25 thoughts on “Erica Synths Steampipe Physical Modeling Synthesizer Hands-On Review”

1. The fact that all parameters are midi controllable means that this thing will be hella fun to sequence on your favorite given sequencer.

2. xxxxxxxxx

   1. Admin: Personal attack deleted. Readers are encourage to share their opinions about THINGS (products, company practices, this review, etc) but personal attacks on people or groups of people are not allowed.

      Keep comments on topic and constructive.

      Also – you’re using multiple names to post comments (Noticing, Smug Behringer Fan, Will, etc). This leads to your comments being flagged for moderation and delayed, because using multiple names is a common technique of spammers. In a nutshell, every time the moderation system sees you comment using a new name, it treats it as a new commenter, and all first time commenters are manually approved.

      If the moderation system sees you doing this a lot, your behavior looks like a spammers, and the moderation system will just treat your comments as spam. Using a consistent ID and posting construtive on-topic comments will avoid this.

      Bottom line: Use a consistent name and post constructive comments, if you want your comments to show up, and do not waste the admin’s time.

3. There was and still is a Reaktor ensemble with that name and physical modeling. Has this something to do with that..?

   1. This is discussed in the video. The firmware for the Steampipe hardware is related to the Steampipe 2 virtual instrument.

4. The hands on controls do look fun. Great that they’ve managed to pull off a complicated digital hardware synth.

   I think this is one specific type of physical model (Karplas-Strong)? I also highly recommend the Respiro VST which is very expressive and sounds quite different to this, and more like Yamaha VL. I think that’s using other models or more complicated architectures which are harder to get hands-on with.

   1. From my understanding it’s based off an old Steampipe Reaktor ensemble which was easily available back in the day. It’s basically the same synth as far as I recall. So you could try it there for less first

      I really like this I have to say. Big juicy reverb knobs and all

      1. it there source code for that old Reaktor? would love to see what i could do with it. this is a great sounding synth for me.

         1. There are newer versions of Steampipe available from NI Reaktor Factory Library

            There is a free Reaktor player available from NI

            You might find an old version callled “Reaktor Legacy Library” or something along those lines if you search around a bit

            These old Reaktor libraries had tons of ensembles including Steampipe

      2. hi i love your music

5. I’m a wind synth player. I’ve been very underwhelmed by the demos I’ve heard. Maybe it just needs some time for people to dial it in. But yeah, Respiro produces better sounds than what this does so far in demos at least.

6. Brilliant sounding synth if not limited, however it is very useful for sound design purposes. I had a bit of time with it and I really enjoyed it for its less intended purpose.

   And I love Loopop silly explanation of “no money exchanged hands”….possibly however something of value did exchange hands when you receive a synth at a deep discount to review.

   1. You are aware that the production of a video costs way more than a synth though, right? Even if they gave him the thing for free, they would still owe him money. IF it was a business transaction, which it’s not.

      1. Production of a video? You are surely joking! From Patreon to ad revenue Loopop is not hurting, and shooting a video on your iPhone or digital camera is hardly “production”! You’re embarrassing yourself with this drivel about production. If we were talking Veritaisium or Kurzgesagt where the production value is high and on location filming occurs, you may have a point, yet this….right.

         1. System7 – When you say things like “You’re embarrassing yourself with this drivel about production.”, you’re veering into personal attack territory. Please keep your comments on topic and respectful to other readers, and we will expect other readers to treat you with respect, too.

            Realistically, one of these review videos – when done at the level that loopop does it – represents a week’s worth of work, and video producers make $50 /hour. Anyone trying to do these types of reviews professionally needs to have a target to make at least $2k/video for it, or it’s not worth their while.

            When it comes to worrying about bias and ‘quid pro quo’ arrangments influencing gear reviews, the important thing to consider is early access to gear.

            Anytime a company intros a major new piece of electronic music gear, you’ll typically see 5 or 6 Youtube reviews pop up the same day that the gear is released. Manufacturers are only going to provide this early access to reviewers if they have a history of creating professional content and offering a balanced set of pros and cons.

            So you’re not going to see these reviewers say that a synth sucks. If they don’t like it, they just won’t review it.

            Synthtopia tends to feature loopop and Sonic State reviews more frequently than other Youtube reviewers, because they are thorough, the production is good and they are transparent with disclosure.

            1. I concur with you on most of what you laid out, and a week’s worth of work that someone of Loopop’s calibre makes does not have many equals, that said when someone claims “no monies exchanged hands” I do have a problem with that.

               First and foremost, the $50 rate you proposed is the production cost for those whom generally make marketing content! If this is purely a marketing content, then there would be a conflict of interest. However Zev states that no monies exchanged hands in exchange for his review. Yet, still it did, the discount for the synth, never mind all the synths he receives “free” of charge in exchange for this review is just that, something of value in exchange for a review.

               If someone said they received nothing in exchange for the “free” or “discounted” item them received in exchange for a review, the “exchange” is literally the currency and the delivery mechanism. Again, I do not believe that is pure semantics. And Loopop’s reputation and integrity is certainly above most, in my opinion, however the disclosure of “no monies” is not exclusionary of something of value exchanging hands. And if we argue that his time is worth $50 an hour for the production of said content, then we are entering the marketing scheme.

               I realise there is a grey area that is difficult to navigate. If he was ever required to return a synth for review, something that Sonicstate does often to ensure the integrity of their reviews, that would be another matter.

               As for the personal attack, that was not my intent. I do appreciate your thoughtful and thorough engagement with your audience.

               1. System7

                  If you’re trying to produce videos professionally, you have to make enough money for it to be worth your while. It doesn’t matter what type of video you’re making – $50/hour is a minimum target to shoot for, or you’re not going to be able to do it professionally

                  Youtube video producers are required to enable the “paid promotion” flag on their videos if there’s any paid product placements, sponsorships & endorsements. That applies if there’s any ‘quid pro quo’ going on, and you see it a lot on ‘synthfluencer’ type videos, as a result.

                  We can’t guarantee that third parties are following the rules. But any serious video producer should follow this requirement, because failing to do so can result in your video getting yanked by Youtube or even an FTC violation.

                  As I noted elsewhere, the important bias issue to consider is that manufacturers won’t give early access to anybody that has a history of highly critical reviews. This is why all early reviews tend to be pretty positive.

            2. Couldn’t have said it better. To anyone still not understanding how much time and effort the production of a video review such as Loopop’s takes, I challenge you to create one yourself. If it’s as easy as you think, it should be no problem. And then make sure to make one or two of them per week, and always be done in time, because that’s what it takes to be provided with one of the few review units ahead of release. And then find a way to pay your rent and bills while spending 40-60 hours a week producing free content without a salary. Do it for a month instead of going on vacation next time and share with us how you’re getting by with all the “free gear” and “exposure”.

               1. You are missing the point and we’ve seen your “content”! No one is forcing you to make your living in this manner. You cannot claim the value of your production and then simultaneously claim that said value is not in exchange for goods or services. I have replied to Synthhead, he simply has to make the editorial decision to post my reply.

                  If the $50 per hour production charge is the typical rate then that is a service, and it calls into question the content’s credibility. We have employed 2 different “content” providers over the years to produce marketing and adverts for our software, and yet we have never confused said adverts as reviews! And we never offer our software in exchange for a review!

                  That is clearly a choice we made early on and it has served us well. Any reviews we have had on our products, whether positive or not, has been followed by the same message! A thank you note and questions as to how we can improve said product! No monies ever exchange hands, figuratively, literally, or conceptually.

                  1. Loopop is honest, reliable, and accurate in his assessments. He doesn’t simply say, “This is the best product” or “Buy it” In fact he never uses exaggerated phrases describing a “brand’s sound” as magical or discussing how “amazing analog is”, Instead he offers a balanced and truthful reviews highlighting the product’s strengths, weaknesses and areas for improvement.
                     His videos are well structured with thoughtful evaluations, analyses and critiques where necessary all culminating in a comprehensive summary of his experience. He also provides valuable insights that help others make informed decisions, offering most of the necessary information about the product without pushing for a purchase. This reflects the true spirit of an impartial review.

            3. Well said sir

7. I have to say that I’m very impressed with this. It sounds very interesting, and will take users into completely different territory than another subtractive synth.

   Also, the design and build look fantastic and tweakable – it looks like it would be a lot of fun to use.

   Kudos to Erica Synths for coming up with something unique, and kind of sexy. And the price seems fair for a synth that’s unique, powerful and well built.

   With this and synths like the Syntrx II, Erica Synths is making their mark in the premium synth market, with stuff that’s very different from what other companies are doing.

8. it even has a screen

9. Its a smart design, but its not for newbies. It took a while for me get a grip on Chromaphone. You have to learn not to think in oscillator terms, but in exciting a serious mathematical model. Your synthesis, even with a keyboard controller, still depends on acoustic playing techniques. Feel is king.

   People mention the VL1 a lot, but David Sancious said as much as he loved the sound, he had to struggle with playing it. You have to blow, just right, until you’re worn out! Physical modeling yields some great sounds, as long as you wrap your mind around it. A basic Moog, it ain’t. That’s why finding the right controller is extra-important here.

10. Loopop’s video also highlighted why physical modelling can be quite tricky: the same parameter can have very different effects depending on the configuration of other parameters, and finding sweet spots can be difficult.

    They could have expanded on the sonic potential by allowing more waveforms as exciters, and more interaction types between the exciter and the resonating string/pipe. That’s essentially how you can model different instruments such as saxophone (single reed), oboe (dual reed), brass (lips) etc.

    Maybe some extra firmware changes in future as the synth is a lovely piece of hands-on knobby hardware.

    And maybe one day I’ll revive Zed-Synth :o)