July 15, 2024, 06:24:41 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register

Arturia Forums

Author Topic: What's the most versatile V Collection 5 subtractive synthesizer?  (Read 1797 times)


  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 242
  • Karma: 6
Hello everyone,

So, in V Collection 5 I have only really delved with any real depth into the Prophet V and Modular V.

I really really love the Modular V but I am starting to feel despondent about how many BUGS it has. People have been requesting an LFO trigger for years. Amplitude Modulation still has distortion/aliasing on audio signals. And the list could go on.

I really like the Modular V's interface but at this point I really need function more than I need form. I haven't dug very deeply into the CS-80 V or the Matrix-12 V, are these VSTs able to do everything the Modular V can do but with at least an LFO Trigger as well?

If not, I mean, I'm not going to wait another year for Arturia to maybe fix and improve the Modular V, I'm probably going to have to find another VST to have as my main modular/sound design/subtractive synthesizer VST.


  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 336
  • Karma: 13
Re: What's the most versatile V Collection 5 subtractive synthesizer?
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2016, 10:07:10 pm »
I've been using the 2600, Matrix, CS80 and Modular, SEM
Out of all of them, for subtractive...Modular in my opinion, is the most versatile, and has the most variation in basic audio characteristics, followed by 2600, then SEM.
The CS80 is a beast unto its own, quite different, and at first a bit difficult to predict what's going to happen, but has some great features. However at the moment there's something wrong with it and you cannot turn off the high pass filter. V2 is fine,it all works ok, but V3 is quite hobbled in that regard. Intense low pass filter sweeps will also move the hi pass cutoff even if you don't want that. Envelopes are not as snappy or intense as other Arturia apps. {EDIT UPDATE} The filter switches have been added Thanks Be to Arturia!.

Matrix looked so promising to me, and it's great with heaps of different modulation but for me it does not sound as snappy or responsive as Modular. It sounds kind of 'softer', 'mushier' compared to Modular. The envelopes don't sound as snappy or as fast as Modular, or 2600. It has some issues when both osc's are perfectly in tune - there's some inconsistent phase thing going on that makes each voice sound different.  However, Matrix has the layering of patches, as does CS80. Modular, or 2600 doesn't do that so conveniently.

2600 is interesting, more raw, more organic sounding, though you can't pick and choose as many modulation sources and destinations as you can with Modular. You might find that more interesting to fiddle with. There are some sections ( the right hand side with reverb/outputs) that I still don't understand. I kind of like that it's still a challenge!

SEM is a lot simpler, not as many mod sources, but it's more a classic subtractive analog type synth, and way easy to get workhorse type sounds quickly.

Out of all, if I were to be limited to only two, Modular hands down and then maybe SEM OR 2600. I still mess with Modular and find things I haven't heard before. yes, it has some bugs, Arturia software has heaps of things wrong with it and their development / qa process is so slack, but I still love their synths to bits.

PS I have not tried JP8 at all, nor Prophet, so I'm not fully across all of them.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2016, 12:03:09 am by jeffbart »
cubase 9.0.40
the amazing Modartt Pianoteq
Arturia things
tc electronic konnekt 24d


Carbonate design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.17 | SMF © 2019, Simple Machines