Dear Zebra

[pdxindy]

My thoughts on adding sample playback to Zebra.

It should for sure not be done in the regular Osc. It would not sound so good with OscFX and so on.

Massive X and Serum both have a "noise" Osc which can play simple samples as say a bowed attack sound to add realism. Serum allows the user to add their own samples and Massive X doesn't but it is otherwise a similar concept.

While I could imagine a very simple module in Zebra for that, using samples brings its own headache. Samples do not transpose well across the keyboard. They don't modulate well and you cannot change the basic timbre based on say velocity or key range. Thus you end up with Kontakt libraries with many layers of multi-samples and complex scripting in order to get realism.

I would rather Zebra stay with pure synthesis. I would rather see development time put towards creating more realistic attacks and noises for simulating acoustic/real instruments. There is fruitful ground for such development (not sure whether it would pay the bills) without depending on samples or incurring the drawbacks of them.

I have to agree! I've dabbled in sampling more this year and unfortunately my efforts haven't really resulted in anything much better than I imagined: realistic, solid sampling requires many, many layers of multi-samples to get the sound you're looking for without the chipmunk effect. It's the sort of thing that can very quickly balloon and you end up with Omnisphere. Not that I dislike Omnisphere at all, but it's sheer size requires not just a very large storage capacity, but an SSD is practically mandatory to avoid very long load-times: whether patches or the just loading an instance of the synth itself.

There's some benefits to sampling without a doubt and it can open up new avenues that weren't otherwise there, but I can understand the reasoning behind not wanting it at all as well. Where-ever you stand, it's definitely not a requirement even though people might want it to be.

Zebra presets load quick and it is so easy to share one or more.

Also, it is easy enough in my DAW to create a layered instrument with sample and Zebra.

IIRC, Urs mentioned that some aspect of the physical modeling for drums that u-he was working on may make its way into Zebra 3. I find it exciting to continue to creatively expand the synthesis capability of Zebra.

There are so many tools that can play samples, but there is nothing quite like Zebra!

[medienhexer]

There are some interesting things you can do with samples.

- use as template for additive OSC
- use in granular OSC
- use in extreme time stretching for ambience
- use for convolution (reverb, delay taps, resonator?)

I voted No anyways, because that’s not what the poll is asking for. I don’t want Zebra to become a ROMpler or sampler for the reasons already mentioned. I have other plugins for that.

[lunardigs]

A thought experiment:

If I made a sample playback device with some nice features. But the only samples I add are those of a sine waveform, a sawtooth waveform and a square waveform. So it would be a pretty plain synthesizer, but you could add your own samples. Make your own multisamples. How many would I sell of these?

Now, what if I added a terabyte of absolutely amazing multisamples everything super mapped and mangled all of it you can ever think of?

Exactly.

If that sampler were a realtime effect, it could be amazing. Think something of a blend between Bitwig's sampler (with Cycles and Textures modes) with the ease/quickness of a delay-looper (guitar) pedal. Plus has transient/pitch detection and quantize tools. Something which could create beats at once from sampled material, like drumming or complex material like singing--and then feed it back in a variety of ways, realtime or not.
I'd buy that, if also it ran on Linux.

Although, such a thing doesn't seem like a good fit for Zebra--unless, we're talking about Zebrify. Yet, I can't even be sure of what Zebrify is! Somehow though, I use it all the time and I love it.

[Urs]

We're not sure yet if Z3 will have a Zebrify. We would like to evaluate the possibility of merging its functionality in Zebra itself, and then maybe offer the option to open Zebra on an effects slot in the host software.

[PieBerger]

I voted no. I really like the sample oscillator in Phase Plant, but already people are asking for multisample and granular functionality and I feel it will be the same for Zebra. People will always ask for more, more, more and adding even the most basic sample playback function in Zebra will almost certainly open the floodgates for users demanding additional features/content, which Urs has made clear on many occasions he's not keen on pursuing.

[medienhexer]

We're not sure yet if Z3 will have a Zebrify. We would like to evaluate the possibility of merging its functionality in Zebra itself, and then maybe offer the option to open Zebra on an effects slot in the host software.

Audio In. Vocoder?

[krans]

We're not sure yet if Z3 will have a Zebrify. We would like to evaluate the possibility of merging its functionality in Zebra itself, and then maybe offer the option to open Zebra on an effects slot in the host software.

This here!
This could turn out so cool.
The ultimate sound machine.

[fladd]

If I made a sample playback device with some nice features. But the only samples I add are those of a sine waveform, a sawtooth waveform and a square waveform. So it would be a pretty plain synthesizer, but you could add your own samples. Make your own multisamples. How many would I sell of these?

If it would be integrated into Zebra, then as many as Zebra sold, plus at least one more to the guy who just posted before you, and possibly many more

Now, what if I added a terabyte of absolutely amazing multisamples everything super mapped and mangled all of it you can ever think of?

Then you would probably sell much less, because no one wants multisamples in Zebra. Not sure why you would even bring this up, seems very far fetched.

[fladd]

I don’t want Zebra to become a ROMpler or sampler for the reasons already mentioned.

Being afraid that Zebra becomes a Rompler when sample playback is added is like being afraid that your car becomes a club when you add a stereo

[Urs]

Not sure why you would even bring this up, seems very far fetched.

Because I fully agree with this:

I voted no. I really like the sample oscillator in Phase Plant, but already people are asking for multisample and granular functionality and I feel it will be the same for Zebra. People will always ask for more, more, more and adding even the most basic sample playback function in Zebra will almost certainly open the floodgates for users demanding additional features/content, which Urs has made clear on many occasions he's not keen on pursuing.

A single sample (like Serum) leads to granular stuff. And to multisamples. And factory content. And to add-on content. And to a lot less time, emphasis and recognition for the synthesis engine.

If we added sample playback to Zebra, I'm afraid I'd spend the rest of my worklife listening to sample packs. But I really just want to make synthesizers.

And also, we have other ideas for sample manipulation. Just no time to ever get started on this.

[lunardigs]

We're not sure yet if Z3 will have a Zebrify. We would like to evaluate the possibility of merging its functionality in Zebra itself, and then maybe offer the option to open Zebra on an effects slot in the host software.

Audio In. Vocoder?

+1
I would FAR rather see a vocoder than a sampler.

I'm also in favor of Zebra as a singular plugin for instrument & effects.

[pdxindy]

Then you would probably sell much less, because no one wants multisamples in Zebra. Not sure why you would even bring this up, seems very far fetched.

That is what happens when samples are added... users start asking for lots more complex sample features and sound design for the synth starts focusing on samples and less on synthesis and the reputation of the synth starts becoming related to sample quality and so on.

Of course you are welcome to want what you want and ask for it. Speaking for myself, I am very glad Urs has not added samples to Zebra and that Zebra remains pure synthesis. Zebra is still one of my top 3 favorite and most useful synths and it is partly because it has continued to focus on synthesis and not gone the sample route.

[pdxindy]

We're not sure yet if Z3 will have a Zebrify. We would like to evaluate the possibility of merging its functionality in Zebra itself, and then maybe offer the option to open Zebra on an effects slot in the host software.

Audio In. Vocoder?

+1
I would FAR rather see a vocoder than a sampler.

I'm also in favor of Zebra as a singular plugin for instrument & effects.

A u-he take on a vocoder would be sweet!

[Shiek927]

As someone who loves the sound of VPS Avenger, but honestly think it's overboard with regards to what it can do, there genuinely are limits: there's a point where the amount of features becomes a real detriment. Yes there's practice, but even then there's never ever going to be one single synth that covers all of your needs. There's always going to be something done better in another synth or maybe you just prefer it's character. Putting every conceivable feature into a synth doesn't change that and only creates more and more of a burden. The simpler, easier to use synths like Hive and Diva are the ones I always reach for more.

Again, I do think VPS Avenger is a great synth with a great sound, but I'll say loudly that I do NOT want Zebra3 to be like VPS Avenger.

I completely expect Zebra3 to be the most feature-rich of u-he's synths. Even then, it should never come at a cost to it's own workflow, CPU, or even the expense of neglecting the raw sound of the synth. Because it's honestly true that, while the samples in synths like Omnisphere sound beautiful and very well mapped out, the raw tone coming out of the synth engine is often not quite as rich as other synths that are pure synthesis. Samples in synths are fun, but if it start's becoming more about samples, then you essentially have an extremely large ROMpler on your computer. Suddenly it's all about sample packs (which are an additional cost), preset-tweaking, and less about creating or learning how to make sounds. It's incredibly easy to pile on features that it taxes on the workflow, the CPU, it's ease of use, to eventually being less used or outright neglected over simpler, easier to use, CPU-friendly synths. Synths that, from a raw synthesis stand-out, sound better than synths like VPS Avenger or Omnisphere which place heavy emphasis on samples and sample packs: the former with a vast array of VERY expensive sample packs and the latter which is so large that you essentially need a large-story SSD drive to use it.

There's always going to be some sort of trade-off and that's fine. No synth in the world, even one toting to be an "all-in-one, the only one you'll ever need", will ever truly be the one one a user ever has. Instead, it should be about functionality and being the best at it's intended purpose. Zebra isn't even necessarily about having the most features on the planet: it's purpose is about being an easy to use, 'wireless' semi-modular synth. If it has just enough features to encapsulate that vision, it's all it really has to do regardless if it doesn't have samples or this or that.

[PieBerger]

As someone who loves the sound of VPS Avenger, but honestly think it's overboard with regards to what it can do, there genuinely are limits: there's a point where the amount of features becomes a real detriment. Yes there's practice, but even then there's never ever going to be one single synth that covers all of your needs. There's always going to be something done better in another synth or maybe you just prefer it's character. Putting every conceivable feature into a synth doesn't change that and only creates more and more of a burden. The simpler, easier to use synths like Hive and Diva are the ones I always reach for more.

Again, I do think VPS Avenger is a great synth with a great sound, but I'll say loudly that I do NOT want Zebra3 to be like VPS Avenger.

I completely expect Zebra3 to be the most feature-rich of u-he's synths. Even then, it should never come at a cost to it's own workflow, CPU, or even the expense of neglecting the raw sound of the synth. Because it's honestly true that, while the samples in synths like Omnisphere sound beautiful and very well mapped out, the raw tone coming out of the synth engine is often not quite as rich as other synths that are pure synthesis. Samples in synths are fun, but if it start's becoming more about samples, then you essentially have an extremely large ROMpler on your computer. Suddenly it's all about sample packs (which are an additional cost), preset-tweaking, and less about creating or learning how to make sounds. It's incredibly easy to pile on features that it taxes on the workflow, the CPU, it's ease of use, to eventually being less used or outright neglected over simpler, easier to use, CPU-friendly synths. Synths that, from a raw synthesis stand-out, sound better than synths like VPS Avenger or Omnisphere which place heavy emphasis on samples and sample packs: the former with a vast array of VERY expensive sample packs and the latter which is so large that you essentially need a large-story SSD drive to use it.

There's always going to be some sort of trade-off and that's fine. No synth in the world, even one toting to be an "all-in-one, the only one you'll ever need", will ever truly be the one one a user ever has. Instead, it should be about functionality and being the best at it's intended purpose. Zebra isn't even necessarily about having the most features on the planet: it's purpose is about being an easy to use, 'wireless' semi-modular synth. If it has just enough features to encapsulate that vision, it's all it really has to do regardless if it doesn't have samples or this or that.