Synapse Audio OBSESSION is now available!

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
Obsession

Post

zerocrossing wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:20 pm
v1o wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:00 pm
zerocrossing wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 5:00 am
Arashi wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 1:28 am
chk071 wrote: Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:31 pm Synapse Audio's synths have a certain sound, just like the synths from most other developers have a certain sound.
I've never been entirely convinced by the idea that everything made by one company has a "certain sound". Would be very interested to see any real evidence that supports this theory.
I think it happens. If you listen to the Arturia emulations, they all have a bit of a boxy sound to them that can be heard despite character differences in all of them. Even OB-Xa V has it.

Another thing that happens is preset style. You can hear Howard Scarr all over every single U-He synth, though his stuff is great and pretty wide ranging. Listen to Tone2 plugins though. I swear it’s as if they try to replicate the same set of presets over and over again. I don’t think I could pick any one of their synths out in a blind test, but when you dig into them you can start discerning differences, though it’s still clear they’re made by the same company.
I disagree. There's a definite break with the newer products as its a new younger team doing the DSP code at Arturia, versus the older stuff which was mainly coded by the guy at Xils Lab. The Phase distortion synth for example was coded by Oli Larkin as an external contractor. I don't see how synths coded by different people can have the same sound.
I just got the CZ emulation, so I can’t speak to that one, but what I’m talking about is easy enough to hear. Obsession, to me, sounds like what an analog filter sounds like. I can’t speak to that specific one, but in general. OB-Xa V... there’s something else going on. Not necessarily worse, but not as natural sounding. You don’t even have to listen to it compared to Obsession. Just find that a/b comparison file that Arturia posted on their own site.
I agree about the OBX - I prefer the filter in Obsession, the Arturia one is weaker, however I do think the Arturia synths vary a lot and do not have the same sound at all. For example the filter in the SEM V is lovely and so is their Buchla Easel.

Post

v1o wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:00 pm I disagree. There's a definite break with the newer products as its a new younger team doing the DSP code at Arturia, versus the older stuff which was mainly coded by the guy at Xils Lab. The Phase distortion synth for example was coded by Oli Larkin as an external contractor. I don't see how synths coded by different people can have the same sound.
With Arturia, I hear an "Arturia sound" alright. You know what it is? The effects. They're not very good, and the presets are slathered in them. And they're the same across the product line. Doesn't matter who did the DSP for the raw synths when the same reverb, delay, chorus is applied to most presets across the entirety of the product line.

Mystery solved.

Post

After some more demoing i decided to pass on Obsession. It sounds very good, and i'm sure it's a good emulation, but it's just too limited for my needs, i was hoping for more (and better implemented) modulation options. Plus the ui feels like going back to last decade.

Also, the fx are limited and imo mediocre. Plus i'm missing other drive or saturation options. And some other missed opportunities. Let's see if stuff gets added in the future, but for now, i'm out.
More BPM please

Post

One thing I’d really like to see is an oscillator mixer. I know it’s outside the feature set of the original, but I do think that would be a nice way to add quite a bit of sonic variation. Bonus if you model some sort of filter drive after you pass a marked point.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

v1o wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:00 pmI disagree. There's a definite break with the newer products as its a new younger team doing the DSP code at Arturia, versus the older stuff which was mainly coded by the guy at Xils Lab. The Phase distortion synth for example was coded by Oli Larkin as an external contractor. I don't see how synths coded by different people can have the same sound.
Just because they contract someone else to do it doesn't mean that person isn't working from the same code-base as the rest of the company or using the same shared code, especially when that work will become part of a collection with a whole raft of commonality with the stuff already in there.
dionenoid wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:21 pmIt sounds very good, and i'm sure it's a good emulation, but it's just too limited for my needs, i was hoping for more (and better implemented) modulation options.
Like what? It has tonnes of modulation and even a mod matrix to work with.
Plus the ui feels like going back to last decade.
Well, that's a failure because it should feel like it's going back 40 years. Apart from the front/back panel annoyance, I quite like the GUI.
Also, the fx are limited and imo mediocre. Plus i'm missing other drive or saturation options.
It's not a standalone synth and a lot of people will turn the on-board effects off anyway, just on principle, so why would it matter one way or the other? It did annoy me when I was making presets for it but in my own work that stuff is totally irrelevant.
NOVAkILL : Asus RoG Flow Z13, Core i9, 16GB RAM, Win11 | EVO 16 | Studio One | bx_oberhausen, GR-8, JP6K, Union, Hexeract, Olga, TRK-01, SEM, BA-1, Thorn, Prestige, Spire, Legend-HZ, ANA-2, VG Iron 2 | Uno Pro, Rocket.

Post

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:33 pm
v1o wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:00 pm I disagree. There's a definite break with the newer products as its a new younger team doing the DSP code at Arturia, versus the older stuff which was mainly coded by the guy at Xils Lab. The Phase distortion synth for example was coded by Oli Larkin as an external contractor. I don't see how synths coded by different people can have the same sound.
With Arturia, I hear an "Arturia sound" alright. You know what it is? The effects. They're not very good, and the presets are slathered in them. And they're the same across the product line. Doesn't matter who did the DSP for the raw synths when the same reverb, delay, chorus is applied to most presets across the entirety of the product line.

Mystery solved.
I think you’re taking what I’m saying farther than I mean it. I’m not saying that all the Arturia synths sound the same (I always kill effects anyway). Here’s an experiment. Go launch Legend and Mini V. Initialize a patch so that they’re basically the same. Then do a very simple filter sweep sound. Try and match it as perfectly as you can. I usually use the resonance up full to match the exact cutoff and then back it off to about 50%. Listen to the two closely. Now do the same experiment with Obsession and OB-X V. Listen closely to the filters, especially the top end. You don’t hear some commonality? I do. Not in Legend and Obsession, but in Mini V and OB-X V. That said, they’ve changed Mini V since I last checked... so maybe this experiment might not work, but you could probably pick Prophet V and do the same thing.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post


Post

Richard, more slots in the Mod Matrix please?

As so many otherwise 'normal' functions need to be modded from the matrix (Osc level, noise level, etc) more than 6 slots would be nice.
I lost my heart in Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipukakapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu

Post

revvy wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:50 am Richard, more slots in the Mod Matrix please?

As so many otherwise 'normal' functions need to be modded from the matrix (Osc level, noise level, etc) more than 6 slots would be nice.
I agree. Frankly, in instances like this, I wouldn't begrudge developers from just using a more thoughtful approach to modernizing classic synths while making it easy to recreate the original. What do I mean? Let's take Obsession and imagine some of these tweaks like...

1. Instead of buttons, use volume knobs for oscillators and noise. "But the original had buttons!" Yeah, but then scale the knob so 100% equals same level as button on, and in the case of Osc 2 volume, mark the 50% setting that equates to the hardware.

Benefit: You can set Osc levels without needing to use Mod Matrix slots.

2. Add Filter Velocity and Amp Velocity trimmers to the front panel like RePro.

Benefit: Don't need to go to the back panel, don't need to waste a Mod Matrix slot.

3. Keytracking as a knob. Mark the full range. Same benefit as 1 and 2.

4. Sync'd LFO option for standard waveforms.

5. Additional LFO shapes (Triangle and Saw - technically, the saw is missing from LFO2, and a triangle just makes sense).

Not one of those things would've prevented Obsession from being an OB-Xa clone, and they would've expanded the front-panel capabilities, saved mod slots, improved the workflow.

Don't get me wrong, I like Obsession, but there's room for improvement still.

Post

I agree. This things would've resulted in an improved and modern version of an OB-Xa, while you can still do whatever the hardware could, just as easy. Find a good balance between authenticity and new features that result in a better synthesizer.

Post

Yorrrrrr wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 4:25 am I agree. This things would've resulted in an improved and modern version of an OB-Xa, while you can still do whatever the hardware could, just as easy. Find a good balance between authenticity and new features that result in a better synthesizer.
Maybe by the time the P600 emulation goes to beta, these types of things will have been incorporated. If not, maybe some beta testers can bring up that type of workflow feedback early enough to convince Richard in time to get things changed (not saying that this type of feedback wasn't provided about Obsession).

Post

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:33 pm
v1o wrote: Fri Jul 03, 2020 10:00 pm I disagree. There's a definite break with the newer products as its a new younger team doing the DSP code at Arturia, versus the older stuff which was mainly coded by the guy at Xils Lab. The Phase distortion synth for example was coded by Oli Larkin as an external contractor. I don't see how synths coded by different people can have the same sound.
With Arturia, I hear an "Arturia sound" alright. You know what it is? The effects. They're not very good, and the presets are slathered in them. And they're the same across the product line. Doesn't matter who did the DSP for the raw synths when the same reverb, delay, chorus is applied to most presets across the entirety of the product line.

Mystery solved.
I’ll give you that one. Their effects suck ass. I just turn them off.
Stormchild

Post

zerocrossing wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 2:04 am One thing I’d really like to see is an oscillator mixer. I know it’s outside the feature set of the original, but I do think that would be a nice way to add quite a bit of sonic variation.
While a dedicated Osc mixer woul be nice you can already edit the Osc volumes in the mod matrix by assigning a "Const" source to the Osc and Noise volumes (mostly i just reduce the volume of one of them with a negative mod amount when i need that feature). Same works with the pulse width for both Oscs and the filter keytracking by using the "Flt Keytrack" destination.

As mentioned earlier with the Cutoff, pulse width and Volume destinations usig the "Const" mod source could result in settings those beyond the range of the Cutoff knob as the value in the mod matrix behaves in an additive way for those parameters. Same is true fo the Resoanance while the result is more obvious with the 4-pole LPF. The range if some of those parameters can be also extended in the voice trimmers.
revvy wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:50 am Richard, more slots in the Mod Matrix please?

As so many otherwise 'normal' functions need to be modded from the matrix (Osc level, noise level, etc) more than 6 slots would be nice.
This is one of my requests too besides improvements in the Step LFO that were already mentioned.

With enough slots adjusting parameters like e.g. Osc volumes and filter key tracking in the mod matrix is less of a problem concerning "wasting" mod matrix slots.

Mostly for me it already works with the current 6 mod matrix slots for more indeed would be helpful.
Last edited by Ingonator on Sat Jul 04, 2020 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ingo Weidner
Win 10 Home 64-bit / mobile i7-7700HQ 2.8 GHz / 16GB RAM //
Live 10 Suite / Cubase Pro 9.5 / Pro Tools Ultimate 2021 // NI Komplete Kontrol S61 Mk1

Post

Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: Sat Jul 04, 2020 4:22 am 1. Instead of buttons, use volume knobs for oscillators and noise.
Extremely no, not under any circumstances, just nope.

Post

Any particular reason why not?

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”