Alright, Urs, thanks for explaining. That's fair enough of course. Still not makes perfect sense to me, as most probably, you will have the switch on one setting which sounds best to you anyway, especially when making sounds which fit in a certain category, but i guess it wouldn't be a u-he synth without a bit of geekery.Urs wrote:The synth engine switch replaces more than a dozen parameters that would, by them selves, be seen as "esoteric" at best. We concentrated them into three complementary flavours that do make an audible difference, instead of adding 30 more drop downs that leave people scratching their heads.chk071 wrote:As we're already on with the critics, tbh, i've been thinking the same when i read that Hive is going to have 3 switchable sound engines. Seems already a bit too much in the geek department considering the target audience and the simplicity approach. At least i'm wondering who'd really make use of it. In the worst case, people could be puzzled which engine sounds the best now, especially when the differences are "subtle".hakey wrote:What happened to less is more?
We also got the number of parameters down to about, hmm, two thirds (?) of similar synths, without sacrificing flexibility. While we dropped rather unimportant parameters, we also added new ones that let Hive go far beyond other offerings. So, despite a muchly reduced parameter set we managed to put more features onto the table.
Therefore, I'll stand behind "Less is More"
Btw, what's these sound examples everyone's talking about? I guess i missed these... Edit: Got it.
It's always a question whether it handles as good as it looks though. There are GUI's i judged as good on pictures, but they didn't really handle well when really messing with them. I like that it's all laid out on one page though, that's always a big plus for me. Maybe there could be a bit more contrast, i don't know.
