Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
quilys
KVRist
52 posts since 26 Jul, 2014

Post Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:39 pm

Zero dB wrote:
Fri Apr 05, 2019 7:44 am
Reading about the patch browsing lag, I'm wondering how people are finding the performance of the new 2.6 version compares with version 1.x?

I recently upgraded to 2.5 from version 1 and have been really disappointed by the slowness. As others report above, there's UI lag when loading patches that simply did not exist in version 1. Frankly the whole thing just seems pretty bloated compared with v1! (I've a bunch of points on that note I've been discussing with their support - can post here later if anyone's interested).

So I'm wondering if there's any improvement at all on 2.6 v 2.5... or should I consider going back to version 1.5?! Would love to get the thoughts from people on Windows specifically. I'm on Win 7 but I don't imagine there would be too much of a difference between 7 and 10?

Cheers

Ben
Spectrasonics has not improved at all the outgoing sound of Omnisphere, it continues to sound like the first version. Now with four layers the CPU suffers more, before in my Intel i7 ate 7% with some open instances, now it does not go below 20%. It is still very basic and primitive in the handling of samples, you can not even visualize the wave, but if you can visualize it in an editing method (Fragtals), Omnisphere needs to incorporate basic sampling tools, even if it is a synthesizer, it is a break, therefore the point that 'no' can sample is not valid because it is a synthesizer, it is a ROMPLER with synthesizer capabilities, which is not the same. That version 3.0 incorporates a mini version of the Kontakt and will be unbeatable.

Echoes in the Attic
KVRAF
6557 posts since 12 May, 2008

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:52 pm

quilys wrote:
Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:39 pm
Zero dB wrote:
Fri Apr 05, 2019 7:44 am
Reading about the patch browsing lag, I'm wondering how people are finding the performance of the new 2.6 version compares with version 1.x?

I recently upgraded to 2.5 from version 1 and have been really disappointed by the slowness. As others report above, there's UI lag when loading patches that simply did not exist in version 1. Frankly the whole thing just seems pretty bloated compared with v1! (I've a bunch of points on that note I've been discussing with their support - can post here later if anyone's interested).

So I'm wondering if there's any improvement at all on 2.6 v 2.5... or should I consider going back to version 1.5?! Would love to get the thoughts from people on Windows specifically. I'm on Win 7 but I don't imagine there would be too much of a difference between 7 and 10?

Cheers

Ben
Spectrasonics has not improved at all the outgoing sound of Omnisphere, it continues to sound like the first version. Now with four layers the CPU suffers more, before in my Intel i7 ate 7% with some open instances, now it does not go below 20%. It is still very basic and primitive in the handling of samples, you can not even visualize the wave, but if you can visualize it in an editing method (Fragtals), Omnisphere needs to incorporate basic sampling tools, even if it is a synthesizer, it is a break, therefore the point that 'no' can sample is not valid because it is a synthesizer, it is a ROMPLER with synthesizer capabilities, which is not the same. That version 3.0 incorporates a mini version of the Kontakt and will be unbeatable.
You can visualize the wave since 2.5
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.

noiseboyuk
KVRAF
2646 posts since 25 Jan, 2007

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sat Apr 06, 2019 11:27 pm

Still, this is progress - we had to get to page 23 before someone made a post as dumb as quilys'. That used to be the standard-issue 2nd post.
http://www.guyrowland.co.uk
http://www.afterschoolvideoclub.com/
W10 Pro Creators Edition, i7 7820X, 64gb RAM, RME Babyface, 1050ti, PT 2018 Ultimate, Cubase Pro 9
MBP 2015 OSX 10.13.3 2.8ghz 16gb 1TB SSD

User avatar
topaz
KVRAF
4395 posts since 15 Jul, 2001 from Holmfirth, West Yorkshire, U.K

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sun Apr 07, 2019 12:00 am

:hihi:
noiseboyuk wrote:
Sat Apr 06, 2019 11:27 pm
Still, this is progress - we had to get to page 23 before someone made a post as dumb as quilys'. That used to be the standard-issue 2nd post.

TheSynthScientist
KVRist
161 posts since 29 Nov, 2018

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sun Apr 07, 2019 3:13 am

Tasty update!

gentleclockdivider
KVRAF
1724 posts since 22 Mar, 2009 from gent

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sun Apr 07, 2019 1:27 pm

quilys wrote:
Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:39 pm
Zero dB wrote:
Fri Apr 05, 2019 7:44 am
Reading about the patch browsing lag, I'm wondering how people are finding the performance of the new 2.6 version compares with version 1.x?

I recently upgraded to 2.5 from version 1 and have been really disappointed by the slowness. As others report above, there's UI lag when loading patches that simply did not exist in version 1. Frankly the whole thing just seems pretty bloated compared with v1! (I've a bunch of points on that note I've been discussing with their support - can post here later if anyone's interested).

So I'm wondering if there's any improvement at all on 2.6 v 2.5... or should I consider going back to version 1.5?! Would love to get the thoughts from people on Windows specifically. I'm on Win 7 but I don't imagine there would be too much of a difference between 7 and 10?

Cheers

Ben
it is a ROMPLER with synthesizer capabilities, which is not the same.
Image
:tu:
Eyeball exchanging
Soul calibrating ..frequencies

Echoes in the Attic
KVRAF
6557 posts since 12 May, 2008

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sun Apr 07, 2019 3:33 pm

gentleclockdivider wrote:
Sun Apr 07, 2019 1:27 pm
quilys wrote:
Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:39 pm
Zero dB wrote:
Fri Apr 05, 2019 7:44 am
Reading about the patch browsing lag, I'm wondering how people are finding the performance of the new 2.6 version compares with version 1.x?

I recently upgraded to 2.5 from version 1 and have been really disappointed by the slowness. As others report above, there's UI lag when loading patches that simply did not exist in version 1. Frankly the whole thing just seems pretty bloated compared with v1! (I've a bunch of points on that note I've been discussing with their support - can post here later if anyone's interested).

So I'm wondering if there's any improvement at all on 2.6 v 2.5... or should I consider going back to version 1.5?! Would love to get the thoughts from people on Windows specifically. I'm on Win 7 but I don't imagine there would be too much of a difference between 7 and 10?

Cheers

Ben
it is a ROMPLER with synthesizer capabilities, which is not the same.
Image
:tu:
"A rompler with synth capabilities.." haha. Wow, we've got an ignorant one here. Yeah just a few synth capabilties like morphable wavetable oscillators, each with frequency modulation, ring modulation, waveshaping, unison and stacking, hard sync, granular etc. But yeah, um , mainly a rompler right?...
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.

User avatar
beely
KVRAF
1698 posts since 6 Jul, 2013

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:04 pm

Some people just don't like to let facts get in the way of an opinion... :lol:

vertibration
KVRist
70 posts since 11 Nov, 2010 from ny

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:53 pm

My gripe is not with its synthesis capabilities, or anything like that. I think it sounds great. I am just hoping they add some sort of custom parameter editing for their hardware profiles even if you dont have the hardware. Sort of like the mod matrix page, but customized to each profiles parameters of the actual hardware so its much easier to create custom patches if you dont have the hardware

jobinho
KVRist
130 posts since 8 May, 2015

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:59 pm

If Omnisphere loaded NKI I would jump to the moon :roll:

noiseboyuk
KVRAF
2646 posts since 25 Jan, 2007

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:23 pm

vertibration wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:53 pm
My gripe is not with its synthesis capabilities, or anything like that. I think it sounds great. I am just hoping they add some sort of custom parameter editing for their hardware profiles even if you dont have the hardware. Sort of like the mod matrix page, but customized to each profiles parameters of the actual hardware so its much easier to create custom patches if you dont have the hardware
I don't quite get how that would work. Many of these profiles are insanely complex, with literally thousands of parameters - even just limiting to 1 channel can be many hundreds. Take a look at one - click "Show Current Midi Assignments" on any remotely complex hardware profile and then experience your eyes glazing over.

Personally I still think a front page a la the Trilian or Keyscape controls would be neatest, with a cute nod to the hardware UI. Just a dozen or so controls which give the best unique flavour of that synth, especially when they control multiple Omni parameters.
jobinho wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:59 pm
If Omnisphere loaded NKI I would jump to the moon :roll:
Would be great if it could edit photoshop files too. And book flights.
http://www.guyrowland.co.uk
http://www.afterschoolvideoclub.com/
W10 Pro Creators Edition, i7 7820X, 64gb RAM, RME Babyface, 1050ti, PT 2018 Ultimate, Cubase Pro 9
MBP 2015 OSX 10.13.3 2.8ghz 16gb 1TB SSD

Echoes in the Attic
KVRAF
6557 posts since 12 May, 2008

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:40 pm

noiseboyuk wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 2:23 pm
vertibration wrote:
Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:53 pm
My gripe is not with its synthesis capabilities, or anything like that. I think it sounds great. I am just hoping they add some sort of custom parameter editing for their hardware profiles even if you dont have the hardware. Sort of like the mod matrix page, but customized to each profiles parameters of the actual hardware so its much easier to create custom patches if you dont have the hardware
I don't quite get how that would work. Many of these profiles are insanely complex, with literally thousands of parameters - even just limiting to 1 channel can be many hundreds. Take a look at one - click "Show Current Midi Assignments" on any remotely complex hardware profile and then experience your eyes glazing over.

Personally I still think a front page a la the Trilian or Keyscape controls would be neatest, with a cute nod to the hardware UI. Just a dozen or so controls which give the best unique flavour of that synth, especially when they control multiple Omni parameters.
I agree, I think they should have done Trilian style Macro pages for their supported synths, but maybe that would have been a lot of work. I mean they'd have to do a different layout for each profile. Though when you think of how easy it is to do macro pages in something like Falcon or Halion, I'm sure they could have whipped up something that was relatively easy to put together for each new profile. Actually this gives me an idea. I'd love to see a macro page builder like Halion/Falcon, which lets you either assign macros, or assign a control from one of the hardware profiles. For example you add a knob and assign it to Little Phatty overdrive, or Juno Chorus I/II, which like the hardware counterpart would run exactly the same functions, such as instantiating the effect and turning it on, or effecting several parameters at once (overdrive/volume etc.). This way people could make simplified macro pages, which would be a big deal for preset developers and also allow getting access to the midi mapping that are already set up for hardware. Seems pretty doable to me, selecting a hardware profile knob/button just has to send the midi commands of that specific macro.I might have to suggest this. Others should too! Imagine being able to combine hardware profile functions! That would also make midi mapping easy to hardware because you would just have to midi map those macros which in turn do multiple things in the Omnisphere main engine.
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.

noiseboyuk
KVRAF
2646 posts since 25 Jan, 2007

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Wed Apr 10, 2019 2:06 am

It's a nice idea Echoes, but it does feel a bit like mission creep. The best they could do is to name each CC / NRPN number in their database for the hardware profile, and then give users a menu to select a control which is then assigned as a knob / fader / button, with an appropriate range etc. It would be a pretty unwieldy menu with all the different manufactures, models, areas of the synth and then specific controls. It all reminds me of the headache-inducing VSL automation panel. And - worse - it wouldn't really work in many cases. Specific controls for some synths rely on particular FX being in the chain. If it wasn't there, it wouldn't work. If it were invoked, it might blitz over what was originally there.

Even ignoring these significant practical issues, somehow I can't quite see it in the Spectrasonics world. Their paradigm isn't really about users building their own UIs.

But the Trilian / Keyscape style front pages... well that does feel much more company style, continuing an existing design aesthetic in fact. It doesn't make sense to replicate all the basics of ADSR etc, but just put the big controls and funky idiosyncratic stuff there on its own page, along with stuff that triggers complex modulation routings.

Then they could do a few other cute things across the rest of the synth that would help. For example, the layer mixer in Main is all set up with default waveforms for the appropriate synth, which is really nice. It would be lovely touch to go one stage further. The arrow buttons could light up when there was a model-appropriate waveform hiding in the next option. It would be bright blue with a thin blue box, exactly mirroring the HW hardware profile button at the top of the synth. Then it turns back to thin white without the box when you've run out of that model's choices. Same for the filters. You'd retain the option to roam at will, but it gives you a nudge in the direction of that particular model if you want to follow its own programming architecture.

EDIT - While they're at it, I'd move the Trilian / Keyscape / Synth Panel controls to their own dedicated button alongside ORB/MAIN/A/B/C/D/FX/ARP.
http://www.guyrowland.co.uk
http://www.afterschoolvideoclub.com/
W10 Pro Creators Edition, i7 7820X, 64gb RAM, RME Babyface, 1050ti, PT 2018 Ultimate, Cubase Pro 9
MBP 2015 OSX 10.13.3 2.8ghz 16gb 1TB SSD

Echoes in the Attic
KVRAF
6557 posts since 12 May, 2008

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Wed May 15, 2019 5:53 am

The 2.6.1 update has a couple nice things. Arrows to go through filter presets is nice. Also the auto playback functions a lot like a preview as you hear the sound a fair bit before the patch loads so you can go through hearing presets pretty quickly.
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.

User avatar
Biome_Digital
KVRian
687 posts since 9 Jan, 2014 from Worldwide

Re: Omnisphere 2.6 announced at NAMM [RELEASED 27-03-19]

Post Wed May 15, 2019 1:36 pm

Looking forward to the update!

Return to “Instruments”