Is omnisphere still king?

[pdxindy]

The fact you cannot add samples is a showstopper...

Huh? Man, there are a lot of showstopper synths out there then! Are Zebra, Sylenth1, Massive, Predator, Spire, FM8, etc. etc. all showstoppers too?

Those are all synths... Omnisphere is foremost a rompler and has a considerable cost and sample based structure... so yeah, for me it is a showstopper...

I'm happy with Alchemy...

No, this is again inaccurate. Nexus is a ROMpler. Omnisphere is a synthesizer that can either use sampled waveforms or DSP waveforms as oscillators.

Every synth I have or know of that features the use of samples lets users import them. Iris, Alchemy, Absynth, Diversion, Synthmaster, etc etc etc...

I do think it interesting to consider what people would pay for Omnisphere and how they would view it if you took away the 50 GB library. Take away the library, and I wouldn't put Omnisphere in the top ten best softsynths. Would people pay half the price - $250 - for just the synth part?

[A.M. Gold]

You're missing the point, but you're not in the minority in expecting Omnisphere to be "a ROMpler".

There's a reason the sample content is referred to as being "soundsources" and not referred to as instruments. I've never asked him directly but I have a strong gut feeling that Eric wanted a synthesizer that could tap into the best of what sampled waveforms and DSP sound sources could offer. I'm not at all seeing Omnisphere as essentially complete yet either, it's only at 1.5x.

They have already established many ways to shape sampled sounds, like very tweakable granular, waveshaping, tons of filters, unison, bit reduction, timbre shifting which shifts the samples up and down to achieve brighter or darker tones, highly editable envelopes, etc., all of which have extensive modulation options, plus effects.

Couple that with the fact that there are thousands of waveforms, particularly if you add the Moog expansion, and every patch can combine and blend the DSP oscillators with the sampled waves.

What you end up with is a true synthesizer that is built on a hybrid DSP/sample approach and goes from the ground up based on that.

One very cool thing is that you can go through the thousands of presets and if you find one with the basic design you like, you can easily change the soundsources and instantly change the fundamental sound while preserving the other design elements of the sound.

[aciddose]

No, this is again inaccurate. Nexus is a ROMpler. Omnisphere is a synthesizer that can either use sampled waveforms or DSP waveforms as oscillators.

Okay, I wrote a portion of the code for Nexus and I've seen 100% of the source code from mid 2010.

Nexus is not a "rompler" in the sense you seem to be using it. It uses both sample sources and a blit-based oscillator with several different waveforms. I wrote a new oscillator with many new waveforms during 2010, but I'm unsure whether it was ever backported to Nexus.

I wrote the filters for Nexus and am responsible for the "sat" control being there. These filters are identical to the filters in Xhip for 12db and 24db modes.

I also wrote the comb-filter for Nexus and the compressor and gate.

I could go on and on about technical details but the point is quite simple and short: Nexus is not a "rompler" in the sense you seem to be using it.

In other words, in this sense they're both identical.

[pdxindy]

You're missing the point, but you're not in the minority in expecting Omnisphere to be "a ROMpler".

Take away the 50 GB Library... so no samples at all (nor any sample import)... and I really doubt that Omnisphere would be a big seller at half price - $250.

Much of what people are buying is the sample library. Which makes it a Rompler. Some hardware Romplers also have sophisticated synthesis engines as well.

[BBFG#]

I don't really consider SOmni to be a rompler, except at its basic levels of layering which is quite like a rompler. At that level, it reminds me a lot of the old Proteus Fx (x2) but with rolandesque sampling style. It does become more of a VS once you dig into it deeper. It seems there are more users using it at the basic level of being a rompler though, which as someone said, says more about the people that use it more than the software. Still haven't heard or seen anything that I see as special about it though and the problem of it not being able to load your own means your tastes are always dictated by their choice of what they choose for you. That ultimately makes it closed and limited.

Much like the vexations of the deities in philosophical posits of premise.

[A.M. Gold]

No, this is again inaccurate. Nexus is a ROMpler. Omnisphere is a synthesizer that can either use sampled waveforms or DSP waveforms as oscillators.

Okay, I wrote a portion of the code for Nexus and I've seen 100% of the source code from mid 2010.

Nexus is not a "rompler" in the sense you seem to be using it. It uses both sample sources and a blit-based oscillator with several different waveforms. I wrote a new oscillator with many new waveforms during 2010, but I'm unsure whether it was ever backported to Nexus.

I wrote the filters for Nexus and am responsible for the "sat" control being there. These filters are identical to the filters in Xhip for 12db and 24db modes.

I also wrote the comb-filter for Nexus and the compressor and gate.

I could go on and on about technical details but the point is quite simple and short: Nexus is not a "rompler" in the sense you seem to be using it.

In other words, in this sense they're both identical.

Ok, well the truth is my dog isn't really in that fight. You know much better than I so maybe that shows my expectation bias about Nexus, since I don't own it and have only watched demo videos.

All I'm saying is that Omnisphere is meant for sound design and the spirit of it is more synth based than it is general content based like a broader ROMpler.

You can really go to town with designing around the included samples there that are acoustic or traditional electric instrument based (which is part of why I wish they would get to adding some missing basic elements like brass, a better piano, and various other things).

One very cool thing you can do with sampled elements is randomly modulate the timbre parameter, then apply a rhythmic trigger with the arp. What you get is an amazing effect that causes the sound to constantly vary and sound alive and organic rather than static.

They also included a deceptively simple sample start control. The reason this is so cool is that, unlike the attack in the ADSR, it doesn't ramp up the volume and fade into the sound, it just chops off the attack (or part of it) and triggers the sound after that, so you can effectively soften a a sample without fading into it.

[A.M. Gold]

You're missing the point, but you're not in the minority in expecting Omnisphere to be "a ROMpler".

Take away the 50 GB Library... so no samples at all (nor any sample import)... and I really doubt that Omnisphere would be a big seller at half price - $250.

Much of what people are buying is the sample library. Which makes it a Rompler. Some hardware Romplers also have sophisticated synthesis engines as well.

Whatever. I'm not going to chase both of our tails with this semantics argument. Call it what you want. That's twice in two posts you said "Take away the sample content" and I tried to explain to you why you were barking up the wrong tree with that reasoning.

[A.M. Gold]

I don't really consider SOmni to be a rompler, except at its basic levels of layering which is quite like a rompler. At that level, it reminds me a lot of the old Proteus Fx (x2) but with rolandesque sampling style. It does become more of a VS once you dig into it deeper. It seems there are more users using it at the basic level of being a rompler though, which as someone said, says more about the people that use it more than the software. Still haven't heard or seen anything that I see as special about it though and the problem of it not being able to load your own means your tastes are always dictated by their choice of what they choose for you. That ultimately makes it closed and limited.

Much like the vexations of the deities in philosophical posits of premise.

I agree many people buy it like a box full of magic sounds, only to find it is more like a messy alchemist's den full of esoteric stuff mixed together with more conventional stuff.

But that's just the presets and the rather cumbersome menu/tag/search aspect (which Eric says he's massively reworking for the next free update).

What's special about it is it was put together by smart and talented people, which is the same thing that's special about Alchemy and I guess Nexus. It's got its own strengths and isn't the same as those other two, though, so it's not at all redundant to own more than one.

For my own part, I have never sampled anything in my life so that isn't a big minus for me. Yes of course importing 3rd party things would be wonderful but that isn't likely to happen. The self-contained, closed architecture that Spectrasonics has always had is certainly not all that great for the end user in some ways but that is the business decision they made, for better or worse. Who knows, maybe they'll reconsider that at some point.

[A.M. Gold]

I really like Omnisphere buts its not the plug in I go to for bread and butter sounds. I go it for cool unique sounds that I do not have else where. For bread and butter stuff I use Kontakt and Sampletank depending on which one fits my need better.

I agree, but I think it can do a lot of basic synth duties. If it were literally my only soft-synth I would be ok.

But it does have a "sound" and no it doesn't sound like Zebra or Sylenth etc., etc.

It's a valuable tool but it's one product (that happens to be very expensive) so it's not an easy call as far as recommending it.

One thing I will say is this; if you do television or general film music and you already have great library content for most traditional instruments but are looking for a go-to for adding a wide variety of extra "spice" (and this could also apply to something eclectic like hip hop), I highly recommend it and in that context I don't think you'll be disappointed.

agreed. I think in some ways as good as it is Omnisphere is a bit overrated but it is very diverse. I think if u want better bang for your buck I think for $500 Komplete 9 is a better buy. If you can swing it you can get even more out of Ultimate if its all you have.

Yea, that's a different direction to go in but you certainly get more diversity if you get Komplete. Again, I would probably never tell someone starting out to buy Omnisphere unless a friend had it and they had already fallen in love with it. It's sort of like buying a pricey sports car vs. buying a minivan. It's a high quality product but it's not really what you want to go with to build your basic foundation.

[A.M. Gold]

First, to answer the question in the title: no, Omnisphere is not king, and it never was. Anything that suggested it was was based purely on hype.

But the bottom line is this argument about what to call it could go on forever, and completely depends on how you define synthesizer. It's not a wavetable synth so it doesn't work as fundamentally on building new sounds out of digitally stored wave content, but it does basically everything else possible above that level to rework the sample content and make it into a broader variety of sounds. I call that a sample based synthesizer (particularly since the DSP synth works in parallel with the sample based part of it so countless textures can emerge just by carefully blending the two).

As far as I'm concerned, ROMPler has usually been used as a pejorative term by people who don't like it (zerocrossing notwithstanding) and many if not most of those people don't own it.

I don't define ROMpler as anything that is sample based. To me a ROMpler is more the kind of baked in digital sample based instruments we used to use like Proteus, etc., etc.

If you insist on calling anything that uses samples as oscillator building blocks then I guess you'll call it a ROMpler, but if you are attacking it with that term then I'm not about to pat you on the back for somehow identifying some fatal weakness in it. If you are attacking it by calling it a ROMpler then my opinion is you don't really know what it's capable of.

[gassle]

Much of what people are buying is the sample library. Which makes it a Rompler. Some hardware Romplers also have sophisticated synthesis engines as well.

That's why they are called 'synthesizers'. Like D-50 and JD-800. Using high quality samples instead of simple waveform oscillators as source is one way of synthesis.

[aciddose]

This is an issue related to the common degeneration of language. In some cases it is due to use of language by those unaware of its true meaning where the meaning is then lost or converted into whatever they use it for, which may be completely unrelated.

I prefer to use more isolated definitions as often as possible and hate "pseudo-synonyms" although people often can't understand what I say as they are often unaware of those isolated meanings which are now considered obscure or "old-fashioned".

Get off my lawn, etc.

A proper term in this case if I can suggest one may be: "Preset-machine."

"Rompler" already has a definition: A sample synthesizer containing sampled content which can not be changed. Also applies if your rompler can sample, or have samples loaded. In which case it is a sampler-rompler or just sampler for short.

This hierarchical structure of language formed by use of strictly defined isolated lexemes is required in order for language to be both eloquent and precise. Without it, language becomes entirely subjective.

[Lotuzia]

If we try to anlyse the whole thing while also trying to remain neutral.
Omnisphere is tied to its sampled library, its true/
Then, this means that Spectrasonic people have created a certain number of sound source, or Oscillators. Sometimes heavily preprocessed, cleaned etc. For the record a friend of mine sampled a lot of analog synths to populate some of the slots. And they have done so in a brulliant way ( imo ) Its a lot of work, and we might see it as an integral, and intimate, part of the synthesizer, that probably could not be dissociated from it.
Then it has a lot of other hybrid synthesis tools. This is also true. And these tools, oscillators, filters, modulations, enveloppe, LFOs, effects make it as enjoyable to create instruments that many other synthesizers that people would identify as "pure synths" at first sight ( and they would be right )

At the end of the day, when programming Omnisphere, you have tons of different sound sources, and enough tools to create your own instruments. Yes its limited in the sound source department compared to something like Kontakt, wich also in pure semantics wont be called a sampler -omg it CAN'T sample !-, but its definitely enough to create thousands of different, beautiful and usefull presets. It also has its own character, and the included sample library should be considered as a richness, and tbh something you cant have access to in any other synthesizer, whatever the category name you give to this synthesizer ( Rompler, Sampler, *pure synth*, etc )

Nice synthesizer it is. Really enjoyable to play with, fun to program, with a lot of hidden tweaking possibilities, wich can give birth to really expressive presets. (this last part is imho only, ymmv)

My 0.002

[aciddose]

I think this would make omnisphere a synthesizer-sampler-rompler, nexus a synthesizer-sampler-rompler-preset-machine. You could add a whole lot of extra information there too like effects-processor or parametrized or modulatable. If you're going to leave anything out you need to subjectively determine what is more or less important.

So the issue here is in fact then one of semantics where I would argue "synthesizer" is the overriding word.

As far as using "rompler" to indicate anything other than samples that can not be changed, you need to discard part of the existing definition to make the word more generic. In other words you're expanding its lexeme to carry multiple meanings. Adding subjectivity is bad if we actually care to understand each other.

An example of this is indeed the word "sampler" which carried two meanings since the beginning of its use. Both as a noun for the act of sampling (a word for analog-to-digital-convertor) and playing back those samples.

If we were to discard "samples", we'd need to use a term like sample-rompler for the existing meaning which is cumbersome. All we've accomplished is to move things around from preset-machine to sample-rompler. At the same time we've chosen to convey different information using the existing term which will be confusing.

Since preset-machine already exists also, this is no improvement at all! The only improvement would require inventing a new word to carry the meaning of "preset-machine".

I propose the new word: "Limmy", as you are limited to presets.

[whyterabbyt]

I propose the new word: "Limmy", as you are limited to presets.

Omnisphere doesnt limit you to its presets, though.