Syntronik [update March 2018: New T-03 Bonus Content & 4-for-1 bass synth promo] available

[ShawnG]

if the samples are used as I understand them to be, as oscillator sounds only, with the intention of using the included modelled filters, LFO's and envelopes to fully sculpt a sound, then this product is a synthesizer.

If this product includes samples which are recorded as fully sculpted useable sounds from the original synth; and the filters, envelopes and LFO's are only included to tweak an already produced sound, then this product is a Rompler.

whether this is "full featured" or not does not matter. It's either a synth or it isn't. The word "Rompler" gets thrown around a ton on this site, mostly as a term of derision for a product that person doesn't respect. I've heard Kontakt and Omnisphere being called Romplers on here by various people at various times. If you want to be really frigging technical, you wouldn't be able to call anything PC based a rompler, since the samples are stored either on rewriteable hard drives or SSD's and not on ROM chips imbedded in hardware.

[Dewdman42]

there is some more of your speculation. Just sayin'... The final price for this without jam points or crossgrade or early discount, is not actually that cheap so your argument there is not logical.

I do agree, a more sophisticated mod matrix on this would have made this considerably better. And omnisphere does have that. Agreed. is that your definition of synthesis then..it must have a mod matrix to be considered a "synthesizer"?

what I see here on this thread is a pointless religious war about whether this is worthy of being called a "synthesizer" or not, and I think that is just ridiculous. Yes it is a synthesizer. Some of you feel it should not be allowed to have that label because its not up to your standards of what a synthesizer is capable of or how you think a synthesizer needs to be architected in order to be called a synthesizer...mind you..none of you have used it yet, you're basing that opinion on screenshots and speculation about what will be possible with it or how you assume that it works under the covers. Because it does not meet your opinion of what should be included in synthesis, you are labeling it a rompler. Whoo hoo, good for you, definitely don't buy it.

Lots of so called "synthesizers", by the way, use sampled wave forms, wavetables and other manner of oscillation. This will not be the first synthesizer to use sampled waveforms as the starting point of synthesis. what makes this one a little confusing to many is that they are using samples from a collection of classic analog synths, modeled filters from the same classic synths, and a GUI that looks like the originals. So.. apparently this is causing a complete short circuit for people that think if the GUI looks like the original and it has the same filters and my god..the osc's are sampled too...then it must be programmable exactly like the original or else BLASPHEMY..its an imposter...its a rompler! Burn it....

kind of funny really. I think this is going to make some great sound with plenty of creative potential to program a vast array of sounds out of it that have an analog synth spirit to them. This will not be a preset player or a simple rompler... But hey...we shall see... I do agree though, if the synth engine it does have, had just a few more features like mod routing and perhaps a few more envelope features...it wouldn't take much...it would be an even bigger monster. No it would not be authentically emulating these classic synths...but who cares, there are plenty of plugins out already that do that well..

[ghettosynth]

where do you get your information that its the "sampletank" engine?

Dewd, Ghetto can be a little too straight forward for some folks so let me take a stab at this.

Thanks man, I think that's the nicest way anyone has ever put it on KVR.

Look, rompler isn't a dirty word, it has meaning here and that meaning applies. Whether the samples are stored in ROM is a pedantic point, the term still has value in the sense that it is, for all intents and purposes, the same basic synthesis technology.

So, yes, pretty much all of UVI products are romplers, as are all of IKM's synth products, AFAIK. No Kontakt isn't a rompler, but, many, frankly, most of the products that you buy for it are.

It matters from a "what can you do with this" technological point of view. Really, the same limitations mostly apply to Kontakt as well, except, you can at least build your own product with it that includes your own samples and a pretty damned flexible processing and fx section.

[ShawnG]

Rompler isn't a dirty word if you are describing a rompler. It is one if you are trying to call something that isn't a rompler a rompler. rompler isn't a synthesis technique either. romplers, subtractive synths, sample based synths, and wavetable synths all use the same subtractive synth technique to make their sounds. What makes a Rompler a rompler is that the samples can be viably used as a sound in their own right without further processing, and that the available synth controls are only used to tweak a sound slightly. (and if you are comparing to a sampler, whether you can load your own samples)

as I said, if these samples are only oscillator samples, and the means of making your sounds are by using the included filters and envelopes, this is a sample based synth. If you want to take exception to people calling this an emulation that's a legit concern, but it's still a synth.

[ShawnG]

as an aside, here's a (rhetorical) challenge. try to describe the following terms accurately vis-a-vis today's music production lexicon WITHOUT squirming!

DAW

Sequencer

Sampler

Rompler

Host

Is Cubase a better Sampler than Kontakt? (laughs evilly)

[Terrafractyl]

if the samples are used as I understand them to be, as oscillator sounds only, with the intention of using the included modelled filters, LFO's and envelopes to fully sculpt a sound, then this product is a synthesizer.

hang on.. therein lief the beef... to fully sculpt a sound?
Well for sure you wont be able to do that with these... with the onboard LFO you can modulate just 3 things.
3 things!
I don't have the stats on hand, but pretty much everything I consider a synthesizer has a lot more modulatable parameters than that. but I never got into minimoogs, so there is that.
But this is still def a Rompler in my book too.

Personally I like it when my synthesizers actually synthesize something.

and yes I would consider Cubase a much better sampler than Kontakt! Why it can even sample things!

[ShawnG]

so the original hardware minimoog is not a synth then? the Mopho? modulation depth has nothing to do with whether something is a synth.

[Terrafractyl]

no they are, cause they are actually synthesizing! I wasn't even talking about modulation Depth!

I don't know where you got that from, I was just pointing out that when you said 'it can fully sculpt a sound, so its a synth'
I completely disagree.
Also On a lot of these analog synths being emulated the LFO can go ridiculously fast, modulate something and still sound totally awesome.
I don't have to try the demo to know that these will not do that.

[ShawnG]

well, now you're downtalking the likes of Alchemy, Omnisphere, Linplug's Crx4...

so it can either make it's own sound and be simple, or playback samples and be really complex, but nothing in between?

and when I said modulation depth I guess I meant "depth of modulation options" sorry

[Terrafractyl]

I think your just arguing for the sake of it. but people like to do that!

to make it simple I just think that this fits all my criteria for being a rompler.
I don't have many.

Sample playback. check!
Simple modulation , so simple its almost to the point of no modulation. check!

rompler!

Ok 've had enough, Ive wasted more time today on Ik than I have for 10 years, I don't know why I broke that habit

[ShawnG]

no they are, cause they are actually synthesizing! I wasn't even talking about modulation Depth!

I don't know where you got that from, I was just pointing out that when you said 'it can fully sculpt a sound, so its a synth'
I completely disagree.
Also On a lot of these analog synths being emulated the LFO can go ridiculously fast, modulate something and still sound totally awesome.
I don't have to try the demo to know that these will not do that.

so? that just means that it isn't an emulation, not that it isn't a synth.

[ghettosynth]

Rompler isn't a dirty word if you are describing a rompler. It is one if you are trying to call something that isn't a rompler a rompler. rompler isn't a synthesis technique either. romplers, subtractive synths, sample based synths, and wavetable synths all use the same subtractive synth technique to make their sounds. What makes a Rompler a rompler is that the samples can be viably used as a sound in their own right without further processing, and that the available synth controls are only used to tweak a sound slightly. (and if you are comparing to a sampler, whether you can load your own samples)

Nonsense, that definition of a rompler doesn't pan out for the actual things that we call romplers. I own multiple of them and have for decades. I believe that I've already mentioned that the JD-800 is still at the heart of my hardware studio and your understanding of a rompler is completely flawed even for factory patches. Romplers often use extensive modification of the sample via envelopes, pitch modulation, key-tracking with respect to pitch, etc. Many of the JD-800 factory patches use various samples in this way.

When you play samples back in the classic way and use that as your sound source, and here I'm not talking about proper wavetable synths or digital synths like the DW8000 that use single cycle waveforms in rom, then there are implicit technical limitations and that's what makes the term "rompler" useful. If you can change the samples we tend to call that a sampling engine, no matter how limited, and if you can't it's a rompler.

Nobody is saying that the definitions are perfect, that's pedantic nonsense. It's useful because it defines very similar and important technical limitations that are a byproduct of using looping samples as your main sound source.

So call it whatever you want, it makes no difference, those of us who are calling it a rompler understand what that means in this sense and aren't going to use a different term because someone's offended.

[ShawnG]

I'm not offended in the least. wouldn't call the JD-800 a rompler either, but at least the really pedantic definition is covered with that one

I think Rompler is a perfectly viable term to describe Sampletank, (although it should be said, you can load your own samples into sampletank, not that anyone does really) but not for this. it's like Halion Sonic. it's a rompler at heart, but load up the auram or voltage or trium modules, it's a synth.

[ghettosynth]

I'm not offended in the least. wouldn't call the JD-800 a rompler either, but at least the really pedantic definition is covered with that one

I think Rompler is a perfectly viable term to describe Sampletank, (although it should be said, you can load your own samples into sampletank, not that anyone does really) but not for this. it's like Halion Sonic. it's a rompler at heart, but load up the auram or voltage or trium modules, it's a synth.

I'm not making this distinction between rompler and synthesizer, I've said this several times. Most romplers are also synthesizers, it's just that their romplery nature limits their ability to synthesize as compared to products that properly leverage modeled oscillators. Moreover, the key element here, and again, this has been discussed, is that even if you implement those features in some particular way, it's not going to sound the same as either the analog variant or a modeled counterpart. Rompler is a useful distinction here. It identifies that the sound sources are complex samples of analog synths.

The fact that it's a rompler is not even my major criticism of the product, although, it's generally something that I'm not interested in when it comes to samples of analog synths. I'm not going to repeat myself, I've talked about where I think romplers provide a genuine advantage in a synthesizer. What I think is weak is how many limitations there are in the rompler engine given the depth of the synthesizers that it's trying to capture.

This is round 2 of this silly discussion, it's all been stated before if people would just take the time to read the thread.

[wagtunes]

Look guys, here's Peter's own words that he himself has posted here several times.

This is a collection of classic and iconic synthesizer sounds with a carefully-crafted easy-to-use interface. It is not intended for someone who wants to create infinite synthesizer sounds from scratch. We have all the parameters in the world that we could expose if we wanted to, but it would make the interface a lot more difficult to use and generally undesirable for most people. We have chosen the provide the most popular controls so users can edit our sounds quickly and easily. But (again) this is not the product for someone that wants a total control synthesizer with a mod matrix, etc.

Take this to mean whatever you want it to mean. I take it simply as, if I am looking for a traditional synthesizer in every sense of the word, I am NOT going to be happy with this product because it is going to be limited as far as what I can do with it. Those are Peter's very own words, not mine.

Now, if I'm looking for a product based solely on sound, then there is no question this is a quality product. I liked what I heard.

But I want to be able to do what I can do with Synthmaster One where I can take a simple sine wave and make it sound nothing like a sine wave. I can't do that with this product. I can maybe filter that sine wave and maybe do a few other simple things, but it's still going to sound like a sine wave. If I want a different sounding wave, I'll need to load a different sounding wave.

That's all I'm saying. That's all anybody here is saying who is calling this something other than a full featured synthesizer. That's why they're using the term rompler. It's not meant as a derogatory statement. It's just a more accurate one than lumping this thing in with every other synth where I can make a sine wave sound like Swiss cheese.

If you can't understand that then I don't know what else I can say to make you understand that.

Again, read Peter's own words above.