Hive preview (April 1 update)

[bmrzycki]

I don't suppose there is a 'patch dump' post with all the posts thus far?

Here you go: http://u-he.com/PatchLib/hive.html

I update the KVR Beta .zip file frequently. I need to do another update soon, probably tomorrow.

[Shiek927]

@shiek927 I was surprised at how easy and immediate it was to get into patching it. Something like Zebra is more of a commitment. one thing to try with Hive is dial the 4 volumes down, 2 in each oscilator and then open up just the main volume of osc 1. make sure its selected as a source in filter 1. and basically go from there. you will be surprised at how fast you can dial up a new sound. try adding a number of unison oscillators in osc 1, like 4 to 6 and mess with the detune knob and filter to taste.

Hive has this electronic buzzy sound generally, even with the filters closed off. hence the name Hive I guess. bees. buzz. I am still deciding if its a synth for me however. I try and be judicious with plug in purchases. I am definitely going to get Zebra.

I will always adore Zebra, but here's the thing.

I've grown to realize that, with a 'simple' modern VA synth, you have more practically at your fingertips than a budding producer or sound-designer may realize. Never allow anyone to tell you that "this is a Trance synth" or some-such. A synth is an instrument and can be used for whatever style of music you want.

Yes, this synth will not be able to produce Harmor or Razor sounds without additive synthesis, or complex wavetable sequences like Massive or Zebra.

And yet, I've made some incredible bells, guitars in just a few minutes that, to my ears and with the right creativity, could easily fit into a film-score. This coming from a "EDM synth".

A synth can be used for whatever purpose you want, and there is a value in simplicity. While there is a world of sound that Hive will not be able to touch as-is, you have to ask yourself if you even want or need that level of depth. If your focus is on your compositions first, if you're making (dance) music, than you can't be mired in ten thousand features or overwhelmed by an extensive feature-set. Especially if you're on a deadline.

I see Zebra2 as a professional sound-designers dream, with the emphasis on sound-designers. If you are however are focused on production and making music, than something like Sylenth, Spire, or Hive is more than enough: it doesn't just have to be contemporary EDM. I've already heard some pretty retro-sounding patches from here (the filters REALLY help with this) and lush pads, so you're not gridlocked to only making Dubstep wobbles.

There's a *reason* why such simple synths are so popular. It's not so much that people are idiots and don't go deeper when they can, so much as they don't *need* too. You have something simple that sounds great, and you get good enough at it that you can become very creative with it and do things people wouldn't expect of it (like doing something else besides EDM). Zebra2 sounds extraordinary, even without zero-delay-feedback-filters, but it unfortunately has an incredibly large learning curve for someone who's just starting out, especially if there focus isn't on sound-design itself and making patch libraries, but simply making music. It truly sounds incredible, but for all it's genuine ease-of-use, I'm not sure I could recommend it to someone doesn't want or need to explore synthesis on that level.

Just my two cents. If you were a sound-designer more so than a producer, I'd recommend Zebra. The other way around, I'd more likely recommend Hive.

[plexuss]

+1 Sheik927 I come at this from around 1981. my first synth was a yamaha cs01 and Juno 6. and soon after a minimoog. the juno was $2000 and the minimoog I paid $300 for. and as a reference I could have bought at least 20 TB303s at $50 each Id see in pawn shops. that analogue sound was common place and inexpensive. digital was the new expensive thing.

Im just saying I have a background and duversity of experience with synths. Some synths are better at certain sounds and feelings than others. and because music is such a personal thing in that each person will have a unique approach to sound and feel. and so we pick and choose what stynths work and what are a lower priority. economy matters. id buy every plugin if I were rich enough. we prioritize because we have to.

For me a synth like Hive is on the borderline. I somewhat take it to be the kind of synth that I take on as a challenge. I can enough of a sense that it might be useful to me but its going to take some wrangling. sometimes you have to try tricks to push a synth into your realm. more often than not it opens up a whole new world of sound for you. or it just doesnt work out. thank god for plugin demos!

[tedlogan]

Yes, you can use synths to try and make whatever you want with it, regardless of what they're targeted at. I love electronic music, but don't much care for house and trance etc. Hive is squarely aimed at EDM of course, but I still love it as it simply sounds beautiful. Here is a non-EDM patch - a hybrid flute-cello-sax:

https://soundcloud.com/gaping_hole/hive ... loax-patch

Here is the patch if anyone is interested. For those unaware, only click the "Click here to start downloading from sendspace" in the centre of the page, the rest is garbage.
https://www.sendspace.com/file/sa9xh0

[dumbledog]

Yeah I'm all about the 80s synthwave deal and can't stand the supersaw-heavy EDM/dubstep stuff, which is one reason why I've been working on that Juno 6 patch converter.

What I'm really hoping to do with it eventually is employ Hive as a patch morphing synth, using all the mod targets available to it.

[bmrzycki]

Thanks for the support! I have a long weekend just starting up which I'm hoping to more or less dedicate to this. Spent tonight cleaning up some of the code and starting to look at how I'm going to output the actual h2p.

I spent some time with Python to auto-generate .h2p scripts about 4 years ago and unfortunately don't remember any of it. I'm not even sure if I still have the scripts. I'm glad you're starting it up again and it might make me go digging through a few DVD archives I have (and upload them to Google Drive) to see if I can find the code.

totally got lost into reading the last few SoS...

Oh yeah, I've been there. Gordon's simple way of explaining things always makes me want to play along while reading which ends up with a night invested in reading 3 lines and twiddling knobs for 45 minutes at a stretch.

Still to do: bottom row, relative volume of the oscillators, reverse engineering the arpeggio, maybe some basic aftertouch support and of course patch export.

I'll check out the reed patch when I update the beta zipfile, thanks for posting! I look forward to your adventures in the bottom row knobs...

[Sendy]

While I agree with what Shiek927 said, I think "sound designer" vs "music makers" is a bit of a false dichotomy. I like complex synths BECAUSE I'm making music with them, and when you know what you're doing, extra options don't get in the way, but are just sitting there to help you be more specific in your sculpting.

Sound design and composition are not separate and flow right into eachother for me. That is what works for me and I know it doesn't work for everyone, and everything is valid if it works, but since electronic music often doesn't have a performance skill requirement, I feel it's important to go the extra mile moulding your sounds to your arrangement.

Where I agree is in the fact that simpler synths do have a lot to offer, provided you approach them with a modular mindset. I use the term "modular" because it was mentioned in the culmination of the Sound On Sound Synth Secrets series, and it sums it up particularly well.

[tedlogan]

While I agree with what Shiek927 said, I think "sound designer" vs "music makers" is a bit of a false dichotomy. I like complex synths BECAUSE I'm making music with them, and when you know what you're doing, extra options don't get in the way, but are just sitting there to help you be more specific in your sculpting.

Sound design and composition are not separate and flow right into eachother for me. That is what works for me and I know it doesn't work for everyone, and everything is valid if it works, but since electronic music often doesn't have a performance skill requirement, I feel it's important to go the extra mile moulding your sounds to your arrangement.

Where I agree is in the fact that simpler synths do have a lot to offer, provided you approach them with a modular mindset. I use the term "modular" because it was mentioned in the culmination of the Sound On Sound Synth Secrets series, and it sums it up particularly well.

+1 !

That said, I do like taking a break from Bazille and Zebra just to approach a different perspective on sound via Hive. I'm finding these three to be the holy trinity for me.

[Shiek927]

While I agree with what Shiek927 said, I think "sound designer" vs "music makers" is a bit of a false dichotomy. I like complex synths BECAUSE I'm making music with them, and when you know what you're doing, extra options don't get in the way, but are just sitting there to help you be more specific in your sculpting.

Sound design and composition are not separate and flow right into eachother for me. That is what works for me and I know it doesn't work for everyone, and everything is valid if it works, but since electronic music often doesn't have a performance skill requirement, I feel it's important to go the extra mile moulding your sounds to your arrangement.

Where I agree is in the fact that simpler synths do have a lot to offer, provided you approach them with a modular mindset. I use the term "modular" because it was mentioned in the culmination of the Sound On Sound Synth Secrets series, and it sums it up particularly well.

If you can handle it, more power to you .

I tried my absolute best to stick with absolutely nothing but Zebra2, but after a year, I ultimately found it too overwhelming; it was fun exploring all the different options and getting truly indepth, but I found it more 'work' than I felt I needed. That said, that there are so many many sound-sets for it goes to show just how much it works for so many people.

My mindset on music is very much like Hive's methodology: "reduced to the max". One of my biggest pet-peeves with other producers is that they drown themselves, and there CPU, in more things than they need too. Like they are 'collectors', and expecting a certain plugin to do all the work for them. I'd rather keep my workflow as streamlined as possible so I can focus straight on the point of it all: making music. On that note, as important as sound-design is, you're more likely to be known for your compositions, arrangements, the creativity and quality of your chord progressions, melodies, etc...

It's also why I said that simpler synths have so much more hidden depth than people may commonly think. People seem to think, perhaps because they are so commonly used for them, that a modern VA synth is only good for churning out a few EDM patches and it's a necessity to go further if you want something original. I find this to be wrong on several levels: a synth can be used for whatever style of music you want, regardless of what people commonly use it for. Sylenth is often attributed to Trance when it's simply a modern VA synth. Here's a wonderful audio example of Sylenth used for ambient music (https://sellfy.com/p/F1km/). Secondly, if we are talking about being creative with your work, you're more likely to be creative with your instruments when they are simpler to actually work with. Despite the plethora of features, I never could find myself getting truly creative with Zebra because there was simply so much to work with. I guess I could never figure out any 'sweet spots'. I spent more time constantly referring to the manual and understanding what certain parameters or filters actually do

I know this is not-so for many people, especially those with vastly more sound-design skill. I do feel however there is worth in reminding, particularly since I've learned this lesson myself recently, that being a good sound designer =/= having the most flexible, modular synth in existence. A decent sound-designer with a simple synth will get much more done than a novice with the most modular synth possible. Either way, people, as before, are more likely to remember you for the quality of your arrangements and actual music. As before, this is what it's all about in the end anyway: nobody knows or cares how advanced or feature-rich your tools are: just the end-product.

While I don't believe in oversimplifying things at the cost of quality (where exactly is that margin is what I'm always learning), I would prefer to get really really good at one thing, like a synth, rather than having half-a-dozen and only superficially touching them or using presets. Of course, as my skill improves or desires change, I could very well change my opinion: for the moment, I'd like to leave modular synths behind for awhile and see how much actual millage I can get out out of much simpler synths like Spire or Hive. I wouldn't be surprised to find that there is much more than it appears at first glance.

[Shiek927]

(Sorry for the double post; I don't know how to delete ><)

[Shiek927]

(Make that a triple >_>)

[mcnoone]

I think it relies on a balance of time used.
If you spend more time on your music, your music will be better, but your sound design skills won't be as good, as if you spent more time on sound design.
A quality of time used factor is there though.
Heard a lot of great music done by people with sound design skills, that may be good for their own music, but lack diversity, and don't really go into any depth of feature usage.
For example, lots may just use a few matrix type modulation assignments.
Many don't use any long timed lfo's that gives sounds slow sweeping over time for held notes.
No velocity type settings, or poorly done velocity settings.
Most are designed using a sequencer, and not played by using fingers on keys to design them.
They seem rushed, and time is saved with the details like those, which is understandable for those who spend more time using the daw to make music.
Some can find a good balance between both doing sounds, and music as well.
One may get the sounds one needs for a set music style that they do, but they won't learn to do a wider variety of sounds that someone who spends more time doing sounds will be able to get.
edit: One thing I'm starting to notice is that the Hive, is a deeper synth than it at first seemed.

[Shiek927]

I can believe that; it really is a balance between sound-design and actual production. I've simply been trying to push the point that 'simple' synths like this one, from a practical standpoint, are actually more capable than people may think. A lot of that, quite honestly, has to do simply with creativity which is probably the most overlooked and undervalued ingredient of them all.

Regarding Hive, I'm like everybody else and wouldn't mind a richer feature-set provided they stick to there "reduced to the max" methodology. I believe Urs said that an X/Y performance set is a possibility and that would *definitely* increase the sonic palette. What I hope to see is, ultimately, the epitome of this type of vision: a synth that is as feature-rich as it possibly could be without compromising it's own ease-of-use/immediacy; deepening the wellspring of potential sounds as much as possible, but without or leaving budding sound-designers or those only looking for basic dance patches behind.

Ideas like...modular-esque capabilities perhaps but with simple parameters, allowing for complex patches without touching wavetable synthesis (that's what Zebra is for). Almost like an introduction to modular synthesis like Diva or how ACE was envisioned, but in a modern VA synth instead without cables (an XY performance feature, like before, would help with this: rather than having 4 performance pads like in Zebra which takes up a ton of space, they can be inspired by "The Orb" from Omnisphere and simply wrap and layer the performance pads around each other in a sphere-shape so you *have* multiple performance pads, but in a smaller space). Free-draw LFO's like in Zebra wouldn't also be bad, and would allow for cool sequences without raising the difficulty too much. I haven't tried it yet, but also being able to use the mod-matrix or somehow 'bus' FX chains like in Zebra would also open up a world of sound.

A guitar-amp/overdrive would be awesome, as well as more shaper/distortion effects in general honestly. I love Diva's awesome rotary-distortion .

MSEG's....I don't know. It would undeniably open up a world of sound, but may not be the right direction to go. Perhaps other things, like quantized envelopes like in Diva, might be better. Then again, now that I think about it, Spire has a "Stepper" which I think essentially is an MSEG without taking up much space at all. Something like that may be tucked in with the Step+Arp.

I can't think of anything off the top of my head that would also help, but experience with Zebra2 tells me that I'm not sure I'd like anything else in this kind of synth. Past the sorts of things I described, you start hitting things like mod-mappers or Zebra's XMF filters...and I don't think anything more advanced would be the right way to go. I also don't think Hive needs comb or formant filters. Comb filters are usually used for physical models, but the richness if the filters makes it rather redundant I think. Diva doesn't have a comb filter and it does incredible emulations. Formant filters as well are a bit overdone; you can do vocoder patches without a formant filter, and I'd just use a real choir sample library if I wanted choir sounds anyway.

Increasing the amount of depth with simple modular-esque capabilities, or 'unique' features you might normally only associate with modular synths, without actually touching any cables or wavetables....I wonder if anything like that could be accomplished. If it can be done, without increasing the amount of individual features that I brought up, feel free to completely cast them aside.

It's tricky because there's that balance between simplicity and versatility, but retaining the ease-of-use is ultimately much more important than a humongous feature-set because, with experience, more veteran users will end up making use of those more advanced features and/or coming up with various little tricks to get sounds that people wouldn't expect (like making beautiful ambient textures in an "EDM/Trance" synth). Julian Ray is already making beautiful ambient patches, and this is in a synth with EDM in mind...and it's not even out yet!

At the same time, while Sylenth was the inspiration behind Hive, it's important to also not stick too closely to it and not be afraid to go toward uncharted territory or go places that Sylenth rightfully should have gone had it continue to update. In that sense, looking at forums at what people want(ed) from Sylenth or other modern VA synths could collectively bring out just the right sweet-spot feature set that people have always craved but never had in a single plugin before.

(On that, may I ask what the future looks like for Hive? what sort of things are planned for it? )

That's my current viewpoint: getting to the profound point where you can get truly creative with your instrument/synth of choice and doing things that truly surprise people. This is unlikely to happen though if you simply dump a million features or effects onto the user: they are more likely to spend time referring to the manual like that.

[tedlogan]

Here is an FX patch: Hiding in a drain with a storm brewing outside.
Play the water with one hand while striking lightning with the other:
(no external processing)

edit: Sometimes this patch does not load correctly and just creates washes...frustrating.


https://soundcloud.com/gaping_hole/hive ... tch-design

Here is the patch:
https://www.sendspace.com/file/cgfzqj

[aaron aardvark]

tedlogan,
Thank you for the refreshing patch. Now someone needs to hand me a towel, I'm all wet.