Great explanation Thank youUrs wrote: ↑Sun Apr 18, 2021 12:49 amWe certainly get and respect a lot of input. Thankfully it's not out of thin air. We can look back on almost twenty years of Zebra. We have collected a humungous amount of data and we have created concepts that truly excite me. And there's a high bar for that.EnGee wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 5:45 pmIt needs a consistency. It is must not end when the synth released, but keep going. I don't see a fail if it is planned well. A good choice of a DJ and relative beta testers to the EDM will lead to a good result as Urs has the open mind to listen and response (I think).pdxindy wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 3:29 pmAnd that of course is no guarantee that it will then be popular and used for that purpose (if it isn't already)EnGee wrote: ↑Sat Apr 17, 2021 2:01 pm
Also, there are few players in the market as far as I know, so I see a good opportunity for u-he to release such a product (It is already there, Hive!), but if the new Zebra can compete with Serum, Avenger ... etc, then why not. It still can produce everything else, so it can be like a Massive X quality but with a better GUI interactions and the advantage of a good care by a company like u-he.
In the end though we are a development driven company, not a marketing driven one. As such there is no role for particular genres to take part in the development process. To be blunt, the one time we did cater for a particular target audience - Hive - was the one time we failed, though luckily we managed to fix it 7 years later. We value input from experienced users no matter what music they make, and Hive is good proof of that.
Zebra 3 was talked about the day Zebra 2 went public beta, long before we actually mentioned it. Back then it would have looked exactly the same. But today, we look at the technologies available. We make some of the best sounding DSP algorithms out there in many, many areas. And these are not bought elsewhere, these are all our own inventions (many of the examples often named are created through contract work or licensing, but that's a whole different story to talk about). The same goes for our user experience, preset management, the whole package. I'm confident we'll solve a lot of the shortcomings Zebra certainly has, but we won't reinvent the wheel and make it a totally different concept.
Which brings me back to the question of whether or not it will be accepted by EDM people. That is something I don't think can be planned. EDM is apparently a set of genres where things get old-fashioned quickly. I think that's got a lot to do with the tools that define it more so than with it defining the tools. It seems to me that it's not only the sounds that mark the era, but the sounds are likewise identified by the synthesisers which made them. No matter if that's physical or psychological, it poses the problem that designing a synthesiser for contemporary styles of EDM may inherently lead to fast expiry. We need to think further than that.
In my view it is much more likely that pushing boundaries is contributing more to inspire culture than setting a framework on what's in the charts this week. Again, that doesn't mean we won't listen to individual concerns or ideas, but suggesting that Zebra 3 needs to match synth X or Y for particular sounds for particular genres simply isn't visionary enough. We'll have a look, but we won't stop there.
Still there are some points to be sure of. All teens and young trends changes fast, but if we notice other fashion industries, we see companies that are doing a line for young that changes fast other than their classic lines.
I don't know, I see that Hive is succeeding especially in the Dance world. So, you might keep Hive for the fast EDM results that suits young generation, while keep Zebra the classic power horse. In fact if Hive gets FM and sync with Zebra Oscillator's FX (like fold, symmetry, ...etc) I'm sure it will attract more EDM sound designers and automatically will be in the spot! But of course you know better.