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

[ghettosynth]

Sometimes I get the impression that forum mods deliberately allow one arbitrary thread to become a cesspool. People are going to take a metaphorical dump on the board anyway, may as well contain it to one thread and let the others remain mostly clean (while metaphorically extending that a lot of members apparently don't wash their hands after pressing "submit" in the cesspool thread). Apparently ED is the bidet in this instance.

Did you know that you can get a bidet seat for a standard toilet? It costs extra to have heated water, probably worth it.

[Vectorman]

Lush, expansive, deep, powerful, dimensional. These are words I would use to describe the kinda of sounds possible barely scratching the surface of the synth. I couldn’t believe the depth to sounds I could easily come up with, often times shocked that I wasn’t using any delay, reverb or other effect. The comb filter is truly amazing. The routing engine is well thought out. As I was programming, I was struck by the stereo imaging. I was so immersed the sound.

This description echoes a lot of what I perceive too. NI has found, IMO, a nice sweet spot between hi-fi clarity and smoothness that has sounds I really like falling out of it pretty easily when programming. The stereo imaging really does hit you with this synth - very immersive.

I recall I said something a couple days ago about being surprised and a bit disappointed that there is only one full-featured filter, but I've since found the split filter modes on the SVF very useful regardless. Using that filter, an MX version of a patch I had done years ago on Zebra with one of the XMF dual filter modes was readily obtained.

Apart from other things that have been mentioned, two other little bits of weirdness I've encountered using MX in Reaper on Windows. Patch names are forgotten when closing and re-opening a session - the patch still plays correctly, but the name field at the top is blank. Also, Reaper's "send all keyboard input to plugin" option doesn't seem to work with this one for me. Consequently, I can't use the spacebar when naming patches.

[aMUSEd]

Yes, there has clearly been some recent optimisation but like I said it was manageable on my old MacMini several weeks ago, the differences are there but not as huge as is being stated here.

Ok, so then it never really was a CPU eater and ED was just exaggerating a bit?

I think it depends on what you find acceptable. Some people I guess would have considered using up to 25% of a core, even of an old i7, unacceptable. A lot depends on whether you are a multiple instance user or not (I am not). It uses a bit less now, most patches for me are not going above 20%, but I would hardly describe this as 2-3 times better.

[Pytchblend]

Are all the Xeon PC workstations missing out on AVX?

Works fine on my DELL T-20 with it's Xeon E3-1225 (Win10 Pro).

[bartoszkwiecinski]

Is Massive X NKS ready?

[Stefken]

.. an MX version of a patch I had done years ago on Zebra with one of the XMF dual filter modes was readily obtained.

How would you compare MX and Zebra 2 towards sound quality?
(I have my opinion, but I'm interested in yours).

[EvilDragon]

Yes, there has clearly been some recent optimisation but like I said it was manageable on my old MacMini several weeks ago, the differences are there but not as huge as is being stated here.

Ok, so then it never really was a CPU eater and ED was just exaggerating a bit?

No it was absolutely eating CPU over here (even with no voices playing), but they optimized it quite well in the last couple of weeks. Could be there was lots of debug code still lying around, etc.

Is Massive X NKS ready?

Of course, it's a NI product, it's going to be NKS ready.

[aMUSEd]

Is Massive X NKS ready?

Yes - it uses the same preset format even

[ghettosynth]

Yes, there has clearly been some recent optimisation but like I said it was manageable on my old MacMini several weeks ago, the differences are there but not as huge as is being stated here.

Ok, so then it never really was a CPU eater and ED was just exaggerating a bit?

No it was absolutely eating CPU over here (even with no voices playing), but they optimized it quite well in the last couple of weeks. Could be there was lots of debug code still lying around, etc.

I see. It's pretty light on my machines now. I'd be more concerned about a heavy blocks patch.

[chk071]

Are all the Xeon PC workstations missing out on AVX?

Not sure what you mean with "workstations", but... my Xeon supports AVX. Just like many others.

[Functional]

So apparently the basic saws are really, really close to JP8000 saws, just in case anyone is wondering. I haven't done A/B testing but I was looking for a waveform that resembles closest to the JP8000 saw and after I almost gave up, I gave a shot for the basic saws and voilá, it sounds almost like JP8000. Only thing you need to do is turn the filter knob (in osc section) just slightly down. I can't tell a difference after doing that, I doubt even if I made an A/B test.

Note, the JP8000 waveform comes from Omnisphere as it has JP8000 wavetable in its standard selection after the hardware updates. It might just be that it doesn't sound anything like the real deal but that wavetable has been by far my favorite sawtooth.

EDIT: Technically waveform, not wavetable. The wavetable I haven't cared for much at all, but the waveform itself is another story.

[DavidCarlyon]

Going into my evaluation with he highest amount of scepticism, being extremely critical, looking for something to really dislike, and being one of those that do believe that the aliasing could be a problem when leveraging modulations, I can only say that I produced some of the most amazing, unexpected sounds using MX that I wouldn’t even have thought of being able to do with my other synths (perhaps I should re-examine them more closely).

Lush, expansive, deep, powerful, dimensional. These are words I would use to describe the kinda of sounds possible barely scratching the surface of the synth. I couldn’t believe the depth to sounds I could easily come up with, often times shocked that I wasn’t using any delay, reverb or other effect. The comb filter is truly amazing. The routing engine is well thought out. As I was programming, I was struck by the stereo imaging. I was so immersed the sound.

So good.



Yes, I think the GUI is terrible. Yes, it feels absolutely unfinished to me.

Good, balanced post. I agree with everything here. Similar to my experience.

[zerocrossing]

Do I notice aliasing in the oscillators? Yeah. I didn’t at first but with all the talk I checked out the sawtooth at the upper range of my 61 key controller. Yes, clearly audible aliasing. Do I care? Not a bit. If the rest of the synth was flaccid and weak, I’d probably be part of the contingent of whiners, but...

On a more objective note, this has been advertized as 'clean', 'advanced' and a notch or two above the current top wavetable synths - in every way. Very advanced technology, developed by a team of seasoned experts, etc.

Aliasing is an undesired effect and they've put a lot of effort in removing, reducing and so on dealing with it. The end result is that it is audible, you can hear the aliasing. Would anyone call this a success?

Besides, digital artifacts such as aliasing, lossy compression etc. can cause earache, headache, especially if you're demoing raw oscillators and looking specifically at the high frequencies they produce. Just like I did the other day for a few hours - on headphones, - got my ears burning, then came here and found out why.

Edit: 'demoing raw oscillators and looking specifically at the high frequencies they produce.' - that's the first thing I do when demoing a new synthesizer. Browsing through presets is not real demoing and not my thing at all.

I get the sense some compromises were made to appeal to the CPU whiners. I think an HQ mode with much more oversampling is not an unreasonable thing for this synth. It's really low on CPU for being "next-gen."

Right, which makes me think that all they needed to do to avoid this entire conversation was to introduce quality modes.

You think it's that simple? Apply internal oversampling - which is some pre-cooked code that gets pasted somewhere - and be done with it? Why did they NOT do it, then?

And, what about about third party wavetables, if and when this is implemented? I'm sure their wavetables have been made as perfect as possible, but throw a user made wavetable at it, and oversampling is magically going to solve its issues? Aliasing is not the only digital artifact that occurs when you tweak a wavetable. So they have to take that into account too.

Advancing the science is hard work, you can not just oversample it.

I never said it was simple, or easy. I honestly have no idea what goes on in the depths of code like that. But I do see this option in other instruments, so I know it’s something that’s often thought about and considered valuable to many users. Clearly, they’ve already thought of this, as they do have HQ modes in the distortion modules. I’m just saying that a HQ button in the oscillator section could be a good way to make more people happy. People with CPU to burn get their clean oscillators, people who value being able to run at low latencies with older computers can keep things as they are.

Personally, I have no skin in this game. I have two hardware synths that use FPGAs running at very high rates to create nearly artifact free digital waveforms. I already have the thing that people are asking for, but I also understand that these instruments are costly and a software instrument is a great way to provide great sound on a budget. I’m personally very happy with Massive X’s sound as is. If I were presented with the current crop of new wavetable synths, I’d pick it over any of them, and that’s still with a large list of things that I’d like changed or fixed. I just dig the sonic thumbprint of the thing.

[zerocrossing]

Going into my evaluation with he highest amount of scepticism, being extremely critical, looking for something to really dislike, and being one of those that do believe that the aliasing could be a problem when leveraging modulations, I can only say that I produced some of the most amazing, unexpected sounds using MX that I wouldn’t even have thought of being able to do with my other synths (perhaps I should re-examine them more closely).

Lush, expansive, deep, powerful, dimensional. These are words I would use to describe the kinda of sounds possible barely scratching the surface of the synth. I couldn’t believe the depth to sounds I could easily come up with, often times shocked that I wasn’t using any delay, reverb or other effect. The comb filter is truly amazing. The routing engine is well thought out. As I was programming, I was struck by the stereo imaging. I was so immersed the sound.

So good.



Yes, I think the GUI is terrible. Yes, it feels absolutely unfinished to me.

Good, balanced post. I agree with everything here. Similar to my experience.

Agreed. This is actually the synth I was looking for when I bought a Peak. I was hoping for something really juicy and lush. Expansive. I feel like getting that sound out of Massive X is effortless. The Peak nearly went back to the store a number of times... but I found it’s true calling and decided it was worth keeping for that. Instead of juicy and lush, I got hard and confident. More suited to monophonic sounds and massive (pun not intended) unison bass and lead sounds. Massive X is like sunlight filtered though exotic forests and sci fi inspired cathedral windows. The Peak is like a laser light show that gets projected on top.

What’s funny is, if this were a hardware synth, they’d be pooping their pants over it over at GearSlutz. I guarantee it. And I make that guarantee with absolutely no way of ever getting called out on it.

[realtrance]

Going into my evaluation with he highest amount of scepticism, being extremely critical, looking for something to really dislike, and being one of those that do believe that the aliasing could be a problem when leveraging modulations, I can only say that I produced some of the most amazing, unexpected sounds using MX that I wouldn’t even have thought of being able to do with my other synths (perhaps I should re-examine them more closely).

Lush, expansive, deep, powerful, dimensional. These are words I would use to describe the kinda of sounds possible barely scratching the surface of the synth. I couldn’t believe the depth to sounds I could easily come up with, often times shocked that I wasn’t using any delay, reverb or other effect. The comb filter is truly amazing. The routing engine is well thought out. As I was programming, I was struck by the stereo imaging. I was so immersed the sound.

So good.



Yes, I think the GUI is terrible. Yes, it feels absolutely unfinished to me.

Good, balanced post. I agree with everything here. Similar to my experience.

Agreed. This is actually the synth I was looking for when I bought a Peak. I was hoping for something really juicy and lush. Expansive. I feel like getting that sound out of Massive X is effortless. The Peak nearly went back to the store a number of times... but I found it’s true calling and decided it was worth keeping for that. Instead of juicy and lush, I got hard and confident. More suited to monophonic sounds and massive (pun not intended) unison bass and lead sounds. Massive X is like sunlight filtered though exotic forests and sci fi inspired cathedral windows. The Peak is like a laser light show that gets projected on top.

What’s funny is, if this were a hardware synth, they’d be pooping their pants over it over at GearSlutz. I guarantee it. And I make that guarantee with absolutely no way of ever getting called out on it.

Except here I am.....