I WANT to love it...

[Boy Wonder]

- Serum. It sounds digital, harsh and the filters are really bad. It is also cpu heavy. Developer is super nice tho.

I agree with this. It really surprises me how in love with Serum people seem to be when soundwise it would fit right in with the vsts that were coming out when stuff like Vanguard and Albino were considered top of the line (I know, I was using those synths back then!). I can't help but think it sounds totally lifeless next to something like Spire or Diva. Maybe Serum 2 will change that? Here's hoping!

I actually wasn't a big fan of Serum, but now that a few of my current songs has dubstep/growl elements, I use Serum as it seems to be the preferred tool for that.

[Ploki]

Definitely Falcon for me. It's user interface is atrocious. So many mouse clicks and various pages needed for rather simple things. It's the "Linux" of software synths in my opinion. So powerful and capable yet ultimately completely uninspiring.

To UVI's defense, it isn't a synth for simple things. If you want a fair degree of complexity, the cost is always going to be a more complex interface. When I first got Falcon, I was feeling like you, but I put in some time and properly learned it, and it was well worth it, but I'm not going to it to create a simple wavetable synth sound. That would be like learning to fly an F16 to go to Disneyworld on vacation. Now that I know it well, I can't really imagine a more clear way to implement all the features. It is a great tool but it's for specific kinds of sounds.

It's not that I don't understand Falcon, I do, it's that I just can't gel with the interface. There's just something extremely uninviting with it and I've put probably around 100 hours by now in trying to gel with it.

Complex synthesis is exactly what I want from it, it's why I bought it. It's slightly frustrating when people think I don't know my way around synths and try to use that argument as a reason for me not liking Falcon. I'm recently passed 35 years of experience with synthesizers and as you at least probably know, I dive deep. I deep learned Kurzweil VAST in the beginning of the 90s for crying out loud. I'd wager I go deeper in editing synthesizers than most people. Heck, I made a semi realistic grand piano sound for FabFilter Twin 2 in 2009, which could have been better if I hadn't run out of all it's modulation slots (it only gave like 45 connections until no more were available).
What I'm trying to say here: I know what I'm doing. Please all, stop assuming I don't. It's not my know-how of synthesis that is my problem with Falcon, it's the UI I don't gel with.

As an example of another rather horrible UI but still manageable: I have an easier time navigating Melda SoundFactory through it's deepest levels. I can do a preset that has tons of modulators modulating modulators etc, I can create the custom UI and abuse the oddities of the various macro knobs to do some cool shit and I can modify everything with the various transfer functions. And all of this is more accessible and quicker to use than Falcon. MSoundFactory! That's saying something.

CAN I HAVE THIS PATCH

I have no clue how you pulled this off with 3 measly oscillators, it's incredible.

[rod_zero]

- Serum. It sounds digital, harsh and the filters are really bad. It is also cpu heavy. Developer is super nice tho.

I agree with this. It really surprises me how in love with Serum people seem to be when soundwise it would fit right in with the vsts that were coming out when stuff like Vanguard and Albino were considered top of the line (I know, I was using those synths back then!). I can't help but think it sounds totally lifeless next to something like Spire or Diva. Maybe Serum 2 will change that? Here's hoping!

I actually wasn't a big fan of Serum, but now that a few of my current songs has dubstep/growl elements, I use Serum as it seems to be the preferred tool for that.

I also think Serum filters doesn't sound good for the amount of CPU the synth uses, I think it sounds better than vanguard or albino, but the filters doesn't compare to Diva and as a wavetable synth Largo still has more character.

I also think it is the case it became very popular for some genres, where very aggressive sounds are the norm, it kind of substituted massive in those genres.

I still use it for pads, as its wavetable capabilities are nice, but for bass and leads never.

[davidguda]

Zebra, it is build just the way I think a synth should be built with semimodularity etc but I just can't feel at home in it.
I have a hard time saying what I don't like about it.

[cryophonik]

If I can add a hardware synth, I’ll go with my Moog Sub37. This synth is so cool, and has a great interface, but I can just never get rid of that smeared nasally sound in the low mids, so I never use it in any recordings. My Minitaur and Slim Phatty sound MUCH better and my SE-1X is even better - they’re just so phat and juicy sounding, whereas the Sub37 just wants to be saturated (yes, I keep the oscillator levels well below 50%). I keep sitting it aside thinking maybe I just need to revisit it, but I always end up in the same place. I think I’m about to give up and sell it.

[Halonmusic]

Zebra, it is build just the way I think a synth should be built with semimodularity etc but I just can't feel at home in it.
I have a hard time saying what I don't like about it.

blasphemy!!!

[syntonica]

Zebra, it is build just the way I think a synth should be built with semimodularity etc but I just can't feel at home in it.
I have a hard time saying what I don't like about it.

There's no room to spread out. The UI is chock full of everything, all cramped together like sardines. Plus, those oscillators just make me scratch my head and want to close the whole plugin and not dive in and tinker (how I do feel about Warlock.) Otherwise, I'm sure it's a loverly plugin.

[DJDJ]

- Serum. It sounds digital, harsh and the filters are really bad. It is also cpu heavy. Developer is super nice tho.

It’s understandable. I kind of feel the same way. I think it’s really that it’s useful for a particular sound quality and not as useful for others, which I think is a good thing with synths.

Serum to me very much sounds “stiff”, “hard”, “cutting”, “up front”, “aggressive”, etc. It’s very useful in that role, assuming you want a synth that has that kind of immediacy to its sound.

Even though it’s a wavetable synth, I don’t think of it as an all-rounder. I wouldn’t choose it for pads, for warm analog brasses and leads, or for anything that really leans more ambient and lush. I don’t like it’s filters or envelopes for those kinds of sounds, but it can do FM’d screaming leads and dubstep wobbles for days.

It’s a synth with a strong suit, and some significant deficiencies. And I think that part of the reason people don’t like it is because they’re expecting and all rounder sonically, and it’s just not.

[zerocrossing]

Definitely Falcon for me. It's user interface is atrocious. So many mouse clicks and various pages needed for rather simple things. It's the "Linux" of software synths in my opinion. So powerful and capable yet ultimately completely uninspiring.

To UVI's defense, it isn't a synth for simple things. If you want a fair degree of complexity, the cost is always going to be a more complex interface. When I first got Falcon, I was feeling like you, but I put in some time and properly learned it, and it was well worth it, but I'm not going to it to create a simple wavetable synth sound. That would be like learning to fly an F16 to go to Disneyworld on vacation. Now that I know it well, I can't really imagine a more clear way to implement all the features. It is a great tool but it's for specific kinds of sounds.

It's not that I don't understand Falcon, I do, it's that I just can't gel with the interface. There's just something extremely uninviting with it and I've put probably around 100 hours by now in trying to gel with it.

Complex synthesis is exactly what I want from it, it's why I bought it. It's slightly frustrating when people think I don't know my way around synths and try to use that argument as a reason for me not liking Falcon. I'm recently passed 35 years of experience with synthesizers and as you at least probably know, I dive deep. I deep learned Kurzweil VAST in the beginning of the 90s for crying out loud. I'd wager I go deeper in editing synthesizers than most people. Heck, I made a semi realistic grand piano sound for FabFilter Twin 2 in 2009, which could have been better if I hadn't run out of all it's modulation slots (it only gave like 45 connections until no more were available).
What I'm trying to say here: I know what I'm doing. Please all, stop assuming I don't. It's not my know-how of synthesis that is my problem with Falcon, it's the UI I don't gel with.

As an example of another rather horrible UI but still manageable: I have an easier time navigating Melda SoundFactory through it's deepest levels. I can do a preset that has tons of modulators modulating modulators etc, I can create the custom UI and abuse the oddities of the various macro knobs to do some cool shit and I can modify everything with the various transfer functions. And all of this is more accessible and quicker to use than Falcon. MSoundFactory! That's saying something.

hidz

Sorry, I misunderstood, but I just disagree with you. I like MSoundFactory a lot too, but I find Falcon to be just as good. I generally like any UI that has a logic to it, and I think both Falcon and MSoundFactory do. We’re all entitled to our opinions, of course, so have at it. I found both to have a bit of a learning curve, but once I saw their structures, I found them both easy to work with.

[zerocrossing]

If I can add a hardware synth, I’ll go with my Moog Sub37. This synth is so cool, and has a great interface, but I can just never get rid of that smeared nasally sound in the low mids, so I never use it in any recordings. My Minitaur and Slim Phatty sound MUCH better and my SE-1X is even better - they’re just so phat and juicy sounding, whereas the Sub37 just wants to be saturated (yes, I keep the oscillator levels well below 50%). I keep sitting it aside thinking maybe I just need to revisit it, but I always end up in the same place. I think I’m about to give up and sell it.

Studio Electronics does Moog better than any of the Phattys, IMO.

[Rabid]

GX-80. Way too much stuff on the screen. And those little short throw sliders across the middle. Uggg.

Anything IK Multimedia. I started to upgrade to the Max Everything bundle during the Black Friday sale, then I started thinking about everything I've bought from them over the years. I don't think anything ever made it into a final mix. No matter how good the deal is, if you don't use it...

[zzz00m]

GX-80. Way too much stuff on the screen. And those little short throw sliders across the middle. Uggg.

Right. Yamaha had a terrible idea when they released the CS-80 in 1977, a first of its kind synth. They should have realized that synths of the future would be a bit more ergonomic.

[Boy Wonder]

I really need to give Cardinal Rack and other spaghetti synths more face time. The thing is, if I'm in the middle of creating a song, I pretty much know what kind of sound I'm hearing in my head, so to stop and spend six hours patching cables would ruin my flow, and my inspiration would fade like dust in the wind.

[Uncle E]

Heck, I made a semi realistic grand piano sound for FabFilter Twin 2 in 2009, which could have been better if I hadn't run out of all it's modulation slots (it only gave like 45 connections until no more were available).

That sounds amazing. Half piano, half Rhodes, half nylon string guitar. IOW, it's 50% better than any one of those instruments.

[Smasha]

What Tony Banks did with the Arp Pro Soloist blows any Serum preset out of the water but every drover's dog raves about Serum.


Forgot about the sex on a stick KB instrument,the Rhodes!

i find today's synth sounds plasticky and dated more than the 70's classic sounds like shopping food mall noodles sitting in the warmer going stale.