# Let's talk about Pigments



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

Do you hate it?

Do you love it?

Yeah I'm considering getting it and want to hear what y'all think about it!

I was kinda surprised by how many votes it got on that poll about what synths people were looking presets for.

Edit:

I found this video that goes into detail on the analog oscillators and they don't sound bad at all.




Why do you think it sounds sterile @vitocorleone123 ? Maybe the filters?


----------



## axb312 (Nov 16, 2021)

Too sterile sounding for me in what I've heard so far...


----------



## Alchemedia (Nov 16, 2021)

@Pier Glutton for punishment, eh?


----------



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

Alchemedia said:


> @Pier Glutton for punishment, eh?


Oh boy you know me so well already


----------



## cuttime (Nov 16, 2021)

With the addition of the granular engine, I don’t think sterile is a legitimate criticism at all. If one can get Pigments half price, it’s a no-brainer.


----------



## Macrawn (Nov 16, 2021)

It's freaking amazing. It is not sterile sounding unless you want it that way. It has some great analog sounding options and filters. It's so easy to use and it's mostly a one pager. It has additive, wavetables, analog sounding osc, granular, lots of fm options. All kinds of ways to route things to filters. You can get so many different kinds of sounds out of it. Tons of modulation options. 

It took me a while to come around to it. I think it's because I don't like the electronic stuff people do with it and it's very popular with that crowd. You don't hear the full range of what it can do from those people. 

It's often available for like $100 bucks and it kinda makes every synth for $100 bucks seem like a joke compared to it. 

But the best thing is you can demo it and see if you think it's something you might want.


----------



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> It took me a while to come around to it. I think it's because I don't like the electronic stuff people do with it and it's very popular with that crowd. You don't hear the full range of what it can do from those people.


Any good demos you can share?


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (Nov 16, 2021)

I'm interested in it as well, considering the discounts Arturia are offering at the moment. There are some comments on KVR that it is heavy on CPU.

But what do people mean by "sterile"? Lack of harmonic complexity? Serious question.


----------



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

rhizomusicosmos said:


> There are some comments on KVR that it is heavy on CPU.


I just saw a video comparing the granular stuff with Falcon CPU wise. Pigments was a bit heavier on the CPU when playing like 6 note chords, but not by much.



rhizomusicosmos said:


> But what do people mean by "sterile"? Lack of harmonic complexity? Serious question.


For me it means that it sounds digital and precise, if that makes sense. Not digital as in "has aliasing" but as in lacking analog mojo.


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (Nov 16, 2021)

Pier said:


> For me it means that it sounds digital and precise, if that makes sense. Not digital as in "has aliasing" but as in lacking analog mojo.


OK, so would that analog mojo essentially be saturation, complexity of filters, noise or something more unpredictable/indefinable? Or, perhaps, all of the above?


----------



## antames (Nov 16, 2021)

I have it and it is an excellent synth with great sounding presets. I would say it is one of the best sounding synths you will find out there today. It takes a bit to get used to the interface. They spent some years developing it and it shows.


----------



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

rhizomusicosmos said:


> OK, so would that analog mojo essentially be saturation, complexity of filters, noise or something more unpredictable/indefinable? Or, perhaps, all of the above?


I'm not an expert but I would guess a combination of "imperfect" oscillators with drifting and non linear filters. I also tend to associate analog with saturation at the filter level and the rest of the audio path, but I don't think all real analog hardware synths do this.


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (Nov 16, 2021)

Yeah, I think oscillator stability is a factor. But this is something the developers must need to quantify and add deliberately to software synths (all of which are fundamentally digital). I see that Pigments does have an oscillator drift function, so this is a consideration in its design.

I'm just interested in the "sterile" label -- it's a very negative term but seems rather vague. I remember using a Buchla 200 alongside DX7s and D-50s decades ago and no one seemed to consider one was more sterile sounding than the other. Perhaps they were all similarly beautiful in their imperfection.

I'm wondering if "sterile" is perhaps really short for "doesn't evoke nostalgia for the long lost days of synthesizer glory" . . .


----------



## Pier (Nov 16, 2021)

rhizomusicosmos said:


> I'm wondering if "sterile" is perhaps really short for "doesn't evoke nostalgia for the long lost days of synthesizer glory" . . .


Maybe for some.

Personally I don't have any nostalgia for the "long lost days of synthesizer glory" though


----------



## CATDAD (Nov 16, 2021)

Love it.

I can't agree with it being fundamentally sterile either, something it has over say, Serum, though it can do that if you want some crisp digital precision! The "drift" parameter affects tuning and phase stability in the "analog" oscillators, and they freely run independently from each other. They have some more recently added analog-modeled filters as well, with the SEM, Jupiter-8, and MatrixBrute filter modes. It's not quite Diva-organic, but... it's also not Diva!

I also appreciate the immediacy of its additive and granular synthesis engines. They're not the absolute deepest, but they're quick to work with and layer together!

I like that it has 2 FX buses that you can run in parallel or in serial if you like to be subtle with your spices...
...but it also has an OTT style multiband compressor if you like to add some straight salt do your synthy dishes!

You can build MSEG-style modulation, sample+hold from noise, turing machine modulation, and the sequencer is more powerful than it has any right to be. It can do some generative stuff too, between the sequencer and being able to quantize the oscillator tune modulation to any set of notes you'd like.

I'm sure most other soft-synths have caught up by now, but it works well with MPE if you have and use such a feature.

I like Pigments because to me, it hits the sweet spot for power-vs-accessibility when building your own patches. It doesn't feel daunting to start, but I also rarely hit dead-ends either.


It's also pretty cheap during Black Friday! Hehehe.


----------



## grabauf (Nov 16, 2021)

I really love Pigments. Here are demos for two of my favourite preset packs:


----------



## cuttime (Nov 16, 2021)

Another really nice feature that is not really stressed by reviews is that there is a sound designer tutorial built into factory patches with instructions on what parameter does what. Also, there is a decent tutorial built in, plus a really good user manual.


----------



## rroc (Nov 17, 2021)

I got it today for the granular sample engine and so far I'm super-impressed! I love the UI as well - shows me everything I need to see at a glance! I'd say BF going well so far  

With *Pigments *and *Abyss *I have now picked up 2 lovely instruments with well-thought-out UIs that let me get straight to shaping sound! I still love you *FM8*, and I've made a few sounds in you that I use _all the time, _but they were all complete accidents - with Pigments and Abyss I'm actually in charge of where the journey is going :D


----------



## Macrawn (Nov 17, 2021)

Pier said:


> I just saw a video comparing the granular stuff with Falcon CPU wise. Pigments was a bit heavier on the CPU when playing like 6 note chords, but not by much.
> 
> 
> For me it means that it sounds digital and precise, if that makes sense. Not digital as in "has aliasing" but as in lacking analog mojo.


The more I think on it it probably is more sterile by that definition.


----------



## shropshirelad (Nov 17, 2021)

cuttime said:


> Another really nice feature that is not really stressed by reviews is that there is a sound designer tutorial built into factory patches with instructions on what parameter does what. Also, there is a decent tutorial built in, plus a really good user manual.


Arturia seem really on the ball with this - opened Vocoder V for the first time today and up pops a step by step guide to getting set up in Cubase (seemed to recognise the DAW I was using). Brilliant stuff. 

Arturia were getting slated for the high cost of upgrades/updates in recent years - they seem to have listened to users concerns, always a smart move.


----------



## whinecellar (Nov 17, 2021)

Man, put me down as another vote for kinda sterile and generic-sounding. Like Falcon, it’s certainly a capable engine with all sorts of possibilities, but its very dependent on the programmer to pull good stuff out of it - there’s certainly very little in the factory stuff that moved the needle for me at all. Nothing I haven’t heard elsewhere, and with much more impressive sound quality.

For me, the current benchmarks for creative sound design and jaw-dropping quality are the new Omnisphere expansions, as well as Dune and Spire. Those 3 alone could keep me inspired for a long time to come. Next to those, Pigments left me feeling glad I only spent $60 on it. 

YMMV of course


----------



## Voider (Nov 17, 2021)

Pier said:


> Yeah I'm considering getting it and want to hear what y'all think about it!


Pigments is my favourite synth UI-design wise. I think the visual representation of everything and the easy way to drag & drop modulations together with the clear and well sized modules (_it's a pleasure to work with envelopes_) are really the best one can get today when it comes to softsynths.

However, it needs a little bit more work to get dirty/raw/gritty sounds out of it, Pigments' very basic character is more neutral and clean which can be good or bad, depending on one's preferences. A single _saw oscillator _in Dune 2 gives me more power / grittiness right away than those in Pigments.

Nevertheless, every synth has its own character and that's the one from Pigments. It has a lovely sound, especially when it comes to patches made for melodies. I think that the clean character makes the details of any form of pitch modulation - even very subtle ones - shine more, which is a good thing.

I'd give it 10/10 and recommend it without hesitation.

Here's my demo for my _Analog Cyberpunk _soundset, I believe that gives a good impression over the versatility that Pigments is capable of. It's all Pigments only, no external postprocessing.


----------



## doctoremmet (Nov 17, 2021)

That Analog Cyberpunk soundset as well as your demo @Voider remains one of my favourite presets purchases. I’ve stolen a lot of your ideas.


----------



## Voider (Nov 17, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> That Analog Cyberpunk soundset as well as your demo @Voider remains one of my favourite presets purchases.


I feel honored to read that! I'm glad you enjoy it 

@grabauf 
That's awesome, didn't see that when I replied!


----------



## grabauf (Nov 17, 2021)

Voider said:


> I feel honored to read that! I'm glad you enjoy it


They're really awesome. 
Look at post #21 in this thread.


----------



## whinecellar (Nov 17, 2021)

Voider said:


> Pigments is my favourite synth UI-design wise. I think the visual representation of everything and the easy way to drag & drop modulations together with the clear and well sized modules (_it's a pleasure to work with envelopes_) are really the best one can get today when it comes to softsynths.
> 
> However, it needs a little bit more work to get dirty/raw/gritty sounds out of it, Pigments' very basic character is more neutral and clean which can be good or bad, depending on one's preferences. A single _saw oscillator _in Dune 2 gives me more power / grittiness right away than those in Pigments.
> 
> ...



Very nice work! You make it sound far better than what the factory presets would suggest 😁


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 17, 2021)

rroc said:


> I got it today for the granular sample engine and so far I'm super-impressed! I love the UI as well - shows me everything I need to see at a glance! I'd say BF going well so far
> 
> With *Pigments *and *Abyss *I have now picked up 2 lovely instruments with well-thought-out UIs that let me get straight to shaping sound! I still love you *FM8*, and I've made a few sounds in you that I use _all the time, _but they were all complete accidents - with Pigments and Abyss I'm actually in charge of where the journey is going :D


I love granular synths and I *adore* Pigments and ABYSS. The sounds are marvelous and the UIs/UXs are gorgeous and well thought out. I use them *a lot* in my tracks. For example this one when Pigments v3 first came out:

Details can be found here:





Perception, my latest track made entirely with Arturia Pigments 3


Hi everyone! Let me share with you my latest track and video entitled Perception. It is made entirely with Arturia Pigments v3, actually 18 tracks of separate Pigments synths running concurrently with mostly granular and harmonic engines. Even percussion instruments are made with it :) I really...




vi-control.net


----------



## Pier (Nov 17, 2021)

liquidlino said:


> Ok, so interesting. Created my first patch from scratch (which you can't do in the demo mode). Only took about 5 minutes to create this, so it's definitely super super quick, and that includes the time fumbling trying to figure out how modulations work (so that was easy). I think it sounds plenty non-clinical. My thoughts so far compared to Falcon:
> 
> 1. Much much faster to create a sound
> 2. Things like unison, drift are very welcome - saves a lot of time compared to having to setup the same in Falcon by hand. On the other hand Falcon I can then go on to fine tune those things to exactly my preference, whereas it's a three-knob parameter in Pigments. Not bad, just less flexible
> ...


Thanks for the mini review.

I liked that patch a lot. Could have been part of my Urban Warfare thing


----------



## Loïc D (Nov 17, 2021)

Go for it !
It’s powerful, has a great GUI and a very nice learning curve.
Disclaimer : I’m French, so I am biased


----------



## Pier (Nov 17, 2021)

Voider said:


> Pigments is my favourite synth UI-design wise. I think the visual representation of everything and the easy way to drag & drop modulations together with the clear and well sized modules (_it's a pleasure to work with envelopes_) are really the best one can get today when it comes to softsynths.
> 
> However, it needs a little bit more work to get dirty/raw/gritty sounds out of it, Pigments' very basic character is more neutral and clean which can be good or bad, depending on one's preferences. A single _saw oscillator _in Dune 2 gives me more power / grittiness right away than those in Pigments.
> 
> ...



Great stuff @Voider ! That and the track by @Tatiana Gordeeva sold me on Pigments.

BTW Tatiana, where did you get that gorgeous drone shot of the city? It's fantastic and fits the dystopian mood of the track so well.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 17, 2021)

Pier said:


> BTW Tatiana, where did you get that gorgeous drone shot of the city? It's fantastic and fits the dystopian mood of the track so well.


Thanks Pier! If I remember well, my husband first found the footage, thought of the concept and gave me the basic idea for the track. Then the music and the video kind of co-evolved  

If you look carefully there's an orange filter that is cast progressively over the images during the video to increase this dystopian, Blade Runner feel. Add a few video glitches and weird transitions to make it Matrix-like and rewind everything, replay it with some geometry bending effects and then "fly" through it in 3D. Then just call it "Perception" to underline the sense of another possible weird layer of reality. That's how it was born!


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 17, 2021)

liquidlino said:


> There's the whole of Tom Wolfes pigments collection with sound demos... I don't think it sounds clinical at all times, although yes, it does trend towards a clinical sound, like Falcon. https://www.tomwolfe.co.uk/product/pigments-collection/


I can vouch for @tomwolfe soundsets for Pigments as well. I used them predominantly on _Oceania_ and other tracks since. Beautiful!






Oceania, a cinematic descent into the abyss (update: now official demo!)


Updated 21.06.22 - Now official demo! - Click here to see post below Dear friends, I'm happy to be back among you after this harrowing experience with The Bottle. o_O During my recent life as a recluse I had time to reflect and was able to let my creativity flow again. I was helped in this...




vi-control.net


----------



## Macrawn (Nov 17, 2021)

Pier said:


> Any good demos you can share?


No just some presets. This is 4 samples of them. First one is just a single chord playing. I don't know the instrument that well yet but I've made about 10 patches. 

First one uses harmonic and wavetable, Second and 4th the granualar and wavetable. Some of the utility noise in there in some places and perhaps utility bass osc. Just having fun with it.


----------



## shropshirelad (Nov 17, 2021)

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> I can vouch for @tomwolfe soundsets for Pigments as well. I used them predominantly on _Oceania_ and other tracks since. Beautiful!


Such a shame they cost 3x more than I just paid for the instrument itself!


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 17, 2021)

Wavetable and Sample engines are very nice and useful. I love the Granular engine. Utility engine is handy but it feels a bit gimmicky. Pigments is where I go when Zebra won't cut it for samples/wavetables/granular. Instead of using Pigment's own global effects, I use Zebrify in the channel strip. Nothing beats Zebra's Rev module. 

Very easy to master the UI. Simple sounds are easy to make. Modulations are super easy. Arpeggiator is meh. Fixed architecture is quite limiting. Creating/recreating a specific sound into an actual patch is hard. Zebra still rules here. IMO.

I posted a set of patches that I created while experimenting with Pigments here:





FREE Synth Plugins & Patches


Seven years after purchase, I still find myself reaching for Zebra for sound design. Here are some “almost acoustic” presets I created. The comb filter is the bomb. Download link available in youtube video description or here. Full disclosure: I did not play badinere, turkish rondo or the...




vi-control.net


----------



## Pier (Nov 17, 2021)

R. Naroth said:


> Nothing beats Zebra's Rev module.


Do you have any tips on using it?

I typically default to the new reverb because the old one always seems kinda metallic.


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 17, 2021)

I am not really an expert.. but what I noticed is that Zebra's Reverb is quite different from an acoustic Reverb plugin. It does amazing things to the sounds piped through it.. It transforms, adding more resonances and character, especially when a bit of FM is involved. I can't really explain it. It just makes it sound large and expressive.

The knobs that I tweak usually are Pre-delay, Feedback, Dry and Wet. Damp knob turned down can make it sound muddy/metallic very quick. I have not yet started tweaking the diffusor knobs. A lot of it still need to be studied.

One technique I have seen is to add a Delay module after Reverb which works great for Pads. I think I am yet to make a patch that doesn't use the Rev module... maybe because most of my patches are very ambient and "cinematic". Playing with the Dune sounds, I noticed that HZ sets the Rev in some of the ambient sounds to 0% dry and 100% wet.

I use the Nu Rev module when I run out of spots in the master lanes. Still so much to figure out about the nuances of each modules within Zebra.


----------



## shropshirelad (Nov 18, 2021)

shropshirelad said:


> Such a shame they cost 3x more than I just paid for the instrument itself!


Change of outlook, I was a bit hasty, seems I was looking at the bundle price & didn't realise they were available in smaller sets. Have downloaded a few samples and they are indeed superb.


----------



## Whywhy (Nov 18, 2021)

For those who are interested, I released a new sound set for Pigments 3:


And a quick walkthrough:


----------



## Whywhy (Nov 18, 2021)

What I like the most about Pigments is the constant evolution of the synth:
Synthesis types, effects...


----------



## Pier (Nov 18, 2021)

Whywhy said:


> What I like the most about Pigments is the constant evolution of the synth:
> Synthesis types, effects...


Yeah, that's been pretty impressive actually. Other companies take years to add a few features to a synth.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Nov 18, 2021)

Sorry I missed the call-out in the first post, @Pier.

Yes, it's true, I did not like Pigments enough to keep it, and sold it after one year. If I had to sum it up, I felt that Pigments3 was decently good at everything and excellent at nothing except being good at everything, which came with complexity, heavier-than-expected CPU usage, and, worst of all to my ears, lackluster, sterile sound. I also admit buying Pigments 3 despite knowing I never clicked with v1 or v2, but I very much wanted to love it, and also thought I'd get into some granular as I didn't have a tool to do that except Omnisphere (another tool collecting virtual dust on my computer).

I now know enough about my preferences to say I'm biased in this assessment. I don't use a lot of wavetable synthesis in my music, or even use virtual analogs (separate from analog emulations). My ears were more satisfied with the virtual analog of Hive2's oscillators and filters, and even those of Vital, than Pigments 3. I tend to use the clean wavetable or virtual analog sounds as an accent or to add contrast to the sounds I favor that are generated by either analog, emulated analog, or FM synths.

I'm also tipping further into hardware, which makes the sterile Pigments 3 that much more stark of a contrast. I have a Roland SE-02 (analog monosynth), OB-6 desktop (analog polysynth), and a Digitone (FM synth with analog benefits), plus a couple digital pedals and an analog filter box (Erica Synths Acidbox 3). You can tell my preferences based on what I've invested in, both monetarily and in terms of physical space.

Every time I tried to use Pigments - a couple times per month - I found myself getting bored and distracted. I just didn't click with it. Chances are, anyone who's read this far has also encountered the same thing with other instruments of some kind .... or even people 

I'd never try to convince anyone to NOT buy it. But I would encourage people to try it out first and don't be wowed too much by the UI. I'd also encourage anyone looking at Pigments3 or Serum to also, at the same time, demo Vital. They're all different, but there's also overlaps in different ways. The nice thing about Vital is that the cost won't be a barrier to buying anything else, since you get a lot for either $0 or $25. If I want a super-unabashedly-digital-sounding synth I can always dust off DS Thorn, as well.


----------



## Pier (Nov 18, 2021)

vitocorleone123 said:


> Sorry I missed the call-out in the first post, @Pier.
> 
> Yes, it's true, I did not like Pigments enough to keep it, and solid it after one year. If I had to sum it up, I felt that Pigments3 was decently good at everything and excellent at nothing except being good at everything, which came with complexity, heavier-than-expected CPU usage, and, worst of all to my ears, lackluster, sterile sound. I also admit buying Pigments 3 despite knowing I never clicked with v1 or v2, but I very much wanted to love it, and also thought I'd get into some granular as I didn't have a tool to do that except Omnisphere (another tool collecting virtual dust on my computer).
> 
> ...


Very good points Don Corleone.

I will definitely get Pigments and spend some time with it this weekend.

Regarding its sound, I've heard tons of demos by now. It seems to be capable of a wide palette. At times it does sound sterile but it also has the capacity to sound analog. It would be weird if it didn't though, considering Arturia's DSP knowledge from emulating analog synths and their hardware adventures.


----------



## Nimrod7 (Nov 18, 2021)

I am in love with the interface, but I can't get around on how it sounds. 
It's never ending up on a track for some reason, maybe it's just me, because I always rely on a small group of synths I know well.

If I need wavetable, I usually go with Serum, 
If I need analog, Diva probably,
Anything else Zebra

Knifonium is what I will target to evaluate next.

The other synths are rarely ending up on a track...


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 18, 2021)

Nimrod7 said:


> because I always rely on a small group of synths I know well.


Amen. The best synth is the one you understand deeply.🦓


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 18, 2021)

R. Naroth said:


> Arpeggiator is meh. Fixed architecture is quite limiting.


I find it quite powerful actually. One very interesting, and often forgotten or ignored feature of Pigments' Arpeggiator / Sequencer module is that *it supports full MIDI Out* so you can drive / control / play *any* _other_ synth with it. A very powerful feature imho!

Edit: You can make it even more powerful if you use the free TransMIDIfier:


Be Wary Software - Products - TransMIDIfier


----------



## cuttime (Nov 18, 2021)

I'm curious if the naysayers here are doing their own programming, or if they’re just using it as a preset player, as the two different approaches can yield two very different sets of results.


----------



## Macrawn (Nov 18, 2021)

Pier said:


> Very good points Don Corleone.
> 
> I will definitely get Pigments and spend some time with it this weekend.
> 
> Regarding its sound, I've heard tons of demos by now. It seems to be capable of a wide palette. At times it does sound sterile but it also has the capacity to sound analog. It would be weird if it didn't though, considering Arturia's DSP knowledge from emulating analog synths and their hardware adventures.


I really would like to know your thoughts when you demo it. I thought your Falcon 2 comments were spot on about it. 

I've grown more and more appreciation for one page synths that have easy functionality/ routing. Pigments is top notch there and Phaseplant (interface ease of use) as well. 

Having a modulation matrix in a software synth (unless analog emulation maybe) is just absurd now. The exception being a small developer. It just pains me thinking about buying an older software synth that is decent but has a modulation matrix on a separate page. But even then Unfiltered Audio Lion is a great example of interface and so is Generate. It's where Falcon 2 is showing it's age and some other synths that have been around for a while as well. 

I would really like to see a Zebra 3 if it ever happens type synth that sounds organic and fat with an interface as good as Pigments or Phaseplant along with the versatility. Pigments is the closest right now to that ideal but it isn't it. It's not organic enough. It's still really great despite and still very applicable to film music. 

And to Bill above, you can get Knifonium dirt cheap sometimes and you should get it. Knifonium and Generate produce some of the best fat analog sounding stuff. I think I got it for like $25 bucks, like no evaluation needed. Lion was dirt cheap too. I do not understand why people pick Oberhausen over Lion or Knifonium on plugin alliance. Makes no sense to me.


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 18, 2021)

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> I find it quite powerful actually. One very interesting, and often forgotten or ignored feature of Pigments' Arpeggiator / Sequencer module is that *it supports full MIDI Out* so you can drive / control / play *any* _other_ synth with it. A very powerful feature imho!


My god, I really need to give Pigments another go. I think my problem is trying to apply my Zebra habits in Pigments. Honestly, my opinions really don’t count. I am quite new to this whole sound design thing — just been a “preset player” all along.😇


----------



## grabauf (Nov 18, 2021)

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> I find it quite powerful actually. One very interesting, and often forgotten or ignored feature of Pigments' Arpeggiator / Sequencer module is that *it supports full MIDI Out* so you can drive / control / play *any* _other_ synth with it. A very powerful feature imho!


Exactly. This opens a lot of new possibilies. 
It has been posted before, but you can't get too much of "Morning Coffee"


----------



## Pier (Nov 18, 2021)

Macrawn said:


> I really would like to know your thoughts when you demo it. I thought your Falcon 2 comments were spot on about it.


Thanks, I will definitely post my impressions in a couple of days.



Macrawn said:


> I would really like to see a Zebra 3 if it ever happens type synth that sounds organic and fat with an interface as good as Pigments or Phaseplant along with the versatility. Pigments is the closest right now to that ideal but it isn't it. It's not organic enough. It's still really great despite and still very applicable to film music.


Knowing U-He, I think Zebra 3 will be exactly that. It's what I'm expecting anyway.

When Urs created Zebra 2 he didn't have a clue of the impact he would cause and that 15+ years later people would still use it in Hollywood blockbusters. I'm sure with Zebra 3 he will create a product with a long term vision and no compromises.


----------



## Pier (Nov 18, 2021)

R. Naroth said:


> I think my problem is trying to apply my Zebra habits in Pigments.


I know exactly what you mean.

I learned synthesis with Zebra which is free form. Ideas flow and the patch grows organically. It took me a while to be able to "think" with fixed architecture synths.


----------



## Soundbed (Nov 19, 2021)

I don't need another synth.

I don't need another synth.

I don't need another synth.

I don't need another synth.

I don't need another synth.

Maybe I will try the demo.

*sips coffee*


----------



## grabauf (Nov 19, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I don't need another synth.
> 
> I don't need another synth.
> 
> ...



Resistance is futile!


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 19, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I don't need another synth.
> 
> I don't need another synth.
> 
> ...


You are one of us... One of us...


----------



## vitocorleone123 (Nov 19, 2021)

cuttime said:


> I'm curious if the naysayers here are doing their own programming, or if they’re just using it as a preset player, as the two different approaches can yield two very different sets of results.


Both, for me. Presets help give a quick tour of features and functions, and help me learn what and how things work. Then I try to deconstruct things. Then I build my own. I use the same process on my hardware synths (since I'm coming from decades of software).

My naysaying was personal. THIS TIME IT'S PERSONAL!!! Ha. That is, I don't think it's a bad synth in any way. It just wasn't for me, personally. I found it sterile. Others may find that the sound is perfectly what they need.

Everyone should demo it - Arturia practically give it away. I also like Arturia the company.


----------



## Pier (Nov 21, 2021)

So... I've been playing with Pigments for a couple of days...

*TL;DR: *IMO Pigments is very fun to use and a gateway drug into the world of synthesis and sound design. OTOH it's a Jack of all trades but master of none. It's cute but sadly limited in many ways.

*Usability and UI*
I think this is definitely the best part of Pigments. The UI is really clear and easy to use. I have a couple of minor gripes regarding usability, but in general the workflow is very fast and efficient and I enjoy using Pigments.

I'm very happy that Arturia finally fixed the issues they had with hiDPI displays on Windows. I tried Pigments 2 years ago and the amount of bugs was so bad I refunded it after a couple of emails with support.



Spoiler: How I fixed the blurry UI on Windows



On Windows, by default the plugin will scale according to the OS settings, but it will still render at low DPI with blurry text (regardless of the window size). To fix this, I disabled a setting on Bitwig that tells the window plugin to stretch. After this, Pigments ignored Windows scaling settings and it rendered pixels 1:1. So now I could use Pigments' setting to scale the UI without getting a blurry UI.



*Features*
Pigments includes a lot of stuff in a very streamlined format. This seems like a good thing, but OTOH it makes Pigments cover a wide area without really going very deep. In general it feels like playing with Lego blocks that can only be used in a limited set of ways.

The sampler is very basic, but it has some fun features such as being able to trigger random samples and the granular features.

You get 2 engines with banks of 3 analog oscillators, but you can't configure how many voices per oscillator you want to use.

It's not possible to add distortion per voice which I find very strange (with the exception of the Mini filter). It's possible to add waveshaping on the wavetable oscillator though, but not when using any other engine.

Probably the most limiting aspect of Pigments is the routing. If you want to send an engine straight to the effects you're forced to do it via a disabled filter (hence sacrificing one filter). Or if you want to send a single analog oscillator to the effects you're forced to sacrifice 2 oscillators (since they come in banks of 3). Or if you want to send an engine to the dry output you're forced to sacrifice a filter and an fx bank. Etc. Maybe someone with more experience than me can chime in if there are any non obvious ways to overcome this.

The sequencer is very fun to get quick random results. It's also great you can output MIDI from Pigments into other synths (if your DAW doesn't have these probability/random stuff). The polyrhythm thing is also pretty unique. OTOH it seems kinda limited to actually write sequences since all notes will be triggered at the same rate (eg: you can't combine 1/16 notes with 1/8 notes).

I think the preset browser is great. It has a deep tagging system and you can use the macros right from the browser. This makes it really good for preset surfers.

*Effects*
The effects certainly do the job, but I didn't find them particularly impressive. Neither in terms of sound nor variety.

I like that Arturia included a pitch shifting delay and a Juno chorus, but I expected more distortions and reverb types. Also, why didn't Arturia include a filter module here with the same capabilities as the 2 main filters?

I find the architecture of the effects section (3 banks of 3 effects) doesn't make much sense. Arturia could have made something like Zebra which gives you plenty of flexibility and is still super easy to use in a very small space.

*Sound*
How does Pigments sound? It will depend a lot on what you're looking for. K bye! Thanks for reading!

Ok, let me elaborate 

If you're looking for that organic fat analog sound, you won't find it here. The analog oscillators do sound good, but are dragged down by the very well behaved and not very organic filters. You can't drive the filters at the input to bring up their non linearities. Only the Mini filter has a drive setting but it is very meh. I compared it to other emulations of the Ladder filter on The Legend, Dune, and Zebra. Pigments was very anemic in comparison.

With that out of the way... I generally enjoy how Pigments sounds. I wouldn't call it sterile per se but I will say it feels more like drinking a Lambrusco than a French wine. It has really surprised me a couple of times with the range of timbres it can produce. Specially with the additive and granular sources and some of the modulation options available in the engines.

*Pigments sweet spot*
I think Pigments shines mostly as a granular and/or additive synth. It's also great fun for all its probability based stuff, random samples, etc. It's also really fun to combine different sound sources. I feel it probably lends itself more into EDM and experimental IDM stuff, rather than cinematic.

Definitely don't get Pigments if you're looking for an analog emulation. I don't think it will be able to satisfy that itch.

Also, I wouldn't get it exclusively for its wavetable capabilities. It can do really convincing dubsteppy stuff, specially when combining wavetables with that surgeon filter. OTOH if you want to do that stuff I'd just get Vital for free (or very cheap).


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 21, 2021)

Pier said:


> *Pigments sweet spot*
> I think Pigments shines mostly as a granular and/or additive synth. It's also great fun for all its probability based stuff, random samples, etc. It's also really fun to combine different sound sources. I feel it probably lends itself more into EDM and experimental IDM stuff, rather than cinematic.
> 
> Definitely don't get Pigments if you're looking for an analog emulation. I don't think it will be able to satisfy that itch.


I agree with your evaluation of Pigments' strengths. For me the granular and additive synths are the winners. So is the Sequencer / Arpeggiator.

I personally have not much use for oldish "analog" sounds. There are zillions of other options for that anyway. I value Pigments for whatever _modern_ features it brings to the table, namely nice granular and additive engines, tons of other techs, powerful arp/seq, nice clear GUI, tons of soundsets by good designers, support, updates and integration with other Arturia products.


----------



## Pier (Nov 21, 2021)

liquidlino said:


> why didn't i just do this in Falcon and then I could keep going with adding FX, oscillators, etc etc.


Yeah exactly. I do something I'm loving on Pigments, I want to keep going because I'm enjoying myself, but then I hit a roadblock pretty quickly.


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 22, 2021)

Pier said:


> So... I've been playing with Pigments for a couple of days...
> 
> *TL;DR: *IMO Pigments is very fun to use and a gateway drug into the world of synthesis and sound design. OTOH it's a Jack of all trades but master of none. It's cute but sadly limited in many ways.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the detailed write up @Pier. Usability is definitely one of Pigments’ strong points. Modulation is easy to apply and track. It has one of the most friendly Granular synthesis controls I have ever seen. The ability to lock the grain pitch to a scale helps to create very musical textures. For now, Pigments will be my go to tool when I need to create grain based patches.


----------



## Pier (Nov 22, 2021)

R. Naroth said:


> Pigments will be my go to tool when I need to create grain based patches.


So I take it you're not enjoying Falcon either?


----------



## R. Naroth (Nov 22, 2021)

Pier said:


> So I take it you're not enjoying Falcon either?


I find the grain synth in Pigments easier to use and being able to pitch the grains to a scale is great. I really want to love Falcon but it in no time pulls me into deep layers and then my PC croaks. It is such as bummer. I hope to upgrade my desktop soon and it will give me another chance to go deep into Falcon. Like you mentioned, Falcon UI leaves a lot to be desired.. I have to compartmentalize the synthesis and after a while, it is a bit hard to reason where things are within Falcon. I would blame myself for not having developed the discipline to make Falcon work to my advantage because technically, Falcon has everything you'd ever want in a synth.


----------



## CATDAD (Nov 22, 2021)

Pier said:


> If you're looking for that organic fat analog sound, you won't find it here. The analog oscillators do sound good, but are dragged down by the very well behaved and not very organic filters. You can't drive the filters at the input to bring up their non linearities. Only the Mini filter has a drive setting but it is very meh. I compared it to other emulations of the Ladder filter on The Legend, Dune, and Zebra. Pigments was very anemic in comparison.


Good thing we all just bought Volcano 3 because we have no self-control, right? 

Really though, I appreciate the comment about pre-filter drive, as it would probably do well to highlight the differences in the filters they've already made. You can add a filter to the FX section with distortion, wavefolding, or overdrive before it, but the filter itself is pretty flat, and it's costly on the FX slots.

With the above (accurate) comments of granular and additive being the "X-Factors" of Pigments, they are actually both cases where you might be more likely to want to bypass the filters as well. Little "bypass filter/FX" buttons in the engine output section wouldn't take up too much screen real-estate nor would it add much complexity either.

I think with a softsynth like this, Arturia would need to take good care in keeping Pigments in its place of "moderate power with ease of use" when adding to it, but those two specific changes I don't think would get in the way. Great overview!


----------



## Pier (Nov 22, 2021)

CATDAD said:


> Really though, I appreciate the comment about pre-filter drive, as it would probably do well to highlight the differences in the filters they've already made. You can add a filter to the FX section with distortion, wavefolding, or overdrive before it, but the filter itself is pretty flat, and it's costly on the FX slots.


Exactly.

Another point is that when you drive the input of the filters themselves, they should behave non-linearly. Here I'm not referring to adding a drive on the signal before the filter (which is also missing). You can do this in Zebra, Diva, Hive, Dune, The Legend, even on Bitwig's Polysynth.

Check this video at around 2:46 that exemplifies this in Hive:





CATDAD said:


> I think with a softsynth like this, Arturia would need to take good care in keeping Pigments in its place of "moderate power with ease of use" when adding to it, but those two specific changes I don't think would get in the way. Great overview!


100% agree. Arturia could easily make Pigments more flexible and rich without sacrificing usability and ease of use.


----------



## spektralisk (Nov 28, 2021)

I think Pigments has very capable granular engine. I've made a sound pack a while ago that is focused only on granular side of Pigments and I had a lot of fun with it. I'm planning to explore its other engines further next year.

The other strong point is usability and interface. I especially like the browser and how simple it is to export and import the presets back. It's all self contained you don't really need to think about any sample dependencies, I really love this simplicity.

Here's a preview of the sound pack I mentioned.


----------



## tony10000 (Dec 8, 2021)

Pigments is a great synth as an all rounder but does not replace a VA synth or a modular synth. It fits well in the context of Analog Lab where you can double it with something analog.


----------



## Trensharo (Dec 8, 2021)

I'd choose Pigments 3 over Falcon 2.5/HALion 6 any day on usability alone. There really is no comparison between these when it comes to ease of use and workflow. Pigments wins, there. IMO, it feels like what SynthMaster wanted to be, but never will because KV331 doesn't have any UI/UX designers good enough to deliver something like this... and Arturia has better DSP programmers.


----------



## Trensharo (Dec 8, 2021)

For many people the differences do not matter. They just want to design sounds for use in their productions.

Falcon and HALion are huge hybrid synth/sampler instruments. I'm quite aware of the differences, but an EDM Producer (for example) isn't really that concerned with the sampling side.

To these people, these are synths for sound design at the end of the day, and unless Falcon or HALion have a killer feature that just blows their minds they're not going to waste more time doing the same work in those plug-ins when they can get it done faster (and, frankly, while having more fun) in Pigments 3.

There are many producers who use Serum for almost everything... So, absolutely you can compare these two and legitimately say "I will use Pigments for everything and I don't need Falcon for anything."

I read your post when it was made. It's a lot of overthinking and overanalyzing. That is not how most people are approaching this - though I appreciate the analysis (cause I like having tons of information).

I am aware of those details, but sometimes the details literally do not matter at all.


----------



## Trensharo (Dec 8, 2021)

liquidlino said:


> Completely agree, except perhaps for the having more fun. Fun is in the eye of the beholder... I do like my Pigments, and it's great for working quickly. But I find Falcon more fun personally, as I can draw down on it's massive FX set, have tons of oscillators and samples etc. Experimenting with layers of amp sims and different filters, modulation fx and distortion fx etc is lots of fun.


You don't need any of this built into the synth to do this.

I see where you're coming from, but these applications run into the same issue that REAKTOR runs into. 75% of the people that buy them end up doing nothing but running presets in them, while using another synth to do all of their sound design... because they don't want to be encumbered by that level of complexity.

It's fun for nerds like us - well, was for me... I'm out of that phase of my life - but people generally bias to simplicity and intuitiveness,


----------



## antret (Dec 10, 2021)

A while back I was demo-ing some of these newer 'super synths' (Pigments, Rapid, Avenger, etc).... I have to say I liked them all actually! I did think that Pigments scored very high on the fun/usability scale and it had some very cool features (sequencer, modulation options). I would never call the sound sterile, but it really has a stunning hi-fi kind of sound.... cant really describe it. I just never quite pulled the trigger on it... for me and my setup, it ate up a fair amount of CPU.

FWIW....My next favorite was Equator 2. I am still putting that thru its paces on the Splice 'rent to own plan'.... which means I will own it.  

I've got a fair amount of synths and never had an issue creating a track folder and 'layering' a number of synths together to get a sound (still do that!), but after demoing these I did see the value of the self contained layered preset.


----------



## Bluemount Score (Dec 10, 2021)

I first read this thread as "Let's talk about Penguins"


----------



## Pier (Dec 10, 2021)

antret said:


> A while back I was demo-ing some of these newer 'super synths' (Pigments, Rapid, Avenger, etc).... I have to say I liked them all actually! I did think that Pigments scored very high on the fun/usability scale and it had some very cool features (sequencer, modulation options). I would never call the sound sterile, but it really has a stunning hi-fi kind of sound.... cant really describe it. I just never quite pulled the trigger on it... for me and my setup, it ate up a fair amount of CPU.
> 
> FWIW....My next favorite was Equator 2. I am still putting that thru its paces on the Splice 'rent to own plan'.... which means I will own it.
> 
> I've got a fair amount of synths and never had an issue creating a track folder and 'layering' a number of synths together to get a sound (still do that!), but after demoing these I did see the value of the self contained layered preset.


What was your opinion on Rapid?


----------



## Trensharo (Dec 10, 2021)

antret said:


> FWIW....*My next favorite was Equator 2.* I am still putting that thru its paces on the Splice 'rent to own plan'.... which means I will own it.


Search Engine Activated XD

EDIT: Ehh... I don't need another $250 Hybrid Synth. Looks impressive, though I guess that's the intended effect of good UI design :-P


----------



## antret (Dec 10, 2021)

Pier said:


> What was your opinion on Rapid?


Hello!

I may have to dig up some notes on that one.  That was the one I really was drooling after for a few years. Never gave it much consideration in the past due to the pricing honestly. All I can recall is that I took that one out of rotation the quickest.... which again, surprised me a bit. On paper that synth is a beast and does offer some things the other don't (like the 8 independent layers). I'm drawing a blank on specifics, (maybe the granular side wasn't as great sounding as the others??) but i just recall that it wasn't as much fun to use as some of the others and seemed (at the time anyway) that the effort didn't match the results for me (if that makes sense)? Please remember I am a simpleton. 

Avenger also has 8 independent layers and I recall enjoying that one a bit better for workflow and sound results. The one large screen, kinda tabbed interface is a lot to digest at first, but I found it made some sense quickly.


----------



## richmwhitfield (Dec 14, 2021)

v3.5 is available in the Arturia Software Center


----------



## Whywhy (Dec 14, 2021)

News distortions algo are really nice!


----------



## sostenuto (Dec 14, 2021)

Reactions to this new expansion ? 


https://www.composerastofficial.com/soundpacks



Adding now as recent Pigments 3 user with early days learning.


----------



## doctoremmet (Dec 14, 2021)

I’d prefer @Whywhy‘s latest expansion


----------



## Wes Mayhall (Dec 14, 2021)

Venus Theory talks about the new Pigments 3.5.


----------



## cuttime (Dec 14, 2021)




----------

