massive vs rapture

Author
chauncey_gardner
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 803
  • Joined: 2007/01/17 13:50:23
  • Location: Houston Tejas
  • Status: offline
2007/02/07 23:39:26 (permalink)

massive vs rapture

anyone compared the two? I just bought Massive but only played with it like 3 hours. I have owned Rapture for some time.

DIfferent in some ways, similar in others, from a very brief comparison.

Any thoughts from other users who have both?

Sonica Dual Core 3.4 GHz, 2GB Ram, 3HDs, UAD1, PoCo Firewire, DIGI 9652, D8B, vintage synths, guitars and more money than talent (though questionable how much of either). XP Home SP2. SPE6.2. Other things of variable interest.
#1

12 Replies Related Threads

    Nick P
    Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3112
    • Joined: 2006/09/01 18:08:09
    • Location: Area code 392 - Arlington Hts, IL
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/08 01:26:15 (permalink)
    LOL love the username and avatar. Great movie! What would Chauncey say about this?

    Really it comes down to personal taste. Which one sounds better or has the features you need. There's no way someone else can decide this for you.

    As a Rapture owner I've found a synth that sounds as analog as I think is possible w/ virutal analog technology, and has an incredibly deep potential for learning programming. There is a wealth of 3rd party information such as B Rock's excellent tutorials. And now there is an official book called "Cakewalk Synthesizers". More, I don't need, so I observe the latest developments in soft synths, but it will take something truly remarkable to persuade me to add to Rapture. At least in the synth department. Rapture's got it covered for me.

    Cakewalk Forums - A Great Learning Resource For All Things Cakewalk!
    #2
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/08 14:37:18 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: chauncey_gardner

    anyone compared the two? I just bought Massive but only played with it like 3 hours. I have owned Rapture for some time.

    DIfferent in some ways, similar in others, from a very brief comparison.

    Any thoughts from other users who have both?


    I have Rapture and love it . To be honest I was tempted to explore Massive a while back and later on decided that I would be better off learning the SFZ and I should get the same results yet better. Huge library though and heard it needs power , i mean power CPU.
    #3
    Frank@ProSounds
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 199
    • Joined: 2006/03/12 20:09:34
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/08 21:34:49 (permalink)
    I'll take Rapture over Massive any day.
    #4
    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/08 22:31:15 (permalink)
    Frank is a sound design man. Programing the sounds we use He knows the ins and outs so when he recommends Rapture over Massive it is an informed choice. Me I'm just a lowly user but a happy camper just the same. I do have a few NI synths. FM7, Vocator.
    #5
    sjr
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 17
    • Joined: 2006/03/25 00:34:07
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/08 22:45:37 (permalink)
    I bought Massive when I found out Rapture would not work in C4. I really really like it. Then I got a beta of Rapture that allows it to work in C4. I was amazed at how different Rapture sounds from Massive.

    Both are good and I'm glad I have both. I like Massive's UI a little better. I like the raw wave forms in Rapture a little better. I think both are musically very useful.

    You can get Rapture and Massive for 1/4 the price of a Virus TI which I bought and returned because of the clicks and pops it made. All in all, it is a great time to make music on a computer.
    post edited by sjr - 2007/02/08 23:10:19
    #6
    Amek
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 4
    • Joined: 2007/02/10 15:44:37
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/10 15:59:15 (permalink)
    My massive crashes trying to load a saved project in Cubase sx3 I had the same problem with Battery 3, Fm8 and Kore something to do with the programing translation to support vst 2.0 aswell as vst 3.0. After a few month there just finaly now sorting out this problem theres a lot of angry users on the NI forum. I have played around with Massive in DXI stand-alone. Its the only alternative software to a hardware virus ti. Rapture is an awsome instruments and I load the editing functions and its STABILITY (Native Instruments TAKE NOTES) There both heavy on the cpu you would have to be running a beast of a machine to work with both in one project at once. I also love the new Refx Nexus synth but again a real cpu drainer
    post edited by Amek - 2007/02/10 16:20:12

    Chance Favors the prepared mind (Louis Pasteur)
    #7
    Nick P
    Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3112
    • Joined: 2006/09/01 18:08:09
    • Location: Area code 392 - Arlington Hts, IL
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/11 03:01:24 (permalink)
    Amek - I disagree. Rapture is anything but CPU intensive. You mention experiencing a number of conflict-type issues w/ your hardware and software. I've got a 15 month old computer which was mid-range when purchased. An HP "off the shelf". So far Sonar, P5, Rapture, Battery, all of 'em run without a hitch and looks like very good on the CPU usage. Many other Rapture users have reported similar results in being pleased with Rapture's "going easy" on the CPU cycles.

    Cakewalk Forums - A Great Learning Resource For All Things Cakewalk!
    #8
    Amek
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 4
    • Joined: 2007/02/10 15:44:37
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/11 06:27:38 (permalink)
    Your running sonar mate they handle Plugs diffrently. I use sx3 an Asio2 direct monitoring audio interface and its still chewing up my cpu. theres 2 gig of DDR in the machine aswell so its not a memory shortage issue straining the cpu any other plugs like vanguard or batttery 2 i could load about 10 or 12 instruments and its sit around halfway it goes straight to half in the cpu perfromance in sx3 with just Rapture alone. Its a 2800 dual core.
    #9
    Nick P
    Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 3112
    • Joined: 2006/09/01 18:08:09
    • Location: Area code 392 - Arlington Hts, IL
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/11 06:58:52 (permalink)
    Noted. That was exactly why I chose Rapture and Dimension Pro. I decided on Sonar and P5 as my DAW platform and wanted to stay in the family. I was sure that Rapture and DimPro were well tested on at least those two DAWs and thus my chances for such conflicts were low. Although I was disappointed at Cakewalk not releasing a full-fledged drum solution, I thus opted for Battery 3 after NAMM. But I am good with synths with just Rapture and DimPro and my Cakewalk Synthesizers book. Theoretically it shouldn't matter what plug-ins you use, as long as they support the standard. But practically if you stay within one company's products, you risk less problems I feel.

    However there are a few "outsiders" that interest me, such as the GMedia stuff, the Korg Legacy, and NI's FM8. But for now I've got all I can handle with Rapture, my Cakewalk Synths book, and the many great Rapture tutorials available, such as the BRock collection. Those alone could keep someone experimenting for quite a long time.

    Cakewalk Forums - A Great Learning Resource For All Things Cakewalk!
    #10
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/11 10:36:57 (permalink)
    To be fare I would disagree a little. Rapture instances are heavier on the CPU than other such as Dimension. Rapture is wonderfull but the reality is it uses lots of CPU . This was discussed before .
    #11
    Frank@ProSounds
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 199
    • Joined: 2006/03/12 20:09:34
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/11 12:17:30 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: Amek

    Your running sonar mate they handle Plugs diffrently. I use sx3 an Asio2 direct monitoring audio interface and its still chewing up my cpu. theres 2 gig of DDR in the machine aswell so its not a memory shortage issue straining the cpu any other plugs like vanguard or batttery 2 i could load about 10 or 12 instruments and its sit around halfway it goes straight to half in the cpu perfromance in sx3 with just Rapture alone. Its a 2800 dual core.


    Amd correct? That's probably your problem.
    #12
    Amek
    Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 4
    • Joined: 2007/02/10 15:44:37
    • Status: offline
    RE: massive vs rapture 2007/02/13 05:16:13 (permalink)
    a bit unfair to blame AMD im assuming your using a trusted pentium. But a lot of pro audio pc companies are fitting AMD dual cores so they cant be all that bad. Nick I use all the G-media plugs my favorite is MINIMONSTA wich is a wkd Moog replication. I also recommend Refx Nexus its just so packed with essential sounds for all dance genres and refx are constantly releasing expansions. Vanguards good but dont use the Fatt Knob it phases the sound load in a spectral analyzer vst fx on the vanguard channel you can see it happening it also eats up more cpu. Cakewalk have to go into the drum market your right its the only thing theyre lacking maybe we should start a campaign. I use battery and kontakt but on both there murder to scroll through samples to find the right Kick, Hi hat exc. start a new thread? a cakewalk drum machine and what would make it better than battery and kontakt for ease of use?

    Chance Favors the prepared mind (Louis Pasteur)
    #13
    Jump to:
    © 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1