Buy Omnisphere 2

[fmr]

p.s. Specstrasonic do make quality products... i know because i could do a side by side comparison with a ton sh!t...

Again, I never said the opposite. I said that the price/performance ratio is poor

is this fact based or opinion based?

This is entirely subjective, as prety much anything else being discussed in this thread (including your opinion about how great Omnisphere is, and how justified is its price)

However, instead of "price/performance ratio", I think "bang for the buck" is more accurate, since I don't mean performance exactly, but what you get for what you pay.

[BMoore]

Strange how quality is dictated by price...

Omnisphere is a fantastic product, regardless if it costs $99 or $600.
If it can justify cost/use or not, is up to you.

[neverenoughfunk]

p.s. Specstrasonic do make quality products... i know because i could do a side by side comparison with a ton sh!t...

Again, I never said the opposite. I said that the price/performance ratio is poor

is this fact based or opinion based?

This is entirely subjective, as prety much anything else being discussed in this thread (including your opinion about how great Omnisphere is, and how justified is its price)

could you please point me to where i said "how great Omnisphere is"...

i never said anything about justifying the price... i talked about affording it and not affording it... period... go back and read what i said...

it appears to me WE have gone from stating OUR opinions to YOU putting words into my mouth...

i do think Specstrasonics makes quality products... just like NI, Steinberg, East/West, you name it... i.e. they would not be in business if they did not... right? smart guy...

[fmr]

p.s. Specstrasonic do make quality products... i know because i could do a side by side comparison with a ton sh!t...

Again, I never said the opposite. I said that the price/performance ratio is poor

is this fact based or opinion based?

This is entirely subjective, as prety much anything else being discussed in this thread (including your opinion about how great Omnisphere is, and how justified is its price)

could you please point me to where i said "how great Omnisphere is"...

i never said anything about justifying the price... i talked about affording it and not affording it... period... go back and read what i said...

You didn't use those exact words, but it's IMO what's implied when you say, and I quote: "plus, Omnisphere is not a "must have" but a "nice to have"... if price is a concern... why not look at things one can afford... right?"

To me, this sounds like the price is justified, in your opinion. Of course, you are the author, so you may say you meant something else

But you are right. You have been somehow more equidistant than others

[noiseboyuk]

Please take the discussion to a serious level.

Ha ha ha! You do make me laugh, fmr.

It seems you have a few reading issues, so I'll help you out. My original claim regarding Omni and the V Collection was "it covers a far greater range of synths but without attempting to be a recreation of any". Go on fmr, read it again just to be sure because that statement is 100% correct. I've listed the synths it covers, some little more than a handful of patches, some in more depth, then some again have multiple wavetables and are fully hardware profiled. Since you are clearly not interested in Omni and how it works, I'll explain that - it means that if you have the hardware for the specific synths, its controls are matched exactly in Omnisphere.

So once again, and this time I'll use the bold tag to see if it helps the ol' reading issues, Its not an Arturia-style attempt at an emulation, but it means that in 2.5 you can program any of those hardware profiled models them in the exact same way as the original synths, if you have that hardware.

While I'm on the delicate subject of your reading problems, the soundsoruces I helpfully listed for you are labelled entirely correctly - hardware used. So yes, for some soundsources hardware samplers were used.... not sure why that's a problem for you? Would you prefer me to remove the half a dozen samplers just leaving the 85 synths? Would that be "better"?

And forgive, but one more reading lesson. I have never said - or even hinted - that any of this means its the same as the real thing. Trying bold and italics now, as I said before Its not even an attempt to emulate. The whole point of Omnisphere is this incredibly deep well of raw material from which to draw, and then manipulate in a gazillion different ways. While its really fun to limit yourself to the architecture of a Juno 106 to re-create authentic 106-sounding patches, its also great to work without those limitations. Once you've learned Omni's architecture, then it stands to reason that its a pretty quick synth to work with all those thousands of sources, be they samples or pure synthesis.

In general you do seem terribly confused about what Omnisphere is. For example, "And while we're at it, we can compare CPU taxation on both too (being the Arturias real synths, and the other a sample based)" - I don't know how many times and in what font I'd have to write that there are currently 1,100, soon to be 2,100 patches in Omni that are entirely synthesis based... that means NO SAMPLES. Here's the thing - prepare for your mind to be blown - Omni CAN DO BOTH!

Now, just to prove that in turn I do try to read your posts, you say that "I certainly prefer to have the real things". I'm slightly unclear however... do you consider Arturia to be the real things? If so, there's an entire universe of KVR posts to enlighten you that an Arturia Minimoog is in no way like the real hardware. Personally I don't care all that much... if it sounds good to you, you go ahead and use it. So much time and energy wasted on this sort of snobbery.

People do get terribly hung up on the pure synthesis (which is worthy and real) vs samples ( which is unworthy and not real) thing. If that ideology is very important to you, then 50% of Omni will be of no interest, granted. For many of us, we simply don't care, or perhaps rather that we see the merits in both. For me, synthesis is a glorious broad church. I love having the D-50 bells right there in Omni, and I like hearing gorgeous pads created from radioactive caves. I like creating pure analog synthesis patches from scratch, I love playing with granular or putting things through convolutions. I like 70s string machines, and having a wide choice of them. I like an instrument that feels like an instrument, not a virtual fascimilie - I like a synth that is not slavishly copying one analog model from 40 years ago, expecting that using a mouse and a keyboard will in some way recreate the experience of using that glorious hardware. I like software synths that are actually designed from the ground up to be used with a mouse and a keyboard, making the most of the interface we are stuck with rather than the impoverished virtual make-do that most emulations are. And if one of those soft synths can also pull tricks to be used with actual hardware as a bonus, well that's just peachy. As I said, its fun and indeed creative to limit sometimes.

Anyway, I shan't take up any more of your precious time with my non-serious debate. All the best with those reading lessons, let us know how you get on!

[fmr]

Please take the discussion to a serious level.

Ha ha ha! You do make me laugh, fmr.

Good. I'm glad you're having fun

It seems you have a few reading issues, so I'll help you out. My original claim regarding Omni and the V Collection was "it covers a far greater range of synths but without attempting to be a recreation of any". Go on fmr, read it again just to be sure because that statement is 100% correct. I've listed the synths it covers, some little more than a handful of patches, some in more depth, then some again have multiple wavetables and are fully hardware profiled. Since you are clearly not interested in Omni and how it works, I'll explain that - it means that if you have the hardware for the specific synths, its controls are matched exactly in Omnisphere.

My problem is not reading your posts, it's about semnantics. For me, having a bunch of samples is NOT "covering a range of synths". It's just a bunch of samples. Kontakt can do that, and again, can do it better.

So once again, and this time I'll use the bold tag to see if it helps the ol' reading issues, Its not an Arturia-style attempt at an emulation, but it means that in 2.5 you can program any of those hardware profiled models them in the exact same way as the original synths, if you have that hardware.

This sounds like marketing bull to me.

The whole point of Omnisphere is this incredibly deep well of raw material from which to draw, and then manipulate in a gazillion different ways. While its really fun to limit yourself to the architecture of a Juno 106 to re-create authentic 106-sounding patches, its also great to work without those limitations. Once you've learned Omni's architecture, then it stands to reason that its a pretty quick synth to work with all those thousands of sources, be they samples or pure synthesis.

Taking apart the pure synthesis (which will probably be included in the next version of Kontakt, since Falcon and HALion already got that), what's the advantage of Omnisphere compared to Kontakt? Seems to me like it's exactly the opposite. In what concerns samples, Kontakt clearly wins. I know a lot of sample libraries that fully recreate the synth control panel. If that's what you want

In general you do seem terribly confused about what Omnisphere is. For example, "And while we're at it, we can compare CPU taxation on both too (being the Arturias real synths, and the other a sample based)" - I don't know how many times and in what font I'd have to write that there are currently 1,100, soon to be 2,100 patches in Omni that are entirely synthesis based... that means NO SAMPLES. Here's the thing - prepare for your mind to be blown - Omni CAN DO BOTH!

I was talking about comparing Mog for Moog, and Jupiter for Jupiter, since we were talking about the range of synths covered

But OK, let's talk about the synthesis part. Will it beat the other soft synths in that chapter? Will it beat any of the multiple wavetable synths we have available? What about subtractive synths? Granular synths? Will it excels in ANY chapter? Or will it be a mere MEH in ALL of them?

People do get terribly hung up on the pure synthesis (which is worthy and real) vs samples ( which is unworthy and not real) thing. If that ideology is very important to you, then 50% of Omni will be of no interest, granted. For many of us, we simply don't care, or perhaps rather that we see the merits in both. For me, synthesis is a glorious broad church. I love having the D-50 bells right there in Omni, and I like hearing gorgeous pads created from radioactive caves. I like creating pure analog synthesis patches from scratch, I love playing with granular or putting things through convolutions. I like 70s string machines, and having a wide choice of them. I like an instrument that feels like an instrument, not a virtual fascimilie - I like a synth that is not slavishly copying one analog model from 40 years ago, expecting that using a mouse and a keyboard will in some way recreate the experience of using that glorious hardware. I like software synths that are actually designed from the ground up to be used with a mouse and a keyboard, making the most of the interface we are stuck with rather than the impoverished virtual make-do that most emulations are. And if one of those soft synths can also pull tricks to be used with actual hardware as a bonus, well that's just peachy. As I said, its fun and indeed creative to limit sometimes.

You are pointing at the wrong guy. I am not a sample hater. Actually, samplers are my favorite toys, since the 80s. That's why I would ALWAYS prefer Kontakt over Omnisphere, even if they were priced equaly. Being priced as they are... well, you got the picture.

And as hybrids, I think Falcon and HALion are WAY better too.

Now, I hope you keep having fun

[ghettosynth]

So, still no user multisamples then?

[noiseboyuk]

Ghetto - no. There are some fudges and workarounds using multiple layers or patches in a multi, but imo it's not worth it. Not the right tool for that job. User samples are really intended as sources for mangling, not playback of sample libraries, and I suspect that won't change.

fmr - I am utterly perplexed at why you keep comparing Omni with Kontakt. They could not be more different. Over the years I've had a few Kontakt synths, and every single one ends up gathering virtual dust. It's a poor host for synthesis imo, but a bloody brilliant one for sample libraries.

I don't really know how to answer your question about why Omni is "better" than Kontakt, because its like asking which is better - a truck or a skateboard. Both have wheels it is true, and both can get you to from some kinds of A to some kinds of B, but they are kinda intended for different purposes. Omni is a synth. Kontakt is a sampler.

Again, with your reading difficulties - "I know a lot of sample libraries that fully recreate the synth control panel. If that's what you want". I have literally zero clue how it could be divined from anything I've written, but hey that's the fun of debating with people such as yourself, where thoughts veer off wildly in all directions based on nothing. Its all vaguely Trumpian, and thus grimly fascinating.

If you'd prefer 30 different synths that all do things in their own way, go ahead. And fwiw I do have a lot more synths despite Omni - RePro 1/5 is fantastic despite being a slavish emulation and gets a lot of use, Avenger is the most fun to program etc. Yet Omni I keep coming back to because it consistently delivers regardless of what I ask of it. Your meh is clearly not mine, neither is it for tens - hundreds perhaps - of thousands of pro users.

Well this really HAS been fun hasn't it, but that'll do me for the day as I sense your need to troll Omni threads is likely to be insatiable, and I prefer this sort of thing in moderation.

[fmr]

Well this really HAS been fun hasn't it, but that'll do me for the day as I sense your need to troll Omni threads is likely to be insatiable, and I prefer this sort of thing in moderation.

OK, fine, but what do you mean with my "need to troll Omni threads". As far as I remember it was the first time I ever wrote in an Omnisphere thread.

And since when expressing own ideas is "trolling"? I didn't insult or have been incorrect to anyone, AFAIK. But if I was, I apologize.

[wagtunes]

I happen to personally know a professional who uses Omni for his job. He is the music director for the CBS TV show "The Young And The Restless." In fact, he purchased one of my libraries. If you watch the show, you can tell there's Omni all over it.

Why does he use it? I don't know. I didn't ask. I don't care. What I do know is TONS of people who actually make a crap ton of money use it in their professional lives.

Your mileage may vary.

[Oopi]

I just bought Omnisphere 2 because of this thread. Have to sell some of my sfuff and now I'm not going to pay my rent anytime soon. I hope it was worth it.

[Zexila]

I just bought Omnisphere 2 because of this thread. Have to sell some of my sfuff and now I'm not going to pay my rent anytime soon. I hope it was worth it.

[fmr]

I just bought Omnisphere 2 because of this thread. Have to sell some of my sfuff and now I'm not going to pay my rent anytime soon. I hope it was worth it.

[ghettosynth]

I just bought Omnisphere 2 because of this thread. Have to sell some of my sfuff and now I'm not going to pay my rent anytime soon. I hope it was worth it.

Don't sweat it bro; you can move into the box that Omni comes in, there's probably even room for your cat.

[vurt]

omnisphere has such warm pads, a he is surplus to requirements, even in winter.