|
Is the subtractive soft synth market oversaturated? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| palm |
| quote: | Originally posted by tehlord
Half the fun of making music is fantasising about/buying new gear.
So no! |
im oposite, when i want gear i cant do , when i got that gear i can do even less than , when i get rid of everything things start to happen. |
|
|
| Eric J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Richard Butler
I'd say the future lay in specialist dedicated synths that focus on ONE task.
Suboombass is an example of a specialist product that saves me time having to trawl for a good bass sound. I've just bought this and it's damned hot.
Next we need one JUST for killer leads.
One just for pads. The string machine by gforce is based on old solina type sounds, but we need a dedicated string beast for those searing sizzling trance pads.
Next one just for fx - meaning practical sweeps etc. I know there are sample packs for this but for me they dont give enough control for example over the release time.
One just for rolling mid bass and arps. |
I'm sorry but that's just ridiculous. There is not THAT much difference between synthesizer products that you can't perform all these tasks with a single subtractive synth, or even just an FM synth for example. All it takes is even some basic programming skill to accomplish all of these tasks. The idea of a specialized synth for each task not only smacks of narrow mindedness and laziness, but would greatly contribute to more generic music flooding the market. |
|
|
| evo8 |
Yes.
Plus every new sub synth that comes out seems to be more interested in "sounding analog" as opposed to anything else |
|
|
| Kysora |
| quote: | Originally posted by Richard Butler
One just for pads. |
Atmosphere anyone?
| quote: | | One just for rolling mid bass and arps. |
Eh, from a production standpoint I can't see why anyone would focus on mid basses and only mid basses. They really aren't that hard to find/create. And any synth with an arpeggiator can be used just as well as any synth made to "specialize" in arps. Unless you just want a ton of premade ones, in which case you can just use z3ta+.
I don't really know much about subtractive synths but just as a thought experiment, can anyone point out two that are virtually the same? It's hard to say the market is saturated until examples of copy-cat synths can be mentioned. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| quote: | Originally posted by evo8
Plus every new sub synth that comes out seems to be more interested in "sounding analog" as opposed to anything else
|
No kidding - that catchphrase has gotten so old and stale now that it's lost all meaning (if it ever had any - not all analog synths sound alike, after all).
| quote: | Originally posted by Kysora
...can anyone point out two that are virtually the same? It's hard to say the market is saturated until examples of copy-cat synths can be mentioned. |
TerraTec Komplexer and Waldorf Largo are very similar from what I've heard.
You probably won't find too many exact copycats, but I'd say that there are far more similarities between most of the subtractive soft synths out there than there are differences. At its a core, a basic subtractive synth is not much more than a tri/saw/square/sine oscillator(s)/noise source, a filter, some LFOs and envelopes to change the sound over time, and some effects (usually). The biggest differences between most subtractive synths is simply the number of each, the number of modulation sources and destinations, the types of filters (e.g., lo/hi-pass, band-reject, band-pass, formant, etc.), and the GUI. Of course, some companies beef up their subtractive synths by adding some additional synthesis capabilities (e.g., FM, vocoder, sample-manipulation, etc.). |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Abso-freakin'-lutely.
I think the saturation is because subtractive synths are really easy to build, not too difficult to work with, and can be made to sound pretty good. It doesn't matter that they all sound pretty much the same, everybody wants a piece of the pie.
Corollary: FM synths are much more difficult to get the right sounds out of, so even though they are far more versatile, they don't get the same love, and you don't have 500 mickey mouse software companies all looking to capitalize on the demand.
I'd like to see more interesting products come out, like Cameleon (its dinky preset library was its downfall), Absynth (gaining in popularity, but still way over most people's heads), Blue, and some of the one-offs by independents like UGO. Even the sampler-hybrids like Trilogy tend to have a longer shelf life than an average subtractive soft synth. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
Good points, DigiNut.
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'd like to see more interesting products come out, like Cameleon (its dinky preset library was its downfall)
|
Have you checked out Alchemy? It covers all of Cameleon's capabilities and a lot more. It will even import Cameleon presets.
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Even the sampler-hybrids like Trilogy tend to have a longer shelf life than an average subtractive soft synth.
|
I'm kinda surprised that there aren't more romplers on the market trying to compete with Nexus. That's obviously been hugely successful for many years (despite its many detractors), and is a pretty straightforward model, yet there's nothing really giving it a run for its money that I'm aware of. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
I'm kinda surprised that there aren't more romplers on the market trying to compete with Nexus. That's obviously been hugely successful for many years (despite its many detractors), and is a pretty straightforward model, yet there's nothing really giving it a run for its money that I'm aware of. |
My guess as to why is that they are harder to put together. For a truly great sample-based instrument you need to have truly great samples. The developer has to think very carefully about what to put in the box, as opposed to simply throwing in a million knobs and switches and farming out to someone like Rob Papen to figure it all out and make a bunch of demo patches.
And no, I haven't tried Alchemy yet. |
|
|
| hexadecimal |
| quote: | Originally posted by Richard Butler
I'd say the future lay in specialist dedicated synths that focus on ONE task.
Suboombass is an example of a specialist product that saves me time having to trawl for a good bass sound. I've just bought this and it's damned hot.
Next we need one JUST for killer leads.
One just for pads. The string machine by gforce is based on old solina type sounds, but we need a dedicated string beast for those searing sizzling trance pads.
Next one just for fx - meaning practical sweeps etc. I know there are sample packs for this but for me they dont give enough control for example over the release time.
One just for rolling mid bass and arps. |
This was meant to be sarcasm, right? |
|
|
| tehlord |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
I'm kinda surprised that there aren't more romplers on the market trying to compete with Nexus. That's obviously been hugely successful for many years (despite its many detractors), and is a pretty straightforward model, yet there's nothing really giving it a run for its money that I'm aware of. |
I'm surprised it has any business at all tbh.
I completely rate it for it's sound and simplicity but it is just WAY too expensive.
For the same price as an expanded Nexus (€1399!?) I bought a used Virus Ti, and it's pretty much the street price for a new Ti2 desktop.
The Nexus VST should be $99/€99 and the expansions maybe €25, and even then it's still a pricy option.
Even better would be the VST itself to be free (like Kore Player) and pay a reasonable price for the expansion packs. |
|
|
| Fledz |
ing hell, you can get Omnisphere for $500 and that S all over Nexus multiple times. Nexus is waaaayyy too expensive.
Oh and yea, Spectrasonics releases free soundbanks. Hell, you could even add Trilian to that and still have it cost less than a fully expanded Nexus. |
|
|
| tehlord |
What am I talking about.
I paid £900 for the Ti |
|
|
|
|
