ES M vs Retro Synth vs Alchemy vs ES 2

[Danny Wyatt]

On my quest to minimizing the amount of tools I use, I decided to revisit the ES M and see if there's indeed the need to use it.

Tested it against the Retro Synth, Alchemy and ES 2. Tried the filter, with and without resonance and I have to say that apart from very slight differences (for example the ES M seems to be less bright than the others when the filter is 100% opened), I don't hear significant differences compared to the other 3. And since the Retro Synth and Alchemy come with more filter options and Alchemy includes all the modulation and extra things we can use, is the ES M really useful? Another thing I noticed is that it seems to be gentler on the CPU compared to Alchemy, for example, but compared to Retro Synth and ES 2, it seems that all 3 are pretty similar.

Any thoughts?

Also, anyone knows which filter would be similar to the one used in ES M, that RS or Alchemy could use?

Next test would be ES P...

Edited September 23, 2023 by Danny Wyatt

[des99]

Those old emagic-era Logic 4.x instruments are mostly not worth bothering with, imo. The ES1 was the first software plugin I ever bought, by the way (with the EXS24 being the second), around the Logic 4.6 era.

The ES2 still holds up and is worth using, but in general the more modern stuff like Retrosynth are pretty good and have better sounding components. Alchemy is a different beast entirely, of course.

They were just simple, free bundled in instruments in the early days of Logic when computers weren't powerful and virtual instruments were a new thing. They don't offer anything that isn't done better by, well, better instruments, and the interfaces are... well, somewhat dated. But if you like them, like the sounds they make and/or the presets and like working with them, then use them.

Edited September 23, 2023 by des99

[Danny Wyatt]

Yeah that’s what I think. Especially the ES M and the ES 1. They seem to be outdated versions of what the other synths can do. 
 

I think the ES P can maybe be a bit different just because it comes with 5 oscillators and the noise which none of the other synths can do using just 1 instance, but having all the options such as modulation and extra stuff, doesn’t seem to be worth the time. I think I will recreate their presets just for fun, but to be honest I don’t even think I’ve ever used them extensively. If I used them 5-10 times in all these years… maybe that’s it. 
 

I think the ES2 is still a very good synth. Mostly because of:

FM. Alchemy is not that great when it comes to FM. Retro Synth is more accurate, but still not very versatile compared to ES2. 
 

Wavetable synthesis, which Alchemy does t do at all and Retro Synth is not great at. I was able to kinda crack how to import wavetables without issues, but it’s not always reliable. 
 

Randomization. This is something I would like to see in all plug-ins, especially synths. And having the ability to pick the amount of randomization is something I like about the ES2. 
 

the only thing I wish the ES2 could have is a few effects internally such as delay and reverb, at least, so we could save the presets with effects. I’m still not a huge fan of patches. They are not super fast to load (at least on my computer) and the browser experience is just horrible for me. I hope they will eventually improve it. 
 

but yeah, I think it’s not worth the time to bother with the ES M, ES P or ES 1. 
 

 

[gacki]

ES2 is still my go-to synth for many cases (more than Retro Synth). What I really dislike about it though is the resolution of the modulation matrix. Even the smallest amount (0.01) can sometimes already be too much. But the actual internal resolution must already be higher. This becomes obvious when for example controlling the intensity via ModWheel and setting a range from 0.00 to 0.01 - the modulation is faded in very smoothly (and in certain cases this particular range and the ModWheel half up is exactly what I want - which would translate to about 0.005).

 

 

[Danny Wyatt]

Yes I think the whole synth could benefit from a revamp to adapt to current synths and the modulation matrix is a clear example.

The minimum value for me is 0.02. How do you get 0.01?

And sometimes I feel that the range is not enough, for example when using FM, the max is not enough to really push the amount of FM being used. For more aggressive sounds I need to add multiple modulation "blocks" to go higher.

[gacki]

22 minutes ago, Danny Wyatt said:

The minimum value for me is 0.02. How do you get 0.01?

Shift-drag the green triangle; at least for me the increments are 0.01 per step then.

 

[Danny Wyatt]

9 minutes ago, gacki said:

Shift-drag the green triangle; at least for me the increments are 0.01 per step then.

Oh ok, that works. I thought it was OPTION/ALT since that's used for automation, for example, and other parameters, I guess.

[matamoris]

I would use ES2 much more if Apple would update the GUI.  Even though it sounds good, I can't tolerate the current GUI.

[enossified]

The early ES synths are simple and based on classic hardware, even though they don't sound very close to the hardware they mimic.

ES-M: Roland TB-303

ES-P: Roland Juno 

ES-E: string/brass polysynths like ARP Omni

The simplicity of these and RetroSynth makes them easily accessible to users familiar with retro hardware. I never use them, turning to Alchemy or a few third party softsynths I had bought when I was using Live.

[enossified]

27 minutes ago, matamoris said:

I would use ES2 much more if Apple would update the GUI.  Even though it sounds good, I can't tolerate the current GUI.

I agree. Sampler’s updated GUI is much more user-friendly than the EXS-24 GUI. 

[DanRad]

"more modern stuff like Retrosynth"  Dripping with irony

[des99]

11 minutes ago, DanRad said:

"more modern stuff like Retrosynth"  Dripping with irony

To be clear: "Modern" in the fact that the plugin was much more recently developed for Logic 10, and uses more sophisticated modelling than the ES plugins, which were developed in the early 2000s, when computers were much less powerful.

Not "Modern" in the choice of vintage synths that they model.

[gacki]

But at the same time Retro Synth strikes me as strangely limited. No pitch modulation except Vibrato?

[des99]

7 minutes ago, gacki said:

But at the same time Retro Synth strikes me as strangely limited. No pitch modulation except Vibrato?

Yes, it is intended as a relatively simple, but good sounding, synth giving a range of vintage synthy sounds.

Alchemy is the complex one... 😉 (And I guess, ES2, Sculpture, but they are of the earlier generation...)

Edited September 24, 2023 by des99

[gacki]

But Alchemy always strikes me as overly complex. ES2 sits (comparatively) in the middle.

And in my opinion pitch modulation with an envelope isn't really rocket science - and oddly enough it's even implemented (in the Sync model) albeit called differently ("Sync Modulation"). Right away I can't think of an analog synth that offers Sync but not pitch modulation ("Sync Modulation" is basically pitch modulation of the synced osc - and without sync you get a nice pitch modulation instead).

With a slightly extended functionality we would be in Prophet 5 oder OB-X territory which would still be quite a way from what Alchemy offers.

 

[des99]

Sure - when you're trying to keep things accessible, it's always a set of choices as to what compromises best make sense for what you're trying to do. Maybe we'll see a Retrosynth Pro in a future version...

A lot of people making music in Logic and using synth presets etc aren't really into synth programming at all, so I can see why relatively constrained feature set instruments is good for those people. Not everyone's a synth nerd.

I like Retrosynth for what it is, personally, but it's not something I'm going to end up spending hours to sound design in - it's a pick a preset and quickly tweak, or dial up something quick from scratch type of instrument to me. I have plenty of other deeper synths if I want to go deep...

[David Nahmani]

I think that goes to show that there still is a place for a synth that is both simple to program and still flexible, with a fully customizable modulation matrix. Kinda like the ES2 or U-He Diva but with a modern interface like Quick Sampler or Sampler. 

[des99]

They'll probably follow the established trend with "Sampler" and just call it "Synthesizer"... 🙂

Edited September 24, 2023 by des99

[loukash]

On 9/23/2023 at 10:08 PM, des99 said:

Those old emagic-era Logic 4.x instruments are mostly not worth bothering with, imo. The ES1 was the first software plugin I ever bought, by the way (with the EXS24 being the second), around the Logic 4.6 era.

Given that I have a bunch of archived (partially unfinished) v4 projects that I eventually may want to convert to the current format, those oldies are possibly still there for compatibility reasons which is a Good Thing™.

On 9/23/2023 at 9:43 PM, Danny Wyatt said:

the Retro Synth

I love the Retrosynth. :)
I'm not a keyboardist, so simplicity is a virtue here. The keyboardist in one of my bands likes retro sounds though (or rather: she's not very skilled in tweaking the sounds on her Juno-DS so she uses mostly the stock sounds), so when we did some recordings last year and I captured her performance as MIDI, it was pretty easy to find and tweak the matching sounds with Retrosynth.

[gacki]

On 9/24/2023 at 7:16 PM, des99 said:

Sure - when you're trying to keep things accessible, it's always a set of choices as to what compromises best make sense for what you're trying to do.

For some reason those choices include 18 filter types, but on the other hand no s&h for the LFO waveforms.

Why include Chorus and Flanger, but not a (also period appropriate) Phaser which the ES2 includes?

A lot of those choices seem to be rather arbitrary.

[des99]

I can't add any insight into the decision making process. That we don't know the reasons doesn't mean there wasn't reasons. Things in software development are seldom arbitrary, they're generally intentional, by the nature of having to do the engineering (or unintentional, in the case of bugs).

I don't know the factors that went into those decisions - I could speculate, but there's not much value in that..! 😉 

[ivanologico]

interesting topic

I noticed

1) alchemy can do everything, even if 4 oscillator are not enough we can trackstack everything on top, also retrosynth and ES2

2) Alchemy and ES2 and Retrosynth synth with an external amplifier looks as the real thing a fat synth. Then people will say that they are able to recognize the sound but I do not know  a friend of mine let me hear on the headphones the ue diva preset and could not hear any difference(ue diva are considered the most real ones)

3) we can use third part plugins, i have vcv rack, arthuria collection

My question is

do you know where can find patches of old vintage sounds in logic. I know maybe for copyright reasons cannot be done by apple but i would like to know for instance which preset in retrosynth is similar to juno, or a moog sound

Edited September 28, 2023 by ivanologico

[enossified]

2 hours ago, ivanologico said:

do you know where can find patches of old vintage sounds in logic. I know maybe for copyright reasons cannot be done by apple but i would like to know for instance which preset in retrosynth is similar to juno, or a moog sound

In Logic 10.7.8, only one channel strip/patch has Moog in the name, and it’s for ES2! So no, you cannot ID any of the factory sounds by name as “Moogy” sounds. You have to audition them.

Easysounds sells some sounds for Sampler/EXS-24 based on samples of the MiniMoog and Jupiter 8. They used to have sounds for RetroSynth, but it's no longer shown for sale on their site. You could email them to see if it can still be purchased.

Loopmasters sell sounds for RetroSynth as well as an Essential Synths pack with sounds for Alchemy, EFM, ES1, ES2, Retro Synth and Sculpture. They also sell packs specifically for Alchemy, ES2 and hundreds of “construction kit” sample libraries.

Both of these vendors supply sounds in channel strips as well as instrument level patches. They have demo songs using their sounds.

I own all three of the linked packages. Easysounds is focused expressly on vintage analog sounds, while Loopmasters focus more on contemporary sounds. For vintage Moog sounds, I'd buy the Easysounds library.

 

Edited September 28, 2023 by enossified

[gacki]

4 hours ago, ivanologico said:

I know maybe for copyright reasons cannot be done by apple but i would like to know for instance which preset in retrosynth is similar to juno, or a moog sound

We did this a while back with the Van Halen "1984" sound. There is not really a copyright on sounds - at most on sound recordings (read: factory samples). But any "normal" analog sound is basically fair game.

A number of the EXS24 factory patches are also coming from vintage instruments:

JP8 Unison Saw

Mini Saw Lead

Matrix12 Synbrass

and so on.

At one point I tried to recreate a few of the Prophet 5 factory patches in ES2; the results were so-so. But I also have a collection of fusion lead sounds (Jan Hammer, George Duke, Chick Corea) that IMO come quite close.

[ivanologico]

thanks @enossified and @gacki, i think can start from moog samples, and import them in alchemy with some tune.

Edited September 28, 2023 by ivanologico