I’m lucky enough to own HALion 7. For what it’s worth, the update was seamless and easy. The new features are very welcome, especially the modulation, FM, and Spectral additions (and I like the new Home page). The software looks great, especially FM Lab, and the whole package has an tantalizing air of possibility and competency.
However, I do wish the UI were resizable, and it’s inexplicable to me that it’s not. (The snap-to-macro feature is useful, but not the solution.) Also, the effects updates are uninspiring (why no proper graphical interfaces, a la Falcon? Or support for VST3 plugins?) and the lack of work on the sound set is disappointing - at least give us new macros, please! The old ones are so dated I sometimes think they make the sounds worse.
The biggest let-down for me was the lack of new players; for example, Euclidian or generative sequencers created within HALion’s scripting environment. This is one of the most interesting features of Falcon and I’d fervently hoped to see them in the new update. It’s this lack more than any other that I think gives Falcon the edge as a playground for experimental music, despite HALion’s superior sampling and sound-design capabilities.
Just did a quick comparison, the results are very similar with the sample I used, but I prefer the HALion interface, it’s more logical and it seems a little easier to hit a sweet spot with your sound. I love it, it’s definitely one of the best granular engines out there, but perhaps not worth the upgrade on its own if you already have Padshop.
The product is out. What I’m hoping for now is content creation, YouTube videos of tips and tricks and good usability cases to show how we can use H7 in a production environment. Not seeking a “reading the manual for you” on YouTube type video, but real cases that get real production results. Ie, here is a cool or useful thing, do this and this, and it will sound and get results like this, type stuff.
Considering this updated took 6 years, it is dissapointing to see how far behind HALion sits in comparison to Falcon when it comes to effects and sequencers/arpeggiators.
I have a Yamaha MODX so I tested HALion because of the new FM engine ported from it but was very surprised to see that it’s way behind the Yamaha hardware synths as well, when it comes to effects. HALion needs more/better effects, bring the whole Montage FX
You’ve got the whole DAW and third party plugins for effects though. Personally, I prefer the patches to be as dry as possible and put processing within the mixer channel strip.
Just my preference of course, but seems silly to throw resources into developing effects inside an instrument when they would be better as plugins that can sit within the mixer channels. Plus HALion needs to remain CPU efficient.
If the effects are integral to the sound it’s good to have them wrapped up in the preset. I often use HALion standalone, too. The onboard FX aren’t terrible, just limited. Two reverbs and two delays, none particularly inspiring, is a shame for an instrument like this. I’d like to see something more like Pigments perhaps. Oh well. It’s still a strong piece of kit.
Yeah, that seems like a weak spot. And it goes for various distortions models too, that is now very much a big thing in modern music, chorus/phaser/ensemble/flanger could use some love too, and the ability to modulate more or less every FX parameter. Funny thing is Yamaha had one of the most sought after SPX ensemble FX, but not in Cubase. I found it at Overloud, GEM.
The effects in the DAW are used ontop of the whole HALion output.
You want to use them at various levels (layers) inside HALion for sound design.
The effects architecture itself is less flexible than Falcon’s as well, but useable nonetheless. But we need the effects themselves.
Now the question remains of are we going to have another 5 or 6 years for Halion to be upgraded in any capacity (new effects, etc)? If so, that is going to be a hard pill to swallow but a likely one unless history is not an indicator of the future. Let’s hope Halion 7 gets a jumpstart here and gathers some more interest from users and therefore supply and demand helps kickstart quicker development.
I route out HALion layers to multiple channel strips from a single HALion preset.
I just don’t like the idea of so much being managed in a single plugin, as you’re at the mercy of HALion to spread the CPU load in a large project, it’s not as easy to automate individual parameters or setup side chaining etc.
You can also mixdown into individual elements then too, which is great for archiving projects.
Like I say, it’s just personal preference, and would prefer that if additional Yamaha FX were added that they’d come in as universal plugins.
If you routinely go through this effort, what’s the point of using something like HALion or Falcon? You could just use specific synths on individual tracks in the DAW, by the same logic you apply to the effects themselves.
There are multiple reasons to have effects inside:
– You usually want to modulate them with the modulation system inside HALion, keeping stuff in sync with the osc modulators etc
– HALion is also (or primarily) an instrument/library design environment. You need to have the effects inside your instrument if they’re part of the sound (which they are) and the instrument is meant to be distributed.
I do too, when using a tracking DAW, but I also use other types of hosts…such as scoring suites that have none, or lousy effects…and even if you buy 3rd party affects they don’t always allow hosting effects for every channel…just a few on the mains or off in AUX BUS like channels.
For many, it’s also a tool for live performing. The simpler the better for many in those situations…stand-alone even, with very little if any sequencing going on at all.
Just because internal effects are present doesn’t mean they must be used. If trying to do huge projects and something is too resource hungry and one has other options, that’s great…but I’d have to agree that some attention to internal effects would be a welcome thing. Much of the stuff inside HALion seems to be duplicates of what comes with Cubase…glue in a few more.
I.E. Either figure out the parameter’s address directly if it exists…or…right click the control you want to ‘modulate’ that’s part of an FX. Add as new automation. Have a script that mirrors that control parameter with whatever parameter you want to be the ‘modulation source’.
I’ve done similar stuff before just trying to have various things get ‘displayed’ in macros.
Yes, as i’ve said it hits the CPU And the parameter list would be uncontrollable - this is why i go out to channel strips. In fact, I’ll render out multi-layer HALion patches into their own tracks so I can pan them out and automate elements at will - plus they all go to stems when i back my projects up.
It’s no effort you just bypass the effects and route out - it’s 3/4 clicks. But i’m trying to fit sounds into a mix and not looking for that mammoth single preset sound that’s caked in reverb and god knows what else.
You’ve come from the perspective of comparing MODX vs HALion but dismissing it’s strongest gains over hardware, which is multi-out across multi-instances. Many Montage patches (And I think the same for MODX) take up 5-6 chans themselves and that’s running on dedicated DSP hardware.
I use HALion as it integrates well into Cubase and can get to sounds and use my hardware to change presets on the fly - for me it’s a workstation replacement. I have a Montage but it’s much easier to just work with HALion/Cubase and not have to route all the outputs, and render out stems everytime i close a project.
It’s just an alternative viewpoint that if Yamaha resources went into new effects I would want the option of using them across my entire project… That’s all. I think if they went into HALion they would have limited parameter control, limited automation options and potentially cause it to be CPU heavy.
From what the Steinberg guy had said on another thread, I think you can get to them via scripting…
Did you see this? (Bottom paragraph)
Just seems crazy to fall down that hole to me when you can put them out into their own inserts and control via MIDI Remote… But I’m clearly in the minority! lol
