Getting Hive?

[Faza]

(in reply to Wags)

I don't really think in those categories. We strive to achieve the best sound possible with anything we do. We certainly go for "character" here or there, but that is part of the feature set. I couldn't reduce a synth on just "how it sounds".

If, once Zebra 3 comes out, all people say is "meh, it sounds like Hive", I'd be very upset

(they won't)

I don't think so, even when Hive is one of the simplest u-he synths, then it's still a huge monster. It sounds very, very good and unique and it has ultra good filters and effects with modulatable parameters (especially wonderful distortion, chorus, plate reverb and very important for me equalizer), constant, random, alternate as modulation source. It only needs some kind of mathematical operation, like substract, divide; power and root for number and logic gates for modulation values (and audio-rate modulation signal, only for other synths, that are going to be designed for this). Bazille is in my opinion the biggest monster in the digital existence (with effects that make him more unbelievable, like my favorite distortion and the lovely spring reverb), then I think that Zebra 3 is going to be at least exponentially bigger and better.

[S0lo]

Well, if your cooler is any good, you don't have to do anything extra. Just balancing the components well (good mobo, quality RAM, great PSU, etc.) and it works. It's not rocket science. Today's mobos even have auto-overclocking built into their UEFIs. Anyone not into this stuff, there are people who build DAWs for living and can do it for you when they build you a machine.

Good to know, I guess I'm too old, last time I checked wasn't that easy. My PC is old too.

Still, if it was that easy, then why don't intel/AMD just commit it to the market out of the box?. I mean in the old days those speeds used to double like every 8 months.

On the otherhand, lets ask this, for how long the max OC speed has been at 7Ghz ? (if thats the max)

[EvilDragon]

The max seems to be over 8 GHz with an AMD FX CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling (from 2012).

https://valid.x86.fr/records.html


In the "old days" the ground to expand was still pretty big and the tech was still new. It's gotten to the point where things need to be thought through a looooot more, since everything's so damn tiny. As far as I'm concerned, it's good that things have started spreading into more and more cores rather than more and more GHz, along with consideration for power consumption as well. Eventually we will see more and more 4 GHz+ chips with more than 4 hyperthreaded cores, that'll be great enough for DAWs.

Still, if it was that easy, then why don't intel/AMD just commit it to the market out of the box?.

They already do, this is what Turbo frequency is. A factory tested "overclock", shall we say, that is safe to use for longer periods of time.

[kmonkey]

My gawd what is happening

You stumped on people which suffer from "self entitled" disease. On top of that they think they are product specialist and they want to "help" you making your next synth (Zebra 3) by saying you should shape your next product to their liking. Like you being in the business wouldn't know what to do next. That's what happened.

I don't think we need another synth that does what Hive does best.

Speak for yourself. I don't even in my dreams feel like i should touting Urs about making his stuff his own way. If Z3 will sound like something new, or even improved Hive or anything in between Hive, Z2, Bazille or whatever just let it be done. Historical fact: U-he is known to deliver amazing product at any rate. No question about that.

Bottom line: If Zebra 3 comes out and I hear more of Hive's sound and less of Zebra 2's sound, I will be disappointed.

Who cares about that? Like all of a sudden he will going to change product roadmap because internet nobody will be disappointed?

What do you want me to do, put a gun to my head and blow my brains out? I can't change how I perceive sound, even if it's a faulty mechanism that's doing the perception.

Bottom line: No one want anything from you. I think nobody care what or how you hear or perceive really. I think you need to bang something to stop feel so superior on teaching synth guru what he should do next. Or you don't and continue to entertain us across KVR - whatever.

[wagtunes]

@kmonkey

I couldn't have said it better.

Whatever. LMAO.

Alligator - @#@^$#

[S0lo]

The max seems to be over 8 GHz with an AMD FX CPU and liquid nitrogen cooling (from 2012).

https://valid.x86.fr/records.html


In the "old days" the ground to expand was still pretty big and the tech was still new. It's gotten to the point where things need to be thought through a looooot more, since everything's so damn tiny. As far as I'm concerned, it's good that things have started spreading into more and more cores rather than more and more GHz, along with consideration for power consumption as well. Eventually we will see more and more 4 GHz+ chips with more than 4 hyperthreaded cores, that'll be great enough for DAWs.

Still, if it was that easy, then why don't intel/AMD just commit it to the market out of the box?.

They already do, this is what Turbo frequency is. A factory tested "overclock", shall we say, that is safe to use for longer periods of time.

Thanks allot for the information man . I guess I have seen the number 3.3GHz so many times for the last few years that I've blindly ignored current advances. I'm used to the old days "double speed every year". I guess thats too much to ask now, but I really hope that more 4GHz+ CPUs will be here soon as you said.

Multicores are good, yes but for parallelism. Which is not always possible. At one point or another, a core has to wait for another. I think the best application for multicore is multi-plugns, polyphony and the like where tasks are totally independent. A single CPU heavy mono synth would not usually benifit that much from Multithreading.

[EvilDragon]

Multicores are getting used by your DAW all the time - so in this case, the more the merrier. It's not useful just for plugins.

[fluffy_little_something]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

[Zexila]

Getting HIV?

[S0lo]

Multicores are getting used by your DAW all the time - so in this case, the more the merrier. It's not useful just for plugins.

That's what I meant

[S0lo]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

Which would performs faster, an i5 At 3.3ghz or the same i5 over clocked at 4ghz ?

[fluffy_little_something]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

Which would performs faster, an i5 At 3.3ghz or an the same i5 over clocked at 4ghz ?

The latter, obviously.
But I was referring to the general statement a few posts ago: "I really hope that more 4GHz+ CPUs will be here soon".

[S0lo]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

Which would performs faster, an i5 At 3.3ghz or an the same i5 over clocked at 4ghz ?

The latter, obviously.
But I was referring to the general statement a few posts ago: "I really hope that more 4GHz+ CPUs will be here soon".

And I was referring to this statement before me

Eventually we will see more and more 4 GHz+ chips with more than 4 hyperthreaded cores, that'll be great enough for DAWs.

[fluffy_little_something]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

Which would performs faster, an i5 At 3.3ghz or an the same i5 over clocked at 4ghz ?

The latter, obviously.
But I was referring to the general statement a few posts ago: "I really hope that more 4GHz+ CPUs will be here soon".

And I was referring this statement before me

Eventually we will see more and more 4 GHz+ chips with more than 4 hyperthreaded cores, that'll be great enough for DAWs.

That's the point. A couple of AMD's FX processors have had 8 complete cores (not just hyper threaded ones) and between 4 and 5 GHz for years now, but that doesn't mean they are as powerful as one might expect.

[S0lo]

The CPU clock as such does not really mean much. Look at the AMD FX processors, some of them do between 4 and 5 GHz, yet they are at the i3 and i5 level in terms of performance. There are so many other factors to consider.

Which would performs faster, an i5 At 3.3ghz or an the same i5 over clocked at 4ghz ?

The latter, obviously.
But I was referring to the general statement a few posts ago: "I really hope that more 4GHz+ CPUs will be here soon".

And I was referring this statement before me

Eventually we will see more and more 4 GHz+ chips with more than 4 hyperthreaded cores, that'll be great enough for DAWs.

That's the point. A couple of AMD's FX processors have had 8 complete cores (not just hyper threaded ones) and between 4 and 5 GHz for years now, but that doesn't mean they are as powerful as one might expect.

I'm sure you know what I meant