Syntronik [update March 2018: New T-03 Bonus Content & 4-for-1 bass synth promo] available

[ghettosynth]

Peter, here are a few questions.. hopefully easy to answer...

1. can I choose any sample from the entire collection to use within a particular instrument as a source OSC? or if I am looking at the SY99 screen(for example), will I only be able to select SY99 samples to use in OSC1 and OSC2?
2. I read somewhere that I can use any of the filters in any of the instruments...so that is similar to question #1, but I think already answers that YES, I can mix and match the filters in the instruments to get different results.
3. You have the layers...ok...is there any synth processing that can be done to all the layers as a whole...or at least FX processing? In other words, does synth processing need to happen entirely within each of the layers or can we really layer the bare OSC's from different instruments and then process that resulting layered OSC through the synth and FX engine?

1. You would select the instrument you want to use (thus the oscillator(s)) and then go from there. For other instruments' oscillators you'd use another instrument on another layer.
2. Yes you can choose filters that are not normally associated with the synth you're working with in Syntronik
3. There is no master bus processing inside Syntronik. Think of it as 4 complete synths with their own effects.

So, pretty much how I've described so far, only it wasn't clear how the effects are a part of the equation, now it is. Each patch not only defines the samples, it also defines the effects.

Really there's little benefit over only having one layer and loading multiple instances in the DAW. It sounds like the only real benefit is being able to save a.fxb from your DAW, if it supports it, so that it will capture the state of all four layers?

[noiseboyuk]

1. You would select the instrument you want to use (thus the oscillator(s)) and then go from there. For other instruments' oscillators you'd use another instrument on another layer.

Ah, and there it is. Well, I did have some residual hope that this represented a bit more than presets, but reluctantly I'll concede that in practice not really. Ghetto-dog-with-a-bone makes fair points - the lack of variety between synths/UIs makes it moot anyway, perhaps.

Goodness I use plenty of presets myself, but I'm hardly short of them if I need them, and I can always tweak any with more variety than I'll ever have here. So sadly, it's a pass for me - feels like a wasted opportunity, it wouldn't have taken too much effort to give more flexibility it seems to me.

[Dewdman42]

1. You would select the instrument you want to use (thus the oscillator(s)) and then go from there. For other instruments' oscillators you'd use another instrument on another layer.

Hmm, that is a bit disappointing to hear. Maybe I should have waited before throwing down $69.

So Peter, basically if you are looking at one of the instruments that supposedly has some big collection of osc samples inside..how do you go about selecting the OSC samples you want used for that instrument?

It does start to sound kind of rompler like, with an analog sound to it. I won't know until I try it. On the other hand, the only reason I haven't bought Zebra is because I don't know enough programming to make good use of it, even though that is probably the be all end all do everything synth. So maybe this thing will be exactly what I need, great presets with analog sound. Just depends on how dynamic it is to automate tonal changes over time, etc. We shall see I guess.

[wagtunes]

I can't say I'm all that surprised by the way this turned out but I will say this for those who are maybe a little disappointed.

Here's how you have to look at this instrument and how I would have looked at it if I was still in the market for buying synths other than for business use.

You have to listen to it for its sound quality and what it brings to the table as far as new sounds and possibilities. For some, this could be considerable. For others, maybe not so much. It will all depend on your current collection and what you're able to do.

I still think there is a market for this instrument. How big remains to be seen.

[Dewdman42]

I will use the string machines if nothing else. I'm sure it will have some useful sounds. Its worth $69. I'm not sure its worth 50GB of disk space, but anyway, when it comes I will give it a go...who knows maybe I will love it that it provides some presets as layered instruments that I use as a starting place and bring off to tweak and have some big fat sounds. I love the way my JP-80 sounds because of layering essentially rompler waves and a simple synth engine. So who knows...might just end up loving it.

[JJ_Jettflow]

Well, for me, the product is still something I am looking forward to. As I said before, the Roland Cloud synths are now my main synths, but the are very heavy on the CPU. So his product is a godsend. The sound quality appears (though only through the audio demos) to very close to the Roland stuff so now, I can use Syntronik for the simpler sounds allowing me to save CPU cycles for the Roland gear.

For others, maybe it will not be enough but for my use of it, it fits my needs perfectly.

[ghettosynth]

I can't say I'm all that surprised by the way this turned out but I will say this for those who are maybe a little disappointed.

Well, I hate to say "I told you so".....hold the phone, who I am I kidding, I LOVE to say "I told you so", LOL

I TOLD YOU SO!

I still think there is a market for this instrument. How big remains to be seen.

Of course there's a market for this. There was ALWAYS a market for this. It's the same market that UVI sells all their products to. I don't understand the space gripe either, that's the tradeoff, if you don't want to model it, you need deep samples to capture the variety in the original synth.

I do think that IK could have done a MUCH better job making this interesting. I get that not everyone wants a super complex synth. I even hate, for example, all of the "everything but the kitchen sink" ensembles in the Reaktor user library. However, I think that there's a huge gap between "we don't want to confuse users with an overly complex synth engine when most synths won't use most of the features and no synth will use all of the features", and, "here is a very basic synth engine with different pictures of front panels." I also think that not having a master mixer and a tone/patch concept to save patches of all the layers are oversights. Maybe the latter is there, I don't know. However, this thing should have a mixer panel with send fx and insert fx for all of the layers and the master bus.

Of course, what I'm envisioning would have been a lot more work. I think that zerocrossing pointed out earlier that it's priced reasonably, and it is. It's certainly competitive with other sample libraries of comparable size and depth.

And I'm going to say, that I hope that some of you who were doubting that I had some insight as to what this was learned something about how you absolutely can sometimes look at the promo materials for a product and infer significant detail of it's "DNA."

[Peter - IK Multimedia]

...or you can read the explanations I've posted and more than just "infer" things from the also detailed information on the Syntronik web pages.

I told everybody so, multiple times. I've stated exactly what Syntronik is and exactly who it is for. At least I won't bore people by quoting one of said posts explaining both of those things again. At least not on this page.

But thanks for the drama and whatnot, it certainly is great to see such interest.

P.S. - Water is wet and bears **** in the woods. Please find a way to rip this apart as somehow unclear for another 35 pages or so.

[Peter - IK Multimedia]

We posted another video too, by the way. Part 3 of the series:

[Peter - IK Multimedia]

Well, for me, the product is still something I am looking forward to. As I said before, the Roland Cloud synths are now my main synths, but the are very heavy on the CPU. So his product is a godsend. The sound quality appears (though only through the audio demos) to very close to the Roland stuff so now, I can use Syntronik for the simpler sounds allowing me to save CPU cycles for the Roland gear.

For others, maybe it will not be enough but for my use of it, it fits my needs perfectly.

First, I'm glad you are looking forward to Syntronik. It is a heck of a product and I'm confident you'll find it well worth your time and money.

Second, speaking of audio demos I'm reminded of a comment from another forum so I'll reiterate here that if you are interested in the audio demos in their original form (in other words, not altered at all for streaming by SoundCloud) we do enable downloads there so you can get the WAV file for local listening at better quality.

Thanks!

[ghettosynth]

...or you can read the explanations I've posted and more than just "infer" things from the also detailed information on the Syntronik web pages.

I told everybody so, multiple times. I've stated exactly what Syntronik is and exactly who it is for. At least I won't bore people by quoting one of said posts explaining both of those things again. At least not on this page.

Clearly, you weren't clear enough because even after pages and pages people still felt that there was more going on and were adamant that my interpretation needed to be verified by you.

TBH, your language isn't very clear. I think that you have a hard time separating sales mode from informational mode. I think that's exactly why, right up to the end, some people were still confused. I told wags a page or so ago to read YOUR text because it seemed fairly clear to me, but, people still needed clarification.

[VitaminD]

...or you can read the explanations I've posted and more than just "infer" things from the also detailed information on the Syntronik web pages.

I told everybody so, multiple times. I've stated exactly what Syntronik is and exactly who it is for. At least I won't bore people by quoting one of said posts explaining both of those things again. At least not on this page.

Clearly, you weren't clear enough because even after pages and pages people still felt that there was more going on and were adamant that my interpretation needed to be verified by you.

TBH, your language isn't very clear. I think that you have a hard time separating sales mode from informational mode. I think that's exactly why, right up to the end, some people were still confused. I told wags a page or so ago to read YOUR text because it seemed fairly clear to me, but, people still needed clarification.

I've tried to keep up, but I have yet to see where Peter stated exactly who this synth is for.. I've seen a few of his claims of him previously stating exactly who this synth is for though (but not the actual explanation).

However, I don't really need him or anyone to explain as I can infer directly from the promotional clips and IKM website details. This is a product designed for the novice user to get sounds instantaneously. Of course it can be used by anyone though..

It really is an advanced rompler... with vintage synth oriented sounds. Nothing inherently wrong with that.

[olepro]

...or you can read the explanations I've posted and more than just "infer" things from the also detailed information on the Syntronik web pages.

I told everybody so, multiple times. I've stated exactly what Syntronik is and exactly who it is for. At least I won't bore people by quoting one of said posts explaining both of those things again. At least not on this page.

Clearly, you weren't clear enough because even after pages and pages people still felt that there was more going on and were adamant that my interpretation needed to be verified by you.

TBH, your language isn't very clear. I think that you have a hard time separating sales mode from informational mode. I think that's exactly why, right up to the end, some people were still confused. I told wags a page or so ago to read YOUR text because it seemed fairly clear to me, but, people still needed clarification.

I've tried to keep up, but I have yet to see where Peter stated exactly who this synth is for.. I've seen a few of his claims of him previously stating exactly who this synth is for though (but not the actual explanation).

However, I don't really need him or anyone to explain as I can infer directly from the promotional clips and IKM website details. This is a product designed for the novice user to get sounds instantaneously. Of course it can be used by anyone though..

It really is an advanced rompler... with vintage synth oriented sounds. Nothing inherently wrong with that.

No, not advanced.
To me it look's very simple.
Roland D50 is an advanced rompler

[robotmonkey]

Well, I hate to say "I told you so".....hold the phone, who I am I kidding, I LOVE to say "I told you so", LOL

I TOLD YOU SO!

I think this is very much warranted in the context of this thread.

But after reading 34 pages I'm still not sure what ROMpler means.

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

From the above posted video, "Syntonik's Galaxy synth offers the authenticity and flexibility of the Alesis Andromeda"

Ikm have nobody else to blame but themselves for the way this thread has turned out. Bullshit marketing 101 'wins' once again