Zebra3 Info

[G-Roove]

I would love to have an easy way to use MSEG like a StepSeq

That's something I have in mind, but both of these examples are rather basic. I was thinking more along the lines of CabelGuys' o—o tool combined with a Y-axis constraint which works on *every* segment, not just horizontal ones. That's important because some of the greatest step sequences are made up from segments which are not all square.

I'm also going to try a curve->steps transform, and a curve stencil tool. I don't think we'll have a grouping feature though, that'd be a tad overkill.

Even better

[Urs]

Sounds awesome. Ive been personally toying with the idea alot about FM-izing an existing sound, i dont know how possible that is (I have one idea for resynthesis but its pretty involved and probably requires a full 6 operator setup or more) but would be cool to have for example an osc effect that does FM-ize. Another thing about FM, the easy page in FM8 is pretty amazing, would be nice to have some macro control over FM oscs, but i guess it would be a cross module thing, might not fit the z3 paradigm, i guess it could be manually built into a patch though.

Zebra has the mother of all macro controls, the XYs... they need to be set up though. I hope to be able to add more automatic setup functions for this though...

Some of Zebra's osc FX do FM-style operations, such as "Scramble" which does Feedback-FM. But because of the granular approach in Zebra's oscillators, it sounds considerably different at extreme settings.

[pdxindy]

Sounds awesome. Ive been personally toying with the idea alot about FM-izing an existing sound, i dont know how possible that is (I have one idea for resynthesis but its pretty involved and probably requires a full 6 operator setup or more) but would be cool to have for example an osc effect that does FM-ize. Another thing about FM, the easy page in FM8 is pretty amazing, would be nice to have some macro control over FM oscs, but i guess it would be a cross module thing, might not fit the z3 paradigm, i guess it could be manually built into a patch though.

Zebra has the mother of all macro controls, the XYs... they need to be set up though. I hope to be able to add more automatic setup functions for this though...

I actually find the XY's limited for a few reasons... because you cannot set the modulator range across the X or Y. Parameter range can be set, but if I want cutoff to go from 44 to 58 across the X range of -100 to -20, you cannot do that. It is always spread across the whole X or Y axis. Also no curve adjustment.

There is also no fine control... just integers and sometimes it is too crude.

Also, the X/Y's cannot themselves be modulated.

I used to try and use them, but haven't touched them in years because too often I bump up against these limitations. I always just use regular modulation which offers more control and which does not box me into a corner.

[Cinebient]

The mother off all macros are still snapshot morphings for me.
The kind of how it works in Alchemy is still king for me.
4 XY pads just make sense on a touch screen for me.

[Hanz Meyzer]

Hey urs, is there a beta of Zebra 2.8 available?

[EvilDragon]

Not an up-to-date one, no. The new preset browser testing takes priority, so that Zebra can have it

[jme-audio]

The XY-Pads are great on its own, but I don't see them as a replacement for regular one-knob-macros, they're just an alternate thing. Often I just want to control one virtual parameter (that is linked to multiple targets) and then I feel that XY-Pads are not the right tool - because in that case I don't want to record two parameters. That is a bit like if your pizza dealer would only allow you to buy at least two pizzas, you would not do that (I hope).
As the Performer page is so extremly sparse looking, I think it will be very welcome if you would add 8 Macro knobs to it too.

[Urs]

The mother off all macros are still snapshot morphings for me.
The kind of how it works in Alchemy is still king for me.
4 XY pads just make sense on a touch screen for me.

Snapshot morphing is just 2 dimensions. N macro controls/axises have N dimensions.

I actually find the XY's limited for a few reasons... because you cannot set the modulator range across the X or Y. Parameter range can be set, but if I want cutoff to go from 44 to 58 across the X range of -100 to -20, you cannot do that. It is always spread across the whole X or Y axis. Also no curve adjustment.

There is also no fine control... just integers and sometimes it is too crude.

Fine tune is coming in 2.8, and we're also offering them as modulation sources (currently only in ZhZ 2.8 I think).

Curves may happen in Z3, but I have to see how that pans out before I commit.

The XY-Pads are great on its own, but I don't see them as a replacement for regular 1-knob-macros, they're just an alternate thing. Often I just want to control one virtual parameter (that is linked to multiple targets) and then I feel that XY-Pads are not the right tool.
As the Performer page is so extremly sparse looking, I think it will be very welcome if you would add 8 Macro knobs to it too.

New Perform page (Z2.8 ) is not sparse anymore. I think adding extra macro knobs adds too much extra work. But we might give user the choice to switch between XY and knobs.

[#rob]

The XY-Pads are great on its own, but I don't see them as a replacement for regular 1-knob-macros, they're just an alternate thing. Often I just want to control one virtual parameter (that is linked to multiple targets) and then I feel that XY-Pads are not the right tool - because in that case I don't want to record two parameters.
As the Performer page is so extremly sparse looking, I think it will be very welcome if you would add 8 Macro knobs to it too.

Then just use the XY tab at the bottom of the interface? 8 macro knobs right there, individually and independently controllable?

[jme-audio]

Then just use the XY tab at the bottom of the interface? 8 macro knobs right there, individually and independently controllable?

Thank you, Rob! I forgot about this. That works for now.
Still, incorporating an optional knob-display-mode into the perform-view would result in better integration and would be more self-explanatory too (as the bottom-settings don't feature the user definable labels).

[analogo13]

Yes, 2.8 is going in a more polished direction, while Zebra 3.0 is a lot about improving the waveform / envelope editing features.

Had to dig through my memory, then YouTube, to find it.



I knew I didn't dream it!

Finally a wonderful Zebra 2.8 GUI!
The current Zebra GUI is one of the ugliest of all professional plugins ever..

Hey urs, is there a beta of Zebra 2.8 available?

I'm also very interested, because I can´t wait anymore!
Is this possible for license holders, Urs??

[Urs]

Same problem as Repro: The new preset browser may still cause crashes (even if it's just searchable and no tags embedded). As long as that is the case, there won't be any public beta testing. I do however expect internal testing fairly soon.

[analogo13]

Same problem as Repro: The new preset browser may still cause crashes (even if it's just searchable and no tags embedded). As long as that is the case, there won't be any public beta testing. I do however expect internal testing fairly soon.

Please inform us asap, if a stable Zebra 2.8 beta version is available..
Many thanks, Urs!

[Urs]

Please inform us asap, if a stable Zebra 2.8 beta version is available..
Many thanks, Urs!

Absolutely, can't wait to get this out as well!

[analogo13]

Please inform us asap, if a stable Zebra 2.8 beta version is available..
Many thanks, Urs!

Absolutely, can't wait to get this out as well!

Fantastic!! Hopefully soon...