So I tried ACE..

[zerocrossing]

I don't quite get this thread. I like ACE,it's got a very big and present type of tone, but Zebra, while different, is just as good and more flexible. Ultimately, they're just very different.

[~Pd~]

IMO ACE has more instant satisfaction if you want to dial in great sounding subtractive patches. It's loud by default and the filters have a lot of character. You can get something similar going on in Zebra 2 but you have to put a little more thought into building it - mainly, it pays to familiarize yourself with the XMF filter module, or the Diva filters if you have Dark Zebra. I totes understand why someone would just want to stick with ACE though. It's awesome.

[BDeep]

Yeah, in terms of the OP, ACE and Zebra just have a very different character.

But (slightly OT) it's a bit related to what I'm reading more often here as of late, the essence of a synth brought down to its functions. I don't really get it, all I can say is that's certainly not the reason I purchased a 101 in the past. Or why someone would insist on a 303. That's not to say that some features aren't appealing, it's just a part of the bigger picture.

Of course, with Zebra, it has become so flexible that with the right effort, you could mimic just about any synth, should you want to. (I'm of the opinion that this effort is better spent on creating a unique patch btw)

[pdxindy]

I was in the exact same spot, the cables didn't cut it for me. I much rather look at something like Massive which is color coded.

Massive is a hard coded signal path with a bit of flexibility. It doesn't come close to the modular flexibility of ACE. If you made a GUI style like Massive with the flexibility of ACE, it would be harder to grasp than the cables.

[BDeep]

I was in the exact same spot, the cables didn't cut it for me. I much rather look at something like Massive which is color coded.

Massive is a hard coded signal path with a bit of flexibility. It doesn't come close to the modular flexibility of ACE. If you made a GUI style like Massive with the flexibility of ACE, it would be harder to grasp than the cables.

Hmm, not so sure. I mean, you're right of course that ACE is a good deal more flexible, but purely in the number of possible modulation sources and destinations (1 Massive Osc has 10 sockets for 4 destinations already), they're not that far off.
That said, I realise most users don't mind the cables at all.

[pdxindy]

I was in the exact same spot, the cables didn't cut it for me. I much rather look at something like Massive which is color coded.

Massive is a hard coded signal path with a bit of flexibility. It doesn't come close to the modular flexibility of ACE. If you made a GUI style like Massive with the flexibility of ACE, it would be harder to grasp than the cables.

Hmm, not so sure. I mean, you're right of course that ACE is a good deal more flexible, but purely in the number of possible modulation sources and destinations (1 Massive Osc has 10 sockets for 4 destinations already), they're not that far off.
That said, I realise most users don't mind the cables at all.

Massive has a fixed signal path and modulation and signal path are separate. There is some flexibility in the signal path in that you can decide where the insert FX go and the feedback points have a couple options and then which filter the Osc's go to.

ACE has a magnitude more possibilities. You can create arbitrary feedback loops. You can have an Osc output multiplied via an envelope which is added to an LFO that has its speed modulated by that combined output which then modulates the filter and the output of the filter can modulate the Osc.

Not possible to do that in Massive. But imagine if you could... or even just take something you can already do in Massive like a straight-forward chain. You can set it so Velocity modulates LFO2 and LFO2 modulates LFO1 and LFO1 modulates Env1. Now put Env1 on Filter cutoff. Looking at the Massive GUI then you can easily see that cutoff is modulated by Env1 and also see the depth. But you have no idea that Env1 is modulated by LFO1. To see and follow that chain, you have to tab multiple times between Env1, LFO1 and LFO2.

In ACE you can follow that chain visually without tabbing or even touching the mouse.

And then with Bazille? It must have something like 100 times the number of possible connections compared to Massive. I think it would be a nightmare without the cables.

[Sycopation]

ACE has better sound quality. It is IMO the best thing U-he offers. My guess is that zebra 3 will try to play catch up. I'm not big on zebra 2.

I genreally agree with this. I think ACE just sounds better, as does Diva. Zebra has insanely awesome routing and effects, though. But I've found myself using Zebrify waaaaay more than Zebra. It made me realize that it's really probably the best thing about Zebra. I don't actually care for the sound of the synth itself all that much, but damn, Zebrify rules! It's great on audio tracks, too.

[palebluedun]

So,

If you played ACE or Diva through Zebrify do you think it could bring on the Rapture?

[Xenos]

I'm back to working with ACE after spending a lot of time on Bazille. One thing that stood out immediately is ACE's warmer character. It's also friendlier for creating less-atypical/strange sounds such as basses, leads, pads and keys, thanks to the pre-wired connections. Comparing ACE to Bazille, I would say ACE has a larger mainstream appeal due to the reasons stated above.
That said, ACE is much more limited than Bazille when it comes to the amount of parameters you can play with, and you are limited to analog style sounds rather than the freedom to really push things into harsh digital territory if desired. FM and phase modulation are still possible in ACE, but in a reduced form. I miss Bazille's sequencer, and ACE only has one Modulation Mapper instead of 2. ACE has 2 oscillators/audio-rate modulators, whereas Bazille has 4. On the plus side, having less features is inspiring on it's own. It really forces you to make the most use as possible out of each module. Also, less features means it's a lot easier for people to use and the results are more immediate.

[pdxindy]

ACE has 4 Osc's cause both LFO's can also be Osc's...

but yes, ACE has less modules than Bazille... no lags, rectifier, quantizer and half as many Env's, Multiples etc... Would be interesting to have an ACE XL that was closer to Bazille in complexity!

[D-Fusion]

ACE has 4 Osc's cause both LFO's can also be Osc's...

but yes, ACE has less modules than Bazille... no lags, rectifier, quantizer and half as many Env's, Multiples etc... Would be interesting to have an ACE XL that was closer to Bazille in complexity!

Wow. i didn't know that
Doesn't that give it 5 osc when you count in the sub osc?

How do you route the lfo's to be oscillators?

[Rcl]

ACE has 4 Osc's cause both LFO's can also be Osc's...

but yes, ACE has less modules than Bazille... no lags, rectifier, quantizer and half as many Env's, Multiples etc... Would be interesting to have an ACE XL that was closer to Bazille in complexity!

Wow. i didn't know that
Doesn't that give it 5 osc when you count in the sub osc?

How do you route the lfo's to be oscillators?

Wait for it........RTFM!........all in fun......its not obvious but it is there.

[ere2learn]

How do you route the lfo's to be oscillators?

[D-Fusion]

How do you route the lfo's to be oscillators?

Thank you

[Sycopation]

So,

If you played ACE or Diva through Zebrify do you think it could bring on the Rapture?

Just saw this now (yeah, I don't get here much).

I think it's a possibility, but I don't know if my soul would dither correctly during A/D conversion, so I'm not going to risk it.