E-Phonic Invader 2 v1.0.11 (WIN / OSX)

[Teksonik]

Well, that's the point, there is no lit block, it is a blinking underscore prompt. Lit implies permanently.
Don't get me wrong, as I said, I was also confused initially. Until I thought about it

I thought about it and I realized why I don't like the current method. It's because I'm used to the way Hive does it.
When you select Record in the Sequencer and hit a note it fills in the first slot. Hit another note and it fills in the second slot and so on.

Here I've recorded a four note sequence. You can see the highlighted slot is number four. It didn't jump to number five. That way you can tell how long the sequence is at a glance.

Hive.png

Much better system....when you've actually worked with both.

[e-crooner]

Well, that's the point, there is no lit block, it is a blinking underscore prompt. Lit implies permanently.
Don't get me wrong, as I said, I was also confused initially. Until I thought about it

I thought about it and I realized why I don't like the current method. It's because I'm used to the way Hive does it.
When you select Record in the Sequencer and hit a note it fills in the first slot. Hit another note and it fills in the second slot and so on.

Here I've recorded a four note sequence. You can see the highlighted slot is number four. It didn't jump to number five. That way you can tell how long the sequence is at a glance.


Hive.png


Much better system....when you've actually worked with both.

Certainly, but the Hive sequencer is much more elaborate to begin with. The one on Invader 2 is rather minimalist, just a fun addition. Since nothing is displayed, I suppose it makes sense to write down the notes you enter.

I never tried the Hive sequencer, but judging from your screenshot, you can edit the notes and other values at will? Basically more like a mini DAW?

[Teksonik]

Yes you can manually edit values after recording a sequence. Not a mini DAW just a very capable internal sequencer.

A lot of synths have a built in sequencer but not many of the ones I own have the record from keyboard option so it's a cool addition. I can see patterns on my keyboard better than I can by manually entering +5-3+7-12 etc etc.

I don't expect Invader 2 to have all the features of Hive's sequencer but hey if it did I would be happy.

[e-crooner]

A new video, no review, just a lot of sounds...


Strange comment:
"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

[Vortifex]

Edited

[e-crooner]

What's going on with the way the main oscs affect the sub osc? If I select a saw on osc 1 and select a pulse on the sub it's as if the sub gets stuck in a random part of a pulse width modulation even though it's not being modulated, and you have to keep reselecting the waveform to get the right part of the modulation for the sound you want. And if I bring down the level of the main osc and bring it up again the same thing happens. It makes it random pot luck as to what your patch will sound like if you use the sub osc. I have two other synths with a sub osc (U-NO-LX and Phonec2) and don't experience this. It makes it impossible to save a bass preset that sounds a particular way, for example.

To demonstrate I made a short sequence with the osc 1 volume slider being automated every 4 notes, starting with it at full volume then dropping to 0 then repeating: https://voca.ro/1o3UxMJp27Mf

Yes, I noticed weird behavior myself a few days ago when I wondering about the sub's actual waveform because when I did the same sub+osc combination in another synth it didn't sound anything like it.

In Invader it sounds as if the sub is phase-locked to the main oscillators, and its initial phase is set randomly.

You can also leave the sub on and slightly detune the main oscillator, and undo that, yet it sounds different than before.

When the phase relationship is right, it sounds very good and consistent, like on the Roland Juno where all waves are derived from the same signal and thus phase-locked.

[GaryG]

Strange comment:
"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

Call me old fashioned by I like synthesizers to sound synthetic.

[e-crooner]

Strange comment:
"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

Call me old fashioned by I like synthesizers to sound synthetic.

Hehe I think he meant it differently, like, not analog. But maybe I am mistaken...

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

I can understand the comment if it's meant to be interpreted as, "it's not RePro, The Legend, Tal J-8 level analog emulation." If that's the point, then yeah, I think that would be a fair statement. Invader 2 feels like a VA-style synth that doesn't interest itself in being an end-all analog emulation but rather one that's just trying to sound really good with a fast workflow, great presets, and decent (but not giant) feature-set. If that was the goal, then Invader 2 totally accomplishes it.

[e-crooner]

What's also a bit odd, albeit no problem, is that even when using no unison, i.e. setting 1, the stereo knob changes the volume of the sound. The less width, the louder.

[GaryG]

Strange comment:
"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

Call me old fashioned by I like synthesizers to sound synthetic.

Hehe I think he meant it differently, like, not analog. But maybe I am mistaken...

I'm sure he did, as in obviously VA, not smooth and 'analog'. Which is a little strange as I think Invader sounds pretty darn smooth.

[Teksonik]

"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

Just for clarity that quote was from a viewer who commented on the video not the person who made the video and yes he did write expansive. Not sure if he meant expensive or not.....

[BONES]

I disagree. I'd rather the lit block reflect the actual sequence length not one more. If I want to record an eight note sequence I don't want the ninth block lit.

That's very confusing. If the first light is on, I expect to be entering a note into the first step. If the 8th light is on, I expect to be entering a note into the 8th step, not the 7th step.

I'd rather see the first block light up when you've entered the first note then the second block light up when you've entered the second note and so on.

OK, it sounds more reasonable when you put it like that and it gives me an idea - the light flashes on the next step and becomes solid, or changes colour, once you've entered a note. So 8 solid lights (or 8 red lights) would denote an 8 step sequence.

To demonstrate I made a short sequence with the osc 1 volume slider being automated every 4 notes, starting with it at full volume then dropping to 0 then repeating: https://voca.ro/1o3UxMJp27Mf

Does it matter? The difference is so subtle I doubt you'd hear it in a mix. I had to concentrate quite hard to hear any difference at all. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest.

What's also a bit odd, albeit no problem, is that even when using no unison, i.e. setting 1, the stereo knob changes the volume of the sound. The less width, the louder.

It's probably using phase inversion/cancellation between left and right to create the effect, so the less spread, the less cancellation in the centre, the greater the perceived level.

[e-crooner]

It's probably using phase inversion/cancellation between left and right to create the effect, so the less spread, the less cancellation in the centre, the greater the perceived level.

But should there be any width with a single wave?!

[Clem4]

"Sounds very synthetic and electronic but like many other VST that are far more expansive. For $5 it seems to be a good beginner's choice and not a big risk on the financial side!"

For me, he compares it to hardware (mainly hardware videos on his channel)... so Invader sounds synthetic and electronic compared to hardware but sounds as good as expensive vst. So for him, even expensive vst sound synthetic.