What is KVR Audio? | Submit News | Advertise | Developer Account

Options (Affects News & Product results only):

OS:
Format:
Include:
Quick Search KVR

"Quick Search" KVR Audio's Product Database, News Items, Developer Listings, Forum Topics and videos here. For advanced Product Database searching please use the full product search. For the forum you can use the phpBB forum search.

To utilize the power of Google you can use the integrated Google Site Search.

Products 0

Developers 0

News 0

Forum 0

Videos 0

Search  

Alchemy 2

Official support for: camelaudio.com

Moderators: ZenPunkHippy, ugo, biomechanoid, Ben [Camel Audio]

User avatar
KVRian
 
754 posts since 21 Aug, 2011
  

Postby Phase47; Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:48 am

ZenPunkHippy wrote:
, this new 1.5 browser could certainly use another think for 2.0

The browser is unlikely to change much. What part of it is killing your workflow?

The old method of selecting bank - category - preset worked OK but the new way is (IMHO) better, although it does require some adjustment to the way we think about finding a sound.

Peace,
Andy.


Hi Andy. Sort of hard to articulate, but the old flow of Bank/Category/Sound was simply very fluid and quick for me. What I got to, very quickly, were the presets. Presently, I think the amount of columns, the fact that I need to scroll through lists, etc., is a much slower and more cumbersome proposition (again, ymmv).

I understand things aren't likely to change, but even simply putting the "simple mode" pull-down menu categorization of bank/category/preset back the way it was I'd find incredibly useful over seven scrolling lists.
User avatar
KVRAF
 
9613 posts since 18 Jun, 2008, from Melbourne, Australia
 

Postby ZenPunkHippy; Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:59 am

Thanks for the comments. The additional attribute columns can be ignored (obviously). Just set the category (and sound library if that's useful)) and all presets in that category are available using program change or previous / next preset.

IMO this is far superior to accessing a limited number of presets in the current bank / category as the old system did.

While this did take me a while to get used to, thinking in terms of "what type of sound do I want" rather than "where is it" is much more intuitive (IMO).

Peace,
Andy.
KVRist
 
217 posts since 21 Feb, 2011, from Paris (France)

Postby Marginal Ray; Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:10 pm

liquidsound wrote:I own 4 major FM synths

I can understand that an FM fan can dream about using it with Alchemy's modulation capabilities!

Another idea (but it's not really the same goal) could be to use Alchemy as a FX plugin. I red about this suggestion on this forum. But it would be the end of Camel Space and Camel Phat... Another issue...
User avatar
KVRian
 
754 posts since 21 Aug, 2011
  

Postby Phase47; Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:19 pm

ZenPunkHippy wrote:Thanks for the comments. The additional attribute columns can be ignored (obviously). Just set the category (and sound library if that's useful)) and all presets in that category are available using program change or previous / next preset.

IMO this is far superior to accessing a limited number of presets in the current bank / category as the old system did.

While this did take me a while to get used to, thinking in terms of "what type of sound do I want" rather than "where is it" is much more intuitive (IMO).

Peace,
Andy.



Understood. I'm still in Bank Mode. :)
KVRAF
 
17898 posts since 1 Oct, 2001, from England

Postby Kriminal; Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:25 pm

ZenPunkHippy wrote:
While this did take me a while to get used to, thinking in terms of "what type of sound do I want" rather than "where is it" is much more intuitive (IMO).

Peace,
Andy.



If you want a bass sound, you look in the bass folder...?

I also prefer the older way, but then again i dont have any presets installed, so doesnt really affect me much.
KVRist
 
178 posts since 22 May, 2012

Postby Cimbasso; Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:50 pm

I'm not synth expert as most people here by any means - I'm working as a media composer and I use presets most of the time tbh. I think that current presets and sample material don't reflect what's Alchemy capable of, mainly in terms of sound quality. I like Alchemy quite a bit, it's my go-to for soundscapes and pads. My biggest wishes for v2 are: better sound quality and better factory library, and I think that those two are very much connected, since I heard some great quality recordings - mainly from Simon Stockhausen. Maybe Camels can collaborate with Simon on some factory content for v2 - that would be great. With sound quality similar to Omnisphere, Alchemy would be really hard to beat, especially at the current price. New browser is really great and very intuitive, btw.

I apologize if this was already discussed, but I'm new to the forum.

Keep up the great work, Camels!
KVRAF
 
2417 posts since 30 May, 2006, from US / Italy

Postby liquidsound; Sat Jan 12, 2013 1:14 pm

Marginal Ray wrote:
liquidsound wrote:I own 4 major FM synths

I can understand that an FM fan can dream about using it with Alchemy's modulation capabilities!
:love:
I should add that since I got Alchemy I spent very little time on those 4.
Sample synthesis is new to me with the exception of frequent use of Sampler in Live (which it uses FM :wink: ).

Anyway, I'm to new to Alchemy to be asking any other feature beside the above.
MuLab & MUX
User avatar
KVRAF
 
3911 posts since 28 May, 2005, from Netherlands

Postby Nielzie; Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:46 pm

Marginal Ray wrote:...to use Alchemy as a FX plugin. I read about this suggestion on this forum. But it would be the end of Camel Space and Camel Phat...


That's why I won't expect that to happen any time soon. Space and Phat are already very nice effects on their own. A little "old" though.. Maybe they are next on the list to be improved? If they will work on enhancements to the internal fx of Alchemy I'm sure that code will find it's way to Space and Phat too. :)
RIP Reason Lahalla
KVRist
 
382 posts since 22 Jun, 2006, from Hungary

Postby dune_rave; Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:19 pm

I'd like to see
4 independent Arpeggiator in Alchemy 2.
The present solution of A/ B/ C / D / ALL
is a bit awkward.
KVRAF
 
3422 posts since 12 May, 2008

Postby Echoes in the Attic; Mon Jan 21, 2013 12:36 pm

Phase47 wrote:
ZenPunkHippy wrote:
, this new 1.5 browser could certainly use another think for 2.0

The browser is unlikely to change much. What part of it is killing your workflow?

The old method of selecting bank - category - preset worked OK but the new way is (IMHO) better, although it does require some adjustment to the way we think about finding a sound.

Peace,
Andy.


Hi Andy. Sort of hard to articulate, but the old flow of Bank/Category/Sound was simply very fluid and quick for me. What I got to, very quickly, were the presets. Presently, I think the amount of columns, the fact that I need to scroll through lists, etc., is a much slower and more cumbersome proposition (again, ymmv).

I understand things aren't likely to change, but even simply putting the "simple mode" pull-down menu categorization of bank/category/preset back the way it was I'd find incredibly useful over seven scrolling lists.


Not to criticize your point of view at all, but I don't get it. The new method seems every bit as easy as the old. Simply select the Bank and the sound type. To me it seems like the same amount of clicks the first time and then much less click every time after that. I just don't see any simplicity being lost but much more power.

Isn't it the same if you want it to be? Click bank > click type > click preset? Except now you don't need to go to the menu every time to see the next presets because they are right there.
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit. Once I have something clever, I will certainly fill it in.
KVRist
 
382 posts since 22 Jun, 2006, from Hungary

Postby dune_rave; Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:29 am

Cimbasso wrote:I'm not synth expert as most people here by any means - I'm working as a media composer and I use presets most of the time tbh. I think that current presets and sample material don't reflect what's Alchemy capable of, mainly in terms of sound quality. I like Alchemy quite a bit, it's my go-to for soundscapes and pads. My biggest wishes for v2 are: better sound quality and better factory library, and I think that those two are very much connected, since I heard some great quality recordings - mainly from Simon Stockhausen. Maybe Camels can collaborate with Simon on some factory content for v2 - that would be great. With sound quality similar to Omnisphere, Alchemy would be really hard to beat, especially at the current price. New browser is really great and very intuitive, btw.

I apologize if this was already discussed, but I'm new to the forum.

Keep up the great work, Camels!


Hi! In my view - sound quality is better than Omnisphere, but you have to buy some extra Camel library to achieve this! Camel Audio goes the other way than Spectrasonics - they keep the Alchemy price lower with "small" factory content, and everyone can extend the library by buying some more alchemy banks. It's better than putting the software and all banks together so users have to spend 500$ to even use the software. Camel Audio gives users to choose what they want, there are several bundles with different preset banks on different discounted prices! So thinking this way, I don't feel they should come up with better factory sounds - they should improve here and there and give new functionality instead!
User avatar
KVRAF
 
6420 posts since 22 Sep, 2008, from Windsor. UK
 

Postby tehlord; Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:34 am

I can't believe I never upgraded from Alchemy Player...... :shock:


Perhaps I should just wait for Alchemy 2 now :hihi:
KVRist
 
382 posts since 22 Jun, 2006, from Hungary

Postby dune_rave; Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:36 am

tehlord wrote:I can't believe I never upgraded from Alchemy Player...... :shock:


Perhaps I should just wait for Alchemy 2 now :hihi:


You just can't wait forever or can you? :)
User avatar
KVRAF
 
6420 posts since 22 Sep, 2008, from Windsor. UK
 

Postby tehlord; Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:43 pm

You know what it is. Alchemy would require a significant investment of time, as I know I'd want to learn it all inside out. Every other synth I have with the possible exception of Zebra is fairly straightforward. I also have Omnisphere, but I pretend that's just a rompler :hihi:

When I do get it, I suspect it'll take over a bit. I have a folder full of H4N audio recordings ready to go as well! :help:
KVRist
 
217 posts since 21 Feb, 2011, from Paris (France)

Postby Marginal Ray; Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:10 am

Hi! In my view - sound quality is better than Omnisphere, but you have to buy some extra Camel library to achieve this! Camel Audio goes the other way than Spectrasonics - they keep the Alchemy price lower with "small" factory content, and everyone can extend the library by buying some more alchemy banks. It's better than putting the software and all banks together so users have to spend 500$ to even use the software. Camel Audio gives users to choose what they want, there are several bundles with different preset banks on different discounted prices! So thinking this way, I don't feel they should come up with better factory sounds - they should improve here and there and give new functionality instead!


It's evident that a 200 € synth can not be shipped with 30 Go first quality samples, in every possible domains. If Alchemy works really like a sample manipulator, with resynthesized samples, the raw quality of those samples (recording quality, velocity levels, round robin…) may be less important than when Alchemy works as a kind of modern rompler or sampler (playing samples in "sample mode").

Of course, we don't know much about Alchemy V2, but according to Camel Audio, sound quality improvement should be the first goal. And I agree with this! The VA engine is very good. The modulation capabilities close to perfection. The FX section can be improved, but I think more visually that for sound quality. The additive editor can be improved, and of course the spectral one, not very usable. But the weak points are, in my opinion, the insufficient transparency of resynthesizing (especially in additive mode) and the quality of some samples from the factory bank, especially the acoustic instruments. All this will be improved in V2.

As Cimbasso wrote, Simon Stockhausen showed that Alchemy 1 (or 1.5) can provide very good and interesting sounds with good orchestral samples, even resynthesized in additive mode. The Dream Voices bank, from Camel Audio, is an absolute must, and shows also what Alchemy only can. The demos of the new Biolabs light space bank are very impressive too (I'm just a bit dirt-poor to time, if this expression translated from French by the reverso website makes sense).

I think Alchemy can everything, because it's a top synth, a sampler, and a mix of both. But please Camels, keep V2 as easy to use as V1. A genius performance section (4 alchemy or alchemy player instances just with the Himalaya vintage sound bank and you're the king of Ibiza!). And "right click - add modulation". So cool!
PreviousNext

Moderators: ZenPunkHippy, ugo, biomechanoid, Ben [Camel Audio]

Return to Camel Audio