KVR Audio

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:17 am

No, but nexus does, which is what his argument was about regarding his use of the term "rompler".

Although "limmy" might be a bad choice. Not only do I absolutely hate it, but it also carries a meaning which is far too abstract. What about a modulatable-limmy? It turns out this whole language business is pretty darn difficult and landing anywhere valid between concrete and abstract is really hard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp6gaB-YmVA

ariston · Post by **ariston** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:31 am

Language is, and has always been, a blunt tool with which to describe reality. People are emotional. They use language in a way that might be imprecise when seen from the POV of a definition, but that is completely accurate from an emotional, personal POV.

Basically, I'm saying it's pretty futile to argue over words and the usage of words. But it's always fun to watch people try.

When someone in these here parts says "ROMpler", the emotional meaning is usually that it's a load-n-play sound machine that's not meant for tweak-heads (and thus, worthy of complete and utter disdain from the "it's not a good sound unless it's YOUR sound" crowd).

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:39 am

ariston wrote:When someone in these here parts says "ROMpler", the emotional meaning is usually that it's a load-n-play sound machine that's not meant for tweak-heads (and thus, worthy of complete and utter disdain from the "it's not a good sound unless it's YOUR sound" crowd).

This is all in the last decade and a bit as before the "music software revolution" very few of these people would have been concerned with plugins and whether they had fixed presets while containing an otherwise fully adjustable synthesizer.

The key here is in the "pler" suffix. This is not just any suffix, but taken from "sample synthesizer which contains samples in rom". Instead of saying ROM-sample-synthesizer all these meanings were condensed into one word with an emphasis on ROM, chopping off another word and applying it as a wholly new suffix as if ROM were the body.

It helped it along a lot that "pler" sounds like "player". ROM-player.

So yes, it carries both connotations however the primary one is "sample", not ROM-player. Otherwise we'd use the term ROMplar.

Okay, I suggest "ROMplar".

ariston · Post by **ariston** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 12:08 pm

Oh, and I always thought the word derived from "romp", as in "wasn't that a delightful romp yesterday evening?". The "ler" is then added like with, er, the Dude, for example, who as we know can be called Dudester, or El Duderino. Presto: The Romp-ler!

Sorry, I'll get my coat.

osiris · Post by **osiris** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 1:39 pm

Say what you will, but the fx , arp, Stepped LFO's and Harmonium )plus the Orb) is one of the most advanced out there - still.
I had Nexus, and it's a good synth but after a while it sounds like the same saw sound. The big thing is the superb Arts Acoustic Reverb built in which I think accounts for more than half the cost of it..

jeffb01 · Post by **jeffb01** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 1:47 pm

One thing I'll say is that I've been impressed with how camel has released all these cool sound packs for alchemy that are presets AND cool sound sources (does anyone refer to alchemy as a romper?). I thought spectrasonics would do the same - especially having a closed system - not that I've exhausted all the sound sources?

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:04 pm

BBFG# wrote:Oddly enough (or maybe it's really more like coincidence), Omnisphere (and now Trillion, since I got to hear it at NAMM also); their sounds are so much like the Roland to me, it almost turns me off. I know few would agree with me here, but playing Omnisph really brings out my appreciation of Alchemy more.

you know I think this encapsulates why I love Omnisphere and like Alchemy.
It's always a personal taste.
In the hardware days Roland's were by far and away (well not including Oberheim's) my favourite sounding hardwares in general and the Yamaha DX-7 and Kurzweil were some of my least favourite..... Alchemy reminds me of the Kurzweil sound.......not what I consider fat juicy and warm, but more transparent......vanilla almost.

And I am not saying there is anything wrong with your taste, we just have different tastes. If you didn't like the sound of Roland I totally get why you wouldn't like omnisphere but would alchemy.
rsp

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 2:22 pm

and to 'help' omnisphere's rep as a rompler:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rompler

rsp

jeffb01 · Post by **jeffb01** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:08 pm

zvenx wrote:and to 'help' omnisphere's rep as a rompler:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rompler

rsp

just to clarify - you're say it's not a rompler because omnisphere generates original waveforms?

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:15 pm

imho yes......
rsp

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:17 pm

I would find it hard to believe that (even though I don't' need it) all this 'quiet' time Spectrasonics is not indeed working to make Omnisphere be able to import one's own samples.......

but I am sure there will be other things to complain about even if they do that.
rsp

BBFG# · Post by **BBFG#** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 4:46 pm

zvenx wrote:
BBFG# wrote:Oddly enough (or maybe it's really more like coincidence), Omnisphere (and now Trillion, since I got to hear it at NAMM also); their sounds are so much like the Roland to me, it almost turns me off. I know few would agree with me here, but playing Omnisph really brings out my appreciation of Alchemy more.
you know I think this encapsulates why I love Omnisphere and like Alchemy.
It's always a personal taste.
In the hardware days Roland's were by far and away (well not including Oberheim's) my favourite sounding hardwares in general and the Yamaha DX-7 and Kurzweil were some of my least favourite..... Alchemy reminds me of the Kurzweil sound.......not what I consider fat juicy and warm, but more transparent......vanilla almost.

And I am not saying there is anything wrong with your taste, we just have different tastes. If you didn't like the sound of Roland I totally get why you wouldn't like omnisphere but would alchemy.
rsp

Wow, to me, Alchemy is nothing like Kurzweil. Thank goodness! Kurzweil sounds cheesy to me overall. Omni sounds thin (it's suppose to be more transparent that way. Even when using it in the rompler page of simple layering, eight layers of thin doesn't really make it thicker. It reminds me somewhat of the LuSH-101 in that regard. I think you can do some more interesting stuff than the presets when you get into the modulation routing of Omni. But Alchemy has far more mpwer with a single sample for me. And that has to do with those who are doint the samples, which can be anyone with their different ways of going about it as opposed to Spectra's "only our way of doing things" is what we deem best for you. (After all, they want you dependent on only them.) Nothing is actually wrong with that when you consider a basic VA only gives you a few forms of sines and even basic wavetables give you around 100-300. Omni is what it is, and unapologetically so.
So it does come down to sound and taste. I liked the sound of Rolands until I hit that wall of realizing their samples were always truncated and compressed and still thin without further processing. Some of the Roland effects are great, some, not so much. The only Roland I have and like now is the one using Elastic Audio, which seems to break it out of itself more than their other products.
Omni can sound layered without being muddy, but still ends up not blending as well as I would like it to. For me, in so many ways of customizing and overall sound, Alchemy kicks its ass.
And Kurzweil? Not even a contender in my book to either of them.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:35 pm

aciddose wrote:
"Rompler" already has a definition: A sample synthesizer containing sampled content which can not be changed.

Yup... Omnisphere...

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:37 pm

zvenx wrote:and to 'help' omnisphere's rep as a rompler:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rompler

rsp

heh...

"Popular examples of software romplers are reFX Nexus and Spectrasonics Omnisphere."

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Tue Feb 04, 2014 6:42 pm

zvenx wrote:I would find it hard to believe that (even though I don't' need it) all this 'quiet' time Spectrasonics is not indeed working to make Omnisphere be able to import one's own samples.......

rsp

It would be trivial for Omnisphere to allow users to import samples as it already supports samples.

It is a design choice not to allow it (at least up til now)... perhaps to keep the available material of a high quality, to control the market for sample based add-ons or ?

And of course it is their product and they can choose to do as they wish

Is omnisphere still king?