Zebra 3 Public Beta (final beta)

[Benjamin923]

I think if there are some really expensive voice module settings then a quality mode is worth considering, i.e. a draft mode for real-time and a high-quality mode for rendering.

[glokraw]

10 years of development, and not,a single nice e-piano nor another accoustic sound in the presets.

I can't even begin to explain how much I resent such comments. There will probably be some e-pianos, but I have not spent 10 years of development to be measured by how many of these sounds we put in a beta release.

I noted a few excellent new sounds in the collection that I would call 'e-piano', and look forward to using, being more unique and interesting than the existant bread & butter universe covered in myriad software/hardware products. I suspect Zebra 3 will increase versatility of sound, while shrinking the plugin and track count previously needed for a similar range of unique creations.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Is there an option to prevent controls from responding to scroll events?

I'm sure, there will be.

So one of the surprising things for us is this. We have forever had this in Zebra 2 and I can't remember a single complaint. Suddenly, here, we have a lot.

So we'll deal with it. Either we'll figure out why suddenly it does not work, or we'll add a preference or something.

One of the things I’ve always liked about your synths is that the controls respond so nicely to mac trackpads. I will admit though that a couple times trying the beta I accidentally adjusted a control rather than scrolled the rack. No idea why it didn’t cone up with older zebra versions. And no idea what the best way around it is. Maybe an optional modifier? But probably just being careful is best. So I wouldn’t force a modifier.

[DCrown]

I checked lots of presets and I don't know any other synth with so many good presets. I use HZ Zebra quite a lot and it is the same. Normally about 20% of presets are useable, but Zebra has lots more so beautiful presets. Whoever made the presets, I suppose it's a team, great job!

I tried the method (your video) to reduce cpu, sometimes it works, sometimes not, sometimes also comp filter, FMO, filter 1-3 or modal resonator cause high cpu (total 40-80%).

I can't use about 40% of presets, nevertheless I will buy it, still too many good sounds I can use.
I am more a preset user, the only synth I use for creating my own presets sometimes is Avenger, I spent lots of time learning this synth and cpu is ok.
I can use all plugins I have and like (Avenger, HZ Zebra, Superior Drummer, Microwave 1, Mercury-8, Elka-X, Atlas, opsix native etc) without issues, so buying a new computer for just one plugin I couldn't justify, unfortunately I am not equipped like Hans Zimmer (and I am probably not the only one) haha
Maybe you will manage to reduce cpu...

[ReiKru]

got it the day before yesterday

[Urs]

I think if there are some really expensive voice module settings then a quality mode is worth considering, i.e. a draft mode for real-time and a high-quality mode for rendering.

The current idea is, use the super expensive filters with low polyphony, and when you need high polyphony, use some less expensive filters.

A global quality setting will make things less obvious - and not necessarily better. Like, if you have an expensive filter and you run it with draft quality, the filter will probably be less oversampled, have a lower maximum cutoff and more aliasing. It might sound better to simply use a different filter then and keep the quality.

The Module Performance Meter is there to help people make an informed decision on where they can save CPU.

It is however not a quick way to remedy a patch if you need an instant fix... hmmm...

[Urs]

I tried the method (your video) to reduce cpu, sometimes it works, sometimes not, sometimes also comp filter, FMO, filter 1-3 or modal resonator cause high cpu (total 40-80%).

So the current suggestions are only for the oscillator, pretty much, but we'll add more hints later on. Filters are the most obvious, but even FMOs, Modal Resonator and some of the FX have settings that use less CPU than others.

[El°HYM]

Could you also make a short video how to optimize Zebralette 3 cpu wise?



@Urs

[werter318]

If all the people who take this craft somewhat seriously just got a decent processor, the developers wouldn’t have to cut corners for sound quality so much anymore. It’s 2025, processors can take it.

[El°HYM]

^ nice first post.


Another sock puppet account.

[werter318]

^ nice first post.


Another sock puppet account.

It may sound rough but it's all to push digital as far as it can possibly go sonically.

[Urs]

Could you also make a short video how to optimize Zebralette 3 cpu wise?

Done that a few months ago (the optimisation mentioned at the end has been added to Zebralette 3 by now):

[El°HYM]

Thank you, kind sir.

[Garrincha]

@Urs:
You probably don't remember, but more than 20 years ago, when we both worked for a german magazine, I visited you and Sascha in Berlin. It was that night out in a pub when I learned about the unusual street numbering in Berlin and about the most complicated night bus schedule that according to Sascha you were the only one on earth to understand.

You told me your idea of a synth based on wavetables "but done differently". That eventually became Zebra. So congratulation to an outstanding release with Zebra 3!

When you sent me a beta of Zebra 1 the first thing I did was trying to make it sound like a Waldorf (or PPG) Wave. There was a certain sound I was after that our common friend Peter Gorges made für his Waldorf Wave. That sound relied heavily on clipping (after all it was based on the Wavetable #14 "Clipper") and on detuned OSCs and unison. The Hardware would be monophonic then and Peter sampled it with an AKAI S-1000 to make it polyphonic. It was on the sampling CD "Wizoo powered Wave".

With Zebra 1 I could make something remotely similar, but in the end it was not what I had in mind. I think I even sent you that preset.

Now with Zebra 3 I finally was able to program such a sound, onlyeven better than the original Waldorf patch. It uses 4 OSCs with 8 voice unison (on my i285 I can use 16 voice unison, but it would melt any CPU lower than that, so I reduced the unison-count for the public).

This is the result:

The (P)PG Wavezebra.rar

For this patch I just fumbled around with the curves by ear until I found the overtone-structure I wanted. Ironically enough I imported the original (single cycle)Waves and tried to recreate my own "Clipper" Wavetable, but it didn't sound like it at all. Maybe the wrong wav-format. What format does Zebra expect? 44,1/16bit or something else?


Next thing I tried was a nice FM-Piano and I came up with this patch in literally no time:

Stereo FM EP.rar

And for those who think Zebra can't do analog, here is a rolandish analog Pad that took even less time than the DX-piano.

Effendi.rar

Overall I'm absolutely flored about the sheer quality of Zebra 3!

Performance wise it's not that bad on my i285k, but I'd really like to see multi-processing. One voice of Zebra - regardless of how complex the patch is - runs well even on an efficiency core. Since you have so many E-cores on a modern intel CPU, multi-processing would greatly enhance the performance. After all those cores would usually do nothing in an actual DAW-session, so why not use them for creating lots of voices for Zebra?

[Urs]

@Urs:
You probably don't remember, but more than 20 years ago, when we both worked for a german magazine, I visited you and Sascha in Berlin. It was that night out in a pub when I learned about the unusual street numbering in Berlin and about the most complicated night bus schedule that according to Sascha you were the only one on earth to understand.

Thank you!

Wasn't that the night we talked about phasers with 40 stages?