Page 2 of 2
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 6:46 pm
by ehbes
cane creek wrote:Will be interesting to see what instruments Sugar bytes come up with for the Reason rack.
theres already a fair few...
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 7:19 pm
by VirtualMark
sunny_b_uk wrote:imo its not a good sounding synth at all
free synths like sonigen modular sound way better
I agree, it seems to lack power and clarity. Pretty awful sound quality, plus the interface seems to make my cpu jump up a lot in cubase, no need for graphics and animations like this on a music program. Not impressed at all.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:28 pm
by sunny_b_uk
VirtualMark wrote:sunny_b_uk wrote:imo its not a good sounding synth at all
free synths like sonigen modular sound way better
I agree, it seems to lack power and clarity. Pretty awful sound quality, plus the interface seems to make my cpu jump up a lot in cubase, no need for graphics and animations like this on a music program. Not impressed at all.
i love synths with several synthesis types but the quality is absent. yeh CPU usage is a joke, high as diva although diva isnt worth comparing to cyflop

Re: Cyclop
Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2012 5:11 pm
by Kit Fysto
When I first saw it I thought it looked really cool minus the Wobble Knob. For some reason having a "wobble knob" seems really lame to me, but regardless of that it provides a lot of really great automations that seems extremely easy to control. Sad to hear the sound quality is lacking. Not surprised its a CPU hog though
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2012 11:04 am
by legskeattch
I have created much better bass sounds in Cyclops than I have in Massive! Once you get passed how to use the thing, its incredibly powerful!
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:20 am
by twilitez
Testing this out and not getting much out of it basswise. One patch so far that could actually function as a bass. Of course im a huge noob for now, but i get the feeling its actually more suited for entirely different kinds of sounds. The overload of modulation option has to be worth something even though it really just seems... too much.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:38 am
by sunny_b_uk
twilitez wrote:Testing this out and not getting much out of it basswise. One patch so far that could actually function as a bass. Of course im a huge noob for now, but i get the feeling its actually more suited for entirely different kinds of sounds. The overload of modulation option has to be worth something even though it really just seems... too much.
its trash if i was you id uninstall it, you can make much better sounds distorting basic waveforms.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:23 am
by twilitez
Im leaning towards doing that, but i just have that odd feeling im missing something since Sugarbytes is usually quite awesome.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:00 am
by sunny_b_uk
theyre alright at FX, not really into WOW filter but i like some of their other stuff. they seem to suck at making synths for some reason.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:25 am
by nowaysj
sunny_b_uk wrote:theyre alright at FX
Vogue is incredible for abuse purposes.
Re: Cyclop
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 2:35 am
by fuz
The learning curve is weird. It doesn't make it a bad synth imho.
Kind of mix Effectrix, WOW, and a bit of Massive (not its best side). The sampler feature is nice.
It's heavy, and cluttered. I use it a bit.