Zebra 3 Public Beta 2 Revision 20552

[Urs]

I can't figure out how to decouple these end points.

The editor lets one tie first and last point or last and first point with these icons:

Screenshot 2026-01-24 at 22.37.51.png

This is how the first and last point can have a vertical line, if needed (mostly for when it makes a difference to the morphing algorithm)

[trance_lucent]

Sorry if it was asked/requested already, but it would be great to have A/B/C/D macro parameters as automation targets. At least, in the Logic's automation target list I can't see these parameters.

[Urs]

Sorry if it was asked/requested already, but it would be great to have A/B/C/D macro parameters as automation targets. At least, in the Logic's automation target list I can't see these parameters.

Hehehe, this is pretty much what the past 13 pages are about.

Yes, we're working on it.

[JoeLowery215]

I can't figure out how to decouple these end points.

The editor lets one tie first and last point or last and first point with these icons:

Screenshot 2026-01-24 at 22.37.51.png

This is how the first and last point can have a vertical line, if needed (mostly for when it makes a difference to the morphing algorithm)

Oh wow! Okay thank you. Can you give an example on what morphing algorithm would matter and why?

[Urs]

I can't figure out how to decouple these end points.

The editor lets one tie first and last point or last and first point with these icons:

Screenshot 2026-01-24 at 22.37.51.png

This is how the first and last point can have a vertical line, if needed (mostly for when it makes a difference to the morphing algorithm)

Oh wow! Okay thank you. Can you give an example on what morphing algorithm would matter and why?

Uh... I wrote that code like 3 or 4 years ago... there must have been a reason, but I'm sitting on the sofa on a Saturday night... I'd reckon it makes a difference already when morphing a sawtooth into a triangle.

[Shabdahbriah]

I can't figure out how to decouple these end points.

The editor lets one tie first and last point or last and first point with these icons:

Screenshot 2026-01-24 at 22.37.51.png

This is how the first and last point can have a vertical line, if needed (mostly for when it makes a difference to the morphing algorithm)

That's really clever. Love the (visual) graphical/function clarity.

[jrgillam]

Also here's an argument for 8 instead of 4 macro knobs: The reason sound designers like 4 more because they want to pack more into each knob, to make them really stand out/impressive when you turn them. But to be honest, when you're actually making music, most of these "show off" presets (I dont intent to be mean, coudnt find another word) are often unusable, because they're too impressive and distinct. Also makes sense for preset surfers, they cant program and 4 knobs already look intimidating (some arent even aware of them).

But if you design your own sound, ime some of the best patches are ones that are built around the song, where you have a bunch of automations for various parameters that change overtime throughout the track, instead of letting the modulations do all the work, think virtual instruments libraries like strings where you have CCs for dynamics, expression, vibrato, attack types, release time, legato types/speed, etc... Each knobs have simple assignment, but when all are automated, it's way more expressive than 1 single macro knob.

That's why I think 8 is better, sometimes I just want knob 1 to be cutoff, maybe 2 is decay time, so at softer section it's a pluck but at bigger section it's a sustained sound and so on.
"Well just automate them" - the problem is not all DAWs have non destructive automation like Z3 CLAP + bitwig in the future. So finetuning these automated knobs would be really tedious.

Nice post. Some other synths I’ve tried allow a macro to be a CC/automation control and also a modulation target, which I actually think is really great for “on the fly” sound design in the context of a song or piece. One macro can be drive, another filters, and so on… then you can see what happens if you modulate the macro with an LFO or whatever. It lends itself to experimentation in a way that I think is cool and would love to be able to do in Zebra.

I find it a bit easier to get my head around some of those macro systems in other synths than I ever did with the old XY pads in Zebra2, which were so tedious to set up that I never used them for my own sounds. But they are definitely fun with presets and I can see why people like them. Maybe we could eventually have 8 macros that could map to XY pads. If the macros/XY pads were more useful at the sound design stage it might minimize some of hassle of mapping them to presets down the road, both for u-he/sound designs and for those of us who make our own sounds often.

BTW Urs, fantastic work on some of this new modulation stuff. Being able to swap e.g. Ctrl A for Ctrl C is really really great. Also being able to assign modulations via right click is a big help. Looking forward to how the GUI stuff all comes together but even what’s in this latest beta is a big improvement.

Another little idea I had - sometimes you want to assign multiple targets from the same source via drag and drop - it would be cool if you could hold a modifier key to allow multiple “drops” without having to go back to the source each time.

[jasperdunn]

I've noticed that Osc FX Sync behaves differently from what I'm used to with other synths (hard sync). For example in the RetroSynth plugin built into Logic, the sync sounds smooth and balanced, whereas using sync on the same sounding saw wave in Zebra 3 loses bass and brings in audible artefacts as the waveform changes throughout the sync, it doesn't sound bad, just different, and I'm wondering what makes Zebra's oscillator effects different in this regard to other synths?

Will Zebra support the more traditional hard sync feature?

[exmatproton]

I've noticed that Osc FX Sync behaves differently from what I'm used to with other synths (hard sync). For example in the RetroSynth plugin built into Logic, the sync sounds smooth and balanced, whereas using sync on the same sounding saw wave in Zebra 3 loses bass and brings in audible artefacts as the waveform changes throughout the sync, it doesn't sound bad, just different, and I'm wondering what makes Zebra's oscillator effects different in this regard to other synths?

Will Zebra support the more traditional hard sync feature?

The sync fx is hardsync. As hard as you can get A windowed option is available in a different fx module, if i am not mistaken. Has a different name though (could be wrong though...not at my desk atm) nah...'softsync' or a windowed variant isn't in here

You could make a splined 'hardsync' OSC preset though

[jtsterays]

Could you guys add a 85% zoom option for us 1080p people? 80 is a bit too small and 90 is slightly too big.

[jasperdunn]

The sync fx is hardsync. As hard as you can get 'softsync' or a windowed variant isn't in here

You could make a splined 'hardsync' OSC preset though

Ahh okay I must have gotten the terminology backwards, not sure how feasible it is but it would be really nice to have 'softsync' built-in as an oscillator effect. It's such a classic sound.

[Urs]

Could you guys add a 85% zoom option for us 1080p people? 80 is a bit too small and 90 is slightly too big.

We're changing the UI form factor for a few pixels wider and a few pixels shorter. And bigger fonts.

[Rnaroth]

Urs,
Comparing with Z2's Shapers, I am able to find equivalency for Wedge but I have to also insert Util modules before and after Distortion to get there. Would it be possible to add Input and Output knobs to the Distortion module?

Thanks.

[jasperdunn]

I can see we have Symmetry, are we going to get a Bend oscillator effect too?

[Benamad]

Thanks for the update.
Can you add a third option for the mouse wheel please ?
To hold a key (like command on Mac) allow to move knobs with the MW, otherwise it’ll just scroll.
Because I like to move knobs with mw but sometimes move by accident a knob while I just wanted to scroll.