Why can't Alchemy be the new Omnisphere?

[mandolarian]

Why can't I be you?

It's technical. I'll explain it in excruciating detail later. For now, all I can say is that they are making great strides in audio gene therapy.

[munchkin]

I don't own Omnisphere but I've seen the latest NAMM demo videos and it looks incredible, especially with all the ongoing development and new presets. But I want to address the claim that Alchemy presets aren't as good/well programmed/versatile etc. etc, as Omnisphere's. I own Alchemy and one of its strengths is the incredible attention to detail of the preset programming and the controls available to manipulate them. Perhaps Omnisphere can compete but I don't know of any other synth that has this level of detail and versatility.

[highkoo]

Trouble you say? And asking for it?

Asuredly!
There are roustabouts about.

But now that you (not you, highkoo, that other you),

What a sweet effin rhyme!
Yep, figured it was that other guy. He is a dick. Roustabout, ruffian, hooligan..

Why can't the old Zebra be the new Alchemy?

Bro,
If the old Zebra was compared to the new Alchemy, whatever.
But if the new Omni was compared to the new Zebra, fukk!

[IncarnateX]

Why can't both be cheap as hell?

[AstralExistence]

The samples used in Omni are better than in Alchemy in my opinion.

definitely. i was at a friends house and he had atmosphere i nearly shit myself. i cant even fathom how good the omnisphere samples are.

[AstralExistence]

oh, and why cant bread be chicago style pizza from chigago??? id love to buy a slice of deep dish pizza for 99 cents at the grocery store.

[ErikH]

All I read about Omnisphere is about presets. That's by far the least creative part of a synth. Using something someone else created... It also takes a lot of GB.

So why should Alchemy be like Omnisphere? If you like O, then use O. If you like A, then use A . If you like both, you know why because you grasp and experience their differences.

[jasinski]

As the most stunning preset library I've ever heard is for Alchemy, I'm a bit biased.
http://www.patchpool.de/alchemistry_beyond.html

I'm more of a synthesist rather than a performer so I suppose it appeals to me. I'm sure glad we all got options.

[A.M. Gold]

The thing is Omnisphere doesn't have a unique status in 'our workflow' there is no 'our workflow' your premise is bad to begin with. If you were asking for your own needs that is one thing, but there is no universal 'workflow' world where Omnisphere rules them all. I'm just saying

Alright, I'm sorry. Would you be happier if the thread title was "Could Alchemy's development end up replacing Omnisphere's status because (insert my first post here)?" You are just trying to pick out what is wrong with the thread title, and I am saying I believe the question is a legitimate one. And everyone has to go on about how this is a pointless thread while people have contributed their experience and viewpoints to it.

It's pointless for a reason you are missing.

YES, YES, YES, Alchemy "could be" the next Omnisphere, if they made the conscious decision to mimic Omnisphere.

They are products with different design philosophies that overlap somewhat, but they have many differences.

Also, I really don't see any "status" at all to Omnisphere, any more than an acoustic piano has a status that an electric piano doesn't. There's no status to either one of them, there is only what each does best and who needs either, or both, to do what they want.

Omnisphere isn't some kind of be-all that another plug-in needs to aspire to. It's just Eric Persing's baby, and it has his mark all over it. I honestly think if people could demo it who had never used it extensively, it would dispel a lot of the myth about it, but it would also be something a lot of people would still like and want.

[mandolarian]

As the most stunning preset library I've ever heard is for Alchemy, I'm a bit biased.
http://www.patchpool.de/alchemistry_beyond.html

+1! (And Warped Strings! And the Prequel to Alchemistry Beyond, Alchemistry Behind is great for older sounds. Alchemistry Beyonce is a bit of stretch for my tastes tho.)

Sure glad Simon didn't get tied up with the other team.

[A.M. Gold]

All I read about Omnisphere is about presets. That's by far the least creative part of a synth. Using something someone else created... It also takes a lot of GB.

So why should Alchemy be like Omnisphere? If you like O, then use O. If you like A, then use A . If you like both, you know why because you grasp and experience their differences.

Samples take a lot of gigabytes, presets take no gigabytes.

Omnisphere has a vast collection of soundsources, sound synthesis/shaping tools, and effects. The presets help serve as easily altered starting points for a lot of people who need to compose/arrange with more of their time than they have to devote to pure sound design.

Eric Persing was (and still is) a preset guy. His products will always feature many presets.

And as far as "using something someone else created" as something that is implied to be somehow weak or lame, tell that to Vladimir Horowitz and Glenn Gould, who never once spent a day working in a piano factory.

[munchkin]

The samples used in Omni are better than in Alchemy in my opinion.

definitely. i was at a friends house and he had atmosphere i nearly shit myself. i cant even fathom how good the omnisphere samples are.

Having used Atmosphere in the past it doesn't come close to Alchemy in sound quality and versatility. I suspect that 45GB of Omnisphere samples won't improve on Alchemy's sounds at all. They're both capable of great sounds and have some stunning sound banks available to them.

I own Stylus RMX and the sound quality is great but it's clunky and restrictive in comparison to Geist and can't touch BFD2 in terms of sound quality. So if we're comparing Spectrasonic products and the competition a little humility and a lot less hype is required.

[braj]

Why can't I be you?

It's technical. I'll explain it in excruciating detail later. For now, all I can say is that they are making great strides in audio gene therapy.

You're so perfect you're so right as rain....

[cryophonik]

definitely. i was at a friends house and he had atmosphere i nearly shit myself. i cant even fathom how good the omnisphere samples are.

Atmosphere was the first Spectrasonics plugin I ever purchased and it still gets a lot of use, even though I own Omnisphere (which includes the entire Atmosphere library, BTW). If I'm only going to be needing pads, I actually prefer using Atmosphere due to its lighter footprint, quicker loading (for me, at least), ease of use, etc. I really wish Spectrasonics would have given it one last 64-bit update before discontinuing it, though.

Sorry for the OT (not that I have any idea what the topic is anymore )

Why can't I be you?

It's technical. I'll explain it in excruciating detail later. For now, all I can say is that they are making great strides in audio gene therapy.

You're so perfect you're so right as rain....

Everything you do is quite delicious.

[A.M. Gold]

The samples used in Omni are better than in Alchemy in my opinion.

definitely. i was at a friends house and he had atmosphere i nearly shit myself. i cant even fathom how good the omnisphere samples are.

Having used Atmosphere in the past it doesn't come close to Alchemy in sound quality and versatility. I suspect that 45GB of Omnisphere samples won't improve on Alchemy's sounds at all. They're both capable of great sounds and have some stunning sound banks available to them.

I own Stylus RMX and the sound quality is great but it's clunky and restrictive in comparison to Geist and can't touch BFD2 in terms of sound quality. So if we're comparing Spectrasonic products and the competition a little humility and a lot less hype is required.

You don't want hype, you do want humility, but apparently rampant subjectivity and speculation is a ok on your side.