Zebra 3 Public Beta Revision 20399

[Matty686]

Do you plan to support Mpe timbre I need it as part of my set up (I'm currently using Bitwig)

[buckycore]

Do you plan to support Mpe timbre I need it as part of my set up (I'm currently using Bitwig)

I had asked the same question, and they indeed shall implement MPE. But Urs wanted to get a properly functioning Beta out, so other features like a sequencer and MPE will be coming sometime in the next iteration or so

[Matty686]

Do you plan to support Mpe timbre I need it as part of my set up (I'm currently using Bitwig)

I had asked the same question, and they indeed shall implement MPE. But Urs wanted to get a properly functioning Beta out, so other features like a sequencer and MPE will be coming sometime in the next iteration or so

Thanks I am specifically asking about MPE timbre because I noticed many synths don't support it even if they claim to be MPE synths and I really need this one particular feature

[Urs]

MPE Timbre typically maps to CTRL-A for us, so we recommend to set it to CC #74.

We currently do not interpret CCs as bipolar though, which is compatible with the MPE specs even though they encourage bipolar interpretation. We might eventually add this as an option later on.

[quantum7]

I'm late to the party, but finally upgraded and tried out the first 100 patched or so this afternoon. GOOD STUFF!!!! I cannot wait for multi-core support because some of those patches suck the juice out of my 4 year-old PC. Will my Zebra 2 patches work with Zebra 3?

Oh yeah, when is Zebra 4 coming out?

[Funky40]

edit: if i missed something, and it´s already doable, please enlighten me somebody


i have a special feature request. It´s vs. FX, particularly vs. the Delay

First, my backround:
i´m specialised in creating "live- play" patches in a live play host.
It has nothing to do with typical DAW production work.

Usually i would just use a external Delay post-instrument (same for ANY other FX).
But playing with Zebra3 now, there are sounds, it just feels so intervowen.



So:
Delay has a Mix parameter. Dry-Wet.
My wish: please make it a Send-Return setup.
Just make the knob a plain SEND. Or best, give folks both choices. Make the knob switchable. Or whatever possible.


vs. realtime play Jam usages, incorporating the delay as a "to jam" parameter, does it make a difference like night and day if the Delay is controllable by a SEND parameter.

Now "that" would be nice

(yes, i´m well aware, quasi nobody is doing "that" (very rare vs. HW, i´ve not seen it in SW). )

[Matty686]

MPE Timbre typically maps to CTRL-A for us, so we recommend to set it to CC #74.

We currently do not interpret CCs as bipolar though, which is compatible with the MPE specs even though they encourage bipolar interpretation. We might eventually add this as an option later on.

I can't use it this way it needs to be bipolar I actually decided to use instead of pressure because its means the volume is on by default if its bipolar and assigned to volume currently the synth possibility space is collapsing toward surge xt which has it implemented this way I was going to use release velocity instead of all this but Bitwig took a bug report about release velocity I sent them and actually made the issue worse meaning timbre is now the only option for controlling the synth volume that I am willing to use. as I said earlier my lead instrument is an ocarina and I am too disabled to record with a keyboard #accessibilitystruggles

[pdxindy]

So:
Delay has a Mix parameter. Dry-Wet.
My wish: please make it a Send-Return setup.
Just make the knob a plain SEND. Or best, give folks both choices. Make the knob switchable. Or whatever possible.


vs. realtime play Jam usages, incorporating the delay as a "to jam" parameter, does it make a difference like night and day if the Delay is controllable by a SEND parameter.

You have the different lanes in the FX Grid and they have send knobs.

[pdxindy]

I think part of the disconnect here is expectations. Zebra isn’t designed primarily as a “realistic instrument recreation” synth, and that’s not the problem we're solving with it.

Its strengths are in abstraction, flexibility, and exploring sound structures rather than imitating existing acoustic or electro-mechanical instruments. The spline/vector approach isn’t meant to map directly to “draw this shape → get a violin,” but to give you a very direct way of shaping spectra, motion, and modulation relationships that would be much harder to express in a fixed architecture.

If the main goal is realism or instrument emulation, there are other tools that are a better fit. Zebra is more about creating sounds that don’t already exist, or arriving at results through exploration rather than reproduction.

Zebra 3 is also great at creating organic/natural/acoustic timbres as well. So for me it is great at realistic instrument creation (different from re-creation)

[jooster]

Modal has profile A and B and a blend mode to go between. Why was this not set up similarly to OSC, MSEG with multiple curves (transfer functions) to blend between? It seems a bit odd to me that this UI is different/limiting as compared to OSC, MSEG. And of course, an editor for the frequencies would have been more natural than CSV files (they are easy enough to edit, but it seems a bit unfinished ... beta?)

[jasperdunn]

I just had a good play with the Noise oscillator module, and had no idea it was this deep. I had naively assumed the usual fixed noise patterns, so much power in there! Fantastic

[jasperdunn]

Any tips on how to get more bass out of the Modal synthesis modules?

[jtsterays]

The noise module shape should definitely have a static icon right next to it for visualization.

[Bunte_Panther_OX]

Hello,
i am intrested in building MPE presets.
is it coming in Beta testing bevor release or does it come later on?

Best,
OX

[Urs]

Modal has profile A and B and a blend mode to go between. Why was this not set up similarly to OSC, MSEG with multiple curves (transfer functions) to blend between? It seems a bit odd to me that this UI is different/limiting as compared to OSC, MSEG. And of course, an editor for the frequencies would have been more natural than CSV files (they are easy enough to edit, but it seems a bit unfinished ... beta?)

So the Modal Resonator is designed to quickly capture and bend quasi-realistic materials *intuitively*.

We studied competing implementations such as Chromaphone, Pigments, MSoundFactory and Object, and we wanted to position Zebra 3 on the upper end of sound quality and on the faster end of getting good results. We wanted more flexibility than the more restricted implementations, but also not the tediousness of some of the more open concepts.

Unfortunately, judging from the state for the art, editors for user defined modal partials are either quick, but lacking density, or they are utterly tedious and lacking a fast and intuitive workflow.

Instead, we have developed internal tool chains and workflows that are abundantly nerdy and hard to use - but they allow us to create quality modal profiles that would be very, very hard to achieve by hand with any visual or spreadsheet style editors.

The modal profiles we have added are the result of several months of work. We would not have been able to achieve those with the tool chains present in any of the competing products. Best of all, because they are based on standard .csv files, the set is extensible.

However, Zebra's oscillator can do a very similar thing to what you ask, with all the possible depth, using the curve based editor. You can set distinct partial ratio, gain and decay for hundreds of partial in the Z3 oscillator using just 3 curves in the Additive Renderer with "Curve Spectrum" as Source and "Curve" as Spectral Modifier, and then "Spectral Decay" as OscFX. This is pretty much exactly what you'd be looking at if the Modal Resonator had a curve based editor. This is not exactly intuitive... and blending between two different realistic materials would be, dunno, hours of work? Days?