Yonac Intros Magellan – A ‘Professional Analog Modelling Synthesizer’ For iPad

Yonac Software has announced Magellan, described as a “professional analog modelling synthesizer’ for the iPad.

Features:

  • Two independent polyphonic synth engines, with a total of 6 configurable oscillators.
  • Polyphonic unison mode giving 24 simultaneous wave generators.
  • Two filter banks per synth engine, each bank with its dedicated envelope and 11 unique filter types to choose from.
  • FM synthesis module with blend and dedicated envelope.
  • Dual LFOs in each synth with 4 freely assignable destinations each.
  • Complete FX rack with modulation, time-delay, reverb and wave shaping effects.
  • Dual traditional keyboards, as well as dual touch pad performance interfaces with individual parametric control over each voice.
  • Built in arpeggiator for each synth engine, allowing you to run two different arps simultaneously, as well as a built in analog-inspired polyphonic step sequencer.

Here are some audio demos of Magellan:

Pricing and availability for Magellan are TBA.

Check out the specs and demo and let us know what you think of Magellan!

14 thoughts on “Yonac Intros Magellan – A ‘Professional Analog Modelling Synthesizer’ For iPad

  1. Its a nice refinement of the standard. I’m sure a lot of people will flock to it because it has more muscle than most such apps, so far. My question is simply “How does any new take on a synth idea justify itself beyond mere novelty? I don’t think many people know the difference between a mere ADSR and an envelope generator with 32 or more steps. Most don’t know an Oberheim filter from a coffee filter. If they can’t mentally connect with why those things might make for a better (or worse) SOUND experience, how meaningful is it to have such tools? Or is it that an ADSR and 8 filter types cover 90% of what a synth can do, or that people can actually feel in use? This is a tidy instrument with several great aspects, but I don’t think it would have any more creative potential if it had eight times the features. There’s a cutoff point past which those don’t mean anything more to the listener. Truth or blarney?

    1. Sounds like you’ve never been sucked into a ‘discussion’ about the relative merits of the Moog filter vs the Minimoog filter vs the ARP filter vs the ARP post-lawsuit filter…….

  2. Hopefully “many people” and “most” is not referring to synthtopia readers.
    I’m pretty sure most of us here know about multi breakpoint envelopes, etc.

    I’ll leave the philosophical implications for someone else to ponder…

    1. >>>> Hopefully “many people” and “most” is not referring to synthtopia readers.
      I’m pretty sure most of us here know about multi breakpoint envelopes, etc.

      Of course; we’re the “in crowd” who actually play the gear. The many-to-most would be the group who are into the shiny consumer dazzle so much, the tools start defining the results. My goal is NOT to sound too much like anyone else. The line between an homage and simply lacking fresh ideas can be perilously thin. Check out Soundcloud; you can hear everything from feeble attempts to bloody genius that will humble you. Its not the features that cause either one; its the strengths and weaknesses of the user. Never mind the filter set. How does the music make ya FEEL? (BTW, Moog filters are beefier, but Oberheim filters sound richer to me. Let the fist-fight begin!)

      >>> I’ll leave the philosophical implications for someone else to ponder…

      Aw, don’t do that. That’ll leave the juiciest underpinnings of what makes music great up to the marketing department. Oh noooo…… After all, capable people like Rob Papen read the groups. Everyone’s opinion plays a role in the nature of HIS next inspiration, too. We need him to build synths, but he needs us to play them. Don’t discount anyone’s role in The Process, including your own.

  3. By Jove! Comes nowhere close to animoog and is iPad only? Double your sales and make iPhone version lol!

    Really not digging this iPad only lark

  4. >“How does any new take on a synth idea justify itself beyond mere novelty?

    Through application and use. It’s up to the user to impress, not the tool. If we applied your logic to all things, we would have one type of shoes, one brightness of light bulb, one car model, one hair cut, etc. Variety is vital to allow users to approach the tools in ways that work best for them, even if their inherent capabilities are exactly what other tools offer.

    All that being said, I’m excited to try this synth out, and welcome it to the big conversation!

    1. I think the snarkiness comes from people who can’t quite differentiate between a criticism and a critique. The former ‘dislike’ things reflexively; the latter add to the dialogue and sometimes lead me to shift my view based on new info or a different perspective. I opened by complimenting the synth and I stand by that as my first take on it. If I was an iPad-centric type without an existing setup, I’d leap on this one. It really is a great refinement of the old-school form.

  5. Sounds cool (no pun intended). TBH, I’m sad there’s no screenshots (although the image up there when flattened seems to be close to what it might look like). This now joins NWave on my watchlist. wait…holy sh*t!!! 6 Oscillators! 11 Filter Types! 4 LFOs! Isn’t that a little…excessive. Hopefully it won’t tax CPU too much, and think, massive only has 3 oscillators and 16 voice unison if I remember correctly. Looking forward to this!

Leave a Reply