Correct me if I'm wrong but NI hasn't released a non-Reaktor synth since 2009's Absynth 5
-
- KVRian
- 702 posts since 19 Mar, 2014 from Denver, CO
As long as they keep putting out stuff as good as Monark, I'm cool with it.
- KVRAF
- 3321 posts since 2 Jul, 2007
I'm of two minds - in that I really do not mind if the synth is standalone or hosted in Reaktor. The sonic quality of synths like Razor, Monark and Prism is really good and I purely love to program in them. In a way, putting synths inside of Reaktor is basically sheer genius - the ASIO, MIDI and other host functions are right there on board in Reaktor, so the synth designer can concentrate on making great synths that sound like nothing else.
I guess it's NI's "philosophy", because the exact corollary is Kontakt and it's framework approach to setting up a sampled instrument. If you look at them simply structually, Battery is of the same structure (except for the envelopes, which I might be wrong about anyway.
What I do mind, like many others, is the file system for Reaktor, which forces the user to save presets to a copy in another directory when working from within a host. This is recent, maybe just from last year, maybe from 2012, and it really f**ked with my work aesthetic. I do not see that they need to protect the factory presets from user presets - if you screw something up too bad, you can just get the original factory presets from somewhere.
I may be incorrect, but I think the same decision made by NI occured at the same time that their programs would no longer permit the active tinkering about with Reaktor ensembles' internal structure while being used in a host, even if they were not factory ensembles. I do not like that. You can't even load samples into an ensemble while working in a host (I think - please tell me if I'm wrong and how to do it).
I guess it's NI's "philosophy", because the exact corollary is Kontakt and it's framework approach to setting up a sampled instrument. If you look at them simply structually, Battery is of the same structure (except for the envelopes, which I might be wrong about anyway.
What I do mind, like many others, is the file system for Reaktor, which forces the user to save presets to a copy in another directory when working from within a host. This is recent, maybe just from last year, maybe from 2012, and it really f**ked with my work aesthetic. I do not see that they need to protect the factory presets from user presets - if you screw something up too bad, you can just get the original factory presets from somewhere.
I may be incorrect, but I think the same decision made by NI occured at the same time that their programs would no longer permit the active tinkering about with Reaktor ensembles' internal structure while being used in a host, even if they were not factory ensembles. I do not like that. You can't even load samples into an ensemble while working in a host (I think - please tell me if I'm wrong and how to do it).
-
UltimateOutsider UltimateOutsider https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=216800
- KVRian
- 810 posts since 5 Oct, 2009 from Portland, OR
Reaktor and Kontakt are instrument platforms, and there are some obvious advantages (both for NI and users) to the approach of releasing instruments as ensembles/kontakt instruments versus standalone apps and plugins.
For one thing, if they made them standalone, they'd still be using the Reaktor or Kontakt engine internally anyway. Because, why rewrite something you've already written? You'd just end up filling your HD with duplicate code if everything was packaged as a completely discrete product. Another advantage to the platform approach is that if NI fixes a bug in Reaktor or Kontakt, all ensembles and instruments automatically benefit from that fix with just a single Service Center update, without requiring developers and users to have to update each product individually.
The weird thing, to me, has always been that people often seem to have more of a problem with Reaktor-ensembles-as-products than they do with Kontakt-instruments-as-products, but some of the commenters here have shed some light on that, I think? I do agree that NI could make some improvements to both the browsing and preset systems in Reaktor. I just don't have any philosophical objections to the platform approach.
For one thing, if they made them standalone, they'd still be using the Reaktor or Kontakt engine internally anyway. Because, why rewrite something you've already written? You'd just end up filling your HD with duplicate code if everything was packaged as a completely discrete product. Another advantage to the platform approach is that if NI fixes a bug in Reaktor or Kontakt, all ensembles and instruments automatically benefit from that fix with just a single Service Center update, without requiring developers and users to have to update each product individually.
The weird thing, to me, has always been that people often seem to have more of a problem with Reaktor-ensembles-as-products than they do with Kontakt-instruments-as-products, but some of the commenters here have shed some light on that, I think? I do agree that NI could make some improvements to both the browsing and preset systems in Reaktor. I just don't have any philosophical objections to the platform approach.
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 883 posts since 4 Jul, 2012 from Blue Crest, Eastern Europe
As I said in the first post, not taking any side here. It's clear that NI is finding it comfortable to make synths in Reaktor, which btw I think is a great environment for instrument creation. However, I feel that Reaktor ensembles lack the depth of NI's stand-alone plug-ins and because of that they tend to be niche products, used for specific purposes.
What I find strange is the lack of a solid developer market for Reaktor as opposed to Kontakt.UltimateOutsider wrote:Reaktor and Kontakt are instrument platforms
- KVRAF
- 14943 posts since 26 Jun, 2006 from San Francisco Bay Area
Well, from my POV, the above is fine...cryophonik wrote:Yeah, what the hell is wrong with NI, coming out with Maschine 2.0 and Studio, Battery overhaul, a bunch of new effects and new Reaktor synths, a bunch of new libraries for Kontakt and Maschine, new keyboard controllers, new Traktor what-not, but not catering to MY needs,....well, except most of the stuff that I just mentioned. Buncha lazy bastards.
...except that they're calling it a new "Komplete" version. That implies something... maybe not a full new version of everything, but I'm with the OP. I keep seeing them add a few new libraries (which I don't care about) and some marginally interesting effects (that I don't care about) and in the end the result is I feel like it's not an upgrade... at least not for me. How can you announce a full new version upgrade that does not include a single update of one synth?
Zerocrossing Media
4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~
4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~
-
Echoes in the Attic Echoes in the Attic https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=180417
- KVRAF
- 11031 posts since 12 May, 2008
Ya the biggest difference I think is saving presets. With Kontakt you save a file on disk. With Reaktor you save it in the ensemble, thus requiring saving the ensemble to save the snapshot.UltimateOutsider wrote: The weird thing, to me, has always been that people often seem to have more of a problem with Reaktor-ensembles-as-products than they do with Kontakt-instruments-as-products, but some of the commenters here have shed some light on that, I think?
-
Echoes in the Attic Echoes in the Attic https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=180417
- KVRAF
- 11031 posts since 12 May, 2008
That's a tougher sell. There is a massive factory library and an ungodly amount of ensembles in the user library. It could keep you busy forever. Comparatively there is not a massive collection of quality sample-based instruments sitting around for free. Sampling can also cost a fair bit of money to use good equipment, hire players etc. for a commercial library whereas Reaktor is just programmer time (often a labor of love I would say).cocoazenith wrote:As I said in the first post, not taking any side here. It's clear that NI is finding it comfortable to make synths in Reaktor, which btw I think is a great environment for instrument creation. However, I feel that Reaktor ensembles lack the depth of NI's stand-alone plug-ins and because of that they tend to be niche products, used for specific purposes.
What I find strange is the lack of a solid developer market for Reaktor as opposed to Kontakt.UltimateOutsider wrote:Reaktor and Kontakt are instrument platforms
- KVRAF
- 35249 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
I think that's just a question of what you see as the preset. In Reaktor you also save a file to disk - that file is the ensemble (or instrument/macro etc) - ensembles etc are Reaktor's presets. A snapshot is a subpatch.Echoes in the Attic wrote:Ya the biggest difference I think is saving presets. With Kontakt you save a file on disk. With Reaktor you save it in the ensemble, thus requiring saving the ensemble to save the snapshot.UltimateOutsider wrote: The weird thing, to me, has always been that people often seem to have more of a problem with Reaktor-ensembles-as-products than they do with Kontakt-instruments-as-products, but some of the commenters here have shed some light on that, I think?
- KVRAF
- 3321 posts since 2 Jul, 2007
Can third-party developers make Reaktor ensembles with lock-able components, like Razor and Monark?cocoazenith wrote:As I said in the first post, not taking any side here. It's clear that NI is finding it comfortable to make synths in Reaktor, which btw I think is a great environment for instrument creation. However, I feel that Reaktor ensembles lack the depth of NI's stand-alone plug-ins and because of that they tend to be niche products, used for specific purposes.
What I find strange is the lack of a solid developer market for Reaktor as opposed to Kontakt.UltimateOutsider wrote:Reaktor and Kontakt are instrument platforms
-
Echoes in the Attic Echoes in the Attic https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=180417
- KVRAF
- 11031 posts since 12 May, 2008
True but ensembles aren't really manageable files as sound presets since they are often pretty big. NKIs are small and reference the big files (samples) which happen once.aMUSEd wrote:I think that's just a question of what you see as the preset. In Reaktor you also save a file to disk - that file is the ensemble (or instrument/macro etc) - ensembles etc are Reaktor's presets. A snapshot is a subpatch.Echoes in the Attic wrote:Ya the biggest difference I think is saving presets. With Kontakt you save a file on disk. With Reaktor you save it in the ensemble, thus requiring saving the ensemble to save the snapshot.UltimateOutsider wrote: The weird thing, to me, has always been that people often seem to have more of a problem with Reaktor-ensembles-as-products than they do with Kontakt-instruments-as-products, but some of the commenters here have shed some light on that, I think?
And even though the ensemble is technically the preset, if we are comparing Reatkor ensemble workflow to a VST workflow, then we need to consider the snapshots as the preset since the ensemble is analogous to the VST.
-
- KVRist
- 305 posts since 25 Jun, 2010
Yeah saving the ensemble as preset is pretty much a no go as they tend to be huge, especially with included sample banks.A lot of them shrink to about 5-10% of their size if you zip them but that's still not ideal. Snapshots need to work as individual files so when you have multiple instances open in the host you don't risk over writing them from each other. I either have to reference the other instance to amend the snap on another number or create different snap banks for each instance which sucks. NI should rewrite snaps to be individual files like vst presets that can be morphed like they can now as I suspect the reason they are the way they are is largely because of the morph function. an upgrade to the Reaktor snap browser and snap systems is greatly needed.
- KVRAF
- 23077 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia
No.SODDI wrote:Can third-party developers make Reaktor ensembles with lock-able components, like Razor and Monark?
- KVRAF
- 35249 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
I wasn't saying save the ensemble as a preset, an ensemble is a preset for Reaktor, and a snapshot is a sub preset. I agree with the multi instances problem but since version 5.6 or 7 it has been possible to save independent presets in .nrkt format as individual files on your hardrive as well so you could always do that then consolidate them in a single snapshot bank afterwards.tonkatodd wrote:Yeah saving the ensemble as preset is pretty much a no go as they tend to be huge, especially with included sample banks.A lot of them shrink to about 5-10% of their size if you zip them but that's still not ideal. Snapshots need to work as individual files so when you have multiple instances open in the host you don't risk over writing them from each other. I either have to reference the other instance to amend the snap on another number or create different snap banks for each instance which sucks. NI should rewrite snaps to be individual files like vst presets that can be morphed like they can now as I suspect the reason they are the way they are is largely because of the morph function. an upgrade to the Reaktor snap browser and snap systems is greatly needed.
- KVRist
- 446 posts since 13 Mar, 2008 from Finland
Indeed, too bad it is not included in K10...Sampleconstruct wrote:Molekular certainly is one of the most interesting FX releases so far this year.