Every analogue synth in existence would boast that same point.

Few can boast it nearly to this degree.

Actually, it just says that Arturia failed.

Why would anyone buy a piece of hardware if you can only comfortably edit it with a computer?

Different things for different people. The sun doesn't shine for YOU alone.

It's this logic that forces DSI to sell the Tetra at such a ridiculously low price. The Tetra is leagues ahead of the minibrute in terms of its flexibility, yet a lot of people would have no idea because they're too busy twiddling knobs.

I throw the question back to you: why would anyone buy a piece of hardware if you can only comfortably edit it by twiddling knobs?

The answer to both your question, and my question is that the hardware in question sounds good.

But, to answer your question with another answer: if you use midi to control the synth, you can record the midi performance from your keyboard. This means that you can tweak the aspects of the sound that you have played after your performance. I have an Sh-2 which I wouldn't trade for the world, but the major shortcoming is that every time I record a few tracks for a song a) I have to video record the placement of the knobs/faders so I can recreate the sound at a later point, and b) if I make a mistake by moving the filter two slowly or quickly, or whatever, I have to record the whole take again. Digitall controlled synths solve both these problems.

-------------------

But seriously, the reason why digitally controlled analogue synths are still unpopular is because the companies who make them are failing to integrate the hardware and software properly. People don't like the idea of using a Tetra because it doesn't have many knobs that they can twiddle. But, if DSI did a better job at the hardware/software integration, you could have as many knobs as you want on your midi keyboard. Unfortunately, DSI rely on a crappy 3rd party for their software and as yet, don't even have a VST to control the Tetra. So, I can totally understand why people fall back on knobs and faders built in to the synth.

Because that's part of the hardware "experience" and a big reason why people prefer it over using a computer and mouse?

If you can't play it like an instrument intuitively, you've got something with a good sound that's more of a pain in the ass to use compared to software (wires, MIDI, lack of integration with the DAW), which just isn't worth it to most people.


Honestly, if the Minibrute wasn't set up the way it is, with a one-knob-per-function aesthetic, I wouldn't have ordered one.

Leagues? I agree the Tetra is a great synth but I really don't think you understand what the Minibrute is capable of when you make a statement like that.

Tetra vs Minibrute?
These do not stand oposed against each other in my view, but rather complement each other extremely well. I can't see anyone desiring a performance analogue VCO-based monosynth choosing a poly synth module with zero performance capabilities, just like I can't see anyone choosing a mono synth when looking for a poly synth!



The answer is in your question: "comfortably".

I can comfortably, and more importantly, fast and intuitively edit a synth with knobs and sliders, or i can get annoyed, loose the flow and inspiration by wading through menus, or software editor (RSI here I come) or get bogged down in midi conundrums and indistinct knobs on a midi controller.

Your question is similar to questioning why is it good to have exposed strings on a guitar? Shouldn't they have a plastic cover which would obscure all strings and allow to access only one at a time through a small hole?



You are right as such...but you have outlined two working methods. I appreciate the instant recall of soft synths, and the automation afforded by digital control on hardware synths. This is truly excellent and helpful. But at the same time, there is something to be said about using a traditional VCO based synth with no automation - I just go for the pass, record the take live and do my best to get it right. Make a choice and stick to it. Sometimes even leave things to chance as I know that I won't be able to recall a sound 100% at a later date.

So, in my experience this 'live' aspect is often a better approach to getting things done, than having the option to continuously tweak a midi part, and keep tweaking the synth on that track...obviously one needs to have the rudimentary skills of being able to play the keyboard - no midi step recording here, or painting notes in your host! So this will also hone the skills! How good is that?

In a way if newcomers to hardware synths buy the Minibrute (or any of the new breed of analogue synths with full parameter access via knobs and sliders) they will have an opportunity to learn music making the old school way which will only help them to develop a better production technique and have more fun in the process!

edit:typos
Last edited by himalaya on Fri May 11, 2012 6:15 am; edited 1 time in total

Maybe you need more practice. A performance instrument needs practice. I play bass guitar. When I play a wrong note I have to play it again to get it right too. No digital fix there.

I have had my SH-09 since 1982 and apart from writing down some settings (I even photocopied loads of blank patch sheets - ended up only using a couple of sheets) I just use that thing live. We didn't have cameras on phones back then. We had to learn how to use the instrument like an instrument, not like a preset machine. The joy is in the moment. The moment comes, the moment goes. It gets recorded, or doesn't. The next time it's slightly different. So what? If you were talking about a Jupiter-8 or something with lots of knobs I would agree, but an SH-2?

If you want a knobless SH-2 that you can control via a mouse, that's fine for you, but that's not how I and many others like to work. People are not 'falling back' on synth hardware with knobs because companies don't make nice VSTi GUIs for them - it's because they want the knob interface, and some may not even like VSTi GUIs or computers at all for their music making.

You just have some perverse world-view that we should live in a knobless, mouse-driven society and that we all either do or should think like you. Some may agree with you. Many don't. It's called diff'rent strokes.

That's what I said, but it got ignored

Oh, I saw it, I was just reiterating for those that think their methods are the only methods. This guy is like the opposite side of the same coin of a guy on the Moog forums who insists that the only way you can record a Minimoog is with tape and all digital stuff is crap. And he's been to music tech college and everything so his ears are better than us mere mortals.

I love these people with absolute truths.

I'm sure he also has the indispensible $1,000/ft audio cables

I look forward to it. The Minibrute is high up on my shopping list.

If I were performing live (never gonna happen), I'd be using mostly analog hardware. For old geezers like me, it's easier to feel confidant that the right noises will come out the speakers with only minor troubleshooting. I still sometimes miss the old simplicity of the pure analog signal path.

Time to form a Minibrute busking troupe?

There's a few of us getting the 'brute, all we need is mini amps and off we go! Node managed to do a full scale performance in London's King's Cross train station, kitted out with modular gear - I kid you not- therefore we can do it with Minibrutes!
Power to the synth, massive annoyance to the public!