So, what do people who have used Massive think of it?

I'm finding it pretty interesting that people are *completely* missing the point of Massive. Probably the fault lies in the fact that people don't understand what real Wavetable Synthesis actually is.

A wavetable synth has the ability to scan an oscillator through a wavetable _during_the_duration_of_a_note_! As an example, you could hold down a key and have a square wave sound slowly change to an electric piano sound then morph into a saw wave then dissolve into white noise...you could do this without amp or filter envelopes, or any use of a filter at all! Now, start adding filters, envelopes and other modulations and you can create the kind of movement and unique timbres that you *can't* get using any other synthesis method!

I have a short intro to Waldorf Microwave wavetable synthesis, that is very close to the way Massive operates, on my website for anyone with further curiosity:

http://www.carbon111.com/xt_intro.html

 

I'm very impressed by Massive; I was playing arond with the new Virus last month, and though "this is one of the best sounding synths I've heard in a long while". After getting Massive, I feel pretty much the same way.

Very pleased with the presets, the programmatic/patching interfaces are nicely done, but end of day, it's the sound that counts. And I find it really provides a new sound palatte to choose from.

Wanted to mention that I'm super pleased with the bass presets. Haven't quite sorted out the magic behind those sounds, but very nicely done.

Tom

 

I like:

a) how easily-programmable it is;
b) the GREAT modulation-routing possibilities;
c) the built-in reverb sounds pretty gorgeous;
d) that you can make a fairly complex & evolving sound from only one oscillator (a lot due to the wavetable & modulation possibilites), e.g:

http://www.hitsound.co.uk/massive/ ..then download 'Test Pad JC.ksd'


I dislike:

a) The insane amount of CPU load - even on my dual 2.5gHz G5. (Every other NI instrument is less CPU-taxing, & they don't sound any worse for it either);
b) that an independent & modulatable pan-position is NOT available for EACH oscillator.. (very sad oversight IMHO);
c) that 'eco' mode has such a bad hf roll-off... (check it out on an analyzer!);
d) that some presets actually change tonality in the different sound-quality modes. e.g.: Load the 'Algebra' preset, hold down a note, then switch between Ultra/High/Eco modes.... the resonance-generated bleep in the mid frequencies (from the noise-osc + filter2 settings) changes pitch... (but I expect that may be due to the change in the oscillators' HF output in the different quality-modes).

So..... Massive hasn't blown my socks off in the way Absynth 3 did the first time I heard that, but nevertheless, it's a nice new addition to the armoury.

Cheers,

JC

 

i have only just touched the surface but already have a couple of tunes started ... it seems like a monster ... it seems fantastic ...

 

So... I've been reading the hype too. So I downloaded the demo and began running through the presets. The method I use to demo a synth goes like this: Run through the presets. If you make it through them all without ever being inspired to tweak one, or have it lead into a riff or ambient bed for a loop... uninstall it. Sure a lot of people would say "presets don't make the synth" but I think that's kind of silly. That's part of what I'm paying for right? Also, don't presets serve to show the synth off at its best? I fell in love with Absynth that way.

I'd say about mid way through the presets I just basically lost interest. This was what all the fuss was about? To me Massive has that "NI" sound of a Reaktor .ens. Don't get me wrong, I like it... but I own it already. Warm? What is warm about this synth? I'm not saying I don't think its tone is good, but warm is the last word I'd use to describe it. To me Massive sounds like an insectoid alien computer's idea of what a synth might sound like. (this is not to say I think this is bad)

So I started reading these reviews. Takes all kinds, I guess. I think I learn more about human nature than I do about software on these forums. I went back and started listening to the rest of the presets... then for a hoot I switched to Zebra2.

Man, Zebra2 is beautiful. Of course we all have different ears and tastes. When I found Zebra2 I was so excited about the synth that I couldn't stop going through it's presets and tweaking and tweaking. Lots of great jams came out of just the demo.

So download the Massive demo. If you like it, by all means buy it, but for my money there's no place in my plug-ins folder for it. I already get the insectoid alien computer sound from other NI products.

 

Each to his own.

I've heard quite a few people saying Massive sounds like Reaktor. I think what you're hearing is Mike Daliot's input both with the synth itself and the sound design rather than any specific thing about the sound generation itself. Mike's responsible for both Photone and Carbon 2, which are the two Reaktor synths I most often hear compared to Massive. Bear in mind though that even Mike's FM7 patches sound Reaktorish... which, as you would say, isn't a bad thing.

I'll agree with you about Zebra being a great synth; I own it myself. However, I've found some sounds in Massive that I can't get anywhere else. Your mileage may vary.

ew

 

Hi Ew,

Now I realise why I like Massive so much, Photone and Carbon2 are two of my favorite synths!

Cheers

Andy

 

Massive versus Rapture?

Both of these synths use wave-tables so I would think they would be natural competitors. I've tinkered a bit with both demos. I think the Massive GUI is far better and doesn't require a telescope to change parameters. Soundwise, I think Rapture is really smooth. I'd be curious to hear someone's opinion if they have experience with both of these soft-synths???

 

Re: Massive versus Rapture?

Massive by a mile. I'm still not totally sold on Massive's sound but the UI is superb. I'm having a hard time finding anything to like about Rapture.

 

Finally picked up Massive -- for the longest time I've felt like Reaktor has so much, I'd be crazy to be adding anything more to my softsynth arsenal (and have Rapture and Dimension Pro, too). What is it with this stuff? It's only software right, should all sound the same? who needs more than one?

Massive is well worth it, even if you have all of the above. Yes, conceptually it and Rapture are somewhat similar, but they go to completely different places, both sonically and in their interfaces.

It'll take a little more time for me to think through an outright comparison between Massive and Rapture, but suffice to say, I'm not letting go of either!

I don't see where people are saying Massive "sounds like Reaktor" -- that's kind of like saying the ocean sounds like the wind, well yes, sort of.....

I don't mind the Massive CPU load, there's a LOT going on here! As with other things, infinite polyphony is not the only story to be told; Massive is great even with just a few, beautiful, wavetabley voices.

The interface is so wonderfully done that I've pointed it out to some work colleagues in an entirely different discipline as a true model for deep, creative thinking about how to solve some very fundamental UI problems, brilliantly and elegantly. Massive is well worth the money for this alone.

Above all, however, as James has pointed out: it's the incredible flexibility and extensive mod routing, like the Q, that makes this a hugely flexible instrument to play with. I feel utterly spoiled by the range of things configurable in Massive, and I'm a happy Nord Modular user of many years, along with Reaktor. The ease of assigning modulation control all over the place is another foundational innovation in Massive; if you like to think through mod matrixes, at the level that only the Q, NM and A6 provide on a non-modular hardware synth, Massive tops them all on that front, in terms of ease of use and flexibility of architecture.

And finally, sure, Reaktor is far more architecturally open, but much more time consuming to work through; it's truly a deep synth toolkit. Massive takes you up just a couple of levels, does a lot of the groundwork for you and gives you an instrument that really focuses on sound design and playing more (Reaktor is a mad scientist's ultimate laboratory, where the molecules of sound can be deconstructed completely).

That's how I feel about it so far (first day).

 

Yeah, I'm a big Rapture fan, but Rapture is a hundred US dollars less. I think that's where my negative feelings about Massive stem from. Is it good? Yes. I did actually like it.... I just don't think it's worth $300 when similar quality (but different sound) synths cost 1/3 it's price... sometimes less. I was able to pick up Surge for $150 and it's an amazing synth. Komplexer is $250. I think if Massive was $199, I'd probably already own it.

I know I'm hyper critical at times, but all this is from a man who owns a lot of NI's software. Reaktor, Absynth 3, 4, Kontakt, Battery 2, Electronic Instruments 2 ... I love them all. Massive sounds good, but not $300 good when you can get a hardware synth for that much. I'd buy a Roland SH-32 or Alesis Micron in a heartbeat before I got Massive for $300. I wish NI had decent crossgrade discounts, ie 30@ off for Absynth owners or something like that. Komplete doesn't interest me as I'll never need or use Guitar Rig as I do all my guitar stuff using dedicated hardware.

 

I do agree that the price is a bit higher than I've seen elsewhere. On the other hand, NI is a smaller company, and I'm more than willing to part with an "extra" hundred dollars if it will help lead to further development and support of this new synthesizer. I do hope that will be possible, that, because this is a software synthesizer, it is much more open to transformation and growth than it would be if it were "locked in silicon," so to speak, as a hardware instrument.

Separately from that, though, I also feel like the browser/filter/database system for patches is so compelling as a separate feature, that again, it's well worth it to me as something I'd pay extra for along with such a Massive synth. Plus there are obvious innovations and effort made on the overall interface design that, again, justify the extra cost to me.

I think at this point it's far easier to design a softsynth that is competitive sonically, at a fundamental level, than it is to design one that -- like many of the best hardware instruments -- is pleasant and inspiring to use. One of the biggest negatives of soft synthesis for me remains the simple experience of playing and sound-designing with them; and I think Massive takes some big steps forward solving those problems.

 

Oh BTW I must either be lucky in my config or have set things up right, because, for example, I can use the factory preset "Breathstine" with 13-16 voices playing, CPU only hits 47% (this is in standalone mode, mind you), with sample rate set to 96kHz (why? filters sound better to me on NI stuff at this rate, I'd rather freeze a line of sound at this sample rate than have more polyphony/tracks going on at lower sample rate) and ASIO latency at 5ms.

Things are certainly better than they used to be, a few years ago! For what Massive is doing in this patch, I consider that pretty efficient system resource useage.

 

Like some one else here, my first synth was an ARP. Mine was an AVATAR... same as an odyssey but with a guitar interface instead of a keyboard.

Times have changed indeed.

I find myself reaching for massive first when I am composing a new song. Massive works great for my writing style (fusion and prog rock).

I love the interface. Best I have used since the oberheim expander I used to own. (I kick my self for getting rid of that one). Most any sound I have in my head I can get to quickly with massive. Easy to stumble on to sounds I never thought of as well.

I do agree that massive is not naturally warm. It can be made to be warm with a little work but all sounds seem to start out on the cold side (as compared to atmosphere or rapture for example). Never the less, the current composition I am working on uses 3 instances so I must like it well enough.

BTW: it is a resource hog so in cubase, I record one track and freeze it right away before recording the next track. It's the only way I can keep from driving my computer crazy.

 

I'm using Massive with Zebra 2 and Atmosphere and ArcDev mainline, between those I've got everything I need covered.

When I first went through the presets I was fairly unimpressed but when you start abusing the macro controls you can open up so many new sounds. I'm loving the intuitiveness of the synth, it makes sense to me and I'm very lazy when it comes to learning new technologies.

I'm really happy with the sounds I'm getting from it, sounds I could not get elsewhere. I've not used reaktor before so can't compare the two. Massive is a joy to write with, a truly inspiring synth.

Ta