1. Hi everyone,

    Apple just released Logic Pro 10.5 for MacOS 10.15. We found out that Crush Pack, Mod Pack, Replika, and Replika XT will crash.

    Our teams are currently working on a fix, and we hope to have this out to you as soon as we can!

    Best wishes, 
    The NI Team

    Dismiss Notice

Is Massive Dead?

Discussion in 'MASSIVE + MASSIVE X' started by sijarvis, Dec 30, 2019.

  1. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    Here's one for NI to answer. Has Massive come to an end?

    Now MX is on the scene, does this mean Massive is to be made redundant? If so, when is support going to end?
     
  2. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    Massive won't receive any new features, but will just receive compatibility updates if necessary, I'd assume. Until when, that's a good question, indeed.
     
  3. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    Personally, I think the old dog still has a few incredible patches to be coaxed out of it yet, although without any new tricks added to its architecture, it'll soon be committed to the VST graveyard. I find it hugely more efficient than MX, although the sound is IMHO a little colder.

    Anyway, as I said, I think this question is really one for NI to answer.
     
  4. Uwe303

    Uwe303 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    5,203
    Massive is still a great synth and worth to use. And it also has a different sound and also a different gui/layout/functions wich guides you to different sounds in my opinion. And of course also the vast amount of free and paid patches available for massive is a argument for it for some people.

    Uwe
     
  5. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    It's not, really, I tested it. With full polyphony (64 voices) and Ultra quality in old Massive, it's the same CPU usage (or higher) than MX, with a similar patch (high filter resonance with lots of modulation, long envelope release times...)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    Not on my computer, which shows an increase of about 5-10 times the CPU consumption.....and it's my computer that matters to me.
     
  7. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    Well, I suppose it also depends how well a particular CPU executes AVX instructions. On my i7-6700K the situation is as I mentioned.
     
  8. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    Feel free to swap computers. Then you can be as disappointed as I am with MX's greater CPU usage. Don't get me wrong. i think MX is brilliant. I just don't care for its consumption. Oh how I wish they'd develop both.
     
  9. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    Yeah the only computer I would be swapping with would have even better AVX performance, which means MX would perform even better than on my current machine :D
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Uwe303

    Uwe303 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    5,203
    I have a old i5 and a newer ryzen 5 2600x and MX performs good on both, but if I don't forget it I will also make a test, only problem it strongly depends also on the patch I guess.

    Uwe
     
  11. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    i've got an old i5 3320m laptop. I get a 14% cpu hit on one note, all oscillators using all the modulators once only....no fx. I'm pushed to get a 3% cpu hit on massive with large chords......still enjoying MX though.....thank **** for freeze function
     
  12. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    Yeah that sounds about right for a 7 years old CPU... AVX performance of those early mobile CPUs wasn't exactly stellar.


    I did notice that MX could use more CPU for a single voice, but as you play more and more voices it scales the CPU usage much better, it's not single voice CPU usage * number of voices played. Ultimately, I get to the situation I explained: old Massive at Ultra quality can in some cases use even more CPU than MX.
     
  13. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    I'll check that out....i've been spending more time experimenting with the possibilities than writing music. To be honest, i'd actually like to see more of everything, so I shouldn't really worry about cpu until it falls over completely.Bring on as many new features as possible I say!
     
  14. tkurgpold

    tkurgpold NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    88
    Given that Massive is 13 years old now, I think it's a pretty sure thing that it's only going to receive the occasional bugfix at this point. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's been mentioned by NI before.
     
  15. sijarvis

    sijarvis NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    243
    I'm not that regular on these forums so I wouldn't have read that.....it would still make me happy were NI to add a few new features, even if it is destined for the vst grave.
     
  16. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    This is a very good viewpoint! But any new features likely won't be happening for old Massive.
     
  17. Paule

    Paule NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,143
    So old Massive isn't dead but in pension?
     
  18. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    16,725
    That's a good way to look at it, I'd say!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Uwe303

    Uwe303 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    5,203
    Yeah but still rocking like the rolling stones
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Paule

    Paule NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    6,143
    I'm in pension too since last year.
    Me not .. still sound designing.