Now Hive is here, is it RIP Sylenth?

[Urs]

I don't know why, but I can't stop thinking of Sylenth1 as the "Kryptonite" for Urs!

Yes, it's a de-facto free synth that offers almost as much as Hive. Hence it's a lot more popular. And then people use the popularity of a widely pirated software to establish some argument of it superiority over the one that isn't pirated. Which in turn makes the de-facto free synth more popular, which in turn...

Of course it's my Kryptonite. Which is why I'd love to turn discussions onto actual facts (features, audio quality) rather than keep spinning in circles.

Anyhow. We'll redesign Hive's UI. It's gonna look great.

[fluffy_little_something]

My statement was directed towards Hive's user interface concept, not its visual representation. Had you read the whole thread since it was resurrected the other day you'd know that it was already established that I didn't find the looks that great either. But I guess you conveniently omitted that.

What gui concept? The only unusual thing about the gui is the possibility of dragging and dropping modulations. Other than that the gui concept seems pretty straightforward to me, not much different from Sylenth1's.

[Robmobius]

Regarding Hive's gui, I don't think it's great at all, it looks cold and
not like hardware, more like from some Sci-Fi movie.

And?

So, every synth has to look like faux hardware now to give of that 'ikkle cuddly wuddly sound?

Meh... to you deductive reasoning.

[fluffy_little_something]

Yes, it's a de-facto free synth that offers almost as much as Hive. Hence it's a lot more popular. And then people use the popularity of a widely pirated software to establish some argument of it superiority over the one that isn't pirated. Which in turn makes the de-facto free synth more popular, which in turn...

Of course it's my Kryptonite. Which is why I'd love to turn discussions onto actual facts (features, audio quality) rather than keep spinning in circles.

Anyhow. We'll redesign Hive's UI. It's gonna look great.

Odd view. Just because some people use pirated versions, it is de-facto free?!? I don't know the percentages, but why would so many people still try to buy it on the KVR marketplace if they could simply use a free version? Most people are decent people.

[chk071]

I don't know why, but I can't stop thinking of Sylenth1 as the "Kryptonite" for Urs!

Yes, it's a de-facto free synth that offers almost as much as Hive. Hence it's a lot more popular. And then people use the popularity of a widely pirated software to establish some argument of it superiority over the one that isn't pirated. Which in turn makes the de-facto free synth more popular, which in turn...

I don't know why you refer to Sylenth1 as a "de-facto free" synth. Maybe you didn't hear it yet, but they implemented a new copy protection since v3. And i agree with fluffy_little_something here, offering other devs "help" with what you think is a superior to everything copy protection you developed is a bit patronising. At the very least, i wouldn't be surprised to get no reply on that.

Anyway, i have no idea why you have such a strong point on another software, and another dev. Why not concentrate on your own product?

[Urs]

My statement was directed towards Hive's user interface concept, not its visual representation. Had you read the whole thread since it was resurrected the other day you'd know that it was already established that I didn't find the looks that great either. But I guess you conveniently omitted that.

What gui concept? The only unusual thing about the gui is the possibility of dragging and dropping modulations. Other than that the gui concept seems pretty straightforward to me, not much different from Sylenth1's.

Not much different, no. Similar types of controls and stuff - knobs, faders, combo boxes like in the majority of VSTi. But there are some nice details that you might have missed, maybe due to the all-too-flashy visual design.

[fluffy_little_something]

Regarding Hive's gui, I don't think it's great at all, it looks cold and
not like hardware, more like from some Sci-Fi movie.

And?

So, every synth has to look like faux hardware now to give of that 'ikkle cuddly wuddly sound?

Meh... to you deductive reasoning.

No, of course not. But there are certain common aspects of good gui's...

[pdxindy]

Well, because you seem to think that he needs your help. But he surely doesn't.

Urs didn't say that. You are only projecting your own ugly bias onto his statement.

I think you are wrong there.
And what bias? I bought both synths - and sold both...

Bias against Urs...

Urs said he offered his skills at copy protection... which are real, then he said he hopes LD gets some good copy protection... Urs didn't says "his" copy protection, just some good copy protection. There are a variety of things out there.

Maybe LD has good skills at copy protection, or maybe not. If he does, then he has purposefully let Sylenth be easily cracked for years now (which he has the freedom to do and I'm not judging that). For a decade now you can trivially download Sylenth plus all released soundsets. This is one key to its popularity. Every aspiring 'producer' can easily have Sylenth and all soundsets for free... and they do. Obviously the situation works for LD or he would have done something about it years ago. It is also easy to see why other developers such as Urs might wish it were not that way. It's harder to compete with free. But there it is, and things are what they are.

[Urs]

I don't know why, but I can't stop thinking of Sylenth1 as the "Kryptonite" for Urs!

Yes, it's a de-facto free synth that offers almost as much as Hive. Hence it's a lot more popular. And then people use the popularity of a widely pirated software to establish some argument of it superiority over the one that isn't pirated. Which in turn makes the de-facto free synth more popular, which in turn...

I don't know why you refer to Sylenth1 as a "de-facto free" synth. Maybe you didn't hear it yet, but they implemented a new copy protection since v3. And i agree with fluffy_little_something here, offering other devs "help" with what you think is a superior to everything copy protection you developed is a bit patronising. At the very least, i wouldn't be surprised to get no reply on that.

Well, there were a few developers who actually found my help useful.

But no - and that's where you and fluffs are wrong - I never went to Lennar and said "hey I have something better". It was their own users. I just said they didn't approach me (fair enough, nothing wrong with that) and I hope they do the right thing and implement something stronger than what they used to have. If they did, good on them! I hope they did.

You guys really need to learn to read & understand before you punch out such nonsense accusations. It's mind blowing how your bias works against logic.

[chk071]

But no - and that's where you and fluffs are wrong - I never went to Lennar and said "hey I have something better". It was their own users.

Could you link perhaps to the posts of "their users", where those have pointed out that they want a better copy protection? I only read from a very small amount of people who need to run virtual machines that they aren't cool with that kind of copy protection. Lennard wrote this:

It may be worse for the 1% Sylenth1 users who need Hyper-V on the same machine they use Sylenth1 on yes. And I am truly sorry for those.

However, a dongle is worse for at least 75% of Sylenth1 users. And it's either this or that..

So, i really don't know where you're taking it from that the Sylenth1 user base is totally discontent with the copy protection. Either pre- or post-version 3.

[fluffy_little_something]

Well, there were a few developers who actually found my help useful.

But no - and that's where you and fluffs are wrong - I never went to Lennar and said "hey I have something better". It was their own users. I just said they didn't approach me (fair enough, nothing wrong with that) and I hope they do the right thing and implement something stronger than what they used to have. If they did, good on them! I hope they did.

You guys really need to learn to read & understand before you punch out such nonsense accusations. It's mind blowing how your bias works against logic.

Why would he approach you just because some Sylenth1 users wish it had your protection system? Would BMW approach Mercedes if BMW drivers thought Mercedes', say, navigation system was better? Of course not, BMW would either ignore it or develop a better system themselves.

Again, there is no bias on my part, else I would not have bought your synth to begin with. I was actually hoping Hive would do for me exactly what the title suggests, but it didn't really.

[pdxindy]

My statement was directed towards Hive's user interface concept, not its visual representation. Had you read the whole thread since it was resurrected the other day you'd know that it was already established that I didn't find the looks that great either. But I guess you conveniently omitted that.

What gui concept? The only unusual thing about the gui is the possibility of dragging and dropping modulations. Other than that the gui concept seems pretty straightforward to me, not much different from Sylenth1's.

It is a pretty capable feature set fit into a mostly one page design. You have a tab to switch between arp and fx and a tab for second page of the matrix (which could be done away with by getting rid of the extraneous spaceship visuals). You can see all osc's, lfo's, filters and envelopes at once. There is the drag-n-drop modulation which works especially well because all the modules are visible at once. The mod matrix with the second modulator. You can even drag-n-drop to other mod slots and to FX parameters. Module copy/paste and presets. Locking of left and right side but still able to edit independently at the same time.

I don't care for the visual look of Hive and have said so from day one, but the workflow functionality is exceptional. Easiest synth I have used with any sort of complexity. This ends up being a powerful feature in itself.

[pdxindy]

Why would he approach you just because some Sylenth1 users wish it had your protection system? Would BMW approach Mercedes if BMW drivers thought Mercedes', say, navigation system was better? Of course not, BMW would either ignore it or develop a better system themselves.

Actually, competing companies frequently share resources when it suits them both.

[Urs]

Could you link perhaps to the posts of "their users"

I'd have to search for them. It was probably a year ago, around the time they announced V3. There were even two or three people who wrote emails to us, suggesting to approach Lennar (or was it a Reuben at that time?). Can you please take my word on this? Just this once?

Do I have to prove everything that I say with links? Am I that untrustworthy?

[Cyoon]

Could you link perhaps to the posts of "their users", where those have pointed out that they want a better copy protection?

here are two who want the same protection in sylenth. viewtopic.php?p=6143030#p6143030

another one here: viewtopic.php?p=6011859#p6011859

probably more in that last thread, like here: viewtopic.php?p=5862636#p5862636