iZotope Iris

[FarleyCZ]

Question: Demoing Iris got me into thinking about buying Alchemy again. With student discount I'd save about 40$ or so (compared to iris). Can't got them both by any way, so what would you choose? Eventhough this looks cool, Alchemy feels still a bit more ... beast-ish.

[Sampleconstruct]

I noticed in the video that playing higher keys resulting in the playhead moving faster and lower keys made it go slower, kind of like tape of vinyl behaves. Is there a way to make the playhead play the same speed regardless of pitch (while still being in spectral mode)?

On the upper right of the GUI set pitch to Radius instead of Resample to avoid chipmunking, this thread is full of it
Adjust the Radius settings to your liking (and CPU power).

[Sampleconstruct]

Question: Demoing Iris got me into thinking about buying Alchemy again. With student discount I'd save about 40$ or so (compared to iris). Can't got them both by any way, so what would you choose? Eventhough this looks cool, Alchemy feels still a bit more ... beast-ish.

If it's either or, get Alchemy.

[Echoes in the Attic]

I noticed in the video that playing higher keys resulting in the playhead moving faster and lower keys made it go slower, kind of like tape of vinyl behaves. Is there a way to make the playhead play the same speed regardless of pitch (while still being in spectral mode)?

On the upper right of the GUI set pitch to Radius instead of Resample to avoid chipmunking, this thread is full of it

Sorry, at work, haven't downloaded the demo yet. But couldn't help ask questions.

I thought Radius used granular resynthesis, no?

[Sampleconstruct]

I noticed in the video that playing higher keys resulting in the playhead moving faster and lower keys made it go slower, kind of like tape of vinyl behaves. Is there a way to make the playhead play the same speed regardless of pitch (while still being in spectral mode)?

On the upper right of the GUI set pitch to Radius instead of Resample to avoid chipmunking, this thread is full of it

Sorry, at work, haven't downloaded the demo yet. But couldn't help ask questions.

I thought Radius used granular resynthesis, no?

It stretches the audio quite well to the original speed of the wav file at all pitches, of course introducing more artifacts with extreme transpositions. But one can't alter the timestretching so it's always 100% of the original.

[lightsfadelow]

I noticed in the video that playing higher keys resulting in the playhead moving faster and lower keys made it go slower, kind of like tape of vinyl behaves. Is there a way to make the playhead play the same speed regardless of pitch (while still being in spectral mode)?

Yes if you turn on Radius RT it will time stretch so that the play head moves at the same rate for every key.

[Sampleconstruct]

Summarizing today's Iris-experiments in one widget:
http://soundcloud.com/sampleconstruct/s ... ting-iris/

[bmanic]

Well this is a rather interesting concept but I think iZotope missed a LOT of opportunities here.

It's rather basic actually, considering what might have been possible.

For instance, it'd be much more interesting if each marked area was treated as it's own key-group with it's own sends, envelopes and filters. It'd also be much more interesting if it did some stretching and tempo syncing together with the ability to force some marked zones as static, non-pitch shifting.

There was a LOT of potential here but perhaps it will evolve into a 2nd release a few years from now.

There's really nothing you can do here that you can't do in Alchemy, except the spectral synth part of Alchemy is mono. My money is on Alchemy Version 2. Once that comes around I'm certain it'll basically do the same plus a whole lot more.

Finally, I'm not entirely convinced by the actual sound produced by Iris. No matter how much you tweak, it all has a very "similar" sound to it. Would have been nice to be able to select the filter steepness or "edges" around each marked zone.

I understand that iZotope probably wanted to keep this as simple and as intuitive as possible but still.. it could have been so much more. Oh well.

Cheers!
bManic

[bmanic]

Question: Demoing Iris got me into thinking about buying Alchemy again. With student discount I'd save about 40$ or so (compared to iris). Can't got them both by any way, so what would you choose? Eventhough this looks cool, Alchemy feels still a bit more ... beast-ish.

If it's either or, get Alchemy.

It depends. Try both demos.

Alchemy is very cumbersome to work with when it comes to the spectral part.. and it's mono, but basically you can do some of the same things plus a whole lot more.

It's also well known that Camel Audio are constantly updating their product and I'm sure Alchemy 2.0 can't be more than a year away so investing in alchemy now might be a good idea. I don't know what iZotope's upgrade policy has been or how frequently they update their more exotic plugins.

Bang for buck definitely goes to Alchemy whereas ease of use and immediate cool results definitely goes to iZotope Iris.

Then there's also Image-Line Harmor to consider. Personally I can't stand the GUI of that thing but the results you can get with it are nothing short of amazing!

Cheers!
bManic

[cryophonik]

Well this is a rather interesting concept but I think iZotope missed a LOT of opportunities here.

It's rather basic actually, considering what might have been possible.

For instance, it'd be much more interesting if each marked area was treated as it's own key-group with it's own sends, envelopes and filters. It'd also be much more interesting if it did some stretching and tempo syncing together with the ability to force some marked zones as static, non-pitch shifting.

There was a LOT of potential here but perhaps it will evolve into a 2nd release a few years from now.

There's really nothing you can do here that you can't do in Alchemy, except the spectral synth part of Alchemy is mono. My money is on Alchemy Version 2. Once that comes around I'm certain it'll basically do the same plus a whole lot more.

Finally, I'm not entirely convinced by the actual sound produced by Iris. No matter how much you tweak, it all has a very "similar" sound to it. Would have been nice to be able to select the filter steepness or "edges" around each marked zone.

I understand that iZotope probably wanted to keep this as simple and as intuitive as possible but still.. it could have been so much more. Oh well.

Cheers!
bManic

I just expressed nearly the identical sentiments on another forum. So many missed opportunities here. I don't see how Izotope expects Iris to compete with Alchemy once the intro price is gone and it goes to $249 without seriously beefing this synth up.

[FarleyCZ]

Question: Demoing Iris got me into thinking about buying Alchemy again. With student discount I'd save about 40$ or so (compared to iris). Can't got them both by any way, so what would you choose? Eventhough this looks cool, Alchemy feels still a bit more ... beast-ish.

If it's either or, get Alchemy.

It depends. Try both demos.

Alchemy is very cumbersome to work with when it comes to the spectral part.. and it's mono, but basically you can do some of the same things plus a whole lot more.

It's also well known that Camel Audio are constantly updating their product and I'm sure Alchemy 2.0 can't be more than a year away so investing in alchemy now might be a good idea. I don't know what iZotope's upgrade policy has been or how frequently they update their more exotic plugins.

Bang for buck definitely goes to Alchemy whereas ease of use and immediate cool results definitely goes to iZotope Iris.

Then there's also Image-Line Harmor to consider. Personally I can't stand the GUI of that thing but the results you can get with it are nothing short of amazing!

Cheers!
bManic

My demo period of Alchemy is unfortunately long gone, but as I remember, I've seen much worse interfaces. I think it's gonna be Alchemy. They promisted more spectral mangling in their topic for the next version. Only thing bothering me is drag&drop. If I remember right, Alchemy does not support it. Iris does. Does Alchemy have some folder favoriting at least?

[rexlapin]

edit

[Ingonator]

I just found another important difference of Alchemy and Iris. In Alchemy you could edit the existing harmonic content by deleting or multiplying the amplitude of existing harmonics or adding new harmonics with a certain amplitude (by selecting the drawing color between black and white). This allows a deep editing of an imported sample or allows to create a totally new sound from scratch.

It would have been nice if Iris would have contained a 3D spectrogram display like iZotope Ozone 5 does. Based on the price of Iris (especially the full price) this is not a thing a customer could not ask for.
http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/o ... bridge.asp

If i have missed on of those two features in the current version of Iris please correct me.

I don't see how Izotope expects Iris to compete with Alchemy once the intro price is gone and it goes to $249 without seriously beefing this synth up.

Based on the things i mentioned above i got the same feeling. Just the ability of drag & drop of samples does not justify buying Iris while i already got Alchemy IMO, at least not at the current state of Iris.
With additional editing options and an additional 3D display i would maybe give Iris a go.


Ingo

[PietW.]

I think Harmor can do the same as IRIS and in Harmor in can import own Waves and Samples.
For me i am very Happy with Alchemy

[rexlapin]

Iris allows you to import your own samples as well. I think the strengths
of Iris are the flexibility and precision of it's selection tools. I often use
RX Advanced for sound design, and if you have Ozone 5 you can use the
Meter Bridge to see the results of your selections if you put it after Iris
(or use the Meter Tap plugin). Comparisons to Alchemy are inevitable but
they are not really meant to be competitive products. I have both and have
worked on the beta teams for both of them and enjoy both. Actually, Iris
came about as a suggestion from Dave Spiers at GForce to find a way to
make RX into a synthesizer (you can hear his voice near the end of the
"Final Transmission" video). Anyway, try the demo and if it seems worth
it to you buy it, and if it doesn't, don't.
Cheers,
Scott