KVR Audio

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:36 pm

OK, so I found out what was wrong. I used the Sin-Tri-Saw-SQ wavetable for osc 1, and the SQ-Sin-Saw for osc 2, just like it is on the init patch. When i use Sin-Tri-Saw-SQ for both oscillators, and set engine to Rest OSC, they "perfectly" phase. I guess the sawtooth waveforms aren't quite the same in the different wavetables, thus they don't phase. At least that's my theory why it doesn't work with different wavetables with the same waveform.

T-Noise · Post by **T-Noise** » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:42 pm

Exactly, they aren't identical.

simon.a.billington · Post by **simon.a.billington** » Sun Oct 04, 2020 8:23 am

Vortifex wrote: Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:10 pm I wish they'd improve the lagginess. Opening the interface is slow, switching presets is slow. Just running through the presets feels like a chore. I'm also getting random CPU spikes and occasional clicks and crackles from it. The only reason I'm keeping this at the moment is because it sounds so good, but I've found myself swapping it out sometimes for something more responsive.

I can relate to this. The rendering can certainly do with some speed refinements.

...And a browser you can tap your way through with the up and down keys without the DAW changing tracks.

simon.a.billington · Post by **simon.a.billington** » Sun Oct 04, 2020 8:25 am

chk071 wrote: Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:36 pm OK, so I found out what was wrong. I used the Sin-Tri-Saw-SQ wavetable for osc 1, and the SQ-Sin-Saw for osc 2, just like it is on the init patch. When i use Sin-Tri-Saw-SQ for both oscillators, and set engine to Rest OSC, they "perfectly" phase. I guess the sawtooth waveforms aren't quite the same in the different wavetables, thus they don't phase. At least that's my theory why it doesn't work with different wavetables with the same waveform.

It might be that each oscillator is "analogue styled" in nature so that subtle variations are being injected by default, as opposed to it being a wavetable based thing.

ScrLk · Post by **ScrLk** » Mon Nov 02, 2020 8:11 pm

I hope people will give this synth more of a chance now we're a few updates in. It's still a bit rough around the edges, and I personally don't like that opening and closing the UI has so much lag and white flashing. In the end it is pretty much my ideal digital synth however, with the editable signal flow being the cherry on top for me.

Dalle · Post by **Dalle** » Tue Nov 03, 2020 11:28 am

Pretty wild how this was announced over two years ago and it still feels unfinished

trusampler · Post by **trusampler** » Tue Nov 03, 2020 11:34 am

Has it been two years lol

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Tue Nov 03, 2020 12:01 pm

trusampler wrote: Tue Nov 03, 2020 11:34 am Has it been two years lol

Crazy, isn't it... the older I get, the more time flies.

gondii · Post by **gondii** » Tue Nov 03, 2020 12:12 pm

Time flies but not that fast. Massive X was released in the end of June 2019.

Edit: Sorry, didn't register "announced".

v1o · Post by **v1o** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:31 am

Two years has gone by so quick. I don’t think Massive X will ever match the success and popularity of the original Massive. It’s also not worthy of flagship status for a company like NI. Not with the level of competition on the market right now. NI are also no longer at the cutting edge of technology when there’s heavyweights like Falcon, Serum, Avenger, Rapid, Zebra, Dune and Pigments.

Sinisterbr · Post by **Sinisterbr** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:51 am

v1o wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:31 am NI are also no longer at the cutting edge of technology when there’s heavyweights like Falcon, Serum, Avenger, Rapid, Zebra, Dune and Pigments.

I don't agree. IMO Massive X sounds better than all above.

v1o · Post by **v1o** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 2:08 am

Sinisterbr wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:51 am
v1o wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:31 am NI are also no longer at the cutting edge of technology when there’s heavyweights like Falcon, Serum, Avenger, Rapid, Zebra, Dune and Pigments.
I don't agree. IMO Massive X sounds better than all above.

It sounds good but it’s not a flagship synth. You can argue that Falcon has more better tech because it has more features. Massive X doesn’t even have a browser and it feels unfinished.

Sinisterbr · Post by **Sinisterbr** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 2:57 am

v1o wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 2:08 am
Sinisterbr wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:51 am
v1o wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 1:31 am NI are also no longer at the cutting edge of technology when there’s heavyweights like Falcon, Serum, Avenger, Rapid, Zebra, Dune and Pigments.
I don't agree. IMO Massive X sounds better than all above.
It sounds good but it’s not a flagship synth. You can argue that Falcon has more better tech because it has more features. Massive X doesn’t even have a browser and it feels unfinished.

I agree, it feels totally unfinished, and the worst part is the browser. Yet, it sounds better than all the competition (workhorse synth), IMO.

EvilDragon · Post by **EvilDragon** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 7:38 am

v1o wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 2:08 amYou can argue that Falcon has more better tech because it has more features.

"More features" does not equal "better tech". It just means more features. "Better tech" amounts to quality of DSP involved, where MX absolutely shines over many things in Falcon.

DJ Warmonger · Post by **DJ Warmonger** » Thu Nov 05, 2020 7:45 am

The thing with modern syntha is that there is no time to use all these "features" or figure out if they have a significant impact on the sound. Most of sounds usable in music are pretty simple, and there's no need to use dozens of layers, modulators and effects for each.

I still use Massive X mostly as oldschool VA with some extra features which may be helpful but are not necessary to dial in every time.

Massive X 1.6.1 update (September 2025)!