Massive X 1.6.1 update (September 2025)!

[chk071]

I already wrote that to another user (I guess?) in the NI forum, but, you can download SaviHost or Tone2 Nanohost (bit more tidy and minimal GUI compared to SaviHost), and you basically have your standalone. I don't know what NI used, but, some soft synths even implemented SaviHost for the standalone version.

[p1afff]

I already wrote that to another user (I guess?) in the NI forum, but, you can download SaviHost or Tone2 Nanohost (bit more tidy and minimal GUI compared to SaviHost), and you basically have your standalone. I don't know what NI used, but, some soft synths even implemented SaviHost for the standalone version.

Hi thank you chk071. But they're only Windows. And I would prefer a NI solution, if it ever happens.

[chk071]

Ah... alright. I don't know if something similar is available for Mac OS X.

As a last resort, there is Komplete Kontrol.

[cfernn]

Beautiful sounding synth. But for someone who designs their own sounds and likes to sort presets by categories and folders....MX has one of the worst modern browsers I’ve ever used. It’s impressively bad and make me feel like I’m still testing a beta version

[pdxindy]

Not understanding this; the macros appear in the Bitwig instrument box, like normal parameters do, and can be modulated just like anything else. Not sure how that results in the conclusion "I cannot use bitwig's modulation system with MX". Because, well, you can.

I know you don't like that you have to assign to the macros to begin with, but once done, Bitwig Modulators work as normal.

You're right... but in practice it becomes clumsy enough that I wont bother using it. So much workflow and capability is lost.

For example, one thing that is cool about Bitwig's modulation system is that I can select a device and see all its modulators and targets in the Inspector. So it is not necessary to open VST plugin GUI's to see and edit modulation depths. So I set up a Bitwig Macro, and it modulates say 3 parameters. I can see those 3 targets in the inspector, what they are, edit depth of each one individually, add a mod curve to a specific target, or modulate the depth via another modulator per target. It is all in one easy to see visual list and all that can be done without opening the VST GUI.

If I connect a Bitwig Macro to an MX Macro which then modulates 3 parameters, all that is seen in the Inspector is the MX Macro number. There is no access to the parameters the MX Macro is controlling so one always has to open the MX GUI to edit anything or see what is doing what. Then there is no visual indication of what I am modulating when I move the Bitwig Macro. It turns the MX Macro knob, but not the knobs the MX Macro is modulating. In all my other synths, modulating a parameter moves the actual parameter. The 3 parameters being modulated by MX Macro in my example may not be visible, so then the only way to determine what they are is to tab around the interface to find them. So tedious compared to every other synth I have.

Then in MX, filter cutoff has a max of 3 mod sources. I frequently use more than 3 sources for filter cutoff. If the parameter was directly automatable/modulatable, one could bypass that limit of 3 sources using a Bitwig modulator. But since the only option is a Macro knob and the Macro knob requires one of the 3 slots, no can do. And so on.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Not understanding this; the macros appear in the Bitwig instrument box, like normal parameters do, and can be modulated just like anything else. Not sure how that results in the conclusion "I cannot use bitwig's modulation system with MX". Because, well, you can.

I know you don't like that you have to assign to the macros to begin with, but once done, Bitwig Modulators work as normal.

You're right... but in practice it becomes clumsy enough that I wont bother using it. So much workflow and capability is lost.

For example, one thing that is cool about Bitwig's modulation system is that I can select a device and see all its modulators and targets in the Inspector. So it is not necessary to open VST plugin GUI's to see and edit modulation depths. So I set up a Bitwig Macro, and it modulates say 3 parameters. I can see those 3 targets in the inspector, what they are, edit depth of each one individually, add a mod curve to a specific target, or modulate the depth via another modulator per target. It is all in one easy to see visual list and all that can be done without opening the VST GUI.

If I connect a Bitwig Macro to an MX Macro which then modulates 3 parameters, all that is seen in the Inspector is the MX Macro number. There is no access to the parameters the MX Macro is controlling so one always has to open the MX GUI to edit anything or see what is doing what. Then there is no visual indication of what I am modulating when I move the Bitwig Macro. It turns the MX Macro knob, but not the knobs the MX Macro is modulating. In all my other synths, modulating a parameter moves the actual parameter. The 3 parameters being modulated by MX Macro in my example may not be visible, so then the only way to determine what they are is to tab around the interface to find them. So tedious compared to every other synth I have.

Then in MX, filter cutoff has a max of 3 mod sources. I frequently use more than 3 sources for filter cutoff. If the parameter was directly automatable/modulatable, one could bypass that limit of 3 sources using a Bitwig modulator. But since the only option is a Macro knob and the Macro knob requires one of the 3 slots, no can do. And so on.

Also, why would they hide parameters anyways? No synths do this. We all like having access to as many parameters as possible. We don't want to have to assign parameters to macros within the synth first in order to automate. Why would NI just suddenly decide that what works for everyone is all of a sudden something nobody needs or wants. Such a stupid decision.

[spacepluk]

I don't think they hid them, they just didn't expose them to save some work. I asked for it in the last questionnaire they sent... maybe if enough people ask for it they'll add it.

[audiouser720]

I heard that the analog modelled filters of Massive X are one of the best in VST. Has anyone compered them to The Drop by Cytomic by any chance (which is IMHO the absolute best).

I wonder how Massive X filters hold up with The Drop in terms of accuracy/audio rate modulation etc.

[EvilDragon]

They hold up really well IMO, they are coded with audio rate modulation in mind. However, note that only the Monark Blue filter is analog modelled really. But they're all zero-delay feedback AFAIK.

[ScrLk]

The Drop convinced me of the magic of analog filters.

[chk071]

I heard that the analog modelled filters of Massive X are one of the best in VST. Has anyone compered them to The Drop by Cytomic by any chance (which is IMHO the absolute best).

I wonder how Massive X filters hold up with The Drop in terms of accuracy/audio rate modulation etc.

I don't know how The Drop's filters sound, but, MX's are among the best I heard in such "flag ship" type synths (the only comparably synth is Dune really, which also has nice analog modelled filters, even though I must say there's something about the general character of the synth that I just don't like. Just my opinion). The Blue Monark filter is not quite up to par with the filter in Monark, as far as I know, it lacks some of the more complex stuff modelled in that one, but, they all sound great, and very "analog" as well.

[EvilDragon]

Yeah all the complex stuff modelled in Monark wouldn't work quite well polyphonically, which is why it's also slightly amended name-wise (it's not just "Monark filter", it's "Blue Monark"). It has additional modes and a bit different non-linear behavior compared to the Monark filter.


Oh also, Scanner seems to be analog modelled too, but all filters in MX (except Blue Monark) are "inspired by" rather than "direct clone".

I don't know how The Drop's filters sound

You need to get it! It's f**king spectacular.

[chk071]

Scanner is pretty cool too. Adds nice textures to the sound.

I don't know how The Drop's filters sound

You need to get it! It's f**king spectacular.

I'll try it. Only read good things about it so far. Even though I usually don't have too much use for those standalone filter plugins.

[EvilDragon]

You'd be surprised what you can do with that in the context of a mix. Or especially for monophonic bass/lead sounds...

[JoeCat]

Yeah all the complex stuff modelled in Monark wouldn't work quite well polyphonically, which is why it's also slightly amended name-wise (it's not just "Monark filter", it's "Blue Monark"). It has additional modes and a bit different non-linear behavior compared to the Monark filter.


Oh also, Scanner seems to be analog modelled too, but all filters in MX (except Blue Monark) are "inspired by" rather than "direct clone".

I don't know how The Drop's filters sound

You need to get it! It's f**king spectacular.

And they are integrated into a bunch of Ableton devices a few years now (Operator is the best little FM synth ever with those), though, interestingly, they were not integrated into Analog (probably because of the legacy AAS code).

Monark's filter is awesome, and all the Massive filters work quite well IMO even if they're not modelled.
Can get p*ssed at NI for a lot of things but not the DSP.