Zebra 3 and Zebra Legacy

[zvenx]

You are aware that Z3 is not even close to finished right? rsp

[Tj Shredder]

Is there any idea of the performance of z3 compared to Z2 or even ACE or Diva?

Yes it will be faster on M1 compared to z2-ace-diva on PPC… (no idea if they existed back then…)
The CLAP versions will be faster than the VST3…
Gosh I want Zebra with MPE. Performance is completely irrelevant for the moment…

[Urs]

I had started to post a reply but got sidetracked...

I can only speak for oscillators right now, and as long as you do what's possible in Hive, it'll use as little CPU. OscFX will use some more CPU, and if you use the curve-based waveforms directly, they'll use considerably more CPU, depending on what type of CPU you're on. A CPU that supports AVX2 will use significantly less CPU to render the curve based waveforms than one that supports only SSE4. We also have code rendering it in AVX512F, which is ridiculously fast. However, if you don't use Hive-style wavetables (.uhm/.wav) *and* curve based waveforms simultaneously in the same oscillator, I think I'll add "render curve to wavetable" and then even this will be as fast as it is in Hive.

Additionally, there'll be an option to render everything purely additive. This uses a lot of CPU, as it literally renders up to 4000 sine oscillators simultaneously. Again, AVX2 and AVX512F are ridiculously fast, when compared to other products that do similar things. Depending on the material, if there are only, say, 100 harmonics, like your sawtooth at A=440Hz, this again is barely taxing the CPU at all.

I guess we'll see. The bigger concern currently is UI performance on Windows. We might have to use Vulcan there.

[Lbdunequest]

Any teaser pictures more of this goodie thats coming up aka Zebra 3?

[TENETfanboy]

Any teaser pictures more of this goodie thats coming up aka Zebra 3?

A gui screenshot would be amazing no matter how rough it is

[pierb]

I had started to post a reply but got sidetracked...

I can only speak for oscillators right now, and as long as you do what's possible in Hive, it'll use as little CPU. OscFX will use some more CPU, and if you use the curve-based waveforms directly, they'll use considerably more CPU, depending on what type of CPU you're on. A CPU that supports AVX2 will use significantly less CPU to render the curve based waveforms than one that supports only SSE4. We also have code rendering it in AVX512F, which is ridiculously fast. However, if you don't use Hive-style wavetables (.uhm/.wav) *and* curve based waveforms simultaneously in the same oscillator, I think I'll add "render curve to wavetable" and then even this will be as fast as it is in Hive.

Additionally, there'll be an option to render everything purely additive. This uses a lot of CPU, as it literally renders up to 4000 sine oscillators simultaneously. Again, AVX2 and AVX512F are ridiculously fast, when compared to other products that do similar things. Depending on the material, if there are only, say, 100 harmonics, like your sawtooth at A=440Hz, this again is barely taxing the CPU at all.

I guess we'll see. The bigger concern currently is UI performance on Windows. We might have to use Vulcan there.

Sorry to insist Urs.

Just in case you missed this post:

viewtopic.php?p=8476472#p8476472

You might have ignored it deliberately too, which is fine

[Urs]

Wasn't deliberate, I just have no clear answer.

I'm fairly sure we'll have ample effects, but I'm still not entirely convinced that synths need to be "mastered", i.e. their output turned into a "brick of sound". I still think that, while it certainly sounds impressive and stuff, mixing "bricks of sound" from each track or stem makes mixing and the final master not exactly easier.

IDK

That said, yeah, we'll certainly have more reverb options.

[imrae]

I don't even understand why people want reverb in their presets. Unique ambience on every instrument does not make mixing easier.

[pierb]

Wasn't deliberate, I just have no clear answer.

I'm fairly sure we'll have ample effects, but I'm still not entirely convinced that synths need to be "mastered", i.e. their output turned into a "brick of sound". I still think that, while it certainly sounds impressive and stuff, mixing "bricks of sound" from each track or stem makes mixing and the final master not exactly easier.

IDK

That said, yeah, we'll certainly have more reverb options.

More reverb options would be a great addition! Also having a bigger effects grid and being able to have more effect instances. Maybe bring some of the DSP from Uhbik

Before, when I said a final sound I wasn't referring to having a limiter or "brick of sound". Rather being able to offer a final sound in terms of sound design. A lot of people who use Zebra end up using third party reverb, delays, and distortions. If for example the Uhbik reverb algos were included in Zebra, it would alleviate this problem significantly.

Anyway, thanks for commenting Urs. I know you're a busy man.

[pierb]

I don't even understand why people want reverb in their presets. Unique ambience on every instrument does not make mixing easier.

You may not want it, and that's fine, but there are many types of users out there.

A lot of synth users are really preset surfers or tweakers. They don't buy the synth to do sound design. Some because they lack the skill or the interest, and many because they lack the time and just can focus on writing for a deadline (probably most media composers).

Another reason is many users want to check presets to get ideas quickly. Being able to provide complete sound ideas is a net benefit for a workhorse synth platform like Zebra, Omnisphere, etc.

[Qhohi]

One thing I personally like about u-he synths that they only have very few inbuilt effects. And if they have inbuilt effects they mostly fit the synths theme very well (like in Repro).

I like to have a high amount of modularity and want to use my own effects that I carefully selected from all the choices out there.
For me having a lot of inbuilt effects was why I stopped using phaseplant. Because the right side of my phaseplant patches would always be completely emtpy and that felt like I wasn't using it to it's full potential (which was true after all).

With u-he synth I don't really encounter this issue. There is not much screen estate dedicated to the effects.
U-he's preset tagging system invites me to create and sythesize my own sounds which I then can modify with my personal choice of plugins.

I get that there are many types of users out there but for me having the ability to fully mix sounds inside the synth overwhelms me and puts me in a dillenma where I want to use a synths full potential but can't due to also wanting to use my own effects.

[ahanysz]

Before, when I said a final sound I wasn't referring to having a limiter or "brick of sound". Rather being able to offer a final sound in terms of sound design.

I'm in the opposite camp. When I browse presets, I often find myself spending a lot of extra clicks to turn off reverb, chorus, delay, etc, to find out what the preset "really sounds like" and whether I can get it to fit into the same soundworld as my other tracks.

Once in a while I appreciate how someone uses discreet EQ or a tight reverb to add resonance and make something sound more organic -- these things can be used as part of the intrinsic sound rather than a distinct extra layer -- but most of the time, too many effects within presets just irritate me.

It's good to have diversity in the market, some synths catering to my preferences, some to yours :-)

[lunardigs]

Before, when I said a final sound I wasn't referring to having a limiter or "brick of sound". Rather being able to offer a final sound in terms of sound design.

I'm in the opposite camp. When I browse presets, I often find myself spending a lot of extra clicks to turn off reverb, chorus, delay, etc, to find out what the preset "really sounds like" and whether I can get it to fit into the same soundworld as my other tracks ...

I usually do the same.

Although, built-in effects are valuable to me for the option alone. Especially if those effects offer something special.

In the case of Zebra (Zebrify) I definitely appreciate it.

[TENETfanboy]

I like built in effects, that’s a huge part of what makes a synth for me, especially when the effects can be modulated by parameters inside the synth, allows for so much more creativity, and it’s easier to do that than have to setup modulation lanes in Cubase. I always usually always use the built in effects in Zebra, and I like them on presets cause it can really show me the potential of a sound right off the bat

[imrae]

I don't even understand why people want reverb in their presets. Unique ambience on every instrument does not make mixing easier.

You may not want it, and that's fine, but there are many types of users out there.

A lot of synth users are really preset surfers or tweakers. They don't buy the synth to do sound design. Some because they lack the skill or the interest, and many because they lack the time and just can focus on writing for a deadline (probably most media composers).

Another reason is many users want to check presets to get ideas quickly. Being able to provide complete sound ideas is a net benefit for a workhorse synth platform like Zebra, Omnisphere, etc.

I'm not sure you entirely understand my point. Reverb is good for making one preset sound impressive by itself. But generally makes it more difficult to mix multiple tracks together. Are these "preset surfers" making music with just one track? Or are they being led toward bad mixes?

If you go to a magic shop they are usually demonstrating the same trick cards and props, but it's very rare to see a professional use them. Why? Because they are actually difficult to work into a longer routine at a more advanced level. But they are easy to sell because they are simple to learn and look good on their own.

Anyway, I guess the message to U-He is please keep the FX bypass button