Firstly a better test might be to remove the silly LFO creating the warble. Also set the sub osc to off and put the whole thing down an octave.

Now when you do this yes I do detect a very slight difference. I feel the bottom end is nicer in 3.3.1 though. The reason is that they may have actually changed or improved Mojito in some very subtle way and maybe not told us about it.

It is still not significant though. I have been using V2 for a long time and now that I have switched to V3 I feel there is no difference in sound really at all. If anything it might be slightly better. They are not going backwards in sound, only forward.

Jemusic wroteFirstly a better test might be to remove the silly LFO creating the warble. Also set the sub osc to off and put the whole thing down an octave.

Sorry, but if i do it, then this test will not make any sense.
I was not able to get the same sound (yes, I just like how it sounds in v2), and it would be interesting to know the real reason.
In the end, it's not just about the sound, but even the usual project compatibility, where there is no concept of "a little bit different", otherwise, it should be explained technically.

The PreSonus "Gain" effects (Compression, possibly the Fat Channel, Pro EQ, etc.) changed in their algorithm or whatever magic makes them work in version 3 from version 2.

It was well cited in the release notice back when version 3 came out.

Haven't you noticed the pop-up asking if you're sure you want to save a version 2 song which is opened in version 3?

I'm sure it's searchable to find all effected plugins... I think there was even a list that spec'd how much dB was changed.

scottyo7 wroteThe PreSonus "Gain" effects (Compression, possibly the Fat Channel, Pro EQ, etc.) changed in their algorithm or whatever magic makes them work in version 3 from version 2.

It was well cited in the release notice back when version 3 came out.

Haven't you noticed the pop-up asking if you're sure you want to save a version 2 song which is opened in version 3?

I'm sure it's searchable to find all effected plugins... I think there was even a list that spec'd how much dB was changed.

scottyo7 for this reason I attached the project. You see there are any active effects? (during it open in v3)
Sorry, I'm not being sarcastic, I really have only recently started to use v3 and can miss something .

Interesting, even without changing any of the settings for Mojito I actually prefer it in V3 in my studio anyway.

Hmm,
I didn't see any attached project, only wav files.
No matter, I like it in V3 best also.
The audio engine was also tweaked in V3 and most favor it over V2.

In the end, you have to do what you think sounds best... our opinions are subject to our own.
If you like V2 best then that is totally fine.

Many people prefer Windows 7 over Windows 10 and that's OK (and best) too.
New isn't always better... or for everyone.

Peace,

scottyo7 wroteHmm,
I didn't see any attached project, only wav files.

Hi, i'm here.
Strange, well maybe forum blocked some attached content (although i see mojito test.song in attach in my first post properly), ok i attach song file again in zip archive, tell me if you still not see it.

File:

Your Mojito setting sounds different in v3 compared to v2 here too (the LFO seem to alter the sound differently).
Why? I don't know! But apart from the GUI, there apparently was also something changed under the hood.

I must noticed - the settings of Mojito (in attached project) are displayed absolutely the same values of his all parameters when open in both versions, but sound different.

Else, I would probably did not create this topic, if the sound different for the better, but it became worse. And I just want to understand what has changed in the tool. The difference is not so much in the lfo character, how in the decrease of the sub-bass (in sub osc).

Another example.
In this case i make simple Mojito setting (similar to default), but set Sub Osc to maximum. In general, the reason of difference exactly in sub osc sound it seems. In v3 its just sometin like as thin saw waveform (for what ?), while in v2 it really good subbass timbre.

Files:




(Now, I think I said everything that I wanted on this topic.)

I have downloaded the latest test and will be happy to have another listen.

I assume you created this in V2. Just out of interest when I load the V2 song into V3 I dont get the warning anymore about it being a V2 song and if you save over it from V3 you wont be able to load it back into V2 anymore.

Is there any reason for this. Have they dropped that now? Just curious.

OK here is what I have found and this is an interesting comparison. Firstly I have several computers in my studio and I can run the same song on two machines one with V2 booted up and the other with V3 booted up. I can play both at the same time and switch between them. This is actually important because too much time is lost in between otherwise.

They don't sound the same and yes the V2 song is a little fatter. But the actual sound of both Mojito synths is not exactly the same either. On V2 the higher notes don't open up the filter quite as much as they do on V3. On V3 the high notes are opening the filter a little more.

But that is not the issue. The Sub OSC is louder in the V2 version and it is a little softer in V3. Hence the reason why V2 sounds a little deeper.

But because the Sub OSC is up full and you cannot seem to turn down the normal OSC in relation to the Sub OSC so you cannot match these balances.

But what I did was turn the Sub Osc off in both cases and transpose both parts down an octave. I also closed the filter right down too in both cases to stop being distracted by the top end. This also allows you to hear the bottom end more easily as well. I also had to fiddle the V3 sound a little to get it to match perfectly with the V2 sound. Now I am hearing both sounding very identical in fact I would go so far as to say that V3 is now a little fatter. I am hearing more bottom end coming from V3 when I do this.

So they have definitely done something to Mojito in V3 that is for sure. I agree though that you should be able to use the Sub OSC and put the riff into a higher octave if you want but when you do this in V3 the Sub OSC cannot be made the same level as it is in V2 so yes I agree there is a difference.

But not when you do what I did though and turn the Sub OSC off. V3 sounds fatter to me. I had to tweak the keyboard tracking in V3 in order to get it match v2 as well. To stop the filter from opening up more on the high notes.

But thanks for bringing this up. It does show they have made some subtle changes to Mojito that is for sure and they have not really told us about them either.

I have got the Arturia Mini Moog by the way and when you set up a bass sound like this it blows Mojito right out of the water. Floor shaking comes to mind. I would not even use Mojito in a case like this because I have got about 5 analog synths that are about a million times better and fatter.

Hi Jem, sorry, honestly to say, I don't know why might be prompted to save or not, probably could have various reasons, honestly I did not attached importance to this.
But it is obvious that the project saved in the newest version will be opened incorrectly in older, it is normal practice.

What for the theme topic, again, as I understand, in the latest version perhaps by mistake instead of the sub-osc generator was did\insert something other, and it is well heard.

(EDIT oh till I wrote you already answered yourself)

Jemusic wrote It does show they have made some subtle changes to Mojito that.

But this is not subtle changes. This is completely different sound in sub-osc. I.e. I would say, in this state, he is not "sub" at all.

(I changed the name of the topic, in accordance with the problem)

I am still hearing the sub osc as the same sound in both cases but in V2 it is just louder to me that is all. (when the sub osc volume is up full in both cases) I dont think you can turn the main osc off and only expose the sub osc though which makes this a little harder.

Jemusic wroteI am still hearing the sub osc as the same sound in both cases but in V2 it is just louder to me that is all.

I insist on the fact that it has a very different sound, it is a completely different waveform\timbre.
Well ok, let's not argue. Let everyone believes to what he hears. )

Of course, there is no way to remain active only sub oscillator, it would be quite clear.

anatolyjbugaichuk wrote

Jemusic wroteI am still hearing the sub osc as the same sound in both cases but in V2 it is just louder to me that is all.

I insist on the fact that it has a very different sound, it is a completely different waveform\timbre.
Well ok, let's not argue. Let everyone believes to what he hears. )

Of course, there is no way to remain active only sub oscillator, it would be quite clear.

You may be right but just be careful about the filter though. What I noticed was the filter settings are different and hence the sound could be also, but yes it would be nice to be able to expose the sub osc on its own to really find out what is going on there.

Jemusic wrote

anatolyjbugaichuk wrote

Jemusic wroteI am still hearing the sub osc as the same sound in both cases but in V2 it is just louder to me that is all.

I insist on the fact that it has a very different sound, it is a completely different waveform\timbre.
Well ok, let's not argue. Let everyone believes to what he hears. )

Of course, there is no way to remain active only sub oscillator, it would be quite clear.

You may be right but just be careful about the filter though. What I noticed was the filter settings are different and hence the sound could be also, but yes it would be nice to be able to expose the sub osc on its own to really find out what is going on there.

Well, i think filter in this case not important, in second attached example its fully open, you can open it fully also in first example, the situation will the same.

Well Ok, i probably will make another (last ) example, in which I will try as much as possible to express the character of exactly sub osc (of both versions). But tomorrow, because need have to go to bed because need will go to work.

(although I already have the impression that it is generally necessary for nobody)