

The modulation section is pretty easy to understand, although I don’t know why some negative and positive versions of the same parameter are grouped together (e.g., velocity) and some aren’t (e.g., keytrack). No big deal, but it does seem odd.

Also note that although on the Osc page the envelopes have distinct names (Amplitude, Filter, and Pitch), the only one that’s normalized is Amplitude, and all of these envelopes are basically free to modulate anything.

[Anderton]

Between the last few posts and the posts today, I've installed 64-bit Windows 7 as a clean install, so I'm basically starting over from scratch (although Windows XP, which I'd been using previously with the review, and Vista 64-bit are still on removable drives so I can swap out operating systems any time).

Yes, the drivers work, as does the USB communication and the Vyzex editor...one less thing to worry about

[triton76]

can everything be programmed without a computer?

[Anderton]

Originally Posted by triton76

can everything be programmed without a computer?

Excellent question, and the answer is no, not really...the physical controls are for real-time, performance manipulation, not editing. So the only programming you can do is if it coincides with parameters that are brought out for performance, which is quite a few but by no means reflects the depth of the instrument.

However, the editor does seem to be pretty non-critical - works with all flavors of Windows from XP on, and Mac OS X.

One other thing: It would take a lot of button-pushing and knob twisting to achieve the same degree of programmability as the editor. I'm not sure it would be a pleasant experience...given the price, and the fact that the price of physical controls really adds up, I'm pretty sure the designers figured it made more sense to hit a price point and include an editor than include enough controls to make programming something other than an exercise in frustration. But, that's just speculation.

[This]

Originally Posted by Psicraft

All the best,

Tony

Tony Antoniou,
Managing Director
Psicraft Designs, Inc.

Don’t take this personally Tony, but I think its hilarious that Avid has outsourced its software development.

[Psicraft]

No offense taken, of course.

Avid did produce the drivers and the control panel app required by Venom, so they haven't exactly started outsourcing their software yet, nor do I expect they ever will - Psicraft Designs was called in to handle a special case situation, namely to develop a synthesizer editor that could match Venom on every front.

Editor development is a deceptively difficult thing to do. Anyone can string controls into a panel and call it an editor, but if you want to have seamless real-time integration with the instrument's front panel and manage all aspects of the sound design in an intuitive but flexible way with 100% reliability it takes many years of experience to get right - Not just from a UI design perspective but from a development perspective and (very, very importantly) from a quality assurance perspective as well.

This is the main reason pro audio companies have been 'outsourcing' to Psicraft for almost a decade now: We bring a proven technology to the table that is custom designed to match their instrument with guaranteed delivery dates that fit even the tightest manufacturing schedules. Also, we handle all the tech support for our editors as part of the deal which is a fantastic bonus value to any manufacturer.

Here's a list of the 'officially supplied' editors Psicraft has developed over the years:

• Roland: D-50 (VC-1) Card for V-Synth
  
• TC Helicon: All rack and large pedal Voice processors from VoiceOne to VoiceLive 2
  
• TC Electronic: G-System, G-Major 2, G-Sharp and M350
  
• Line 6: PocketPOD & FloorPOD Plus
  
• Akai Professional: EWI 4000s, MPD24, MPD26, MPD32, MPK25, MPK49, MPK61 & MPK88

So, I would say Avid is in pretty good company - The members of this list are all satisfied customers and you know how quickly word gets around in this industry of ours.

Cheers,

Tony

[Anderton]

Not to derail the thread, but people might be surprised how much companies "outsource" various tasks. I've done dozens and dozens of manuals, as well as tons of presets for synths and effects - sometimes under my own name, but often, uncredited. Now, these companies have plenty of writers who could do manuals (although of course, not as well as me ) and plenty of sound design people. But, this is a much smaller industry than most musicians realize. Often, there just aren't enough people to do everything a company needs, but they may not need (or be able to afford) someone full-time. Take manuals - if a company puts out a couple products a year, they really can't afford to have a dedicated manual writer on-staff.

As to the situation with Avid and Psicraft, Avid's Big Deal is Pro Tools 9, and that's a major upgrade. I just don't see them saying "Hey, let's take our top two programmers off of PT9, and have them develop a librarian for Venom." And, as Tony pointed out, creating editors is a very specialized process...and that's a Psicraft specialty. I bet it cost less for Avid to go to a company that does this all the time compared to getting people internally up to speed.

[Psicraft]

I'd say you hit the nail exactly on the head there, Craig - All very true stuff.

Cheers,

Tony

[nomenclature]

Anderton, maybe you can confirm something for me since m-audio doesn't want to support something that a customer just bought (seriously, if I knew they had zero customer support previously it would have impacted my decision to purchase any of their products). If you open up Vyzex and enable the midi monitor so you can see the send messages, go into global mode and Arp to local + midi, and global midi to any channel but 4. choose any patch in multi mode, hit a key, you should see the messaging sending on the channel you have set for global midi. hit the arp button on the Venom to turn it off, hit any key and you should see the messages sent on your selected global channel. works fine, right?

Now set the Venom to single mode, the arp will probably turn on. hit a key, messaging sends on your set global midi channel. now hit the arp button to turn it off and hit a key... if it's anything like mine, suddenly it's sending on channel 4, and there's no way to change it. is that what you're getting too?

totally frustrating. I'm still getting into the Venom and liking most of what I'm seeing, but the fact that I can't use it as a controller and use the arp without needing to have it hooked up to a computer to change it back to local + keyboard just so I can send messaging on the right channel is crap. So far I can't get anyone else to check and confirm that this is a bug or now.

[Psicraft]

Hi Nomenclature,

Confirmed on my testing unit. You have definitely found a bug, it's an obscure one, but it's certainly serious for those who want the ARP MIDI output plus the keyboard outputting on any channel other than 4 as you correctly point out. Private message me your mailing address and I will see if I can weasel a Venom T-shirt for you as a prize for this fine detective work.

Incidentally, you can always ask tech support questions at http://www.vyzor.com/support/viewforum.php?f=53 - If it's an editor issue I will help, if it turns out to be a firmware issue I will ensure it gets fast tracked to Avid, and if it's a general usage question outside of the Vyzor tech support mandate then I will forward it to the venomsynth.com forums (http://www.venomsynth.com/forums/) which were set up by the fan-based Venom Users Group for these kinds of discussions.

Cheers,

Tony

[nomenclature]

Thanks Tony. I had posted this on the m-audio forums a few days ago but traffic seems to crawl there with a post maybe every other day, and I figured this was firmware, not the editor, so I didn't think to check the vyzor website. I'll bookmark both forums for future reference.

[Psicraft]

No problem, No menclature...

Craig, before we zigged and zagged around the thread today, you wrote:

It would take a lot of button-pushing and knob twisting to achieve the same degree of programmability as the editor. I'm not sure it would be a pleasant experience...

Agreed - From a purely mechanical point of view, I definitely think the drag and drop capabilities of the bank views within Vyzex would be very tedious if anyone tried implementing them as front panel operations on a synth like Venom. There are at least six other features in the editor I can think of right now that would be similarly awful to do with just pushbuttons and encoders from the front panel, so your point is very well made.

You also wrote:

I'm pretty sure the designers figured it made more sense to hit a price point and include an editor than include enough controls to make programming something other than an exercise in frustration. But, that's just speculation.

Your speculation was right on the money. Hopefully Taiho will elaborate on this topic when he chances to check in on this review.

Cheers,

Tony

[scud133]

umm can we hear what it sounds like? its page 3 already!!

[Anderton]

Originally Posted by scud133

umm can we hear what it sounds like? its page 3 already!!

Of course! But, I felt I really needed to explain the architecture first...I figured if I did a preset showcasing the ring modulator, I didn't want the reaction to be "It has a Ring Modulator? Really?"

Another issue is that if you've been following the Wavelab 7 Pro Review, you may have noticed that I've started doing videos that let you hear the audio while you see what the controls are doing. I think that would be perfect in this case, so you can see how, for example, the Performance controls affect the sound.

However, as mentioned previously I just switched to Windows 7 and haven't installed my screen capture software yet. That will happen in the next day or two. If I have problems with it for some reason, then I'll just do audio examples, but as the live performance aspect is a Big Deal with Venom, I think a video embedded in the post would be cool.

In any event, I have only one more page to cover (the Aux page, which has the Aux FX as well as the Arpeggiator) and then the Single patch architecture part will be done and we can move on to audio examples.

After that we'll get into what the Multi thing is all about, which will lead to more audio examples...and the final set of audio examples will showcase processing external audio through Venom.