Opinions on MassiveX

[lwj]

I’m a fan but I can see how someone else might hate it for exactly the same reasons. I was pretty sure I was gonna hate it too before I tried it.

It won me over with the quality of the effects like the reverb and non linear lab, coupled with the noise generators it seemed like you can do really interesting organic, hybrid sounds with it. I don’t pretend to understand the oscillators, but they are intriguing with the different readout modes. More interesting than being able to draw your own.

It also runs really well for me, for the sound quality. It turns out to be a handy workhorse for the basic simple sounds too. I kind of like the GUI as well, with dark mode and visible envelopes now it’s much better. But I hope they’ll still add animations for modulated controls and the wavetables.

[n9research]

I tend to work on patch and sound design in fully modular environments, either software or hardware, but wanted to have a simple, fixed-architecture synth for when something needs to be cooked up quickly.

I've recently tried most of the popular best-in-class plugins for this purpose. Massive X I almost didn't consider, not being a fan of the first one, way back when.

After 5-6 minutes, starting from the raw triangle wave, I'd purchased a license. Further sessions have not led me to regret that decision; Quite the opposite, in fact. It's a beautiful, beautiful tool, and I look forward to spending lots of quality time with it.

[HTT]

Also, for those who have both MassiveX and Synthmaster2 (also has a sweet discount at the moment), how would you compare the two?

For the presets alone, I would take Synthmaster 2 over Massive X. That said, also consider looking at Hive, Dune, etc.

[fisherKing]

i have MX, hive, and dune... and don't see how any one replaces the others. presets? seems most of the kvr community likes to either make their own, or tweak (full disclosure: am a tweaker).

MX is pretty awesome, and has a sound (& workflow) of it's own.

[Sinisterbr]

i have MX, hive, and dune... and don't see how any one replaces the others. presets? seems most of the kvr community likes to either make their own, or tweak (full disclosure: am a tweaker).

MX is pretty awesome, and has a sound (& workflow) of it's own.

Really? I'd say these 3 synths overlap quite a lot. Anyway, out of the three, I'd choose MX, without question.

[Hink]

how is "So I really do want for nothing... its just taken me a long time to figure out that a lot of the most revered synths do very little for me" relevant to the topic?

It really isn't. It's a ghastly tangent. Very sorry.

not so serious, really. certainly not on the kvr forums, where every day, threads derail and people rant and so on. it's a non-stop party...

hi

[chk071]

i have MX, hive, and dune... and don't see how any one replaces the others. presets? seems most of the kvr community likes to either make their own, or tweak (full disclosure: am a tweaker).

MX is pretty awesome, and has a sound (& workflow) of it's own.

Really? I'd say these 3 synths overlap quite a lot.

In terms of features, definitely. Even though MX has all those oscillator modes, the performers, and the macros. In terms of sound, they're all pretty different. And, MX surely can't compete with the gazillion of oscillators you can use with Dune and Hive.

BTW, just took a look at MX's manual, i'm a bit surprised how untidy it is. You would think that every manual starts with the sound producing elements, the oscillators, but... not this one. In chapter 11 after 44 pages, they finally get into them.

[Sinisterbr]

i have MX, hive, and dune... and don't see how any one replaces the others. presets? seems most of the kvr community likes to either make their own, or tweak (full disclosure: am a tweaker).

MX is pretty awesome, and has a sound (& workflow) of it's own.

Really? I'd say these 3 synths overlap quite a lot.

In terms of features, definitely. Even though MX has all those oscillator modes, the performers, and the macros. In terms of sound, they're all pretty different. And, MX surely can't compete with the gazillion of oscillators you can use with Dune and Hive.

BTW, just took a look at MX's manual, i'm a bit surprised how untidy it is. You would think that every manual starts with the sound producing elements, the oscillators, but... not this one. In chapter 11 after 44 pages, they finally get into them.

I see. Well, that's one more reason I'd choose MX, I really dislike synths with a gazillion oscs, much prefer different osc modes (like MX) at my disposal

[HTT]

i have MX, hive, and dune... and don't see how any one replaces the others. presets? seems most of the kvr community likes to either make their own, or tweak (full disclosure: am a tweaker).

MX is pretty awesome, and has a sound (& workflow) of it's own.

If your comment was directed at my post, I didn’t say anything about replacing the others. I merely suggested that the OP look at the other wavetable plug ins available on the market.

At this point, I am also just a tweaker. I don’t have the time to create from scratch anymore. That said, synthmaster 2 has many excellent presets to tweak to get songwriters up and running.

[EnGee]

IMO go for the synth that inspires you more in your music. It doesn't matter if you are tweaker or always from scratch kind of guy.

Just one thing to notice is that some synths need more time to spend with till it begins to inspire you.

I usually load two different synths. These days I'm in love with the duo Massive X and Super 8. Of course I can add some more organic feel from RePro/Diva or the Legend/Dune 3 if needed. That suits my music perfectly I just need to finish all those pieces before starting new projects! Damn it!

[fisherKing]

haha, am getting a lot of responses (a good thing, since my GF isn't talking to me today). personally, i own MX, hive, dune; i use dune a lot, am exploring MX, and find hive... too lightweight, and rarely use it. but it's... pleasing, for what it is.

and that's the point; we use what we want, or need. we make different music. we hear things differently (altho, to be fair, i am always right). just ask my GF...

[Examigan]

You can find a fairly in-depth review for it here:

https://soundbytesmag.net/review-massiv ... struments/

[vertibration]

When Massive X first came out it was kind of a mess. They fixed it up pretty nice now. If you like presets, and don't like building from scratch, then get something else. Building patches in MX feels rewarding. Its pretty simple, everything is laid out. It definitely feels like tweeting a euro rack skiff in a digital realm. Reason I say that obviously the routing options, and their choice of envelopes and LFO's. The effects are some of the best Ive heard, and even though the Oscillators are set, they are great. It all depends on your music taste though. Trancy dudes will probably dig Dune and Hive, DnB dudes will probably like Serum, FM8 and Phaseplant. MX sort of doesn't have any particular place, its unique in that way.

[BONES]

So I'm a heretic, basically - I like warm and subtractive, clearly.

I think that's just garbage. I love the analogue style subtractive synth sound but I think the best softsynths do it far, far better than any analogue hardware I've ever heard. They simply have so much more to offer because they aren't restricted by the cost of building complexity. I dunno about Massive X but the original Massive was definitely the kind of digital synth that gives them a bad name.

[DJ Warmonger]

And, MX surely can't compete with the gazillion of oscillators you can use with Dune

A "gazillion" of oscillators doesn't necessarily make a synth any better. Can you tell the unison made from 11 voices from the one with 13 voices? Often one distinct sound can have more impact than multiple layers.

So far I threat Massive X like a simple single-layer synth, but gifted with all the features man can dream of.

I dunno about Massive X but the original Massive was definitely the kind of digital synth that gives them a bad name.

Not a fan of original Massive either.

However, MX has distinct analog features, like phase modulation and hard sync + audio-rate modulation and feedback. These alone resemble analog more than digital, as for two decades digital was not quite able to offer that.