Zebra 3 and Zebra Legacy

[limitlesssss]

Zebra 3 has a built-in waveform editor, but it is vector based, using splines - as opposed to sample based waveforms that wavetables are made of. You can import and vectorise individual waveforms from .wav files, and Zebra 3 will create a smooth transition between two or more of them. But it won't import hundreds of frames, only up to 16.

Since it's vector-based, does it support importing SVG format as well?

[Urs]

Zebra 3 has a built-in waveform editor, but it is vector based, using splines - as opposed to sample based waveforms that wavetables are made of. You can import and vectorise individual waveforms from .wav files, and Zebra 3 will create a smooth transition between two or more of them. But it won't import hundreds of frames, only up to 16.

Since it's vector-based, does it support importing SVG format as well?

Yeah, well, as long as it's an SVG depicting some kind of waveform.

(not sure if you seen it and where it was, but I once copied a Z3 waveform as SVG, pasted it into Illustrator or something, and then copied and pasted it back. I have not touched that code in 2 or 3 years, so I reckon it still works, kinda)

[jtsterays]

Will there be some kind of OTT type multiband compressor in Z3? In my experience, for basic bread n butter patches, this type of compressor always improves the sound.

[Urs]

Not yet...

[jtsterays]

Thanks in advance

[Lbdunequest]

In comparison, using most heavy modules how heavy cpu use will be to something like Repro 5 or Diva, Hive 2?

[Urs]

In comparison, using most heavy modules how heavy cpu use will be to something like Repro 5 or Diva, Hive 2?

Each module in Zebra 3 typically uses less CPU than any equivalent in Diva or Repro. But instead of 3 or 4 modules, you can use 10. If you use 10, you simply get 10 modules worth of CPU.

Hive 2 uses next to no CPU. It's got 4 modules that account for its CPU usage, if any. If you use equivalent modules in Zebra 3, say, 2 plain oscillators, 2 plain filters (Vanilla, SVF, linear or old Zebra ones), your CPU will hardly notice.

In contrast, if you use analogue modelled filters (which are plentiful and all stereo in Zebra 3), if you use heavy oscillator effects, if you use aliasing free FM oscillators, if you use 256-partial stereo Modal Resonator banks (instead of, say, 64 partials), and a lot of any of those, your CPU will get a serious workout.

[Lbdunequest]

In comparison, using most heavy modules how heavy cpu use will be to something like Repro 5 or Diva, Hive 2?

Each module in Zebra 3 typically uses less CPU than any equivalent in Diva or Repro. But instead of 3 or 4 modules, you can use 10. If you use 10, you simply get 10 modules worth of CPU.

Hive 2 uses next to no CPU. It's got 4 modules that account for its CPU usage, if any. If you use equivalent modules in Zebra 3, say, 2 plain oscillators, 2 plain filters (Vanilla, SVF, linear or old Zebra ones), your CPU will hardly notice.

In contrast, if you use analogue modelled filters (which are plentiful and all stereo in Zebra 3), if you use heavy oscillator effects, if you use aliasing free FM oscillators, if you use 256-partial stereo Modal Resonator banks (instead of, say, 64 partials), and a lot of any of those, your CPU will get a serious workout.

Thank you for detailed explaination

[Urs]

Also, we're including a Module Performance Meter now, which shows not just the worst offenders within a patch but also possibly some ideas on how to improve perfromance:

image (3).jpg

(note, this patch runs on an efficiency core of the M4... it uses less than 2% CPU overall on a performance core)

[Urs]

(oh, not the latest UI... ah well)

[trusampler]

That's incredible news ! And so useful... why doesn't everyone do that, nvm.. lol

[enCiphered]

Super helpful. What would make it even more useful: the ability to collapse the window and detach/drag it outside the editor so it can stay visible while tweaking parameters. Having it float next to the plugin would streamline workflow a lot.
I can’t imagine using the info efficiently if I have to switch back and forth all the time just to check the changes. A detachable or persistent view would solve that.

[Urs]

Super helpful. What would make it even more useful: the ability to collapse the window and detach/drag it outside the editor so it can stay visible while tweaking parameters. Having it float next to the plugin would streamline workflow a lot.

Yeah, one of the next big projects is "open parts of the UI in new windows". It involves quite a lot of work and testing, so won't happen this year, maybe next year.

I can’t imagine using the info efficiently if I have to switch back and forth all the time just to check the changes. A detachable or persistent view would solve that.

Here's the thing: Measuring CPU this way costs CPU in itself. Measuring possible spikes of certain modules means turning off some optimisations. Therefore I view this as a helpful tool to verify things aren't too bad, or identify possible issues within a patch. But I would not recommend keeping it open at all times.

For example, the exciter and resonators of modal synthesis might only spike during note on and then quickly fade to like half or a quarter of the initial CPU, as partials fall below the audible threshold. So while the Module Performance Panel is open, we might actually need to process even the inaudible partials to give an accurate reading of peak performance.

Furthermore, if your CPU has a mix of efficiency cores and performance cores (e.g. Apple silicon or modern Intel), the reading is highly inaccurate as you often don't know which kind of core you're mainly processing on. So Zebra 3 comes with an FX module called "Burner" that simply only costs CPU, and easily a lot of it. Once you set it to, say 50% - 60% you can be sure that the OS will only schedule Zebra 3 on a performance core, and then the reading of the individual modules becomes accurate. We'll have to make a tutorial video for this.

[Urs]

Ok, let's show this, too:

Zebra 3 CPU Burner.jpg

So here is pretty much the same patch as in the previous screenshot. You see the CPU Burner uses humungous amounts of CPU, thus forces Zebra 3 to be run on a performance core. And there you have it the oscillators and filters now show their real CPU usage, which is much lower than an isolated measurement on an efficiency core suggests.

[trusampler]

Slick, I love it.