Native Instruments Massive X Synth - Sequel to Massive (Out Now!)

[pdxindy]

Maybe the controls that appear on that mixer/control panel can change depending on which tab is activated. Notice that only the A, B, and F-shift are in bold type. Osc, C and Bit are greyed out. So that would mean that A and B modules are active while C is inactive. Also that only the F-shift controls are currently visible on the panel. Osc or Bit controls only appear on that panel if you select Osc or Bit in the tabs, the text turns bold depending on which you select.

If all the modules are active, are they all editable at the same time?

[pdxindy]

In Massive insert FX were all per voice, with additional FX that were global. I don't think they'd gimp it here.

Yes, you are right... I got confused for a moment cause the term FX usually means global...

[pdxindy]

8 macros is not enough for a synth of this complexity. Especially if that's going to be the only way to automate parameters (rather than reporting hundreds, or potentially thousands of parameters to DAW)!

You will not be able to directly automate parameters? That's an odd limitation. Well, I'll reserve judgement until trying it.

The biggest thing for me will be the sound. I never particularly liked the sound of Massive so though I've owned it since release have rarely ever used it. But I do like the sound quality of Blocks. With Blocks I find it clumsy to use so don't often use it either.

So for me, Massive X will be a buy if it has the sonic quality of Blocks and the ease of use of Massive.

[liv]

"The new routing section offers a freely patchable audio routing matrix, and features a new feedback bus, audio rate filter modulation bus, the use of modulators as audio sources, and more."

The feedback feature of Massive offer such endless magic.
Now (new feedback bus) perhaps developed even further and with new colors and options.

So with a freely patchable audio routing matrix does that mean you can routing one Osc into another Osc for modulation?

I would like to think so, aswell as using modulators as audio sources.

[drdriller]

8 macros is not enough for a synth of this complexity. Especially if that's going to be the only way to automate parameters (rather than reporting hundreds, or potentially thousands of parameters to DAW)!

macro should stay macro, they are not made to be automation wrapper... i hate that on battery, this extra step before automating a parameters..

about wavetable edition, I find it useless and in charge of the poor quality of most serum presets librairies, but people love it today à wt synth have to offer this functionality, as NI often select the musical aspect before what people want i don't think it will be part of massive ✖

[EvilDragon]

I personally have nothing against having "automation wrappers". It makes a lot of sense especially with more complex instruments (like Kontakt and indeed Battery as you mentioned), because you're never going to need to automate each and every parameter the plugin might have at the same time. So rather than have a huge overhead of too many reported parameters to host, keeping it simple like this seems like a good idea to me.

[mickbenjamins]

give us the performer back, who need to have the same automation windows than in ableton live clip ?

Performer is a lot more advanced now:

[drdriller]

it looks like ableton clip automation, i don't need another one, the performer and the ring modulation was the massive identity, those premade curve\spike woobled so well, automating the switch from 2 performers also offered great moments ^^ (maybe we can still automate the switch from p1/p2/p3, but the ui does not suggest so..)

[EvilDragon]

You can still do wobbles, man. Don't worry. They can just be a lot more elaborate

[loachm]

8 macros is not enough for a synth of this complexity. Especially if that's going to be the only way to automate parameters (rather than reporting hundreds, or potentially thousands of parameters to DAW)!

Do you know that for sure - that it'll only be 16 automatable parameters or is it just an assumption?

And the thing with the amount of parameters - I was always wondering, technically would it be possible to reserve a certain number of IDs for a module slot in a VSTi and then report only the parameters to the DAW, once this slot has been filled with a module instead of reporting all parameters of every module, no matter if they're actually used or not.

Even though the number of parameters of a complex synth can still go into the hundreds with such a slot architecture, it'll still be more comfortable than dealing with the thousands of parameters this synth has in total.

The idea is, that even though the total number of parameters of all the modules might be insanely high, the number of parameters of the modules, that are currently used, may be significantly lower. And with hardware like Maschine or the Kontrol-S Series the handling of even hundreds of parameters is actually quite comfortable. Or would that be too much of a niche feature for the majority of users in your opinion?

[EvilDragon]

AFAIK there's no dynamic allocation of automation parameters in VST2, possibly even VST3. They all need to be reported when instantiating the plugin. So it's either report all possible parameters, or do the "wrappers" like Kontakt, Battery, etc.

I'd say dynamic allocation of parameters to host would just wreak havoc anyways.

[liv]

I wonder if rain and water are synthesized or samples.
Would be cool if synthesized. Cool, nevertheless.

[loachm]

...still can't help thinking, it would look so much better with differently coloured backgrounds & knobs for each module. Or at least a dark colour scheme

[Urs]

looks like someone is worried it could be a zebra killer

I have indeed worried that some day something would come along that "kills Zebra". I stopped worrying around June 3rd 2005. In the meantime I have figured out that an unbiased view on competing products opens the opportunity for critical reflection. And maybe gives me an idea or two for a modular patch when I'm on Eurocrack.

[JoeCat]

looks like someone is worried it could be a zebra killer

I have indeed worried that some day something would come along that "kills Zebra". I stopped worrying around June 3rd 2005. In the meantime I have figured out that an unbiased view on competing products opens the opportunity for critical reflection. And maybe gives me an idea or two for a modular patch when I'm on Eurocrack.

Given the (relative) inexpensiveness of plugs vs. hardware (especially eurocrack - imagine paying an extra $300 to add the Uhbie filter to Diva lol), it's not always an either-or unless the synths are very similar. My plugin folder is like Imelda Marcos' shoe closet (there - I've shown my age).

Macro's are always a welcome solution to automation. I like being able to make a synth template in Live and mapping the Live macros to the synth macros, then just working in the synth. Would be a welcome addition on the more complex u-he synths ( )