Sytrus vs Rhino [6 years dead thread bumped; go to page 21]

[diverdee]

OK - i'll respond just once - i'm not american - British actually. And now on a positive note - a friend of mine (the mate i mentioned who swears by fruity) bought fruity online a few years ago - anyway his computer basically blew up and for various reasons he wasn't online for a long time - lost all his registration details etc. Anyways i told him to get back online & email imageline & explain his situation etc. & that he would be fine (I had heard imageline are cool with that type of situation) so he did and had his updates sent virtually straight away. First class customer service, and (though I don't use fruity personally) an excellent product. All i'm saying is that if I didn't have that alternative viewpoint I would dismiss imageline due to the negative impression i've gained from lurking around here and reading Gol's posts. Maybe it is a cultural thing - who knows?

[tony tony chopper]

I don't think musicians care about what's inside the box. I think they pick synthesizers based in how fast they can make music with them, or how good their music becomes with them, or how inspired they feel with them.

I think that some do care, because not everyone has the same needs.

As I wrote, those who want to quickly browse a list of impressive presets but never TWEAK them should go for a sampler, and could be happy with Rhino as well.

The same applies for those who want to play realistic instruments, they should go for a sampler because there's no other choice, except the Synful hybrid - not as good as what a (future, hypotetical) good orchestral physical modeller will be, but still better than a sampler.

That leaves those who want to
-craft their own presets from nothing
-tweak the timbre & other parameters of existing presets

Those do/should care of the synthesis method, because they will have to use it, and they know what kind of freedom to expect from samples vs full synthesis.

So, in that last category, if they need to decide between Rhino & Sytrus, they need to compare the synthesis capabilities of both. Knowing that they will be able to tempo-sync EVERY loop preset they will meet, or knowing that they will have more envelopes or filters available should matter to those.

If you do music you know the advantage of fully tweakable presets. An amazing preset is the one a musician should NOT use, because it will be used & heard in too many songs, and a too-recognizable preset is one to stay away from.

[elv]

Well I for one want to thank both Réne and Gol for taking the time to come here and give answered

[smart]

This is the answer I got:

Something similar happened to me (an american) a while ago that really pissed me off, and my reply didn't even appear to be automated, but was the same bullshit that didn't answer my question comming from a support person. I hate that crap

I do agree with your generalization of american customer service. Around here everyone gets what they want buy yelling. I used to work for Cingular, a cellular provider, and it seemed that about 50% of the time if a customer wanted something or was upset, he's just scream his head off and the employees would just give him what he wanted to make him shut up and stop threatening to "talk to the manager".

From what I assume, in France for instance, the guy would just get laughed out of the place for being so rude.

I'm moving

[tony tony chopper]

breaking the spartane and fundamental laws of synthesis

note that my opinion for/against sampling is nothing conservationist nor mystical - I won't be the one to, for ex, defend the usual hardware vs software synthesizers.

It's about freedom in presets. Say you release a synthesizer, while it's a rompler full of recorded choir voices. Someone will try it, and, conclude 'I'm sold' because it sounds impressive (that's in case of an impulsive buy).

Now either he was only looking for an impressive set of limited choir presets, or he was looking for a true synthesizer. If it's the latter case, he will bump on the lack of tweakability, willing to change the tone of the voices, for ex. So, shouldn't he have been warned of the type of synthesis before buying? Shouldn't he be informed on how the sound is generated and what he can expect from that?

[René]

As I wrote, those who want to quickly browse a list of impressive presets but never TWEAK them should go for a sampler, and could be happy with Rhino as well.

Well, samplers come with an extremely limited amount of presets. The contents bundled in most of the major players (HALion, Kontakt, Gigastudio) focus on 'hey, watch how hyperrealistic this sounds' and not in 'artificial' sounds.

I mean, if you buy a sampler you migth get a great sounding Cello, Rhodes, Piano, Trumpet or Xylophone. But they have zero sounds like any of the atmospheric sounds you can get in either Sytrus or Rhino, or ABsynth or z3ta+. None. Nada.

It's about freedom in presets. Say you release a synthesizer, while it's a rompler full of recorded choir voices. Someone will try it, and, conclude 'I'm sold' because it sounds impressive (that's in case of an impulsive buy).

I understand that, but I don't think that's terrible. Things return. I'm sure you know what the Mellotron was, and how it worked. That's not cheating or marketing hype, it's just a different method of providing a tool.

If you do music you know the advantage of fully tweakable presets. An amazing preset is the one a musician should NOT use, because it will be used & heard in too many songs, and a too-recognizable preset is one to stay away from.

Back in the 80's, I made a few bucks making commercial soundbanks for several synths, including the DX7. After you program any synth for a while, you know that no matter how much you tweak every parameter you'll end sounding like something which is already a preset. You start lacking surprise. That applies to every synthesizer with every technology I've seen.

Synthesizers need some way of 'expandability'. Dropping samples into them is a great way, and I wish we'd see others soon.

I don't see how having a sample to FM or RingMod another can be a bad thing at all. I do believe it is a good and powerful thing. But we've been there already.

-René

[Forever Sun]

So, in that last category, if they need to decide between Rhino & Sytrus, they need to compare the synthesis capabilities of both. Knowing that they will be able to tempo-sync EVERY loop preset they will meet, or knowing that they will have more envelopes or filters available should matter to those.

If you do music you know the advantage of fully tweakable presets. An amazing preset is the one a musician should NOT use, because it will be used & heard in too many songs, and a too-recognizable preset is one to stay away from.

I really do not appreciate the line of reasoning here. You are comapring two synths and implying that one (Rhino) is hadicapped in the synthesis department and that a musician will not be able to edit a preset adequately to make it sound original.

This is misleading. You know very well Rhino has all the tools to tweak a preset beyond all recognition.

I want to learn about these synths as much as possible but reading such misleading comments is not helpful.

And on a separate note, I've been making FM sounds from scratch for 15 years. Synthesis isn't alien to me. I love picking an algorithm and working with sine waves from scratch. Love to choose an analogue synth and pick a sawtooth wavefrom to edit. Likwise, I love editing a sample. No matter what the oscillator source, it's what happens after that, which is most important, in my view. And Rhino doesn't dissapoint here.

[Forever Sun]

On a more separate note, it is really satisfying to mix FM with samples. That's why I love SY77. It is gorgeous.
I can use samples here with FM in any which way, mix, inter-modulate, feedback the FM sound through the sample. Great, creative stuff. THIS IS PURE SYNTHESIS.

This is where it's at for me, new synthesis ideas, combining different synthesis methods, etc.

Synths of the calibre of Sytrus and Rhino can do anything. Any neatpicking like 'it's not pure synthesis' or 'you can't edit presets and will sound like everybody else' is rubbish. Pure rubbish.

[tony tony chopper]

I'd really like to hear usable results out of FM with complex samples. It's already too easy to get noise with FM when you get a little away from pure sines.

You are comapring two synths and implying that one (Rhino) is hadicapped in the synthesis department and that a musician will not be able to edit a preset adequately to make it sound original

I'm implying that Rhino is handicapped *compared to Sytrus* as a synthesizer. It's still a synthesizer, better than a lot out there.

And yes, its sample-based presets are less tweakable, proof is that soundbank I don't remember the name of (see other twin thread), about which someone said he wished the sequences were tempo-syncable.

You know very well Rhino has all the tools to tweak a preset beyond all recognition

to tweak a preset, but a sample? Beyond all recognition AND still usable (that is, not noise)?

[René]

I'm implying that Rhino is handicapped *compared to Sytrus* as a synthesizer.

Interesting. What would you consider that would be the 'handicap' of Rhino when compared to Sytrus?

-René

[tony tony chopper]

Interesting. What would you consider that would be the 'handicap' of Rhino when compared to Sytrus?

I wrote a big comparison list in this same thread.

Basically, Sytrus has envelopes available for more features, has a third filter with a serial filter mode, can route oscillators/filters to effects individually, has a unison, and plucked synthesis.

[René]

I see, thanks for the explanation.

In my humble opinion, noteven all items in your list together offer to an experienced sound designer more than the ability to load samples or user waveforms.

I reckon that non-tweakers would have to decide based on how the shipped program banks suit their music, but I'm pretty sure that serious designers will go for that feature. It opens a whole new world of synthesis.


-René

[Big Tick]

You know very well Rhino has all the tools to tweak a preset beyond all recognition

to tweak a preset, but a sample? Beyond all recognition AND still usable (that is, not noise)?

Here's a quick experiment I did with that drumloop sample that offends you so much. Of course a drumloop is not the easiest sample to start with, since it has so much high frequency contents, FM'ing it quickly brings noise in. Still the results are... interesting..
'Tick

[tony tony chopper]

depends.. I like the flanging effect, but is it the FM, a post-flanger?

[Big Tick]

It's 2 octave-detuned versions of the loop
Each octave FM-modulated by a detune sine (pitch +7 and +14 semitones, each sine with different lfo envelopes

The output of this is run through 2 filters with different settings (panned differently)

Each filter has its cutoff modulated by an LFO envelope.

The result is processed through the multicomb and ring mod effects.

The FM part is responsible for the low frequency booming effects.

'Tick