FYI!! Melda SoundFactory ON SALE til JUNE 30

[exponent1]

UVI Falcon is another example of absolutely horrendous UI design. It is notoriously bad as far as I can tell.. so yeah, using that as a counter example just shows on what level MSF is.

.. and of course you can directly compare Sytrus or FM8 matrix part to MSF. There is literally no reason for MSF not to have it setup as a matrix instead of a bunch of sliders and clickable junk on the UI. It is after all a "module" within MSF and could thus have it's own proper UI for the FM section.

Same goes for the Additive section.. or anything really. All of the modules that are separate entities could have their own proper UI which is suitable for whatever task they perform. This is basically the main curse of Melda thinking in general. He has a set rigid framework. I suspect this is simply convenient from a coding point of view. It's the only good reason for such a rigid framework to be present.

What other comparable synths exist in the market that are better in your opinion?

[Aloysius]

One Ping Only

[bmanic]

What other comparable synths exist in the market that are better in your opinion?

In terms of capabilities or UI design?

For UI design, for specific functions like FM, the classic matrix as I've mentioned already, is easiest to use in Sytrus and FM8. I'm sure there are other synths doing FM this same way (those that have freely assignable routings). Synths that have ready made routing algorithms for the oscillators can make do with just a few sliders (basically volume per osc and multipliers for pitch).

For Additive anything that has a row or matrix is way easier to use. Examples would be Vengeance Sound Avenger, Apple / Logic X Alchemy 2 or basically any macro that properly uses the Sine Osc module in Reaktor. One needs to be able to quickly "paint" the partials volume, pan and phase (the latter feature which is missing in MSF as far as I can tell). Try creating a 64 partial sound in MSF and tweak every one of those partials volume and pan. Yeah.. supremely painful.

In terms of possible features only the mega modular systems like Reaktor / Max MSP and such can compete (ignoring a few omissions found in MSF that make it less powerful than it is).

Like I said, MSF is super powerful.. on paper. But it's not all that fun to use in all categories (FM and Additive being some of the main culprits.. or any complex patches that uses tons of routings and modulations). It isn't let down by the potential power of synthesis! It's let down, as always with Melda, with it's user interface (again, not meaning graphics!!).

[David]

…
Anyway... those of us who know what good design is, see the potential with Melda but also are frustrated because the Vojetch's stubborness - we can see how great these products could be with a better UI and workflow. Alas...

So, this is actually a complement, then?:) Why else keep hammering on the poor guy's head to be different! be different! if you don't actually really want what he's got to offer, right?

That said…
Got an example software product (of any sort) with as many features and as deep as MSF that you think IS well designed?

By which I DON'T mean "looks better".

I mean, software that is as complex a tool with as much power to be almost anything the user wants, but handles the infinity of options and possible uses much better, with a better designed solution for how to handle that level of complexity?

For those rare folks who WANT such complexity in a modular synth toolkit, I'd say Vojtech's solution for providing that is as good as any, and is only reasonably compared with just that level of tool. Sure, you need to learn it to use it, just as with any complex tool. Using MSF isn't the first time I've had accept that the tool "is what it is", because I want what that can uniquely allow me to do.

And sure, some other guy/company will probably come up with some other mix of features and usability for this same sort of purpose as MSF, that will appeal to others more, maybe even me, too. But waiting for better means not doing what can be done now.

I'm game for the learning and the accepting; just PLEASE don't start ditching features because not every body is; that's MY opinion.

As I see it MSF's NOT, at heart, just an Instrument synth (it's a FACTORY! TaDa!), and compared to all the other build what you want super-synths out there, it's go its own way of trying to be something else, different, something purposefully unique…

No surprise, and GREAT! Thanks for THAT! I'm looking for unique!

I don't WANT every synth maker to have the same opinion about what's going to be useful to me and what's just too much. I WANT complex, odd tools, and makers not hammered into conformity by somebody else's (or even "MOST" people's) idea of "good design", or working off whatever is currently popular (Euro-rack?…NO thanks, here). In my experience, the more product makers bow to the inevitable pressure to make what "most everybody" wants, the more the products start to suck. Or lose their flavor, at the very least.

(As a result, I do live with the knowledge that, very often, if I like it…it's doomed )

As always, all this is just "…to me."

(I'm kinda allergic to pronouncements about How Things Really Are…sorry:)

[NeoKortex88]

What is your involvement with this David? You seem to really love it (I can see why).i just wish some other people with more knowledge than me would shill it.

[David]

What other comparable synths exist in the market that are better in your opinion?

…

OK, parallel question, good answer…

But, still:

All those other synths you mention, you've already got access to them, right?

So maybe the Bitwig Grid, if it ever allows plugin hosting, will be much better… I'll certainly check it out.

But it won't be MSF.
It'll be different.

And for me anyway, different tools for doing the same sort of infinitely varied task as making sounds or music or ART, always mean different results.

Which, to me…is good.

[wagtunes]

David, the problem with synths this deep (and there really are very few) is that all of them are train wrecks as far as usability. Problem is, where the other synths are an engine car and a couple of caboose wrecks, Melda is a 1,000 passenger car wreck mixed in with a nuclear reaktor meltdown and earthquake all rolled into one typhoon cataclysm.

It is only from working with MPS for so long (purchased in 2015) that I can navigate this Hollywood magnitude disaster with relative ease. That doesn't mean that doing so is fun. It's not. It's very time consuming. Not something you really want to deal with if your primary goal is to make music. Sure, if you're a tinkerer and your main enjoyment comes from designing things, MSF is probably as good as it gets. It should keep even the most skillful designers quite busy. And while I used to be like that, these days, I just want to make music. Most likely, I will be using MSF for the presets, only doing slight tweaks here and there.

And yeah, we're all different. We all get into different things.

Thank God.

[David]

What is your involvement with this David? You seem to really love it (I can see why).i just wish some other people with more knowledge than me would shill it.

Purely a bewitched user!

MSF's by no means my first deep entanglement with a new sound-making tool, but it's been a very long time since I've been ensnared so deeply and for so long by one.

Somebody asked, way back, why this thread wasn't posted in the Sales category rather than Instruments.

Well, "for me", because MSF's an EVENT, not just a sale:)

[mevla]

Plus it really sounds great to me. All this is just "to me…" Folks are different; what a concept:)

As one who creates music using mostly (sometimes slighty) tweaked presets I find MSF's sounds much better so far than MPS. MPS is rather cold whereas a same patch in MSF sounds way better. If it continues like this MSF will probably become part of the regular arsenal. So I'm not that much concerned with any UI corner cases (or not so corner cases) as I do not design sounds or rather, the ones I do for synthesis learning purposes I rarely use in creating pieces.

Hopefully whatever functionality makes MPS as it is, won't be 100% transferred in MSF so that MSF will retain the current characteristics.

[bmanic]

…
Anyway... those of us who know what good design is, see the potential with Melda but also are frustrated because the Vojetch's stubborness - we can see how great these products could be with a better UI and workflow. Alas...

So, this is actually a complement, then?:) Why else keep hammering on the poor guy's head to be different! be different! if you don't actually really want what he's got to offer, right?

That said…
Got an example software product (of any sort) with as many features and as deep as MSF that you think IS well designed?

By which I DON'T mean "looks better".

I mean, software that is as complex a tool with as much power to be almost anything the user wants, but handles the infinity of options and possible uses much better, with a better designed solution for how to handle that level of complexity?

For those rare folks who WANT such complexity in a modular synth toolkit, I'd say Vojtech's solution for providing that is as good as any, and is only reasonably compared with just that level of tool. Sure, you need to learn it to use it, just as with any complex tool. Using MSF isn't the first time I've had accept that the tool "is what it is", because I want what that can uniquely allow me to do.

And sure, some other guy/company will probably come up with some other mix of features and usability for this same sort of purpose as MSF, that will appeal to others more, maybe even me, too. But waiting for better means not doing what can be done now.

I'm game for the learning and the accepting; just PLEASE don't start ditching features because not every body is; that's MY opinion.

As I see it MSF's NOT, at heart, just an Instrument synth (it's a FACTORY! TaDa!), and compared to all the other build what you want super-synths out there, it's go its own way of trying to be something else, different, something purposefully unique…

No surprise, and GREAT! Thanks for THAT! I'm looking for unique!

I don't WANT every synth maker to have the same opinion about what's going to be useful to me and what's just too much. I WANT complex, odd tools, and makers not hammered into conformity by somebody else's (or even "MOST" people's) idea of "good design", or working off whatever is currently popular (Euro-rack?…NO thanks, here). In my experience, the more product makers bow to the inevitable pressure to make what "most everybody" wants, the more the products start to suck. Or lose their flavor, at the very least.

(As a result, I do live with the knowledge that, very often, if I like it…it's doomed )

As always, all this is just "…to me."

(I'm kinda allergic to pronouncements about How Things Really Are…sorry:)

Your question is weird. You purposefully seem to be accepting bad design and excusing it with the capabilities. MSF could quite easily be much better with quite simple tweaks to the user interface (again, not talking about graphics).

What I'm trying to say is this: If we go by your logic then the answer would be a C++ compiler with a super intuitive and awesome text editor + Juce VST framework is both much more powerful than MSF and much better designed.

See the problem? Not sure why you are trying to forcefully twist the subject. MSF is based on modules. Bad design is all over the place in melda plugins but he could at least start by making sure each module is well designed. FM and Additive parts already mentioned and their problems pointed out.

The multiple pop-up windows (of which you can have up to 4 layers deep if using MXXX!) is just plain silly in 2019. We have advanced much further than that. Web browsers use tabs for a reason. It could also be easy to just show a clickable nice little text path to help navigation within the hierarchy, like Reaktor does. There are tons of very basic UI tricks to be used, many of which have been pioneered in other industries.

Yes, MSF is supremely capable of amazing sound design possibilities but that doesn't make it useful at all when so many parts of the software is downright archaic to use.

You can run Linux completely text based and do all your photo editing that way too if you so like and it can be extremely powerful.. but there are real reasons why nobody does that.

[mevla]

As a Factory it will generate products, products which will be designed to expose certain parameters in an easy way, as can be seen is so many other Melda plugins (all the Turbo series for instance in their easy mode).

[David]

David, the problem with synths this deep (and there really are very few) is that all of them are train wrecks as far as usability. Problem is, where the other synths are an engine car and a couple of caboose wrecks, Melda is a 1,000 passenger car wreck mixed in with a nuclear reaktor meltdown and earthquake all rolled into one typhoon cataclysm.

It is only from working with MPS for so long (purchased in 2015) that I can navigate this Hollywood magnitude disaster with relative ease. That doesn't mean that doing so is fun. It's not. It's very time consuming. Not something you really want to deal with if your primary goal is to make music. Sure, if you're a tinkerer and your main enjoyment comes from designing things, MSF is probably as good as it gets. It should keep even the most skillful designers quite busy. And while I used to be like that, these days, I just want to make music. Most likely, I will be using MSF for the presets, only doing slight tweaks here and there.

And yeah, we're all different. We all get into different things.

Thank God.

Well, I don't give a Tinkerer's Damn what…

Oh, jeez, sorry, I meant, yes, I guess I AM a tinkerer, happy to be, altho I see myself more as a Lover of Musical Machines. Yes, exactly that. More so than a music maker. When I want MUSIC, I tend to go to the masters. But ever since synths, and guitar FX, and home studios, well, I realized I pretty much preferred to make Sounds and all the tools that go with that, rather than to shoot for Music (or buy HiFi gear). More interesting, actually. More…interactive. More ongoing…

…and yeah, what you said.

[bmanic]

As a Factory it will generate products, products which will be designed to expose certain parameters in an easy way, as can be seen is so many other Melda plugins (all the Turbo series for instance in their easy mode).

.. and for that Factory to be successful and ultimately useful for the layman, it needs sound designers, preferably seasoned professional sound designers. This in turn means they need good return on investment which means time. Bad UI design is one of the biggest time killers in the world.

See the problem?

It's the reason you see FabFilter Pro-Q plugin in virtually every studio in the world instead of Melda EQ or DynEQ (which is supremely capable and awesome). User interface is one of the core reasons some software become more popular than others, even when less capable. A good interface can be a game changer.

Reaper is a great example (though I'm one of the weird ones that likes it's UI and functionality). It's never going to be mainstream until it's cleaned up and made to be intuitive and easy to use from the get-go. Yet it is by far the most capable DAW out there, by quite a margin.

ProTools took over tape recording and the whole digital market when it came out (there were alternatives at the time!) due to superior workflow and also partially by being the cheapest option out there.

Microsoft Windows was born due to the superior user interface of Apple Macintosh.

Smartphone market exploded after iPhone was introduced.

Google won the whole friggin search engine race due to user interface (no bloat on screen and extremely powerful search engine which negated false search results = user interface).

This is why I'm always so confused when people disregard smart intuitive design. It really is one of the fundamentals of a successful product.. and it can be seen everywhere.

[exponent1]

As a Factory it will generate products, products which will be designed to expose certain parameters in an easy way, as can be seen is so many other Melda plugins (all the Turbo series for instance in their easy mode).

.. and for that Factory to be successful and ultimately useful for the layman, it needs sound designers, preferably seasoned professional sound designers. This in turn means they need good return on investment which means time. Bad UI design is one of the biggest time killers in the world.

See the problem?

Then don't buy it. Don't use it </EndOfDiscussion>

[Sampleconstruct]

As a Factory it will generate products, products which will be designed to expose certain parameters in an easy way, as can be seen is so many other Melda plugins (all the Turbo series for instance in their easy mode).

.. and for that Factory to be successful and ultimately useful for the layman, it needs sound designers, preferably seasoned professional sound designers. This in turn means they need good return on investment which means time. Bad UI design is one of the biggest time killers in the world.

See the problem?

This nails it bmanic. I invested a fair amount of time dealing with MSF, made plenty of suggestions during Alpha/Beta, none of them were acknowledged. The chaos of having numerous pop ups floating on various monitors while making patches was so off-putting that eventually I quit MSF and haven't touched it since. Actually I find it much worse than working in MXXX which I use frequently.