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

[Stefken]

Probably why AVX is needed too

I still don't know what this AVX is! I need to read about it though. Oh Ok! I read about it here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_ ... Extensions

In this thread someone gave a very good explanation. (But too many recent posts, that I can pinpoint it just like that.)
In a nutshell : they use larger registers that allow them to do parallel computations on larger data. So they can do e.g. 8 additions in one go, instead of just 1 addition. In practice, you should count some overhead so in practice it can make processes like ~6 times faster.
Something along these lines.

[EvilDragon]

I'm not sure if there's an overhead there with AVX. As far as I understand it, it's literally: do 8 additions in one go, instead of one addition 8 times in 8 goes.

There's some overhead when you're mixing SSE and AVX libraries in the same binary - which is why you'd usually pick if you want to develop for one or the other. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

[Stefken]

I'm not sure if there's an overhead there with AVX. As far as I understand it, it's literally: do 8 additions in one go, instead of one addition 8 times in 8 goes.

Well maybe not on the AVX level, but in the end result you can't expect that the load on your cpu will be like 8 times less. As AVX is not the only thing that comes into play.
One dev posted some tests and the end result was about 6 times faster.
In isolated use cases, you could even have a slight increase in cpu consumption.

Not an expert though. I just wanted to give Engee like a fast and easy explanation.

[JunSev]

I personally think the only thing regarding sound quality that truly matters is, if it is sounding good and inspiring to you. If it does, it doesn't matter wether some oscilloscope or other kinds of measuring tools are showing you things that would be mathematically unpleasant, or not.

Exactly. Actually, the opposite, i think anti-aliasing, and "hi-fi" sound (meaning a very bright sound, with lots of top end frequencies) are the reasons for all those super clinical and sterile sounding soft synths these days.

I have to agree with this one .

And I have to disagree in part with both of you, not related to Massive or NI or all the discussion about aliasing; I agree with the first quoting, what really matters is that someone enjoy the synth they are using.

And I disagree with both of you because actually clean and clear oscillators without artifacts can sound beautiful, "fat" and full of life too and at the end of the day if I want to dirt up the sound a little bit to make it sound more "analog" I just tweak here and there parameters, saturation, little bit of randomness here and there, little bit of different distortion modes, convolution ext ext.

"sterile" is not really the word to describe a clean and clear digital synth; all of that is really subjective and preferences related.

[collider]

None of the wavetables or noise tables are available in my demo, is this a bug or is that how the demo is?

no. You're having a problem with the additional stuff. Rescan Presets again - just do it. when that's done, close Massive X and reopen it.

I have the same problem and can't get it to work.
No Massive X demo for me

[EnGee]

I'm not sure if there's an overhead there with AVX. As far as I understand it, it's literally: do 8 additions in one go, instead of one addition 8 times in 8 goes.

Well maybe not on the AVX level, but in the end result you can't expect that the load on your cpu will be like 8 times less. As AVX is not the only thing that comes into play.
One dev posted some tests and the end result was about 6 times faster.
In isolated use cases, you could even have a slight increase in cpu consumption.

Not an expert though. I just wanted to give Engee like a fast and easy explanation.

Thanks, you explained it well. Hmmm, I think the AVX are important instructions as I noticed immediately how low CPU it is using! I wish I can purchase only synths coded with AVX now!

Anyway, for me it really sounds great! And looking at the CPU usage makes me even happier Thanks AVX

[kelvyn]

NI should be a lot more explicit about what processors have AVX.
I read - and assumed - that working on Mac OS 10.12 as the minimum suggested would ensure I would be partying with Massive X... but no!!
My 2010 iMac that runs like a dream doesn’t have AVX... which I just found out after upgrading to Komplete 12:( Bummer!
So as a warning... Macs earlier than 2011 won’t work with Massive X.

[EvilDragon]

NI should be a lot more explicit about what processors have AVX.

https://support.native-instruments.com/ ... -Processor

[chk071]

AVX - the 21st century nemesis of KVR users with 10 year old Mac computers.

[eXceedingdeath]

Another fun thing: somehow Massive X is actually capable of doing... Boards of Canada sounds?

If anyone is interested here I could try and make it into an usable preset and upload it somewhere. This thing seriously sounds like Boards of Canada. I know that this claim is extremely dubious because often "BoC"-presets are just some detuned presets that barely sound like BoC but this is honestly as close as I could imagine a softsynth ever getting to them

Curious about what is specific to Massive X that would make it sound closer to BoC than other synths?

[wagtunes]

NI should be a lot more explicit about what processors have AVX.
I read - and assumed - that working on Mac OS 10.12 as the minimum suggested would ensure I would be partying with Massive X... but no!!
My 2010 iMac that runs like a dream doesn’t have AVX... which I just found out after upgrading to Komplete 12:( Bummer!
So as a warning... Macs earlier than 2011 won’t work with Massive X.

I don't think it's NI's responsibility for users to know what kind of computers they have and what's in them.

[midi_transmission]

So after some day demoing it. I will pass on MX as it has not enough want have factor at the moment. I will wait how it will evolve over time. Could be something I want in the future when the usability is improved.

My summary. MX has a lot potential. I like the layout and concept. The sound quality is good. The filters and fx are damn good!!!

The reason why I pass on MX are usability things that I don't have with other plugins. At the moment I just don't like tweaking this thing. Like the knob sensitivity thing or other visual quirks.

I think it's not a finished product or NI is taking a direction from the interface that I absolutely don't like. I can understand that such things can happen as software is complicated and I we should not hate NI for that. They say that the continue developing it and that's ok. But I will wait a bit and see how things evolve in this regard before I spend money on it.

[Reefius]

What? I can't run Massive X on my Atari ST? It's only 25 years old, this is outrageous!

[chk071]

NI should be a lot more explicit about what processors have AVX.
I read - and assumed - that working on Mac OS 10.12 as the minimum suggested would ensure I would be partying with Massive X... but no!!
My 2010 iMac that runs like a dream doesn’t have AVX... which I just found out after upgrading to Komplete 12:( Bummer!
So as a warning... Macs earlier than 2011 won’t work with Massive X.

I don't think it's NI's responsibility for users to know what kind of computers they have and what's in them.

Exactly. They're not supposed to tell you whether your computer has Windows 7, or 10, or if your CPU has 2 or 4 GHz as well. It was communicated pretty early that Massive X would require a AVX capable CPU. Sometimes i really have to wonder.

[DJ Warmonger]

The nightmare of each developer:

- Why we can't use the latest and greatest tech?
- Because customers have legacy systems which don't support it