# Falcon is worth buying



## Trancer (Sep 7, 2021)

I was wondering if buying Falcon made sense having Omnisphere / Serum / Phaseplant.


Won't that duplicate?


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 7, 2021)

Maybe Phaseplant comes close (btw: have you completely switched to French now?) but Falcon has a lot to offer in terms of synthesis and the modular way you get to shape your own architecture, LUA scripting and of course the excellent multi-sampling options, when compared to Omnisphere and Serum.

So I’d argue Falcon is worth getting.


----------



## Trancer (Sep 7, 2021)

Merci pour votre réponse.

Je ne comprends pas votre réflexion sur le français.


----------



## mscp (Sep 7, 2021)

Trancer said:


> Je me demandais si acheter Falcon avait du sens en ayant Omnisphere / Serum / Phaseplant.
> 
> Cela ne va-t-il pas dupliquer ?


Nein. Sie müssen Falcon 2 kaufen. Es ist fantastisch.


----------



## rrichard63 (Sep 7, 2021)

There are many synthesizers that feature sample playback. Omnisphere is a great one. And there are samplers with some synthesis capabilities. But I'm not aware of anything that is both a full-fledged synth and a full-fledged sampler in quite the way Falcon is. If there are others, please name them here.


----------



## ok_tan (Sep 7, 2021)

Trancer said:


> Je me demandais si acheter Falcon avait du sens en ayant Omnisphere / Serum / Phaseplant.
> 
> Cela ne va-t-il pas dupliquer ?



ahhhh mas, falcon 2 bagus sekali. terlalu luar biasa!


----------



## mscp (Sep 7, 2021)

rrichard63 said:


> There are many synthesizers that feature sample playback. Omnisphere is a great one. And there are samplers with some synthesis capabilities. But I'm not aware of anything that is both a full-fledged synth and a full-fledged sampler in quite the way Falcon is. If there are others, please name them here.


My only pet peeve is the fact it only uses one core so it's pretty hard to build a complex patch with it without running into a wall. I wish they do something about it, cause other than that, Falcon 2 is perfect.


----------



## Trancer (Sep 7, 2021)

Thank you very much for your answers and opinions

So interesting to get it and it would be a good complement given its peculiarities


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 7, 2021)

Well, I noticed your posts were all in French all of a sudden…

Like the one that tells me in French that you don’t understand me asking about you talking in French







And that was after this one in another thread:





So you seemed to have decided to switch to French.


----------



## Trancer (Sep 8, 2021)

Sorry, automatic translator. The why, text in French


----------



## muziksculp (Sep 8, 2021)

Hello @Trancer,

I think Falcon is a great tool for creating your custom sounds, and sound design, plus general synthesis. 

I was trying to decide if I should invest time learning Falcon, or Halion in-depth, I decided to go with Falcon. But I haven't yet had the time to study Falcon. So plan for some learning time to harness the power of Falcon. 

There are some good Falcon Tutorials by MacPro Video, and an even a more detailed one at Groove3, and as usual possibly more free ones on YT. 

Good Luck.


----------



## Trancer (Sep 8, 2021)

Thank you very much for your answer.

Indeed, Falcon 2 apparently requires a long learning to be able to use it correctly.

On the other hand, so complete and rich, it is certainly worth it to dive into it in depth.


----------



## Pier (Sep 9, 2021)

At some point I plan to get into Falcon. It's a sound designer's dream as you can do anything you can imagine.

I've seen a couple of videos and it seems pretty intuitive.


----------



## mscp (Sep 9, 2021)

Pier said:


> At some point I plan to get into Falcon. It's a sound designer's dream as you can do anything you can imagine.
> 
> I've seen a couple of videos and it seems pretty intuitive.


Yep. It's pretty versatile. When I don't want to deal with Max/MSP (partly because I need to meet short deadlines) , I often reach for Falcon 2.


----------



## Trensharo (Sep 10, 2021)

Falcon is like Kontakt and Reaktor meshed into one. It's comparable to HALion, which I prefer over it because the multi-core limitations of Falcon can be problematic for some work. 

If you have Komplete or HALion you kind of need a reason to invest in it, IMO. Like something more specific you need from it. Otherwise, I'm not seeing the value. All of UVI's libraries will run in Workstation, anyways.


----------



## Pier (Sep 10, 2021)

Trensharo said:


> Falcon is like Kontakt and Reaktor meshed into one. It's comparable to HALion, which I prefer over it because the multi-core limitations of Falcon can be problematic for some work.
> 
> If you have Komplete or HALion you kind of need a reason to invest in it, IMO. Like something more specific you need from it. Otherwise, I'm not seeing the value. All of UVI's libraries will run in Workstation, anyways.


Can you use Halion outside Cubase?


----------



## Jaap (Sep 10, 2021)

Pier said:


> Can you use Halion outside Cubase?


Yes you can load Halion as standalone program.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2021)

rrichard63 said:


> There are many synthesizers that feature sample playback. Omnisphere is a great one. And there are samplers with some synthesis capabilities. But I'm not aware of anything that is both a full-fledged synth and a full-fledged sampler in quite the way Falcon is. If there are others, please name them here.


MSoundFactory.


----------



## Trancer (Sep 11, 2021)

Thank you for your answers.

Indeed, a vst which must be most exciting, but you really have to invest time.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

Trensharo said:


> Falcon is like Kontakt and Reaktor meshed into one.


That's not quite true. Falcon is very different from Reaktor in it's approach and possibilities. It's a synth workstation while Reaktor is a synth/DSP building toolkit.


Trensharo said:


> All of UVI's libraries will run in Workstation, anyways.


That's also not true. Falcon libraries only run in Falcon, and they're editable so they work as documentation as well.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

José Herring said:


> MSoundFactory.


This is true. But UVI really push Falcon as a sampler and there are third party libraries for it, whereas my contacts with Vojtek (Meldaproductions’ developer) asking him specific questions about MSF’s sampler have lead me to believe it is not the main focus of attention. He’s more like “MSF supports Sfz, I’ve implemented it according to the specs, so look up the specs and what you want to achieve should work - goodbye”


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

I would also like to mention Equator 2, that kind of secretly has killer multisampling options. Great synth overall. I hope it will get the love it deserves. From ROLI or whoever may pick it up.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> This is true.


It's also on sale rt. now, for one day: https://www.meldaproduction.com/emd?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=emd


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

I highly recommend MSoundFactory. Watch a few hours of @Chandler and you’re transported to another world


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> I highly recommend MSoundFactory. Watch a few hours of @Chandler and you’re transported to another world


Dan Worrall's tutorials for Falcon do the same


----------



## Pier (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> I would also like to mention Equator 2, that kind of secretly has killer multisampling options. Great synth overall. I hope it will get the love it deserves. From ROLI or whoever may pick it up.


When I was looking for a hybrid synth I considered Falcon and Equator. Ended up getting Bitwig for less than what Falcon costs and it's way more powerful.

For my own stuff, Bitwig is all I need, but at some point I'd like to release a hybrid library and I don't see composers buying Bitwig presets/libraries.

I guess Falcon would be the best option now that Equator's future is uncertain.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

Falcon is an incredibly well designed package, and overall seems to be a wise pick. It does not seem to have a flourishing eco system in terms of third parties offering presets though. I’ve hardly noticed the regular suspects embracing Falcon, except maybe Simon Stockhausen who was very active for a while (some years ago now I might add). So this may either mean there may be a market of composers that is not yet served, OR that composers are still more versed in Kontakt / Omnisphere / U-he and (increasingly?) Pigments “land”…


----------



## Pier (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Falcon is an incredibly well designed package, and overall seems to be a wise pick. It does not seem to have a flourishing eco system in terms of third parties offering presets though. I’ve hardly noticed the regular suspects embracing Falcon, except maybe Simon Stockhausen who was very active for a while (some years ago now I might add). So this may either mean there may be a market of composers that is not yet served, OR that composers are still more versed in Kontakt / Omnisphere / U-he and (increasingly?) Pigments “land”…


One thing that always bothers me about UVI products is iLok. And I suspect I'm not alone in this. NI and U-He have their own license/activation tech which is way more user friendly.

I also suspect big developers like Spitfire, OT, etc, would not risk investing tons of cash into Falcon products when Kontakt is already the de facto standard. Falcon might be more powerful with the IRCAM stuff, but other than Kontakt's ancient UI it does the job well for samples.

So basically the only company investing heavily into Falcon is obviously UVI themselves but their stuff doesn't have universal appeal tbh. There are also a couple of small companies and sound designers like Simon Stockhausen but that's not enough to shift the market away from Kontakt.

IMO UVI should make an aggressive push to increase adoption of Falcon. Maybe reaching to companies with an ample Kontakt catalog like say Cinesamples and offering to port their stuff to Falcon for free. I don't know, maybe UVI is just doing fine and doesn't care for more adoption.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> One thing that always bothers me about UVI products is iLok. And I suspect I'm not alone in this. NI and U-He have their own license/activation tech which is way more user friendly.


You don't need an actual dongle, it's "soft" iLok.


Pier said:


> I also suspect big developers like Spitfire, OT, etc, would not risk investing tons of cash into Falcon products when Kontakt is already the de facto standard. Falcon might be more powerful with the IRCAM stuff, but other than Kontakt's ancient UI it does the job well for samples.


I see Falcon mostly as a "start from scratch" instrument.
Still, I love some of the Falcon extensions/libs simply because they are open, so a beginner like me can dissect them and understand more about Falcon (and synthesis in general).
Yet, some of them (Cinematic Shades is a concrete example) are actually amazing.
I found myself using it quite a bit when sketching the temp soundtrack for my current movie.


----------



## mscp (Sep 11, 2021)

Trensharo said:


> Falcon is like Kontakt and Reaktor meshed into one.


Vaguely.

Falcon is a synthesis/sampling workstation with pre-built modules. It also allows some scripting. 

Kontakt is a sampler that allows scripting. 

Reaktor (and the same goes to Max/MSP, and others) is a graphical modular software that you can build your own modules from the ground up.


----------



## rrichard63 (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> This is true. But UVI really push Falcon as a sampler and there are third party libraries for it, whereas my contacts with Vojtek (Meldaproductions’ developer) asking him specific questions about MSF’s sampler have lead me to believe it is not the main focus of attention. He’s more like “MSF supports Sfz, I’ve implemented it according to the specs, so look up the specs and what you want to achieve should work - goodbye”


For MSoundFactory's sampler functionality, do I need the full version or is all of that also in the ME version?


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

All versions have the sampler for playback and can handle all presets based on samples, such as the Monastery Grand. If you want to edit your own patches, you’ll need MSF proper.


----------



## mscp (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> I also suspect big developers like Spitfire, OT, etc, would not risk investing tons of cash into Falcon products when Kontakt is already the de facto standard. Falcon might be more powerful with the IRCAM stuff, but other than Kontakt's ancient UI it does the job well for samples.


Also note, Falcon does not utilize more than one core per instance. Running highly-scripted libraries in Falcon would not work at all due to the constraints of today's single-core performance. 



Pier said:


> So basically the only company investing heavily into Falcon is obviously UVI themselves but their stuff doesn't have universal appeal tbh. There are also a couple of small companies and sound designers like Simon Stockhausen but that's not enough to shift the market away from Kontakt.


Falcon has never been seen as a sampler 'in my books'. The sampler module provides me the ability to add my own audio so I can sound design with it.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> One thing that always bothers me about UVI products is iLok. And I suspect I'm not alone in this. NI and U-He have their own license/activation tech which is way more user friendly.
> 
> I also suspect big developers like Spitfire, OT, etc, would not risk investing tons of cash into Falcon products when Kontakt is already the de facto standard. Falcon might be more powerful with the IRCAM stuff, but other than Kontakt's ancient UI it does the job well for samples.
> 
> ...


I don’t get all the Falcon vs Kontakt juxtaposition to be honest. I for one did not try to bend the discourse in that direction.

That said, I agree Falcon won’t be the next Kontakt, nor does it try to be - nor -imho- should it be a serious objective for UVI. I don’t think “adoption” is high on their agenda to be honest.

When I talk about Falcon I see it as a very well designed AND maintained super synth, semi-modular, really good sounding, and with a pretty cool set of add-ons, in terms of new preset packs, instruments, samples, EPs, pianos and even some orchestral packages. In that sense it is a flourishing synth. And when I spoke of third parties earlier I did not mean the Spitfires of this world but rather the Unfinished’s, Tom Wolfe’s etcetera, mainly because I was under the impression you were considering Falcon as a “platform to develop synth presets for”. 

TL;DR
I am not at all bothered by Falcon NOT being the next Kontakt. And that fact does not have any negative impact on my appreciation of the synth.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> One thing that always bothers me about UVI products is iLok. And I suspect I'm not alone in this.


This debate will likely never die haha, rivaled only by Waves’ WUP and eLicenser dongle threads 

I use iLok without any troubles so I really don’t get why people truly dislike it, but of course that’s no valid argumentation either hehe. What I do know is that MANY composers on here seem to revere LiquidSonics reverbs, so that’s a category that apparently doesn’t really worry about iLok.

I don’t know if your hybrid library will rely (heavily) on samples, but a Kontakt or Omnisphere library seems to make more sense I gather than a Falcon one? (Purely from a commercial / sales POV).


----------



## Piano Pete (Sep 11, 2021)

I'd say falcon 2 is definitely worth it. There is a learning curve, but some things are just easier to do within it compared to the alternatives. If you have the time to sit down and learn it and its architecture, Falcon is extremely powerful. It does take some investment—though. If you code LUA, it's even better! 

Like everyone else, I wish its performance was better optimized.

One negative, if you fall into this category, is that there are not as many packs or third party presets made for it compared to the other engines you mentioned; so, if you heavily rely on the premade sound packs of say omnisphere or preset packs of phaseplant/serum, there is just not the same amount of support. If you are a do it yourself person, and you can learn from what packages are available for it, it's a rocket ship.

While I agree with Doctorremmet that you really shouldnt toss Falcon into the same category as Kontakt—as it really isnt a one to one—some of the best private libraries I have ever used are built in Falcon. Lua efficiency and flexibility with some of the functionality exposed under the hood makes it a walk in the park to do things that are a royal PITA with Kontakt. 

However, while there are some neat libraries for it, I predominantly use it for sound design rather than a generic sampler.


----------



## RogiervG (Sep 11, 2021)

Jaap said:


> Yes you can load Halion as standalone program.


And as instrument inside any compatible daw (majority of them are)


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 11, 2021)

@Piano Pete I have done quite a lot of patching in Falcon and recently downloaded IRCAM’s Modalys (with the intention to use the MAX for Live version). Both use LUA Scripting. Do you happen to know some sources / books / websites / courses about LUA, particularly geared towards use in the context of Falcon or Modalys? I do have a very basic knowledge of scripting in general, but I have never really been able to “start” my journey with LUA for Falcon, due to a lack of sources really. No idea how to go about such an endeavour


----------



## Pier (Sep 11, 2021)

digitallysane said:


> You don't need an actual dongle, it's "soft" iLok.


I'm well aware of that. I use iLok because I own UVI and Waves products.

I guess it all comes down to the fact that I'm still pissed I lost a product license. A machine with iLok died on me 2 years ago and that was it. Also the fugly UI of the iLok software and the license transfer fee.



doctoremmet said:


> I don’t get all the Falcon vs Kontakt juxtaposition to be honest. I for one did not try to bend the discourse in that direction.
> 
> That said, I agree Falcon won’t be the next Kontakt, nor does it try to be - nor -imho- should it be a serious objective for UVI. I don’t think “adoption” is high on their agenda to be honest.


That's a good point.

I've always seen Falcon more like Omnisphere. Somehow a Kontakt with synthesis reather than a synth with samples, but now that I think of it you're absolutely right.

BTW the Programming in Lua book is probably the best resource to learn if you already know how to code. It was written by one of the lead Lua authors. Not sure how good it is for beginners in programming though.


----------



## Pier (Sep 11, 2021)

mscp said:


> Also note, Falcon does not utilize more than one core per instance. Running highly-scripted libraries in Falcon would not work at all due to the constraints of today's single-core performance.


Sounds more like Falcon is not very well optimized...

A single core should be able to handle plenty of stuff. Multi core is even disabled in Kontakt by default AFAIK. Heck, I can run dozens of Diva or Repro voices in a single core.


----------



## Piano Pete (Sep 11, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> @Piano Pete I have done quite a lot of patching in Falcon and recently downloaded IRCAM’s Modalys (with the intention to use the MAX for Live version). Both use LUA Scripting. Do you happen to know some sources / books / websites / courses about LUA, particularly geared towards use in the context of Falcon or Modalys? I do have a very basic knowledge of scripting in general, but I have never really been able to “start” my journey with LUA for Falcon, due to a lack of sources really. No idea how to go about such an endeavour


@Lindon posted this a bit back: https://falcontinuum.com/ (in this thread https://vi-control.net/community/threads/lua-resources-for-uvi-falcon-scripting.93509/) Maybe he can chime in with more specific resources regarding LUA and Falcon—specifically.

And of course, there is a brief tutorial on uvi script: https://www.uvi.net/uviscript/_tutorial.html

Regarding a specific course like what @d.healey did for Kontakt and HISE, I'm not sure if there is one.

There is an ask.video course. I just found it with a quick google, so I cannot vouch for it. https://ask.video/video/uvi-falcon-the-video-manual/16-16-scripting

But, I kind of just dove in and worked messed with it. I have LUA scripting experience from working on addons and stuff for use with Finale and Sibelius. Derek Banas has some great coding tutorials where he covers syntax etc.  I found these nice primers to learn other languages' syntax, and I felt they were also presented in such a way that you can watch them without a lot of prior experience. Udemy also has some decent coding courses floating around—especially if you are just getting started. The nice thing with LUA, is it doesnt have too many gross idiosyncrasies like some of the other languages.


----------



## kevinh (Sep 11, 2021)

I own a lot of falcon libraries and are great. Only thing I wish they would address is that sometimes they’ll fix tuning of a flute or some loop and it makes you re download the entire 20GB library again. Expansions can be very inspiring. Sound design wise it’s pretty fun.


----------



## mscp (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> Sounds more like Falcon is not very well optimized...
> 
> A single core should be able to handle plenty of stuff. Multi core is even disabled in Kontakt by default AFAIK. Heck, I can run dozens of Diva or Repro voices in a single core.


Try loading some heavily scripted patches with multiple mic positions on, and you'll see how it goes.

Falcon is a beast but some of my own patches put my CPU to its knees. I can't recreate my patches with Diva due to the patch requirements because the ones that drop my CPU to its knees are based on IRCAM stretching techniques.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

Pier said:


> Sounds more like Falcon is not very well optimized...
> 
> A single core should be able to handle plenty of stuff. Multi core is even disabled in Kontakt by default AFAIK. Heck, I can run dozens of Diva or Repro voices in a single core.


It is very well optimized. Complex, layered patches with tons of oacillators and, more importantly, tons of effects, are very doable.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 11, 2021)

mscp said:


> Try loading some heavily scripted patches with multiple mic positions on, and you'll see how it goes.
> 
> Falcon is a beast but some of my own patches put my CPU to its knees. I can't recreate my patches with Diva due to the patch requirements because the ones that drop my CPU to its knees are based on IRCAM stretching techniques.


Some of the IRCAM oscs are slow by their nature and this is mentioned in the Falcon docs as well.
Yes, one IRCAM stretch module with the "right" tweaks can get it crawling, but that's expected.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 12, 2021)

Piano Pete said:


> And of course, there is a brief tutorial on uvi script: https://www.uvi.net/uviscript/_tutorial.html


There are some nice examples as well here: https://www.uvi.net/uviscript/examples.html

The most elaborate and useful is this one: https://www.uvi.net/uviscript/mono_bass_line_8lua-example.html
but it actually requires a patch to be loaded, which they don't provide on that page  

I had to write to support and they emailed it to me, I attach it here.


----------



## Lindon (Sep 12, 2021)

Piano Pete said:


> @Lindon posted this a bit back: https://falcontinuum.com/ (in this thread https://vi-control.net/community/threads/lua-resources-for-uvi-falcon-scripting.93509/) Maybe he can chime in with more specific resources regarding LUA and Falcon—specifically.


Sorry - these days I do everything in HISE - so I'm a bit out of touch with the current Falcon resources...


----------



## mscp (Sep 12, 2021)

digitallysane said:


> Some of the IRCAM oscs are slow by their nature and this is mentioned in the Falcon docs as well.
> Yes, one IRCAM stretch module with the "right" tweaks can get it crawling, but that's expected.


Yeah, I know.


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 12, 2021)

I’m very new to synthesis and digital recording generally (as opposed to live acoustic playing), so I may simply be doing things wrong, but I don’t have any more problems running complex layers of parts in Falcon than I do in Omnisphere (both single core, I believe) or running multiple instances of certain instruments in Kontakt (multi-core) - I’m thinking of things like Straylight.

I know that Simon Stockhausen is planning to do more individual instruments for Falcon. He seems very keen on it, but he isn’t working on it right now.

I bought Falcon as a license transfer on impulse; I’m not really ready for it yet. I’m doing much of my learning on Pigments and analog emulations. But I just love the sounds that Falcon makes. I don’t know what it is, but it sounds so much more alive to me than Omnisphere. Every notable synth has its own sound, as well as workflows that suit some better than others. While I like the ball park it operates in, I haven’t heard anything from Zebra 2 that I really like; but others love it (it certainly does mix well in a hybrid composition).

For purposes of commercial soundsets, nothing is going to beat the usual suspects anytime soon. The better supported a synth is, the more people are going to buy it to access the soundsets, which leads to more soundsets and so on. (And if anyone wants to know how to suck eggs...) The exciting thing is we never know when some great new development could turn things on their head. Unless you do, in which case, don’t violate that NDA!


----------



## Piano Pete (Sep 12, 2021)

Lindon said:


> Sorry - these days I do everything in HISE - so I'm a bit out of touch with the current Falcon resources...


Figured it was worth a shot. I have actually been making the move into HISE for some private library stuff—unless Kontakt is a requirement. Being able to make a standalone vst has been fantastic.


----------



## mscp (Sep 12, 2021)

Bee_Abney said:


> I’m very new to synthesis and digital recording generally (as opposed to live acoustic playing), so I may simply be doing things wrong, but I don’t have any more problems running complex layers of parts in Falcon than I do in Omnisphere (both single core, I believe) or running multiple instances of certain instruments in Kontakt (multi-core) - I’m thinking of things like Straylight.


It really depends on the type of synthesis/algorithm you build your patch with. It's not about what you're doing wrong, but how many audio files you have loaded with the IRCAM stretch and granular algorithms and how much you're telling Falcon to compute in real time. 

When I run some of my own patches (with a few stretch and granular layers), I have to render it to audio (offline rendering) to be able to hear it without audio buffer glitches -- all in an i9 9900k.

Not a deal breaker, though.


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 12, 2021)

I see; I agree that it is worth a bit of extra trouble for the right effect but that an improvement would be very welcome.


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 13, 2021)

I have the impression (warning! uneducated, subjective "internet opinion" following) that the multi threading thing is not very well suited for the type of work that a _multiple-voice_ synth/sampler is supposed to be doing.

MSoundFactory for example: they make a big point in their _marketing _about the multi threading, performance etc. Then you check the actual _manual _and it says that activating multi-threading might actually result in _reduced _performance.

It seems to me that UVI are very well aware of that and just made a decision to optimize hard for single threading instead of dealing with multi threading complexities for little gain.

Which doesn't help their marketing dept, but apart from that I think Falcon's performance is excellent.


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 13, 2021)

digitallysane said:


> I have the impression (warning! uneducated, subjective "internet opinion" following) that the multi threading thing is not very well suited for the type of work that a _multiple-voice_ synth/sampler is supposed to be doing.
> 
> MSoundFactory for example: they make a big point in their _marketing _about the multi threading, performance etc. Then you check the actual _manual _and it says that activating multi-threading might actually result in _reduced _performance.
> 
> ...


Although UVI are canny enough to make the idea of retro-synth emulations sound like an abomination compared to sample libraries, so you'd think they'd be able to put some spin on this! I generally prefer samples if I want a retro sound myself, but I have seen haughty attitudes in the other direction.


----------



## mscp (Sep 13, 2021)

digitallysane said:


> I have the impression (warning! uneducated, subjective "internet opinion" following) that the multi threading thing is not very well suited for the type of work that a _multiple-voice_ synth/sampler is supposed to be doing.
> 
> MSoundFactory for example: they make a big point in their _marketing _about the multi threading, performance etc. Then you check the actual _manual _and it says that activating multi-threading might actually result in _reduced _performance.
> 
> ...


I don't know much about the programming side of audio software development (at the time of this post), but limitation is still one of the reasons why I still have hardware synths / modular.


----------



## doctoremmet (Sep 13, 2021)

Bee_Abney said:


> Although UVI are canny enough to make the idea of retro-synth emulations sound like an abomination compared to sample libraries, so you'd think they'd be able to put some spin on this!


Please help this non-native speaker parse this sentence…. Genuine question!


----------



## digitallysane (Sep 13, 2021)

mscp said:


> I don't know much about the programming side of audio software development (at the time of this post), but limitation is still one of the reasons why I still have hardware synths / modular.


Since I got my MODX, my time spent with Falcon dropped dramatically 
Nothing wrong with Falcon (which can do way more than the MODX, overall... like IRCAM stretch stuff) and maybe is just the novelty factor, but I find that gadget more fun and easier to approach than a VSTi (and I can also use it as a VSTi if I want).


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 13, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Please help this non-native speaker parse this sentence…. Genuine question!


UVI have some publicity on their site saying how good their recreations of classic synthesisers are. This is, they say, because they are samples. So you get the original sounds, not a digital soft-synth that sounds a little bit like it. 
Many think this is less good than a soft-synth emulation, because it is a rompler and not a real (soft) synth. So this shows that they know how to emphasise the positive aspects of a feature that may look bad to some. 
I hope that's clearer! 
Shorter version 'canny' means smart, clever, skillful, insightful, intelligent.


----------



## mscp (Sep 13, 2021)

digitallysane said:


> Since I got my MODX, my time spent with Falcon dropped dramatically
> Nothing wrong with Falcon (which can do way more than the MODX, overall... like IRCAM stretch stuff) and maybe is just the novelty factor, but I find that gadget more fun and easier to approach than a VSTi (and I can also use it as a VSTi if I want).


For granular I use a particular synth, and some Eurorack modules. Unless my PT/Cubase sessions are pretty bare and have almost nothing going on (which is never the case), hefty falcon/omni patches can be more than just a pet peeve. I like Falcon though and wouldn't let go of it.


----------



## Lindon (Sep 14, 2021)

Piano Pete said:


> Figured it was worth a shot. I have actually been making the move into HISE for some private library stuff—unless Kontakt is a requirement. Being able to make a standalone vst has been fantastic.


Yes its a "different beast", to try and put it in context with the other platforms mentioned by mscp


mscp said:


> Vaguely.
> 
> Falcon is a synthesis/sampling workstation with pre-built modules. It also allows some scripting.
> 
> ...


and HISE is a development platform, not an end user product like the others here, that has the sampling capabilities of Kontakt, a set of synthesis capabilities(but not as wide as Falcon), the modular "wiring" capabilities of Reaktor (tho again not as deep), and a scripting language and API that outstrips them all as well as an optional built in very-low level DSP language to allow you to build from the c++ up if you want. Oh and you can build FX too...and obviously VSTs, AUs, AAX plugins , standalones on Mac Windows and iOS(tho I havent tried this last one myself).

If you are thinking about Falcon, here's why I moved away - Falcon uses LUA, and I have nothing against LUA, or any language really (well I'm a bit over KSP), but when a developer offers you a scripting interface the REALLY important thing is the programming interface they provide - what you can *do* with the language. Falcon's LUA is much under powered, if you have any experience with KSP or HISE then it will be very disappointing very quickly. Sure the Falcon engine is lovely, and extensible, and powerful, but if you are trying to build a realistic commercial product then these days there's a range of things you are going to have to provide, that as far as I can tell are not possible using Falcon's LUA interface. A simple instrument in Falcon is quite possible - I built and sell one, but DAW synced timing and engine manipulation as well as note manipulation are hard to do (if at all) to just name two things off the top of my head. That's not to say that Falcon's scripting interface is pointless, just its limited - and as others have said perhaps UVI dont really want to take on Kontakt or HISE in that way -so its fine, but for me, a person building (hopefully) sophisticated virtual instruments, its not a realistic option.


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 14, 2021)

Just to prepare myself for the future - what's the issue with tempo syncing? Falcon as a whole is temp synced, so I assumed that the effects, arp, etc. were all temp synced. I'm guessing it is something more sophisticated as it requires scripting.

Also, so any of you use a slave computer to run CPU heavy synths and platforms? Obviously not much good if you need to stay mobile, but I was perhaps naivey hoping to to do that to solve some of my issues. Again, in the future.

(Is it bad that I have three degrees but had to look up how to spell 'naively'? No humble-bragging here; just horrible spelling and an academic career.) (Edited twice due to mistyping 'tempo' twice.)


----------



## mscp (Sep 14, 2021)

Bee_Abney said:


> Also, so any of you use a slave computer to run CPU heavy synths and platforms? Obviously not much good if you need to stay mobile, but I was perhaps naivey hoping to to do that to solve some of my issues. Again, in the future.



Not me. I use one computer and a couple of powerful hardware synths. I used to have a slave computer, but I am not a fan of having to deal with multiple computers anymore. Now I load the essential in VEP, and run the rest on Cubase. When I'm low in RAM, I just freeze some of the instruments within Cubase.


----------



## Lindon (Sep 17, 2021)

Bee_Abney said:


> Just to prepare myself for the future - what's the issue with tempo syncing? Falcon as a whole is temp synced, so I assumed that the effects, arp, etc. were all temp synced. I'm guessing it is something more sophisticated as it requires scripting.
> 
> Also, so any of you use a slave computer to run CPU heavy synths and platforms? Obviously not much good if you need to stay mobile, but I was perhaps naivey hoping to to do that to solve some of my issues. Again, in the future.
> 
> (Is it bad that I have three degrees but had to look up how to spell 'naively'? No humble-bragging here; just horrible spelling and an academic career.) (Edited twice due to mistyping 'tempo' twice.)


OK so tempo-sync per-se is in Falcon, but lets say you build a drum machine, with a sequencer, and you want to let the user press play - but for the sequencer to wait until the first beat of the next bar to start - last time I looked(and I admit this was a while ago) - not possible in Falcon LUA...


----------



## Bee_Abney (Sep 17, 2021)

Lindon said:


> OK so tempo-sync per-se is in Falcon, but lets say you build a drum machine, with a sequencer, and you want to let the user press play - but for the sequencer to wait until the first beat of the next bar to start - last time I looked(and I admit this was a while ago) - not possible in Falcon LUA...


Great, I understand now. I don't know if that's possible in LUA yet, but I know what to look out for now.

I also still have two mistyped instances of 'tempo'. I must have been tired...


----------



## cmillar (Oct 7, 2021)

Bee_Abney said:


> I know that Simon Stockhausen is planning to do more individual instruments for Falcon. He seems very keen on it, but he isn’t working on it right now.


Just bought Falcon today, and the Stockhausen libraries sold me on it. (I've been using MachFive for many years, and have had my eye on Falcon for quite awhile).

I find Falcon is truly impressive and inspiring, and just having the Stockhausen sounds would be fine along with the factory content. But, there is so much that Falcon is capable of doing.

Falcon 2 is the 'best of' many different synths put together. Excellent!


----------



## whinecellar (Oct 20, 2021)

After hearing so many rave reviews and being impressed by quite a few demos, I grabbed it along with a few expansions on the recent sale. I haven’t gotten deep into it yet, but I have to be honest and say that most of the sounds I’ve heard so far really didn’t impress me much. So many are kind of bland and don’t give me a whole lot of “wow factor.”

I’m finding that with a lot of demos, it gets very frustrating because they sound stunning, but of course it’s impossible to know how much of what you are hearing is coming from just that particular library/expansion, how it was mixed/processed, etc. - so you grab that particular library or expansion only to be disappointed that the individual sounds aren’t particularly special.

From all the rave reviews, it was hyped to be on the level of Omnisphere, but on a purely sonic level, Omnisphere runs circles around what I’ve heard in Falcon so far, with a few exceptions.

I will say this though: Falcon certainly seems to have an advantage for a skilled sound designer. Just by digging a little bit into a few patches I liked, I could see vast potential. It has a staggering amount of power under the hood. So, maybe it’s just a matter of finding the right sounds/expansions. But IMO, my current crop of favorite synths just sound “expensive” and inspiring at every turn: Dune, Spire, Avenger, Omnisphere, etc.

Here’s hoping I just have to discover some consistent gems for Falcon, because it certainly seems capable!


----------



## Pier (Oct 20, 2021)

whinecellar said:


> From all the rave reviews, it was hyped to be on the level of Omnisphere, but on a purely sonic level, Omnisphere runs circles around what I’ve heard in Falcon so far, with a few exceptions.


What you're actually saying is that Omni has better presets/samples, right?


----------



## whinecellar (Oct 20, 2021)

Pier said:


> What you're actually saying is that Omni has better presets/samples, right?


You could possibly boil it down to that, which is of course a very subjective opinion on my part - but I think the rest of my post needs to be read for context. I was just really underwhelmed by the majority of what I’ve heard so far, especially when compared to the other plugins I mentioned. But that’s not to say it’s not capable…


----------



## Pier (Oct 20, 2021)

whinecellar said:


> You could possibly boil it down to that, which is of course a very subjective opinion on my part - but I think the rest of my post needs to be read for context. I was just really underwhelmed by the majority of what I’ve heard so far, especially when compared to the other plugins I mentioned. But that’s not to say it’s not capable…


I know what you mean. Honestly, I think everything UVI releases does sound _passé,_ in a way. Unlike Spectrasonics which has top notch sound designers.

That's not to say the tools themselves aren't good, but that UVI is more of a DSP software development company than a sound design one.

It's a shame UVI doesn't have more interest in working with third parties.


----------



## whinecellar (Oct 20, 2021)

Pier said:


> I know what you mean. Honestly, I think everything UVI releases does sound _passé,_ in a way. Unlike Spectrasonics which has top notch sound designers.
> 
> That's not to say the tools themselves aren't good, but that UVI is more of a DSP software development company than a sound design one.
> 
> It's a shame UVI doesn't have more interest in working with third parties.


Yeah, that's been my limited experience with them as well. Honestly the ratio of sounds that I'd really use with Falcon so far is pretty low, so unless I find some expansions that really floor me, I'll probably sell it. I'm just not hearing enough that's really impressing me so far...


----------



## Alchemedia (Oct 20, 2021)

whinecellar said:


> Yeah, that's been my limited experience with them as well. Honestly the ratio of sounds that I'd really use with Falcon so far is pretty low, so unless I find some expansions that really floor me, I'll probably sell it. I'm just not hearing enough that's really impressing me so far...


Those who buy Falcon primarily for preset surfing may be disappointed. It's hardly intuitive and you get 10X more presets with Omni or Arturia V collection. For sound design however Falcon is brilliant.


----------



## c_voltage (Oct 20, 2021)

Trancer said:


> I was wondering if buying Falcon made sense having Omnisphere / Serum / Phaseplant.
> 
> 
> Won't that duplicate?


Falcon has no ability to self-modulation of modulators (lfo1 > lfo1 phase etc) unfortunately, what you can do in Phaseplant as far i remember (in Arturia Pigments too, for example). This can give pretty complex interesting interaction tricks, different in the feel of the process and by result ,if compare to usual relation between modules.
(Due to this, it seems to me that comparing it with a modular design is also not exactly correct.) 

For buying Falcon definitely worth though (i did, and no regrets here, one of the best grain engine by sound in certain config), but some great modulation sucker can catch little bummer.


----------



## Alchemedia (Oct 20, 2021)

c_voltage said:


> For buying Falcon definitely worth though (i did, and no regrets here, one of the best grain engine by sound in certain config), but some great modulation sucker can catch little bummer.


Crusher-X is the one to beat for pure granular. HALion's granular engine is somewhat more flexible than Falcon's.


----------



## md11 (Oct 20, 2021)

Alchemedia said:


> Those who buy Falcon primarily for preset surfing may be disappointed. It's hardly intuitive and you get 10X more presets with Omni or Arturia V collection. For sound design however Falcon is brilliant.


agreed! don't care for the presets too much. however throwing my own samples, found sounds and what not into the keygroups and then start tweaking away is great fun!


----------



## c_voltage (Oct 21, 2021)

Alchemedia said:


> Crusher-X is the one to beat for pure granular. HALion's granular engine is somewhat more flexible than Falcon's.


Yes, but i rather meant certain method - spraying (or smear) of grains, that quite popular task among such type devices though, but it seemed to me that Falcon's (or his Ircams) does this somehow more special \ beautifully, compare to many other engines which i been check time by time at similar purpose. 
Although, a number of years have passed since then, but this feeling remained with me, perhaps a subjective thing (or that difference would seem insignificant to another user). Will not claim, but i should was express this. 

CrusherX in my opinion very suitable for experimenting with "clean scanning", perhaps can say he is the best for this method. Not to mention his other very valuable side, this is all that what go beyond the usual use of granulars (either as fx or a sampler using, multichannel design, fun autotune generativity, multitonal instant droning, physical movement modulator etc).

However, a person who wants to make fun of the sound should have all this.


----------



## Russell Anderson (Oct 23, 2021)

Alchemedia said:


> Crusher-X is the one to beat for pure granular. HALion's granular engine is somewhat more flexible than Falcon's.


From what I understand HALion granular is simply Padshop ported into a HALion module, minus the spectral oscillator.


----------



## cedricm (Oct 23, 2021)

I'm just beginning to learn Falcon. I'm just amazed at the sound quality and regret having not purchased it sooner. Looking forward to mastering it.


----------



## New_Loops (Oct 24, 2021)

whinecellar said:


> After hearing so many rave reviews and being impressed by quite a few demos, I grabbed it along with a few expansions on the recent sale. I haven’t gotten deep into it yet, but I have to be honest and say that most of the sounds I’ve heard so far really didn’t impress me much. So many are kind of bland and don’t give me a whole lot of “wow factor.”
> 
> I’m finding that with a lot of demos, it gets very frustrating because they sound stunning, but of course it’s impossible to know how much of what you are hearing is coming from just that particular library/expansion, how it was mixed/processed, etc. - so you grab that particular library or expansion only to be disappointed that the individual sounds aren’t particularly special.
> 
> ...


I completely get what you are saying. Seems many here agree about the included presets. I am a sound designer by trade and spent all day making presets, demos, sound packs etc… so I don't really care about the included presets as I won't use them, I only make my own! I also own and use every synth you mentioned and a ton more. Falcon is an absolute beast, and in my opinion easily rivals Omnisphere, not for presets, but for workflow and options. Omni is great too, but I think people get it for the insane amount of sounds it comes with, for that fact I think they are a bit different. I would happily work with UVI on creating patches that make Falcon shine, but I am actually working on my own sound bank now.


----------



## New_Loops (Oct 24, 2021)

cedricm said:


> I'm just beginning to learn Falcon. I'm just amazed at the sound quality and regret having not purchased it sooner. Looking forward to mastering it.


Yes, the sound quality is impressive. I really like the distortion effects and the filters. Some of the best I've heard, in fact!


----------



## whinecellar (Oct 26, 2021)

New_Loops said:


> I completely get what you are saying. Seems many here agree about the included presets. I am a sound designer by trade and spent all day making presets, demos, sound packs etc… so I don't really care about the included presets as I won't use them, I only make my own! I also own and use every synth you mentioned and a ton more. Falcon is an absolute beast, and in my opinion easily rivals Omnisphere, not for presets, but for workflow and options. Omni is great too, but I think people get it for the insane amount of sounds it comes with, for that fact I think they are a bit different. I would happily work with UVI on creating patches that make Falcon shine, but I am actually working on my own sound bank now.


Yes, it certainly seems to be an engine worthy of deeper digging - but sound design is crucial for making that all-important first impression. I wish you nothing but success with your efforts!


----------



## Pier (Oct 26, 2021)

liquidlino said:


> What the falcon presets lack are bread and butter sounds. The presets are often designed to demo specific features. Reveal sound spire, has the most amazing presets out of the box, almost every one is ready to use in a track. So much so, that I've been reproducing several of its presets in Falcon as a way of learning Falcon and synthesis better.


I would love to hear some comparisons of those patches between Spire and Falcon!


----------



## Widowsky (Nov 3, 2021)

mscp said:


> Not me. I use one computer and a couple of powerful hardware synths. I used to have a slave computer, but I am not a fan of having to deal with multiple computers anymore. Now I load the essential in VEP, and run the rest on Cubase. When I'm low in RAM, I just freeze some of the instruments within Cubase.


Genuine question:

I never used VEP. I've been using Cubase since the Atari days. I loved its workflow. I find it awful now, especially with the new mixer and user interface that started with Cubase 7.

What does VEP bring, now that you don't have a second computer, and why don't you load everything in Cubase?


----------



## mscp (Nov 3, 2021)

Widowsky said:


> Genuine question:
> 
> I never used VEP. I've been using Cubase since the Atari days. I loved its workflow. I find it awful now, especially with the new mixer and user interface that started with Cubase 7.
> 
> What does VEP bring, now that you don't have a second computer, and why don't you load everything in Cubase?


Because Cubase doesn't handle my template well. Using VEP has made things much more stable.


----------

