Zebra 3 feature suggestions

[VitaminD]

Please don't forget ease of use. One can throw everything but the kitchen sink at a synth design, but then is it so complicated that they don't want to interact with it?

[tony10000]

Except Zebra has direct mod assignments right next to the parameter it modulates, and mod matrix is just an adjunct.

That provides a whole lot more programming flexibility than limited matrix slots!

[recursive one]

I've got no slightest idea if that would be possible to implement tho

Individual modulation rate is possible per module, but it would account for all parameters of a module at once, making the CPU skyrocket.

Having a few, fixed HiRes-slots is the most economic option.

But there's another thing. In synth history there are three paradigms of modulation assignments. I call them as follows:

- on source: Set LFO/Env depth where the modulator is (e.g. LFO-Depth on vintage Roland synths)
- on target: Set LFO/Env depth where the target parameter is (e.g. direct assignments in Zebra)
- intermediate: Set Mod Depth in a separate entity (e.g. ModMatrix or Moog Modular-style attenuator/vca modules)

I find that "on source" is very limiting. The reusability of modulators is completely up to how many depth knobs you'd like to add. Therefore, some synthesizers conceptually have modulators for dedicated sections, such as the Schmidt C. This is my least favourite because it's an unnecessary impediment of usability, and even if a target selector is present, you still need to look at two places to edit target and depth (long ways of mousing, but no big problem with two hands on hardware).

I find that "on target" is the most usable. You edit the modulation right next to parameter's actual setting. It's also limited in the number of things that can modulate stuff, but a source selector is a good remedy. I prefer this over all other approaches because it's very direct and lends itself to economic implementation (less mousing, and allows editing of source as well as target with two hands at once).

I prefer a ModMatrix over "on source" for their vast flexibility. That flexibility is bought by having to look at three places to set up modulations. Hence we add a ModMatrix commonly as addition to "on target" modulations. Our new-in-Hive on-source editing thing is somewhat a remedy, but it's far from perfect. There's still more mousing involved than in any other approach. In hardware, a ModMatrix is particularly taxing as you commonly don't have three hands. There's a lot of arm-waving involved when editing source, target and matrix to create the sound you want.

That makes a lot of sence.

I ocassionally use "on source", e.g. when assigning an LFO destination in Spire or Virus TI but far more likelly I'll do the same thing in the matrix. I do vastly prefer mod matixes to any other way of making assignmets, actually I often find myself making somtehning like an env-> filter assignment in a matrix even if there is a dedicated filter env knob, just for the sake of doing things in a unified way. I understand that's not the most ergonomical way, but that's how my brain works Other people prefer, e.g., drag and drop and won't even look into a matrix if there is one.

I like how Serum basically allows doing it both ways. You may prorgam everything by drag and drop without looking into the matrix at all, or you can do everything in the matrix. I think Hive follows the same concept. Not sure how that would work in Zebra 3 though which I understand is going to be modular like Zebra2.

My dream is a mod matrix in Bazille but undertsand it's impossible to happen

[Urs]

I think Hive follows the same concept. Not sure how that would work in Zebra 3 though which I understand is going to be modular like Zebra2.

As I said, the ModMatrix improvements made in Hive are actually for Zebra3. It will therefore be the same and thus much like Serum, but with the option to see ModMatrix and synth engine at the same time.

Btw. Zebra2 has a new thing as well, the magnified MSEG view has an on-source matrix of all modulations, regardless if direct or via the actual ModMatrix. That is a very special case which we have discussed very controversially. Would be nice to get some feedback on it.

[MorpherX]

Except Zebra has direct mod assignments right next to the parameter it modulates,

If it didn't have that, it would be a complete calamity

Ofc, it's manageable but i find the co-existence of two separate modulation systems somewhat confusing. Maybe that's because I use/program Zebra much less than some other synths, but I don't quite undretand what's the logic here. Yes, it's cool that I can assign a mod source right at the modulated parameter but why wouldn't it automatically appear in the matrix, like in Serum or Rapid?

If i'm not mistaken (I only have a demo), making a drag and drop assigment in Hive also automatically crates a modmatrix entry in Hive.

That's exactly what I also think !
Especially a complex synth like Zebra 3 will be, should be as userfriendly as possible and to this there also belongs strukture of the synth and to the strukture belongs the modulation system.

[MorpherX]

Hive's ModMatrix is a byproduct of reworking Zebra's ModMatrix for V3. It's a lot more advanced and not all parts of the UI could be leveraged back into Z2.

The difference in Zebra between a direct assignment slot and ModMatrix is the control rate. Direct assignments have a granularity of 4 samples (audio rate, but not as fast as, say, ACE or Bazille) while ModMatrix slots have a granularity of 16-64 samples. The exact granularity varies depending on buffer size and timing of MIDI events.

For Hive 2 I have experimented with a fixed granularity of 16 samples, but the quality difference was audible only in edge cases while costing twice as much CPU as the variable 16-64. So I left it at that.

Anyhow, a granularity of 4 is top notch for a control rate, so it makes sense to keep it for standard modulation paths for Z3. We will probably reduce it for paths with a lot of built-in redundancy. For instance any gain staging: Module volume/mix/pan parameters can typically live with a lower control rate and thus don't need direct mod assignments. If a higher control rate is vital for the case at hand, a separate mixer module with direct assignments can be used. This way we reduce a lot of clutter without actually losing any functionality.

I understand your technical arguments, but please keep in mind that also musicans and composers, which are not sound-design gurus, want to edit and program something in an upcoming Zebra 3.
These are lost in the desert of modulation missmatch when it goes to a bit more complex presets.
I am able to program complex presets in Zebra 2 HZ, but I fear the day I want to edit such a preset in a year or two.
Hive 1.2/2 has also two LFO assigments which are not shown in the modmatrix, but it's not that complex than Zebra and can be easily and direct seen on the GUI.
A solution could be a ghost copy of a direct mod-assigment in Zebra3 to the mod-matrix, which can not be edited but seen. This way a user could see all mod-routings.

[SpaceJanitor]

It'd be nice to see a more complex reverb control within the actual synth. Custom IR shaping / importing / exporting.

[Megalord]

Hello, Urs.

I apologize if the topic has already been raised.
But are you planning to refine Detune modes?
Recently released update for Phase Plant with new Unison modes and they sound amazing.
It would be really nice to see the development of these ideas in Zebra3.
For example, changing the pitch of each voice individually as in Aparillo.
Or if we have 16 votes, it would be great to manually adjust the position of each of them in the panorama and not only the position, but also the volume.
Also great one voice to chord modulation like MassiveX
Position randomization of the voices (which of course can be done using the LFO, but then it should not be synchronized for different modulation objects)
I think this will add many variations to what you have already come up with.
This could be implemented in a separate tab. Something like a mode for the pros with keeping presets for ordinary users.
Also in Aparillo you can modulate not all voices at once, but every second voice or part of them.
If you are unfamiliar with this synthesizer, then be sure to take a look. Very interesting ideas come with it.

A few pleasant things that I would like to see:
Oscillator wave exporting as a wavetable.
Wavetable import as LFO and MSEG forms (it seems no one has done this yet, but the idea is right on the surface)
Improving FM synthesis. I really like Phase Plant idea where I can send the oscillators 1-> 2-> 3-> 4-> 5-> 6-> 7 ... (to infinity) and moreover I can change each individually creating unique tones.

I try to not use serum, but they have recently implemented a feature I have long awaited.
LFO points modulation.

(Time is 1.07)

You said that free drawing leads LFO to the same results. This feature make more complexity.
It would be great to see similar modulations of LFO and MSEG points.

There is still a very interesting idea for a delay. We could add pitch control to reflections. For example, after pressing key there will be 6 reflections. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and if I could change the pitch of only 4 and 5 reflections it would be interesting.

You talked about your own algorithm that mixes waveforms and vocoder.
It would be great to be able to create words and sentences right inside the zebra 3.

Probably the main thing I want to ask you is not to simplify. I think most of us, those who are really waiting for Zebra3 are people with experience who are not afraid of difficulties. The more different parameters for adjusting the sound, the better.

And the last most interesting question.
Why did you decide not to make Zebra3 a fully modular synthesizer. As a Bitwig PolyGrid for example or VCV Rack?

[EvilDragon]

A few pleasant things that I would like to see:
Oscillator wave exporting as a wavetable.

You can already do this in Z2, in OSC1 tab on the bottom.

[Megalord]

You can already do this in Z2, in OSC1 tab on the bottom.

Looks like I lost update

[Urs]

I think most of these things can be done in Zeebs already - but maybe we need to simplify in order to make those things obvious.

(But maybe it's already so that the simple concepts I'm always talking about are simply too abstract for people to recognize their potential. Which is why we're thinking of investing more into educating people how to achieve certain complex results with simple means instead of "more of everything".)

[dayjob]

I think most of these things can be done in Zeebs already - but maybe we need to simplify in order to make those things obvious.

(But maybe it's already so that the simple concepts I'm always talking about are simply too abstract for people to recognize their potential. Which is why we're thinking of investing more into educating people how to achieve certain complex results with simple means instead of "more of everything".)

some of my favorite patches are so simple.. just a few slots and some modulators. i think people get hung up on the idea of complexity. looking at some of the Dark Zebra patches is a good eye opener into how seemingly simple things can sound so good.

there is so much that can be done in zebra already and it's not hard to get unexpected sounds and experiment with all kinds of things.

[lunardigs]

... Which is why we're thinking of investing more into educating people how to achieve certain complex results with simple means instead of "more of everything".)

I like that idea.
How do you think it would be realized?
In the past I've wondered about something similar for soundsets which double as an instructional sort-of thing.

[Dirtgrain]

I learned a lot from the u-he tutorials. They are short and informative, and it is nice how they line up with presets (at least sometimes, IIRC).

[Urs]

For starters, we've hired a full time video guy. He'll be busy covering hardware for a while, but he'll also continue where our old Zebra tutorials left, for all of our stuff. As his first task we have had him re-imagine the very first Zebra Mini tutorial from 9 years ago:



The focus is a bit more on how to use Zebra in general, so it's a lot more busy and immersive. I think it's also a lot more clear about not just what he does but also why.