Urs have you ever thought of designing something like Reaktor?

[pdxindy]

I'm...not the right guy to do something that just offers a gazillion of little flip flops, multipliers and shift registers. I think my strength lies elsewhere

+1 I find the level of complexity, features, and creative workflow to be well-balanced in u-he products (especially Zebra IMO)!

Agreed... Zebra is for me the perfect balance of modular and easy/fun to use...

And in its own way, Bazille too... What a creative and powerful sound design tool with remarkable sound quality... and it is 1 page only.

[chilly7]

I'm...not the right guy to do something that just offers a gazillion of little flip flops, multipliers and shift registers. I think my strength lies elsewhere

+1 I find the level of complexity, features, and creative workflow to be well-balanced in u-he products (especially Zebra IMO)!

There are never too many features in musical products. Just do not use them if u want so, but other people might find a use for additionl features.

[V0RT3X]

Great feedback, for me it was just a thought.

No criticism at all intended to anyone, I was merely curious.

Can't wait for Bazille to get finished

[bmrzycki]

I'm...not the right guy to do something that just offers a gazillion of little flip flops, multipliers and shift registers. I think my strength lies elsewhere

+1 I find the level of complexity, features, and creative workflow to be well-balanced in u-he products (especially Zebra IMO)!

There are never too many features in musical products. Just do not use them if u want so, but other people might find a use for additionl features.

Software isn't magic -- every feature has consequences. When writing software of any kind you have to deal with trade-offs in complexity, features, and interfaces between objects/functions. I would definitely disagree with you that it's not as simple as "not using some". There is real-world work that has to go into designing, testing, refining, and supporting every line of code that developers write. Urs and his team are very good developers and I have faith in them to address this in their product design.

[jupiter8]

I'm thus not the right guy to do something that just offers a gazillion of little flip flops, multipliers and shift registers. I think my strength lies elsewhere

Ah c'mon, we needs us sum oversampled analog modeled flip flops and shift registers.

[ksandvik]

Well, even with a high end dual Xeon such a system would be struggling with CPU cycles -- see Urs's posting above.

He seid it's hard work to program right, but he did not say it is impossible.

P.s.
For the good programer the big challenge is always anjoyment

Maybe you should read his posting again...

Now, I'm sure CPUs, especially all these future 48 core systems and so on, will become powerful enough to handle all kind of crazy macro-level modules without the help of pipelining the code. Kind of a shame that each time the CPUs get more powerful, we are asking for more complexity to chew up the cycles.

[ew]

Hmmm... the thing about these environments is that they work on a sample per sample basis. So each module processes one sample for each input and passes the results to the outputs which may then be picked up by following processes.

While this offers ultimate flexibility, it also easily gets complicated to set up and it's hard to compete CPU-wise with processes that are optimised for processing blocks of samples.

This. A prime example is FM4 (in the Reaktor factory library) vs FM8. FM4's only four op, yet eight voices of that will use as much CPU as 32 voices of FM8 (six op) on my machines.

It will be years before there could be something like Diva inside a modular environment... right now the cpu would get totally crushed!

I do not think so... Even modern quade core i7s are pretty powerful today, but when u get something like Apple Mac Pro with Xeons prossesors the thing are even better...

pdxindy's right. Maybe in three or four years, but not any time in the immediate future.

ew

[ThomasHelzle]

I can highly recommend having a look at Usine (http://www.sensomusic.com) if you are after a modular able to load the u-he syths. And you can load it as VST(i) as well and load VSTs inside of it...
Each and every in and output can be accessed with patchcables...

The next version will be Mac and PC, going into Beta soon.

Really amazing system

Cheers,

Tom

[Rimwolf]

Hmmm... the thing about these environments is that they work on a sample per sample basis. So each module processes one sample for each input and passes the results to the outputs which may then be picked up by following processes.

For Pd at least this isn't the case. Pd processes in blocks; the default sample block size is 64, and it's possible to change the block size in subcomponents.

Pd is open source and free, so you can check it out without cutting into your U-He budget. It is indeed at a lower level of componentry than U-He's fine creations, and the UI is, ah, nowhere near as refined.

[ghettosynth]

Hmmm... the thing about these environments is that they work on a sample per sample basis. So each module processes one sample for each input and passes the results to the outputs which may then be picked up by following processes.

For Pd at least this isn't the case. Pd processes in blocks; the default sample block size is 64, and it's possible to change the block size in subcomponents.

Pd is open source and free, so you can check it out without cutting into your U-He budget. It is indeed at a lower level of componentry than U-He's fine creations, and the UI is, ah, nowhere near as refined.

That might be the biggest understatement seen on KVR. Don't hate, I love pd, but there's a picture of it next to fugly in the dictionary. Also if I'm not mistaken, a number of these environments are block based. At any rate, I agree with Urs general assessment. People drool over the potential of these environments but few are able to capitalize on their power. A glance at any of the user libraries will tell you this. I think most users want really great instruments, not the potential to build really great instruments with skills that they do not have. In other words, it's a different market segment.

[ew]

I think most users want really great instruments, not the potential to build really great instruments with skills that they do not have.

Exactly. If it weren't for the user library, Reaktor's user base would be much, much smaller than it is, considering that 90% of Reaktor users don't build their own instruments.

ew

[chilly7]

I can highly recommend having a look at Usine (http://www.sensomusic.com) if you are after a modular able to load the u-he syths. And you can load it as VST(i) as well and load VSTs inside of it...
Each and every in and output can be accessed with patchcables...

The next version will be Mac and PC, going into Beta soon.

Really amazing system

Cheers,

Tom

Thank u, but i have Mac...

[ThomasHelzle]

Yeah, as I wrote, Beta for Mac and PC starts in the beginning of 2013...

[chilly7]

Yeah, as I wrote, Beta for Mac and PC starts in the beginning of 2013...

Thank u