Zebra3 Info

[wilx]

I’ve never had an issue with it but surely the easiest and least cpu intensive way to show all modulation assignments (those assigned within modules and also the modulation matrix) is to have a separate page/tab listing them.

What do you think of the modulation target display on the expanded MSEG page in Zebra 2.8?

This control is our answer to frequent requests for "a way to show me what this LFO/Env/... targets", testing it with the MSEGs. It's being discussed controversially internally as "overengineered", "great stuff", "not necessary" or "not as great as expected". However, we barely have any feedback from people out there.

I've just been looking into this.

My first issue was trying to assign a parameter - vcf cutoff.
This wasn't listed - only modsource1 and modsource2. These seem to be the two assignable controls next to the cutoff knob.
I'm not sure why there are two knobs there that both control cutoff, or what the difference is between using those or using the mod matrix. (I've read the manual and searched this forum).

Secondly - setting the loop region isn't intuitive - I kept trying to drag the grey loop indicator around to set the loop region and it didn't work. The manual helped me out though. Clicking and dragging the loop region indicator would be a good way to do this if possible.

In terms of the mod target display, it's handy to see the targets there and to be able to modify them, but it doesn't really add much visual feedback. The expanded view actually seems a bit laggy and low framerate when the envelope is being highlighted, compared to the smaller view. Could just be the same framerate but a larger size means more 'gaps' in the motion so it looks worse.
Adding/editing points and curves seems pretty well-implemented to me - both on the main editor and the expanded one.

Interestingly, there's a trick in the manual which allows to you visualise the LFO in realtime using modmap. I feel like it would be useful to have the lfo use that visualisation - in the same way, with a grey speck on the orange waveform - without needing to change or resize the current LFO layout. MSEG and Modmap already do this anyway.

Finally, after some more manual reading - the envelope types (quadric, v-slope) are explained and visualised in the manual. For quick reference I'd far prefer they were displayed in the GUI (even as a tab you could expand/hide) - or even more simply, just update the Data Display in the middle with an explanation or visualisation of the different types. Massive Modular skin implements this quite well, and even allows you to modify the v-slope curve from the graphic. Much more intuitive than the way it's handled in Dot Eight.

All suggestions, and all subjective. Worth adding that since I've had the time to really dig in to the manual and vids, I'm even more appreciative of just how powerful and well-made Zebra 2 is. I'm doing so much more from a bare init patch and it's an absolute joy to use.

[Howard]

…rather than a Massive style system where you're looking at the knob for feedback, you'd go looking on the matrix page and see one row for every modulator in a patch. And like Omnisphere, Z3 could even show a visual animation of the speed/position of the modulation to kind of help clue you in as to what you're hearing. Wouldn't be sexy, but could be effective.

Almost exactly what I was thinking recently.
You hear a movement… you see that same movement in the matrix page and immediately know which source and target are involved. The matrix could also be collapsable and sortable like a file browser.

[Urs]

@Wilx Thanks for the comprehensive feedback - nevertheless, hehehe, I was specifically asking about the particular control. Naturally, the target parameter is not visible directly when the whole view is taken by the MSEG, hence not that kind of visual feedback. It's simply not possible to show the VCF module when the MSEG fills the view. This is why we added this list of modulation targets, and we're wondering if people want more of that. They used to say so, and now that it's here, they don't seem to mention it much. Hence the question...

[Urs]

…rather than a Massive style system where you're looking at the knob for feedback, you'd go looking on the matrix page and see one row for every modulator in a patch. And like Omnisphere, Z3 could even show a visual animation of the speed/position of the modulation to kind of help clue you in as to what you're hearing. Wouldn't be sexy, but could be effective.

Almost exactly what I was thinking recently.
You hear a movement… you see that same movement in the matrix page and immediately know which source and target are involved. The matrix could also be collapsable and sortable like a file browser.

For fast modulations anything tiny enough to stuff somewhere (virtual LEDs...) isn't really good enough, due to low UI update rates. I.e. the fastest and thus possibly most apparent modulations are those that are hardly visible while those that slowly change catch all the attention.

There needs to be an oscilloscope style visualisation option. That's the only way to combat screen refresh / UI update rates.

[wilx]

@Wilx Thanks for the comprehensive feedback - nevertheless, hehehe, I was specifically asking about the particular control. Naturally, the target parameter is not visible directly when the whole view is taken by the MSEG, hence not that kind of visual feedback. It's simply not possible to show the VCF module when the MSEG fills the view. This is why we added this list of modulation targets, and we're wondering if people want more of that. They used to say so, and now that it's here, they don't seem to mention it much. Hence the question...

Sorry Urs! - I wasn't expecting to see the VCF module in the expanded view, so that's fine. The way it's implemented makes sense to me. (apart from not seeing 'cutoff' in the list of parameters to modulate). I would expect to click in an empty slot to add a new modulation rather than click 'add' at the bottom, then click again in the empty slot.

I tend to find myself using the non-extended MSEG view as I like seeing the main interface while editing, and I find there's enough space and detail in the smaller view to do the work I need. Would be interesting to hear other users' opinions though. The fact that it's one click to expand or hide that view makes it very convenient to work whichever way is preferred.


Also - it would still be good to know about the assignable control vs mod matrix thing, just in case I've missed a crucial difference there. Any why two assignable knobs for cutoff and not one for cutoff, one for resonance?

[wilx]

…rather than a Massive style system where you're looking at the knob for feedback, you'd go looking on the matrix page and see one row for every modulator in a patch. And like Omnisphere, Z3 could even show a visual animation of the speed/position of the modulation to kind of help clue you in as to what you're hearing. Wouldn't be sexy, but could be effective.

Almost exactly what I was thinking recently.
You hear a movement… you see that same movement in the matrix page and immediately know which source and target are involved. The matrix could also be collapsable and sortable like a file browser.

For fast modulations anything tiny enough to stuff somewhere (virtual LEDs...) isn't really good enough, due to low UI update rates. I.e. the fastest and thus possibly most apparent modulations are those that are hardly visible while those that slowly change catch all the attention.

There needs to be an oscilloscope style visualisation option. That's the only way to combat screen refresh / UI update rates.

For what it's worth, I find the Mod Map visualisation very useful indeed - when it's too fast for the screen refresh rate it doesn't bother me at all, it's mainly just so I can check: Is it moving in the first place? In which direction? If so, is it slow, fast or nuts? All that information at a glance is very handy to have.

[Urs]

Also - it would still be good to know about the assignable control vs mod matrix thing, just in case I've missed a crucial difference there. Any why two assignable knobs for cutoff and not one for cutoff, one for resonance?

Directly assigned modulations (e.g. modulation sections next to the parameter modulated) run at 10+kHz update rate, whereas the more general ModMatrix runs at about 800+Hz. Direct ones are simply hard wired paths which have the advantage of extremely high resolution.

One of the reasons we need to write Zebra3 from scratch is that when certain things were initially designed, other things weren't there yet. So now the parameters directly assigned to Cutoff modulation are called "ModDepth1" and "ModDepth2". Had I know there'd be such a list or something where those parameters were shown out of context, I might have gone for "CutoffMod1" etc. or something...

Likewise, in 2003 I don't remember any synth with Resonance modulation that required high audio rate, or which had any hard wired Resonance modulation. The first time I heard audio rate modulation of Resonance was in Bazille IIRC. It's still not a common thing, whereas Cutoff modulation is. 2 Slots are required to do standard Envelope + ModWheel assigments, so it made sense to add two direct paths.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

…rather than a Massive style system where you're looking at the knob for feedback, you'd go looking on the matrix page and see one row for every modulator in a patch. And like Omnisphere, Z3 could even show a visual animation of the speed/position of the modulation to kind of help clue you in as to what you're hearing. Wouldn't be sexy, but could be effective.

Almost exactly what I was thinking recently.
You hear a movement… you see that same movement in the matrix page and immediately know which source and target are involved. The matrix could also be collapsable and sortable like a file browser.

For fast modulations anything tiny enough to stuff somewhere (virtual LEDs...) isn't really good enough, due to low UI update rates. I.e. the fastest and thus possibly most apparent modulations are those that are hardly visible while those that slowly change catch all the attention.

There needs to be an oscilloscope style visualisation option. That's the only way to combat screen refresh / UI update rates.

For what it's worth, I find the Mod Map visualisation very useful indeed - when it's too fast for the screen refresh rate it doesn't bother me at all, it's mainly just so I can check: Is it moving in the first place? In which direction? If so, is it slow, fast or nuts? All that information at a glance is very handy to have.

This is my take too. Even hardware synths with LED indicators for LFO rates just look like a solid light after a certain speed, and that's well below audio rate. Visually, that tells me "fast LFO" even though I can't make out how fast.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

…rather than a Massive style system where you're looking at the knob for feedback, you'd go looking on the matrix page and see one row for every modulator in a patch. And like Omnisphere, Z3 could even show a visual animation of the speed/position of the modulation to kind of help clue you in as to what you're hearing. Wouldn't be sexy, but could be effective.

Almost exactly what I was thinking recently.
You hear a movement… you see that same movement in the matrix page and immediately know which source and target are involved. The matrix could also be collapsable and sortable like a file browser.

I don't know that any approach would be perfect, especially when you start getting into very fast modulations, but of the various options discussed, I think an expandable/collapsable mod matrix with all assignments would cover most basic user needs in the cleanest manner. To Urs point, maybe an Oscilliscope may be necessary (I'd never use it personally) for fast modulations, and therefore, maybe create a way to link the two views. Example: click the Zoom icon next to each row to open up a view of what the modulation actually looks like. Maybe I've been spending too much time in Omnisphere lately though with zoom icons and list views.

If you do go with a list view, please also sort the items in the view and don't display empty slots for unused parameters. One of the downfalls of the Omnisphere Modulation Zoom/Matrix is that pages 1 and 2 may not have any modulations, but I may have some on page 3. Never want that happen.

[wilx]

Thanks Urs - perfectly explained!

[Urs]

Also - it would still be good to know about the assignable control vs mod matrix thing, just in case I've missed a crucial difference there. Any why two assignable knobs for cutoff and not one for cutoff, one for resonance?

Directly assigned modulations (e.g. modulation sections next to the parameter modulated) run at 10+kHz update rate, whereas the more general ModMatrix runs at about 800+Hz. Direct ones are simply hard wired paths which have the advantage of extremely high resolution.

I need to add, there are different philosophies in different synthesizers. One is the idea that modulation depths are a property of modulations, and thus the depth of an LFO is found near the LFO. I'd call this the source centric approach (Example: Sequential's Mod/PolyMod section). Likewise, another philosophy sees the modulation depth as part of the target parameters, let's call it target centric approach (Example: Roland synths, e.g. Juno 60). It may not seem like much of a difference, but here's one very striking one: The target centric approach allows to put the depth parameter next to multiple targets. It encourages reuse of sources (more knobs...), whereas the source centric approach encourages fewer knobs and thus more simplicity. Now, u-he stuff is not exactly known for its simplicity, so you guess what I favour.

The third approach in this context is neither source centric nor target centric, it's the matrix approach. The matrix approach is the least intuitive because there's no spatial relation between a modulation's source and depth or its target and depth at all. It is however the most flexible approach, only limited in the number of possible connections.

Now, the direct modulations in Zebra are a crossover of target centric approach and matrix approach, in that the modulation depths are obviously assigned to the target, but the source can be freely selected. It's a bit of "best of both worlds", but it can not overcome the spatial separation from modulation source and modulation depth. Hence the frequent request for visualisation.

So why add a ModMatrix at all? - Simply because the ModMatrix can reach almost *any* parameter with a knob. It saves hundreds of knobs on the UI for all the cases which are less common. It can furthermore assign multiple sources to a single target. Yet, it does have various drawbacks (adding complexity, slower update rate).

[wilx]

That's a really interesting insight into the thought/dev process behind it all - thanks. Good to know the knobs are higher res than the matrix assignments too.

Are the Ace/Hive etc updates consuming the Z3 team at the moment? Zebra 3 would be a fantastic Christmas present this year...

[RobGee]

I’ve never had an issue with it but surely the easiest and least cpu intensive way to show all modulation assignments (those assigned within modules and also the modulation matrix) is to have a separate page/tab listing them.

What do you think of the modulation target display on the expanded MSEG page in Zebra 2.8?

This control is our answer to frequent requests for "a way to show me what this LFO/Env/... targets", testing it with the MSEGs. It's being discussed controversially internally as "overengineered", "great stuff", "not necessary" or "not as great as expected". However, we barely have any feedback from people out there.

It's definitely useful to be able to edit the envelope along with all its modulation amounts and destinations all in one screen. Its saves time and improves workflow as I'm not having to switch tabs and screens as much. I would like to have the option of editing the destination parameter value within the editor (eg filter cutoff, osc 1 pitch etc), that way you could edit everything in that one screen (envelope, mod amount, destination, destination value). For me its definitely a step in the right direction, it improves workflow and I wouldn't like to see it removed.

[Howard]

If you do go with a list view, please also sort the items in the view and don't display empty slots for unused parameters. One of the downfalls of the Omnisphere Modulation Zoom/Matrix is that pages 1 and 2 may not have any modulations, but I may have some on page 3. Never want that happen.

+1

[Howard]

What do you think of the modulation target display on the expanded MSEG page in Zebra 2.8? This control is our answer to frequent requests for "a way to show me what this LFO/Env/... targets", testing it with the MSEGs. It's being discussed controversially internally as "overengineered", "great stuff", "not necessary" or "not as great as expected".

I wouldn't miss this feature if it wasn't there. It's an odd implementation anyway, as mod matrix entries don't/can't show the final target. See example image: The first entry is almost decypherable (the MSEG is modulating OSC1 Phase) but the second one isn't. You have to close the expanded view, open the matrix and look, then reopen the MSEG and expand again = 4 clicks.

MSEG mod list.png