UADx Opal Morphing Synthesizer

[oneshotdeal]

I’ve pulled the trigger. Already had PolyMax. I think it sounds better than the competition. Even though it’s wavetable, it sounds much more like my analogue synths. I’ve concluded it sounds better to me than Massive X.

For 50 doughnuts this is an absolute steal. I don’t mind UA connect or Ilok. Don’t wanna sound like a fanboy either but all the native plugins I’ve recently demoed from UA are sublime.

Would you say PolyMax is above the competition as well? u-he, XILS, GForce?

[audiouser720]

It really depends on the individual needs and preferences. I always prioritise raw sound quality because I have some great analogue synths, so that is my benchmark.

If you need features, more options and your priority is using presets, I wouldn’t say PolyMax is above the competition.

If sound quality and authenticity are the most important factors, then I would say that because of how the OSC, filters and modulators are modelled in both PolyMax and Opal (+ fx sounds great), they are above the competition. I can’t elaborate on why exactly and this may sound stupid, but they both sound like there is electricity flowing through them, like the real analogue synths I’m used to. I think that UA did an exceptional job in modelling these analogue circuits.

Also, PolyMax is an amazing platform to learn synthesis on, if you are starting out. I don’t think you you should buy it for the presets. You should by it if you want to treat it like an actual analogue poly and tweak your own sounds out of it.

Its simplicity and raw sound are the key points here. Less is more, sometimes.

But these are very personal factors. To me, with both Opal and PolyMax, the sound and the interface it’s just inspirational.

[Sinisterbr]

Trying the demo. How do I add tags when saving a preset? Nothing in the manual about it.

I'm wondering as well. I suppose it isn't possible (and I hope they improve the browser at some point)

[LFO8]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

[audiouser720]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

A more instant modulation solution would be better indeed. For instance by right clicking on the destination and selecting the source from a drop down menu, or just dragging and dropping like in Massive X.

I'm still trying to work out what source I could modulate the pan knob with to spread notes across the stereo field, there are a couple of options, but a direct OSC pan option (like in TAL-MOD) would be great, albeit it would significantly increase the CPU usage as well.

Like you say, this is down to personal preferences. I like the general layout because I'm looking at my Grandmother, and the modules are almost placed in the same way / order (I'm talking about the synth, the Moog haha).

[Sinisterbr]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

I agree there are some shortcomings I didn't expect in an UA synth. There's no double-click-to-reset, for example, and the matrix could be more readable.
Anyway, I'm very satisfied with it.

[Sinisterbr]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

A more instant modulation solution would be better indeed. For instance by right clicking on the destination and selecting the source from a drop down menu, or just dragging and dropping like in Massive X.

Exactly. I miss that. And the right button is completely useless in this synth, it's a waste.
Btw, Massive X's workflow is way better than people use to say, IMO.

[audiouser720]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

A more instant modulation solution would be better indeed. For instance by right clicking on the destination and selecting the source from a drop down menu, or just dragging and dropping like in Massive X.

Exactly. I miss that. And the right button is completely useless in this synth, it's a waste.
Btw, Massive X's workflow is way better than people use to say, IMO.

Yeah, I love Massive X. I think the interface is so easy to use and intuitive.

Regarding the parameter reset, I know it's not double click, but Alt+Click on a mack resets parameters on Opal (and on any UA plugin AFAIK). It's a tad slower, but I can get used to it. Would prefer double click.

[Vortifex]

Trying the demo. I have to say, this sounds very good, equal to Massive X in terms of quality IMO. They've opted for simplicity over sound design options, which is fine but renders it limited compared to other wavetable synths. Workflow is annoying without double-click to reset - this is a real pain when the filters are infinite rotary encoders with no min/max positions. Modulation is via mod matrix only - no right-click or drag & drop.

The FX are fine, although you have to manually modulate the phaser in the matrix because it doesn't come with a speed control. Delay and reverb could use a high pass. Having the presets in a pop-out panel that shoots the synth off to the right feels a bit clunky, and the browser font is absolutely tiny. There doesn't seem to be a way to tag your own presets.

When you modulate stereo spread via sample & hold it can add a click to the attack depending on the sound you're using. Select the Doubt preset and play some chords for an example. The click disappears when the track is reduced to mono.

With a few basic feature and workflow enhancements this would get a 9/10 from me. They already added resizing so perhaps they're open to adding a few more. It's hard not to be tempted by that current sale + coupon price though...

[_leras]

Trying the demo. I have to say, this sounds very good, equal to Massive X in terms of quality IMO. They've opted for simplicity over sound design options, which is fine but renders it limited compared to other wavetable synths.

With a few basic feature and workflow enhancements this would get a 9/10 from me. They already added resizing so perhaps they're open to adding a few more. It's hard not to be tempted by that current sale + coupon price though...

Gotta agree with this summary. I'd say sonically its got a slight edge over Massive X, a bit more present, more like it's coming out of a small modular. Of course a bit less range. At first I thought the UI panes were pretty clunky, but actually they're pretty logically laid out and fine to work with.

UI for a synth is a totally different ball game than for an FX in most cases. I hope UA can recognise this and up their game a bit. I think their synths sound great.

[Uncle E]

Massive X can definitely sound great but it's just as easy to make it sound bad. Opal is limited but pretty much every sound is great.

Cherry Audio Sines compares favorably against Opal. All three of these are excellent pad synths.

[Sinisterbr]

Massive X can definitely sound great but it's just as easy to make it sound bad. Opal is limited but pretty much every sound is great.

Cherry Audio Sines compares favorably against Opal. All three of these are excellent pad synths.

I don't think it's limited at all but, as has been said, the GUI doesn't allow drag and drop modulations like MX or Phaseplant, so it takes more time to make better, more interesting and organic sounds (and that's probably why the presets are so plain). Workflow wasn't their priority, it seems.

[idoru97214]

It seems like a solid buy for $49. I did it. Will check it out later today...

[zerocrossing]

This is all down to personal preferences obviously, but in my opinion the interface is made mostly to look pretty. Less so to be optimised in workflow. To my taste at least, it was hindering the flow. The way you have to assign modulations for instance. The sound is nice imo. Though only 12 voices and no way to spread those voices across the stereo field besides using per osc 'ensemble' which is unison but still doesn't pan the voices out much.

A more instant modulation solution would be better indeed. For instance by right clicking on the destination and selecting the source from a drop down menu, or just dragging and dropping like in Massive X.

The way the modulation system works is seriously clunky. I’m with you on the right-click-assign method, but drag and drop is also nice.

I'm still trying to work out what source I could modulate the pan knob with to spread notes across the stereo field, there are a couple of options, but a direct OSC pan option (like in TAL-MOD) would be great, albeit it would significantly increase the CPU usage as well.

The pan is not the same as voice spread. Voice spread is definitively something they should add to future versions of Opal.

Like you say, this is down to personal preferences. I like the general layout because I'm looking at my Grandmother, and the modules are almost placed in the same way / order (I'm talking about the synth, the Moog haha).

I think the layout is good. I don’t think you can ever go wrong with your basic left-to-right signal flow style layout. It’s how much of the world reads, so we’re just used to seeing that type of flow. It’s why synths like Hive are so frustrating to many.

[Vortifex]

For voice spread you set the modulation source as sample & hold, destination to pan, and in the LFO section you set the sample & hold trig to note on. A bit clunky but it works, although the actual spread is somewhat random, which may or may not be a good thing depending on what you're after.