Opinions on MassiveX

VST, AU, AAX, etc. plug-in Virtual Instruments discussion
trance_lucent
KVRist
414 posts since 27 Sep, 2005

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:24 am

recursive one wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:14 am
trance_lucent wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:08 am
I am pondering on purchasing MX. Could someone please tell how copy protection works there? I heard that it requires to be online. Online when? When registering? Or when using this synth?
Only when registering. You need to download and install their Native Access app which shows all your purchased NI stuff and lets you isntall and update it. After that you may go offline.
Thanks, this is ok then. Can't understand why some people were complaining about this.

Functional
KVRian
773 posts since 26 Oct, 2011

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:26 am

EvilDragon wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:42 pm
0-127 for sure is not enough for adjusting filter cutoff or oscillator tunings, or say precise delay times... It's far from enough in a lot of cases, actually.

More MIDI channels are going to be a treat for orchestral composers.

Bidirectional communication yeah for visual feedback to your MIDI controller, similar to how DAW host automation works. Except you wouldn't need a host to do it, necessarily. Imagine you MIDI learn your plugin and when you change a patch in it, you can see where the parameter values are actually (say your MIDI controller has encoders with LED rings) not requiring you to catch to the parameter value but just keep on tweaking...
I suppose this all makes sense. i didn't think of the 0-127 aspect enough because I was thinking of it in terms of accuracy and practical sensitivity; if we think of it in 0-1270 scale, it's hard to really control it accurately to such a degree. But I'm assuming that you can do some "smart programming" in the controller-related software to give out those exact values etc as CC-data (if not, I mean, 0,01-5 detunement is pretty hard to control through pressure sensitivity with that kind of resolution unless you can scale it down in the plugin itself - where 0-127 would be enough)

But I guess this tangent can end then

recursive one
KVRAF
4376 posts since 7 Feb, 2013

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:33 am

trance_lucent wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:24 am
recursive one wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:14 am
trance_lucent wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:08 am
I am pondering on purchasing MX. Could someone please tell how copy protection works there? I heard that it requires to be online. Online when? When registering? Or when using this synth?
Only when registering. You need to download and install their Native Access app which shows all your purchased NI stuff and lets you isntall and update it. After that you may go offline.
Thanks, this is ok then. Can't understand why some people were complaining about this.
Native Access may be buggy. But you only have to deal with it when installing or updating your plugins
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

User avatar
BONES
GRRRRRRR!
9305 posts since 14 Jun, 2001 from Somewhere else, on principle

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:48 am

Functional wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:09 pm
This isn't exactly true. Massive X does not communicate any other except the 16 macro parameters with your DAW.
Really? Because I can automate any parameter on the original Massive in Cubase, no problem. My comment was in response to a more general criticism of NI software, not specifically about Massive X, which I have less than no interest in even trying.
NOVAkILL 4.0 : Dell G7 17 (Core i7, 8GB RAM, Win10), UR44C, Cubase, DUNE, Thorn, TRK-01, Equator, Hive, Substance, Arcsyn, Aparillo, Phase Plant, Pigments, Trueno, Analog Keys, MicroMonsta, Uno, Skulpt, Craft 2.

User avatar
EvilDragon
KVRAF
19235 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:18 am

noiseboyuk wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:58 pm
EvilDragon wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 11:42 pm
0-127 for sure is not enough for adjusting filter cutoff or oscillator tunings, or say precise delay times... It's far from enough in a lot of cases, actually.

More MIDI channels are going to be a treat for orchestral composers.

Bidirectional communication yeah for visual feedback to your MIDI controller, similar to how DAW host automation works. Except you wouldn't need a host to do it, necessarily. Imagine you MIDI learn your plugin and when you change a patch in it, you can see where the parameter values are actually (say your MIDI controller has encoders with LED rings) not requiring you to catch to the parameter value but just keep on tweaking...
Not to mention the Holy Grail for composers - Look Ahead. A DAW could intelligently switch articulations based on what note(s) are coming next, making much note musical and realistic choices (if developers and DAW manufacturers got their heads together).

Sorry for being off topic. Again.

This is not really what MIDI 2.0 is about, from what I understand, though...

JJ_Jettflow
KVRian
879 posts since 23 Jan, 2011

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:25 am

pdxindy wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:54 pm
JJ_Jettflow wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:29 pm

As for selling Komplete, I would never dream of it but in your case, it might make sense because I think that the perceived issues you have with MX are really from an overall dissatisfaction of NI the company and not just one product.
The things I’ve mentioned are not ‘perceived issues’. It is a fact that MX does not support PolyAT or have Midi learn etc.

For one person that may not matter to them and another it does... there’s no problem here.

Oh.. and my opinion on MX is based only on MX and my experience using it. I would like it if it fulfilled my interests. I have plenty of other synths to use... both software and hardware so again, there is no problem here. We are just having some friendly conversation!
They are "perceived" issues because they are problems from your point of view and not something that affects all users...unlike issues that would affect everyone like crashing, incompatibility issues, etc. Lack of poly AT, MPE are not "issues" for everyone and do not go into forming an opinion on MX, such as myself and my opinion of MX. I would have very little gear if it had to be all poly AT!

Absolutely, this is a friendly conversation and I meant nothing personal by my statement.

JJ_Jettflow
KVRian
879 posts since 23 Jan, 2011

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:32 am

Functional wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:03 pm
pdxindy wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:54 pm
JJ_Jettflow wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 7:29 pm

As for selling Komplete, I would never dream of it but in your case, it might make sense because I think that the perceived issues you have with MX are really from an overall dissatisfaction of NI the company and not just one product.
The things I’ve mentioned are not ‘perceived issues’. It is a fact that MX does not support PolyAT or have Midi learn etc.
Yeah there's a clear lack of various midi-related features (MPE in general, which ties into lack of PolyAT). I'm kind of hoping that NI isn't going to roll down before it implements them because the current trajectory is not good. These aren't the worst kind of issues necessarily but Massive X would benefit a LOT if it could be properly hooked up to a Seaboard or Continuum for example
They are not even issues, they are personal preferences.

User avatar
EnGee
KVRAF
5810 posts since 7 Oct, 2005 from NZ

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:40 am

BONES wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 2:48 am
Functional wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 10:09 pm
This isn't exactly true. Massive X does not communicate any other except the 16 macro parameters with your DAW.
Really? Because I can automate any parameter on the original Massive in Cubase, no problem. My comment was in response to a more general criticism of NI software, not specifically about Massive X, which I have less than no interest in even trying.
Unfortunately, it is not like the original Massive! It is not a big problem, but they made it two steps instead of one step using the macros. Anyway, they should implement midi learn or make the parameters automated directly in the DAW. But still, it is not a big issue for me.

The biggest issue was solved and that was the static envelopes drawing! Man! how big difference it made especially it is not just ADSR slides or knobs! Now, it is very enjoyable to program.

The sound is from the best synths and actually I think it is the best sound from a wavetable synth. I'm using it even more than Dune 3 (but I use Super 8 for analogish sounds which I like much more than Monark, and this made MX+Super 8 a dream team!).

If only NI would make FM X now, I would be in heaven :pray:
Let's donate to help the kids and save our planet.

User avatar
RobGee
KVRist
202 posts since 11 Jan, 2014

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 10:04 am

I never liked Massive or Serum but I do like Massive X. Great routing options and sound quality. Yes I’d like an extra oscillator and filter and the presets browser could be better but those aren’t massive issues for me.

User avatar
DJ Warmonger
KVRAF
3565 posts since 7 Jun, 2012 from Warsaw

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 11:59 am

People, check the manual for this thing. Some incredible and unseen ideas:
Manual Chorus: Gives you direct access to the basic core of the algorithm, in this case the four delays.
You can use this to create a subtle aural room effects, or modulate it with the LFO´s,
envelopes or performers. You can access the delay lines by the four controls, labeled Time
Left1, Time Left2, Time Right1, Time Right2.
Delay Latch: This button enables you to recall the delay times with note-on messages received from the synth engine. This means you will only hear the change of delay times, when a new note is pressed. This enables you to synchronize the delay changes to actual notes playing and is available in both Sync and Free modes.
LFO:
Waveform Selector: Selects one of sixteen waveforms for the LFO. The new shape is updated with each cycle, providing a synchronized switch when heavily modulated.
Latch Shape: When activated, changes to the Shape (via direct control or modulation) are latched until the next note is received.
http://djwarmonger.wordpress.com/
Tricky-Loops wrote: (...)someone like Armin van Buuren who claims to make a track in half an hour and all his songs sound somewhat boring(...)

User avatar
rezoneight
KVRist
127 posts since 18 Feb, 2004

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:11 pm

drdriller wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 9:02 am
MassiveX is a very uninspiring synth, the UI is a mess, demo it and you'll get in a seconds why it didn't reach success.
Uh, ok. One, not sure Massive X has been around long enough to determine its success or not. Two, the UI stuff is so subjective. I love it. Did the demo. Love it. The default skin is gorgeous.

User avatar
rezoneight
KVRist
127 posts since 18 Feb, 2004

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:13 pm

Stefken wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 10:10 am
Sinisterbr wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 9:42 am
I think its GUI gorgeous. Besides, MX has an excelent workflow. Given all its capabilites, it's still not difficult at all. They did a great job IMHO.
Ok, ...never quit your job to become a UI designer. Never.
Given that a UI being good or bad is pretty subjective, especially in something as complex as a synth plugin....care to share what is so bad about it? I personally love it. Gorgeous default skin.

V0RT3X
KVRAF
7926 posts since 4 Jul, 2012 from Alesia

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:17 pm

I think the UI works just fine if you use your ears and understand how the synthesizer works. :tu:

User avatar
EnGee
KVRAF
5810 posts since 7 Oct, 2005 from NZ

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:42 pm

It's also about the learning curve. I have spent not short time learning the original Massive and only when I understood it, I fell in love with it.

With Massive X, I already feel at home, especially it got most of the workflow of the original. There are still some things I liked more in the original like the modulators flexibility (morphing is one of them), but MX has a better sound engine overall. It certainly better than Serum or any other wavetable synth I have tried (except Dune 3 which is on the same league but with different character).

After the enhancements, I do think most of original Massive users would like the experience in MX. Just give it a try with open mind ;)
Let's donate to help the kids and save our planet.

3ptguitarist
KVRist
297 posts since 14 Oct, 2006

Re: Opinions on MassiveX

Post Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:33 pm

Where do think I should start with learning Massive X? I'm kind of a beginner at this.

Return to “Instruments”