Native Instruments Massive X Synth - Sequel to Massive (Out Now!)

[EvilDragon]

No corners were cut sound-wise.

[highkoo]

Pigments is pretty cool.

[pdxindy]

Can Massive X load user wavetables from Serum?

[BONES]

It seems you have absolutely no idea.

Right, because I owned two of them for years and, despite running classified ads in several publications, I couldn't find anyone willing to pay $100 each for them. So how, exactly, does that reflect on my knowledge? Or do you think I put them in the bin because I like throwing money away? At the time I was very keen to fund the purchase of a DW8000 and I'd have had it a month earlier if I could have got anyone to buy the 303s. So if we're looking for "clueless twats", how about you whistle and I'll point?

In any case BONES you definitely are objectively terrible.

If idiots like you are setting the standard, I am more than happy not to make that particular grade.

From a philosophical point of view, and strictly speaking, NOTHING is objective.

The thing with philosophy is that it's made up garbage and has no basis in anything objective.

Everything is how it appears to you. So if you see a ball and say 'this is a ball', this is subjective. If you measure a frequency of 1 kHz with your spectroscope, this is not objective either.

Provably untrue. There are any number of ways to confirm an observation that do not require the interjection of a human mind. That's the beauty of mathematics - if the equation balances, you know your perception is correct.

You guys should really read up on ancient Greek philosophy, before posting around on music forums. This would save the discussion from derailing into error, sin and the realm of Satan (yes, Christianity is about that too).

Again, philosophy is meaningless, made-up shit. It has nothing to offer unless you are unable to make sense of the world on your own.

No, they are not, because that's how they appear to you.

No, that's how they appear to EVERYONE. Then there is the inescapable fact that they behave in ways you can predict, which further confirms your observation. At the end of the day, the chance that it's not a ball effectively reduces to zero.

And the thing itself is not its attributes.

Ah, but that is precisely what it is, which is why we can describe it and everyone else will know what it is. You did it yourself, describing a ball and a 1kHz signal.

[JJ_Jettflow]

In case it passes you by, the beauty of the bass drop is that it acts like a duck. It's one of the benefits of the design. It gets out of the way of the resonant peak. It does have a downside, but it has a lot of upsides too. I have a couple of modules that have bass compensation on the ladder, it's basically a bleed circuit. The resonance just doesn't have the bite in that mode. I've turned it off on all of them.

+1 Absolutely.

I when I begin a mix, many times I will fiddle with the cutoff and resonance to make a synth sit better (or give a bit more edge if it is soft) before reaching for an EQ.

[liv]

Bump.

[spunkmuffin]

In any case BONES you definitely are objectively terrible.

If idiots like you are setting the standard, I am more than happy not to make that particular grade.

Yeah I often think I'm an idiot. That's life.

[Stefken]

The thing with philosophy is that it's made up garbage and has no basis in anything objective.

Actually philosophy shows us that science and mathematics we use there, are based on axioms.
These axioms, these assumptions, are therefore already a subjective view. And without these the whole system collapses. So much for objective.

Actually philosophy shows us how we make sense (and nonsense) of the world. Not the other way round.
It also shows us the one man's Minimoog in the landfill is another man's treasure on a stand.

[jancivil]

Studies - mapping - of the brain indicates that a lot of supposed knowledge of events (hearing is a good one) is really educated guesses.
For instance, you can totally fail to discern what is being said from a distorted recording of the words spoken and once you're primed with the clear recording it's all obvious. This is not objective perception, it's absolutely not your hearing, you now have a better take on it from the given data and you believe you hear more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyu7v7nWzfo

[jancivil]

Believing your ears don't lie is a kind of delusion. Believing you understand filters construction better than Moog is as well. Perfect illustration of Dunning-Kruger Effect. Everyone else is an idiot unless they arrive at the very same conclusive yet ill-considered answer you have. This is subjective, the top-down belief that you're the one smart person in the room (which leads you to wrong conclusions, in the failure to recognize what the better answer even looks like after repeated assumption you must have it above all) is you as the subject, your need to be that.

"philosophy is made-up garbage based in nothing..." a signal illustration of the issue.

[digitalboytn]

The thing with philosophy is that it's made up garbage and has no basis in anything objective.

Actually philosophy shows us how we make sense (and nonsense) of the world. Not the other way round.
It also shows us the one man's Minimoog in the landfill is another man's treasure on a stand.

Depth of thought...simplicity of expression

[BONES]

Actually philosophy shows us that science and mathematics we use there, are based on axioms.

Maybe yours does but not mine. And that's the thing with philosophy, you can choose any one you like, one that fits your preconceptions or one that challenges them or another that completely disregards them. It's just like religion, you can find one to support whatever absurdity you need to justify to yourself to get through your day. Not everyone needs that sort of crutch, though, some of us can see the world for what it is on our own.

Actually philosophy shows us how we make sense (and nonsense) of the world. Not the other way round.

Why would you need to be shown, are you incapable of observation and deduction? It's all there to be discovered, you only have to look with a clear mind (no bias, no preconceptions). The constant need for reinforcement puzzles me when the world is so easily understood. People, on the other hand, absolutely do my head in even though, as someone mostly on the outside looking in, I think I probably understand them better than most.

Studies - mapping - of the brain indicates that a lot of supposed knowledge of events (hearing is a good one) is really educated guesses.
For instance, you can totally fail to discern what is being said from a distorted recording of the words spoken and once you're primed with the clear recording it's all obvious. This is not objective perception, it's absolutely not your hearing, you now have a better take on it from the given data and you believe you hear more.

This is very close to what we see going on here. The consensus is that MiniMoog is a classic, one of the great synthesisers of all time, so everyone adjusts their perception of it to align with this thinking. OTOH, an objective observer, someone from a time before it became so revered, was able to assess it without their judgement being skewed by these new perceptions, and was therefore keen to get rid of it in favour of something better. Which is why I never saw anyone using a MiniMoog on stage - by 1979, when I first started going to see live bands, everyone had moved on to better synths.

Believing your ears don't lie is a kind of delusion. Believing you understand filters construction better than Moog is as well.

Who says they understand filter construction better than Moog? All I'm saying is that I can hear it's limitations. Everyone else can hear it to, they just seek to justify it as something worthwhile, like a used car salesman telling a customer than having a busted window that won't wind down is a safety feature.

Perfect illustration of Dunning-Kruger Effect. Everyone else is an idiot unless they arrive at the very same conclusive yet ill-considered answer you have.

Not at all, because everyone can hear exactly what I'm hearing. The difference is that some refuse to see it for what it is and use weak, easily refuted arguments to try and justify their position. e.g. The absurd, completely unsupportable "ducking" argument above.

This is subjective, the top-down belief that you're the one smart person in the room (which leads you to wrong conclusions, in the failure to recognize what the better answer even looks like after repeated assumption you must have it above all) is you as the subject, your need to be that.

You are now making assumptions. Yes, I have confidence in my opinions because I'm neither relying on someone else's opinion nor making them up as I go along. I can support my opinions with evidence, because I make a real effort to be informed before making any statement, but I am completely open to having my mind changed. All you need is better evidence, which in this case has clearly failed to appear thus far.

I just spent 30 minutes with Monark and Wasp, trying to find some settings that might shed at least a little light on why anyone might think the MinMoog's ladder filter was any good but, if anything, I came away more convinced than ever that it's not. It's a simple test anyone can do - single oscillator, 32 ft saw wave, cutoff at zero, no key tracking, contour at 50%, random pattern or arp in the bass area (C3-C4 on my host). Start with the resonance at zero, then slowly turn it up, taking note of the level in your VU meters. By the time you get the resonance to 100%, you will notice that the VUs are reporting a lower signal than when the resonance was at zero and you will hear with your ears that the lovely, fat oscillator sound has completely disappeared. Why would anyone deliberately make a filter that did that? Moreover, in how many situations would that be desirable behaviour?

When I did the same with Wasp - starting with settings that gave me the same initial sound as Monark and using the LP Fat filter mode - by the time the resonance got to about 80% the filter was screaming so hard I had to put a brickwall limiter on the output to keep it under control and the bottom end just kept getting fatter (caused by the cutoff frequency starting and ending at zero as it was modulated by the envelope, of course). To me, that's exactly the behaviour I expect from a low pass filter - attenuate the signal above the cutoff frequency and emphasise it around that frequency with resonance. i.e. If you modulate the cutoff, you should hear the resonance emphasising different frequencies as the envelope opens and closes the filter.

So what, exactly, am I missing here?

[ATS]

lol Bones got the world all figured out, glad one person out there does.

[functionform]

Pssst... in a Minimoog filter, when properly implemented such as in Monark, the overall volume drops when Resonance is turned up, but the bottom end from below 200Hz stays "unharmed". This gives the Minimoog the bass boost it is famous for. (But yes, you might have to compensate for overall volume drop)

Amen 1000x. Honestly Arturias line suffers from this and sometimes makes me regret purchasing the package. The Legend and Diva do so much better in this regard.

[highkoo]

An argument over the definition of an LP filter kvr, dayum!
Thats a fairly high bar for January, but there is whole year ahead.