Omnisphere 2.5: Hardware Synth Integration and double voice architecture

[Echoes in the Attic]

But all these omnisphere discussions have me wondering more about the Omnisphere
The sample format is still very closed to me..
I tried to find more about the multilayer sample capabilities of omnisphere..
But there is not much to find online, except the fact that its supported..
Is there only vellocity switching, or are there more advanced options in the sample format..


I think the omnisphere instand alone mode could make the perfect live host for any keyboarder..
And it would be even more awesome if they made the omnisphere a VST engine...
Allowing to add VST sounds to the multi’s
Or even better allowing to use VST sounds as input for an oscilator..

Having 4 oscilators/samples is a huge step also,...

It's not really set up for multi layer user samples, to do it you need to fudge with multiple layers and parts in a multi. I don't think it makes sense to build multisample instruments in Omni, the user samples are primarily for stuff like granular and sound design.

It's funny, every time Spectrasonics do some new advances, everyone immediately thinks of another 50 things they'd like Omni to do! Mine is that I'd love them to do UIs for each of the Hardware Profiles like they do with the Trilian patch controls at present, so you could tweak the profiled synths in a way that is consistent with the hardware (given that there's clearly a lot more than 1-1 mapping going on). Would be great for the SH-101, but might get awfully busy with a Voyager...

This would be great. This would also solve my issue which is that I want to map these out to midi controllers, and the main issue there is having a control that works as a macro, controlling multiple parameters, instantiating effects, being restricted to certain ranges over a parameter etc. So if there was a GUI representation of the macros, that make it much easier to use with hardware that isn't on their list but still use the architecture as it is for specific synths. Feature request!

[beely]

I don’t think I see anything patentable here, so nothing to stop u-he doing their own dedicated mapping from a Prophet 6 to Repro or what have you.

Remember, this is not *just* "mapping", even intelligently.

It's configuring OS to have the same architecture, oscillator settings, FX and routings to behave like the profile synth, so that the synth's controls can do meaningfully similar things in OS - even to the extent that, for example, for synths that have a particular filter (like the OB-6's SEM filter) that OS didn't have, they went and implemented a SEM filter just to match the hardware more usefully.

This means you don't end up with a bunch of hardware controls that don't work, or don't match their labels etc.

So yes, you can do similar things with other synths, but those synths would have to have a flexible enough architecture to map those controls and behave similarly. The controls for oscillator 3 on a Voyager aren't going to make sense on a 2-oscillator synth, for example.

For things that are relatively flexible, say, Zebra or Diva, you could go a long way to doing something similar (for supported synths that make sense), by calling up controller mappings *and* a patch template that configures the synth with the correct architecture, components and FX to more or less match the hardware - and have those mappings hand tuned for each synth to give a similar feel to the hardware.

[noiseboyuk]

Yes to all the above, I was using "mapping" as shorthand really. Prophet 6 to Repro 5 should convert well enough, and as you say with Diva they'd be able to do a lot more models where the architecture could match.

[rod_zero]

I currently use my System 8 with Diva, it works quite well, some knobs don't behave properly (as waveform selection or octave knob) but the rest works quite well.

It is also fun to compare how different the range of some controls are, Diva modulation amounts go higher than any roland model, the envelopes are also quite different, specially the jupiter ones, the curve is similar but for example the longest attack on the S8 is way shorter than in Diva analog ADSR.

[Sjefke]

I currently use my System 8 with Diva, it works quite well, some knobs don't behave properly (as waveform selection or octave knob) but the rest works quite well.

It is also fun to compare how different the range of some controls are, Diva modulation amounts go higher than any roland model, the envelopes are also quite different, specially the jupiter ones, the curve is similar but for example the longest attack on the S8 is way shorter than in Diva analog ADSR.

Is there a quick way for you to switch betweem using system8 for comtrolling onboard sounds and comtrolling diva?

[rod_zero]

I currently use my System 8 with Diva, it works quite well, some knobs don't behave properly (as waveform selection or octave knob) but the rest works quite well.

It is also fun to compare how different the range of some controls are, Diva modulation amounts go higher than any roland model, the envelopes are also quite different, specially the jupiter ones, the curve is similar but for example the longest attack on the S8 is way shorter than in Diva analog ADSR.

Is there a quick way for you to switch betweem using system8 for comtrolling onboard sounds and comtrolling diva?

I just turn off the local control, so the knobs no longer control the internal engine, they will send MIDI to the DAW so when the channel where the S8 is being used is selected it will receive those MIDI CC and respond to it.

[Sjefke]

I currently use my System 8 with Diva, it works quite well, some knobs don't behave properly (as waveform selection or octave knob) but the rest works quite well.

It is also fun to compare how different the range of some controls are, Diva modulation amounts go higher than any roland model, the envelopes are also quite different, specially the jupiter ones, the curve is similar but for example the longest attack on the S8 is way shorter than in Diva analog ADSR.

Is there a quick way for you to switch betweem using system8 for comtrolling onboard sounds and comtrolling diva?

I just turn off the local control, so the knobs no longer control the internal engine, they will send MIDI to the DAW so when the channel where the S8 is being used is selected it will receive those MIDI CC and respond to it.

Thank you for the answer.. i downloaded the manuals of system 8
And saw this change is made trough menu diving
Its in the systems menu, so can’t be saved in a performance
Its also not possible to change trough a midi command..

So its rather useless when using omnisphere in stand alone mode as i intended to do
Where i would have to dive in the menu if i would like to change from controlling system 8 to controlling Omnisphere

But using it trough mainstage or a daw should work out just fine.

[george]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the hardware synth integration what Discovery / Discovery Pro has been doing for the past 15 years with Nord synths but for Moog, Dave Smith Instruments, Roland, Korg, Behringer, Novation, Sequential, etc. instead?

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the hardware synth integration what Discovery / Discovery Pro has been doing for the past 15 years with Nord synths but for Moog, Dave Smith Instruments, Roland, Korg, Behringer, Novation, Sequential, etc. instead?

If you watch the video you may find out

[george]

If you watch the video you may find out

It seems about the same for me, that's why I ask.

[Caine123]

back from SUPERBOOTH!
spectrasonics are SUCH AWESOME GUYS and using omnisphere since original release i just cannot be happy even more to personally talked to them and even ERIC who is a wondergul person and his team, so passionate, so enthuisastic im so happy to have a product with such a quality which is still being enhanced, crazy!

LOVE SPECTRASONICS!

[noiseboyuk]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the hardware synth integration what Discovery / Discovery Pro has been doing for the past 15 years with Nord synths but for Moog, Dave Smith Instruments, Roland, Korg, Behringer, Novation, Sequential, etc. instead?

There have been other one-offs such as the MS20iC and (I think?) the impOscar that have all offered hardware control of a particular hardware-emulated soft synth, and they do all look great as far as they go. But - once again - there are major differences than with Omni 2.5, such as:

Omni versions are not emulations or modelled, rather recreate the broad character of a synth
Limitations in hardware such as voice counts can be removed
20 different synths profiled (as a starting point), not limited to a single model
Not restricted to 1-1 mapping - often controls emulate multiple parameters simultaneously
Patches part of the Omnisphere ecosystem and can be further manipulated without limits
Patches created available to all Omni owners without the hardware

[el-bo (formerly ebow)]

If you watch the video you may find out

It seems about the same for me, that's why I ask.

Thing is, all anyone knows is what is in that video. When you remove all of those who do not have any familiarity with Discovery's Nord integration, it pretty much leaves you as the likely best candidate to judge.

What is clear, is that the access to various hardware that Spectrasonic's seem to have will result in a huge amount of options, in terms of compatibility.

[george]

Yes, the hardware integration seems a big and much more sophisticated feature than other products in the market (Discovery, ImpOSCar, MS20iC, others). However...

https://www.spectrasonics.net/news/news ... php?id=111

Omnisphere enters a new era by becoming the first software synth in the world to offer a Hardware Synth Integration feature

There have been other products doing it previously, in a much less complete way of course, but I don't think Omnisphere is being first.

[Elektronisch]

Yes, the hardware integration seems a big and much more sophisticated feature than other products in the market (Discovery, ImpOSCar, MS20iC, others). However...

https://www.spectrasonics.net/news/news ... php?id=111

Omnisphere enters a new era by becoming the first software synth in the world to offer a Hardware Synth Integration feature

There have been other products doing it previously, in a much less complete way of course, but I don't think Omnisphere is being first.

Well you could send them that info. Because you know who are the first ones who introduce this? The ones who shout loudest are and are saying they are first

P.s. thanks for telling discodsp has nord lead integration. Never knew it had this feature