Sylenth1 teaser on Facebook

[Ruben(LD)]

... ? That's just your personal assumption and totally incorrect. Lennard (yes...Lennard) didn't even hear of Hive until the past few weeks. I can assure you he has respect for Urs, but he's in no way the great inspirer for Lennard to start programming again.

Right, we'll just call it a big coincidence then.

Sylenth1 was programmed 8 years ago. In meanwhile, a dozen "Sylenth1-killers" came into play...

[Waza]

so will it play nice with yosemite and logic Pro X.

[tehlord]

... ? That's just your personal assumption and totally incorrect. Lennard (yes...Lennard) didn't even hear of Hive until the past few weeks. I can assure you he has respect for Urs, but he's in no way the great inspirer for Lennard to start programming again.

Right, we'll just call it a big coincidence then.

Sylenth1 was programmed 8 years ago. In meanwhile, a dozen "Sylenth1-killers" came into play...

[Kriminal]

... ? That's just your personal assumption and totally incorrect. Lennard (yes...Lennard) didn't even hear of Hive until the past few weeks. I can assure you he has respect for Urs, but he's in no way the great inspirer for Lennard to start programming again.

Right, we'll just call it a big coincidence then.

Sylenth1 was programmed 8 years ago. In meanwhile, a dozen "Sylenth1-killers" came into play...

its a basic subtractive synth....not hard to beat really.

[fluffy_little_something]

its a basic subtractive synth....not hard to beat really.

Why do people keep saying those things? You seem to think a synth is basic as soon as it is subtractive only. Charlatan is a basic subtractive synth in my view...

[samsam]

its a basic subtractive synth....not hard to beat really.

Why do people keep saying those things? You seem to think a synth is basic as soon as it is subtractive only. Charlatan is a basic subtractive synth in my view...

Dunno - Kriminal has posted a couple of times in this thread so obviously he's just an interested Sylenth owner, expressing his opinion.

[Kriminal]

its a basic subtractive synth....not hard to beat really.

Why do people keep saying those things? You seem to think a synth is basic as soon as it is subtractive only. Charlatan is a basic subtractive synth in my view...

Yes it is. Whats your point?

[Lotuzia]

People who declare such things as 'This synth will kill that synth', or 'this synth is not hard to beat' should first prove that this synth can do exactly what that synth does (Same exact sound), while having another advantage ( Better price, more possibilitites, etc etc). And, until now, such facts are far from beeing established. *Hard to beat* doesnt explain either the continuous success of very simple synthesizers, like the TB-303, or the MiniMoog. So, there must be *something else* that these exegetes can't see/hear.( Maybe the *sound* ? )

Actually, people who declare such things are just echoing a part of marketing from companies who wish to invest a segment of the market, and behave like hype/blurb resonators.

In the real world, I've never seen a single synth killing another one, ie two synths sounding so exactly similar that other factors could decide that one is killing the other. More than that the emergence of too much warlike terms when talking about musical instruments just puts me off. I have zero interest in testing *a musical instrument that kills another musical instrument*. At best, I see this as gentle fanboyism. We're very far from music as I understand it here. Just my 0.002.

[xamido]

its a basic subtractive synth....not hard to beat really.

Why do people keep saying those things? You seem to think a synth is basic as soon as it is subtractive only. Charlatan is a basic subtractive synth in my view...

It's like guitar. You can always say that all guitar are the same, but there's a reason why some brand is more desirable.

[fluffy_little_something]

Yes it is. Whats your point?

Well, since Sylenth is clearly more complex and comprehensive than Charlatan, which you agree is basic, the same label seems inappropriate for Sylenth.

[wagtunes]

People who declare such things as 'This synth will kill that synth', or 'this synth is not hard to beat' should first prove that this synth can do exactly what that synth does (Same exact sound), while having another advantage ( Better price, more possibilitites, etc etc). And, until now, such facts are far from beeing established. *Hard to beat* doesnt explain either the continuous success of very simple synthesizers, like the TB-303, or the MiniMoog. So, there must be *something else* that these exegetes can't see/hear.( Maybe the *sound* ? )

Actually, people who declare such things are just echoing a part of marketing from companies who wish to invest a segment of the market, and behave like hype/blurb resonators.

In the real world, I've never seen a single synth killing another one, ie two synths sounding so exactly similar that other factors could decide that one is killing the other. More than that the emergence of too much warlike terms when talking about musical instruments just puts me off. I have zero interest in testing *a musical instrument that kills another musical instrument*. At best, I see this as gentle fanboyism. We're very far from music as I understand it here. Just my 0.002.

I can't speak for everybody else but there are only 2 reasons why I buy a synth.

1) Do I like the sound?

2) Is it flexible enough so that I can do a lot with it?

Number 1 always comes first. If I don't like the sound I don't care how flexible the synth is. I won't buy it.

Now, what if I do like the sound? Well, that's where number 2 plays a HUGE part for me because there are a lot of "good" sounding synths out there. I think we can all agree on at least that much.

A good sounding synth that doesn't really give me more than just the sound itself (in other words, basic features) has to have either an amazing sound or a sound that just can't be duplicated by another synth. When I say duplicated I don't mean "sounds exactly alike" because no two synths sound "exactly alike." I mean can the sound be approximated by another synth close enough that the difference isn't substantial enough to warrant buying the other synth? If the answer is yes, then I don't buy the other synth. It's that simple. As it is, I have way too many synths. Over 100.

So why don't I own Sylenth1?

1) While it has a good sound, it's not something that can't be approximated by other synths.

2) It is not the most flexible synth in the world. In fact, by today's standards it is extremely limited. I don't think there is any arguing that.

And then finally there is one last thing which, all else being the same, is the deal breaker.

The price.

Sylenth1, in US dollars, is $158.

To put this in perspective, Zebra 2 is $199 and can at least approximate the sounds that Sylenth1 can make if not exactly. Nobody's gonna know the difference in a recording. In addition to that, feature wise, there is no comparison.

Now, some people like synths for their simplicity. That's something Sylenth1 has in spades so I think that helps in making it popular. The fact that it does sound good makes it even more so.

But it's not a synth I have any desire to own. Not at $158. Not when I already have at least a dozen synths that can approximate what Sylenth1 can do.

The only reason I have Charlatan is because it's free. There is nothing special about that synth. I do like the sound. It's easy to program. I can get a few interesting leads out of it. But make no mistake about it, if Charlatan cost even $29 I wouldn't have bought it. IMO, it's a $10 synth, if that.

To get me to part with my money you have to impress me. To get me to part with $158, you have to impress me a lot.

Sylenth1 does not impress me $158 worth.

Everybody has their own criteria for buying a synth. These are mine. Apparently the majority has criteria that are much different because there is no arguing that Sylenth1 is a very popular synth if not THE most popular synth on the planet.

Why?

Damned if I know.

[Kriminal]

Yes it is. Whats your point?

Well, since Sylenth is clearly more complex and comprehensive than Charlatan, which you agree is basic, the same label seems inappropriate for Sylenth.

Both sound poor imo. I aready had Albino and Zebra (among other synths) when sylenth came out. It doesnt sound better than those and doesnt have as many useful features, so i didnt buy it.

[fluffy_little_something]

There are a few things I would like to see added to Sylenth, but I doubt that will happen...

[fluffy_little_something]

Yes it is. Whats your point?

Well, since Sylenth is clearly more complex and comprehensive than Charlatan, which you agree is basic, the same label seems inappropriate for Sylenth.

Both sound poor imo. I aready had Albino and Zebra (among other synths) when sylenth came out. It doesnt sound better than those and doesnt have as many useful features, so i didnt buy it.

While it may not sound as good as some of the latest synths, saying it sounds poor is ridiculous in my view. It does have a specific sound character, which is good for some things and not so good for others. Depends on what one wants and needs...
I like the raw sound of Sylenth. I have compared it to many other synths, saw to saw, so to speak It blows all my Synthedit and Synthmaker synths out of the water, especially on lower octaves the difference is striking. That was important to me as I like to bend synth basses.
With Sylenth one has to use the equalizer (which is one feature I would like to see improved, though) just like on Element. Without EQ the sound is good, but not nearly as good as it could be.

[Teksonik]

But it's not a synth I have any desire to own. Not at $158. Not when I already have at least a dozen synths that can approximate what Sylenth1 can do.

So why do you keep coming back here over and over time and time again ?

We get it.....you think Sylenth 1 is too expensive so move on.........