New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
User avatar
] Peter:H [
KVRian
938 posts since 22 Sep, 2016

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am

Hi all,

only a very new owner of Pigments...

Regarding nirm123's question about modulating fx parameters: I just played around with it a little and found that some/most fx params are modulatable which is quite nice in combination with a Sequencer Pattern, Velocities and a lot of parameters influenced by Velocity, see attached patch.

Playing around with the sequencer, I feel it's quite good but could be even better. I would love to see...
1. Add more "value" lanes like Velocity for instance to add Macro values. Allow all Sequencer Values to be Modulation sources, even the note, the octave, the step number, ...
2. Add the possibility to assign different shapes for each step, for instance a "ramp up", "ramp down" or "double ramp up" shape instead of just assigning a static value.
3. Allow for longer patterns, 32 steps should be okay.

What I really like is the "bulb" thingy which allows patch authors to show where they think "edits" are most promising.

The Analog Engine is okay. What I missed is the phase control of the Oscillators. Seems there's only free running mode. It would nice to have a little more control here.

] Peter:H [
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
muki
KVRist
172 posts since 14 Jul, 2018

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:41 am

] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am
[…]
Playing around with the sequencer, I feel it's quite good but could be even better. I would love to see...
[…]
me too, but:
isn't all of that doable with functions, which basically is a 64 step sequenzer ?

nirm123
KVRist
81 posts since 7 Sep, 2012

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:06 am

] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am
Hi all,

only a very new owner of Pigments...

Regarding nirm123's question about modulating fx parameters: I just played around with it a little and found that some/most fx params are modulatable
] Peter:H [
wasn't my question but my answer instead that most of the fx parameters can be modulated (the clue is the knob image which is different).

User avatar
] Peter:H [
KVRian
938 posts since 22 Sep, 2016

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:08 am

muki wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:41 am
] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am
[…]
Playing around with the sequencer, I feel it's quite good but could be even better. I would love to see...
[…]
me too, but:
isn't all of that doable with functions, which basically is a 64 step sequenzer ?
Sure, I think you can do a lot of things with Functions ... I got more than one "Aha" moment when stepping through presets and thought, "Okay, let's check how the Sequencer is programmed on this one" only to find that all the "steps" were done with functions. Functions are an incredible powerfull thing.
Nevertheless I'm a lazy guy as well and always think about the most "natural"/user friendly/easy way to solve a task ... and for instance kraftwerks robot bass pattern is 32 steps. And if I want to do a steps thing I would choose the seq/arp as my tool... sure, that is my subjective approach how I would solve a problem and other people would do it differently ...

Anyway - I don't want to say that Pigments is not good. Usually if a Synth makes me think about "I want more of it", it has some kind of quality that is intriguing to me and it has already caught me ;-)

] Peter:H [
Last edited by ] Peter:H [ on Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
] Peter:H [
KVRian
938 posts since 22 Sep, 2016

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:09 am

nirm123 wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:06 am
] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am
Hi all,

only a very new owner of Pigments...

Regarding nirm123's question about modulating fx parameters: I just played around with it a little and found that some/most fx params are modulatable
] Peter:H [
wasn't my question but my answer instead that most of the fx parameters can be modulated (the clue is the knob image which is different).
Sorry, then I mixed things up ... hope you don't mind :-(

User avatar
Igro
KVRAF
4172 posts since 26 Apr, 2007 from Noosphere

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:10 am

BONES wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:32 pm
When an oscillator or engine's level is set to zero, there is still some barely audible tone getting through. I'd suggest it is less than the line noise you'd get from plugging a hardware synth into a mixer and could be seen as a feature as much as anything. It certainly does not impact sound quality in any way.
Bones, if you don't find these issues important, you need to say that it's just your opinion and it doesn't affect YOUR workflow.

For me it was important when I was doing my own synthetic snares. I used a built-in distortion on snares and this exaggerated the issue even more. So many ppl worked on a synth and there are sound issues poping now and then. See, U-he has a few developers, but their products are polished very well sound wise. I guess they are not just developers, they are audophiles as well.

User avatar
] Peter:H [
KVRian
938 posts since 22 Sep, 2016

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:25 am

Igro wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:10 am
BONES wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:32 pm
When an oscillator or engine's level is set to zero, there is still some barely audible tone getting through. I'd suggest it is less than the line noise you'd get from plugging a hardware synth into a mixer and could be seen as a feature as much as anything. It certainly does not impact sound quality in any way.
Bones, if you don't find these issues important, you need to say that it's just your opinion and it doesn't affect YOUR workflow.

For me it was important when I was doing my own synthetic snares. I used a built-in distortion on snares and this exaggerated the issue even more. So many ppl worked on a synth and there are sound issues poping now and then. See, U-he has a few developers, but their products are polished very well sound wise. I guess they are not just developers, they are audophiles as well.
Hm, Interessting. I cannot confirm this issue with my setup. I've checked it with Bitwig 3.1.2, Win 10, Pigments 2. I used a single note played in a loop. In Pigments I chose an Init patch, then for each engine I set volume to zero and slowly turned up the volume of my external monitor control. There was nothing audible.
Then I added a compressor right after Pigments in the signal chain in BItwig and set the input amplification to maximum. There was no audible sound nor any indication of sound in any of the the DAW meters.

Isn't that confusing?

User avatar
Igro
KVRAF
4172 posts since 26 Apr, 2007 from Noosphere

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:34 am

] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:25 am
Igro wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:10 am
BONES wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:32 pm
When an oscillator or engine's level is set to zero, there is still some barely audible tone getting through. I'd suggest it is less than the line noise you'd get from plugging a hardware synth into a mixer and could be seen as a feature as much as anything. It certainly does not impact sound quality in any way.
Bones, if you don't find these issues important, you need to say that it's just your opinion and it doesn't affect YOUR workflow.

For me it was important when I was doing my own synthetic snares. I used a built-in distortion on snares and this exaggerated the issue even more. So many ppl worked on a synth and there are sound issues poping now and then. See, U-he has a few developers, but their products are polished very well sound wise. I guess they are not just developers, they are audophiles as well.
Hm, Interessting. I cannot confirm this issue with my setup. I've checked it with Bitwig 3.1.2, Win 10, Pigments 2. I used a single note played in a loop. In Pigments I chose an Init patch, then for each engine I set volume to zero and slowly turned up the volume of my external monitor control. There was nothing audible.
Then I added a compressor right after Pigments in the signal chain in BItwig and set the input amplification to maximum. There was no audible sound nor any indication of sound in any of the the DAW meters.

Isn't that confusing?
Hi Peter.

I have attached a preset at Arturia forum (you need to log in to be able to see the attachments):

https://forum.arturia.com/index.php?topic=100638.0

User avatar
Igro
KVRAF
4172 posts since 26 Apr, 2007 from Noosphere

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:40 am

BONES wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:32 pm

The other issue he reports is audible clicking with fast attack times in the envelope when using the Matrix 12 filter model. Upon checking I discovered that it is not a problem with the filter at all but seems related to the amp section somehow, in that increasing the release on the Amp Envelope makes the clicking go away. That would not be the case if the problem was with the filter itself, because it is modulated by a different envelope. It also only occurs in certain situations, which makes it a bug, not an issue with sound quality. Or maybe it's intentional because that's what you get with a real Matrix 12? After all, audible clicking could be an issue with pretty much every hardware synth I've ever owned.

In any event. I find the Matrix 12 filters the poorest of all those on offer in Pigments. Resonance is practically non-existent and the more you turn it up, the less you seem to get. To my ears, the SEM filters are way, way better and even the generic Multimode filters sound better. I quite like the Surgeon filters, too, especially the Notch.
Because you don't like the Matrix filter, it doesn't mean the issue should be ignored. You said that this might be the Matrix filter behaviour. So why then Arturia didn't comment on this? Very poor communication. Ticket system confirmed the issue, but they did nothing to address this even in v2.

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
9334 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:43 pm

As I've said, how do you know there is an issue with the Matrix filter? Maybe that's how the real one behaves and it's just a super-accurate model? Until you know for a fact that it's not, you don't have an issue, just a feature. And again, if it was such a big issue, why didn't you bother working out the real cause?
Tj Shredder wrote:
Sat Jan 11, 2020 10:33 pm
A point where Pigments shines, is to easily find how a modulation is made and how easy it is to remap them to my expressive controls...
Absolutely! I think it's better in that regard than any other synth I have used. It's easy, for example, to hear that there is LFO modulation on something but often it's a pain to work out which LFO, especially when multiple LFO are being used.. Pigments makes that really obvious/simple.
] Peter:H [ wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:22 am
Playing around with the sequencer, I feel it's quite good but could be even better. I would love to see...
Why? Don't you use it inside a host application? My only use for the sequencer is when playing with the standalone version, so I can hear what is happening to the sound without having to hold down a key. Beyond that, it's never going to be as good as Cubase's piano roll so why would you use it with the VSTi?
Igro wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:10 am
Bones, if you don't find these issues important, you need to say that it's just your opinion and it doesn't affect YOUR workflow.
Clearly it didn't affect the workflow of any of the developers, beta testers or patch designers, either, or they might have fixed it. And if it was such a big issue for you, I'd have thought you would have at least spent the two or three minutes I did working out exactly where the problem was.
U-he has a few developers, but their products are polished very well sound wise. I guess they are not just developers, they are audophiles as well.
Hardly. They are just catering to a different market, because I'd take Pigments over any U-He synth I can think of. It feels way more polished and professional to me than the U-He synths I own (Hive and the RePros) and sounds at least as good.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 17 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, Win10), UR44C, Cubase, DUNE, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Hive, Substance, Arcsyn, Aparillo, Phase Plant, Pigments, Trueno, Analog Keys, MicroMonsta, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2.

machinesworking
KVRAF
1996 posts since 15 Aug, 2003 from seattle

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 4:19 pm

BONES wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:43 pm
Hardly. They are just catering to a different market, because I'd take Pigments over any U-He synth I can think of. It feels way more polished and professional to me than the U-He synths I own (Hive and the RePros) and sounds at least as good.
I don't see any direct reason for comparison. About all Pigments has in common with U-He synths, is they all can be classified as synths. Even Hive and Pigments as wavetable synths, different strengths and weaknesses. Plus flatly, Hive doesn't have an "analog emulation" oscillator, or granular synthesis, or regular sampling..

Pigments lives in it's own category really, like Lion, or Loom II etc. comparing to other synths is sort of useless. You either like it or you don't. Even the argument, or especially the argument about "sound quality" is such a weak argument. The absolute only thing I miss about the EMU E6400 Ultra I had was the band pass filter, it did things not other filter I've used did, if it was aliasing, or 16 bit etc. that did it, doesn't matter. I've tried to get that sound again to no avail.

perpetual3
KVRian
1152 posts since 28 Sep, 2012

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:15 pm

machinesworking wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 4:19 pm
BONES wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:43 pm
Hardly. They are just catering to a different market, because I'd take Pigments over any U-He synth I can think of. It feels way more polished and professional to me than the U-He synths I own (Hive and the RePros) and sounds at least as good.
I don't see any direct reason for comparison. About all Pigments has in common with U-He synths, is they all can be classified as synths. Even Hive and Pigments as wavetable synths, different strengths and weaknesses. Plus flatly, Hive doesn't have an "analog emulation" oscillator, or granular synthesis, or regular sampling..

Pigments lives in it's own category really, like Lion, or Loom II etc. comparing to other synths is sort of useless. You either like it or you don't. Even the argument, or especially the argument about "sound quality" is such a weak argument. The absolute only thing I miss about the EMU E6400 Ultra I had was the band pass filter, it did things not other filter I've used did, if it was aliasing, or 16 bit etc. that did it, doesn't matter. I've tried to get that sound again to no avail.
Re: Emu - TAL Sampler?

perpetual3
KVRian
1152 posts since 28 Sep, 2012

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:15 pm

@Bones

You can do some really cool things with the sequencer, Introducing randomness with probability, etc.

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
9334 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:31 pm

You say "cool", I say "pointless". It really makes no sense to me to want to do that kind of stuff in a synth. I can do it all in Cubase, plus a whole lot more.
machinesworking wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 4:19 pm
I don't see any direct reason for comparison. About all Pigments has in common with U-He synths, is they all can be classified as synths. Even Hive and Pigments as wavetable synths, different strengths and weaknesses. Plus flatly, Hive doesn't have an "analog emulation" oscillator, or granular synthesis, or regular sampling..
So what? They both sit in my VSTi folder which means every time I want to load a new synth into a project, they are competing for that job. To me that makes any comparison completely valid.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 17 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, Win10), UR44C, Cubase, DUNE, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Hive, Substance, Arcsyn, Aparillo, Phase Plant, Pigments, Trueno, Analog Keys, MicroMonsta, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2.

nirm123
KVRist
81 posts since 7 Sep, 2012

Re: New Pigments 2 Thread (On Topic Discussion Only, Please)

Post Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:51 pm

perpetual3 wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:15 pm
@Bones

You can do some really cool things with the sequencer, Introducing randomness with probability, etc.
I agree, actually I would have paid 69$ just for it as I can do things with it that I can't do elsewhere, I'm actually sort of playing the sequencer live, modifying randomness (and using regen to keep it dynamic) and then resetting to original state, you get a really organic performance which is amazing. also where I do see pigments sounds a bit lacking comparing to other synths I have (mostly bass sounds, hard for me to get a rich full bass I can easily get from other synths) I'm still using it to control other synths (mostly legend and massive x which I like to use for bass sounds).

Return to “Instruments”