pdxindy wrote: noiseboyuk wrote:
lotus2035 wrote:I seem to remember that the predecessor to Omnisphere 'Atmosphere' was big with the trance crowd, but since then we have had the onset of wub wub fart noise genres which have made Omnispheres sound dated in terms of electronica at least, which i guess is why they brought out the spotlight preset bank. It all still sounds very 90s though. I'm looking forward to version 2.5 and its new analog collection. It's what Omnisphere is best at.
Love how the KVR debate has shifted from "Omni is a ROMpler" to "Analogue is what Omni is best at". Over 1,000 new analogue patches coming in 2.5....
Again, any attempt to confine Omni to just being about a single purpose or genre will look kinda daft. Its fabulous for ambient of course, as it is for experimental film, pop, retro etc etc. The clue is in the name - OMNIsphere.
The name is deceptive... it gives that impression... but there is a lot of synthesis stuff it cannot do. A more accurate name would be Semisphere
And it is a Rompler... lots of Romplers have extensive synthesis capability.
Yes, moreover, I don't think the debate has shifted at all. Omnisphere isn't really competitive among "good" VA synths by today's standards and now that the detail about that has been thoroughly fleshed out (on KVR), there's no point for people who care about that to debate any further (on KVR). It's not a standout VA and anyone who's into good VAs is pretty clear on that. There are solid technical reasons for it and there's just not much point in talking about it anymore. If you can't hear it, then it clearly doesn't matter to you.
pdxindy is absolutely correct here, the name is deceptive. But it's more than a funny joke, the positioning is definitely a part of the popularity and the target audience, you see that here, and I've seen it elsewhere. Some people are just more susceptible to hype and marketing than others and seem to equate the price with quality. Hats off to Spectrasonics, they have definitely managed to position themselves such that people are still talking about their $500 softsynth in 2018!
I think that there is absolutely a grain of truth in what Vurt was saying with respect to the appeal to, e.g., studios and their clients and part of that comes from the deceptive name. Those who aren't knowledgeable and/or critical are convinced by that. It does everything and it's made by the guy who did the D50 sounds and it's one of the most expensive synths on the market, done! Why buy anything else?
Those of us who are critical of it haven't really changed our position. Omnisphere is an overpriced sample library with a reasonably flexible synth engine built with outdated components and a clunky U/I that appeals to beginners. It is a rompler. It excels technically at no particular sonic thing but does several things adequately. It's biggest strength is the celebrity sound library which IS created by people who know what they're doing. So, no disagreement that Spectrasonics sound designers are top notch, and if you aren't a sound designer and your tastes align with Spectrasonics (mine don't) then you are getting a capable library of sounds. Honestly I think that this is the appeal to TV/Film guys who have to work quickly and are selling to a largely uncritical audience with respect to the authenticity of VA sounds.
Now, re:Trance, Omnisphere does have a pretty cool arpeggiator. And, well, trance as a genre also tends toward the kind of fx drenched bombastic sounds that Omnisphere is known for. So, be honest with yourself here, if you aren't a sound designer and you like bombastic trance (e.g. the video from earlier in the thread), then I'm going to go against the flow here and say that Omnisphere might be a good choice for you. Also, another strength is the ease at which you can apply modulators. Now Omnisphere isn't the only standout here, but, again, if you fit the demographic, and you like a particular sound but wish it had more movement, it will be easier for you to grok how to make that happen in Omnisphere than some other synths.
It's more fun to have fun in these threads than argue. I was only interested in engaging others about Omnisphere up to a point. I gave it the benefit of the doubt at the time because so many people were talking about it. Nothing that has been said over the last n years or so has changed my mind. I think that the largest common factors among Omnisphere customers are the combination of either buy-in towards hype, or realizing the value of that to other customers (e.g. studios), the alignment of taste towards very mainstream and/or overhyped sounds, the lack of need and/or appreciation of actual depth in synthesis combined with a need and/or appreciation of easy to use modulation, and the need/desire to have a very large sound library that achieves the above.
There's no need to argue, you'd be wasting your breath. Note how these threads are almost always started by those who aren't able to figure out for themselves whether or not a synth is useful for a particular genre and how they, and the other posters, center on talking in vague non-technical terms.
With only a couple of notable exceptions, that pretty much sums up my experience with Omnisphere users. I still remember the guy in GC who was so convinced that I should buy Omnisphere. I told him that Reaktor and friends gets the job done for me, to which he replied "Oh, I've had all of those but now I use Omnisphere." So I asked him which of the Reaktor filters did he try? Of course he couldn't answer the question, he had no idea.