I adore my Super6 and still think I have unlimited possibilities with it.
The only real problem for me at present - the tricky way to store patches and use them on the fly.
And if I also once have a vst3 plugin just to make simple automation in Bitwig - oh my… )) Even afraid to imagine how high I could fly.
Easy one for me: add a screen looking like the Modal 002 one in the upper left corner of the Super Gemini.
This empty space is made for that
Complete the Midi implementation by adding sysex commands to address the edit buffer and provide NRPN to address each modulation slot parameter (source, destination and amount).
What about my editor? https://www.sunnysynths.com/udo-super-6
Waiting for a meeting with George since before summer to get answers to a few questions on the patch file so I can complete the Save function (all coded, just a few confirmations needed).
Promised for after the release of FW 1.0 of the Super 6 so waiting with patience…
As Tvaroh said, working editor for S6 and update the firmware asap.
Over the next year product development could look at the possibility of adding a couple of additional voices to the S6 and the ability to split the keyboard , this may / will require a optional user installable upgrade plug board. Whilst thinking of hardware upgrades It would nice if we had the option of installing a basic reverb within the effects section .
In short no new products till the existing ones are all they can be .
Good thing is that not only would it buy UDO time to really access the market direction but would also provide a new revenue stream as people purchase the upgrade boards - this approach should also aid marketing as the synths could be seen as not just a flash in the pan but a real long term investment which can grow with the user .
I guess there’s nothing majorly wrong with your editor, apart from a few bugs here and there and not having the patch files so you can implement the ‘Save’ function but it has been a long, long time since that has been addressed and that’s not your fault as you are dependant on UDO for the info.
In the future, if UDO releases more firmware and that happens to change major structures within the UDO ecosystem, we are potentially left waiting, again, for things to be fixed within your Editor and that’s not your fault. So what I’m trying to say is, it would be more efficient for customers to have a dedicated UDO library from the company itself so at least you know if there are any changes after an update, there would be changes to the software also. (you’d like to think anyway)
I understand. Indeed, at this stage, I can only react on changes that I’m discovering at the same time as all users. I wish I would know things in advance to be prepared and release just after the UDO release but this is not the case.
The issue with UDO is not the willingness. They are all very nice guys and happy to provide info.
It is the team size and lack of time. We must just be patient and things will happen.
But, you mention “apart from a few bugs here and there”. Can you please provide me with detailed feedback so I can correct?
As I’m saying in my daily work: “No input is not output”
I have already a v1.5 ready as I inverted the display of the fixed mod matrix so I can make other corrections if you indicate me what they are (maybe in the Editor thread or directly by email). Thx!
Yes, if I can replace the keybed by myself easily and the cost is less than 300…400Euro.
If the cost would be higher (more than 500Euro) and I would have to send it to a repairshop (Thomann, UDO…), I would think three times if it is worth the money.
I agree with continuing to support your existing models, of course, seeing as how they are already classics and most of us are in it for the long run…
Maybe some day you could open source your firmware and then we could hack the FPGAs and stuff, that would be amazing (far beyond my ability at the moment, only just starting to think of having a tinker with some Arduino, but still it would be super cool).
I have no idea what you’ll do next but I’m sure it’ll be great. I really like the sound of complex oscillators and waveguides, personally, and it could be interesting to do something that sacrifices some polish and immediacy in return for places we didn’t know it could go - but that might be too big a departure.
I like the idea of something more percussive, too. (And would be well happy with more desktop stuff.)
I agree with some others that some sort of Super 6 mk2 could be wise. Not a lot of synths warrant a second version. The S6 might. Trim a little fat, change some unusual hardware (audio in does what now?), enhance strengths → cement legacy. I don’t own a Super 6 … but I would probably buy a mk2. In addition, I’ve noticed some around here are a bit restless regarding future firmware support. Continuing to move in the same direction product-wise could potentially turn that from a problem into an opportunity.
Another option includes a sequencer / groovebox. This could work, but it seems risky. You’d be throwing in with some stiff competition. If it had sampling and FPGA / ultra high-fi processing / playback … well, that might make some waves as well as play to the strengths of UDO.
But for goodness’ sake do not make a monosynth.
Also wavetables are cool. If I were the CEO of UDO and I had to decide in the next five minutes which direction to go in (and I couldn’t choose to pursue super 6 mk2), I would make a small (think microkorg) entirely digital wavetable synth that makes heavy use of the FPGA selling point and is built like a tank.
The 50MHz or whatever it is sample rate really does seem to sound better. UDO has an ace up their sleeve with respect to the competition and it’d be a shame if they didn’t use it.
Drum Machine! A UDO take on machinedrum / tempest vibes would be an amazing thing.
But also a retrofit polyat keybed for the s6 would be pretty wonderful, i love mine so very much but the extra expressiveness would sit very well with it.
I can and it would look like my Prologue editor where I succeeded to put most commands of both layers on the main panel.
The issue is that I have now a probably 95% understanding of the S6 patch file content (not an usual one, I can tell you) but 0% info about the SG patch file.
I would need to get the basic info on the SG patch file from George then some user going deeper and confirming the parameters positions.
Conclusion: with a good complete documentation, this is possible without any problem.