Pigments 3.5 vs Dune 3.5

[3ptguitarist]

Does anyone have a comparison video between dune 3.5 and pigments 3.5? I'd like to see a video showing the same custom made patches of bass, pads, leads, etc.

I think it kinda defeats the point as both synths have very different features. For instance Pigments 3 has an additive oscillator that Dune 3 has not.

Sure, you can do basic supersaw / acid / squelch / house bass with both, but then what's the point? 90% of synths can do that as well.

I like to see and hear comparisons of same style of sounds despite there being differences in features. Some synths sound better to some people than others. I think it's fun seeing comparison videos.

[DJ Warmonger]

Well, in my last video I made an acid bassline with 8 synths, including Dune 3 and Pigments 3.5. But that's it, I don't think anyone is going to make a longer comparison of both... unless you do it yourself ;P

[kvotchin]

Dune 3 is a very capable synth, and I happen to like the interface and workflow.

Pigments is considerably more flexible. Those that get along with its interface and workflow will no doubt find a lot to like.

Anyway. I can’t see the purpose of comparing two significantly different synths. What - of substance - can possibly be revealed, proved, resolved or otherwise concluded?

Just to be clear, comparing - for instance - Serum and Vital would make more sense to me. And so forth.

[kobal]

what type of sound you are after and the choice is easy one , just by the feature set even wihtout talking about sound one synth will be more about present and past type of Va sound while the other will lead more easily to modern / futuristic sound design

[recursive one]

Dune3 is not my most favoruite synth, sonically, (though the new AM filters and some new effects in V3 have improved the overall sound a lot) but I enjoy programming it from scratch, I know some people don't like tabbed GUIs and modmatrixes but I'm used to this way of programming synths (Sylenth, Spire, Virus TI plugin etc) and it makes pefrect sense to me. However reverse-engineering the factory patches may be a PITA, it all is heavily layered, sequenced and buried in effects, apparently made to sound impressive on its own but most of that is practically useless in a mix.

Anyway, I think Dune is much better than Pigments as a "general-purpose" synth, it does a lot of things reasonably well, can do classic "analoguesque" sounds and more modern digital stuff as well. As with most "general purpose" synths I think it's somewhat lacks character, but the engine is very hi fi, with audio rate modulation and really good filters.

As for Pigments, I recently bought it for a very specific purpose, to make stuff like that



Glitchy, very cold and digital sound which may be heard a lot in modern psytrance, also some eerie digital pads and soundscapes. Pigments is perfect for that.

I think it must be possible to make a convincing analoguesque sound with Pigments with some effort but it won't be my first choice for that.

[chk071]

Glitchy, very cold and digital sound which may be heard a lot in modern psytrance, also some eerie digital pads and soundscapes. Pigments is perfect for that.

I think so too. For wavetable-esque sounds, Pigments sounds very good.

[nirm123]

Actually, Pigments in the above video sounds pretty great (speaking as someone who doesn't like hard-core electronic music at all).

By now I have love-hate relationship with Pigments, I was just about to sell it but I'm not sure now.

Also a point for consideration, the fact that it sounds thin by itself can actually contribute to the way it sounds within a busy mix (which goes both ways, "fat synths" can struggle to find their place). a Synth should be judged within the context of the music one makes and not in isolated form. This is why the above Youtube video is interesting as it doesn't (only) present Pigment in isolation.

[AnX]

If those 2 don't happen to be close to each other in the Matrix, then you gotta scroll the matrix back and forth to adjust those two related parameters.

You can move the MM slots up/down

How do you do that? Not that dragging slots around for editing is a good workflow either.

Can't remember off hand, I think you can also sort by source/destination and also initialise the while MM.

[Introspective]

I dunno. I mean, sure, Pigments is great for glitchy, cold, digital stuff, but I wouldn't call that it's "strength." It wouldn't be my first choice for sounds like the ones in that video. (It wouldn't even be in my top five). ...and I really like those kinds of sounds! (And it was a good video which I had not seen, so thanks.)

IMO, Pigments' strengths are its versatility and its UI, both of which are notable. ...It is also, IMO, the best available granular synth right now. It has huge value-for-money.

[kobal]

I dunno. I mean, sure, Pigments is great for glitchy, cold, digital stuff, but I wouldn't call that it's "strength." It wouldn't be my first choice for sounds like the ones in that video. (It wouldn't even be in my top five). ...and I really like those kinds of sounds! (And it was a good video which I had not seen, so thanks.)

and what you would use?

pigment sound right between serum and massive X

[SamDi]

As for Pigments, I recently bought it for a very specific purpose, to make stuff like that



Glitchy, very cold and digital sound which may be heard a lot in modern psytrance, also some eerie digital pads and soundscapes. Pigments is perfect for that.

I think it must be possible to make a convincing analoguesque sound with Pigments with some effort but it won't be my first choice for that.

Wow, that stuff is pretty amazing. I'm impressed. Who cares for this old analog stuff from yestermillenium?

I dunno. I mean, sure, Pigments is great for glitchy, cold, digital stuff, but I wouldn't call that it's "strength." It wouldn't be my first choice for sounds like the ones in that video. (It wouldn't even be in my top five). ...and I really like those kinds of sounds! (And it was a good video which I had not seen, so thanks.)

Why not? Pigments seems perfect for this to me. What would you use instead?

[3ptguitarist]

Dune 3 is a very capable synth, and I happen to like the interface and workflow.

Pigments is considerably more flexible. Those that get along with its interface and workflow will no doubt find a lot to like.

Anyway. I can’t see the purpose of comparing two significantly different synths. What - of substance - can possibly be revealed, proved, resolved or otherwise concluded?

Just to be clear, comparing - for instance - Serum and Vital would make more sense to me. And so forth.

To me, it's about seeing their sound characteristics and ability to recreate certain sounds. Some vst's may sound better than others. I want to see how well Pigments makes bread and butter sounds compared to Dune. Right now Dune sounds better to me than Pigments, but I'd like to see someone who's experienced with synths, make a comparison video. I'm not too experienced myself. Lol

[zzz00m]

To me, it's about seeing their sound characteristics and ability to recreate certain sounds. Some vst's may sound better than others. I want to see how well Pigments makes bread and butter sounds compared to Dune.

The term "bread and butter sounds" needs to be better defined in the context of the user's musical genre. Without context, there's not much meaning to that term.

It will obviously mean different things to different people. For example, orchestral and film composers, rock bands, EDM artists, & hip hop artists, are likely to have widely different views on what constitutes "bread and butter sounds" for them.

[3ptguitarist]

To me, it's about seeing their sound characteristics and ability to recreate certain sounds. Some vst's may sound better than others. I want to see how well Pigments makes bread and butter sounds compared to Dune.

The term "bread and butter sounds" needs to be better defined in the context of the user's musical genre. Without context, there's not much meaning to that term.

It will obviously mean different things to different people. For example, orchestral and film composers, rock bands, EDM artists, & hip hop artists, are likely to have widely different views on what constitutes "bread and butter sounds" for them.

I havent seen it that way. I've always assumed it meant classic sounds like pads, brass, bass, leads, etc. To be clear regarding my previous posts, I'm defining bread and butter as classic analog sounds from the 80s.

[Introspective]

I dunno. I mean, sure, Pigments is great for glitchy, cold, digital stuff, but I wouldn't call that it's "strength." It wouldn't be my first choice for sounds like the ones in that video.

and what you would use?

I apologize; I really shouldn't have said that. If you (or anyone) consider that a strength of Pigments, good on you. My opinion doesn't matter here. It was a stupid comment on my part.

But, just to flesh out my PERSONAL opinion (not intending anyone else to share it): almost any other wavetable synth. I think they would have more "presence," in general, than Pigments would. ...whatever the hell that means ("dancing about architecture"). My first choice would be Icarus. Then VPS Avenger. If neither of those cut the mustard (they would. ...but for the sake of argument:), I might try Vital or Serum or Rapid, next. I'd probably reach for my Cobalt8 or Virus... the Virus would, of course, excel at those sounds! Omnisphere would make the list before Pigments.

It's probably personal bias, more than anything. I think of Pigments as an ambient synth, first and foremost. Which is, of course, asinine, but human brains are flawed things, and that is how mine is wired.