U-he Zebra 3 (Alpha)

[Touch The Universe]

.uhm is (somewhat) human readable and editable text. Each line represents a command that either sculpts a wavetable or sets up configuration data. Lines are read and executed top to bottom. At its core is a formula parser that can create wavetables mathematically. Think "y = sin( 2 * pi * phase)". This is similar to Serum's formula parser, but you can split the operation across multiple lines and multiple wavetable buffers, i.e. you can reuse and manipulate results from prior operations.

Might be worth starting an extra topic... it'll get lost in a few weeks/days...

I agree. I also think it's worth it own thread for sure --> daily post Make it as simple as you like, just a place to ask q's, if you are so inclined.

[Urs]

I don’t really care how busy it is since it’s so functional.

Sure, it is totally fine to like, dislike, prefer whatever product for whatever reason.

It is always difficult for me to jump in when competing products are mentioned because I do not want to appear to be putting down the work of my friends and colleagues in the industry. Can't ignore it either, and then I tend to weigh my words carefully and such.

So about that.

For me, both synths you mentioned appear to have highly tabbed UIs. In my experience, tabs happen when the UI designer's brain explodes because someone else thought that stuffing loads of things into something somehow makes it better. Paradoxically, both products you mention seem to have a rather straight forward architecture (so not over-stuffed with features), but things like LFOs and Envelopes and Waveforms somehow need to be super visual and sticky, and take up a lot of real estate, and thus things end up in tabs.

So the tabs are there to give those things a tidy look, yet these UIs don't exactly look tidy. To be honest, and I'm posting this in the most positive spirit, I just looked at Current's UI for the first time and I personally think there's some opportunity in terms of directing the eye and contrast management.

Anyhow. So for me, tabs are the opposite of functional design - particularly if performing a certain task requires a back and forth between them. As soon as you assign two LFOs to one thing, you'll be switching back and forth a lot. No big deal, but I sure have my grievances with that, and there are certainly way worse tasks that make one tab back and forth.

So yes, we do tabs, too, but we put humungous amounts of effort into making them context specific. What I mean by this is, when we do tabs, we try to do them so that the user is presented with all the information and functionality they need for the task at hand. As a most simple example, when something is modulated by two LFOs, you can see and edit both LFOs and the target.

So here's a thought: One does not need all the fancy stuff to be sticky all the time, like stuck on the front page. If stuff needs to be tabbed away, prioritising functionality might require one to confine visual eye pleasers to tabs. Then optimise the free space for faster workflows. It's a hard thing to do, and maybe some people tend to prefer being dazzled over having a fast workflow.

(my other pet peeve is "Layers", which are the opposite of resource efficiency... if you can't use the envelopes from layer one to modulate anything in layer two, then you're experiencing less than ideal efficiency... probably because the layers are tabbed and ... ah well)

[Kyunghee]

Pigments is an exemple for me of a synth that's busy with features but still has an inviting UI (with some compromises, like having different tabs for each sound engine).

[machinesworking]

Pigments is an exemple for me of a synth that's busy with features but still has an inviting UI (with some compromises, like having different tabs for each sound engine).

Pigments is also touch screen friendly for the most part. Tabs might be a PITA sometimes, but the compromise of a ridiculously tiny interface like The Eighty is not worth it to me. IMO a good interface uses as little tabs as possible, is usable for the most part with a touch screen, and is usable on a 13" laptop without issues. You get those three right and all the other issues fall away, like knobs and buttons of too large of a size range, too packed together, too much menu diving, hidden features etc.

[sunthief01]

Completely agree about tabs and layers. Whenever a synth boasts of layers I wonder what for... Glad it got said here I often wonder if I'm alone in that!

Yes there are instances perhaps (pun intended), but they're pretty rare for me.

Pigments I loved at first and have slowly fallen out with. I think it's actually a lot to do with the sound of the filters and also the tabs

The colors are great, and I overall like the modulation as well

One synth (platform) that I do like but has hella tabs is Falcon. Probably why I only reach for it for very specific sounds or for the amazing sequencing capabilities

[kraster]

I don’t really care how busy it is since it’s so functional.

Sure, it is totally fine to like, dislike, prefer whatever product for whatever reason.

It is always difficult for me to jump in when competing products are mentioned because I do not want to appear to be putting down the work of my friends and colleagues in the industry. Can't ignore it either, and then I tend to weigh my words carefully and such.

So about that.

For me, both synths you mentioned appear to have highly tabbed UIs. In my experience, tabs happen when the UI designer's brain explodes because someone else thought that stuffing loads of things into something somehow makes it better. Paradoxically, both products you mention seem to have a rather straight forward architecture (so not over-stuffed with features), but things like LFOs and Envelopes and Waveforms somehow need to be super visual and sticky, and take up a lot of real estate, and thus things end up in tabs.

So the tabs are there to give those things a tidy look, yet these UIs don't exactly look tidy. To be honest, and I'm posting this in the most positive spirit, I just looked at Current's UI for the first time and I personally think there's some opportunity in terms of directing the eye and contrast management.

Anyhow. So for me, tabs are the opposite of functional design - particularly if performing a certain task requires a back and forth between them. As soon as you assign two LFOs to one thing, you'll be switching back and forth a lot. No big deal, but I sure have my grievances with that, and there are certainly way worse tasks that make one tab back and forth.

So yes, we do tabs, too, but we put humungous amounts of effort into making them context specific. What I mean by this is, when we do tabs, we try to do them so that the user is presented with all the information and functionality they need for the task at hand. As a most simple example, when something is modulated by two LFOs, you can see and edit both LFOs and the target.

So here's a thought: One does not need all the fancy stuff to be sticky all the time, like stuck on the front page. If stuff needs to be tabbed away, prioritising functionality might require one to confine visual eye pleasers to tabs. Then optimise the free space for faster workflows. It's a hard thing to do, and maybe some people tend to prefer being dazzled over having a fast workflow.

(my other pet peeve is "Layers", which are the opposite of resource efficiency... if you can't use the envelopes from layer one to modulate anything in layer two, then you're experiencing less than ideal efficiency... probably because the layers are tabbed and ... ah well)

I don't think it's necessarily about being dazzled but more that graphics can serve a function.

I find it very easy to ascertain what a particular modulator is doing in Current for example.
The modulators in Current are all multimode ie. Any modulator slot can be an LFO, MSEG, Envelope or Envelope follower. Pigments is similar. The fancy graphics are very useful in determining what is doing what.

I find this really easy to work with personally.

As I said above Current is my favourite UI in a synth in a lot of ways because it's tabbed.

I find the engine per page design very easy on the brain.

The problem with having too many controls on screen at once is that there is cognitive load cost in processing all the information. I don't think it's fair to say that in every case that tabs are a result of some kind of design explosion due to having so many features. I think in a lot of case it's a very deliberate design choice to compartmentalise various sections into discrete areas.

There definitely is a lot to be said for the knob per function design for quick access but in a lot of cases that means that the synth will just have less stuff like amounts of modulators and oscillators. The more you add you're either tabbing or scrolling.

A really extreme example of the one page and no tabs is the 2020 drum machine. A great device but it would give you a headache looking at it. The developer was fully committed to not having any tabs!

Behold:

2020-SEMI-MODULAR-BEAT-MACHINE.001.webp

As I said this is an extreme example but even GUIs that are far less busy can have that overwhelming feeling.

I think since the original Massive macros play a large part in bringing together various priority controls to one section that always visible. So adjusting various parameters on one page is less of an issue.

I think ultimately tabbed UIs are better suited to situations were access to a lot of components and more deliberate approaches to sound design are more important than having everything in situ. Tabbed UIs can give you a lot more screen real estate to work with. (The granular page in Current is a good example).

[Touch The Universe]

Tabs are the way to go in most cases, in my opinion. The above is a good example though too complex by a tenth, even then.

[Urs]

There's nothing wrong with tabs, my argument is about what people decide to tab away.

[Touch The Universe]

I appreciate that logic too - don't just tab everything away, but from the above chaos examples, I'd throw each of those boxes in a tab. That would be better with zero brain power exerted. On the whole, I would minimze complexity though by tabbing stuff, so it's a breath of fresh air on first sight..though have alternative gui options of both - im ocd so i'd probably do that, tbh, just in case. Think of sylenth or Nexus 2 screen - the later retains the previous version as an option while also a more complex one. It's a nice and appreciated idea i don't think ive seen elsewhere. A pretty one gui, then an "efficient one".

I haven't had experience sound designing in zebra 2, so i can't see it's logic or if it is a tabbable synth - if that it's a word.

Nonetheless, I can learn to live with just about anything if the sound justifies it. my 1 and a half cent

[whassup]

Behold:

2020-SEMI-MODULAR-BEAT-MACHINE.001.webp

Wow, that is a polarizing GUI!
The design and the colors are great.
But I wouldn't want to work with all those params on one screen.
As unappealing as a hardware modular to me.
These days usability of a GUI is a close second to me right after sound quality/character.
I don't expect to get disappointed by Z3 regarding sound quality/character.
It could be the "final be-all-end-all" synth. LOL
I definitely see it to have that potential.
Countdown...

[Urs]

We'll make sure we'll use the public beta phase intensely to increase usability and address concerns.

[Teksonik]

Am I correct in saying that only those who qualify for the free upgrade to Zebra 3 are getting "License Cards" now?

My Zebra 2 purchase predates the legacy bundle so I don't qualify for the free upgrade which is fine since the upgrade price is quite fair. However when I retrieve "my licenses" now there is no License Card.

I just wanted to check and see if this is the expected result at this point in time. When the Zebra 3 beta drops we'll get an email with the upgrade purchase option and then get a License Card after purchase?

Will we be able to try the Beta without first upgrading (which I will almost certainly do either way)?

[Urs]

Only people with Z2 + TDZ have their License Cards already, and they can test them in the latest Zebralette 3 beta. People with Z2 (pre Zebra Legacy) will get a purchase link for the 30€ upgrade in a few days, either before the public beta hist, or shortly thereafter.

[SamDi]

Only people with Z2 + TDZ have their License Cards already, and they can test them in the latest Zebralette 3 beta. People with Z2 (pre Zebra Legacy) will get a purchase link for the 30€ upgrade in a few days, either before the public beta hist, or shortly thereafter.

How can I test it in Zebralette. Beside a confirmation dialog nothing changes afterwards(?)

[Urs]

If the dialog confirms it, it checked the validity of the card and worked. Once you install Zebra 3 it will already be activated.