Zebra's biggest flaw

[Urs]

With the advent of Zebra 2.5 there's a nice chance to renovate some, uhm, maybe lesser good algorithms. There are loads of things that I'd do rather differently today. Just think of the filters which were designed between 1999 and 2003. Back then they were designed for speed. That means, the lowpass filters often don't fully open and they don't truely self oscillate. Nowadays I would implement them slightly more costy, and with a more consistent impact on patch volume. For instance, I'd implement the Lowpass allround with nicer control over resonance without a noticable performance penalty

The idea is, what could be improved with the existing parameters? Think all the same knobs, all the same menus, but a different scale here, a bit of a wider range there...

What screams for a little adjustment?

Note: As these changes would make things sound different, I've come up with a spiffy idea: Existing presets load with the currently existing algorithms. A little icon in the main display will indicate "2.3" for Zebra V2.0 to V2.3. That means, everything will sound exactly the same as before. But you can also just switch to the improved stuff and work from there.

Please also note that the oscillator brightness controversy has been solved already. Any post concerning "oscillators should sound as bright as synth xy" will be deleted, because this has already happened (see current betas)

[bmrzycki]

I voted for the Waveshapers simply because I think they're way too tame. If I want to make something squeaky or harsh I still turn to Surge's waveshaper. I'd also be interested in some sort of feedback algo/module in the grid.

But really, Z2 is already a monster and these things are minor nits.

[zircon]

I voted the filter vol discrepancy because that is definitely a pain... but I'd really love stronger waveshapers also.

[glokraw]

I'm not an expert, might even consider a flaw a feature, but the only thing I don't like, is that I can't readily use zebra in a quick mix with other synths without
jerking around a lot in the mixer, trying to hear the whispering zebra, when all the others instruments come out stomping and kicking in normal volume ranges, needing only minimal adjustments once the various layers/tracks are in place. Because of that extra
effort always being needed, I can't justify the frustration, when the competition is so strong. There just isn't time. The Zebra sounds and and potential are truly at the highest level, as proven by free soundsets from Menno, and McNoone, among many others.
Folks using Zebra exclusively probably don't even care, because they can set up the recording system to the Zebra volume range as default.
Cheers

[PaulSC]

Voted other: Documentation is incomplete and lags behind latest features.

I do agree that the existing waveshapers "lack guts", and I'd like to see the following smaller improvements:

- copy/paste/import/export individual positions in wavetable
- alternative calibration of oscillator pitch in ratio format, for ease of setting harmonic FM (and ringmod and ...) ratios.
- modmap in "alternate" mode settable to cycle through a smaller number of positions in the map (e.g. alternate between two)

[Urs]

I can't readily use zebra in a quick mix with other synths without
jerking around a lot in the mixer

Try adjusting the others. If they can't step back, they're not worth using. They cause more problems than they pretend to solve. Many of them can never be used properly with vocals or acoustic drums.

I personally don't consider Zebra's friendly attitude a flaw, hence there's nothing to fix.

[bagginz]

I also voted for the improving the Waveshapers.

Implementing some additional modes for the waveshaper module along the lines of Tube, Clip, Super Saturate and Extreme Distortion would cure what I see as Zebra's only Achilles heel.

A sample reduction mode (with a mod source on the rate) would be a very nice addition too.

___________________


Now, moving beyond the necessary and into the realms of idle wishes

Then:

1. The Chorus/Flange could use some more extreme range on the main controls (delay, speed, depth ) and perhaps another less metallic mode.(at higher feedback levels)

2. The reverb could use another mode - high quality mode perhaps?

3. If there was some way to save individual effects patches themselves it would be a timesaver. I often find myself dialling up favourite settings over and over (often as a starting point) for new patches I create.

As Zebra is capable of creating complex fx chains it would be great to save effects chains also. Perhaps this could be done with copy and paste? (from one patch into another)

4. Compressors - there is no number 4 The compressor modes are superb as they are

___________________

>For instance, I'd implement the Lowpass allround with nicer control over >resonance.

btw, I really like the extreme resonance that this filter is capable of. It took me a while to get to know it's character, but it's really useful for creating some types of sounds.

But really, Z2 is already a monster and these things are minor nits.

Totally agreed.

As well as the sheer power, it's cleverly designed interface makes it a real pleasure to use.

Cheers,
bagginz

[zerocrossing]

My other: I love it too deeply.

[Urs]

Voted other: Documentation is incomplete and lags behind latest features.

New, rewritten manual is another project. Planned

- copy/paste/import/export individual positions in wavetable
- alternative calibration of oscillator pitch in ratio format, for ease of setting harmonic FM (and ringmod and ...) ratios.
- modmap in "alternate" mode settable to cycle through a smaller number of positions in the map (e.g. alternate between two)

These things are unfortunately not quite what I mean. This thread is about things that should be different within the given feature set They are however things I'm aware of, so they might pop up at some point

[palebluedun]

Hi Everyone,

I voted for filter consistency but I'll bet all these issues will be addressed before too long. I am not experienced enough yet with Zebra to say so much about the other things. It may sound a bit ingratiating but one of Zebra's most endearing features is that it's always moving toward perfection. As long as that stays the same I'll be happy with any improvements.

Take care,
joji

[Urs]

I voted for filter consistency but I'll bet all these issues will be addressed before too long.

(pssst... I have secretly planned to address all of these issues during the next couple of weeks... no promises though, e.g. if something proves difficult to achieve... but I'm actually looking for *other* and I'm evaluating the need for a separate distortion module with different controls than the shapers...)

[palebluedun]

See?!!!!

[xh3rv]

What screams for a little adjustment?

Just to toss it out there, I voted 'other' thinking about the comb filters. They sound great when tweaked properly but they feel, sort of less easy to tweak than other modules. [e] What I've got in the back of my mind is: e.g. in Zebrify the combs are GODLY but it's hard to really subtly adjust them without shift-clicking, and the inconsistency between parameters -> different modes can be a little confusing (could each mode just display different knobs or something?).

A re-written manual would be nice, would something like a wiki also be helpful? I could see something like a synthesis technique wiki being really worthwile, it sounded maybe like what you were discussing in the Zebra patch contest thread . . . Zebra does so much, it'd be the right synth to anchor something like that on.

[sinzero]

my other...

MSEG doesn't generate buy/sell signals for crude oil

doesn't even make coffee

fix that!

[Kyran]

Zebra really needs better distortion. I always find myself layering two zebra's on each other feeded into an ohmicide and external filter unit. If the sounds could really be roughened up within zebra I would be so happy

Massive for example has some very tasty distortion algo's and they make that synth a go to for a lot of people I know