Zebra3 Info

[Urs]

What's the chances of modules accepting audio as a Modulation source..?

In Z3? - We might be supplying a module that takes audio and converts it to a modulation source, not sure. It would however have to downsample the signal to control rate (12kHz or so). Maybe it could add trigger and envelope follower functionality. But as most of the volume shaping happens in the VCAs behind the audio modules, maybe that's not such a good idea either.

It might be better to add "classical" audio rate modulation where possible - we already have phase modulation (FMOs), Ringmodulation and FilterFM (XMF) and we'll certainly add Osc FM/PM. With the experience of Bazille we might also add through-zero FM where possible.

In the same vein, it might be better to add the flexibility of the audio generation tools to dedicated modulators to create complex behaviors. The main goal of Zebra3 is to unify the data format and editors for wavetables (Osc, LFO), MSEGs and ModMappers. This would be for both sample based and curve based waveforms, such that each of those modules will receive the capability to process each of those things. That, and more means to shape modulation signals might do the trick

- U

[gentleclockdivider]

I don't think they get distracted - all these smaller/other plug-ins are in some way R&D for Zebra and Berlin Modular (or what is it called now ).

theres blocks, softube's and revival of actual analog modular synths

Miles away from Bazille.

Noppes ,i dare to say that reaktor's resolution/event system is higher than
bazille's , it can be up to 176Khz.
Bazille is great , but doing LOTS of audio rate mod. in a patch eventually will bring it down to it's knees .
Bazille is great because of it's unified interface ,ph.d.osc's etc...

I really like u-he plugins , but with every plugin they release it's like : 'look we raised the bar , before the competition did '

[gentleclockdivider]

What's the chances of modules accepting audio as a Modulation source..?

In Z3? - We might be supplying a module that takes audio and converts it to a modulation source, not sure. It would however have to downsample the signal to control rate (12kHz or so).

- U

Why not S.R./2 ?
Which will be just above hearing range(assuming S.R.=44KHz) and less artifacts when lfo's goes into audio range .
I do this all the time in reaktor for H.Q .lfo's and X-modulation
It's the one thing I dislike in zebra right now , the low event rate system .

[pdxindy]

Noppes ,i dare to say that reaktor's resolution/event system is higher than
bazille's , it can be up to 176Khz.
Bazille is great , but doing LOTS of audio rate mod. in a patch eventually will bring it down to it's knees .
Bazille is great because of it's unified interface ,ph.d.osc's etc...

Bazille is also great because it is polyphonic
and because it has the multi-core support which is huge for usability
and the excellent integrated preset system

Reaktor is such a pain with presets and ensembles... big big turn-off
Blocks are monophonic, and there is no ability to use multiple cores. It crushes my CPU

I run Bazille at 96khz and it is not a problem.

[recursive one]

I didn't follow this thread, but I want to ask: gerenarlly, are there any sound quality improvements planned for Zebra3, or will it be mostly Zebra2 with expanded functionality (more modulation sources, audio import/resynthesis etc)? I mean that I find the basic sound character of Diva and Bazille more appealing than Zebra, which sounds somewhat "dated" to me - a bit thin and lifeless in comparison to the more recent U-He synths (ofc, one may disagree but this is my impression).

Other question if whether some some modules/algorithms of other U-He products may make it into Zebra3, like filters based on Diva's filters, supersaw oscillator based on DIva or Hive, saturation based on on Satin, etc.

Generally speaking, if Diva is intended to be a representation of the sound of certain analogue synths in the ITB domain, without the aim of 100% emulating any of said synths, could Zebra evolve into something similar but encompassing classic digital synths, like Virus/Novation/Nordlead/Roland JP/Waldorf?

[EvilDragon]

There will be sound quality improvements in Z3, based on things u-he learned while making Diva, Bazille, RePro-1, etc.


I always laugh at the "dated" comment, when sounds from decades ago are being reinstated all the freaking time... Zebra gives you the tools to make all kinds of sounds, which you couldn't ever call "dated"...

[recursive one]

There will be sound quality improvements in Z3, based on things u-he learned while making Diva, Bazille, RePro-1, etc.

Thnks, that's good to know (I wish there were more details on that though)

I always laugh at the "dated" comment, when sounds from decades ago are being reinstated all the freaking time... Zebra gives you the tools to make all kinds of sounds, which you couldn't ever call "dated"...

You probably misunderstood me, I didn't mean "dated" = "not in fashion", I wanted to say that Zebra's core sound is not as good as Diva or Bazille, it has a bit of that thin/shrill character which I associate with earlier days of softsynths.

[EvilDragon]

It's a different synth for different purpose, I'd say. The way the sound is generated in Zebra is also completely different from Diva or others, which makes it very flexible, but CPU efficient at the same time.

[VitaminD]

It's a different synth for different purpose, I'd say. The way the sound is generated in Zebra is also completely different from Diva or others, which makes it very flexible, but CPU efficient at the same time.

It is also older code based off a time when computers weren't as powerful. Z3 should be a topmodern wondersynth though.

[gentleclockdivider]

Urs explained it how zebra's osc are coded , it was a mixture of grain ,additive ' something .something ..
Anyway zebra's osc's sound extremely well in the upper registers ( because they are additive?? ,), sure they aren't analogue modelled , but I couldn't care less , they sound great nonetheless.
NOt all osc.eff. behave stable( in lack of a better description ) enough when modulated .

[TheHelioSequence]

Noppes ,i dare to say that reaktor's resolution/event system is higher than
bazille's , it can be up to 176Khz.
Bazille is great , but doing LOTS of audio rate mod. in a patch eventually will bring it down to it's knees .
Bazille is great because of it's unified interface ,ph.d.osc's etc...

Bazille is also great because it is polyphonic
and because it has the multi-core support which is huge for usability
and the excellent integrated preset system

Reaktor is such a pain with presets and ensembles... big big turn-off
Blocks are monophonic, and there is no ability to use multiple cores. It crushes my CPU

I run Bazille at 96khz and it is not a problem.

Yeah, Blocks is killing my CPU as well... I often have to run Reaktor at half the sample rate (I'm at 96kHz). I also dislike the "under the hood" approach to patching, as it seems against the general spirit of the modular format. Definitely not an issue on both fronts w/Bazille or even the new Softube Modular, which I'm contemplating since it seems like U-He's modular is still a ways off.

I personally am getting more excited about Z3 as U-He develops better/new tech/emulations. I don't mind the wait!

[Twrogstudio]

Personally, I don't think Zebra 2 sounds old at all. I still prefer it to almost every other synth I own, including Bazille. Plus the HZ version with the Diva filters is just .

[Apostate]

There will be sound quality improvements in Z3, based on things u-he learned while making Diva, Bazille, RePro-1, etc.


I always laugh at the "dated" comment, when sounds from decades ago are being reinstated all the freaking time... Zebra gives you the tools to make all kinds of sounds, which you couldn't ever call "dated"...

t's a different synth for different purpose, I'd say. The way the sound is generated in Zebra is also completely different from Diva or others, which makes it very flexible, but CPU efficient at the same time.

ED is so right here. Of course, Zebra is already too much of a "Wonder Synth" to need defending by anyone, but I always find "dated" comments to be amusing too. Watch a pile of Zebra instructional videos, read the manual faithfully, and you might not need, say, Omnisphere (or practically any other synth). I found out I sure didn't. The only synths I need besides Zebra are Bazille and Blue 2, the former because it's modular set up fascinates me more than anything else, the latter because the overall sound really inspires. On a desert island I could more than make do with Zebra/HZ, my Spitfire Albions, and my East West Hollywoods. All it takes is a thorough knowledge of how to use the synth (though I fully admit that could be applied to Omnisphere in place of Zebra, all I know is I had already learned a ton about the latter when I bought the former last year and ended up selling Omnisphere because it didn't do anything for me music that Zebra couldn't).

But that's just for my music, everyone has different needs, of course

I would like to ask Urs (and this is probably an old question, please forgive) if Zebra 3 might include a way to say effects settings. I was working with HZ and came up with a wonderful, stereo enhancing Reverb setting and wished I could save it as a patch.

[Apostate]

wheee!

[Apostate]

triple yay