One of the most versatile and surprisingly creative synth on the market. Designing patches on the spectrum image (almost as in a photoshop UI) is intuitive and easy and, most of all, gives the user a different point of view, which often results in very original sounds. Automations, macros, playback and loop settings, together with the graphic design you can make directly on the sound file's spectrum, give endless possibilities to musician's creativity.
hmm, i use a early 2010 MacBookPro 6,1 (with orig. Samsung 830 SSD and i7 CPU, 8GB - with samples stored on a "fast" external firewire hard disk) and did not reached the system limits with Iris 2 so far, but mainly used Iris waves in the samples.
There are other products from iZotope which grabbing much more system Ressources like Breaktweaker if runned faster then 48 kHz for me, requiring track bouncing often in my projects with higher track counts and resolution.
But getting such computation without lack of fidelity typically costs large CPU (and partly bus) ressources - even if the critical code got optimized for that type of CPU. If your CPU did not offer a fast and capacitive variant of the cpu/math features the software relys on this could result in a significant performance loss. So having a modern workstation CPU is important if you want to run professional audio processors.
IRIS 2 does feel like a tool that plays samples with basic loop functionality and applies effects and modulation. The spectrum analyser window is helpful but is best left tucked away to reduce CPU load.
The spectral filtering window is the core of Iris, that's what it's all about, if you tuck it away and don't use it, you have totally missed the point of Iris. Using it as a sample player of course will only yield frustration due to the limitations, it's made for spectral resynthesis/filtering, nothing else.
I'll stick to creating within the limitations of the software or hardware. Usually the case in additive synthesis. One can't get frustrated when using a machete to shape a block of wood, because one decided to use it.
Yeah, so now i just reduce the release times and polyphony, use shorter samples and single cycle wave forms, hand draw wave forms and paste them together in external editor. import these into Iris2 scrape out some frequencies in the loops. Spectrum window is useful but was hoping it opens out to a separate window with options for zoom and x-y axis. Since we're using a spectrum analyser, maybe the ability to specify frequencies and Q factors in the filters/tools would be really helpful. Multiple loop points and the ability to change the sequence of these loops for each loaded audio would be appreciated. The visuals are aids, but we still create sounds by hearing and feeling them, adjusting the frequencies and amplitudes that affect that experience. A request for finer control for a better sound. Howz about it Izotope?
After 6 months of use would have to say it sounds good. All patches made in IRIs2 are enhanced by the effects section which is quite good. The distortion sounds nice.
Still best to use as a tool for ambient sounds, pads and fx.
The options for modulation and control are numerous.
Best results seem to happen when the samples are edited and processed well before importing.
The recent crossgrade sale should make it attractive enough for most to get Iris2. I guess iZotope did listen when they sent the survey out, that the owners of Iris and the other tools would like a better deal for upgrades to the latest versions on offer.
BTW I was convinced enough to get Nectar2 Production Suite. Their effects sound good.
After reading a thread squaring Off Hive / Syelnth today, I have to laugh; I bought Iris 2 several months ago.
...and Apple's inclusion of Alchemy out of the box (for under $200, $29 for Mainstage!) has prompted some of these sales too I believe. I see that iZotope has reduced Iris 2 by 50%, and of course there have been direct comparison's given Alchemy's Spectrogram. I've watched videos comparing the two.
Often Omnisphere and Alchemy are directly squared off in a similar fashion. MacProVideo calls the latter "The Most Powerful Synth on the Planet:" http://www.macprovideo.com/tutorial/wha ... pro-x-10-2
And Iris 2 costs *almost* as much as Logic -- ON SALE.
No idea what you tried to "compare" there (j own Iris, the former Alchemy and MainStage plus Omnisphere in version 2).
Just beside the fact that Alchemy isnt developed as AU and VST anymore - Iris is Iris and Alchemy or Omnisphere doesnt include the full functionality plus bring in resource overhead for users just want to work with a timeline spectrum tool like Iris.
I would like to think that each product is not a one-size-fits-all type of product... each has it's advantages and disadvantages. The more a software programmer develops a program and attempts for it to become a "jack of all trades" it tends to become a "master of none." iZotope's Iris 2 is a FINE product, as is Alchemy, as is Omnisphere 2. I have zero information on MainStage. I simply think that in order to create a unique synthesizer the developer has to include and not include some features to focus on what they intend the product to DO.
You could also try out 2CAudio's Kaleidoscope which is processor intensive but worth every strain on your computer if you are attempting to manipulate original sounds in unique ways.
I guess I am just saying that each plug-in has it's inherent capabilities but there will never be one plug-in to "rule them all".