Sustain held notes across new Scale selection

Probably a real pain to implement, but musically speaking it would make Scaler a more properly playable instrument if receiving a command to change to a new Scale did not result in the cutoff of currently held notes.

IOW, ideally, if the player is sustaining a note by holding it down, that note should continue to sustain until the player releases it, regardless of whether a Scale change command arrives in the meantime or not.

Note: this need applies to sustained chords as well.

1 Like

I agree, there are limitations with the synthesis engine vs performance engine in scaler and there are a few anomalies. We will discuss. Thanks for feedback.

It would be interesting to know what proportion of users actually use the Scaler synth engine for their end product, as opposed to just using it to sketch out the elements and then generating sounds via DAW plugins for production of the ‘final’ piece?

IMHO, although the sounds are perfectly fine for development, they can’t compete (nor do I imagine that figured in the design strategy of Scaler by its authors (???)) with say, the 14.000 patches now in Spectrasonics Omnisphere alone, with a 91Gb sound library. You can manage the ‘cut off’ issue in that final polishing.

Except for the felt piano I never use the built in sounds. In fact I usually have the sound in Scaler off by default.

Well I have done lots of sound design for several synth and library companies so I know what is required in terms of raw synthesis to make something great and adaptable. In fairness to Ed and the development team they have done wonders in making so many sounds useable in such a small footprint. A devoted synthesis engine will happen one day I am sure but to answer your question I am genuinely surprised how many projects I reopen (for major clients and producers) that have an inbuilt scaler sounds having a harmonic influence. I love the Felt Piano, Distance, Celestial Existence, Brass, Hybrid Staccato and Retro Bass. The guitars are my least favourite given our constraints but with 2.5 being a big focus on guitar, I imagine that will improve.


As someone mostly focusing on ambient music, I do like the Scaler synth pad sounds. Since they are least likely to be compared to “authenticity” of traditional instruments I think they hold quite well in their unique sound. I often layer them also, since I already use multiple Scaler instances. And another reason to use built-in Scaler sounds is the CPU and memory efficiency. I do appreciate that Scaler has full blown internal instruments, and such a selection - if you compare it to the one sinus wave sound most MIDI tools have for just simple monitoring (e.g. reMidi or Cthulhu)

I am sitting here having just watched the MotoGP race with a red face all the way through, and then decided to grovelingly respond. I had not intended my comment to be seen as a criticism, but more as a statement about the Scaler core purpose in response to the initial comment in this thread about sound generation.
I am maybe Scaler’s greatest fan, in both its innovative concept and realisation. How do you do a good Grand Piano in 18Mb ? Scaler does, and it’s clear that the team have something special in synthesis skills.
However, my comment related to the original poster, noting that if he felt that Scaler had shortfalls in patch behaviour, he could solve it for not many pennies with a heavyweight focussed plugin. Previous other comments have also taken a slight jab at the range of sounds, and my response was that if it was an issue, there was a simple solution with a Barclaycard.
I too love Celestial, Tight Base etc., but I’m slightly surprised if users expect the range and tweakability from the internal synth engine as they might from one of NI’s guitar plugins, or one of Arturia’s modelled synths.
I should note too that I reach for Carbon Electra as first choice for base, for example, and this synth shows that the team is up there with the best of them.
So abject apologies if I was seen to be negative about the sound set, and it was more about positioning and scope; I personally would prefer it if the focus for evolution was on your real functional differences with the amazing, composer led, capabilities for musical exploration rather than delivering a 90 gig sound library …

1 Like