Signing Stories: Westside CowboyDate Signed: August 2025Label: Island Records/Adventure RecordingsBand Members: Reuben Haycocks, guitar, vocals; James Bradbury, guitar, vocals; Aoife Anson-O’Connell, bass, cello, vocals; Paddy Murphy, drumsType of Music: AmericanaManagement: Alex EdwardsBooking: Carly Goldberg, Andrew Morgna, Wassmerman Legal: Ally HornPublicity: Jaycee Rockhold - Pitch Perfect PR, jaycee@pitchperfectpr.comA&R: James TalbutWeb: westsidecowboy.com

Honing one’s sound and being unique can vastly increase the odds of industry attention. It’s a truism taken to heart by Manchester’s Westside Cowboy. The fast-rising band melds alt-country, punk, Americana, folk, and indie rock into a style they’ve dubbed Britainicana. “Don’t look for [a deal],” recommends drummer Paddy Murphy. “Just write the best music you can.” 

“Which is aggravating to hear,” chimes in guitarist Reuben Haycocks. “We had people say that to us, and I would be like, ‘Fuck off. You’re already signed.’”

Nevertheless, the tactic worked. They first inked deals with a pair of local boutiques, Heist or Hit and Nice One Records. Alex Edwards, who runs Nice One with Pete Heywoode, began managing the blossoming act. Touring then ramped up, and during this period they played London’s Sebright Arms. Edwards had invited a modest throng of record people to the show, but the band believes their performance that evening was subpar. “We thought we’d shagged it,” gulps Murphy. 

Yet it didn’t matter. Word was starting to get around. Edwards, who works with English Teacher and formerly supported Sports Team, both successful Island Records acts, similarly invited label people to a subsequent gig at The Social. A trickle of interest turned into an avalanche. “This sort of weird hype started,” tells Murphy. “It wasn’t engineered. It was a right place, right time type of thing.”

The group that once wanted to be on an indie soon found itself in Island Records’ offices. Before leaving, the president said they were sending over a contract. Chuckles Murphy, “We kind of laughed, because we’d never been in a situation like that. Two hours later, it was in our email.” The agreement with newly minted imprint Adventure Records is especially generous with the timeframe around which it will relinquish their masters.

Being on a sublabel of a major comes with advantages. “It means that smaller bands like us are less likely to get lost in the shuffle,” the percussionist points out. “Hopefully, it means we get the appropriate attention and care.”The post Signing Stories: Westside Cowboy first appeared on Music Connection Magazine.

FBI says ATM ‘jackpotting’ attacks are on the rise, and netting hackers millions in stolen cashThe FBI says hacks that trick ATMs into spitting out cash on demand are rising, with hundreds of attacks in the past year alone netting hackers millions in stolen bills.

Bitcoin options market structure leans toward $60K retest in FebruaryBitcoin may stay capped under $70,000 as traders deploy bearish options strategies, and spot BTC ETF outflows point to a retest of the yearly low.

Chris Welz named partner at Secretly Distribution after company’s ‘biggest year ever’The longtime COO steps into ownership after two decades at the independent distributor.
Source

RP2040 Powers A MIDI-Controlled SoundboardWhen you’re livestreaming, it can be tempting to fire off all kinds of wacky sound effects like you’re a morning radio DJ back in the heady days of 1995. If that’s who you want to be, you might like this soundboard project from [Biker Glen].
The build is based around an RP2040 microcontroller. It’s paired with an I2S digital-to-analog converter for sound output, which in turn feeds a small amplifier hooked up to a speaker or a line output.  The RP2040 is programmed to respond to MIDI commands by playing various sounds in response, which are loaded off a microSD card. It’s able to act as a USB MIDI host, which allows it to work seamlessly with all sorts of off-the-shelf MIDI controllers like the MIDI Fighter or the Novation Launchpad.
It’s an interesting hardware solution to a problem that you could probably also solve with software on your streaming machine, especially if you’ve already got a USB MIDI controller. However, there’s something to be said for lightening the load when your streaming computer is already doing lots of hard work to truck video up to the cloud already. Files are on Github if you’re eager to replicate the build.
Soundboards are just fun, which is why we’ve featured them before. Meanwhile, if you’re whipping up your own streaming accessories at home, be sure to let us know on the tipsline!

How to download MIDI on Splice Sounds
Let’s take a look at how you can get started with exploring and downloading MIDI on Splice Sounds in minutes.

dumumub OrbitOrbit is a gravity based granular synthesizer. Read More

ADDAC System introduce the Mixology The ADDAC815 Mixology serves as both a dual effect chain router and feedbacker, and can also function much like a 3x3 matrix mixer, providing multiple routing configurations within a very compact set up.

Steinberg unveil Groove Agent 6 Steinberg's virtual drum instrument has gained the ability to layer and replace kicks, snares and toms, along with a brand-new Punch Kit, additional acoustic kits, a new Pattern Editor and much more.

Traxsource: “Any platform claiming foolproof AI detection is overstating what the technology can currently deliver”Electronic music-focused platform Traxsource has outlined its “nuanced” stance on AI use in a lengthy new statement on its social media channels.
In a somewhat more balanced position than other platforms – some of which have taken an overtly anti-AI stance – Traxsource acknowledges the legitimate use of AI “as a production tool” to “assist within a larger human-driven creative process”, but maintains that entirely AI-generated music “does not belong on Traxsource”.

READ MORE: Following the emergence of AI weekly music charts – the first AI-only radio station has arrived

Within the post, Traxsource downplays the infallibility of AI-detection tools often touted by other platforms and streaming services, saying 100% accurate detection is “not yet possible”.
“Detection tools are improving, but still face significant limitations and remain extremely cost-prohibitive at scale,” the platform says.
“Add in today’s hybrid workflow, which often blends human creativity with AI tools, and accurate detection is nearly impossible. Even the researchers building these systems acknowledge there is no 100% solution.
“Any platform claiming foolproof AI detection is overstating what the technology can currently deliver. We choose transparency over false promises, both to avoid enforcement we cannot accurately execute and to protect human artists from being falsely accused.”
One such platform leading the charge against wholly AI-generated music is Deezer, which last year unveiled an AI content tagging system that filters such content out of royalty payments and blocks it from showing up in editorial playlists. The French streaming service recently announced plans to license the technology out to other companies.
Traxsource touches on the “polarised” conversation surrounding AI use in music, mentioning how some believe AI is a “threat to human artistry”, while others view AI as the “next evolution in a long line of tools” to “push creative boundaries”.
“We believe the issue is far more nuanced and requires an equally nuanced position,” the platform says.
“It’s a fact that house music was born out of technological innovation, and our community has always embraced advancements. But we also must recognise the difference between a production tool in the hands of a skilled human creator and a fully AI-generated song produced from a prompt. This distinction is at the heart of our position.
Traxsource’s stance on AI use on its platform consists of five key pillars:

We champion human artistry – “Traxsource is and will remain a home for music made by artists who pour their talent, experience, emotion and identity into their work.”
We are against fully AI-generated music – “Music created entirely through AI prompting where no meaningful human creative contribution exists does not belong on Traxsource.”
We acknowledge AI as a legitimate production tool – “If an artist or producer uses AI to assist… but the musical vision, composition and artistic direction are their own, we believe that is still their music.”
We believe in transparency for our customers – “We are working towards scanning each upload and including a series of questions which will allow us to determine if a track is Fully Human, Fully AI, or AI-assisted and to what extent, providing the possibility or appropriately labelling each track to provide transparency to our valued customers.”
We will adapt as the landscape evolves – “AI technology, detection capabilities, industry standards and legal frameworks are all evolving rapidly. We are committed to staying engaged with these developments.”

You can read Traxsource’s full statement below:

View this post on Instagram

The post Traxsource: “Any platform claiming foolproof AI detection is overstating what the technology can currently deliver” appeared first on MusicTech.

Eventide releases new version of classic Music Mouse softwarePrior to the release of Music Mouse, digital music software centred around editing recorded tracks – but in 1986, composer Laurie Spiegel launched the software which turned your computer into a standalone instrument.
To celebrate the software’s 40th anniversary, Eventide has modernised and re-imagined Spiegel’s iconic software. And it’s been produced in collaboration with Spiegel herself.

READ MORE: Six synths that define Radiohead’s sound

Originally released on the Mac, Spiegel’s software transformed the common mouse into an “intelligent musical instrument”. By moving your mouse up, down, left or right, across an X and Y axis, you can shape melodies, find new harmonies and explore a bank of diverse sounds and controls via your keyboard.
Four lines on the grid represent four unique voices, which can play simultaneously. Each shift of your mouse can alter where each voice falls on the grid, and as the lines move, they will tweak which notes are played.

Alongside its original sounds, the software comes equipped with a slew of classy retro synth presets, taken from Spiegel’s original DX7 and TX7 patches for Music Mouse. However, Eventide’s refreshed release allows you to control modern hardware and plugins with the software, too.
There are also 10 pattern sequences to utilise, as well as 4 rhythmic treatments (Chord, Arpeggio, Line, Improv) and 6 harmonic modes (Chromatic, Octatonic, Middle Eastern, Diatonic, Pentatonic, Quartal). Users can also control velocity, filter, tremolo and pitch modulation levels.
At its core, Music Mouse focuses on the joy of experimenting with new sounds. For that reason, Eventide hasn’t bloated its reimagined anniversary release; while the UI has had a bit of a tidy up, and you can now sync up your MIDI, it’s still an intuitive software anyone can pick up.
Music Mouse is available now for $29. For more information, head to Eventide.
The post Eventide releases new version of classic Music Mouse software appeared first on MusicTech.

W. A. Production Combustor is FREE for BPB readers (10,000 licenses available)
Combustor ($29.90) is a character compressor plugin for Windows and macOS. W. A. Production offers 10,000 free licenses available exclusively for Bedroom Producers Blog readers. If you’re quick, you can grab your free copy of Combustor by signing up below. After signing up, you’ll receive a redemption key and a link to the instructions page. [...]
View post: W. A. Production Combustor is FREE for BPB readers (10,000 licenses available)

Want to make your own sample pack? Tips from someone who’s actually done itMaking sample packs is a fun way to add a new income stream to your music career. You can explore multiple musical ideas at once without the pressure of finishing them as full tracks.
But that doesn’t mean sample pack creation is easy.

READ MORE: Future-proofing your DAW project: A guide to exporting multitracks, stems, and more

Whether you team up with a marketplace like Splice or decide to sell independently, your success relies heavily on organisation. If you’re unsure where to start, here’s a practical guide based on my real-world experience of making sample packs.
Planning ahead
Companies that release sample packs regularly, such as Splice, BandLab Sounds and Loopcloud, already have their delivery specifications in place. One platform may require true peak levels of -6dB, while another may prefer samples limited to 0dB. Unless you have direct communication, you can’t predict every requirement. But you can optimise your workflow for efficiency.
First, choose a clear theme. You can make a single-genre pack with multiple instruments, a vocal pack filled with EDM toplines, or an instrument-specific collection such as acoustic drums. Song-starter packs often include not only audio, but MIDI files as well. Like an album, a sample pack benefits from creative direction from the get-go.
Even with song-starter packs, it’s not enough to create a few beats, stem them out, and call it a day. Sample packs often contain hundreds, sometimes even thousands of audio files. Sound effects packs tend to be denser, but 200-400 samples is perfectly acceptable for a musical pack. These numbers may seem high now, but many of the samples should be dry or stripped-down versions of fully processed sounds.
For example, imagine building a four-bar drum loop. The full version presents the entire groove. From there, you might mute everything except the kick and snare to create an alternative version. Next, you could export just the hi-hats and shakers as a topper. You can then go further by printing each sound individually. For every loop and one-shot, provide a dry version with no time-based effects for producers who want more control over their mixes.
To plan ahead, sketch out your ideas and prepare a folder with subfolders, such as:

Artwork
Demo track
Loops
One-shots
MIDI

Image: SIRMA
Once you see everything laid out, it’s much easier to focus on one task at a time.
Loops vs one-shots
Many foley and field-recording sample packs consist entirely of one-shots. But for melodic, rhythmic, and harmonic sample packs, providing loops in multiple keys and tempos is standard.
A vocal pack, for instance, may feature toplines in several keys and BPMs. Variety is important, but so is relativity — some one-shots and loops should be easily combinable within the same track.
The main difference between loops and one-shots lies in editing.
A loop is aligned to the grid and cut at a specific tempo, like a shaker pattern or a repeating vocal phrase. A one-shot can be anything from a kick drum to an ambient drone, intended for use as-is or loaded into a sampler.
When editing one-shots, it’s best to remove silence at the beginning of the sample. If it’s a sustained sound or there’s a reverb tail, a natural fade-out tends to work well.
As for loops, maintaining tempo accuracy is critical. Ideally, a loop should play seamlessly when multiplied across the arrangement. To achieve this, insert fades as short as a couple of milliseconds at the beginning and end of the clip.
If a loop contains reverb, try bouncing it in place to capture the reverb tail, then insert it at the beginning of the loop on a separate track. This way, when you sum the two tracks, the reverb tail will be baked into the start of the loop.
Here’s a step-by-step demonstration to walk you through the process.

Editing and mixing with accuracy
Poor editing can be a deal-breaker, regardless of recording quality. Most sample pack platforms have a quality control team to filter out samples that are too loud, too quiet, or plagued by clicks and pops. More often than not, missing fades are the culprit behind such noises. But synthesizers can produce unexpected artefacts too. And vocal recordings typically require careful removal of plosives and excessive sibilance.
Any healthy audio editing workflow should include minimising distracting noises and inserting appropriate fades.
To speed things up, tools such as noise gates or automatic processors like iZotope RX Mouth De-click can be invaluable.
Once edited, you can process your samples in multiple ways to maximise their potential.
Say you cut an electric guitar arpeggio loop with a clean tone and minimal compression. Then, you create an alternative version of it with rhythmic delay and reverb. The same loop can sound quite different with some distortion or tremolo.
This is how experienced sample pack producers approach mixing. With each processing decision, their packs find new homes across multiple genres.
Because varied processing affects levels, it’s best to run all samples through the same limiter. Keeping perceived loudness and true peak levels consistent prevents users from constantly adjusting the volume knob while previewing your sounds.
Consistent labelling and file formats
Consistency in bit depth, sample rate, and file naming makes a pack far more accessible.
MIDI files are straightforward, but audio exports vary by platform. A bit depth of 24-bit is a safe bet. Some marketplaces require a 48kHz sample rate while others accept 44.1kHz. Either way, most major sample marketplaces require WAV files.
Each file name should include all essential information in a single line. For loops, this typically means:

Tempo (BPM)
Key
Instrument type
Loop type
Dry or wet indicator
Descriptive keywords

To differentiate one-shots from loops, you can omit the tempo information.
Let’s break down an example from my Splice pack, SIRMA’s Vocal Palette:
VOX_SIRMA_90_vocal_stack_perfect_storm_lead_wet_Emin.wav
“VOX” — the name of the sample pack label
“SIRMA” — the name of the artist
“90” — signifies the tempo in BPM
“vocal stack” — describes loop type
“perfect storm” — a unique title based on lyrics
“lead” — signals that this is the lead part of the vocal stack
“wet” — indicates that the loop contains time-based effects
“Emin” — means that the key of the loop is E minor
Although some one-shots leave out both the tempo and key information, the formatting remains consistent throughout the pack. The fixed order and the underscores between each word make samples easier to search and work with.
Image: SIRMA
Building a demo track with samples
Most producers stumble upon individual samples while searching for specific vocals or instruments. Even so, a polished demo track still plays an important role in presenting the value of your pack.
A strong demo should function as a medley built largely from your own samples. It can move between tempos and keys, stitching together short sections from multiple song-starters. Taking a DJ-like approach to smoothing the transitions can make your track an enjoyable listen.
Demo tracks typically run between 60 seconds and four minutes. Regardless of length, the first 30 seconds matter most. Grab the listener’s attention immediately: long intros are largely wasted here.
Final checks before delivery
Before finalising your first sample pack, run through a checklist:

Confirm audio specifications
Test loops in a DAW for correct tempo and key
Check perceived loudness and true peak levels
Review file and folder naming consistency
Listen to the demo track
Organise artwork and promotional assets

Remember: this is a repeatable skill. Paying attention to the details that matter will become second nature with practice. Treat your first pack as a test of your system, then refine and build with intention.
The post Want to make your own sample pack? Tips from someone who’s actually done it appeared first on MusicTech.

Pigments 7 vs Absynth 6 vs Serum 2: Which super synth should you buy?A handful of software synths can justifiably don the ‘super synth’ badge. Such instruments are so versatile and powerful that they simply couldn’t exist in hardware form.

READ MORE: Arturia Pigments 7 review: “Almost a no-brainer at $199”

Three synths in particular have long claimed such a title: Xfer Records’ Serum, Arturia’s Pigments and Native Instruments’ Absynth. Each has carved a particular niche: Absynth’s known as a master of pads, evolving textures and complex effects; Serum’s the go-to synth for all flavours of EDM; and Pigments is famed for its modules modelled on classic hardware and its remarkable ease of use.
All three have recently been updated (Absynth 6, Serum 2 and Pigments 7), and I want to find out which one is really the greatest super synth on the market.
Serum 2 wavetable editor. Image: Press
Which synth is most versatile — Serum, Absynth or Pigments
Synthesis is all about creating and shaping waveforms, so the more capable the tools for doing this, the more versatile the synth will be.
Serum and Pigments are similar in this regard, with distinct oscillator, filter and effect stages. The most notable difference is that Serum provides three slots for hosting oscillator modules, while Pigments has just two — although its Utility Engine provides a basic oscillator, noise generation and audio input. Additionally, Serum and Pigments can host two filter modules and offer both send and insert effect busses for hosting effects modules. Serum’s routing of these elements is slightly more flexible than Pigments’.
Absynth takes a different approach, with sound generation handled by three Channels, each combining an oscillator module with a pair of processing modules into which filters and signal processors (waveshaping, for example) can be loaded. The Channels’ mixed and panned (or even 3D panned, if using a multi-channel audio system) output is fed through another pair of processing stages and on to just a single effects stage. This is a far more restrictive effects section than the other two synths, but the modules on offer are less about adding sonic polish and more about creating something that’s an intrinsic part of the sound.
In terms of the actual modules on offer, Serum and Pigments are, again, very similar. Both have an advanced wavetable oscillator model, various pure synthesis oscillators geared to both analogue and digital synthesis techniques, and versatile sample-based engines. Both synths also offer a wide choice of filter and effects models.
Absynth is, again, the outlier. It has the widest choice of oscillator modules — two sample-based and six synthesis-based — but by far the smallest choice of filters/processors and effects. However, Absynth’s versatility arises as much from how flexibly these modules can be combined as from the specific modules themselves. Absynth is also weakest for sample-based emulations of acoustic instruments, although is outstanding when combining a sample-based sound with synthesis-based elements.
Finally, all three synths offer a range of modulation options: envelopes, LFOs, random generators and such. But Absynth is miles ahead in terms of sheer quantity, thanks to its 28(!) envelope generators that can each contain up to 68(!) breakpoints. The more modest modulator offerings of Serum and Pigments are unlikely to ever be insufficient, however.
Winner
Absynth has the most to offer in terms of raw timbral versatility, but it’s the least chameleon-like in terms of its overall sonic character. There’s little to separate Serum and Pigments, though. Serum has the edge for sample-based sounds, but Pigments counters with its physical modelling Modal engine. Overall, then, I call this a draw for Serum and Pigments, with Absynth not far behind.
SCORES
Absynth: 4
Serum: 5
Pigments: 5
Serum 2 clip sequencer. Image: Press
Which synth is easiest to use?
The similarities between Pigments and Serum extend to their ease of use. The visual layout of both is remarkably similar, although where Serum shows all three of its oscillator modules at once, Pigments presents its oscillator modules in tabs. This allows Pigments to spread the controls for its various oscillator models over a wider area of screen real-estate, allowing for more detailed visual feedback and a less-cluttered feel than with Serum.
Once again, Absynth carves its own path here. Many of the changes in its latest, resurrected, version focus on the synth’s appearance, which has been thoroughly modernised while retaining the same general layout as previous versions of the instrument. Notably, Absynth’s oscillator and filter/processor modules are comparatively compact and tend to feature fewer parameters than the other two synths. This makes working with the modules easier overall, although, conversely, it demands one become very familiar with the results of combining different modules in order to truly master the synth.
Modulator assignment is most graceful in Pigments. Each source has its own panel in the main view that shows a real-time graphical representation of the modulator’s activity, and assignment is simply a case of dragging from one of these panels to the destination parameter. Serum is almost as slick, although it lacks the real-time graphical readouts.
In contrast, modulator assignment in Absynth is handled via a dedicated assignment page – select a source in one column, a destination in another, and enter a strength value. This works just fine, but isn’t as intuitive and immediate as Pigments’ and Serum’s solutions.
Winner
Absynth is easy to navigate and work with, but it isn’t quite as intuitive as Serum and Pigments. While those two are remarkably alike, I have to hand the ease-of-use crown to Pigments. It’s a masterpiece of UI and UX design that makes what is a deeply powerful synth an absolute pleasure to work with.
SCORES
Absynth: 3
Serum: 4
Pigments: 5
Image: Press
Which synth has the best sound quality?
In terms of pure sound quality, all three synths are faultless. There are some subtle differences, and, more to the point, considerations of “sound quality” can extend beyond the basic question of “does it sound any good?”
Absynth is the perfect example of this. The synth’s sound has a clarity and spaciousness that underpins its reputation as a master of soundscapes and atmospheric sounds but beyond this, it also supports up to eight output channels. These are designed to work in conjunction with multi-channel surround-sound systems, so each of Absynth’s three sound generators sports a 3D panner for balancing its signal between those outputs. If composing for cinema, VR, or other surround sound media, this opens up massive potential for creating deeply immersive sonic experiences for listeners.
Serum’s sound tends towards being direct and in-your-face, boasting a clarity that could cut glass, yet with a crushing weight. Its oscillator engines feature a pair of Warp processor slots that allow many ways to mess with the sound so that it doesn’t become clinical. Its filter and effect models are more than capable of adding some character, too. This fabulous sound comes at a cost, though, with Serum being the most CPU-hungry of the three.
Pigments also delivers a pristine sound, but I find it to be a smidgen warmer than Serum’s. It’s also a little easier to make Pigments’ sound sloppier and messier than it is with Serum. But perhaps the biggest differentiator is that Pigments includes models taken from Arturia’s V Collection and FX Collection plugins, and these can lend the synth a satisfyingly vintage tone and flavour.
Winner
The sound quality difference between Pigments, Absynth and Serum is insignificant. I can’t stress it enough: they all sound superb! Still, I place Pigments at the top of the list, but only by the tiniest of margins.
SCORES
Absynth: 4
Serum: 4
Pigments: 5
Image: Press
Which synth has the best preset library?
All three of these synths invite you to dive in and create new sounds, but presets are important too, as a starting point for your own sounds or to save time when composing and producing.
Given its 25+ year history and backward compatibility with patches produced for any previous version, it’s no surprise that Absynth 6 comes with an enormous patch library. I find so many patches to be inspirational, sparking whole new musical ideas from just a few notes. Finding sounds within this mass would be tough, but the synth’s innovative AI-powered Preset Browser makes this easily manageable (see my Absynth 6 review for more on this).
Pigments, too, comes with a generous library containing all of the presets from all previous versions of the synth, along with a collection that’s new for Pigments 7. Although voluminous, this is a smaller library than found in Absynth, but what always impresses me here is the consistently high standard of the presets – Arturia’s sound designers really are something else! Finding the right sounds isn’t as graceful as in Absynth, but Pigments does have its own AI-powered system that suggests presets that are similar to the currently loaded patch.
Serum’s included library is excellent throughout, but at around 600 patches, it’s considerably smaller than both Absynth’s and Pigments’ libraries. Xfer sell additional libraries and, given the popularity of the synth, it isn’t hard to find Serum patches online, but it still feels a bit miserly given this is the most expensive synth of the group. Moreover, aside from simple categorisation, Serum’s only sop to aiding in the hunt for a suitable sound is a preview feature – handy, but not that helpful!
Winner
The sheer size of Absynth’s patch library is enough to hand it the victory in this category, a victory made all the more emphatic by the synth’s amazing Preset Browser. Pigments put up a strong fight with its large and impressive preset collection, but the comparative meagreness of Serum’s library sees it trailing in last place, albeit to a smattering of polite applause.
SCORES
Absynth: 5
Pigments: 4
Serum: 3
Innovative patch browser. Image: Press
Which synth is the best value?
At $199, there’s nothing between Absynth and Pigments in terms of asking price, and Serum’s not far behind at $249. Ultimately, this isn’t a big price range. However, value for money comes down to more than just asking price, and needs to factor in the comparative capabilities and features of each synth – you know, what we’ve been discussing up to now!
Manufacturers’ update policies are relevant too. Updates to Serum 2 for existing users are free, and Arturia hasn’t charged for updating the last few versions of Pigments. Updating Absynth, on the other hand, costs $120. This isn’t unreasonable given how long ago the previous version was released, and for all I know, a future Absynth update may be free. Nevertheless, this fee goes against Absynth in this head-to-head.
Winner
With all of this in mind, Pigments nudges itself into the lead, with Serum close behind and Absynth a further step back.
SCORES
Pigments: 5
Serum: 4
Absynth: 3
Image: Press
Which should you buy — Absynth, Pigments or Serum?
I’ve been a fan of Absynth for years, and love the energy and power of Serum, but the winner here is Pigments 7. Its voice is the most versatile, able to swing from vintage analogue to physical-modelling, taking in digital- and sample-based synthesis along the way. And it’s a joy to use, its design is as functional as it is attractive. If any synth can claim to be the only synth you’ll ever need, I say Pigments is the one.
However, in testing all three synthesizers, one thing is obvious: they are all incredibly powerful and fun to use. Your personal preference may lean towards Serum or Absynth rather than Pigments — to that end, I can say with certainty that you won’t be disappointed by any of these bodacious instruments.
The post Pigments 7 vs Absynth 6 vs Serum 2: Which super synth should you buy? appeared first on MusicTech.

Etsy sells secondhand clothing marketplace Depop to eBay for $1.2BThe deal comes nearly five years after Etsy purchased Depop for $1.62 billion, at a time when secondhand clothing apps were gaining traction during the pandemic.