Opinions on MassiveX

[DJ Warmonger]

Anywho, they also gave us 100 new presets. Others would call it an "expansion" and sell it for 30 to 50 bucks.

This. Some people will always demand more, even if they are given great stuff for free. These ungrateful individuals undermine the idea of giving away anything at all.

[fisherKing]

I mean you really have to complain about this ? Who cares what number they give it.

Anywho, they also gave us 100 new presets. Others would call it an "expansion" and sell it for 30 to 50 bucks.

agreed. can't understand why people are so petty; why is the update-numbering worth so much discussion? they can call it whatever they want. either way... bug fixes and new features are always a good thing.

[Sinisterbr]

I really can not understand why people get so defensive in here. I'm a MX fan myself. I Just said, the message I get from NI labeling this small update as 1.2 isn't very encouraging. That's just my impression, I just voiced it here, and some agreed with me. It's a minor subject, I might even be wrong, why are you guys bothering so much? Why so much agressiveness?

[perpetual3]

When a company goes against an industry convention - X.X updates providing new functionality - it’s *reasonable* that some people are (1) disappointed; or (2) surprised because, based on that industry standard, they expected new functionality. To argue otherwise, is *unreasonable*.

It’s not about new presets and bug fixes lacking value per se.

[fisherKing]

I really can not understand why people get so defensive in here. I'm a MX fan myself. I Just said, the message I get from NI labeling this small update as 1.2 isn't very encouraging. That's just my impression, I just voiced it here, and some agreed with me. It's a minor subject, I might even be wrong, why are you guys bothering so much? Why so much agressiveness?

it's when these things get out-of-control, and a thread gets derailed. really, there's no law about how developers can label their updates; NI could call it MX2, or 1.5... or whatever.

if they want to do a 2-digit numbering system, that's their prerogative. but, to be fair, you can say what you want, that is important. and you're right, it's a minor subject. so hope this thread can move forward.

[SmartCat]

As someone who is really interested in MX I enjoy reading every informative post about it and I have followed all the different threads that have been started about it and then closed, one by one.
What some people are not able to understand is the fact that discussion is not only about praise but also about criticism. And the latter is even more important as it will also lead to improvements to make a good software even better.
So everyone would benefit from critisicm and I mainly read very constructive and legitimate critisicm.
Again, critisism is not a bad thing. What is really bad however is to continuous bash those people who are not satisfied with everything about MX. This is not only defensive and aggressive but always leads to only one thing. That even another thread gets closed.

The reason why MX threads get closed is always because of the same defensive people here. Without any exception!
I don´t want to see another interesting topic about this great instrument getting closed, just because some guys aren´t able to control their egos.
I know that the mods are watching this thread very closely and I would like to kindly ask them to try to keep those same people out of this thread if it is possible.
Please, don´t let them destroy every attempt to establish a constructive discussion about MX.

[Stefken]

It's good that they keep on updating the synth.
As for the numbering. In my firm, we deploy a new production version after almost every (2 week) sprint. We are now at 3.29. I'm OK with the numbering. It's just a reference number.

I keep coming back to this synth more and more as the sound does appeal to me.
It's just that this synth is literally a pain to use.

I spent quite some time with the performer as I think the osc's and filter respond very well to glides and stuff. But it's so fiddly to work in it.

Just look how fiddly this is compared to the MSEG editor in Zebra.
I wish this synth could be more like Zebra (or we could make a custom UI, but that's not possible).

masebra.png

[dionenoid]

I really can not understand why people get so defensive in here. I'm a MX fan myself. I Just said, the message I get from NI labeling this small update as 1.2 isn't very encouraging. That's just my impression, I just voiced it here, and some agreed with me. It's a minor subject, I might even be wrong, why are you guys bothering so much? Why so much agressiveness?

I'm not aggressive. Sorry if i came across like that. I just honestly don't care what number they gave this update. As long as they keep doing updates. I don't see the point in discussing this and i find it rather funny that something as trivial as an update number would be worth discussing. Hence my

[pdxindy]

When a company goes against an industry convention - X.X updates providing new functionality - it’s *reasonable* that some people are (1) disappointed; or (2) surprised because, based on that industry standard, they expected new functionality. To argue otherwise, is *unreasonable*.

It’s not about new presets and bug fixes lacking value per se.

I found it disappointing. Not because of what a .1 update should have, but because of what it told me.

It has been 6 months since MX was first released. I consider it incomplete in a number of areas that are important to me. Now after these 6 months, there has been very little if any improvement in those areas. What this update tells me is NI didn’t have a bunch of stuff almost ready but decided to push out the initial release missing some stuff and quickly add that stuff in subsequent updates.

What this update tells me is that it will be a long time before MX becomes what I would consider well rounded and solid. It is a slow time arc unfolding.

It only is of interest to me because I like the DSP tech... it’s like a semi-modular Blocks offshoot but with polyphony. Except the browser is barely functional... I cannot use it directly with Bitwig’s modulation system, cannot set up Bitwig device/preset pages, it doesn’t fully respond to my midi controllers, and it requires more clicking than any other synth I use.

So my rating:
Synth structure and sound 9/10
GUI and workflow 4.5/10
Infrastructure (browser, midi, etc) 2/10

At the current pace it will be years before it will be a synth that solidly meets my needs. So that’s why 1.2 is disappointing for me... not because there is some conventions that NI didn’t follow.

[fisherKing]

i continue to get use out of MX in the present. can i use it to make music? if i can, and i enjoy that... am good...while looking forward to further enhancements, improvements, etc.

anyway, will do my best to stay on track in this thread, and am enjoying (as always) the discussions about the plugin, pros and cons...

[SLiC]

When a company goes against an industry convention - X.X updates providing new functionality - it’s *reasonable* that some people are (1) disappointed; or (2) surprised because, based on that industry standard, they expected new functionality. To argue otherwise, is *unreasonable*.

It’s not about new presets and bug fixes lacking value per se.

I found it disappointing. Not because of what a .1 update should have, but because of what it told me.

It has been 6 months since MX was first released. I consider it incomplete in a number of areas that are important to me. Now after these 6 months, there has been very little if any improvement in those areas. What this update tells me is NI didn’t have a bunch of stuff almost ready but decided to push out the initial release missing some stuff and quickly add that stuff in subsequent updates.

What this update tells me is that it will be a long time before MX becomes what I would consider well rounded and solid. It is a slow time arc unfolding.

It only is of interest to me because I like the DSP tech... it’s like a semi-modular Blocks offshoot but with polyphony. Except the browser is barely functional... I cannot use it directly with Bitwig’s modulation system, cannot set up Bitwig device/preset pages, it doesn’t fully respond to my midi controllers, and it requires more clicking than any other synth I use.

So my rating:
Synth structure and sound 9/10
GUI and workflow 4.5/10
Infrastructure (browser, midi, etc) 2/10

At the current pace it will be years before it will be a synth that solidly meets my needs. So that’s why 1.2 is disappointing for me... not because there is some conventions that NI didn’t follow.

+1 - Pretty much agree with all of that - I dont want new presets or NKS support - they are the sort of things you do when everything else is working as it should be- Infrastructure (browser, midi, etc) should be the number one priority before anything else is even looked.

Od course you can use it and enjoy it now- it makes nice sounds! But prioritise your updates NI!

[DJ Warmonger]

infrastructure (browser, midi, etc) should be the number one priority before anything else is even looked

What is the exact problem with browser, MIDI etc?

I dont want new presets or NKS support

NKS takes care of both preset management and controller support.

[drdriller]

I found it disappointing. Not because of what a .1 update should have, but because of what it told me.

It has been 6 months since MX was first released. I consider it incomplete in a number of areas that are important to me. Now after these 6 months, there has been very little if any improvement in those areas. What this update tells me is NI didn’t have a bunch of stuff almost ready but decided to push out the initial release missing some stuff and quickly add that stuff in subsequent updates.

What this update tells me is that it will be a long time before MX becomes what I would consider well rounded and solid. It is a slow time arc unfolding.

It only is of interest to me because I like the DSP tech... it’s like a semi-modular Blocks offshoot but with polyphony. Except the browser is barely functional... I cannot use it directly with Bitwig’s modulation system, cannot set up Bitwig device/preset pages, it doesn’t fully respond to my midi controllers, and it requires more clicking than any other synth I use.

So my rating:
Synth structure and sound 9/10
GUI and workflow 4.5/10
Infrastructure (browser, midi, etc) 2/10

At the current pace it will be years before it will be a synth that solidly meets my needs. So that’s why 1.2 is disappointing for me... not because there is some conventions that NI didn’t follow.

you should have wait that it get all the features you need before buying/using it.

i'm dreaming about a different MX ui/workflow integrated into the unified maschine/traktor/komplete software which finally include the pdc and automation feature i have been waiting for 8 years for maschine.

plus freeze feature and Maschine mk4 touch screen controler as a bonus

[Sinisterbr]

Yes, I'd say the lame preset management is my main issue with MX right now. It should be their priority from day one, imho.

[Sinisterbr]

As for the numbering. In my firm, we deploy a new production version after almost every (2 week) sprint. We are now at 3.29. I'm OK with the numbering. It's just a reference number.

That's an interesting point of view from someone familiar with this kind of thing.. Thank you