Hey guys I was just checking to see what thoughts are out there regarding this piece of software with the 210gb content with only 5k of presets.
How does this compare to Arturia Analog lab V with 30k presets and is about 1/10th the size??
Thanx

 

Syntronik worth it?
Short answer imho: No.
Long answer: It depends, as always. ... There are some rare emulations. If you're after these, it's worth it.
Just try it out, nobody can tell you cause we don't know what you're targetting.
If it's a general question or if it's only about size, go with Arturia. I would prefer Arturia stuff over IK, but that's just my preference.
Other people will tell you the opposite. :D

 

Preset files are always very small amounts of data, for most synths and effects. The number of presets generally has no direct correlation with the size of the synth and it's data. There is no way I would download this. It is just too big for what it is. Think about how many Kontakt or UVI Libraries you could install in that same 200gb of storage space...it's not a no, it is a hell no. (but thanks releaser )

also keep in mind how much space may be required to extract/decompress just to install it.

 

Actually I was also wondering how syntronik compares to UVI's offering.

If I'm already using UVI's stuff, does it make sense to add syntronik?

 

Every big company copies what the other company brings to the market.

I am for class instead of mass or in other words quality goes for quantity.
I want a large sound and sound spectrum in high quality.
Arturia has many software synthesizers, so presets (patches) that are generated by the synthesizers themselves.
Keyscape has more wav files that come from recording with microphones.

Here is a small overview that I have just researched myself:

Spectrasonics - Omnisphere 2 VSTi - Library - Total Sounds: 14,806 = 64 GB
Spectrasonics - Keyscape VSTi - Library - Total Sounds: 629 = 80 GB
IK Multimedia - Syntronik VSTi - Library - Total Sounds: 5,500 = 200 GB
IK Multimedia - SampleTank 4 Max - Library - Total Sounds: 8,000 = 250 GB
Arturia - Analog Lab - Library - Total Sounds: 6,500 = 4 GB

 

I think the most efficient package is Omnisphere for variety, Arturia for authentic synth engine, UVI Synthology for classic keyboard presets.

 

Analog Lab is better as size/sound goes

 

Syntronik has a better sound quality by far, BUT the biggest con in my opinion is polyphony, i encountered some serious phasing issues with some polyphonic synths that are just not there in say, Arturia's counterpart. Don't know if that was a version related issue but yeah, watch out for that.

 

Never liked their Stuff (Sampletank 2 sounded cheap against Nexus and Hypersonic). 200 GB is Way to much Space for what you get listening to their Sound Demos so for me this was a clear pass.

 

May be we should only listen to the guys who actually installed it and used it rather than people who judge the product only by its specifications (size, number of presets, blah blah blah) or by their past experiences with other products by IK.
For the moment only one member seems to have tried it and he says that the sound quality is better than arturia. That sounds interesting.
I've heard so many times that Arturia synths dont fit well in a mix, and i experienced that problem myself... Im not impressed by the 30000 available presets in analog lab since i will never use them.
To me the reference is more Roland Cloud because they make synths that you can use in a song, not just presets that sound amazing by themselves and collapse in a mix.
Be happy if you find 2 or 3 presets that really stand out in a line of products.

 

Last edited: Aug 30, 2022

I downloaded and installed it but I haven't really tested it yet. I like the sound more than Arturia, it sounds as good as Falcon libraries to my ears, so if you already have all the Falcon synth libraries I think you probably don't need this, and Falcon offers much more. And with Arturia you can tweak the patches more, and Arturia really doesn't sound that much worse...

Haven't tried using it polyphonic yet, but this sounds like a huge let down...

I think I will produce a few synthwave tracks with it and then delete it, because I already have enough alternatives, but maybe I keep it if I really love the sounds.... Need more testing time.

 

No.

 

Syntronik uses alot of of samples for their presets. Samples will dramatically take up storage space. Arturia only has two samplers and the mellotron. Arturia's sound library will be a smaller storage size

 

YES i tested them all.
And never liked IK sample sound (syntronik, sampletank ...).

Arturia analog lab, at least, is more flexible.

Roland Cloud is good too.
KORG legacy too.

 

As someone who owns a lot of vintage synths, as well as just about every replica synth plugin (Arturia, TAL, Cherry Audio, Softube, GForce, Roland Cloud, Korg, etc.) after playing with Syntronik for about a day, I realized, it doesn't fit my workflow and I could replicate almost all of the presets within a few minutes in a plugin, so for me it doesn't make much sense.

The trouble is, that's my workflow and you might be different. I don't use a lot of presets, I design most of my sounds. I might use some presets to get closer to what I'm looking for, but 1000's of presets is not for me, it only slows me down. If you do like to use presets as inspiration or a starting point, than Syntronik might be great. Its essentially all preset based. Unless you want to take the time to go through all the oscillator samples you can't really "dial in" a sound from scratch, so you have to find a preset close to what you want and then dial it in from there. On the flip side, you can find pretty much anything you're looking for synth wise in 1 plugin, rather than having to go through dozens of other VSTi plugins.

So to sum it up, I'd say for anyone that is a synth nerd or proficient with designing their own sounds- go with VSTi's for each sound you're looking for. If you're someone who doesn't know what you want, likes to have 1000's of presets for inspiration, and also would benefit from everything being in one nice plugin with more customization than say, *UVI packs, than try this out for sure.


*Just a note on the UVI comparison- from my experience with UVI sets, like the JX-3P set, doing any sort of ADSR or filter adjustment on their presets just sounds kind of ...eh.. since you're just adjusting the sample as a whole and its not like they modeled that particular synths envelope or filter. With Syntronik, its like a rompler/hybrid synth. The sample is acting as a sample based oscillator from what I can tell, therefore any adjustments to ADSR sound natural like if you were using the synth itself, and the ADSR, filter, etc. are actually modeled after those on the original synth itself. To me Syntronik is miles above any UVI pack I've tried, just for the fact I feel like I'm actually using the synth. Not a sample player with a generic filter and envelope.

 

Last edited: Aug 30, 2022

Obviously it depends what you're using it for, but I have (or used to have and deleted) Syntronik 1&2, Diva, Serum, Massive, Massive X, Omnisphere 2, Keyscape, Vital, some Korgs, some TALs, Arturia V collection, the Martinic AX whatever, and probably a few others, and honestly Syntronik is probably my most used of all those, because in terms of accurate vintage synth sounds, I think its the best. If you want something to accurately recreate vintage synth sounds that will sit well in a mix and actually sound like those synths sounded on records, Syntronik blows all the others away. I use it for 60s/80s-inspired indie rock/indie pop music because it can sound like synths from that era without tweaks, and in that respect, I think its as good as anything on that list, even Omni; the shortcomings are 1) if you want really deep menus for custom patch creation, 2) if you want to do modern EDM-type sounds, 3) if you want to create really deep and complicated arps, 4) the storage required. For making your own patches from scratch, even something like Vital would be better because it has way more modulation and wavetable options; with Syntronik, the interfaces are really basic like an actual vintage synth, so you can't assign a random envelope to modulate a random formant shifter or whatever like you can in Vital. But if you want to use presets that sound exactly like famous synths from the 60s-90s, Syntronik beats them all. The other thing I've noticed is that Syntronik seems to be wider (not stereo width, just more full) and deeper sounding than other soft synths. Like for most patches, to mix it, I'm just putting an EQ on there, if that. whereas if I have a track with Serum I have to double it and pan it and make it louder just to achieve the same width and depth of sound. Also AFAIK there are no external preset packs for the Syntroniks, but they do come with a shitton of presets. For the kinda music I make, Syntronik1&2 are #1, then Omni, then Vital (surprisingly), then Massive X, then the TALs, then Serum, and the rest are all after that. Arturia V collection was actually my least favorite and its one of the few synths I've actually deleted because I never used it. UVI I have no experience with, though.

 

For 200gb, it should not matter what you already have to review it. Other products stand out among all these other options and offerings which are nowhere near the size of this thing.

It is for people who are so easily convinced that a 200gb sample pack is better than a 2gb pack. It's "worth more" because it's such a space commitment. It is for these people developers/vendors bulk these filesizes up like this, any way they can. Graphics, extra useless outdated obsolete formats, etc. Nothing new.

 

"Arturia" and "authentic" in the same sentence?

Anyway, it depends on what you want. If your "synthesizer" is really just a crappy sampler with an obnoxiously complicated GUI (aka all IK multimedia plugins - don't think even for a second that they aren't just sampletank reskins) you might as well just use an actual sampler. Plenty of small synths that can actually replicate hardware out there, you could hoard a few and they'd still weigh a fraction of Syntronik.

As a general rule of thumb I'd stay clear of any synth (that calls itself a synth and not a sample library) with a library that approaches or even surpasses the size of the average EastWest library.

 

Last edited: Aug 30, 2022

The idea that something does not fit well in a mix applies to sounds that can not be easily altered.
It has almost NO MEANING when talking about sonically capable synths with so many controllable variables.
When talking about synthesizers, "It doesn't fit well into the mix" USUALLY means "I suck at mixing" or "I suck at adjusting synths".
One can change SO many variables with most synths, if you can not make it fit into the mix, well... maybe it is not the synth.

The same is usually true when someone says a particular synth "sounds ________________".
Yes, individual software synths are only capable of producing certain sounds, and some are more limited than others, but to say a synth sounds "plastic" only means that YOU are MAKING it sound "plastic".
Now, it MAY BE that the way it is designed makes it very easy to create sounds that might be called "plastic".
But you have to explain what "plastic" SOUNDS LIKE.

Most major software synths will sound how YOU MAKE THEM SOUND.
Again, this is the case UNLESS they are sonically flawed in their algorithms, and none of them ARE, or they would NOT BE major software synths.

Yes, each has limits, and some are easier to manipulate, but to say XXXXX synth sounds "plastic" is utter bullshit.
Plastic makes no sound.
What is the sound of "cheap"?
What is the sound even of "analogue"?
People are so full of shit.

 

My definition of "plastic" is "whatever comes out of FM8", is that a good explanation?