Now Hive is here, is it RIP Sylenth?

[fluffy_little_something]

Sylenth doesn't even ask whether I want to overwrite an existing preset, that's unusual. Most program treat you like you got Alzheimer's

The demo allows one to save and recall presets, which is also unusual

Is there a way to increase the GUI size?

[izonin]

... But back to Sylenth, I'd take it over Hive. Sorry. Cool GUI though.

Hive is a replacement for Sylenth for those who can't use it - Mac 64-bit.

[pdxindy]

For me the envelope of Sylenth is its key feature, but Hive's envelope is not as snappy unfortunately. And the reverb, i much prefer Sylenth version.

Which envelope in Sylenth? The Amp envelopes have a different shape than the Mod envelopes.

Furthermore, which engine in Hive do you compare them too? They're different...

For me i've always liked the mod envelope on sylenth, especially for pluck. I just don't get that kind of pluck with Hive.

I switched to 64 Bit Live so I cannot test Sylenth atm... but you can change the shape of the mod envelope in Hive (via Mod Matrix) and change the character of the pluck.

[xalama qo]

After watching Aiyn Zahev's preview video I was impressed with the UI aspects of Hive. Like Urs said, in a synth "layering-evolution" timeline, Hive would be more ape than man (er, you know what I mean)...less tabbing to get to specific parameters. I like the drag-n-drop modulation assignments...the "via" bit went over my head, but I'll check it out on the beta when I get it to work here. More mod slots, 3 synth engine voicings...that's the equivalent of 3 different guitar amps for anyone looking for an analogy. The arp/sequencer concept, and laying it out on one page, steps 1-8 above steps 9-16, and the great icons used to describe what each step is...tie, rest, etc. The re-ordering of effects, and I'm sure a few other bits I've since forgotten...the whole time I was thinking, "Urs has made the perfect Sylenth 2!"

Or more precisely, if Sylenth 2 ever sees the light of day, it should take a LOT of cues from Hive. Urs has succeeded masterfully at the ergonomic challenges he was trying to address.

As far as sound goes, it's a winner. This is u-he after all, it's gonna sound great, even if it's just viewed as a subset of Zebra by some.

But I never once expected it to sound like Sylenth.
Most probably better in some very technical ways, similar in others, but not THE SAME.

Physical synths can be pulled apart, their circuits measured and scrutinized. With DSP you can try to reverse engineer, but I don't know how successful one would be with that, and it's illegal, so no self respecting dev would do it.
This is IMO why we're becoming more and more satisfied with analog emulations, each new generation brings more detail and subtlety to the resulting sound. But we're still pining for a Virus VST (native, not powercore or TI) and a Sylenth-killer. It won't happen dudes.

Enjoy Virus and Sylenth for what they are. And enjoy Hive for what she is and pray that if Sylenth 2 arrives some day that its UI and feature set compare well to Hive's, and that that awesome legacy Sylenth sound is retained in one of the synth engines!

My $20 worth
Out.

[4damind]

I replaced some Hive patches with Sylenth and IMO soundwise there is not such a big difference but it was easier/quicker to program sounds with Hive. The sub-oscillator but also the dedicated vibrato makes stuff a lot easier.
To be honest, I'm not sure if I need Hive. Only for the sound I would say no. But if it comes to active support by the developer, better designed GUI and so also a quicker workflow I would say yes.

Btw. if understand the statements from Lennard Digital correctly, there are no plans for a Sylenth 2. But Sylenth1 will get the long awaited support for 64 Bit on OSX early 2015 and Ruben wrote that after this they will look into further developing of the preset manager.

[fluffy_little_something]

Why would they make Sylenth2? It is almost perfect the way it is. I can imagine superficial improvements, such as a bigger GUI, but other than that? Why would they change anything? As they say, don't fix it if it ain't broken

I prefer Sylenth's full double voice architecture per oscillator rather than one osc and a rather limited sub-osc. For me personally Hive is insufficient the way it is now. If they improve the architecture, maybe...

What I really like about Sylenth is how clean and punchy the envelopes are, even with pulse at various widths there is no disturbing noise. I wonder if that has to do with the unusual way pulse is produced on Sylenth...

[trimph1]

Why would they make Sylenth2? It is almost perfect the way it is. I can imagine superficial improvements, such as a bigger GUI, but other than that? Why would they change anything? As they say, don't fix it if it ain't broken

I prefer Sylenth's full double voice architecture per oscillator rather than one osc and a rather limited sub-osc.

The GUI could be larger but I agree. Why change the rest?

[Urs]

I prefer Sylenth's full double voice architecture per oscillator rather than one osc and a rather limited sub-osc.

Hehehe, I was expecting that view. But statistically, Hive does the same sounds with less parameters. In practice, the only audible difference between Hive's Subosc and Sylenth's second osc is the pan/width setting. But I hardly came across any preset that justifies the extra parameters. And even if, one can usually work around it without much loss

[4damind]

I prefer Sylenth's full double voice architecture per oscillator rather than one osc and a rather limited sub-osc. For me personally Hive is insufficient the way it is now. If they improve the architecture, maybe...

The sub-oscillator is sharing also the Unison settings (Afaik) and this is IMO a improvement over Sylenth. With Sylenth you must program often the same stuff twice. For a typical sound with a bit more low-end you will use very often the second oscillator of the same part with the same settings as the first oscillator (except the lower octave).
With my experience after re-programming some Hive patches with Sylenth there was very often an additional step which must be made to achieve the same results with Sylenth.

If it comes to an oscillator which needs a own filter for some kind of background movement, you must use with Sylenth another part. With Hive you have all this stuff on one page...
Not to mention this meta control in Sylenth for the filter which is IMO only a workaround to "link" the two filter of the different parts. This is a lot better designed with Hive, where you can link both filters but the second filter is more a "slave" of the first filter, it can still have independent values but follows the changes of the first filter - IMO a great design decision!

[fluffy_little_something]

I don't think the common filter section was a workaround. A workaround for what? The developer certainly wanted to make it the way he did, there was no need for a workaround because he could have done it any other way he wanted to. The way I see it, the common filter section serves to change those few parameters for both filters without changing the differences (more or less the offset) between the settings of both filter sections proper.

It may require a few clicks more, but I like the way one can copy and paste individual sections all across the synth.

[pdxindy]

If it comes to an oscillator which needs a own filter for some kind of background movement, you must use with Sylenth another part. With Hive you have all this stuff on one page...
Not to mention this meta control in Sylenth for the filter which is IMO only a workaround to "link" the two filter of the different parts. This is a lot better designed with Hive, where you can link both filters but the second filter is more a "slave" of the first filter, it can still have independent values but follows the changes of the first filter - IMO a great design decision!

When it comes to GUI and workflow, I think Hive has improved on Sylenth in just about every way.

[mhog]

if understand the statements from Lennard Digital correctly [...] Sylenth1 will get the long awaited support for 64 Bit on OSX early 2015

I would not give much credit. These kind of "announcements" come out at least twice a year... since 2008... Latest one was like: "sorry, for the delay... not in time for the first semester 2014, 64 bit AU will be out for sure within the end of the year (2014), thanks for your patience".

BTW the "resurrected" one (aka: 32lives+Sylenth1) runs smooth as silk in Logic X.

[C-note]

... But back to Sylenth, I'd take it over Hive. Sorry. Cool GUI though.

Hive is a replacement for Sylenth for those who can't use it - Mac 64-bit.

Hive is very nice but not even close (yet) to replacing Sylenth. It's quite easy to use Sylenth on MAC 64 bit - just get Cubase 8 32 or 64 bit, Vienna Ensemble PRO or 32 lives.

[knocks]

As I own neither I am finding it very difficult to choose and take advantage of the current pricing.

[xamido]

I decided to get Hive anyway. It's not a replacement for Sylenth but it's a damn good synth.

Besides i don't own sylenth anymore (sold mine a few months ago), and Hive might be my bread n butter synth. I only hope that Urs will add some extra waveform to the oscillator.