Massive X or Twin 3

[Alexander_D]

I agree that Pigments sounds not warm and for me not good. It's the reason why I was sold it.
I love Zebra, Diva and Repro... I got Twin2 but don't use it.. don't know. Maybe I need to buy an update to Twin 3? It's about 34 Euros for me for the Black Friday sale... don't know...

[fisherKing]

twin 3's ok, but it's such an outlier for fabfilter. i love their eqs, comps... the R2 reverb. but twin 3 is just ok. massive x, on the other hand is amazing; there's no contest.

[Fannon]

What are you looking for, if you're already happy with Zebra, Diva and Repro? A Wavetable synth?

[ChanceB]

On a desert island you will need something fun and engaging. Go with twin 3, no doubt. It is only subtractive synthesis but hell what a flawless implementation.

Plus, twin 4 will arrive, no doubt. Massive X, I really don't think it will have a sequel. Or at least not a good one.

Simon at NI recently said they have big plans for Massive X. I’d take that with a grain of salt but it’s something at least

[vitocorleone123]

twin 3's ok, but it's such an outlier for fabfilter. i love their eqs, comps... the R2 reverb. but twin 3 is just ok. massive x, on the other hand is amazing; there's no contest.

R2 reverb is below average to my ears - especially for the cost, and Massive X needs another redesign to be competitive (the sound isn’t the issue). Just depends on what the goals are, sonically, between the synths and then which interface you can best withstand.

[Ah_Dziz]

I've not set eyes on twin since the V2 update (I think) but I can't imagine it competing with Massive X unless they went crazy with upgraded features. Twin is a great sounding little synth, but Massive is very much on the same level for quality and way ahead for synthesis features. The one downside is the dumb way it (MX) handles automation.

[kraster]

If it's sound quality then it's no contest.

Massive X all the way. It's near flawless.

It is one of those rare VSTs that has that kind of 3d depth you usually associate with hardware.

Interface wise it's a more convoluted than Twin 3 but it's not that hard to get around it and it's enormously flexible.

[Jac459]

On a desert island you will need something fun and engaging. Go with twin 3, no doubt. It is only subtractive synthesis but hell what a flawless implementation.

Plus, twin 4 will arrive, no doubt. Massive X, I really don't think it will have a sequel. Or at least not a good one.

Simon at NI recently said they have big plans for Massive X. I’d take that with a grain of salt but it’s something at least

Thanks for the info !

[Jac459]

I've not set eyes on twin since the V2 update (I think) but I can't imagine it competing with Massive X unless they went crazy with upgraded features. Twin is a great sounding little synth, but Massive is very much on the same level for quality and way ahead for synthesis features. The one downside is the dumb way it (MX) handles automation.

It is a workflow thing, twin 3 has a very nice workflow and you reallyn see what you are doing. I find it a joy to make sound design with.

My problem with massive X is avenger 2. Avenger 2 has everything massive X has, but better, including the sound.
Twin 3 really differentiate with is approach and workflow.

[Jac459]

twin 3's ok, but it's such an outlier for fabfilter. i love their eqs, comps... the R2 reverb. but twin 3 is just ok. massive x, on the other hand is amazing; there's no contest.

R2 reverb is below average to my ears - especially for the cost, and Massive X needs another redesign to be competitive (the sound isn’t the issue). Just depends on what the goals are, sonically, between the synths and then which interface you can best withstand.

Funny how taste can differ. Of all the reverbs I owe, including VintageVerb, R2 is the one I use the most.

[Ah_Dziz]

I've not set eyes on twin since the V2 update (I think) but I can't imagine it competing with Massive X unless they went crazy with upgraded features. Twin is a great sounding little synth, but Massive is very much on the same level for quality and way ahead for synthesis features. The one downside is the dumb way it (MX) handles automation.

It is a workflow thing, twin 3 has a very nice workflow and you reallyn see what you are doing. I find it a joy to make sound design with.

My problem with massive X is avenger 2. Avenger 2 has everything massive X has, but better, including the sound.
Twin 3 really differentiate with is approach and workflow.

I haven't even checked out avenger. It's mostly that I'm very much not a fan of vengeance. I haven't heard any sounds from avenger that interest me enough to look any further into it.

I already have all the NI stuff and I'm familiar with their style so I was going to end up with MX either way. I don't have much of a need for a workflow that consists of using something as simple as Twin that isn't already covered many times over. I know folks that use it as their go-to "bread and butter" synth which is fine for them and anybody else that wants a very nice simple synth. I just don't think that twin and MX are very comparable when it comes to what sounds can be made with them. There's a huge amount of sound design that MX can do that Twin just doesn't have the DSP to achieve.

I'm guessing the OP is comparing them mostly due to extreme sale prices at this time of year. Otherwise they just aren't similar outside of both being well coded and both being able to do most extremely basic (I don't mean that in a bad way) subtractive sounds well. If the question was about twin vs. avenger, I would have kept my opinion to myself as I don't know/care about avenger.

[fisherKing]

twin 3's ok, but it's such an outlier for fabfilter. i love their eqs, comps... the R2 reverb. but twin 3 is just ok. massive x, on the other hand is amazing; there's no contest.

R2 reverb is below average to my ears - especially for the cost, and Massive X needs another redesign to be competitive (the sound isn’t the issue). Just depends on what the goals are, sonically, between the synths and then which interface you can best withstand.

Funny how taste can differ. Of all the reverbs I owe, including VintageVerb, R2 is the one I use the most.

just anecdotal, but we did a shootout in the studio with several popular reverbs, and R2 was one of the faves. like the forum synth discussions, our needs, our aesthetic, our music can be so different.

great, then, to find the tools we need...

[Jac459]

I've not set eyes on twin since the V2 update (I think) but I can't imagine it competing with Massive X unless they went crazy with upgraded features. Twin is a great sounding little synth, but Massive is very much on the same level for quality and way ahead for synthesis features. The one downside is the dumb way it (MX) handles automation.

It is a workflow thing, twin 3 has a very nice workflow and you reallyn see what you are doing. I find it a joy to make sound design with.

My problem with massive X is avenger 2. Avenger 2 has everything massive X has, but better, including the sound.
Twin 3 really differentiate with is approach and workflow.

I haven't even checked out avenger. It's mostly that I'm very much not a fan of vengeance. I haven't heard any sounds from avenger that interest me enough to look any further into it.

I already have all the NI stuff and I'm familiar with their style so I was going to end up with MX either way. I don't have much of a need for a workflow that consists of using something as simple as Twin that isn't already covered many times over. I know folks that use it as their go-to "bread and butter" synth which is fine for them and anybody else that wants a very nice simple synth. I just don't think that twin and MX are very comparable when it comes to what sounds can be made with them. There's a huge amount of sound design that MX can do that Twin just doesn't have the DSP to achieve.

I'm guessing the OP is comparing them mostly due to extreme sale prices at this time of year. Otherwise they just aren't similar outside of both being well coded and both being able to do most extremely basic (I don't mean that in a bad way) subtractive sounds well. If the question was about twin vs. avenger, I would have kept my opinion to myself as I don't know/care about avenger.

I agree with you on the little similarities of the 2 synths, a part from the fact that they would be new toys and seems to be at same price now.

On avengers 2 and Vengeance, I can't blame you, their marketing is at times horrible and their YouTube videos make me willing to puke.
Then they don't allow demos. That's really a bad move because you get to love avenger when you use it.
A good reference material you can use if you are curious about the synth is the tutorial by Jon Audio, quite good.

Regardless, I have Dune 3, Hive 2, Serum, phase plant, Current, falcon, Spire, Myth and many other similar synths and avenger 2 is my favourite hands down.

[Sinisterbr]

I love the Massive X GUI (it's beautiful and, although not perfect, very easy to navigate for me) and hate the Fabfilter one (it's kinda cold and I don' like the way they deal with modulations). But I know I'm a weirdo, hahah
On sound quality I actually think they're on the same level, but more options in MX.

Therefore, Massive X all the way for me.

[seangm]

Plus, twin 4 will arrive, no doubt. Massive X, I really don't think it will have a sequel. Or at least not a good one.

How will you download Twin 4 on a desert island? The wifi is probably spotty at best.