Mixed impressions on u-he Zebra

[tetsuneko]

I just wanted to drop my few cents into this one.

Zebra is the first softsynth I ever considered worth owning. And by synth, I mean 'synth': Not a preset-bank-restaurant, not a sweet sounding square wave with 847284835628 times oversampling (and 'virtually no aliasing'TM) .. It is what you program out of it that makes the thing what it is.

I have been playing around with software synths for about a decade and they all have their strenghts & weaknesses. Z2 has been the first synth that I've run into that offered me all the features I could ever want from a synth: Enough modulation options, enough range in envelopes & lfo's (slow enough, fast enough!), enough synthesis modes, stable microtuning support.. Without having to resort to DIY systems like Reaktor / MaxMSP and such.

Soundwise, I don't think the sound is any thinner than the competition. I don't know what causes this perceptive illusion you are wondering about..I only know that I have these things happening to me as well, which has caused me to abandon all reasoning, logic and faith in DSP/digital audio theory... I only trust God and my ears now, and sometimes not even those :p

In terms of sound quality I'd say zebra is quite good, perhaps not the best in the world (haven't even heard all of the synths in the world anyway), but the options are so vast and one can always use external processors/fx to 'tighten up' the sounds if needed, that for me it's not an issue..

And what's this about Zebra not being a "wow" synth? Heck, I didn't even have to hear any sound from it, the specs alone made me go "wow"! And that was before I made my "press any key.." preset...

Sure, the world still needs SH-101's and millions of others of those classic units people talk about.. But if I'd have to pick just one (soft)synth it would still be Zebra. And not because of any single reason.. for many, many reasons.

I hope this adds something to this discussion and doesn't just repeat what others have already said.. (I'm typing this from the countryside with a <1k/sec connection and reading all msgs on this thread would take heaps of time)


Cheers

[Urs]

Additionally I don't agree that you need a specially designed synth engine to get sounds that stand out for solo and another optimized for sounds that fit well together in a mix. Excuse me, but I think that argument is nonsense.

Hehe, I guess you misunderstood my argument. I don't think you need different engines. I just said that different synths tend to be optimized for different effects. The default settings of mine are all about "nice but clean" (some may call it "thin"). From there on you can bend them to whatever you want. Other synths are optimized to sound "strong" - such as the Virus. I find latter synths hard to fit in a mix, due to the tricks used, one of them being the built-in pseudo-compresssion.

#--

The often mentioned attenuation of upper end has many positive effects IMHO, one of which is that I find the raw oscillators more pleasant sounding, on the other hand it helps keeping aliasing out, without oversampling - which in turn is good for cpu usage.

Urs

[aaastronomer]

another 2 cent piece...zebra 2's not 'thin' but pellucid! i think your demo, demos this quite well, especially in the more 'ambient' breaks. however, i must admit a bias. i had had enough of the thick fat organic analog synth sounds by the mid-80s and started to really admire the 'analytical' sounds of the fm/pm synths used in a lot of 'new wave' music. this bias remains to this day. (thick analog sounds just sound 'old fashion' to me. new is chaotic, gritty, and granulated. musique concrete redux?) however, i do recognize the usefulness of 'thick' as a benchmark for s/w synths in achieving the sonic quality of the best of h/w synths.

[Lotuzia]

I think there are simply different schools of synth design. One example is "those that compensate for filter cutoff volume drop and those that don't". When you close Zebra's cutoff, the volume of the tone will drop. This is because high harmonics are taken out while lower harmonics preserve their level.

I think that some synth developers boost the volume at low cutoff to add that extra ooomph (which is also what happens in FM-Synthesis as the overall amplitude stays the same and is shared among harmonics, so that less harmonics seem to come out louder). ...... ....

....
Hence I think that Zebra is not a wow-synth. It's a most-times-rewarding-get-used-to synth.

Urs

Yep this is a synth design choice and both options seems open, but can be handled easily with sound design, provided that you have enough basic modulation sources/targets to make filter tweak compensation with volume tweaking. A technique we use from the beginning.

To apply or not compensation then really depends of this_preset and its overall usability. A choice that is fully available in Zebra.

(This said former real FM (Yamaha) synths didn't have any filters so it wasn't too much of a problem to handle cut off drops down. As "harmonics" amplitude can be handled in a perfect independant way if you choose the right algorythms ie the ones with independant oscillators groups)

LtZ

[Urs]

(This said former real FM (Yamaha) synths didn't have any filters so it wasn't too much of a problem to handle cut off drops down. As "harmonics" amplitude can be handled in a perfect independant way if you choose the right algorythms ie the ones with independant oscillators groups)

A property of FM is that the amplitude of a carrier stays constant regardless of any modulator amount. Hence FM does not suffer from that much from a volume drop when harmonics are taken away. Instead, the fundamental becomes louder with decreasing harmonics. Which is an effect similar to volume boost on low filter cutoff in subtractive synths.

This I guess is responsible for "suitability" of FM for percussive sounds and bass.

Urs

[Lotuzia]

(This said former real FM (Yamaha) synths didn't have any filters so it wasn't too much of a problem to handle cut off drops down. As "harmonics" amplitude can be handled in a perfect independant way if you choose the right algorythms ie the ones with independant oscillators groups)

A property of FM is that the amplitude of a carrier stays constant regardless of any modulator amount. Hence FM does not suffer from that much from a volume drop when harmonics are taken away. Instead, the fundamental becomes louder with decreasing harmonics. Which is an effect similar to volume boost on low filter cutoff in subtractive synths.

This I guess is responsible for "suitability" of FM for percussive sounds and bass.

Urs

ahhhh ok ok I see what you meant is that if a carrier is in a a sustained (constant) phase while its modulator operator is quickly decaying for example, the volume of the carrier will remain constant (ie they are truly independant with their resp "volume" Evs). Yes you're totally right. Carrier Op handles the volume in FM, whatever the structure/number of its modulators .

And that fact would be responsible for the popular percussive sounds in FM.

Well never saw things with that approach but yes it's an interesting idea. Very sharp attacks, related to the famous clicky "pop" attack of the first FM synths, might be another reason maybe.

So, Ooops, Sorry. Seems that I misinterpreted your words in your first post. (Nicest way to say it might not have been that clear

Anyway I love FM, and Zebra can have some nice FM flavors afaics

LtZ

[Electrobop]

I'm new to electronic music, so I spent a lot of my time in the plug-in ratings section by KVR members. I didn't know what to listen for so I download almost every single vsti out there, free or commercial.

I noticed three things.

1. Some had a "stringy" sound to them.
2. Some were very clear.
3. Each synth had its own "color".

Clarity was everything to me, in the end I had a list of 4.

Zeta
White Noise Additive
Zero Vector
Zebra

It wasn't until I start using Zeta more that I noticed something. I was flipping through each patch very quickly. I noticed that the "color" didn't change but the shape of the sound did.

Additive and Zero Vector's signature wasn't as apparent to me because of the brightness and patches, but I soon started to hear their signatures as well.

Like Zeta, Zebra also has a very apparent signature.

I'm not sure if the signature really matters, in a mix with different synths, they all seem to blend together and create one new sound.

Some people use the words neutral, cold, digital.
I've used the word grey, because I was staring at a grey gui.
Which of course is wrong.

Zebra has an extremely clean, smooth and clear sound.
I don't know how to make sounds yet, so I bought all the commercial banks.
They are all brilliant.
Adam Van Baker's sound set shows how Zebra can have a really big/fat sound.

I bought Additive, Zero Vector, and Zebra.

Lately, I've only been using Zebra. Best synth I have ever used. Just plain damn musical.

My girlfriend calls it "The synth with the pretty sound".

One question.

Urs Heckmann, are you a genius?

Electrobop

[bmrzycki]

My girlfriend calls it "The synth with the pretty sound".

Sounds like a good quote for the U-He website

[djsubject]

My girlfriend calls it "The synth with the pretty sound".

she would not say that if she heard what i use it for

i tend to call Zebra my dirty bitch

Subz

[ObsoleteAcc99]

[DELETED]

[djsubject]

All i know is for someone like me that thought zebra was nothing special, now it's a complete must own tool.

No, i'm not a programmer, but some of these recent third party banks have really shown finally what this monster is capable of. To be honest, i think it's as far from thin as possible. I think its rich warm and lush, and its now in my top 10 of all time.

the pre-sets have come a long way since then indeed (including the included ones)

i'm thinking of doing a D&B pre-set bank to sell for just enough to buy transmission & Zebra Science (& not a penny more!! so i'm not sure the best way to sell them )

but i'll worry about that after i get them finished

Subz

[very angry mobster]

Hi TiUser,

I think I know what "subtle plastic" sound your talking about. IMO it's as Electrobob said, it is Zebra's signature. Even in supposably "warm" patches I still hear the same sound. I hear it as being "cold" but parhaps "extremely clean, smooth and clear sound" is more accurate. That sound is why I bought Zebra.

However the other day a mate came round, I'm working on a song. It's just a couple of pad's by Zebra and some drum samples. Where I hear cold pads, he says "What synth is this? It's so warm!"


Shannon.

[dusted william]

For a few years I've been on the fence on Zebra. Never really liking the sound of it too much when I demo'd it.

When all the cool presets came out for it, I knew I would want it...so I got it.

Now it is for sure one of my top synths, it is a pure electronic dream synth. Really does fit in the mix, and I have to say I love it.

I can now see what all the hype was about. oh...and it is actually pretty easy to program too!

dw

[TiUser]

Hi TiUser,

I think I know what "subtle plastic" sound your talking about. IMO it's as Electrobob said, it is Zebra's signature. Even in supposably "warm" patches I still hear the same sound. I hear it as being "cold" but parhaps "extremely clean, smooth and clear sound" is more accurate. That sound is why I bought Zebra.

However the other day a mate came round, I'm working on a song. It's just a couple of pad's by Zebra and some drum samples. Where I hear cold pads, he says "What synth is this? It's so warm!"


Shannon.

Think this is close to what I mean also I still think words are always inaccurate to nail it.

Well, concerning your mate, perception remains very individual, there is no real meter for that. I would go that far to say if you listen to the same synthsounds in a green, red and blue rehearsal room you would state different sound perception...as well as you might rate different when you heard a "thinner" or "thicker" sound before... it's so difficult because I think it is all very relative... just if I'd have to listen to hoover sounds for five munutes (I hate this type of sounds) then nearly anything later is sweet, soft and simply great...

Maybe my "problem" is that I think a synth should be free of any special "signature" and be able to do everything. I know that might be an illusion but maybe that's the point in my experience.

And just to repeat, Zebra is a stunning VSTi, otherwise I wouldn't be interested much at all...

[beej]

Zebra does have a signature character, but it's flexible enough to be able to get away from that to a certain extent with a bit of work.

If you don't like what you hear, then it's perhaps not the right synth for you - that doesn't make your opinions invalid, or Zebra flawed - no-one is supposed to like everything...

Zebra is however a very rewarding synth to get stuck into, largely because it contains a lot of excellent tools, and let's you combine them in a quick, easy and accessible way - it's like a modular without the pain

It can't do everything, but it can do a *lot* - cold digital, warm thick VA, phase distortion, FM, physical modelling and so on, and it's very flexible. Of course, if you don't program or even tweak, then you are simply looking for a collection of useful sounds to you - and if the sounds you have tried don't do it for you, then again, you're probably best off looking elsewhere.

So, five pages later, and you still have the same opinion, so I'm not sure why you're still debating it. If you don't like it, move on. We won't take it personally, y'know...