Available soon: Tone2 ElectraX

[himalaya]

A good solution would be a 'performance' page with 8 or so knobs, where we could assign the cutoff from all filters to the Performance cutoff, in case where we'd like to sweep the cutoff of all filters simultaneously.

[MaxSynths]

- Why have four layers that act as if they are four separate synths in one instance if it's not multi-timbral?

You can set a different MIDI channel for each synth in the settings panel and control each synth independently from the others.

I'm not understanding a benefit factor for this since it's not multi-timbral.

I can't understand what do you mean for multi-timbral then.
In my home studio a multitimbral device offers different sounds on different MIDI channels each with its independent options (like volume, pan, filter cutoff, filter resonance and so on...). ElectraX can be considered a 4 part multitimbral instruments, if you want to use it in this way...

Concerning the filter complaint... well maybe a master filter could be implemented in the future. Personally I don't like/need it; when you are using 12 oscillators (twelve!) this means that the patch you are using is very complex and each synth has his own settings for filters and other parameters. In other words I think you don't need a master filter for complex patches where all 4 synths are used.

Also keep in mind that if you want to control the filters of the 4 synths at the same time you can assign the same modulation options for the realtime filter control (for example assign the modulation wheel as a controller for the filter cutoff for all the synths and you are ready for the sweeeeeeeep).

I think ElectraX it's very easy to understand... BTW a quick look to the manual could help to better understand some things

[djanthonyw]

As far as I can tell, there is not an option for multiple outputs which is why I said it's not multi-timbral. This is why I don't really understand the point of essentially having four instances of the synth within one instance, especially with no master filter.

I also think the other issues need to be addressed:

I originally tried demoing this when it came out, but there was a bug that prevented it from working in Logic at the time. I finally got around to demoing it properly and the sound is very good, however my dislikes:

- The layout is nice, but they really need to lose the perspective 3d / cartoonish interface. The GUI could also be smaller.

- Why have four layers that act as if they are four separate synths in one instance if it's not multi-timbral? Maybe have a regular, less expensive version called "Electra" with only one layer and then have a 4 layer, multi-timbral version called "ElectraX".

- I'm sure there's a better spot for the resource files than the root plugin folder? Maybe have them install inside Library/Preferences/Tone2/ElectraX.

Besides this it seems very promising, but honestly the GUI is a big issue for me.

[MaxSynths]

As far as I can tell, there is not an option for multiple outputs which is why I said it's not multi-timbral.

As said before multi-timbral is not what you think
An instrument can be multitimbral and have only a stereo output. For example a cheap General MIDI expander: it's a 16 part multi-timbral instrument because it can receive and playback 16 independent parts at the same time... but very often a cheap expander has only a stereo output.

BTW I can't see the benefit to have multiple outs on ElectraX to be honest. The fx section offers a lot of interesting options, are you sure you need to process the output of each layer with external effects?

For me it's enough to program or import different patches and put them in layer on the same instance... to do the same thing using other synths it's a nightmare. BTW it's matter of taste/workflow/knowledge/etc.

[MaxSynths]

I also think the other issues need to be addressed:

Are you talking about the GUI and the files in the root folder?
I avoided to reply because are simply ridiculous complaints

We are not talking about the Monna Lisa... it's an instrument and the GUI is perfect. I don't like endless discussions about the look of a 3D knob, sorry. The GUI as is is very nice, and that's all.

Concerning the files in the root folder... well this is the first time I hear something like this

Don't take offence, but almost all those comments are on the troll/newbie/IDKWIS* border-line





















*I don't know what I'm saying

[bmanic]

- Why have four layers that act as if they are four separate synths in one instance if it's not multi-timbral?

You can set a different MIDI channel for each synth in the settings panel and control each synth independently from the others.

I'm not understanding a benefit factor for this since it's not multi-timbral. Each of the layers act as a whole other synth, but in the same instance. As far as I can tell there isn't even a master cut off knob for all of the layers combined, you have to adjust the cut off or anything else for each of the four layers if you want to do a coherent effect like a filter sweep. If I want to layer stuff I could just load up another instance on another channel so that I can use different insert fx on each one.

The topology of "4 different synths" for layers is actually very common in the rompler world of Roland and Korg. Especially roland has been employing this kind of structure since the JV-1080.. no, wait, heck even the JD-880!

It's a very nice way to do complex sound design under one single preset that the user can easily recall. It's like building legos.. first you think of the "meat" of a sound. Then the "filler" and then perhaps some extra stuff that comes with a delayed envelope, the "fairy dust".

Think about how successful Korg was with the concept of the "Combi" sounds. They were basically 16 presets smashed into one.

Besides, what use is "multi-timbral" in this day and age of VST plugins? Need more separate instances? Create more channels.

I actually prefer it just the way it is. This way it is simple to create really complex presets while still retaining everything under a single preset name.

Cheers!
bManic

[djanthonyw]

Regarding the placement of the files, it's pretty standard for those kind of things to be installed in a preference folder to keep some consistency. I personally like to keep things organized with my files and it's just nice when developers follow standard guidelines instead of placing random files over the file system where they usually aren't installed by any other software.

Like I said, the GUI was my main complaint. It's something you are looking at for a long time if you program sounds and that's something that will put off me as well as others from making a purchase.

Back to the layer system, ok, I'm in agreement and understanding, but I still do think it could use a master filter.

[rj0]

Recently, this kind of question has been on my mind as well.

As a result, whenever I now evaluate a synth, I always look at whether the layers interact (including modulations/controls, of course).

And if they don't seem to interact, I find myself wondering what the advantages are (other than, possibly, CPU efficiency) over just inserting multiple instances?

Otherwise, why did they bother?


(And yes, this adversely affected my take on ElectraX, otherwise I wouldn't be mentioning it here.)

[MaxSynths]

Regarding the placement of the files, it's pretty standard for those kind of things to be installed in a preference folder to keep some consistency.

Well I don't care where the preference files are... usually I hate programs that create folders in my documents folder. BTW I don't see it as a major problem

Like I said, the GUI was my main complaint. It's something you are looking at for a long time if you program sounds

I program sound for it and I feel very comfortable with the black GUI.
BTW you can choose four different styles for the GUI

Back to the layer system, ok, I'm in agreement and understanding, but I still do think it could use a master filter.

Yes a master filter could be useful for some users.

[bmanic]

Agreed. A master filter would be nice to have but then it'd probably also need to have a master envelope as well as the ability to route velocity, modulation and keyboard track values to it!

Cheers!
bManic

[rj0]

The topology of "4 different synths" for layers is actually very common in the rompler world of Roland and Korg. Especially roland has been employing this kind of structure since the JV-1080.. no, wait, heck even the JD-880!

It's a very nice way to do complex sound design under one single preset that the user can easily recall. It's like building legos.. first you think of the "meat" of a sound. Then the "filler" and then perhaps some extra stuff that comes with a delayed envelope, the "fairy dust".

Think about how successful Korg was with the concept of the "Combi" sounds. They were basically 16 presets smashed into one.

Besides, what use is "multi-timbral" in this day and age of VST plugins? Need more separate instances? Create more channels.

I actually prefer it just the way it is. This way it is simple to create really complex presets while still retaining everything under a single preset name.

Cheers!
bManic

Good point (came in during my musings above).

Having a "delayed envelope" is definitely a plus for that.

[Sampleconstruct]

Whoever is looking for some fresh ElectraX patches: I'm working on a Sound Bank for it to be released in Octobre, here is the patchpool page with more infos.

[core]

Whoever is looking for some fresh ElectraX patches: I'm working on a Sound Bank for it to be released in Octobre, here is the patchpool page with more infos.

Good news

[MaxSynths]

Other two banks will be available soon:

Atmosphera and Percussion Elements...

[cyphersuit]

I heard a rumor about a big update coming!? Is this true?