Is it possible with SynthMaker? (Serialnumber, Dyn. Objects)
Archive · 200912 old posts
From the original SynthMaker forum (2004–2014), with its members’ names and dates.
marioranieri ·
Hello. I am new to the SynthMaker community and I want to program nice VST synths in the future. But before I start I have the following two important questions:
1) Is it possible to make synths with SERIAL NUMBER activation control? I want to do commerical projects in the future and my synth has to be copy-protected. (I know there is a way to make a test-version of a synth with white noise in it, but that's not the point.) So is it possible to make them safe like e.g. Native Instruments Synths?!?
2) Is it possible to make "dynamic object"-functions in a synth? For example if i have an OSC with a filter: The user can press an ADD button to add more instances of this readymade OSC with a filter integrated?!? So that i don't have an 3xOSC in my synth - i want to have unlimited OSCs in my synth which the user can add more and more, like he want... Also more LFOs and stuff like that .. and i want that the user can connect the LFO to any CV he wants... e.g. LFO1 controls Cutoff and Resonance, LFO2 controls Pitch, etc etc etc... (Little bit like Native Instruments Massive etc)
(It's a little bit like that that i want to program a VST-synth with SynthMaker which is a little bit flexible and rewireable like the SynthMaker itself 🙂 The connections should not be fixed, the user has possibility to change the "cables")
Hope you understand my questions +g+ 😊
bootsy ·
(1) is possible
(2) is possible in the way that you can internally set up an arbitrary fixed number of modules (OSCs) which are de-activated by default and gets activated by user. It's not straight dynamically instantiated as in object oriented languages.
marioranieri ·
Okay, final question: HOW? 😍
(Kannst auch auf Deutsch schreiben *g*)
oddson ·
I would say
1) no prebuilt solution but you may be able to work something out
2) not possible -- you can have an arbitrarily large number of components pre-built and then activiate them but you cannot dynamically build them on the fly.
See these... there are others too.
dynamic (un)loading of components/modules
[old link]
Instancing modules at runtime
Rockhouse ·
If you buy Setup Factory which is a program to create a install for your VST. I have the program and yes you can put a serial number in using that program. If you want to more info then go to http://www.indigorose.com/products/setup-factory/ I hope this will help youThanks
mayo ·
Rockhouse wrote: If you buy Setup Factory which is a program to create a install for your VST. I have the program and yes you can put a serial number in using that program. If you want to more info then go to http://www.indigorose.com/products/setup-factory/ I hope this will help youThanks
But after you enter a valid serial number during installation, you'll get .dll of the VST without any protection, right?
MichaelBenjamin ·
1.) its possible to make up some serial stuff or invent other castration methods for your software, but it will be futile and wont be safe.
2.) SM is not very good for monster modular synths. at some point of modulation complexity sm becomes a bit clunky, fine for personal use but hard bzw next to impossible to get smooth for the commercial standards.
the much more interesting approach for synths built with sm is to think of the software like its a modular synth already, with excellent indepth control where you can build your modules from scratch and connect them to a modular setup and finally freeze this as a patch to be released as an individual small and specialized synth.
Acrobat ·
MichaelBenjamin wrote: the much more interesting approach for synths built with sm is to think of the software like its a modular synth already, with excellent indepth control where you can build your modules from scratch and connect them to a modular setup and finally freeze this as a patch to be released as an individual small and specialized synth.
subscribed! 🙂
Jay ·
Yes indeed! i to agree with
MichaelBenjamin wrote: the much more interesting approach for synths built with sm is to think of the software like its a modular synth already, with excellent indepth control where you can build your modules from scratch and connect them to a modular setup and finally freeze this as a patch to be released as an individual small and specialized synth.
Most ppl nowadays want small cpu lite tools specific to the task or sound they wish to achieve! i believe that the days of "one synth does all" and massive modular s are pretty much over!
I myself am far more impressed when presented with a synth that can produce decent sound,have stability and low cpu usage and a good clear layout rather than "hey this synth has 20 types of synthesis, 2000 sounds,a drum machine and a built in effects rack"
for a personal use synth i suppose its fine to have lots of sounds and features to play with but in the professional environment like a studio you simply don't have the time to use them all, you want A specific tools that allow you to achieve the required sound quickly!
Best Regards
trogluddite ·
I've always thought that there is kind of a limit to how much complexity in a patch you can actually percieve when listening anyway - so much sublety is masked anyway once you start multitracking sounds and you take into account the crappy acoustics of most people's listening environments. The ultimate irony is to then distribute the resulting music as mp3 etc. - which use perceptual encoding to remove most of the tiny subtleties that you worked so hard to put in there!
I've always had the sneaking suspicion that 'just press one key' wonder-patches are just an excuse not to bother putting any effort into programming (or better still playing) notes and rhythms - booting up half a dozen different monosynths and actually writing a tune with them is far more satisfying. Just adding more of everything does little to make a synth sound more unique - I don't even use SM for synths any more - I've got a plugin folder full of the damn things, and I don't use half of those. New ways of interacting with the sound through the GUI are the way to go to really stand out IMHO.
Twisted_Chrylle ·
Setup Factory 8.2 = $395
isnt there a cheaper alternative for a exe + serial packer/maker?
Andrew J ·
Twisted_Chrylle wrote: Setup Factory 8.2 = $395
isnt there a cheaper alternative for a exe + serial packer/maker?
http://www.advancedinstaller.com/
Wrote something here? To have a post removed or your name hidden, write to [email protected].
SynthMaker