Spire Synthesizer

[recursive one]

loving the new update 1.0.1
you reduced the intermodular calls the half - it opens now as fast as sylenth1 does, everything works faster i feel, but the cpu usage is still to high compared to sylenth1 - i suggest some CPU modes like Massive has.

The CPU usage should be high as opposed to Sylenth, because Spire is in an entirely different league than Sylenth. All the comparison to Sylenth is....I hate to sound rude...but it is comical. Would you compare Sylenth to Camel Alchemy? Would you compare a Ford Focus to an Cadillac? Sylenth is a very limited one-trick pony that should be have low CPU consumption... as it does very little in comparison to Spire. People- at least find an appropriate synth when doing comparisons.

But Sylenth just sounds good, no matter how limited it is. If I design, let's say, a basic saw unison patch with filter envelope with Sylenth and then recreate the same patch architecture with Spire, they will sound equally good, but CPU consumtion with Spire will be much higher.

The sound quality/CPU use ratio in Sylenth still amazes me. I have some synths that provide comparable or higher sonic quality (Synthmaster, Spire, Tal emulations), but take much more CPU for that (of cource, if we speek only about the type of patches Sylenth can do).

[Ameyah Audio]

loving the new update 1.0.1
you reduced the intermodular calls the half - it opens now as fast as sylenth1 does, everything works faster i feel, but the cpu usage is still to high compared to sylenth1 - i suggest some CPU modes like Massive has.

The CPU usage should be high as opposed to Sylenth, because Spire is in an entirely different league than Sylenth. All the comparison to Sylenth is....I hate to sound rude...but it is comical. Would you compare Sylenth to Camel Alchemy? Would you compare a Ford Focus to an Cadillac? Sylenth is a very limited one-trick pony that should be have low CPU consumption... as it does very little in comparison to Spire. People- at least find an appropriate synth when doing comparisons.

But Sylenth just sounds good, no matter how limited it is. If I design, let's say, a basic saw unison patch with filter envelope with Sylenth and then recreate the same patch architecture with Spire, they will sound equally good, but CPU consumtion with Spire will be much higher.

The sound quality/CPU use ratio in Sylenth still amazes me. I have some synths that provide comparable or higher sonic quality (Synthmaster, Spire, Tal emulations), but take much more CPU for that (of cource, if we speek only about the type of patches Sylenth can do).

Lennard came a long way with Sylenth1. i think if Spire will get more optimation it can stand up to Sylenth1.
i also suggested to make cpu save modes like for example massive has:
like draft, normal. high and ultra. (thats a lot of work, but its worth it).
if you can get closer to the cpu usage of sylenth1 you can enter the majority of productions, because why should i use Spire, when it takes more cpu for the same sound sylenth1 does?! (even it doesnt have the same features to produce an equally synth preset?)

btw the comparision with Alchemy isnt working, make a 8 voice supersaw with Alchemy it will still use less CPU as the spire ones.

im not talking about special sounds you can get with advanced features, because they always weight a bit more on the CPU.
im still amazed by Spire - it has that supersaw/Hypersaw OSC and that filters are sounding amazing - more virus like imo.

and that Classic OSC where you can mix various basic waveforms with untraditional ones is such a perfect idea.
anyway ill keep watching Spire and compare.
Lennard needs to get his ass up, because Sylenth1 needs a Challenger! And Spire will be this one.

~Ameyah

[MFXxx]

I've got to say that Spire is a pleasure to program and tweak...

Parts of it are, I agree, but the Stepper is a PIA IMO. It's too hit-and-miss. Almost impossible to set step values with any accuracy - particularly pitch - and a click in the wrong place just screws everything up. It's too fiddly and time-consuming to program at the moment.

This, and the CPU drain is really putting me off buying it right now.

But it does sound good, and I'm keeping an eye on it. The way I see it, this can go only one of two ways; either the developers listen to feedback and make this "synth of the year", or it doesn't get optimised/fixed/improved enough (and quickly), and disappears into VST oblivion.

I sincerely hope it's not the latter.

Again I have to agree the stepper (you refer to the ARP I am guessing) is twiddly and to be fair I rarely use steppers as I prefer to use Cubase's inbuilt arp/stepper, provides versatility if I want to drop another synth onto the part for exploration. On that note, a drag and drop of a sequence fro the DAW would be superb.

I find the Sylenth vs Spire comparison amusing. People have posted for a long time regarding Sylenth requesting updates and feel that one way or another nothing has happened, or abond-ware...which is not the case. Along comes Spire and instantly compared to Sylenth with more features and I feel better sound, the developer has acknowledged posts regarding the high CPU usage yet still people are complaining in comparison to Sylenth. Both Diva, Diversion and Synthmaster (totally different beasts) both have high CPU usage particularly on some presets yet are accepted with glory and dare we say otherwise Appears some biased maybe? I say this with a sense of mirth and ownership of all mentioned.

I am personally happy to support financially and forum-wise any developer who launches a product and listens to their customers, Spire is doing that along with many other developers. When did we last hear from Lennard, yet it's still selling strong and being compared with brute force (ps any support issues with Sylenth have also been positive in response).

[echopark]

I just buyed Spire.

Where can I download the latest installer ?
The one on their website is version 0.9.4 without the Arp Section.

[zvenx]

on their website I see 1.01.
refresh your cache.
rsp

[echopark]

Sorry, it was my mistake. There was also a old version installed on my computer.

[zvenx]

ahhh... glad you are up and running now.
rsp

[fisherKing]

I've got to say that Spire is a pleasure to program and tweak...

Parts of it are, I agree, but the Stepper is a PIA IMO. It's too hit-and-miss. Almost impossible to set step values with any accuracy - particularly pitch - and a click in the wrong place just screws everything up. It's too fiddly and time-consuming to program at the moment.

This, and the CPU drain is really putting me off buying it right now.

But it does sound good, and I'm keeping an eye on it. The way I see it, this can go only one of two ways; either the developers listen to feedback and make this "synth of the year", or it doesn't get optimised/fixed/improved enough (and quickly), and disappears into VST oblivion.

I sincerely hope it's not the latter.

Again I have to agree the stepper (you refer to the ARP I am guessing) is twiddly and to be fair I rarely use steppers as I prefer to use Cubase's inbuilt arp/stepper, provides versatility if I want to drop another synth onto the part for exploration. On that note, a drag and drop of a sequence fro the DAW would be superb.

I find the Sylenth vs Spire comparison amusing. People have posted for a long time regarding Sylenth requesting updates and feel that one way or another nothing has happened, or abond-ware...which is not the case. Along comes Spire and instantly compared to Sylenth with more features and I feel better sound, the developer has acknowledged posts regarding the high CPU usage yet still people are complaining in comparison to Sylenth. Both Diva, Diversion and Synthmaster (totally different beasts) both have high CPU usage particularly on some presets yet are accepted with glory and dare we say otherwise Appears some biased maybe? I say this with a sense of mirth and ownership of all mentioned.

I am personally happy to support financially and forum-wise any developer who launches a product and listens to their customers, Spire is doing that along with many other developers. When did we last hear from Lennard, yet it's still selling strong and being compared with brute force (ps any support issues with Sylenth have also been positive in response).

diva, diversion, synthmaster... i don't know about anyone else, but i have certainly posted about their CPU/mac issues.
(great synths, but CPU-heavy).

sylenth1....i asked lennard about a 64bit mac AU for YEARS. only the release of logicX forced him to deal with this. ugh.

spire is great, and looking forward to more CPU-optimization, fixes, presets, etc. it DOES seem logical to compare it to sylenth1...it feels (to me) like a MODERN S1...such that the only thing i miss from sylenth1 now is my ginormous preset library....

and now, back to work..!

[piastro]

I'm curious: will the multicore support be implemented in future versions?

[xcentric]

If anybody has time, would you submit a review for Spire?

[woodsdenis]

I'm curious: will the multicore support be implemented in future versions?

Does any synth or plugin have multicore support when hosted in a DAW ? Standalone may be different. Mostly they just use one core per instance dont they.

[Ameyah Audio]

I'm curious: will the multicore support be implemented in future versions?

already has, because i maxed my old notebook out with one supersaw patch and all 2 cores got used playing it.

[Bronto Scorpio]

I'm curious: will the multicore support be implemented in future versions?

Does any synth or plugin have multicore support when hosted in a DAW ? Standalone may be different. Mostly they just use one core per instance dont they.

Diva and ACE have it! They spread the voices across CPU cores, which greatly reduces CPU usage!
I don't think any other VSTs have such a feature yet though (I could be wrong on that).

The CPU usage of Spire doesn't really seem to be that high on my system to be honest?
Seems to be really system dependent on this one. I'm just using a crappy AMD A4-3300 here.
I only briefly tried the demo some time ago though (And really, really liked the sound!).

Cheers
Dennis

[HcDoom]

Proper multicore support is a must imo. Why stress one core when you can divide the workload on other cores? I mean, that's why we have multicore cpu at first place.

[sound_dev]

Proper multicore support is a must imo. Why stress one core when you can divide the workload on other cores? I mean, that's why we have multicore cpu at first place.

you think that 20% load of each of 2 cores is better than 40% load of one core?