Syntronik [update March 2018: New T-03 Bonus Content & 4-for-1 bass synth promo] available

[Bump1]

It didn't take away the ability to build a patch from scratch though. It just took away modulation patch points that would make it harder to sound like you were farting into a portable fan.

Neither does Syntronik. What is the difference if you edit a patch or build one from scratch. Since in Syntronik you can edit the patches, what is stopping you from taking a patch that has the oscillators in it that you want and then adding the filter of your choice, since all filters are accessible in all presets and all models, and creating your patch that way??

Ok not gonna argue it anymore because at the of the day...it's just my opinion. But I'm sure someone will not sweat $99 or $149 because it's burning a hole in their pocket anyway....and maybe they just don't care to program synths..and that's EXACTLY who IK is targeting. I just wish they had offered something GREAT...and this is not it.

Editing from a preset is not the same as from an init patch....it's just not.

They had a legitimate opportunity to snag some market share from Spectrasonics...if they just modeled the oscillators or just sampled the oscillators for wavetables.

They already have a leg up on Omnisphere 2 with the modeled filters....if they are GOOD.

But they just dropped the ball with this one.

[JJ_Jettflow]

Ok not gonna argue it anymore because at the of the day...it's just my opinion.

Then please be sure to throw IMO in front of those posts or someone might take it as fact.

[Bump1]

Well if nothing is explicitly stated as a fact...it's an opinion!

[JJ_Jettflow]

Well if nothing is explicitly stated as a fact...it's an opinion!

Just giving a little back of what I get when I dare to make a post that doesn't agree with one of the KVR patriarchs.

[Bump1]

Well if nothing is explicitly stated as a fact...it's an opinion!

Just giving a little back of what I get when I dare to make a post that doesn't agree with one of the KVR patriarchs.

Hey, no problem. Never a personal thing.

[ghettosynth]

And then group the DCO-X synth as a JX-3P/8P/10 inspired synth? They are 3 completely different sounding synths.

JX8/JX10 are exactly the same hardware at the voice level, modulo voice count, obviously. The JX10 has two of the JX8 voice boards. There may be differences in software that could account for some difference in sound, e.g., eg times, however, they are anything but "completely different sounding."

The 3P, of course, has a completely different filter. However, it doesn't matter much with this product because they are all sample based synths and all of the filters are available with all of the interfaces, hence, the grouping is rather pointless anyway.

Then why not just throw the Juno 6/60 under the same group?

It's the exact same architecture as the JX3P except the envelopes are software generated. And the Juno is single osc....and does PWM but who cares because we're using presets anyway, right? And you can do PWM on the JX3P anyway.

Just trying to prove that IK is more about it's marketing sense as opposed to giving something that is just....better developed?

Most likely because the big difference is that the JX3p has two oscillators to the one in the Juno 6/60. Again though, since these are all just samples and since all of the front panels do EXACTLY the same thing, there's not much point in getting persnickety about which one is grouped with what. It's pretty much like asking whether the red SH-101s sound better than the grey ones.

This product would sound exactly the same with just one front panel that worked for all of the patches.

[ghettosynth]

I can't believe that anyone is seriously trying to compare the brilliant product choice of creating the minimoog with that of creating a rompler with a bunch of different front panels that do exactly the same thing. Sorry, you're on shaky ground with that one. If this product is up your alley, more power to you, but, Bump1's sense of it not being a significant synthesizer is spot on despite an inability to articulate clearly what the limitations are.

There's no need for a walkthrough on this, it's all been described in this thread, except that AFAIK, we still haven't seen how you select effects. You choose the sound you like, that will setup the front panel, you edit the front panel to your liking, and you save as a new sound.

[spacekid]

It didn't take away the ability to build a patch from scratch though. It just took away modulation patch points that would make it harder to sound like you were farting into a portable fan.

Neither does Syntronik. What is the difference if you edit a patch or build one from scratch. Since in Syntronik you can edit the patches, what is stopping you from taking a patch that has the oscillators in it that you want and then adding the filter of your choice, since all filters are accessible in all presets and all models, and creating your patch that way??

Yep, that's what I'll be doing. I'm more interested in playing than creating modular messes that play themselves anyway..so I don't want or need modular features, just a few good starting points to edit. Glad everyone seems happy

[benjamind]

Looking forward to MODO Guitar

[DocAtlas]

Since my main interest is in using the Syntronik content in Sampletank 3, my question to Peter is, will the update to ST3 also be available on the 20th, or will it show up in our accounts later?

I can certainly play with the new content in the Syntronik interfaces, but I think for me it'll be nice using it with the editing features Sampletank offers, as well as using it all within one interface. (The Syntronik interfaces look good, but I don't really need to have more than one, so viewing this product as an ST3 expansion is how I'm looking at it.)

[Elektronisch]

This is an issue of semantics here. "raw oscillators" means the raw waveforms.

nope, it's not an issue of semantics. they did multisample "raw oscillators", so obviously they have "raw waveforms". they don't make them available to you, but that is a different issue - just because they don't make those waveforms available to you doesn't mean they didn't multisample them.

You're splitting hairs here for what?

A preset is not a raw waveform. But you can continue chasing your tail.

a preset is not a raw waveform, but just because they only have presets available to you doesn't mean they didn't multisample the raw waveforms used for those presets. it's not splitting hairs. you made a claim about a product that is incorrect, so i'm correcting you, because someone down the line might read your claim and make incorrect decision based on false information you presented. the fact that you use term definitions that are different from what is commonly understood by those terms is not my problem, and to correct you based on that is not splitting hairs.

You are in denial. Ik created preset and sampled on every key. There are no sampled oscillators, you can sample the sound but not oscillator. The only "sampling" you can do is by recreating oscillator in a digital realm, think The Legend, RePro1 (and they dont even hit 100mb size mark). Not only that but also whole connection between modules gives definition to the sound. Also sampling raw waveform doesnt do the shit. Its like taking a picture from a movie and asking that picture to play the movie.

Dont confuse yourself, there is no synth recreation in there, just bunch of sampled sounds from the synthesizers. Everyone sees that, clever enough to understand that, hell even Peter said its a rompler. You dont have to have PHD to connect the dots.

Good luck at 20th realising that

[Burillo]

This is an issue of semantics here. "raw oscillators" means the raw waveforms.

nope, it's not an issue of semantics. they did multisample "raw oscillators", so obviously they have "raw waveforms". they don't make them available to you, but that is a different issue - just because they don't make those waveforms available to you doesn't mean they didn't multisample them.

You're splitting hairs here for what?

A preset is not a raw waveform. But you can continue chasing your tail.

a preset is not a raw waveform, but just because they only have presets available to you doesn't mean they didn't multisample the raw waveforms used for those presets. it's not splitting hairs. you made a claim about a product that is incorrect, so i'm correcting you, because someone down the line might read your claim and make incorrect decision based on false information you presented. the fact that you use term definitions that are different from what is commonly understood by those terms is not my problem, and to correct you based on that is not splitting hairs.

You are in denial. Ik created preset and sampled on every key. There are no sampled oscillators, you can sample the sound but not oscillator.

lol. do you even hear yourself? oscillators make a sound, you sample the sound - you sample the oscillators. filters are modeled, FX also, so the "presets" you're talking about are pretty much naked oscillators. as in, the only thing IK actually sampled is raw sound of oscillators, on every key, just like you said. multisampled raw oscillators, just like it was claimed this synth doesn't do by another guy. hence the correction.

The only "sampling" you can do is by recreating oscillator in a digital realm, think The Legend, RePro1 (and they dont even hit 100mb size mark). Not only that but also whole connection between modules gives definition to the sound.
<...>
Dont confuse yourself, there is no synth recreation in there, just bunch of sampled sounds from the synthesizers. Everyone sees that, clever enough to understand that, hell even Peter said its a rompler. You dont have to have PHD to connect the dots.

Good luck at 20th realising that

it's you who is confused. what you're referring to as "sampling" is not sampling, but modeling. IK never mentioned Syntronik models oscillators, and it's not advertised as such, and pretty much everyone, including myself, knows that Syntronik is not a virtual analog, but a sample-based UVI-esque synth sample library. so your faux sarcasm is entirely misguided, and makes you look like a moron who doesn't have basic reading comprehension and is overeager to bash on Syntronik regardless of context of the discussion.

[robotmonkey]

but a sample-based UVI-esque synth sample library.

Exactly this. UVI has not sampled oscillators but full sounds. I would not even call it ROMpler but a a sampled instruments library. UVI libraries are quite limited in what you can do with them. What Syntronik seems to add is a modeled filter. But it's still a sampled sounds library with no access to raw oscillators.

[Bump1]

I would like to know the logic behind the decision to not include the basic waveforms.

Wanting to give the user the ability to load up playable patches right away isn't sufficient...because that could still be done alongside providing the basic waveforms.

[ghettosynth]

but a sample-based UVI-esque synth sample library.

Exactly this. UVI has not sampled oscillators but full sounds. I would not even call it ROMpler but a a sampled instruments library. UVI libraries are quite limited in what you can do with them. What Syntronik seems to add is a modeled filter. But it's still a sampled sounds library with no access to raw oscillators.

And a similarly limited model. UVI has filters, I wouldn't say that they are modern models, but the jury is out on that one with IK at this point as well.

IK almost certainly started with full sounds. Perhaps some/many of the sounds are setup such that the remainder of the syntronik engine is used as much as possible, but you're not going to be able to do this for every patch. For example, if a patch contains filter FM, you are going to have to sample that. The upshot is that you aren't going to create an interesting product like this just by sampling "raw" oscillators. There is no pitch modulation, no oscillator mixing, no sync, etc. Further, you don't need 50 Gigs to multisample raw oscillators from 37 synths.

Moreover, it's very unlikely that IK went to the trouble of sampling the vast majority, if any of them, internally prior to the signal being passed through the VCF/VCA. For some of the synths, e.g., the Andromeda, this is quite the challenge. So, the samples will include the sound of the open filters at best.

You guys can split hairs over how much of a rompler that this product is, but in any case, it's an extremely limited synthesizer.