Released: Massive X

Discussion in 'MASSIVE' started by Mick @ NI, Jan 16, 2019.

  1. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    14,974
    It would be objective criticism if it were actually audible aliasing, but there is none that's easily audible as far as I can tell (and the graphs show it at way below noise floor). Or do you have a patch/audio example/screenshot of a very apparent aliasing happening?
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  2. telecode101

    telecode101 NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    354
    You are free to offer personal opinion and perspective.

    Fwiw.. I am not hearing grunge or aliasing on my setup. But at the same time I am not hearing anything special. Might you, I haven't really delved into it. I just tinkered with the presets. I think I need to make my own sound with it to get a better idea of how good it is.
     
  3. arachnaut

    arachnaut NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    2,822
    I think the sound is extraordinary. But, as that was what I was expecting, I didn't come out with immediate praise.

    It looks like I will have a lot of fun with it. And it seems very cpu efficient.

    It would be nice to have a user library.

    The 316 presets are all over the place, so no doubt one will find plenty to love or hate. They do demonstrate lots of possibilities.

    The only major feature I would like is being able to drop in my own wavetables or a tool that could take single cycles and form wavetables.

    I plan to do some stress testing to see how many 64 voice instances with monster presets I can make to gauge the AVX impact. (That would be better done with a standalone program, though, so we will see.)

    The BIOS on my system shifts the CPU clock from 5.1 GHz to 4.7 GHZ on sustained AVX threads (like Prime 95) so it will be easy to see if that happens a lot.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2019
    • Like Like x 2
  4. Russellmus

    Russellmus New Member

    Messages:
    18
    Odd, I have the AU component and it's working as expected in Logic :/
     
  5. Tony Jones

    Tony Jones NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    157
    Mine us working now after forcing validation and restarting
     
  6. chrisp303

    chrisp303 New Member

    Messages:
    13

    wrong. the audibility or not of the aliasing is a subjective criteria. you wont hear it. dogs will. therefore, that criteria is subjective. Its especially subjective if your response is that the aliasing is just not 'easily audible'. Easily audible to whom? What if I hear better than you? Sadowick's recent crit, though, was objective: there was a concrete method applied that could be reproduced independently of who was doing it. That meant that the method as well as the results could be addressed and criticized, which is what happened. Full marks then to Sadowick for applying an objective, repeatable and scientific method, yes?

    wrong. Massive X is marketed as having "Immaculate sound and complete sonic freedom for advanced sound design"

    And what does 'immaculate' mean?: "perfectly clean, neat, or tidy."

    Massive X then was not just marketed as being clinically clean, but as being perfectly clean.

    Does aliasing matter? probably not. But the crap that got flung at someone for being objective and transparent does. I don't get what people want anymore. If I got that kind of well structured feed back from my customers when my products went live I would be absolutely thrilled even if it eventually turned out some of the criticism was wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  7. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    14,974
    No, dogs won't hear it either, at -130 dBFS nobody can hear it. This is beyond what is considered silence in actual life.

    BTW, Serum also has aliasing. Every digital synth has aliasing. None of them are "perfectly clean". It's just a matter how far down the noise floor the aliasing is pushed, and how hard you have to nudge the synth to make that aliasing noticeable.

    That's the thing, Sadowick's feedback was neither well-structured nor objective or particularly correct or well-informed in a number of points, and these have been laid out already.
     
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2019
  8. GuidoPa

    GuidoPa NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    96
    Someone an idea when the manual will be there? A week, a month, together with an update?
     
  9. Tony Jones

    Tony Jones NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    157
    They mention no more presets for a month. Hopefully at least one patch before then!
     
  10. Big Gnome

    Big Gnome NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    418
    It was objective insofar as he made an attempt to back up his kneejerk assumptions empirically, but frankly, at best it serves as an object lesson in the difference between valid and sound reasoning. It really was piss poor: I watched the videos, and he misidentified harmonic partials as aliasing (and failed to note the oscillators' spectral filter which is there specifically to eliminate these); he asserted the oscillators were inferior based on the presence of the harmonics he misidentified; he misattributed a bunch of the harmonics to the oscillators rather than the saturation present in some of the filters (there are edge cases where this can produce audible aliasing, but it's negligible in practical use); he complained that the LFOs are not bandlimited, as if that weren't a ludicrous expectation to have--are there any plugins with bandlimited control signals? Like, even one? And, most egregiously, when he was corrected on his core point about aliasing, he made a video in which he popped a freakin' distortion plugin in low-quality mode on it and claimed the aliasing from that was produced by MX. (He made other weird errors along the way as well such as comparing the exciters to LFOs. Huh?!) I'm going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt and assume profound ignorance of the subject, because otherwise I can only see it as a hatchet job.

    Moral 1: Don't get your information from yahoos on YouTube.

    Moral 2: Gazing at scopes—especially if you don’t know how to interpret them—isn’t “science”, it’s not even engineering. Don't mix with your eyes.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  11. drzhnn

    drzhnn New Member

    Messages:
    2
    The scale of this aliasing hysteria is rather scary. It reminds me of the sad story of Ableton Live 6 audio engine fidelity. Remember? Some dude read somewhere that Cubase uses 64-bit for mix summing and Live is still at 32-bit. And he made an angry post about it. Some smart people, including devs tried to explain to him how insignificant that difference is for real life scenarios, and for Live specifically, and how switching to 64-bit would just increase CPU consumption without any noticeable improvement of audio quality... And boom! Audio forums exploded with new posts from other users about how unacceptable such low resolution audio engine is for professional audio production - no wonder pros prefer Pro Tools and Cubase! Anyway... the hysteria was so intense that next Live version was released with the "enhanced audio engine with 64-bit mix summing" and many users reported that their old projects started to sound much "cleaner" and "discernible". There even were phase cancellation tests of Live 6 vs Live 7 mixes that had a difference of several dB :) I really wish history won't repeat itself this time ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Azbest

    Azbest New Member

    Messages:
    2
    How do I make LFOs start from the beginning every time I press a key?
     
  13. drzhnn

    drzhnn New Member

    Messages:
    2
    You need to switch LFO to restart mode (Loop RST)

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. chrisp303

    chrisp303 New Member

    Messages:
    13
    Its a perfectly valid point given those very 'control' signals were marketed also as audio sources: 'It’s also possible to route modulators as audio sources'.

    He didn;t do that. He described the look of them on a scope as looking like a single cycle of an LFO. They do.

    Well like everyone here I do get information from you tube. Infact I've invested over a grand in NI products lately in part because of the very yahoo you're maligning. Ive learnt more about how to use Massive 1 from Sadowick's tutorials on it than from anyone here. This was no hatchet job nor is he ignorant. Hes brainy as f$%k and has been a unofficial ambassador for NI products for ages. Pity to sour the relationship, no?

    He knows how to use scopes and used them to show that shaping the decay envelope stage also shaped the release which wouldn't be obvious given there is no visual feedback. He also showed that the diagram representing the exciter stages was inaccurate. Good job, huh?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    14,974
    It's not a valid point because control sources are very often and in many synths that are not full-on modulars not calculated at full audio rate as the rest of the synth. In MX, they are calculated at 1/4 the internal engine sample rate (which is 88.2k, so control signals are 22.05k).

    Band-limiting/anti-aliasing the LFOs would have severe effects on the quality of the resultant waveform, because it would add ripples into the signal (side-effect of band-limiting) which would screw up the LFOs completely. So yes, it's a completely ridiculous request and it's extremely unlikely that it will happen.
     
  16. chrisp303

    chrisp303 New Member

    Messages:
    13
    It wasn't a request, it was a comment that the sound quality wasn't great when using the LFOs as audio sources. It sounds like you're saying the comment was stupid because of an implementation decision which no-one could possibly have known about. That's hardly fair. The fact these LFOs were advertised as audio sources might have led him to expect something different.

    Meh, Im no expert but I am reading a thread on DSP at the mo which is discussing band limited LFOs without the merest hint that the idea is daft or even unachievable. Infact, it looks more like an approach that is made in practice with various pros and cons. Im reading other threads that discuss swapping in band limited wave forms from 20hz upwards as the rate moves into audio territory. Yet another thread I'm reading is an actual tutorial on creating band limited oscillators which can be used below 20hz to provide 'true LFO's with the usual shapes.

    No one is suggesting it is a silly idea though?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    14,974
    It was when he said "I'm sure they're gonna fix it". Except they won't fix it because there's nothing to fix. LFOs can be used as audio sources as a crutch (i.e. in case you used up all the insert FX for other purposes), but nobody should expect the same fidelity from them as the main dual wavetable or OSC/PM OSC modules that are available as insert FX.

    I didn't say it was unachievable. I said it would create artifacts which would mess up the main purpose of LFOs, which is modulation. You would hear those ripples from band-limiting in the modulations you do (especially pitch modulations). Hence, it IS a silly idea to use band-limited LFOs for modulation.

    It's even sillier to swap between naive LFOs and band-limited LFOs depending on LFO rate, this is likely to blow things up as soon as you start modulating the LFO rate...
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. Big Gnome

    Big Gnome NI Product Owner

    Messages:
    418
    No it isn't. Setting aside heaps of extra processing overhead--seriously, that's up to eight extra oscillators running at the internal sample rate, plus the price of bandlimiting for each--EvilDragon is absolutely on point concerning the resulting ringing artifacts. You wouldn't want, e.g., a square wave LFO that behaved like this would you--?

    [​IMG]

    Because that's more or less what you'd be getting. Same deal with every other waveshape to a greater or lesser degree based on harmonic content.

    They do not. The salient difference between an LFO and an EG is periodicity, not bipolarity. Hell, I have honest to goodness, integrated, non-modular hardware synths with bipolar EGs. Doesn't make 'em LFOs; doesn't make 'em like LFOs. But that's neither here nor there--he didn't seem to understand what the exciters were and characterized them spuriously.

    I'm not maligning the guy, I'm pointing out some of the many areas in which he demonstrated his ignorance. Brainy as f$%k he may be, but at least in this case he hasn't a clue what he's talking about--I'm otherwise unfamiliar with the guy's work and I suppose I can withhold judgment, although based on his performance here I am definitely not inclined to look to him for insight about anything else related to digital audio.
    There are better places to learn about audio online. For example, Sound On Sound is an excellent publication all around, Vladislav Goncharov has some terrific technical blogposts about digital audio (having more to do with EQs and other mixing tools, but still, great stuff), and I strongly recommend Mastering Audio by Bob Katz; and if you’re more into videos than print media, look up pretty much anything by Dan Worrall. He’s someone who really knows his stuff, and does do a fair amount of thorough synthesis related material.

    Of course he doesn't. He mistook relatively low frequency harmonic partials for aliasing and mistook aliasing produced by a distortion plugin running at Fs for aliasing produced by MX--I consider that magnitude of error to be disqualifying from being taken seriously, not to mention the other rookie errors he made based on the same poorly conducted, poorly understood methods. The exciter diagram "looks" perfectly good vis a vis the resulting signal by the way, but that's not a point worth making: sound isn't a visual medium. It doesn’t matter how they look on a scope, it matters how they sound in context, and they sound very nice insofar as pinging a comb filter or adding interesting transient information. Don't mix with your eyes. And don't ever, ever, ever trust spectrum analyzer bros. They know not of what they speak.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2019
  19. chrisp303

    chrisp303 New Member

    Messages:
    13
    Well I know sweet F#$k all. So I can't tell whether you are right or these guys are right who are discussing ..... LFO Bandlimiting in wave table synths and swapping in band limited versions as the rate moves past 20hz.

    https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=163606

    or here

    https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=470275

    where they also discuss it. In this discussion the take seems to be closer to yours, in so far as they basically advise not to bandlimit LFOs, but one contributor says:

    "Note that modulating even with a bandlimited LFO can still produce out-of-band frequencies - in practice you can either ignore this and live with the aliasing, or modulate in an oversampled way and then filter and decimate the result. Doing the latter would probably also go a long way towards removing any effect from aliasing in the original LFO."

    Whats striking to me is that the contributor discusses bandlimiting LFOs as if it can be done in practice and that practical steps can be taken to get rid of unwanted artifacts. He doesn't remotely suggest its a daft idea. But maybe it is. Who knows? You think it is. They think it isn't. Here is me, a layman, suspecting that its a contentious issue and therefore not at all a stupid suggestion.

    How hard it is to implement is moot. Whether NI can or will implement it in MX is moot. Don't get me wrong Im pretty happy with MX as is. Pity about those envelopes though. And good for Sadowick for pointing out the problems with them,.
     
  20. EvilDragon

    EvilDragon Moderator Moderator

    Messages:
    14,974
    Never have I said that it cannot be done in practice. But the real question here is, is it worth the additional CPU usage for a very niche use case, and the answer is - it likely isn't, you have IFX oscillators you can use instead of LFOs in audio rate mode. LFOs being as they are (AND working at 1/4 the audio engine sample rate!) is by design, and as such is unlikely to change.

    Exciter envelopes work just fine.