Sugar Bytes Cyclop impressions?
-
- KVRist
- 87 posts since 1 Aug, 2008
Hello everyone,
I have been playing with this new synth and I didn't think I was going to like it nearly as much as I do.
So far I have started three new song ideas with just the presets ( miner tweaks ) and that doesn't happen for me with other synths as much.
Also non of the sounds I used were of the "wobble" type. There are actually a lot of nice big and evolving sounds, so don't be fooled into thinking this is only some bro step factory.
Anyways I'd like to see if anyone else has given the demo a good try out and hear those opinions.
There is a lot to do sound design wise, while maintaining an accessibility that is quite refreshing.
My only gripe (and it's not that big of one considering the type of sounds its good for) is that it's monophonic.
I have been playing with this new synth and I didn't think I was going to like it nearly as much as I do.
So far I have started three new song ideas with just the presets ( miner tweaks ) and that doesn't happen for me with other synths as much.
Also non of the sounds I used were of the "wobble" type. There are actually a lot of nice big and evolving sounds, so don't be fooled into thinking this is only some bro step factory.
Anyways I'd like to see if anyone else has given the demo a good try out and hear those opinions.
There is a lot to do sound design wise, while maintaining an accessibility that is quite refreshing.
My only gripe (and it's not that big of one considering the type of sounds its good for) is that it's monophonic.
- KVRAF
- 3642 posts since 6 Aug, 2009
i played with the demo, sort-of expected to hate it (i.e. trendy dubstep synth). now i OWN it, love it for what it does (deep, buzzy, noisy, quirky basses, some fx, etc).
think, by the nature of how it works and sounds, monophonic is a good thing...
think, by the nature of how it works and sounds, monophonic is a good thing...
_______________________
https://upstatebrooklyn.com
https://upstatebrooklyn.com
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 87 posts since 1 Aug, 2008
I concor with this opinion, just curious as to what kind of pad sounds it would have produced had it been poly given all the modulation options.fisherKing wrote:think, by the nature of how it works and sounds, monophonic is a good thing...
Im so close to just buying this thing but need to work the budget. I'm with you also on not thinking I was going to like it at all.
I'm so glad that I was curious about this synth!
Any instrument that inspires you to make music should be acquired immediately.
-
- KVRist
- 46 posts since 22 Jun, 2012 from Delaware
I was drawn to this soft synth obviously because the pitch page quotes Modeselektor as saying "Cyclop rules at least 4 tracks on our new album!"
I messed around with the demo for a few days and personally, I don't think it's worth $139. Especially not when you can get Illformed Glitch, Krakli Cygnus, EFM Oddse and so many other "noise makers" for free.
The sound quality is fairly good but it's not as good as the u-he or Tone2 products.
Usability being big factor for me when purchasing a soft synth, in my humble opinion, the Cyclop interface is juvenile. It's looks like some xbox "Call of Duty" tank game and seems very counter-intuitive and disorganized. I'm accustomed to "buying" soft synths you can dive right in and start editing. Cyclop is confusing, to say the least. Too many useless blinking, twirling, moving graphics that have no point (what is that High Score thing anyway??).
Not meaning to offend anyone but this one gets a pass from me. Even if it were free I'd probably uninstall it.
I messed around with the demo for a few days and personally, I don't think it's worth $139. Especially not when you can get Illformed Glitch, Krakli Cygnus, EFM Oddse and so many other "noise makers" for free.
The sound quality is fairly good but it's not as good as the u-he or Tone2 products.
Usability being big factor for me when purchasing a soft synth, in my humble opinion, the Cyclop interface is juvenile. It's looks like some xbox "Call of Duty" tank game and seems very counter-intuitive and disorganized. I'm accustomed to "buying" soft synths you can dive right in and start editing. Cyclop is confusing, to say the least. Too many useless blinking, twirling, moving graphics that have no point (what is that High Score thing anyway??).
Not meaning to offend anyone but this one gets a pass from me. Even if it were free I'd probably uninstall it.
- KVRAF
- 25849 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
After a couple of hours with it, I can only say WOW
The very low CPU load, the many ways of creating sounds, the FX sequencer, the beautiful and hands on GUI
Sugar Bytes copy protection is also one of the most gentle in the business
The very low CPU load, the many ways of creating sounds, the FX sequencer, the beautiful and hands on GUI
Sugar Bytes copy protection is also one of the most gentle in the business
-
- KVRist
- 360 posts since 1 Nov, 2012 from England
Out of all the soft synths I own, this is by far my least favourite. The low end is muddy, and the mids are very digital and the highs are just harsh. Also the layout is pretty confusing and the stock presets suck too......just never 'clicked' with me at all.
- KVRAF
- 1986 posts since 29 Apr, 2010 from NYC
-
- KVRist
- 207 posts since 23 Oct, 2005 from Australia
I think it's a good synth, but it looks a bit gimmicky which is enough to put most people off. It also seems to be marketed as some type of dubstep machine, but really that's selling it very short as it's actually 1. very versatile and 2. has a pretty unique sound to it. If they patched it so that it was polyphonic it would be a real monster - the mono really lets it down in my opinion and seems like a stupid limitation further pigeonholing it as just a "bass synth" when it could be so much more...
- KVRAF
- 25849 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
I just can think of another synth that comes with a free running FX sequencer baked into it?
- KVRAF
- 25849 posts since 20 Jan, 2008 from a star near where you are
Ha ha, I thought I was getting Cyclop at bargain price the other week second hand at $60
Now you lucky people can get it new from third party sellers for less than $55
Now you lucky people can get it new from third party sellers for less than $55
- Banned
- 1181 posts since 24 Jun, 2014 from Giza Plateau
same here..d-s-m wrote:Out of all the soft synths I own, this is by far my least favourite. The low end is muddy, and the mids are very digital and the highs are just harsh. Also the layout is pretty confusing and the stock presets suck too......just never 'clicked' with me at all.
║▌║█║▌│║▌║▌█
-
- KVRAF
- 5664 posts since 7 Feb, 2013
Tried it a while back. Imo the underlying concept is interesting but the actual implementation could be better. Its core sound is too dirty and lo-fi, while the gui is way too messy.
It is marketed as a dupstep synth, isn't it, but for typical dubstep basses I would look somewhere else. However if lo-fi glitchy sound is your thing, you will probably like Cyclop.
It is marketed as a dupstep synth, isn't it, but for typical dubstep basses I would look somewhere else. However if lo-fi glitchy sound is your thing, you will probably like Cyclop.
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try
-
- KVRAF
- 3505 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England
Cyclop just has too many quirks to be enjoyable for me. Not being able to reset modulations is the biggest impediment to workflow. Try modulating anything. Don't like the result? Good luck getting rid of it. There's no way to reset these modulations and the difference between no modulation and almost no modulation is often huge. The additive oscillator also seems capable of some really interesting high frequency stuff but the thing aliases like mad up there. There's no oversampling option so you have to run the whole project at 96k. The pitch of the transformer oscillator is directly linked to sample rate however, so just knocking the whole project up to 96k at the end isn't an option either.
That brings me to my other problem with Sugar Bytes. Stone silence. I reported this stuff a while back and got no response. Look at their official forum on here. Graveyard of ignored questions. There's a nasty bug in Turnado 1.5 in which using the per module output level sliders (a new 1.5 feature) renders any and all other knob movements a mess of zippering noise. Useless. I haven't bothered reporting it. They won't respond.
No more money from me.
That brings me to my other problem with Sugar Bytes. Stone silence. I reported this stuff a while back and got no response. Look at their official forum on here. Graveyard of ignored questions. There's a nasty bug in Turnado 1.5 in which using the per module output level sliders (a new 1.5 feature) renders any and all other knob movements a mess of zippering noise. Useless. I haven't bothered reporting it. They won't respond.
No more money from me.
Last edited by cron on Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:29 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 3505 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England



