Loom II has landed!

[chk071]

You've got to differentiate. Of course, a bigger screen with a much bigger resolution won't solve small GUI problems. The GUI will be small by default too, unless there's some kind of scaling going on. A 32" full HD display will of course show the GUI much bigger than a 22" full HD display though.

[wagtunes]

You've got to differentiate. Of course, a bigger screen with a much bigger resolution won't solve small GUI problems. The GUI will be small by default too, unless there's some kind of scaling going on. A 32" full HD display will of course show the GUI much bigger than a 22" full HD display though.

Then the question becomes, big enough to read? And if not, will going to a smaller resolution cause other problems?

For example, I can't go to smaller resolution on my PC with some applications because the applications themselves don't support smaller resolutions. Cubase can only be run at so low a resolution.

There is only one idea solution. The dev makes their synth GUI resizeable. Problem solved.

Throwing money at a new monitor does not solve the problem 100% of the time.

[chk071]

A resizable GUI is the best option, no doubt. But, full HD resolution is the most common resolution people use now, and most DAW's, or plugin's GUI's are optimized for that, so, if you can't read the text on a GUI on a 22" full HD display, chances are good you'd be able to on a 24", 27", or larger full HD display. It really helps, i know the issue.

The biggest problem IMO pose plugins which are old, and have been written for lower resolutions, because those will be displayed really small. But, those are getting more and more rare.

[wagtunes]

A resizable GUI is the best option, no doubt. But, full HD resolution is the most common resolution people use now, and most DAW's, or plugin's GUI's are optimized for that, so, if you can't read the text on a GUI on a 22" full HD display, chances are good you'd be able to on a 24", 27", or larger full HD display. It really helps, i know the issue.

The biggest problem IMO pose plugins which are old, and have been written for lower resolutions, because those will be displayed really small. But, those are getting more and more rare.

And those are the only ones I'm passing on. I've purchased just about every VST on the market with the exception of the ones with very small GUIs that can't be resized. Of course unless I hear a synth that, to my ears, sounds like absolute garbage. Those are very few and far between. I'm really not that picky when it comes to sound. Let me just be able to read the darn thing.

[ghettosynth]

I look at vsts as an investment, and many investors define what they
purchase as a 'position', because purchases are made at different prices,
for different needs, and at different times etc. Whether you pay
top dollar, or get a deal, it's your position that matters.

Let's say you get Xpand!2 and AIEP3 for under $100, adding to your
position that already includes, for example, Zebra2, Reaktor, SampleTank,
a Motif keyboard, studio monitors, a computer, and a room for it all.

Your position in vst/audio is perhaps $2500 + monthly rent/mortgage.
At that point, an upgrade to _anything_ at $50, is quite trivial,
especially if it addresses a need/desire, which could be just one feature,
or one great sound that you know you can use and expand upon.
You gain great potential in the position, for a tiny fraction of it's overall value.

The perceived and actual value of an addition to ones position, is based
on the relative cost and potential. Things that don't exist have neither.
Dramatising the details of what does not exist,
comes at the cost of making less music.
Which devalues ones position.
Cheers

.

LOL!

That just sounds like a bunch of GAS justification. Setting aside the questionable classification of plugin purchases as "investments." you are ignoring the opportunity cost of the decision which, in this case, is likely to be huge.

In short, that $50 is better spent elsewhere, which, by your own definitions will still "increase your position" by exactly the same amount, but provide much greater value to your workflow.

It's an overpriced update and no amount of GAStification (yes I just made that up) is going to change that fact.

I wouldn't pay that much for that level of upgrade for products that are key to my work, e.g., Reaktor, let alone products that are of marginal value to my workflow. I'm not criticizing Loom, I like it a lot. However, this is a weak update. Had this update been much more significant, $50 isn't necessarily unreasonable. From an economics POV, that the original was heavily discounted isn't necessarily relevant either.

[cron]

Edit: support person in this thread, this is in no way aimed at you - you seem thoroughly decent and I'm sorry you're corporately obliged to mop up threads like this today.

Had this update been much more significant, $50 isn't nedcessarily unreasonable. From an economics POV, that the original was heavily discounted isn't necessarily relevant either.

Agreed, but it's the perfect storm for me.

I waited ages for Loom to go on sale (it never seemed to go on sale IIRC) and picked it up for £45, only for it to be followed with a £55 everything upgrade less than 3 months later that treated me like I'd paid a dollar for Xpand 2. The dollar Xpand 2 sale itself happened less than 2 weeks after I bought Loom.

I mean it was sore, but let's be real, it happens sometimes. Loom was all I was interested in anyway, so I looked at it in a positive light as having saved £10 overall by not getting a bunch of stuff I wasn't interested in.

But then this £50 minor upgrade lands in my inbox and I just feel like a f**king fool. "Oh, that's what *I* get when I pay 50 quid. Thanks!"

Like you ghettosynth, I still think Loom is a great little synth behind the dated ergonomics. I probably wouldn't care if I didn't like it.

i don't believe I've ever sounded this hostile in my entire post history, but I've never had an imprudent purchase decision rubbed in my face quite so determinedly before. I mean I was even supportive of CDP + front end going free and open source and that totalled £250 or so!

[Distorted Horizon]

I really like Loom and use it every now and then. Resizable gui is the only thing I need/want for it (along with at least 32 polyphony) and I just don't simply buy the update until it meets my requirements.

Case closed.

[EnGee]

I have 2 4k monitors, One on a laptop and a stand alone 4k monitor and I had gui scaling issues prior to the previous update and now Loom II is even worse. I can't even access some controls. It also replaced my Loom 1 install. I''m going to hold off on the upgrade for now.

Loom Scale.JPG

Maybe this is related to 4k monitors, as in Windows 10 - Reaper (64bit latest) I don't have such a problem.

Here, how it looks in mine (27" 1920x1080):

LOOM 2 in Reaper 5.5.JPG

Note >> Open image in a new tab as it is the actual image I see on my screen

[budweiser]

But now they expect users to pay almost the same amount just to upgrade to one of the plugs in that package.

No matter the price of the plug, i will buy the upgrade if it solves my problem. Loom is a great synth and 49 usd is not that much, but it's too much for something i won't use without a 200x magnifier.

[shonky]

I still think Loom is a great little synth behind the dated ergonomics. I probably wouldn't care if I didn't like it.

Agreed, soundwise it's very capable, and comes up with some decent and varied textures, the morphing works well and there's a lot of potential for sound design. It's this latter point that's frustrating as the inability to swap or delete modules, when part of it's original USP was that it was a semi-modular additive synth, seems to have been overlooked in the original and now in the update. It has the basis of being a very good synth but, if we compare it to Spectral or Harmor, once you want to go further than the onboard presets, it's quite limited in what it can do compared to what's possible with the competion in terms of modulation sources and targets. Adding a sub-oscillator when these are already standard on so many synths doesn't really seem like a breakthrough.

[starflakeprj]

I have 2 4k monitors, One on a laptop and a stand alone 4k monitor and I had gui scaling issues prior to the previous update and now Loom II is even worse. I can't even access some controls. It also replaced my Loom 1 install. I''m going to hold off on the upgrade for now.

Loom Scale.JPG

Maybe this is related to 4k monitors, as in Windows 10 - Reaper (64bit latest) I don't have such a problem.

Here, how it looks in mine (27" 1920x1080):

LOOM 2 in Reaper 5.5.JPG

My opinion, I would hate running such low resolution on a 27" display

But that wasn't was I was going to say. Windows 10 has scaling option, 100-500 %. In case your Loom II takes up all the screen, you are probably scaling 125-150 %, my guess.

Myself I would like a scaling option to get under 100 %, to get space for more windows

[EnGee]

I have 2 4k monitors, One on a laptop and a stand alone 4k monitor and I had gui scaling issues prior to the previous update and now Loom II is even worse. I can't even access some controls. It also replaced my Loom 1 install. I''m going to hold off on the upgrade for now.

Loom Scale.JPG

Maybe this is related to 4k monitors, as in Windows 10 - Reaper (64bit latest) I don't have such a problem.

Here, how it looks in mine (27" 1920x1080):

LOOM 2 in Reaper 5.5.JPG

My opinion, I would hate running such low resolution on a 27" display

But that wasn't was I was going to say. Windows 10 has scaling option, 100-500 %. In case your Loom II takes up all the screen, you are probably scaling 125-150 %, my guess.

Myself I would like a scaling option to get under 100 %, to get space for more windows

Well, it is not that bad really! I mean if I can manage with Mono/Poly, then it is the same with Loom! I guess maybe because I'm just about one metre from my screen and that my eyes got used to small/blurry fonts from old synths (and some old games)

Hopefully, resizable GUI (like in Sylenth1 or Diva) for all AIR instruments would be available in future updates

[kiezum]

Last year I bought the bundle for next to nothing. I have used Hybrid, Strike and Expand. To be honest, I haven't explored and used Loom version 1 yet. For me, no need to upgrade.

[jacqueslacouth]

Note >> Open image in a new tab as it is the actual image I see on my screen

Isn't this how the world always looks??? FML, I better get to the eye doctor if this is considered an issue...farkin' diabetes!

[glokraw]

I look at vsts as an investment, and many investors define what they
purchase as a 'position', because purchases are made at different prices,
for different needs, and at different times etc. Whether you pay
top dollar, or get a deal, it's your position that matters.

Let's say you get Xpand!2 and AIEP3 for under $100, adding to your
position that already includes, for example, Zebra2, Reaktor, SampleTank,
a Motif keyboard, studio monitors, a computer, and a room for it all.

Your position in vst/audio is perhaps $2500 + monthly rent/mortgage.
At that point, an upgrade to _anything_ at $50, is quite trivial,
especially if it addresses a need/desire, which could be just one feature,
or one great sound that you know you can use and expand upon.
You gain great potential in the position, for a tiny fraction of it's overall value.

The perceived and actual value of an addition to ones position, is based
on the relative cost and potential. Things that don't exist have neither.
Dramatising the details of what does not exist,
comes at the cost of making less music.
Which devalues ones position.
Cheers

.

LOL!

That just sounds like a bunch of GAS justification. Setting aside the questionable classification of plugin purchases as "investments." you are ignoring the opportunity cost of the decision which, in this case, is likely to be huge.

In short, that $50 is better spent elsewhere, which, by your own definitions will still "increase your position" by exactly the same amount, but provide much greater value to your workflow.

It's an overpriced update and no amount of GAStification (yes I just made that up) is going to change that fact.

I wouldn't pay that much for that level of upgrade for products that are key to my work, e.g., Reaktor, let alone products that are of marginal value to my workflow. I'm not criticizing Loom, I like it a lot. However, this is a weak update. Had this update been much more significant, $50 isn't necessarily unreasonable. From an economics POV, that the original was heavily discounted isn't necessarily relevant either.

You make good points, but not everyone shares the same valuation
process, either for a product, or justifying it's price. We purchase
new things on a linear timeline, not being able to predict the ongoing
or final results of the new investment ahead of time. There might be a couple
presets in the new 500, that will be used or modified as the basis or
missing piece of a song that you will love, or a client, or fans will love.
Same with a couple of features that are discredited ahead of time,
but when fully investigated, may lead to unexpected delights.

Regarding the purchasing timeline, it does assume one is actually looking
for something new, not just buying _because_
and how will you know that your $50
spent elsewhere will yield superior results? Not much to demo
in the that price range, you can always get a few fine third-party soundsets
at that price, adding up to 500 sounds, but lacking new synth features...

In defence of Air, and NI, and a host of other companies with
a lot of older plugins, we can't assume the original coders even work for
the same companies several years on down the line, which I suspect
is why some things that were all the rage in 2012, remain unchanged.
Maybe the trend will be (or is) farming out such update work to contractors,
rather than maintaining a more expensive long-run team 'in-house'?

I suppose some smart beancounters know if the number of vst musicians per capita who actually buy products, is shrinking, or growing, relative to the number of vst products and coders, and suggest hiring/firing based on an equasion. Similar math processes for determining tech-support staffing? Advertising?
Infrastructure?
Cheers