Blamsoft and eXode present: eXpanse - Hyperwave Synthesizer

[8cros]

I doubt that I could make a track for the competition.
I can afford a maximum several instruments simultaneously.
Or my song will be 100% of the sampling.

[boobytrap]

I doubt that I could make a track for the competition.
I can afford a maximum several instruments simultaneously.
Or my song will be 100% of the sampling.

Yup. My pentium G can barely hold 10 tracks. With or without that CPU cost, this is 5 STAR....

[Skullture]

I doubt that I could make a track for the competition.
I can afford a maximum several instruments simultaneously.
Or my song will be 100% of the sampling.

Yup. My pentium G can barely hold 10 tracks. With or without that CPU cost, this is 5 STAR....

Mine neither, but I think it's sound quality is fantastic, very feature-rich and it has an outstanding UI.
Diva VST is also a 5/5 imo, not so fantastic in performance on my PC, but great in sound. I really need a better rig .
So far I solve this by resampling, which is made easy with Reason 9 bounce in place feature. I keep a spare document should I need to change up my automations if I make up my mind.

[Digitus]

Is this the first Reason synth to have selectable oscillators stacked in the same UI space? I'm not sure if I phrased that question right.

[electrofux]

So in what CPU Cathegory does this play? Antidote, Zero ...

How do the different settings on the back affect sound and CPU use? Are they saved with the Patch or are they global settings?

[adfielding]

So in what CPU Cathegory does this play? Antidote, Zero ...

How do the different settings on the back affect sound and CPU use? Are they saved with the Patch or are they global settings?

The switches on the back are saved per patch.

As for CPU use - it really depends on the patch and voice count. I haven't had any major issues, and the switches on the back go a very long way toward keeping things manageable.

[EnochLight]

Congrats to eXode & Andrew @ Blamsoft for an incredible addition to our rack; this thing is a beast!

[esselfortium]

Is this the first Reason synth to have selectable oscillators stacked in the same UI space? I'm not sure if I phrased that question right.

4MER and Vibro also use tabs for each oscillator, if I'm understanding you correctly, and Zero has tabs for each of its operators.

[Carly(Poohbear)]

Is this the first Reason synth to have selectable oscillators stacked in the same UI space? I'm not sure if I phrased that question right.

No, straight off the top of my head, Zero and 4mer have stacked OSC/Operators...

In fact I see this device as mix of Zero and 4mer..

Got some nice clean waves and some good patches from eXode..

Shame the CPU usage is not on the front (or more to the point it's a shame you can't automate the back of a RE) as I would want to have the settings on high for the rendering of the song.. Can't beat a good old manual process

[lowpryo]

maybe I'm missing something, but what RE synth has wavetables this robust + 3 waveshaping parameters per oscillator? that seems like a very specific and focused goal of eXpanse IMO. I guess Ochen K's 4mer has similar waveshaping features, but it has pretty abysmal CPU performance and aliasing when they are all in use, which this improves upon.

But this was my point. What does 3 waveshaping parameters per oscillator mean? If next week a synth comes out with 4 waveshaping parameters per oscillator does this mean it's better than Expanse? Personally I feel a bit overwhelmed with features I don't fully appreciate the significance of. Maybe I'm just being a bit of a newb. But I'm feeling a bit overwhelmed & I don't mind admitting it. What does it all mean?!

well it's hard to answer your waveshaper scenario because "better" is subjective (i don't think PX7 is "better" than FM4 even though it has 2 more operators). but this situation with eXpanse is nothing like that. it's not necessarily trying to provide a "better" way to synthesize, just a different way. and it's fine if it doesn't click with you, or is no use to you. but that's a very different complaint than saying it's not "specific" or "focused"!

[Creativemind]

Looks / sounds nice!

[joeyluck]

So in what CPU Cathegory does this play? Antidote, Zero ...

How do the different settings on the back affect sound and CPU use? Are they saved with the Patch or are they global settings?

The switches on the back are saved per patch.

As for CPU use - it really depends on the patch and voice count. I haven't had any major issues, and the switches on the back go a very long way toward keeping things manageable.

I had suggested a few pages back, but didn't see a response...

I wonder if it's possible to add a switch with the CPU usage switches to select between something like 'patch settings' and 'retain user settings.'

I think it would be handy to be able to browse patches without having the CPU usage change. I understand some patch designers might say that the quality selected is part of the design... But most folks might not notice. And that's the reason why I suggest a switch to toggle between whether it is tied to the patch or not. Just not sure if it's possible...

[eXode]

Here's a brief explanation of the CPU switches.

Tables
This setting affects the lower notes. A sawtooth will sound duller/slightly filtered with a low setting. Therefore, it is recommend to keep it set to high for monophonic bass sounds where you want to keep the detail in the bass. If you are designing a bright normally tuned sound, set the table to mid or low to save CPU.

Filters & Dist
Both of these settings controls oversampling of the filters and dist respectively. Lowest setting has no oversampling. If you are using a sound that has little to no resonance you might save CPU by setting the Filters to low.

Summary
Bass sounds where you want detail in the low register: Table set to high. Set Filter and Dist after your needs
Poly sounds that have normal tuning and where you might want to save CPU: Table set from low to mid Filter and Dist from low to mid.

I hope this helps!

[kuhliloach]

Great thread, although some of it has nothing to do with this synth! I resonate with a lot of what's been said here.

Some people want more, others want less. Some people want FX in their synth, some don't. Some people want another device, others don't. Some people are overwhelmed with their existing tools, others always need more. Some people want to load a preset and compose, others do nothing but sound design. Personally if a synth sounds cool, has very few controls, and is $9 I'll buy it.

Is Propellerhead focused on making sure you understand how to use all your existing tools? Or are they more concerned that you keep buying new RE's and upgrades? Have you, like me, bought a pile of synths without fully exploring every nuance in Thor? Does anyone here think they will even scratch the surface of Thor during their lifetime, or even in their next lifetime?

Reason is now so modular, with so many choices, you basically are building your own DAW. I like that there are exotic synths available that are beyond my comprehension and budget level--it makes life interesting. My heart goes out to the little guy -- the beginner, the composer, the musician, the hobbyist. Hopefully the engineers and rocket scientists aren't laughing too hard.

[eXode]

Where will it end? I still feel like I've barely scratched the surface of Zero! Do I want another behemoth synth in the fray? I'd actually like to see more specific, focused synths that are good at doing specific things. Simple devices with a less is more approach in terms of features, parameters & a plethora of built in FX. In the context of the Reason Rack I think this kind of device works really well.

I respect that we all have different opinions, but I'd like to explain a couple of things that are related to your (and to some extent others) comments on Expanse.

From my perspective, Expanse is very focused. In fact, user friendliness is something that both Andrew and I felt was very important to not loose track of during the development of Expanse. Yes, Expanse is an advanced synthesizer with many features, but we are not forcing anyone to use those features immediately. My own vision is that even if you're not a synth expert, you can still use Expanse and that it will grow with you as you grow.

If you take some time to look at Expanse's user interface, I will explain this.

expanse_example.png (256.48 KiB) Viewed 2083 times

You can create a simple sound in Expanse with ease. You can use a single Oscillator, route it through one of the Filters, you can tweak both the Amp Env and the Mod Env directly on screen, and you can also use one of the LFO's with one of it's pre-routed targets. All without switching a single pane - it's all there in front of you.

And this is actually how I would recommend most users to start out. With a single oscillator, perhaps adding a single Mod, learn what they all do, and learn how powerful just a single oscillator in Expanse can be.

As for the comments regarding built in FX vs rack FX. I personally prefer to have a choice. A choice to make a production ready sounds without having to move out of Expanse. If I want something else, I'm free to disable the included effects. That choice is taken from me should the effects have been excluded.

Cheers!

[Carly(Poohbear)]

Where will it end? I still feel like I've barely scratched the surface of Zero! Do I want another behemoth synth in the fray? I'd actually like to see more specific, focused synths that are good at doing specific things. Simple devices with a less is more approach in terms of features, parameters & a plethora of built in FX. In the context of the Reason Rack I think this kind of device works really well.

I respect that we all have different opinions, but I'd like to explain a couple of things that are related to your (and to some extent others) comments on Expanse.

From my perspective, Expanse is very focused. In fact, user friendliness is something that both Andrew and I felt was very important to not loose track of during the development of Expanse. Yes, Expanse is an advanced synthesizer with many features, but we are not forcing anyone to use those features immediately. My own vision is that even if you're not a synth expert, you can still use Expanse and that it will grow with you as you grow.

If you take some time to look at Expanse's user interface, I will explain this.

expanse_example.png

You can create a simple sound in Expanse with ease. You can use a single Oscillator, route it through one of the Filters, you can tweak both the Amp Env and the Mod Env directly on screen, and you can also use one of the LFO's with one of it's pre-routed targets. All without switching a single pane - it's all there in front of you.

And this is actually how I would recommend most users to start out. With a single oscillator, perhaps adding a single Mod, learn what they all do, and learn how powerful just a single oscillator in Expanse can be.

As for the comments regarding built in FX vs rack FX. I personally prefer to have a choice. A choice to make a production ready sounds without having to move out of Expanse. If I want something else, I'm free to disable the included effects. That choice is taken from me should the effects have been excluded.

Cheers!

I think the Essential users will be very happy having built in effects, if they work for a sound I'm creating I will use them and I think it's nice to have them quick at hand....

Was there a reason not to use drop down list's like on the waveform, OSC x Mod's, filter types etc ? (aesthetics maybe).

Just wish Propellerhead would update the SDK so you can have bigger racks so we don't have to page and can see all controls\settings at once

[joeyluck]

As for the comments regarding built in FX vs rack FX. I personally prefer to have a choice. A choice to make a production ready sounds without having to move out of Expanse. If I want something else, I'm free to disable the included effects. That choice is taken from me should the effects have been excluded.

Cheers!

Thanks for the helpful tips!

I think a 'bypass all' or 'enable all' for the effects section would be handy.

[submonsterz]

Having bought eXpanse and played around with it for some time - It's clear to me that at this moment, the people who scored this down on props shop by .5, clearly have an earwax problem or are indeed as deaf as my father!...

Unless they have used vst's with this quality of sound for many years and it just dont hit them as groundbreaking maybe ???.

[XysteR]

Having bought eXpanse and played around with it for some time - It's clear to me that at this moment, the people who scored this down on props shop by .5, clearly have an earwax problem or are indeed as deaf as my father!...

Unless they have used vst's with this quality of sound for many years and it just dont hit them as groundbreaking maybe ???.

Nar I've used Serum for a long time - In my view Serum is the best ('sounding' if you'd like to call it that) VST out there at the moment. I've used most other 'top tier' VST synths too and eXpanse is still a 5 all day long.

[joeyluck]

4.6 is a pretty solid score.

What is that roughly? Out of every five people, three rate it a 5 and two rate it a 4?

[eXode]

Was there a reason not to use drop down list's like on the waveform, OSC x Mod's, filter types etc ? (aesthetics maybe).

It was a limitation that we had to work with.

[DNA Apocalypse]

OH MY GOD!!! This is such a strong synthesizer!! I have a huge and growing respect for Exode and Blamsoft! The GUI is inspiring, the workflow is incredible, sounds are enormous, honestly this came out just when I was starting to learn how nice Zero is, this is a must, I will definitely buy this one!!!! No brainer. Sick. Incredible. Incredible. Incredible.

[Heater]

It really does sound excellent eXode. Well done.

[XysteR]

I've spent all day with this synth now, restricting myself to only using 1 OSC to feel my way around it. I'm blown away at how awesome this sounds. I'm really picky about effects in synths too, not with this, they're brilliant! I also love that you can order the effect chain as you wish! I've not even started to pipe any cv stuff through the back of this bad boy yet. Then when I stop to think further... 4 OSCs = Mind blown! - I'm not even done with using just 1 OSC after hours of fiddling. During my messing about, I've generally been feeling like I needed to name and save a new patch every few minutes. That's a pretty rare thing right?

At first I thought the lack of ability to make my own wavetables would be a restriction - It's not! In fact most of my past experience with Serum and making wavetables, I found it to be pretty hit/miss and time consuming to end up with something decent to use anyway.

Not having drop menus for the Wavetables and filter types will take a little getting used to in the workflow though. When I first started using the synth it did slow me up a little - Later in the day it became less of a problem when I got familiar with where everything was. I think that's the only single tiny negative I've found, but I'm ok with further getting used to it. It's really no biggie when you've used it for a while.

In a nutshell: This synth is just awesome! As much as I love Antidote and Zero etc (they all still have their place in reason) I'm starting to feel like eXpanse is now my favourite Re synth - for me at the moment It's an untamed BEAST! The included patches are also amazing and show the capabilities of eXpanse very professionally. Stellar work from all involved!

Honestly, if you've not done so yet, go demo it now!

I'm feeling a combinator and cv stuff coming on. Maybe I'll have the balls to add in OSC 2 lol

[stratatonic]

4.6 is a pretty solid score.

What is that roughly? Out of every five people, three rate it a 5 and two rate it a 4?

Your math is excellent, Joey...