Zebra 3 feature suggestions

[MonsterPuppet]

Please a randomizer for the comb filters to check if your headphones are top notch.

[HTT]

I have a patch port request for Zebra 3: Esoteric Garden. That patch made Zebra 2 an instant buy for me.

[Howard]

I have a patch port request for Zebra 3: Esoteric Garden. That patch made Zebra 2 an instant buy for me.

OK!

[EvilDragon]

Man, that patch is amazing!

[HTT]

I have a patch port request for Zebra 3: Esoteric Garden. That patch made Zebra 2 an instant buy for me.

OK!

Thanks!

[Aesaire]

Steeper bandpass filters, allows for some physical modelling capabilities + custom formants.

[wilx]

I would still love to see a bit more intuitive visual feedback in the GUI - Vital implements this nicely, as do most new synths. Hive would benefit from this too.
There's been pushback on this from the devs before as needlessly flashy eye-candy, but I hope there's someone on the team vouching for the well-implemented visual feedback as a huge workflow boost and time saver. Now, when I open a synth and press a note, I expect at least some sort of feedback on the GUI to give an indication on what might be getting modulated, at what speed and in what direction - like here at 58 secs.

Sure - for the purists who don't have deadlines, maybe there's an option to switch the visual feedback off, but otherwise I think it would be a mistake to overlook it.

[EvilDragon]

I don't see what visual feedback has with deadlines. We have ears, that's all that's necessary really, to catch any sort of deadline, even without any visual fluff.

[wilx]

I don't see what visual feedback has with deadlines. We have ears, that's all that's necessary really, to catch any sort of deadline, even without any visual fluff.

Exactly the kind of thing I'm getting at. This myopic, holier-than-thou attitude of 'we have ears' and 'visual fluff' therefore no visual feedback is necessary.
I completely understand that for some it is unnecessary. But for many others, especially those who work on projects where time is of the essence, well-implemented visual feedback is very useful indeed.

The project I'm working on right now has around 180 cues. 20 of them are going to a recording session in December and they all need orchestrating, and everything needs to be implemented and mixed by the end of Jan.
Like many, many people who own Zebra, I've designed stuff from scratch often, but mostly I use presets as a base and then tweak to get the sound I'm after from that starting point. I'm not a zebra-savant - just like with the other hundreds of plugins I own, I don't know every quirk and detail and rely to a large degree on intuitiveness and good design.

The bottom line for me, is that tweaking a synth sound in the direction I want would be much easier and much quicker in a synth that was designed with well-implemented visual feedback. Especially on a project like my current one where there isn't time to spare digging much deeper than that.

I adore Zebra - it's my favourite synth by a fair way, so it will always get used regardless. But the attitude some purists have of 'well I don't need any well-designed workflow improvements, so you shouldn't either' is utterly bizarre.

[wilx]

Take this as an example - I load the patch HS Bongolia.

zebra.jpg

When I press a key, I hear a rhythmic stutter and some kind of filter modulation. On another synth, there would likely be some visual feedback indicating where that stuff was coming from. On Zebra, absolutely nothing. Every tab, knob, UI element is static.

Maybe the stuttering comes from a stepped random LFO?

Nope - looks like it's a sinewave LFO so that probably isn't it.

Maybe it's from a MSEG?

Well MSEG1 has something going on but it doesn't match the rhythm I'm hearing. I tab through 2, 3 and 4 and they're all unused. So it's probably the Arpeggiator right?

YES!

Now instead of that process, if I loaded up the patch, pressed a key, and then saw the small 'ARP/SEQ' tab subtly outlined in a way that synced with the stuttering rhythm, I'd know instantly what was responsible for that element of the patch. There are other ways of conveying that information - maybe better ways - but all of them are better than not conveying the information at all.

And this goes for all elements. When a patch is loaded and keys are pressed, I would expect the GUI to provide at least some sort of indication as to what is going on in the patch.

And if your only argument against this is 'well I personally don't need this' - you've failed to understand the issue.

[EvilDragon]

Your first mistake in that line of reasoning is that you check all those tabs. The first step would be checking the direct modulation assignment knobs, and lo and behold, you can see that ArpMod2 modulates the cutoff. If it's not in direct mod assignment knobs, it's in the mod matrix. Big whoop.

Now, I do understand that some people can't live without visual feedback, so I get your point, I didn't miss it. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

[Urs]

Hmmm, if a preset uses a sequencer I agree it might be a good option to automatically open the sequencer tab. However, as the world has moved to large preset librarian functions, such visual would not pop up while browsing presets per sé.

Regarding visual feedback and complex envelopes: The way it's done in Zebra2 for instance, with the MSEGs displayed in the same window seems a lot more usable to me than a caboodle of separate MSEG editors because you can build envelopes in relation to each other without holding a ruler to the screen.

Regarding general feedback around knobs etc.: "Balls in orbit" around knobs are not coming - I believe they're just bad. They promise visual feedback, but they don't hold up to it when you really need it, i.e. on fast modulations. That's why I'm convinced that Hive's Scope is the better option for sound designers. I don't mind little VU meters within a ModMatrix or on sources, as we occasionally did.

And as for wavetables... not sure what's missing there in Hive, being our most modern version of it. I think we have nice feedback there. I see no need to display all oscillators at once, as this would cost valuable screen estate and thus usability.

That said, we always seek for improvements and we'll implement them if we find them useful. But in general I'm not much of a fan of attention seeking widgets.

[wilx]

Your first mistake in that line of reasoning is that you check all those tabs. The first step would be checking the direct modulation assignment knobs, and lo and behold, you can see that ArpMod2 modulates the cutoff. If it's not in direct mod assignment knobs, it's in the mod matrix. Big whoop.

Thanks - that's useful, but it would be more useful still if either the ArpMod2 label or the ARP/SEQ tab were providing visual feedback that instantly illustrated what was going on.

Now, I do understand that some people can't live without visual feedback, so I get your point, I didn't miss it. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

Again - you have a strange attitude about this. I don't think I've implied that people can't live without visual feedback. I've demonstrated (pretty clearly, I thought) why well-implemented visual feedback can be a huge productivity boost and timesaver to people who
a) work on big, complex projects where time is of the essence
b) aren't intimately familiar with every aspect of every plugin they own

It's such a bizarre attitude to point-blank refuse to accept that people work in a different way to you. I hope the u-he team aren't that myopic!

[wilx]

Hmmm, if a preset uses a sequencer I agree it might be a good option to automatically open the sequencer tab.

I don't even think you'd need that - just a (low-contrast) pulsing around the edge of the ARP tab to indicate the Arp is being used to modulate something in the loaded patch, at the speed the outline is blinking (low-contrast, not like a christmas tree)

That said, we always seek for improvements and we'll implement them if we find them useful. But in general I'm not much of a fan of attention seeking widgets.

I know your stance on this, and thanks for replying! I'd just encourage the team to look at what Vital, Serum, Alchemy etc do well and how aspects of well-implemented visual feedback can vastly improve the overall experience.

And re. 'balls in orbit' - a lot of stuff isn't super-fast modulation. It's very easy to see (for example in Alchemy) where I've set the fine tuning to randomly diverge from 0 with each note press, as I can see a subtle indication on the fine-tuning knob. That kind of thing would be very difficult to convey quickly and clearly in any other way.

But as I've said, I appreciate everyone has a take on this. I'd just be wary of thinking it's all about blinking pretty lights and making things look complicated and flashy. It's absolutely not that for me - I'm talking about forward-thinking, intuitive design choices that will make life easier for most of the userbase.

And I appreciate you chiming in

[Robinrobo]

I'm really fond of the way madrona gives visual feedback of modulated parameters in their excellent Kaivo and Aalto synths. It's super intuitive and really apparent where various details of a sound are coming from. That being said it is VERY CPU intensive as I understand it.