Massive X - what's your review?

I have the idea that the plug-in has not been tested extensively.
Graphic problems with the intel GPU, everything lower than HD 3000 then it does not work properly.
The rotary knobs are then missing.
Furthermore, it goes wrong in the browser, selecting a massive preset (old) starts Massive X in INIT mode.
You cannot use all presets that respond in this way.
I simply solved it. I removed Massive X from my system and bought the Pigments plugin from Arturia.
Does not require AVX and works from OpenGL 2 and is also NKS, and you can load your own samples.
You also immediately get a manual, I think that's always handy.
No problem after installing this software.
Ni will think about this with the entire development team.

I'm still happy , René

 

Not NI's problem those HD 3000 chips don't support the minimum required OpenGL version.

It also doesn't sound at all like Massive X and doesn't do many things Massive X can do.

 

Great man, I'm not going to respond to your response. O sh!T i did.

René

 

Still a question, which version should it be openGL?
Because that is nowhere to be found on the NI site.

René

 

https://www.native-instruments.com/en/products/komplete/synths/massive-x/specifications/

OpenGL 2.1.

 

O.K thanks for the info, then it should work with my i5 2500K processor.
That goes to openGL 3.1. But unfortunately that doesn't work here.

René

 

I've got also Pigments and Phase Plant. It's nice they have manual, it's nice they you can see LFO, waves and so moving.

Yet,...

Massive X has a sound both do not have.

It's comparing AC/DC with Slayer or Metallica(when they were not so known)

It's a big difference, the sound of Massive X

 

Why not just buy a cheapo graphics card?

 

After more than a month with Massive X and other synths available for free (Iris 2) to similar-priced synths like Hive 2, Serum, or for much less money, like SynthMaster 2.9, or within the NI universe like Absynth 5, I have to say that Massive X is a run-of-the-mill middle school-level programming achievement, an embarrassmen that significantly taints NI's reputation. How can Massive X be taken even remotely seriously as a "flagship" synth? Why was Massive X ever released like this?

 

The question is: Why don't you use Hive 2, Serum, or Synthmaster (lol), but chose to rant about MX here instead? None of those even sounds remotely as good as MX, by the way.

And this shows that you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about anyway:

 

It was a bit of a rant and perhaps a bit harsh. Why do I have to justify to you my taking a few minutes commenting about a product I paid for not coming close to being what the company marketed the software as being, “a flagship synth”?

 

A month ago the synth was a just born baby. Now there is an update 1.0.1 - so the baby can grow to be a flagship in future?

 

Well you don't have to justify how you spend your time, but I think chk's comment was reasonable given the cartoonishly over the top invective without mention of one single thing you take issue with. We get it, you're pissed about...something, but dropping by to say "Massive X sucks" is about the least constructive thing you could say. So what is your beef? I don't think anyone disputes that it needs work. E.g., my biggest pet peeves at this point are the lack of midi learn and woefully substandard automation implementation, the parallel LP-LP filter still seems borked, and I'd appreciate a tagged browser as well (although as an aside, gentlemen of NI, thanks for overhauling how the menus work; that had really been getting on my nerves, and the 1.0.1 update makes selecting wavetables feel far more fluid.) See? Not so hard. So what in your view would elevate MX above "middle-school-level"? Because what you've written is functionally indistinguishable from garden variety trolling. Make more signal and less noise.

 

Hive 2 does sound pretty great, tho. It has some more interesting wavetable things happening.

 

Yeah, i guess it's pretty subjective anyway. Just needed a "sledgehammer" argument for my post, to counter the "sledgehammer" arguments in Nagato's post. I personally do like Massive X's sound better than the synths mentioned though.

 

Although many things could be improved, I have a lot of fun with it
The 1.0.1 already made MX life a little easier.

 

In all honesty and without trying to be rude, it's piss poor, so much wrong and so much of a difference to the original massive, first impressions count right ? The UI is terrible, envelopes are out of date looking, LFOs are troublesome to use, I don't know if it is just me but everything feels stiff and slow. The thing that got me about the first massive was it was easy to get results, massive x is certainly more work but I honestly wish that NI had kept the workflow of the original massive in massive x, ten years in the making ? feels like it was flung together in 5 minutes.

I bought it without going for a trial, if I had tried it I wouldn't have bought it. This honesty is such a disappointment, I would have expected much more for a successor to a synth that was so dominant in the last decade especially one that costs so much (129 for an upgrade). It's enough to put newcomers off from buying another NI product in my honest opinion, why is midi notes not always triggering the oscillators? wtf ? I know it's a simple solution but this is the type of thing that would stump a newcomer for weeks, everything is hidden away, not laid out in a clear and decisive manor.

Sorry but it feels more like a work in progress than a finished item certainly something that has made me question my loyalty to buying NI products.

 

It's a very powerful synth with a good sound. Really would be nice to have a proper manual though. Some things are buried in tabs. Graphical feedback is a must in this day and age!

 

for some reason, Massive X cannot recognize its own presets