KVR Audio

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:39 am

So, I want to somewhat change my 'answer'.
I realised I still had quite a few Pigment banks I had bought that I hadn't gone thru to favourite, so I decided to do so with a refreshed open mind.

At the outset I want to mention two things, unless it is an old fashioned subtractive synth (and even those I still use a lot of presets although I do roll some of my own), I am a preset guy or a modify a preset to suit the song kind of guy.
Secondly, I do honestly think some sound designers click better with some synths and don't with others. Like for instance, I love the unfinished stuff for zebra and omnisphere and am totally unimpressed by his repro and diva stuff.

That said, I think it is the same with pigments, all of my opinion was based on the work of sound designers on the various banks sold by arturia and two other third party banks. But in particular I think New Loops and Matt Pike stuff for Pigment are definitely not thin or 'ok' sounding, I think they gel well with Pigment.

No I still don't think it could match the bottom end or just the audio beauty of Repro-1 at all and still think Dune sounds much better, BUT there are indeed quite a few Pigment patches that I could use in actual projects.

my new two cents.
rsp

pierb · Post by **pierb** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:58 am

Dune is a much better synth (DSP wise) but Pigments has a much better UI/UX. Pigments also includes the granular and additive stuff.

If Synapse rebuilt a new UI from scratch for Dune and refined the architecture a bit, it would be a killer synth. Unfortunately, as much as the DSP is simply one of the best in the market, as a software product it is pretty outdated.

LoveEnigma18 · Post by **LoveEnigma18** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 5:39 am

If nothing else, Pigments can be usually bought for $49/$69 through Arturia loyalty offers and all the upgrades so far have been free. So, even if someone doesn't get much use out of it, it does have some great features (and presets) that makes it worth keeping. Talking to myself too while I say this.

SynthRatings · Post by **SynthRatings** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:29 am

They are both obviously very very good. I prefer the sound of DUNE personally, but it's a matter of taste really.

fisherKing · Post by **fisherKing** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:10 pm

for all the time i've put into pigments (3.5), i just never use it, am not inspired by it. dune 3... i use often. not sure what it is with pigments; it's an interesting synth, and, as has been pointed out, the UI/UX is excellent, am just not into... the sound.

but makes life interesting, how we all see (& hear) things.

nirm123 · Post by **nirm123** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:45 pm

it's strange that Arturia is already about 20 years in this biz and still people are complaining endlessly about the sound of their products, you'd think that by now they would be quite experts in what they're doing but many people still claim that they don't get the sound right (not only in pigments, even their newest analog emulations get complains mainly regarding the filter quality).

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:47 pm

nirm123 wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:45 pm it's strange that Arturia is already about 20 years in this biz and still people are complaining endlessly about the sound of their products, you'd think that by now they would be quite experts in what they're doing but many people still claim that they don't get the sound right (not only in pigments, even their newest analog emulations get complains mainly regarding the filter quality).

The quality will always be determined by the people developing the software.

That's why I wrote elsewhere that they mabe should hire someone who is an expert on filter design.

Meh, I'm ranting again, and I really don't want to.

nirm123 · Post by **nirm123** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:49 pm

chk071 wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:47 pm
nirm123 wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:45 pm it's strange that Arturia is already about 20 years in this biz and still people are complaining endlessly about the sound of their products, you'd think that by now they would be quite experts in what they're doing but many people still claim that they don't get the sound right (not only in pigments, even their newest analog emulations get complains mainly regarding the filter quality).
The quality will always be determined by the people developing the software.

That's why I wrote elsewhere that they mabe should hire someone who is an expert on filter design.

Meh, I'm ranting again, and I really don't want to.

but they're many people being involved and the people who developed the pre-2016 plugins aren't the same who's doing the new plugins and the FXs.

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:50 pm

Many people doesn't necessarily mean high quality, does it?

zvenx · Post by **zvenx** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:55 pm

Or maybe it is their sound aesthetic and they are happy with it as a company?
rsp

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:57 pm

Sure, could be too. Considering many of their synths are emulations, for me, the indicator would be how close it sounds to the original though, rather than "Let's make all our synths sound like we like them to sound".

You're right though. Many developers seem to have an image of their sound aesthetics. That must be why their synths all share at least a bit of the same character.

fisherKing · Post by **fisherKing** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:02 pm

one of my collabs recently added pigments to his arsenal, and he says he's using it a lot. it's ALL subjective; i mean, some people still think wobble basses are useful...

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:05 pm

Pigments is great for what it does. What I mean is that it would maybe be my "island synth", if I liked the sound better. Although even that is a bit exaggerated. I actually don't find the sound bad, it's just that the filters are a bit lacklustre, and that it could have a bit more character in general.

nirm123 · Post by **nirm123** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:11 pm

chk071 wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:50 pm Many people doesn't necessarily mean high quality, does it?

this wasn't what I wrote. the new developers came with new plugins which received praise even from many people who hated the previous ones, it's not the same line of products, not the same developers.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Sat Jan 08, 2022 3:33 pm

fisherKing wrote: Sat Jan 08, 2022 2:10 pm for all the time i've put into pigments (3.5), i just never use it, am not inspired by it. dune 3... i use often. not sure what it is with pigments; it's an interesting synth, and, as has been pointed out, the UI/UX is excellent, am just not into... the sound.

but makes life interesting, how we all see (& hear) things.

I can get sounds with Pigments that I am happy with, but it is not a synth that effortlessly sounds good. It tends towards a digital and somewhat brittle sound but has sonically interesting sweet spots and a diverse sonic palette. It uses too much CPU. I enjoy the GUI of Pigments.

Dune, I like the overall sound better than Pigments. The core sound of Dune is still not one of my favorites but it is boosted by all the unison options. I find the GUI of Dune uninspiring. It is rather opaque and uninformative. Also has too much tabbing for what is really a simple signal path.

I would use Pigments more if it used less CPU and Dune if it had an enjoyable to use GUI. As is, there are other synths I prefer and so far in projects I haven't used either Dune or Pigments and only dabble with them here and there.

Pigments 3.5 vs Dune 3.5