Talk about Spire, Sylenth, Serum ("S-synths") in this thread is some kind of torture to me. I can not think of any benefit in making Zebra anything like these.
Zebra is not a complicated synth suddenly only because there are some easier to use synths with, well, an architecture which makes "easy to use" easy to get.
Zebra3 Info
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30209 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
-
- KVRist
- 259 posts since 16 Jun, 2015
Well just think about Hive as a point of reference if that eases the pain. The key insight is that there's a lot of what I'll call "jargon" in Zebra, for lack of a better way to put it. What's an XMF? What do all the little knobs mean in the Comb module? What's a "geomorph vs spectral morph" oscillator? And of course all the spectral effects. Hive (and it's ilk) have none of that.
I argue that there is a worthy design challenge here: offer the rich sonic possibilities of Zebra while minimizing "jargon" as with Hive. I say "minimize" because I doubt ZERO is actually attainable -- but I bet you can get dang close.
I confess to having an ulterior motive. When you look at the soft synth landscape, there appear to really be two ultimate, high-quality do-anything instruments -- and I say "instrument" as opposed to instruments building platforms -- and those are Omnisphere and Zebra. And I do not like Omnisphere at all. I dislike it in theory, and disdain it in practice.
Zebra, otoh, I like very much -- in theory. In practice, I have a growing family and a demanding career, and I don't want to devote the time it takes to learn Zebra since that would come at the expense of playing with my daughter or taking my wife to dinner. Thus if I want to roll my own sounds, I find myself relegated to the second tier of synths -- the dreaded S-words.
Hence my selfish desire to have a synth that let's me have my cake and eat it too -- and I think Zebra 3 could be that synth. But my own selfishness aside, I'm also appealing to your self-interest, Urs.
I think your vision for Zebra 3 will be very successful. But you know, those twenty-somethings who start off with S-word synths eventually turn into thirty somethings who would desire greater sonic depth if it didn't demand too much of their time. I think this is an untapped market, and that U-he is just the company for the job.
Zebra 3 also strikes me as a natural opportunity to appeal to that market -- but perhaps that would unacceptably compromise the vision for Zebra. You would know this far better than I. If so, maybe some of the functionality from Z3 could be incorporated in a streamlined fashion into a successor for Hive.
The key thing is the problem -- maximizing sonic possibilities while minimizing tool-specific jargon -- and my conviction that Uhe is poised to better solve that problem than anyone else has to date, and to profit quite handsomely from such a solution. There are some others who could hack it -- which is basically how I view the S-word synths and Omni -- and I can of course get by admirably with those offerings.
But U-he could do it better.
I argue that there is a worthy design challenge here: offer the rich sonic possibilities of Zebra while minimizing "jargon" as with Hive. I say "minimize" because I doubt ZERO is actually attainable -- but I bet you can get dang close.
I confess to having an ulterior motive. When you look at the soft synth landscape, there appear to really be two ultimate, high-quality do-anything instruments -- and I say "instrument" as opposed to instruments building platforms -- and those are Omnisphere and Zebra. And I do not like Omnisphere at all. I dislike it in theory, and disdain it in practice.
Zebra, otoh, I like very much -- in theory. In practice, I have a growing family and a demanding career, and I don't want to devote the time it takes to learn Zebra since that would come at the expense of playing with my daughter or taking my wife to dinner. Thus if I want to roll my own sounds, I find myself relegated to the second tier of synths -- the dreaded S-words.
Hence my selfish desire to have a synth that let's me have my cake and eat it too -- and I think Zebra 3 could be that synth. But my own selfishness aside, I'm also appealing to your self-interest, Urs.
I think your vision for Zebra 3 will be very successful. But you know, those twenty-somethings who start off with S-word synths eventually turn into thirty somethings who would desire greater sonic depth if it didn't demand too much of their time. I think this is an untapped market, and that U-he is just the company for the job.
Zebra 3 also strikes me as a natural opportunity to appeal to that market -- but perhaps that would unacceptably compromise the vision for Zebra. You would know this far better than I. If so, maybe some of the functionality from Z3 could be incorporated in a streamlined fashion into a successor for Hive.
The key thing is the problem -- maximizing sonic possibilities while minimizing tool-specific jargon -- and my conviction that Uhe is poised to better solve that problem than anyone else has to date, and to profit quite handsomely from such a solution. There are some others who could hack it -- which is basically how I view the S-word synths and Omni -- and I can of course get by admirably with those offerings.
But U-he could do it better.
Makin' Music Great Again 
-
- KVRAF
- 26963 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
Comb Module =aumordia wrote:Well just think about Hive as a point of reference if that eases the pain. The key insight is that there's a lot of what I'll call "jargon" in Zebra, for lack of a better way to put it. What's an XMF? What do all the little knobs mean in the Comb module? What's a "geomorph vs spectral morph" oscillator? And of course all the spectral effects. Hive (and it's ilk) have none of that
Prefill - Input - Damp - Feedb - Tune - Detune - Vibrato - Tone - Flavour - Distort - Keyscale - Volume - Pan - Dry - Width
Those all seem pretty clear and descriptive. How are they 'jargon'? What other terms would you suggest?
-
- Pick Me Pick me!
- 10242 posts since 12 Mar, 2002 from a state of confusion
Those are all interesting synths. I own all but Serum out of all the synths mentioned. The more important aspect to all of them is they sound fantastic.Urs wrote:Talk about Spire, Sylenth, Serum ("S-synths") in this thread is some kind of torture to me. I can not think of any benefit in making Zebra anything like these.
Zebra is not a complicated synth suddenly only because there are some easier to use synths with, well, an architecture which makes "easy to use" easy to get.
I think the multi-saw on Zebra2 works in it's own way but can sound a bit mushy to me. On the other hand it does have it's own characteristic sound. And, with the right programming, puts out big detuned sawness that I can't quite get out of any other synth... it has a personal fingerprint; identity. Even Hive sounds different with similar big settings.. though it can sound almost too clean or bright at times so my usage is sadly not as much as I initially hoped.
Sylenth1 has a nice, polished sound.. it fits well in a mix. Spire can sit well in a mix too, yet it can sound almost neutral at times. I use all of them.. often layered together.
Yet that brings me to this.. each of these synths has it's own character.. they all sound different. I've been able to 1:1 create Sylenth1 sounds in Zebra2, but not all. To the point I bought Sylenth1 as it is unique sonically. Yet I still use Zebra2 a lot for big pads, leads, and occasionally basses.. again it has it's own sound and that sound is very nice.
I wouldn't want you to try to clone the sound of one of these other synths, yet hope you improve on the sound characteristics of Zebra... to make Zebra become a more robust yet refined Zebra. It is a swiss army synth that can reach into all kinds of sound space and music genre. I would just hope it doesn't take on a more vintage vibe OR a clone of something already out there, but keep on it's own path (using some of the technology from each). Your direction for Zebra has been well thought out and I hope it retains it's own fingerprint.
But, openly, I'm going to use it for electronic, dance/trance/house type music.
Z2 can do it, I hope Z3 does it even more.-
- KVRian
- 1202 posts since 8 May, 2003 from Munich
I don't see turning a Ferrari into a pedal car in order to make it easier to drive as a sensible design choice.
Improve the comfort as much as is possible without sacrificing performance, yes, but some of the suggestions seem to go an awful lot in the direction of dumbing down the product.
There are loooads of one trick pony synths out there which definitely have their niche in the market. Personally I'm super grateful for what Zebra is and does (and since Zebra-HZ it's almost the only synth I need).
That said, it's good to challenge and push developers.
edited for pre-coffee grammar butchery
Improve the comfort as much as is possible without sacrificing performance, yes, but some of the suggestions seem to go an awful lot in the direction of dumbing down the product.
There are loooads of one trick pony synths out there which definitely have their niche in the market. Personally I'm super grateful for what Zebra is and does (and since Zebra-HZ it's almost the only synth I need).
That said, it's good to challenge and push developers.
edited for pre-coffee grammar butchery
Last edited by pitchdrifter on Thu Jun 15, 2017 8:44 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30209 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
I think I understand now. This is what we need to copy from the S-synths:
- Remove reasonable preset management. We always thought that S-synths are usually geared towards people who rely on presets. And they are. However, if preset management is very easy, people quickly realize overlap between sound banks or single categories. But if preset navigation is tedious (e.g. via drop down menu), people go through presets slower and thus have the impression of much wider variety. They're also urged to appreciate any single preset more since skipping isn't all that easy.
- Avoid Velocity and Aftertouch in factory bank. Obviously there's a lot of frustration when sounds are overly expressive. Users will not only be intimidated by the giant feature set and complicated UI, but foremost by the nerve-wrecking task of quantizing not only note timing but also Velocity. And filter pressure info out alltogether.
- Tab modulations away. It goes without saying, if some obscure modulation path isn't visible, it won't be followed. It's best to keep hazardous modulation features away from the user by adding a sensible selection of tabs to the interface which prevent users from utilizing modulations in one tab to address targets in another. This way we don't ever need to visualize what is going on, simply also because there isn't anything going on to begin with!
-
- KVRAF
- 24417 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia
Wow, that was pretty edgy 
-
- KVRAF
- 3332 posts since 18 May, 2003 from Sweden
/Joachim
If it were easy, anybody could do it!
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30209 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
In all seriousness: I think it's possible that these three factors contribute as much to the commercial success of a synth as a fancy user interface.EvilDragon wrote:Wow, that was pretty edgy
It's a mind numbing realization when you go through a popular synth's factory bank and half way down the list suddenly "oh, this one has aftertouch!"
-
- KVRist
- 122 posts since 26 Jul, 2016
please no.Urs wrote:I think I understand now. This is what we need to copy from the S-synths:
We have a plan!
- Remove reasonable preset management. ...
- Avoid Velocity and Aftertouch in factory bank. ...
- Tab modulations away. ...
Such truth.Urs wrote:It's a mind numbing realization when you go through a popular synth's factory bank and half way down the list suddenly "oh, this one has aftertouch!"
-
- u-he
- Topic Starter
- 30209 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
-
- KVRAF
- 4197 posts since 23 May, 2004 from Bad Vilbel, Germany
Learning how to use the patching grid (might take 10 minutes altogether) then getting a simple patch up and running it is truly a piece of cake in Zebra2. And "Learning synthesis" is the task of a lifetime anyway...aumordia wrote:Zebra removes those limitations, but demands that the user invest much more in learning Zebra vs learning synthesis. Could Zebra 3 make it possible to have my cake and eat it too?
-
- KVRian
- 1245 posts since 27 Nov, 2014
Wow! Why so many hate to S-synths?
I think every synth has it's own place. I like the S-synths for it's immediacy. I like Zebra for its endless posibilities in sound design. From my little experience i can't get fast results from Zebra 2 in EDM music, which i can get from S-synths (i am speaking making from scratch, not presets using), but for film, sound design, great pads, scapes, basses, keys - it is no brainer.
But i understand that everybody expect the one allrounder to make every possible sound in the world.
I think every synth has it's own place. I like the S-synths for it's immediacy. I like Zebra for its endless posibilities in sound design. From my little experience i can't get fast results from Zebra 2 in EDM music, which i can get from S-synths (i am speaking making from scratch, not presets using), but for film, sound design, great pads, scapes, basses, keys - it is no brainer.
But i understand that everybody expect the one allrounder to make every possible sound in the world.
-
- KVRist
- 393 posts since 12 Sep, 2005 from NYC
From a long time synth user ,myself not really a true synth programmer but I have ears......what I love about U-he synths is the SOUND!!. 
I've played with synth players(back in the day) that worked with Herbie,Michael Jackson etc......
For me few soft synths really have that SOUND!!
I have most if not all of of U-he's synths a couple from XILS & the Waldorf Largo, these give me that real feeling of a synth,I have tons of others(none of the S synths,lol) & most are gathering virtual dust because they generally don't grab me like Zebra/HZ,Diva,Repro 1 and Bazille and a couple of others.
For me I hope Urs,Howard and the U-he team continue to do whatever they want to do,I expect a good synth to take time to learn,understand and master,for me it's all about the SOUND!!
I don't want these gems dumbed down.
Team U-he rock on!
I've played with synth players(back in the day) that worked with Herbie,Michael Jackson etc......
For me few soft synths really have that SOUND!!
I have most if not all of of U-he's synths a couple from XILS & the Waldorf Largo, these give me that real feeling of a synth,I have tons of others(none of the S synths,lol) & most are gathering virtual dust because they generally don't grab me like Zebra/HZ,Diva,Repro 1 and Bazille and a couple of others.
For me I hope Urs,Howard and the U-he team continue to do whatever they want to do,I expect a good synth to take time to learn,understand and master,for me it's all about the SOUND!!
I don't want these gems dumbed down.
Team U-he rock on!
2012 Mac Pro,3.46 Ghz,12 core 96g ,Mojave,RME, DP11.01, Logic 10.51,RME UCX, Great River ME-1NV, a few microphones,Spectrasonics, U-he Komplete12U & way too many VI's,Synths & FX galore!, UAD,Mimic Pro/SD3,Focal Twin 6 monitors, Shunyata ....