Sylenth1 vs Albino

[mrjameskent]

So I"ve already tested the Arturia Minimoog against the MiniMonsta to check out the bass tones, and was recommended the Sylenth 1, which is now available on Macs, as an alternative.

I've been watching some of the tutorials on the Future Music DVDs and am intrigued by the simplicity of the Albino, after seeing a Benga feature.

I'm not a dubstep producer, but am very interested to know everyone's opinion on the better start off VST.

I'm on Live 7 on a MacBook, and have been trying to understand Operator, Analog etc, and am having no luck understanding (or enjoying) the user interface.

So I'm looking for some advice on what to do - I don't want to be limited to a 'certain' sound, if that makes sense.

thanks
James

[Coxy]

Albino more can be more indepth, more osc and filter options, the ARP and mod matrix too. It CAN be simple but Sylenth1 is much more user friendly from the outset.

Atmosphere sounds softer and more silky like. Sylenth has the harder edged sound, I feel it has much quicker attack envelope also which further emphasizes this.

I love the phasor on sylent1 but love flexibility and osc selection on albino. EDIT: Actually I don't it's got far too many osc selections and i've experimented with most of them and I didn't find many of them useful(the waveforms). Soundscapes and weird noises and bell like scapes then it's ideal though.

[mrjameskent]

sorry, if you could give an update/insight into CPU usage as well that would be great; the Sylenth1 seems to have a VERY good CPU usage.

thank you
j

[Coxy]

sorry, if you could give an update/insight into CPU usage as well that would be great; the Sylenth1 seems to have a VERY good CPU usage.

thank you
j

CPU on Sylenth as you said is excellent. Albino is good however it uses more from standard than sylenth1. Naturally the more oscs and such you're using start to increase cpu load more.

[pdxindy]

I'm on Live 7 on a MacBook, and have been trying to understand Operator, Analog etc, and am having no luck understanding (or enjoying) the user interface.

So I'm looking for some advice on what to do - I don't want to be limited to a 'certain' sound, if that makes sense.

thanks
James

Those are some great synths that come with Live. You paid for em, learn to use em! It is worth it.

Assuming you purchased Sampler, then Zebra would be my recommendation of the single best all around synth to compliment Live. With Zebra you can avoid the 128 parameter limit for automation in Live, and it sounds great and has a vast sonic range.

Sylenth is excellent at what it does, but is limited compared to the more all purpose synths available today. Albino is solid.

for what it is worth...

[djanthonyw]

IMO...Sylenth makes Albino sound like a toy regardless of its extra features. What good are extra features when even at it's core Albino sounds like muffled aliasing ****. There really is no contest.

[original flipper]

HI

IMO Albino is a solid synth that has a characteristic smooth and soft sound - I have been using it for several years and think that to rubbish it (V's Sylenth1) is being a little harsh.

I don't think Albino is a 'simple' synth, in fact it is considerably more complex than sylenth1 ... by quite some margin.

There are demoes available for both these synths, a thread like this simply brings out peoples opinions, which invariably will range from balanced to extreme: why let someones opinion decide how you spend $200?

Try the demoes - if you want some alternative feedback the plug-in reviews might give you more balanced opinion ... but then again, people don't seem to write negative reviews either!

Flipper.

[dougsyo]

I tend to think of Albino2 as "smooth", "creamy", "silky", etc and as a good trance/dance instrument. It's not my choice for a harder, edgier sound. Perhaps Albino3 is more "general purpose" but I never was moved to upgrade to it, I have other instruments that suit me better for those sounds.

I can't speak about the other instruments you've named.

Doug

[thespecialist]

HI

IMO Albino is a solid synth that has a characteristic smooth and soft sound - I have been using it for several years and think that to rubbish it (V's Sylenth1) is being a little harsh.

Agreed. While I'm also quite a Sylenth1 fanboy, I must say that I do like the Albino sound too quite a lot. Like everybody seems to agree here, it's kinda 'silky', or 'smooth' (although I can understand that some people might find it TOO silky, I like it myself) :

http://www.robpapen.com/downloads/mp3/A ... demo01.mp3

Perhaps Albino3 is more "general purpose"

Hmm... that I don't know. I think a good demo of Sylenth1's versatility, soundwise, is this one:

http://www.arksun-sound.com/music/Arksu ... lenth1.mp3

as it contains both 'silky'/'smooth' sounds as some harder, edgier, sounds.
Anyway, both synths have demo versions available, demo them for a while, that will lead to a much better decision making than reading other people's opinions on forums

[cryophonik]

Albino3 is an excellent all-around synth. But, given a choice between Albino3 and Sylenth1, I'd take Blue.

[ZenPunkHippy]

They are both excellent soft synths, but to my mind (and ears!!) they both set out to achieve very different things ...

For raw analogue squelch I don't think Albino can touch Sylenth1, but it possible to get some amazing (deep but plucky) basses out of Albino. Out of the box, Sylenth has an utterly amazing 303 / analogue style sound. It is capable of other sounds too of course. Possibly the most analogue sounding oscillators and filters I have heard in any soft synth. The filters are amazing, they can really scream yet don't sound digital at all. It has a very strong effects section, but routing is limited to the order the developer chose. The arp section is great, but not as flexible as Albino.

I feel the Albino struggles to achieve the squelchy analogue kind of sound ... sometimes the oscillators and filters have a slightly dry sound to them ... which perhaps reflects a different design goal. The interface of the Albino packs in a LOT of features in to a small space, and once you know your way around it is quite well done. The effects section is very useful with plenty of options for routing each filter to different FX in whatever order you like. The effects are also very solid.

Albino has an amazing arp and very powerful mod-matrix which is easy to use which can produce results as wild or subtle as you like. Using oscillators for FM /AM or filter modulation is also a major plus and it has plenty of interesting waveshapes to alter the timbre of the basic waveforms. It also has far more flexible envelope section which can be synced to track tempo (very handy for dance music!) and used like multi-stage LFO's - fantastic! There are more envelopes available, and it has more modulation sources and destinations that the Sylenth.

With Albino, it will take some time to realise the subtleties that can be achieved in the interaction between all of these features. On the surface at least, Sylenth does not appear to be as deep as Albino.

Someone mentioned aliasing regarding Albino and I find it does tend to be noticeable at higher frequencies. I have not noticed this aliasing with Sylenth.

Also the Albino seems to be much more capable in the midi control / automation area i.e. more of it's parameters can be automated from your DAW than with Sylenth1.

Sylenth1 seems to use less CPU but my programming experience - and hence patch complexity - with that synth are not as extensive as with the Albino. I have no trouble running *many* instances of each in a single Logic project on a first generation Macbook Pro.

Both have very strong polyphony. Each instance of Albino can have up to four independent layers which can be turned on and off with automation. Sylenth has two slightly more integrated / dependent layers per instance.

Which is better for starting off / learning? Tough question! ... the Sylenth interface certainly looks more like a traditional analogue synth if you have ever used them, with two separate pages containing all parameters. Modulations are accessed via menu's and set with knobs, but the values are don't appears as accurate / intuitive as with Albino.

The Albino saves space by forcing you to click on a button to access different oscillators and envelopes, or swap between the arp section, mod section and LFO's. You probably need to have a better idea of the particular sound you want to design with the Albino to save clicking. So perhaps the Sylenth1 is better suited to getting a particular sound straight up, and for instant experimentation.

Peace,
Andy.

[mrjameskent]

Thanks guys, I've been playing with the Sylenth demo for a couple of weeks and am going to spend this week with Albino. I'm just very interested to see different opinions.

I know I should spend time learning Operator and the other Live synths, but I just find their UI really difficult and not as enjoyable as some of the other synths I've played with. But I have a month off work coming up and will be spending it doing some learning!

[dougsyo]

I know I should spend time learning Operator and the other Live synths, but I just find their UI really difficult and not as enjoyable as some of the other synths I've played with. But I have a month off work coming up and will be spending it doing some learning!

Not surprised here. Since Operator is an FM synth, it's going to be a completely different critter to program than Sylenth1 or Albino, and the interface will seem complex (this is true of FM synths in general).

Doug

[AnotherUser]

Albino is great for designing sounds - many, many features. Sylenth1 is probably better for phat leads, Albino sounds a bit digital.