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

[JoeCat]

It is the same development team (more or less) that developed the Original Massive, right? Or is the graphics developer different?

Anyway, the sound is great and the CPU usage is low. I hope they develop more some of the 'missing' things. To be honest, I loaded yesterday Sugar Bytes Factory and compared it to Massive X. Man! The sound of Factory is great as well (if not clearer!) and NI should learn something or two of how graphics/animation development works from Sugar Bytes (I'm not mentioning Aparillo here!). Just see how the details in the visual feedback. Every parameter shows the numerical value and the mouse scrolling works! There are also great oscillators there!

I mean, this black sheep (MX) really made me appreciating having other synths like Sugar Bytes one besides the old NI synths like the original Massive!

Factory is still under the radar IMHO, probably because it doesn't tick all the boxes feature-wise as a "super-synth" (whatever that is, but I guess "does it all") - but SugarBytes always kinda does their own thing, and for what it is, it's great. Their products, to me, seem more geared towards experimentation then being targeted towards any specific product category.

It's interesting, comparing the Factory mod matrix to Massive's mod UI, and pretty subjective as to what one prefers. But Factory is great software extension of (what I guess started with?) the EMS-type matrix. Massive could do with a supplemental mod matrix/table somewhere, but that's more clutter, dev time, etc. Happily, neither are expensive pieces of hardware, so I'm owning both.

Good times, and we're all pretty spoiled. But I agree with most that a lot of the stuff in MX (especially with regards to the envelope graphics, given their complexity) feel more like missing features due to a rushed release then just wish-list items. Great sound and flexibility to me though.

("In my day...": had to program this. A freakin' number pad. Jeez... Sounded great, though.
I also had a DX7 at the time, so that's two - count-em: two - data sliders for input between 2 flagship synths. Now we're all "the knobs are slow." I had a rotary phone too - couple of nines in a phone number and I'd bring a book. And school was uphill, both ways... )

[Functional]

It’s a delight to have someone as curious, knowledgeable and articulate as Functional in this thread.

Thank you for your participation.

Hey, I was just really excited for Massive X and now happy to see that it surpassed my expectations in most regards. A software synth that can pull of Arca-esque, Rival Consoles-esque AND Boards of Canada-esque sounds? Don't give a damn how rough in the edges it is, the things you can do with it simply surpass any softsynth that I know of. It's not a synth that is "better at making that supersaw than X", it's a synth that has wild sonic capabilities when you dig a 'lil deeper.

Does it mean that I'm oblivious to its shortcomings? No, I'll happily list em:

- no custom wavetables
- no envelope shape to quickly figure out how the envelope is arranged (or, for example, directly adjusting shapes there)
- no midi learn (this is a biggie for me!)
- only 2 proper wt oscs
- the routing section requires unnecessary amount of precision: why can't you just drag a "cable" to a box rather than a small dot? The design makes sense in Reaktor, not in here because it's not cluttered

If a synth has all these flaws or limitations and still manages to impress me like no other, that's truly something

[sadowickproduction]

Nothing makes sense, the static images aren't accurate. The attack and release on for the exciter are wrong.



Did no-one realize this? Who tested it?

[Forgotten]

It’s a delight to have someone as curious, knowledgeable and articulate as Functional in this thread.

Thank you for your participation.

Hey, I was just really excited for Massive X and now happy to see that it surpassed my expectations in most regards. A software synth that can pull of Arca-esque, Rival Consoles-esque AND Boards of Canada-esque sounds? Don't give a damn how rough in the edges it is, the things you can do with it simply surpass any softsynth that I know of. It's not a synth that is "better at making that supersaw than X", it's a synth that has wild sonic capabilities when you dig a 'lil deeper.

Does it mean that I'm oblivious to its shortcomings? No, I'll happily list em:

- no custom wavetables
- no envelope shape to quickly figure out how the envelope is arranged (or, for example, directly adjusting shapes there)
- no midi learn (this is a biggie for me!)
- only 2 proper wt oscs
- the routing section requires unnecessary amount of precision: why can't you just drag a "cable" to a box rather than a small dot? The design makes sense in Reaktor, not in here because it's not cluttered

If a synth has all these flaws or limitations and still manages to impress me like no other, that's truly something

Much better approach to discussing its pro's and con's. Glad you didn't just post whiny bullshit like some people have been coming here to do.

[Functional]

This is too much BS to validate with an answer so I won't.

Wow, personal incredulity! Wait, we are allowed to just shout vaguely relevant rhetorical fallacies, right?

[zerocrossing]

I’m going to say something controversial. It is highly possible that some people may be unsatisfied by something that other people find very satisfying.

Hear, hear!

I will add: if you don’t like the programming, change the channel. You’ve probably got it set to Omni and that clearly isn’t working for you!

Yeah, I never quite get the cats who state their case and then hang out as if it’s the forum’s job to turn around and agree with them. If a plugin isn’t for me, I’m usually out after a page or two.

[Functional]

Nothing makes sense, the static images aren't accurate. The attack and release on for the exciter are wrong.



Did no-one realize this? Who tested it?

Do you even know what the exciter is? Because honestly I don't think you do. A snob who is experienced in physical modeling stuff could actually argue that the exciter is not as much of an exciter but a particular type of an exciter that sends out a burst. For example, bowed exciters work entirely differently. The attack and release are not wrong; this is not an AD envelope, it's an exciter.

If you want to know what it is used for, you need to route the exciter to one of the mod slots and route it to the filter (don't have anything else going to the filter) and set the filter to comb. Exciters such as this are meant to excite resonators (which the comb filter essentially is). This particular exciter is meant for plucked tones and it behaves a bit differently than your ADSR mod envelope. How? How about you see yourself and see what kind of tone you get from an ADSR envelope that only has a tiny bit of decay like the exciter does.

Seriously, are you not willing to take a goddamn lesson in how things work before you start criticizing them i.e. "the static images aren't accurate"? Of course they're not accurate, it's an exciter. You can't really even give a 2d-representation of an actual exciter due to the way they work.

[realtrance]

It’s a delight to have someone as curious, knowledgeable and articulate as Functional in this thread.

Thank you for your participation.

Hey, I was just really excited for Massive X and now happy to see that it surpassed my expectations in most regards. A software synth that can pull of Arca-esque, Rival Consoles-esque AND Boards of Canada-esque sounds? Don't give a damn how rough in the edges it is, the things you can do with it simply surpass any softsynth that I know of. It's not a synth that is "better at making that supersaw than X", it's a synth that has wild sonic capabilities when you dig a 'lil deeper.

Does it mean that I'm oblivious to its shortcomings? No, I'll happily list em:

- no custom wavetables
- no envelope shape to quickly figure out how the envelope is arranged (or, for example, directly adjusting shapes there)
- no midi learn (this is a biggie for me!)
- only 2 proper wt oscs
- the routing section requires unnecessary amount of precision: why can't you just drag a "cable" to a box rather than a small dot? The design makes sense in Reaktor, not in here because it's not cluttered

If a synth has all these flaws or limitations and still manages to impress me like no other, that's truly something

Yes, MIDI learn gets my vote as the top feature to add in an update.

I note that the Moog Grandmother has no pictures of envelopes on it, yet people manage to make amazing music with it. MX clearly isn't very rewarding for 'scope peepers, as its main function seems to be to, you know, make music.

[Vortifex]

There are too many words in this thread.

[Functional]

So the attack gets its own curve control but the release curve is linked to the decay even though the ui doesnt make that clear. During adjustments of the decay curve people will get confused as to why their release length is begin effected. Who allowed that?

I guess the people who design synths for a living rather than people who make inaccurate videos about them and can't make a kick drum without having separate decay & release shapes. Can you please next pick up Kaivo by Madrona Labs and review it? Honestly that's the kind of content I'd pay for.

[sadowickproduction]

Nothing makes sense, the static images aren't accurate. The attack and release on for the exciter are wrong.



Did no-one realize this? Who tested it?

Do you even know what the exciter is? Because honestly I don't think you do. A snob who is experienced in physical modeling stuff could actually argue that the exciter is not as much of an exciter but a particular type of an exciter that sends out a burst. For example, bowed exciters work entirely differently. The attack and release are not wrong; this is not an AD envelope, it's an exciter.

If you want to know what it is used for, you need to route the exciter to one of the mod slots and route it to the filter (don't have anything else going to the filter) and set the filter to comb. Exciters such as this are meant to excite resonators (which the comb filter essentially is). This particular exciter is meant for plucked tones and it behaves a bit differently than your ADSR mod envelope. How? How about you see yourself and see what kind of tone you get from an ADSR envelope that only has a tiny bit of decay like the exciter does.

Seriously, are you not willing to take a goddamn lesson in how things work before you start criticizing them i.e. "the static images aren't accurate"? Of course they're not accurate, it's an exciter. You can't really even give a 2d-representation of an actual exciter due to the way they work.

Take a breath and look closer at the negative cycle image description and compare it to the oscilloscope.

[drzhnn]

@Functional
@experimental.crow

Thanks guys. Now it makes more sense to me. I noticed that those little circles also allow to control modulation depth of neighboring modulators, and the position of the modulators in a row is important.



^ In this configuration when the ModWheel is at 0, only L4 affects the Frequency, and when ModWheel is at 100 then only L5 does. That's actually pretty cool.

[Functional]

@Functional
@experimental.crow

Thanks guys. Now it makes more sense to me. I noticed that those little circles also allow to control modulation depth of neighboring modulators, and the position of the modulators in a row is important.



^ In this configuration when the ModWheel is at 0, only L4 affects the Frequency, and when ModWheel is at 100 then only L5 does. That's actually pretty cool.

Oh that makes sense, I didn't actually know how to utilize them in cases where we had 3 boxes.

[collider]

Nothing makes sense, the static images aren't accurate. The attack and release on for the exciter are wrong.



Did no-one realize this? Who tested it?

f**k. Not Again.

[Forgotten]

I’m going to say something controversial. It is highly possible that some people may be unsatisfied by something that other people find very satisfying.

Hear, hear!

I will add: if you don’t like the programming, change the channel. You’ve probably got it set to Omni and that clearly isn’t working for you!

Yeah, I never quite get the cats who state their case and then hang out as if it’s the forum’s job to turn around and agree with them. If a plugin isn’t for me, I’m usually out after a page or two.

It's usually the uninformed and obstinate posters (especially the ones who hate to admit they are wrong) who come back time and time again for no fathomable reason. It usually plays out like a game of whack-a-mole without them realizing they're actually the mole...