Each granular synthesis software has its own specificity, and each can bring its own sound signature that the others cannot. So sometimes it's a good idea to use more than one, as long as the sound result is satisfactory. I also own two large granular synthesis programs: crusher-X and MGranularMB. MGranularMB gives me things that crusher-X doesn't (multiband, transform and an excellent random generator), but I have to say that I find the audio quality of MGranularMB less good than that of crusher-X. However, it's still at a very high level, which I don't think is the case with DUST.
No one is immune to this problem, even the greatest. For example, if you listen to Native Instruments' recent Reaktor Ensembles, the quality is irreproachable, but from my subjective point of view, two stand out: Rounds, whose quality is also top-notch, but whose design is truly innovative, and Morph, also very innovative, but whose audio quality ..............is unfortunately unsatisfactory. I come back to it from time to time, as the creative possibilities are enormous, but I leave it again, with regret, because of the sound quality.
No one is immune to this problem, even the greatest. For example, if you listen to Native Instruments' recent Reaktor Ensembles, the quality is irreproachable, but from my subjective point of view, two stand out: Rounds, whose quality is also top-notch, but whose design is truly innovative, and Morph, also very innovative, but whose audio quality ..............is unfortunately unsatisfactory. I come back to it from time to time, as the creative possibilities are enormous, but I leave it again, with regret, because of the sound quality.
Statistics: Posted by andreTSV — Tue Feb 25, 2025 4:04 pm