Getting Hive?

[ghettosynth]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Time varying factors are almost the entire point. You can easily add non-linear elements to any filter, it's been done since the earliest days of digital filters, making it sound right while you modulate it quickly is the tricky bit.

No EQ is going to fix that problem, period.

Don't get me wrong, per voice EQ is cool, that's what a "filter bank" is all about. It's just not an overall solution for the perceived differences between synths.

[Soarer]

... In sylenth (I am NOT trying to hijack this thread!)

No problem Dasheesh and sorry about my outburst regarding Sylenth earlier. I should be more open minded about it since so many people are fond of it.

[Dasheesh]

... In sylenth (I am NOT trying to hijack this thread!)

No problem Dasheesh and sorry about my outburst regarding Sylenth earlier. I should be more open minded about it since so many people are fond of it.

I know man?woman?. I'm just a little older then the usual poster and have made the move from analog to digital, and I'm just not offended easily. I will readily admit when I'm wrong, but you have to be able to do the same. I went Hive over Sylenth, because Hive had more rock and was more suited to live playing. i know what I like already, and Hive wound up being a better sound to me. I am NOT against buying adn playing Sylenth though! I just had a simple question about the architecture of sylenth. Believe it or not I remember when Sylenth was a little known beta and I'm pretty sure I could download it for free at that time. The GUI was different at that time. Anyway. The way I see it, there is a difference between sound design, producing, and musician, and song writer. They see thing differently, that's why the division in opinion. Keep up your positive vibe Soarer...it's real, and folks are going to try to bring you down, but you got it.

[fluffy_little_something]

I like your balls Fluffy. I don't always see things the way you do and I don't usually agree but you can hold your own and are not afraid.

I have a question for you that is an honest question. In sylenth (I am NOT trying to hijack this thread!) but in sylenth. There are two layers, each with a filter. Then there is a third filter knob. I think it's called filter control or something. Does that control the cutoff of both filters at the same time? or does it add a 3rd filter cutoff? it's an honest question.

It is very off-topic
The way I see it, the global filter cutoff is useful if you have set different values for the two layer cutoffs/resonances. You can change/modulate the global cutoff/resonance without changing the offset between the two layers, i.e. in many cases the character of the sound.

[EvilDragon]

Time varying factors are almost the entire point. You can easily add non-linear elements to any filter, it's been done since the earliest days of digital filters, making it sound right while you modulate it quickly is the tricky bit.

No EQ is going to fix that problem, period.

Don't get me wrong, per voice EQ is cool, that's what a "filter bank" is all about. It's just not an overall solution for the perceived differences between synths.

Quoted for truth.

[Dasheesh]

I like your balls Fluffy. I don't always see things the way you do and I don't usually agree but you can hold your own and are not afraid.

I have a question for you that is an honest question. In sylenth (I am NOT trying to hijack this thread!) but in sylenth. There are two layers, each with a filter. Then there is a third filter knob. I think it's called filter control or something. Does that control the cutoff of both filters at the same time? or does it add a 3rd filter cutoff? it's an honest question.

It is very off-topic
The way I see it, the global filter cutoff is useful if you have set different values for the two layer cutoffs. You can change the global cutoff without changing the offset between the two layers, i.e. in many cases the character of the sound.

That answers my question. it controls both cut off at the same time. As far as that eqing argument is concerned. The sound radix Surfer EQ handles that octive specific dynamic eqing well, but it is unfortunately locked down and out of reach for most folks. The way I see it is that stripping all the organic nature and human aspects out of the sound is for the producers anyway. Not for me.

[Dasheesh]

Time varying factors are almost the entire point. You can easily add non-linear elements to any filter, it's been done since the earliest days of digital filters, making it sound right while you modulate it quickly is the tricky bit.

No EQ is going to fix that problem, period.

Don't get me wrong, per voice EQ is cool, that's what a "filter bank" is all about. It's just not an overall solution for the perceived differences between synths.

Quoted for truth.

It's not about what you strip out, but what you leave in.

[fluffy_little_something]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Time varying factors are almost the entire point. You can easily add non-linear elements to any filter, it's been done since the earliest days of digital filters, making it sound right while you modulate it quickly is the tricky bit.

No EQ is going to fix that problem, period.

Don't get me wrong, per voice EQ is cool, that's what a "filter bank" is all about. It's just not an overall solution for the perceived differences between synths.

With the two synths I have, the eq makes all the difference, even the basic ones built into the synths.
The eq can make the same synth sound more digital or more analog, lighter or heavier, modern or classic, etc.

[Soarer]

I know man?woman?. I'm just a little older then the usual poster and have made the move from analog to digital, and I'm just not offended easily. I will readily admit when I'm wrong, but you have to be able to do the same. I went Hive over Sylenth, because Hive had more rock and was more suited to live playing. i know what I like already, and Hive wound up being a better sound to me. I am NOT against buying adn playing Sylenth though! I just had a simple question about the architecture of sylenth. Believe it or not I remember when Sylenth was a little known beta and I'm pretty sure I could download it for free at that time. The GUI was different at that time. Anyway. The way I see it, there is a difference between sound design, producing, and musician, and song writer. They see thing differently, that's why the division in opinion. Keep up your positive vibe Soarer...it's real, and folks are going to try to bring you down, but you got it.

I'm a MAN!
I remember those days too but Sylenth didn't look so good at that time
Listened a few times but didn't really like it much but that is quite long ago now.

I have owned a few very good hardware synths too and went soft(ware)
Owned the Andromeda A6 for some time but for some reason I found it hard to use at that time. Sold it and bought a Virus TI Desktop and was very happy with it. Wish I still had it but had to let it go for a number of reasons. So I'm glad that soft synths are getting better but I still sometimes check various analog synths. I just much prefer the great flexibility of software.

[ghettosynth]

I am more and more convinced that EQ is the key to the sound of a synth. After all, properties such as metallic, bright, dull, lacking bottom, and even fat and thin, or analog vs digital can be corrected/achieved by equalization to a large extent, be it an external EQ or maybe an EQ profile hardwired within the sound engine.

For that reason I wish synths had better internal EQ's, especially graphic equalizers with a dozen or so bands.

Only to an extent. The thing about EQ is that it's global, whereas synths generate sound per voice. You might EQ a perfectly creamy sound in octave 4, but play in octave 5 and it sounds boomy and terrible. Not to mention time-varying factors like dynamics, phase, and drift.

Time varying factors are almost the entire point. You can easily add non-linear elements to any filter, it's been done since the earliest days of digital filters, making it sound right while you modulate it quickly is the tricky bit.

No EQ is going to fix that problem, period.

Don't get me wrong, per voice EQ is cool, that's what a "filter bank" is all about. It's just not an overall solution for the perceived differences between synths.

With the two synths I have, the eq makes all the difference, even the basic ones built into the synths.
The eq can make the same synth sound more digital or more analog, lighter or heavier, modern or classic, etc.

Sure, that's not incongruent with what I said. Those tricks have been exploited for some time. They're a band-aid, not a cure.

[pdxindy]

With the two synths I have, the eq makes all the difference, even the basic ones built into the synths.
The eq can make the same synth sound more digital or more analog, lighter or heavier, modern or classic, etc.

Sure, that's not incongruent with what I said. Those tricks have been exploited for some time. They're a band-aid, not a cure.

What exactly is the problem that needs a cure?

[ghettosynth]

With the two synths I have, the eq makes all the difference, even the basic ones built into the synths.
The eq can make the same synth sound more digital or more analog, lighter or heavier, modern or classic, etc.

Sure, that's not incongruent with what I said. Those tricks have been exploited for some time. They're a band-aid, not a cure.

What exactly is the problem that needs a cure?

Accurate emulation in the face of rapid modulation. If you think that you can make rapid modulation on a ten year old synth sound like today's cutting edge designs with an EQ , you are mistaken.

[pdxindy]

What exactly is the problem that needs a cure?

Accurate emulation in the face of rapid modulation. If you think that you can make rapid modulation on a ten year old synth sound like today's cutting edge designs with an EQ , you are mistaken.

I did not suggest or even vaguely imply that... You are like an attack dog... so often looking to chew on someone. I do not find that enjoyable...

[dune_rave]

I own and use Omnisphere 2 and Diva so is there any reason for getting Hive? My question is mainly about sound and synth engine.

It seems from what I hear in audio demos that Hive still has a different sound than Omnisphere 2 and it's mainly these two synths I'm curious about. Hive sounds pretty powerful. Will try the demo at some time.

I make Electronica, IDM, Acid Tech, Ambient and sound design.

Only You can answer your question since music is matter of taste and that's pretty subjective.
But let me tell you my answer and my reason. I'm convinced that u-he makes quite stable software with stunning GUI and superb sound, so if they release a sine wave generator, I think I will buy it
So my answer to your question : Go and get Hive!

[ghettosynth]

What exactly is the problem that needs a cure?

Accurate emulation in the face of rapid modulation. If you think that you can make rapid modulation on a ten year old synth sound like today's cutting edge designs with an EQ , you are mistaken.

I did not suggest or even vaguely imply that... You are like an attack dog... so often looking to chew on someone. I do not find that enjoyable...

I didn't say that you implied that, parent was talking about being able to make non-analog sounding synths sound analog with an EQ. I'm not looking to chew on you friend, I take offense at your language. Go read what I wrote a few posts ago.

1) Fluffy suggested EQ was a synth equalizer
2) 9 said, well, except for dynamic issues
3) I said dynamic issues are almost everything
4) dragon quoted me for "truth"
5) Fluffy quoted me to say that he could make A sound like B with an EQ.
6) I said that's a bandaid, not a cure
7) You asked what was the problem that needed a cure
I summarized the conversation for you using the word "you" in a general sense, not meaning "you", per se.

I think that you're being defensive here for no reason. Honestly, I should have just ignored your post because it was pretty clear that you hadn't read the thread.