When is someone going to release good presets for massive

Your response above is just one example of the complete rubbish you utter. Do you even take the time to read it before posting?

As I've already said, your an attention seeker who loves the sound of his own voice. The above is nothing other than verbal diarrhoea. Get a life mate.

Can I recommend that you go back to school and learn a bit more about reasoned argument. That is of course assuming that you have already left school? Your posts do seem reminicent of the musings of a 12 year old. Ahhhh .. maybe your in a school band?

 

This thread is hilarious! ew has the patience of a saint.

And like geoelectro says, it's inadvertently peaked my interest in several Massive soundsets.

Next up for discussion should be whether FL Studio causes mixdowns to be muffled. (perhaps FLS it could filter out the noise added by Massive?)

 

Hear hear! On all three points.
---
Me:

You:

When you said:-

 

Hehe! That's what I meant with my "short attention span" comment. Seems that FB wants others to dig up his own rubbish, because he himself has already forgotten that he wrote it and is too lazy to go back and read what's there for everyone to read.

Guess next he will "explain" why 1 + 1 = 2 is not always true.

 

And what exactly in it is rubbish? And why?

How so? And actually, you can't even answer a simple question because you know you cannot prove any point about me, and you support none of your claims so you just make more insults because you know you cannot supprt them. Nice try but you still fail miserably as a result, and your entire attempt is bankurupt.

Where have I not made a reasoned argument? And why is it not reasoned?

In what respect?
---

Not as apparent when A/Bing. But still noticeable as a program of poorer fidelity.

Do not bend my position, I made it clear that when A/Bing to higher fidelity products, that its noisier and lower fidelity stands out especially. This is why people use different points of reference.

For example as an analogy for A/B-ing and comaring: When it warms up in a colder climate, a person used to the cold believes its warm, but if he goes down to tropical climates of high heat and then goes back to the previous warmed up climate up north, he will perceive that to be cool compared to the tropical climate. What don't you copy about that?

 

FarBeyond:

To quote myself from an earlier post:

And, btw, you didn't answer my question, Are you still at school?

 

The record speaks for itself. All of his claims have been refuted. All of the reasons exist in the record for your pleasure.

Whatever blows your whistle! But with me, it is my actual experience with demo-ing the product first hand that ultimately determines whether i use it or no longer continue to, regardless of what anyone in forums say, or even salesman. I was just open to the suggestion of salesman in my example and decided to verify whether he was saying was true or not and discovered for myself.

The sound quality, fidelity and perceived depth of different synths vary with the level of the engineering/programming that has gone into them. Just like a waves plug-in modeling an SSL or API is far beyond anything offered by Lower end channel strips such as those offered by McDSP. Waves digtal software plugins are like owning a a Bentley, and the McDSPs are like the dodge neons. A similar comparision can be made between Virus vs. Massive and is evident in the price, and the same goes for Axe FX vs. Guitar Rig. As much as you would like to believe otherwise. Because with your logic a Dodge Neon is worth as much as a Bentley.

I seriously can no longer believe i am hearing all of this pure trash.
---

Thats just a smoke and mirrors comment - a red herring attempted again to remove the burden of proof that is really on you to actually show where I said anything of rubbish. I see nothing. Therefore you are the lazy one for not actually going back to show me where.
---

What the hell does that have to do with anything regarding the discussion? Jeez... anyways to bring this back to relevance - please show me where my logic does not work and please explain why. If I am wrong, I would like to know where I am wrong and why it is wrong.

And if you really want to know, I already went to University, then i did tech college, then I got my pro tools certification at a major studio, for Pro Tools LE levels only and my next certificates will be the Pro Tools HD operators, Pro Tools HD Music Producers, and Pro Tools HD post certificate. I am done school, and only still doing certification. So anyways, please answer and ask only relevant questions to this thread.

I am still waiting for anyone to show me where my behavior was out of line. Sure there might be a few that agree with ew's opinion - but hello! we are in the NI forum! what do you expect? lol. but there are others who agree surely with me as well - for the same reason that they know a Waves plug-in is going to be light years ahead of something cheaply programmed like T-racks IK multimedia, or a virtual guitar amp like Axe-FX absolutely and mebarassingly being so far ahead of Guitar Rig 4 or Amplitube 3. But you will see that ew was the first in our exchange to ever be rude in pretty much his first reply. I responded accordingly but kept it civilized the whole time.

 

I have pointed this out before, but what is the title of this thread? What relevance does 98% of your posts have to that title?

The reason I asked if you were still at school is that you display a fundamental lack of understanding on basic debating. ie, know your subject and stick to the topic!

 

Shall we try again?

OK- so then, if Massive's noise floor is below the limit of human hearing (which it is), how can you say you can hear a difference in the S/N ratio between that and the TI? That's impossible.

How have I evaded what question? You were making claims about noise, and I told you why what you're claiming is impossible for the human ear to detect.

If you don't hear any more difference than that, your ears are shot. Really- go and see a doctor; you've got severe high frequency loss happening.

Wrong again. Your left hand's still making contact- correct? And, you also have muting, hammering on vs picking, etc.- all of these have a dramatic impact on your tone. It's your hands shsping the harmonic structure.

No- they play it differently- different attack, picking position, etc. They realize what impact how they play has on the tone. Don't you see you're just proving my point? :~

See- you agreed with me again. The gear's just coloration of the fundamental tone- which is shaped by your hands.

I'll quote you:

(boldface emphasis mine)
What part of what you wrote don't you understand?

Your hands shape the harmonic content. And, with most synths out there, your playing does impact the harmonic content- velocity to cutoff's one of the most used modulations out there.

Ah- no. Once again, you should really learn to read what's being said.

Ah- no it isn't.

As are all the parameters on a synth. What's a chorus? A LFO modulating a slightly delayed copy of the original signal. EQs are filters by definition. Need I go on?

*facepalm*

The envelope is the tone- that's what's shaping the harmonic content. Without harmonic content, all you have is a sine wave. Sound basics 101...

I never said it wasn't in the case of a synth. And by the way, itr's moot and not mute- mute is to silence.

You just don't get it, do you... :~
Nowhere have I said that there aren't differences in how various hardware sounds, and nowhere have I said that hardware has zero impact on your tone. What I am saying is that the biggest impact on your tone's how you play.

Then, I guess you don't believe anything you say either. I'll quote you again:

If you're saying that their tone's changing until they reach a certain competency level, you're saying that the playing's directly responsible for the tone.

No- you've failed to answer the question. What options did the salesman present?

ew

 

Ah - you're crediting me with rather a lot of opinions there, no? I didn't say anything about any of the things you mention.

 

Unbelievable unsportsmanlike conduct on your behalf. You should be thrown out of here for your dirty tactics totally violating all forum policy.

PLease demonstrate where any of my posts are irrelevant to the challenges made by ew - who was the first to bring up anything irrelevant.

In other words, DO NOT wrongly blame me for replying to the first irrelevant topic introduced into this thread by ew - the nonsense he is relentlesly and delusionally believing in that the main sound of the synth magically comes from your hands - look he just wrote again that hands are primary tonal generators and not the instrument! LOL - and then he compared that to the main sound of the guitar tone coming from your hands too! So you say who started the irrelevant responses? Me? Say what? I dont think so, I was just responding to his ludicrous ideas of the MAIN source of the sound and tone of an instrument - so all you are proving is that you enjoy misrepresenting my position and misstating who actually started the irrelevant material in this thread.

And all my complaints about massive presets costing rip-offs are valid and relevant - and they are not exceptional - totally related to the topic of this thread because even the ones for sale are mostly junk - and now we still have people asking when in gods name there will be good sounds released of Massive - for christs sake some one even started a thread on it... oh yea... that right, i forgot - we are debating in that thread!

Look whos talking! You are committing every fallacy in the book, circular agruments, red herrings... and now ad-hominem attacks which are irrelevant to the actual points you do not even engage at all. You are pathetic and you are the one with bankkrupt debating skills. You have not even presented a single valid challenge.

Again, you are the one who did not even address any of my points, did not even respond to the actual material, and you do not show how its irrelevant, did not show how it is even wrong, and you do not understand that they were responses to ew's position of being the first to try irrelevant explanations in the first place. And you also fail to show why you think they do not refute ew's claims. Otherwise PROVE IT!

And the title of the thread is related to my other responses because i have shown why no one is releasing good enough patches for massive - because its a thin-sounding engine to begin with.

So nobody should be surprised why the starter of this thread asked the question "When is someone going to release good presets for massive?" To him I would like to simply answer - never - and the reasons are now clear and evident. Its just a toy - not for serious professional tones.

And btw, the person who started this thread automatically implied total agreement with me that massive does not have good sounds. If it is a high quality synth, we would see alot more better patches, but people are having a hard time programming it to sound goo because you cannot make a turd sound good if all you ever get to start with is a turd.

 

Howdy,

Long time lurker but only just registered since I'm about to plonk my money on Komplete 7. That's off topic but so is most of this thread, so here's a thought:

An observation has been made about 'tone' of playing being due to the player and not the instrument or setup.

As a saxophone player I can tell you that common consensus between horn players is that a sax player's tone is somewhere from 90 to 99% due to the player. This is because of the player's own unique mouth, jaw shape, throat etc. I could go and steal Sonny Rollins' sax (not really!) but I could never sound like him, but he could play my sax and it would still sound like him.

You could get Dave Gilmour's complete guitar set-up and you still won't be able to get his tone if you solo "comfortably numb"; but he could get my most crap electric guitar, and I'm pretty sure it would absolutely sound like him when he played it.

Bill Evans still sounds like Bill Evans no matter which piano he sat down at. And he had to play some rubbish pianos in those days too. If anyone thought they could jump onto the same piano and sound like Bill they were dreaming.

The point is this: an instrument is the conduit for the musician to express him/herself. I'm not sure how this applies to synthesizers but there is a difference between the playing of Edgar W Froese and Jean Michel Jarré - not just in the patches they use or program but in the whole 'tone' and feel of their music.

Kind of on topic: I don't own Massive - yet - but am enjoying patching the demo. Pre-rolled patches are good to get an idea of the instrument's capabilities but don't most people use their own patches in their music, or was that "the old days" ?

 

FarBeyond:

Its clear you don't like when you hear the truth. Unfortunately for you, that doesn't equate to me (or anyone else for that matter) breaking forum rules.

From what I see on this thread, ew used a comparison to make his point. A valid method of argument. He was then attacked by you (rather unfairly) which forced this thread completely off topic.

Take a look around the forums, I think you will find that on the most part, I try to make a positive contribution to the community, can the same be said for you?

ew gives his time to help this community out, do you really think your contribution has been constructive in any way?

Think on that before opening your mouth again please.

 

Unfortunately your intensity of effort in trying is not altering the course. Here is why:

You write:

Because its a noisier synth! LOL. If its not the stated S/N ratio (which is probabily a lie because of what is heard), then it is something else programming or algoriithm-related in the sound engine - something else inherent to the programmed architecture that is simply just lo-fi compared so something much more hi-fi like omnisphere or virus. Just A/B it with something higher end! It does not have to be Virus - A/B it with Omnisphere - even that synth is programmed whey more high end.

By avoiding a real comparison to Virus programming or algorith-related specs which you still have not shown, all you do is simply stick to your same S/N argument when it could be many things in the architecture. So there you go - clear evasive tactics.

Thats only if your S/N reference is accurate - but from the lo-fi sound of Massive - i have reason to believe that this S/N ratio is nothing but a phony spec, and I am going to have an engineer conduct an investigation with his proper scoping tools to see whether this is false advertising.

And its also not impossible because you have not shown anything else programming or algorithm-related about massive to disallow for any possibility of the noise to be coming from another area of the enigine - haven't you ever thought of the fact that the engine's overall DSP just might not programmed well and could possibly have rushed programming and low end algorithms? This is likely to be true. I can tell, I have heard many synths in my life. And in addition, if people are complaining about crappy massive sound - the title of this thread shows exactly why for starters.

Actually, I think you should go see a psychiatrist because if you believe the difference between eco to high or high to ultra is as drastic as you say, then you are experiencing delusions. And since I hear a huge difference between massive in Ultra compared to the Virus TI or omnisphere - then that means my ears are fine and yours are busted if you do not hear this fidelity difference. And not to mention experiencing delusions if you think eco to high or high to ultra is anythink more than the lo to high difference in guitar rig.

No its not, everything you just stated about hands is shaping the envelope structure. But once the envelope begins the string rings and the tone is the same for every player if velocity is the same. The only difference is envelope shaping skills and this is merely just a difference in technique. But the tone is not different at the same velocity for any hand playing it after the attack portion of the envelope shape. So you have failed to present anything close to a challenge.

Not in any way shape or form. Because their main signature technique does not change on the next album - only their base tones do if they decide to make equipment variations. So thank you very much because you just proved MY point.

Its a direct refutation of your bogus idea that fundamental tone is somehow shaped by the hands because those fundamental tones change - sometimes even drastically if the same techniques are used. Otherwise why would they not sound the same on acoustic? LOL! Because its got whey different tone due to the hollow cavity of the body. What part of that is not clear to you?

No the hands just shape the envelope but if the instrument is different or if the amp is different then the main tone changes - therefore tonal shaping is mainly in the gear.

All of the way you are interpreting it - as you are struggling with a losing argument, now you have to resort to trying to play word games. I will rephrase my statement as you clearly chose to misread that, probably on purpose, so I will now make sure there is no confusion about the intended meaning "for more tonal variety and therefore different fundamental tones". Happy?

Clearly you have no case because when a guitar player switches to a synthesizer guitar mode and even if they play the same riff - the sound will be a fundamentally different tone - even if they play it the same way. Therefore your argument has now finally deflated to death where you have run out of any additional fuel for your totally charlatan claims about the hands being the main source of tone. No is blatantly obvious that is the equipment and instrument which is the main source of the timbral and tonal characteristics of what you hear - and the hands just set it into motion by shaping the envelope of the sound only. What part of that is not clear to you?

Thats because it was programmed that way. Programmed to have velocity affect cutoff - thats just midi data. In that case the programming influences what the main tone will be. What part of that is not clear to you?

No you should stick to the relevant discussion and not take it into left field. As your introducing of poweramp qualities into this discussion was. Stick to the relevant confines of the discussion which had me sharing the good preamp quality of the valvestate amp. I do not care about your irrelevant Poweramp discussion. The fact remains that it was a well built amp for a solid state.

And you should learn how to not make any assumptions about how people are using their gear and how they chain it.

 

I said:

"Programming a preset from scratch on a synth is like editing the internals of an amp"

To which ew replied:

Actually, yes it is, you select and shape the waveform, similar to how on an amp you adjust the values to alter the waveform of the gain.

Actually you do, because to be more precise as per my last comment, Programming a preset from scratch on a synth is like editing the internals of an amp, but tweaking the simple sound shaping elements on a preset already created for you by a sound programmer by adjusting the amount of delay, or EQ, is like adjusting the EQ or reverb amount level on an amp - and the amount of distortion... simple stuff.

The envelope is not the tone - on a synth the oscillators and stuff like frequency modulation generate the tone and fundamental timbre of the sound - the envelope is the speed of the rise in level of that tone, decay, sustain and release of that sound/tone across time. So your entire platform for even your sound basics 101 is based on a flawed premise.

And so if mute is on, then why, if "hands are the main source of tone", they why is the sound of a keyboard just a thud if the mute is on? I thought you hands are generating the tone! And even with the thud, its the sound of the key hitting the bottom piece... that is not magically emanating from your finger... your finger is just setting into motion the key but the physical property of the key contacting the material underneath is what is making that thud sound. Its called a compression and a rarefaction. These are the real basics of general grade 9 science that you need to go back even further to review- this is not even advanced level grade 9 - just general level.

No you dont get it unfortunately. Right there you again merely just prove my point that type of equipment of instrument physics is the MAIN source of the tone. And your view is also invalid based on on my keyboard example. How you play is just technique that merely just shapes the envelope. How is that even the source of the main tone? Your hands play little in the main sound generated by the instrument - especially in guitar and keyboard and piano.

No, only for setting that tone into motion.

Nothing but more word games you are trying to extract to try to trick me into your mistaken hands = tone source view.

That was in reference to basic Envelope technique only and the ability to make the instrument even sound musical in the first place. Happy? But the fundamental tone of the instrument will not change if a beginner accidentally plays a note right or if a pro plays that note. Only the musical ability changes, and only the technique and therefore envelope changes,

And my keyboard sound to thud example is sufficient to dismantle your entire tone argument.

The best option for the type of music i was trying to make. He did not need to suggest any other product because out of the synths he knew about, he gave me the best option. Its about quality, not quantity of items suggested.

Many salesmen and other industry people whom i was open to hearing suggestions from - presented various different options, i heard tons and did my research for a very long time.... but which salesman recommended whatever item was not the deciding factor - demo-ing was.

What do you think i have some bias for any particular salesman? I did not even buy it from the salesman who reccommended it to me! - nor did i even buy it from his store!, No, he was just the first person who truly knew what i was describing in other synths as lacking for my gengre and he referred me to the right item. What do you not understand about that?

He could have suggested 500 different products, but thankfully he was professional to know that such would have been a waste of time. And it does not matter - eventually I was going to run into the preference for virus - regardless of who would finally suggest it to me. Because it has the most ideal sound character for what i am looking for. And not to mention premium quality too.

So i already showed you how my demo process of previous suggestions proved unsatisfactory until i came to once again do the demo process again of another new suggestion which proved to be successful because it was the first professional who could relate to my problem. Sooner or later I was going to run into the TI and that is what simply happened. You have not challenged the validity in any of this.
---

Not according to what reasoning i have given to demonstrate ew's proposed concepts as being the real falsehoods - not truth. I show how its not the truth by providing reasoning. You provide no reasoning behind your claims.

You have not shown how anything I have said is not truth. You just claim it without putting your money where your mouth is. You avoid responding to my actual points. Can you actually refer to anything I actually said and make a valid response to it providing any rational means? If I am so wrong as you believe, then I would see you doing that, but clearly you are not for the very reason that you are as wrong as one can possibly be.

When you are being evasive like that then it is you who are living the falsehood - because you cannot demonstrate what is false with my argument - all you do is just claim I do not like truth while failing to show evidence once again.

Misrepresenting me and distorting me as I just showed you in my last response to you is breaking forum rules. So quit your foul play immediately.

You fail to reference which exact, you fail to show which point, or even how the comparison supports his point.

You claiming something without supporting it gives you ZERO weight to your reply again. Wow you really do suck!

You fail to demonstrate how exactly its in any way valid in his example. You even fail to point out the example.

Sorry, other way around - he was the one to cast the first insulting stone. Again you fail to show where I attack on no warrant.

Distorting people's position is what you call a positive contribution? Spreading myths about the quality of products is a positive contribution? Spreading falshoods by telling people that low quality products are as good as premium ones is a positive contribution? Making challenges to a person's position repeatedly without even supporting your claims is positive?

Or is failing to reference any idea whatsoever within my reasoning and failing to refer to reasoning given by any challenger to those exact points - to you positive contribution activity? What about failing to provide reasons behind your agreement with the challenges? Is all that evasive smoke and mirrors sportsmanship a positive contribution here too?

Actually you are contributing nothing but a very negative rotten vibe with your rotten attempts on me.

If this is what you get your kicks out of then just make sure I am light years away from you at all times.

Yes, I am helping people realize how overrated many items in the NI line, and how alot of it is not worth the money and how alot of it is embarrassingly below the competition. But I also make a contribution to sharing what in the NI line is worth using. And finally, I help out the most by making recommendations for gear which is the best of the best for people to consider.

 

You appear to remain as deluded as ever.

That appears like a threat of physical violence to me. May I suggest you pick your words carefully in future

 

I definitely don't see that dissing NI products on their forum is a positive contribution.

Nothing personal because I don't know you but I think you're losing perspective and starting to come across as a little unhinged. Clearly feelings are running high - when it gets to that point perhaps it's time to consider walking away, get some fresh air, relax. Perhaps make some music.

 

Why? He's done absolutely nothing that violates forum rules.

I never claimed the first. The second seems to be self-evident to everybody in this thread besides you.

No- you were the one who started it with your statements. Allow me to quote you yet again:

Followed by:

It's the talent that matters- not the gear. For you to claim that people need to use certain gear to do your music justice is deluded to say the least. And, the first statement's wrong on so many levels, it's impossible to know where to begin.

Once again, if you think they're junk, create them yourself. It's not that hard.
I'll say it again- a poor craftsman blames his tools. You seem to be doing lots of that in this thread...

I'll skip over the rest, but before I do, I think that you should acquaint yourself with the forum rules:
http://www.native-instruments.com/forum/rules.php

However, I'll address your last part:

No- it's implying that you and the OP have no desire to learn how to program it yourself. Just because what the sound designers came up with don't fit your idea of what you want doesn't mean it's bad at all.

To be continued...

ew

 

And again:

Do the math yourself for 32 bit floating point operations. Just out of curiosity, have you turned the noise generator in Massive off? Down at the bottom of the GUI on the left...

I'm not evading it at all. I'm addressing the claim that you made- that Massive's inherently noisier. I'm not qualified to make a comment on the actual code involved, and neither are you.

Go for it =)

Ah, no. It's people who can't or won't program their own sounds complaining that someone hasn't done the work for them.

Personally, I prefer normal quality over high quality in GR. And, if you have the high end drastically filtered off in Massive, you aren't going to hear the difference. Try using either no filters or a comb filter instead ofd the other options; you'll hear a lot more difference.

Ah- no. You're also controlling note decay and the like. As long as you have a hand on the fingerboard, you're still controlling the envelope.

Your techinque's constantly evolving- that's what playing does.

?

An acoustic's a completely different instrument. Go back to what I said earlier on page 3:

What part of that don't you understand?

It's the hands that create the harmonic structure that everything else alters.

Ah- no. You're the one backpedaling, etc. But, do go on...

Different instruments. What part of that don't you understand?

Therefore, your playing affects the sound. What part of that isn't clear to you?

It's totally relevant. I told you that I didn't like Valvestates; you were the one who said why you thought they were good. I told you why I didn't like them.

And where have I done that?

ew

 

Oh- welcome to the forums, Circuit =)

ew