Cube 2 vs. C5000

I've had Chameleon 5000 for at least a year. I have always been a fan of additive synthesis. (My first real synthesizer was a DKI Synergy with the VRAM option ... the Synergy was the first commercial additive synthesizer.) I had hopes that, with its "morphing" capabilties between four parts, it could replace my wavestation. I was excited about C5000, and impressed by its cleverness, but after spending a year with it, my enthusiasm has waned, for the following reasons:

1) C5000 is essentially a monophonic instrument. There is no facility for either static or dynamic panning. So, it has not replaced my wavestation. It has a control for adding a simulated stereo effect to a program, but the synthesized stereo effect has nothing to do with panning.

2) C5000 allows saving of some individual parts of a program, but not others. (Excuse me, but I don't have C5000 in front of me right now, and I can't remember the specifics.)

3) C5000 just doesn't sound that good. It sounds very compressed and is lacking at frequency extremes. It has a kind of nasal quality overall. Most of the canned programs make liberal use of its included workmanlike effects to cover over this.

I have posted my comments about panning and saving on the forum on kvraudio.com and have been politely thanked for my input.

So, I'm considering switching to Virsyn Cube 2. It appears to offer more partials (which , theoretically should sound better), and provides the static and dynamic panning capabilities per part which are very important to me. It bothers me to abandon a true innovative product for that of an imitator, which in this case may have surpassed the original.

Does anyone know how Cube 2 sounds, relative to C5000?

Does anyone know what copy protection Cube 2 employs?

thanks

Keith