hey, a question about the IRIDIUM. well, first of all you have to say that the IRIDIUM is actually a dream synthesizer. it has everything you need, granular, simple synthesis, fm, kernel, wavetable and effects. in addition, the engine is simply amazing because everything is presented perfectly visually. I’ve tried a lot of digital hardware and in the end I’ve always come to the conclusion that, in terms of sound, I haven’t bought any enrichment in contrast to plugins and can therefore save a lot of money and it’s better to only buy analogue because that’s something else.
now my question: whenever i listen to videos about the iridium on youtube, i realize that i don’t like the sound at all. it sounds like a cheap plugin. very digital and harsh and not warm at all. I see it completely differently with the waldorf M, it sounds completely different than the IRIDIUM, much stronger in character but still digital. I think that’s because of the analog filter? unfortunately he can only do half as much.
What do you think, if you don’t really care about the feel, is it worth buying the super expensive IRIDIUM? are there maybe even plugins that sound much better? like I said, it’s actually a synthesizer dream, but if it sounds crapy… maybe a synthesizer as well as an effect should focus on what it does alone, and not all at once.
I’ve only ever used digital synths in my tracks, whether it was the virus or now the iridium, and they never feel like plugins to me because by the time I run them into my mixer, maybe push the input gain a little, it just has a different feel.
Sound quality is subjective though. To my ears the M sounded a little less subtle and wasn’t quite what I was looking for, though I’d happily own both if I had the space and cash.
I think it depends on YouTube quality
If I listen to a track on yt it sounds ok but listening to it from traktor in flac/ wav it sounds ssoooooo much better.
It’s risky but buy one and try within 30 day return period … check clauses etc .
I’m always surprised, when people find, that vsts lack warmth. To me they all have that in abundance. What I miss from them, is top end resolution. The stuff happening in the highest part of the frequency spectrum.
I cancelled my Iridium Keyboard order after I compared demos of the Iridium directly to the Virus TI. This sound (at around 4:24) really showcases how awful the distortion algorithms on the Iridium can sound.
I’ve been using diva recently … it’s very good. I have no issues / snobbery when it comes to hardware vs vst’s, or even ‘toy’ synths like volcas and pocket operators.
I think it’s important to listen to it in person and tweak before judge.
Have same feeling about Iridium, M is much more raw and alive from demos. Haven’t tried yet Iri… but M is very nice in person… a bit questionable interface, but ok Same presence as Micrwave but more modern polished in a good way and more interesting tone overall… BUT… Quantum sounds REAAlY big amassive in person, great great tone. I couldn’t imagine… liked it a lot… nowhere near „cheap vst sound“… so the only way is to go out and try…
Sounds like you’ve already decided you will not be buying an Iridium. Not sure from your post you actually ever really considered it. This reply is really for others who might be reading this thread.
As an owner of an Iridium (and many other synths), it can sound so many different ways. This thread is funny, though, because the one thing I think the Iridium is not very good at is sounding “bad” (as in “raw” or “grumbly”). It can feel a bit cold too. I’d say, “processed” even when using no effects. I don’t know if somewhere in the engines there are compressors at work, but when I want growly, I go to the MatrixBrute or the Cobalt8. Growly and distorted just aren’t really things I use the Iridium for. I use it for lush, complex, clean, evolving, deep, spacey, which probably won’t surprise anyone. In these kinds of sounds, nothing I have ever owned comes close to the iridium, including any of my VSTs (except maybe Omnisphere).
As others have said, it is a tool, in the end. it’s range is broad because it can do so much (those five synth engines). Its implementation of “FM” is really 6 mini synths with all five engines available X 6 separate instantiations (3 “Oscillators” X 2 layers X 6 Kernels). I think of a range of sounds for each synth along a spectrum, like the electromagnetic field, or radio frequencies. I even have my synths sort of arranged this way in my studio, from left to right (around a corner). At one end of the spectrum is “pure analog” (MatrixBrute), then Analog Four, then sort of hybrid (digital sounding like analog= Cobalt8), then wild Digital (Hydrasynth), then more polished or clean digital (Iridium) and then digital VST in a box (Wavestate).
Of course, there is overlap along the spectrum. Iridium fills a huge part of that spectrum, and is for now (my newest synth) the instrument I reach for the most, and mostly the first thing (unless using my Analog Four for drums first).
Now if I could just figure out how to sensibly use all of this with the Octatrack that continually stares at me at the tail end of it all.
I think the quantum is built a bit differently than the iridium. I’m pretty sure it has analog filters, etc. I haven’t seen any videos of quantum either because I can’t afford it anyway. all in all it’s amazing what kind of synthesizers they are. but I can’t take back the iridium sound, the sound doesn’t appeal to me personally, while M appeals to me immediately, for whatever reason. M simply has a special character that sets it apart from many synths in terms of sound. it’s just my personal opinion. unfortunately it doesn’t have that many options. two filters would have been perfect. but if i had the money, then quantum and M would be the first choice for sound design machines. i almost sold my analogue gear for iridium because it really does cover everything. and offers new worlds of sound. but the fact that it’s not 16x multitimbral like e.g. the blofeld and as I said the shrill sound makes me hesitate.
I would tend to agree… the M definitely speaks to me more. I want to say it’s a case of “do one thing well” versus “try to do lots of stuff well” with the Iridium. that said, I haven’t really tried to like the Iridium. it seems more involved than I’d like to deal with, so I’m kind of avoiding it. maybe some day…
agreed. it’s intuitive sometimes, confusing other times.
I think Iridium can sound very close to the M atleast for certain settings, there is a YouTube video that shows it off. That said beyond just matching raw oscillator sounds the way the envelopes and lfos act are kind if peculiar with the M and I think just general taste of M users is going have them pushing the interesting lofi side of the M. More I use the M the more I think the VCAs are also playing a large role. I’ve never experienced another synth that cuts through a stereo space so well. Anyways to bring my ramblings to a close Iridium doesn’t sound bad but its highly flexible and I think brings out different things from people, a lot of people who got it were after that hifi digital sound. M is more focused but it’s still a wavetable synth and is insanely flexible because of it, some of the new additions to modern mode really opened up what you can do also.
Same presence as Micrwave but more modern polished in a good way and more interesting tone overall… BUT… Quantum sounds REAAlY big amassive in person, great great tone. I couldn’t imagine… liked it a lot… nowhere near „cheap vst sound“… so the only way is to go out and try…