The "I don't get it" or your 3 overrated synths thread

[grymmjack]

I can never get used to using any of them. No matter how nice the cardboard is painted, and how carefully the Scotch tape is applied. They just yuck me out... big time.

Sorry.

wow there isn't a single one that you like the sound of?

[sdv]

Yes... this is like a "truth serum" indeed!

As far "I just don't get the hype" I'd go with:

1)Wusik: I don't see alot in v2/3 which makes for better sounds than can be achieved in v1. You can get some unique sounds if you spend alot of time in the wavesequencer.

2)Most all SE creations: god... their sound is always SO thin and plain. And what really gets me about SE is that pepole SELL their inventions!! I think about Reaktor, a program which costs 20x as much and ppl give their creations away for free on NI's site.

3)the usual cast of characters... Cam5K, Melohman (cool UI but just boring thin sounds), etc...


Truly there is little new to be done in the world of sounds it seems like.
If someone really wants to push into some new world you'd have to program something into CSound I reckon or really learn Absynth (it really can do some amazing things but NI is such a butthead company).
I'm more interested in FX or building environs (AudioMulch, Usine, etc) these days.

[Hovmod]

...
Therefore it is quite important to try out the synths with patchmaking, in combination with fx etc to get a realistic impression of the gear before buying it.

OK, fair, but here's the deal - some instruments take lots and lots of work to figure out. Let's take everybody's favourite from a couple of years back (and disqualified from this thread because it's free): Crystal. To figure out WHY some of those presets sounded like they did took WEEKS. A demo version should dazzle, and then after you buy you roll up your sleeves and find out why you were dazzled.

Right now I'm in the early stages of infatuation with Tassman, which dazzled me with a couple of presets. I bought it without doubt after a few days of demoing, it was enough for me to know that with the elements in that package it was possible to make those sounds I was hearing.

This is a thread for overrated synths, and I don't have many commercial synths at all, so let me put the Malström on a list of synths I'd 'hmmmm'. I love reason for meny reasons, and before I met Tassman the Subtractor was my number one subtractive, but I think the mal really is an underachiever.

[eduardo_b]

but seriously, what kinds of presets do you guys wish for in a synth?

Maybe we don't know until we hear them? For me, not a sound designer, I really depend on presets to get a sense of the synth. They don't all have to move me, but if a lot of them make me think of useful, appealing aural textures, I'm more likely to consider getting out the credit card.

Am i the only one thinking Blue and Albino sound very dull ?
I've read tons of ppl saying they love them, and i reckon they must make for easy mixes, but there is no ear candy in there IMO... ?

But isn't ear candy part of the problem with how some of us perceive some synths? I find that when I try to actually use ear candy, most of it doesn't fit with anything else. It has to almost be the center of attention by itself to be anything. Might work for background music on a 15 second commercial, but not for songs.

I love this thread. I can't remember one so interesting and helpful. Reading how others react to synths I have used or have tried but didn't purchase is fascinating.

[grymmjack]

Reaktor: I have near every modular synth environment (I think I'm only missing Max/MSP, Tassman, and Moog Modular). Reaktor is the most obtusely designed of the bunch. I simply don't get why people like it so. Every step in programming it could have been better streamlined, performance should be way lighter than it is, and the design of the shell itself (with that irritating floating control panel, which is irritating in that Adobe Photoshop irritating sort of way) is just filled up with clutter. I've heard good music made with Reaktor, and I can sort of see its appeal (especially since the library is so big) but I really think Reaktor is the biggest con in the softsynth market.

what modular synth environment do you favor over it?

i've only tried reaktor and synthedit. i like reaktor cuz the quality is very high on the library it comes with and it's sorta cool how it works, i agree though that the UI is lacking very much and your comparison to photoshop is probably spot on. i can overlook that bit because i'm an adobe photoshop junky myself

which modular enviro do you like most?

[Hewitt Huntwork]

Proteus X2. Latency, CPU. I'll say to anyone considering it what I wish someone had said to me... Don't do it. I wish I could spend the money on something else. It is possible it might be okay if you are planning to run it on a dedicated machine, but I run it on my DAW so I couldn't tell you.

I also want to weigh in and say I appreciate this thread. Hearing WHY someone doesn't like a synth is informative, IMO.

[neverfall]

Are we basing our opinions on the usability of the synths....or is it more in tune with how expensive they are? Just asking because price seems to be an issue with some posters. Reaktor, Wusikstation, and many others could cost $25, and I still wouldn't use them.I just base my opinion on how inspiring the sounds/library/GUI/workflow are.


I've seen Atmosphere posted on here twice...and although Kontakt isn't a synth it should be included in "all of Native Instruments stuff".


I wouldn't have expected to see any Spectrasonics plugs in this thread because quite frankly their plugs REALLY ARE WORTH THE HYPE. I don't even worry about why else uses Atmosphere because half the time I use it I'm mangling sounds with Camelspace's effects and gating. Oh and Kontakt? Well if that isn't the "best" sampler on the market then tell me what is?


P.S. This thread makes me feel so much better about not giving Zebra and Albino the time of day.

[JerGoertz]

If they didn't, I wish they would have. Would be nice to hear in action what's so great about the new options.

Every synth on the market can list a bunch of features which make it new, revolutionary, and groundbreaking. But it's the sonic result that matters.

I agree. And I have to say that I wasn't that impressed with Aby3 presets either, but then I make ALL my patches from scratch anyway.

To be fair to the sound designers, I think many of the newer features have been used in a way that they just don't stick out in the sounds. Like someone else mentioned, as soon as a synth is getting established and being loved for its special character, one may not leave that path. It's when you're programming yourself that you come to appreciate these features and you will find ways that were impossible to go before.

FWIW: At a time when Aby3 already was there, I made some patches for a friend who was still on v2 - so I had to use that. Often I had to look for workarounds and "waste" more modules for something particular than I would have had to use in v3 - and still couldn't get the same result.

werner

Okay, fair enough. I stuck with programming 2 even when I have 3 and 4, so I haven't tried the new features in detail.

[aciddose]

i think the problem is just that people expect to be totally blown away by stuff, but stuff is so good these days you cant really be blown away by it so easilly anymore. since stuff gets better every day in small steps, its really rare that you'll ever see something comming out a full step ahead of stuff you've already seen. it'll always be more like 1/8th step, 1/16th step.. and over time as we have better systems, better codebases and distribution of knowledge, more experianced individuals working on software, the steps taken will get smaller and smaller.

i have a few things i could pull out that might make people say wow, but nothing related to just software synthesizers. if i pull them out now though, they'll be so much less amazing than they will be if i wait and quietly develop them behind the scenes.

i think the last time i was ever really amazed was when i first used analog synths as a kid. a few years after that it wasnt too amazing anymore. if you want to get that back, try dropping software for a while and buy yourself something like an ms-10, or sh-09, both you can get for under $250, typically. if you have more cash, you can experiment with other stuff, but try to avoid the trendy stuff, it honestly is generally the most boring - not always just due to the fact it's already well known either.

it really is just a complaint about how your toys dont seem so great anymore though.. that is what music is all about, playing around. instruments are toys no matter how complex or expensive they are. its like "wah, my hotwheels aint hot no more...". maybe we all need something else to do? :P

[grymmjack]

1. Massive - terrible presets, "massive" CPU usage - no, thanks
2. FM8 - is there anything that justifies upgrading from FM7, and getting used to a different GUI? I dont see it
3. Reaktor - I would not pay that much to have to build synths on my own

In general I find all VSTS overrated that claim to have anything (sounds, synthesis types) included - I more and more enjoy using good "one-trick-ponies"

2. yes- a great arp, morph square, koresounds (plus fm presets packs 1 and 2 + 127 or so new ones), more effects, better UI (this can't be denied - it's miles easier to program), and high quality mode.

3. you can also just use the ones other people have built, and i was a skeptic myself before i got into it a bit more. the libs that ship with R5 are awesome, include wicked classics, and tons of great effects/instruments that cover nearly all the range of synthesis and sound design. additionally there are thousands of ensembles in the user library. how many are good? well that depends on what ya need and what you think, but i've found several great user ensembles that deserve to be in the commercial library IMO.

3b. agree it is daunting, but once you jump the 'i'm too lazy to learn something new' hurdle, and get in and even slightly dirty your hands, reaktor starts becoming more and more useful.

3c. show me /any/ vst outside of reaktor that can do what skrewell does

[seamoss]

i think the problem is just that people expect to be totally blown away by stuff, but stuff is so good these days you cant really be blown away by it so easilly anymore. since stuff gets better every day in small steps, its really rare that you'll ever see something comming out a full step ahead of stuff you've already seen. it'll always be more like 1/8th step, 1/16th step.. and over time as we have better systems, better codebases and distribution of knowledge, more experianced individuals working on software, the steps taken will get smaller and smaller.

i have a few things i could pull out that might make people say wow, but nothing related to just software synthesizers. if i pull them out now though, they'll be so much less amazing than they will be if i wait and quietly develop them behind the scenes.

i think the last time i was ever really amazed was when i first used analog synths as a kid. a few years after that it wasnt too amazing anymore. if you want to get that back, try dropping software for a while and buy yourself something like an ms-10, or sh-09, both you can get for under $250, typically. if you have more cash, you can experiment with other stuff, but try to avoid the trendy stuff, it honestly is generally the most boring - not always just due to the fact it's already well known either.

it really is just a complaint about how your toys dont seem so great anymore though.. that is what music is all about, playing around. instruments are toys no matter how complex or expensive they are. its like "wah, my hotwheels aint hot no more...". maybe we all need something else to do?

agree 100%

[grymmjack]

2. FM8 - is there anything that justifies upgrading from FM7, and getting used to a different GUI? I dont see it

Several things, IMHO: 1. New, usable multi FX. 2. The browser system makes finding any sound a breeze. 3. FM8 now includes all the prior extra FM7 soundbanks, plus some great new presets (I forget the exact number, but it ships with a ton of presets). 4. General usability improvements. 5. The GUI is actually much easier to navigate and makes programming very simple (again, IMHO).

I was a moderate FM7 user, but FM8 is now my top go-to instrument.

Note that Absynth 4 has many of the same improvements with browser and GUI, but I tend to agree with most of the posters above. Abby just doesn't seem to give me anything USEABLE.

-B

+1 on FM8. i haven't gotten into absynth enough yet to comment but i will say it sounds very beautiful what little i have dabbled in it.

i think the point is reached at some time that yes you do get suckered a bit. komplete4, whoever buys it likely owns other stuff too that overlap with what komplete4 offers, but you cannot blame NI for giving a robust package that attempts to be as 'complete' as possible.

like quite a few people have written things like 'it's too complicated' or 'it's too hard to use', just because something is difficult for a person at one point in their evolving education/experience as it relates to sounds and programming synths, doesn't mean that the stuff is bad

[sc_a]

Proteus X2. Latency, CPU. I'll say to anyone considering it what I wish someone had said to me... Don't do it.

I have Proteus LE vst whisch I have with my Soundcard. So it is not Wise to upgrade? I like to get some more libraries. X2 really so bad?

[mellotronaut]

...
Therefore it is quite important to try out the synths with patchmaking, in combination with fx etc to get a realistic impression of the gear before buying it.

OK, fair, but here's the deal - some instruments take lots and lots of work to figure out. Let's take everybody's favourite from a couple of years back (and disqualified from this thread because it's free): Crystal. To figure out WHY some of those presets sounded like they did took WEEKS. A demo version should dazzle, and then after you buy you roll up your sleeves and find out why you were dazzled.

Right now I'm in the early stages of infatuation with Tassman, which dazzled me with a couple of presets. I bought it without doubt after a few days of demoing, it was enough for me to know that with the elements in that package it was possible to make those sounds I was hearing.

This is a thread for overrated synths, and I don't have many commercial synths at all, so let me put the Malström on a list of synths I'd 'hmmmm'. I love reason for meny reasons, and before I met Tassman the Subtractor was my number one subtractive, but I think the mal really is an underachiever.

Yes, it needs time to check out a synth and Crystal is a tricky one (and one of the best freebies till now, though it's one of the first complex vstis available).
I've tried 13 months Zebra (incl. Zebralette) and now i buy it, because i'm quite sure of it's quality for me and my likes. I tried Tassman (i have this Keys-edition) and my own patches were always crap; so i haven't bought the big one. I do it always like this. With Reason it was the same: i tried and after a while i bought it. Malstroem is my workhorse. I know what to do with this guy even when i sleep, Subtractor is far less inspiring, but that's a question of likes.
I think, people should wait a while, try out the stuff and then decide, what's worth the money for their likes and needs. I would never buy anything, because a mag or many people tell, it's the newest blow-away-thingie.

[shamann]

what modular synth environment do you favor over it?

i've only tried reaktor and synthedit. i like reaktor cuz the quality is very high on the library it comes with and it's sorta cool how it works, i agree though that the UI is lacking very much and your comparison to photoshop is probably spot on. i can overlook that bit because i'm an adobe photoshop junky myself

which modular enviro do you like most?

I prefer modulars that allow you to build stuff on the fly very easily. My favourites would be Vaz Modular and Bidule. They both have flaws, but they really lend themselves to just opening them up and very quickly constructing bits into the sound you want. You can build really complex structures in each, but in many cases there's no need, just get the bits you need and string them up. I even like Synthedit over Reaktor in that sense (I like Reaktor over SE in other ways mind you), as if you know exactly what you want, you can just dive right in and very quickly have a result (for example, I've gone in to SE and made stuff like a step sequenced panning effect, which worked exactly as I wanted it to, in under 10 minutes).

For making music, modulars don't need to be polished for me, they need to be handy. Reaktor has so far not proven handy for me. It's one of those things that requires you to roll up your sleeves and plan, requires a lot of steps to get even the basics working. It's great for set-piece kind of things, essentially what fill the bulk of the user library (just look at how many when turned on make the music of its creator), but it isn't one of those "now I need a filter that's modulated like this" on-the fly tools.

My interest in fiddling about is really slim these days, and if I am going to do that, I'd rather focus the fiddling on the music. Similarly, I find pure data and Synthmaker to be disappointing, as neither is designed to have immediate utility, they are designed to make fully formed set-pieces (well, pd kind of does have immediate utility, in its own hostile-to-the-world sort of way).