Getting Hive?

[Orbit-50]

...to me Hive sounds "in your face" as opposed to "vague, distant, muddy", both of which I suppose are attributes of either "thin" or "thick", or in proper terms "precise, controlled and easy to mix" as opposed to "organic and difficult to tame".

...I suspect that Hive is a good choice for people who like to layer sounds in an orchestral way (think trance)

Thank you so much for your explanation of the concept behind Hive's sound. It makes total sense, and I might have missed that point when trying it out. My ears might have been looking for the opposite of what it is, or to put it better, "the norm".

[Biome_Digital]

Hive has a nice effects section too.

[aumordia]

I ended up going for Sylenth1 over Hive, but it's certainly not because Hive sounded "thin." Most musicians aren't also DSP engineers, so I'm not ragging on anyone for using that term, sometimes it's hard to do any better. But I sometimes wonder if Hive is subject to unfair evaluation because it is inevitably contrasted against other U-he things, especially Diva.

If you like "rich, fat, analog" type sounds -- like Diva -- you'll probably find that any sort of synth like Hive sounds "thin." I've seen Spire and Dune also called "thin." I think the truth is that a supersaw is actually in some ways inherently "thin" due to all the phase cancellation, which is part of why genres like trance have so many layers -- the flip side is these alias-free unison monsters can be very efficient and relative precise in the amount of frequency spectrum they occupy (doubly so because of the relatively clean filters).

As Urs hinted at, it engenders different approaches: lots of little layers of (ironically) smaller sounding supersaws, or a few big Diva type instruments that have been carefully mixed to play nicely together.

Sylenth1 catches a pretty ridiculous amount of flack around here, but one thing it doesn't seem to get called, at least not all that often, is "thin." I suspect, however, that this has more to do with ergonomics than DSP fundamentals -- the Sylenth1 UI/UX is designed to steer you toward the fatter sounds and away from the thinner ones, although it's just as capable of either. This is easy to miss because the Sylenth1 UI has traditionally been hideous, but I think this "bumper lane bowling" it encourages has been a big part of its success.

Hive is different in that it's a little more a-la-carte. You have the three modes and the re-arrangeable effects, for instance. The plus side is greater versatility and, I think, speed -- but these benefits mainly accrue to someone who's more experienced. It's not as optimized for the "turn here for dopeness!" crowd, which is definitely not a bad thing, mind.

At any rate, Hive is perhaps "thin" compared to Diva, but not really compared to other supersaw oriented VA's -- rather, it's a little less opinionated than that pack, a little more neutral. But in capable hands it can definitely sound "fat," and, more importantly, it can absolutely produce gigantic sounding tracks. Check out the new Hive Science 2 soundbank if you doubt:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hBtlClhAyYI

I'm very keen on where Hive is going, especially noting that Urs found an unexpected audience for it. I've just about programmed an entire bank of Sylenth1 sounds -- 512 presets -- and I feel I've nearly exhausted what I can do with it (which includes FM slap bass and Additive Bells, I'm telling you it's underrated here on KVR). I'm casting about for what next. I've got a demanding day job and a baby, so something like Zebra is too fiddly for the time I have available, and Hive in its present state doesn't seem like it makes enough of a sonic difference over Sylenth1. But in the future? That's interesting.

Of course Urs has to get Zebra 3 out before his users lose their entire minds, heh.

[Orbit-50]

Nice post aumordia.

[wagtunes]

I don't know. I look at Hive the way I look at any synth. I use it for what it's best used for. I mean I'm not going to use a Minimoog to do a supersaw or Arturia's SEM to emulate a heavy metal guitar.

You don't buy a screwdriver and try to use it as a sledgehammer. All you end up with is a broken screwdriver.

Hive has its place. Depending on the kind of music you do, you'll either find a use for it or you won't.

Just like every other synth out there.

[ghettosynth]

... But I sometimes wonder if Hive is subject to unfair evaluation because it is inevitably contrasted against other U-he things, especially Diva.
...
At any rate, Hive is perhaps "thin" compared to Diva, but not really compared to other supersaw oriented VA's -- rather, it's a little less opinionated than that pack, a little more neutral.

Nobody's being unfair, well, I'm not being unfair. You've answered your own question, so to speak. I'll make it even more clear. If I want meh filters and supersaws, I don't need to spend $150. I can build layers all day long from the dozens of other merely adequate synths that have accidentally made it into my collection and already cover that ground.

What you can't do so easily, is go the other direction. That is, to use layers to cover up for merely adequate technology when what you really want is excellent technology. In that case, you have to pay for it and there isn't an army of synths built on excellent technology.

I understand the idea of a product that isn't necessarily the best that you can do, but is the best that a particular market will bear, I'm just not interested in those products.

To be clear, I'm not the least bit interested in EDM (the genre) even though I'm very much into EDM (the acronym). I also don't have much patience for trance which has been stupid since the late 90s but, as a genre, descended into clinical mental retardation some years after that. In any case, I'm not so convinced by the layers argument which sounds too convenient by half to me. You're not going to convince a composer that he can make up for inadequate orchestral layers by using lots of them.

That's not to say that I don't use supersaws, I do, when properly coupled with an excellent filter they can yield stunning pads. I just don't think that the synths that have price tags over $100 add enough to justify that difference in cost to those that cost much less than $100. This is especially so in the context of what the OP is asking.

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.

[pdxindy]

At any rate, Hive is perhaps "thin" compared to Diva, but not really compared to other supersaw oriented VA's -- rather, it's a little less opinionated than that pack, a little more neutral. But in capable hands it can definitely sound "fat," and, more importantly, it can absolutely produce gigantic sounding tracks. Check out the new Hive Science 2 soundbank if you doubt:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hBtlClhAyYI

What an impressive demo!!

I've learned a lot from experimenting with Hive because it is so fast to modulate basically anything... including FX parameters.

[mcnoone]

Hive is the greatest synthesizer ever created.

[aumordia]

I basically agree with your assessment of reality, GS -- I definitely notice a difference between Diva and your standard supersaw machine. I simply don't care about it. It's the old engineering tradeoff -- fast, good, cheap: pick two -- but in a different form -- cpu, sound, ergonomics: pick two. Not a perfect analogy, but it holds to a reasonable extent, and I choose CPU and ergonomics. Sound? Meh -- good enough is good enough.

Tom Morello sums up this perspective well: "My take on gear is that it does not matter—at all—ever—in any circumstance."

That's all a bit off topic though, I actually agree that Hive won't really do much for the OP (at least from the perspective of broadening the sonic palette) and said as much earlier in the thread.

[ghettosynth]

I basically agree with your assessment of reality, GS -- I definitely notice a difference between Diva and your standard supersaw machine. I simply don't care about it. It's the old engineering tradeoff -- fast, good, cheap: pick two -- but in a different form -- cpu, sound, ergonomics: pick two. Not a perfect analogy, but it holds to a reasonable extent, and I choose CPU and ergonomics. Sound? Meh -- good enough is good enough.

Tom Morello sums up this perspective well: "My take on gear is that it does not matter—at all—ever—in any circumstance."

That's all a bit off topic though, I actually agree that Hive won't really do much for the OP (at least from the perspective of broadening the sonic palette) and said as much earlier in the thread.

The thing that is really different about what Tom Morello is saying and what I'm talking about here is that he's not talking about using digital models to emulate an analog sound, and, as EVH will tell you, with guitar, the tone is largely in the fingers. This is not the case with synthesizers or any form of digital processing. So, while it may not matter to you, I think that it's a vast overstatement to say that it never matters. In fact, I'm willing to be that it matters quite a lot to Tom Morello's producers when it comes to making his records.

Whether the details are subtle or not, whether they impact the audience, or the performer, aren't always so easy to identify or dismiss. In fact, Tom's telling you that he just creates music using the tone that he has, but, if he wanted to start playing shoegaze or death metal, he'd better get out the credit card because his gear wouldn't be convincing, and I'm sure that he knows that. So even his statement has to be taken in context. In fact, he basically says that, if he had different gear, he'd write different songs. So, well, ok, gear doesn't matter if the gear you have sounds like you want it sound. Duh!

I do agree though with your variant of the iron law. Which is why, all else being equal, synths that are light on CPU generally don't sound as good. Key component there is "all else being equal," that is, you can't really make that comparison across vendors or even with the same vendor across a large period of their technological growth.

You have to ask yourself "what am I trying to get and why can't I get it with what I have?" If some new piece of gear has that thing that's missing, then it might help you get there. Sometimes that's just inspiring workflow, and that's ok if you value that.

[pdxindy]

I basically agree with your assessment of reality, GS -- I definitely notice a difference between Diva and your standard supersaw machine. I simply don't care about it. It's the old engineering tradeoff -- fast, good, cheap: pick two -- but in a different form -- cpu, sound, ergonomics: pick two. Not a perfect analogy, but it holds to a reasonable extent, and I choose CPU and ergonomics. Sound? Meh -- good enough is good enough.

There are plenty of sounds I've made with low cpu synths that are complete. For that use, they could not be better. Then there are sounds where the high cpu of something like Diva really makes a difference (for me).

[keel]

Hive sounds thin, not "in your face". It sounds like any 10 years old VSTi. It lack low end, low mids, snappiness, punch. Hard to explain. It just sounds thin. RePro sounds fat, not thin at all. Huge differences in the sound quality.

I had that 25$ voucher and I demoed Hive really, really hard. No matter how much I tried to like Hive, I just couldn't like it. The sound was and is the reason. And the price was and is too high for that sound. Maybe $79-99 would be better price for it. After Hive disappointment I forgot my voucher and it expired. I could have buy the RePro. I think RePro deserve more that $149 price tag than Hive. Just because of the sound quality.

Anyway, do Hive2 with same concept + with RePro sound and Sylenth style snappy and punchy envelopes and filters and you have a winner.

[twolegstoneworks]

Hive sounds thin, not "in your face". It sounds like any 10 years old VSTi. It lack low end, low mids, snappiness, punch. Hard to explain. It just sounds thin. RePro sounds fat, not thin at all. Huge differences in the sound quality.

Taste varies on this topic, surely. It's very subjective. I've programmed Hive quite a bit and cant say I find it lacking in it's ability to fill up the spectrum. Low end can be achieved by programming technique and I could easily make RePro or Diva sound thinner than Hive. There's also the consideration that RePro was modeled after analog circuitry, while Hive is a modern digital design.

Or maybe I'm just biased as I'm a complete u-he fanboi.

[aumordia]

GS I don't think there's really a debate here, I quoted Morello to illustrate a mindset more than a scientific fact -- gear of course matters, but I thought the spirit of the statement was rather "what I have is good enough for what I want to do now let me go and do it."

If what you want to do is have the thickest, most luscious synth tones, exploring the most cutting edge sounds using the most advanced tech yada yada then this philosophy might not have relevance. A bit different though if you're e.g. doing chiptunes.

FWIW I blend synths with my own recorded stuff, and I find that the "better" synths are actually harder to work with because they stick out too much. My "studio" is an SM57 running into a laptop, and I find I have an easier time taking the more lower tech synths and having them gel with my lower tech recordings. Another thing is that these big beautiful synths can very easily overpower the recorded stuff, while the more rinky dink synths are easier to work with -- even so, it's a bit tricky, so I really prize SPEED of programmability, especially having a wife and baby and just doing this on the side.

So with my objective being "look honey, it's a synthpop version of carrickfergus," yeah, gear really just doesn't matter. YMMV, and take with a grain of salt and a bit of tongue in your cheek, I am posting on KVR after all.

[Urs]

Sorry guys, anyone who's saying that Hive isn't state of the art technology or lacking in whatever department is bullshitting himself. I suspect they are either evaluating Hive with confirmation bias or just come in here to say something negative.

"Sylenth style snappy and punchy envelopes and filters" takes the crown of this. Envelopes can either be snappy (more than exponential) or punchy (less than exponential). If someone attributes both to some random synth with textbook envelopes (i.e. neither of each) you know they do so only because they got nothing else to say.

If you want to slam Hive, show an audio demo, mention an *objective* fact or use Twitter instead (think Trump). But please don't insult us here with stereotype killer arguments that you can slap onto any synth in existance.