Omnisphere 2.5 Using a 2000$ synth as a midi controller?

[switchonsid]

Please help me to understand.

I was watching a video on the new Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2.5 update. So basically, they want me to use my Moog Sub 37 or DSI prophet REV 2 as a VST instrument? They make a bunch of VST replicated the hardware and want me to use my analogue hardware synth as a VST midi controller???

Did I get this right?

[zvenx]

Please help me to understand.

I was watching a video on the new Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2.5 update. So basically, they want me to use my Moog Sub 37 or DSI prophet REV 2 as a VST instrument? They make a bunch of VST replicated the hardware and want me to use my analogue hardware synth as a VST midi controller???

Did I get this right?

Well I don't think they are suggesting anyone goes out to buy a $2,000 hardware just to control Omnisphere, or that you stop using your hardware to produce sounds.
However there is a school of thought that the biggest limitation of modern day software synth is the lack of tactile interaction.
For some of us, we love the sound of software synths and the ease of use (project recall of sounds, almost unlimited instances (only your cpu etc limiting that), no cables to plug in and levels to set etc etc etc) but what is missing is the ability to play and interact easily. The touchy feely.

That if you want to have a hybrid studio (hardware and software), it would be great to use that hardware to control software.

omnisphere 2.5 offers that.
rsp

[switchonsid]

Please help me to understand.

I was watching a video on the new Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2.5 update. So basically, they want me to use my Moog Sub 37 or DSI prophet REV 2 as a VST instrument? They make a bunch of VST replicated the hardware and want me to use my analogue hardware synth as a VST midi controller???

Did I get this right?

Well I don't think they are suggesting anyone goes out to buy a $2,000 hardware just to control Omnisphere, or that you stop using your hardware to produce sounds.
However there is a school of thought that the biggest limitation of modern day software synth is the lack of tactile interaction.
For some of us, we love the sound of software synths and the ease of use (project recall of sounds, almost unlimited instances (only your cpu etc limiting that), no cables to plug in and levels to set etc etc etc) but what is missing is the ability to play and interact easily. The touchy feely.

That if you want to have a hybrid studio (hardware and software), it would be great to use that hardware to control software.

omnisphere 2.5 offers that.
rsp

Let me asking again. They except that people who already own a expensive hardware synth for the analog sound will use their synth as a midi controller for VST synth?

[rod_zero]

It is not a bad idea but I liked much more how Roland did it with the system 8 and their plugouts, that for me is more hybrid.

[Astralv]

Let me asking again. They except that people who already own a expensive hardware synth for the analog sound will use their synth as a midi controller for VST synth?

What kind of question is this? Most of us already using all our hardware synths to control software synths! Been using them for 20 years. The great part of it is that different hardware synths send MIDI data to different controller numbers and results of what parameters get to be changes unpredictable. I used to use Roland JP 8000 synth to control Korg Triton because Triton controls were all in display menus, not easily accessible. I don't see what is so offensive about using moog to control other synths, that is if Moog able to transmit MIDI from the knobs.

[ATS]

Did I get this right?

I really don't think you did

[werp]

It might be interesting to try a couple of hardware synths on the same patch and see what difference the hardware makes sonically. I’ve got three synths on the Omnisphere 2.5 list. I wonder what hardware synths will be next to get the treatment? I won’t hold my breath for the Matrixbrute.

[whyterabbyt]

Let me asking again. They except that people who already own a expensive hardware synth for the analog sound will use their synth as a midi controller for VST synth?

Yes, they accept that some people might want to do that, so theyve made it easier. Although they dont necessarily expect everyone to do it. But that aspect is not really an exception, just an option.

[tasty tatsyn]

Let me asking again. They except that people who already own a expensive hardware synth for the analog sound will use their synth as a midi controller for VST synth?

Yes, they accept that some people might want to do that, so theyve made it easier. Although they dont necessarily expect everyone to do it. But that aspect is not really an exception, just an option.

also people without any hardware synths can have an easier time getting a flavour of those synths
... works both ways

[freshalex]

I bought a Roland Sytem 1m this week ... just to control Omnisphere!

The software synth is fatter and much more flexible than the original sound of the System 1.

Don‘t get me wrong, I don’t want to compare Sys1 with a Moog ...

But where is the problem?

[DonaldM75]

Please help me to understand.

I was watching a video on the new Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2.5 update. So basically, they want me to use my Moog Sub 37 or DSI prophet REV 2 as a VST instrument? They make a bunch of VST replicated the hardware and want me to use my analogue hardware synth as a VST midi controller???

Did I get this right?

Not quite. You can use Omni 2.5 with whatever controller you already have. You will also be able to access ALL of the patches assigned to the 20 or so unique hardware controllers they emulate, no matter what controller you have. What they have done is set up 20 or so profiles so that users who already own one (or more) of those can use those profiles to control Omni without having to do any controller set-up. These profiles allow the user to take advantage of all the unique sound design knobs/sliders, etc, on those controllers to edit, create, design your own sounds with Omni.

Also, the patches they've created for each of the controllers they profiled, are not so much actual emulations as they are "in the style of" type patches. They capture the unique flavor of the synth, but aren't actual emulations as you'd normally think of it.

But all those additional patches are fully available to all users no matter what you're using to control Omni. I use a Yamaha Motif XS8 as my main controller. They will NEVER create a profile for it because the Motif uses too many multi-function knobs and sliders. The ones Omni does profile are one parameter per knob/slider/controller types. However, that doesn't mean I can't use the Omni MIDI CC learn to assign the knobs/sliders on my Motif to assist with editing features in Omni.

So, no, you don't have to go out and buy a $2000 controller to use all the features of Omni 2.5

[bmrzycki]

I understand your confusion here but I think you're missing the core issue that Eric is attempting to address. For those users who are completely in the box with a generic MIDI keyboard this path makes no sense on the surface. However, if you flip the perspective a bit to hardware it starts to become clearer.

Hardware synths live in the real word as physical objects. This forces the designers (of the good ones, without terrible menu diving) to weigh the pros and cons of each knob, button, and slider. Where should it be located, how much the min and max value is, and what it controls need to be weighed too. The final result is the designer's idea of not only a workflow but of a sonic territory best suited to it.

Software is completely malleable. Adding another envelope is often as easy as adding 1 to a data structure. What would have cost Moog another $40 in parts and case size costs the programmer nothing at all. This results in the VSTi feature wars where synth N has 4 oscillators but M has 8. The hidden cost in this is actually on the buyer: the interface "costs" more in complexity and results in confusion, menu flipping, or frustration in not knowing where a feature is tucked away (or that it even exists at all). Adding more features also makes it more difficult to know why widget X was added. The designer may have added knob X to widget Y to better model guitar amp A and decided to increase the range of the parameter because a few of the edges "sounded cool on square waves". The user, however, has none of this knowledge and just sees knob X in an update and has no idea what, or why, it changes. All they can do is read the manual, bug the developer, experiment, or reverse-engineer patches using it. Every one of those cost the user time. To a professional working in sound design or a gigging musician time is often in short supply.

Generic MIDI controllers are of little help here too. The knobs and sliders are not laid out in any meaningful way for a synth, aren't labeled, and can (usually) only control one element at a time. Depending on the application, the mouse is often better.

Omnisphere is taking a completely different approach when you look at the problem from this angle. They decided to support the workflow of a certain set of common hardware synthesizers. Not only that, but they modeled the sound of each so the user has familiar aural feedback to each knob/button/slider. This means your workflow is very close to the original hardware. But now you have all the benefits of software! Patch management, unlimited track counts, easy automation. And you can always pop over to Omnisphere to enhance the sound with more features/FX. For professionals who have a known workflow with synth N, Eric has just upgraded all their supported synths with these features. Eric also wisely has Omnisphere's GUI update and show the user what each knob does. Not only does this teach the user what is being changed, it's teaching the user which parameters matter within Omnisphere for a given sonic change. It's a really smart move, almost like an interactive session with Eric especially when the change modifies more than one parameter.

This is how I see it at least and why I think Eric spent considerable time and money making it happen. He's speculating several hardware-only users will consider Omnisphere as their first big software synth. After all, they have a computer and a DAW to record those synths...

[teilo]

Let me asking again. They except that people who already own a expensive hardware synth for the analog sound will use their synth as a midi controller for VST synth?

Yes, they are truly terrible people who are forcing, I say forcing you to use your $2000 synth as a controller for Omnisphere.

[Echoes in the Attic]

You pretty much have it right. It is a bit weird since the synth you’d be using as a controller already makes all those sounds, but there are some cases where it adds significant functionality, like polyphony, or the granular stuff with prophet x.

However I’d really like to see them create some templates for midi controller with screens like the Novation SL.

[cfanyc]

Please help me to understand.

I was watching a video on the new Spectrasonics Omnisphere 2.5 update. So basically, they want me to use my Moog Sub 37 or DSI prophet REV 2 as a VST instrument? They make a bunch of VST replicated the hardware and want me to use my analogue hardware synth as a VST midi controller???

Did I get this right?

Yes it is perfectly logical. I will explain by analogy: say you have and are accustomed
to driving a horse carriage and are skilled in pulling the horse's bridles to communicate to him
that you wish to start, stop or turn.

You also have a motor car manufactured by "Spectrautomotives"
that has a wheel, breaks, accelerator, gear shift etc.

Version 2.5 of the car offers the following great functionality:
you can drive your car by using your carriages bidles. That way you can experience the same
feeling as turning or stoping your car by pulling bridles rather than pressing on pedals
and turning the wheel which we all know is less fun than yelling, striking and smelling a big animal.

Moreover if you do not have a horse carriage but you own the spectramotives car,
you can still press the car pedals, turn the wheel etc
and see what the highly approximate effect on a horse carriage would be IF that horse carriage
had 300 break horse power, 5 second 0-60mph acceleration, ability to make a turn at 0.95g etc.

You see, all of this is perfectly logical and exactly what you needed but you never
knew that you did!