Hurray, the analog hardware synthie world is still alive, and even the softsynthie boyz are fresh as a daisy, and my popcorn is getting better and better...

Not spamming, but you do benefit from people buying software, and you state why it effected your post. You didn't show the part where it didn't work, just the part where it worked. So why did you do that? Even though your intentions are good it's impossible not to be tainted a bit by the fact that you make a living doing sounds for commercial software synths. Did you just want to make fun of me for defending Fatboy's position even though you agree with me? WHY DO YOU TOY WITH ME?!



So wait a minute... I think what you're saying is... I won!?

I'm no fan of "vintage" and I never have been. Don't get me wrong, I clearly know why they're coveted over modern synths including software, but unlike FBS, I don't care that much and I'd rather have the functionality of a modern instrument.

I think it's time this thread went here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anCVuxP9NA0

I knew that you had it in you.

With zero delay fermentation, virtual butter is getting very close to real butter these days.

Parkay?
Eating Slim Phatty Boys

Wow nice comparisons. The price difference alone would led me to choose the ones you did. So not very subjective to the sound.

While testing both i preferred the sound of the Slim Phatty against the Voyager even if the Voyager is around 4 times more expensive (OK, less for the rack version).
I prefer the Blofeld over Largo as the Blofeld also got sample import and the PPG filter model. There is also a free 3rd party wavetable editor available for the Blofeld. Anyway i love the sound of both synths.
I had started a bank for Largo but now decided to transfer those sounds to the Blofeld for doing a second Blofeld soundbank.

Another software/hardware comparison: My bank for the Blofeld was selling very well and i still sell a few copies after around 18 months. The sales for my PPG Wave 3.V bank, even if it used a lot more work (e.g. for the samples) are more or less horrible. One reason could be that for hardware synths there is a big lack of available soundbanks. This seems to be true for especially the Little Phatty (or Slim Phatty). I'll try to publish my own bank for the Phatty at some point but i will take my time for that as i am still not totally satisfied with the presets i already made. This is like an ongoing project which i work on while i have a bit of time.


Ingo
Last edited by Ingonator on Sat Jun 09, 2012 1:57 am; edited 1 time in total

I just thought about the discussion again.

Do we try to show that softsynths are close to real analog synths or to prove that real analog synths sound less analog than software? I'm a bit confused about that.
If we talk about the second part the discussion is just ridiculous, especially if we talk about a full analog synth like e.g. the Slim Phatty (with VCOs, VCF etc.) as the Phatty would win that competition anytime (at least IMO).

Urs has mentioned that Diva sounds better than analog synths which contain the same components (or less "muffled" than the original synths like he mentioned). So the question is (not only concerning Diva): Do we want an emulation that sounds like the real analog counterparts or one that sounds the way the developer thinks it should sound? I have no real answer to that question, i just was thinking about that specific topic.

Anyway i would REALLY like to see an emulation of the Jupiter 8 which EXACTLY captures both the sound and the features of the real thing. Also the parameter ranges should fit the original synth like it approximately seems to do in the Arturia emulation. I'll also not need extra features like e.g. FXs for that emulation i talk about. So basically i am searching for something like a combination of the Arturia Jupiter (the GUI and parameter ranges and the arpeggiator, proper unison but not e.g. the Galaxy module and FXs) and the Jupiter emulation in Diva (the sound of that one). I don't think that we would really need much improvements of the real Jupiter 8 except maybe that the emulation is not containing electrical components that could die over time (bigger poyphony would be OK too).
Unless this is done there will be "something" like the Jupiter 8 (eith er GUI and feature wise or sound wise) but not a real substitution IMO.

I still hardly regret that i sold a real Jupiter 8 back in 2004 and maybe i will try to get another one in the future which will be really expensive i'm sure. An example. http://www.ebay.de/itm/Roland-JUPITER-8-JP-8-Perfect-Working -Professionally-Serviced-/270853006280?pt=Keyboards_MIDI&has h=item3f1018e3c8#ht_902wt_1396

I am sure that if i would have kept both the Jupiter and also the Minimoog model D which i sold in 2005 i would be maybe much happier today and would have not wasted my time in replacing those two with tons of other softsynths and/or hardware synths. There was a short time back in 2005 where i thought i could live only with my Yamaha Motif ES 7 and a Virus KC keyboard. Obviously i have decided differently later but the Motif is still a center piece of my synth setup (together with the Wavestation EX which i got since the same time)...


CONCLUSION:
For me the question was never either software or hardware synths, it was about if a synth fits to my own needs or not. Personally i still prefer the Blofeld over Largo and others say they are identical. I still prefer the hardware wavestation EX over the plugin and others say they are identical. I like the Moog Slim Phatty for what it is but others say it doesn't sound like a Minimoog. I like Saurus but others say it does not sound like Diva.
Do i really care about that at the end of the day? Not really...


Ingo
Last edited by Ingonator on Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:23 am; edited 6 times in total

See I think people misunderstand what Urs is saying here. I read that



Meaning that of course a developer will have no problems with a comparison when it is in their favor, so such comparisons are meaningless because results can be skewed by the intentions of the person creating them. I do not believe he meant to say at all as a point of fact that 'Diva sounds better' than the hardware it is modeled on, it was a joking point about vested interests determining how any comparison is made, and also how any individual will accept what fits into their desired outcome as most valid.

How do you mean. I "didn't show the part where it didn't work, just the part where it worked" ? I showed that the Slim Phatty sound can be made available in software, something you claimed is not possible. I was able to make it work, so why not show it? There was no "part" where it didn't work in this example. As I said earlier, software can match the sound of hardware analog, and it can't. This was the occasion when it was possible to match it.

So the reason i did that was to balance your fighting stance that it is not possible.



I did no such thing. Seriously, what are you on about?

My intentions? I already stated my intentions, which are far, far removed from what you are suggesting. Following your logic, I should have used a synth that I don't have any banks for, right? Then my participation would not be "tainted"? Perhaps I could have used SynthMaster or Zebra, synths I don't have any banks for, an yet synths which may very well be able to give me all the tools needed to emulate such analog sounds. But then, I don't know these synths well enough to make a quick sound for the purpose of online comparison. So, I'd rather use a synth I know inside out, rather than one which I don't know well and spend several days experimenting. Simple as that. There are no other motives involved, so your suggestions are misguided and rather not nice at all.

But to toy with you? Why! I'm the TOY master, boohahahahaha! {he puts on his Zurg costume and points a laser beam at the zerocrossing toy}

People who engage in discussions about soft vs. hard synths do not make music

ohh, I make plenty of music. If you only knew...

I'm sure most people just want things to sound as good as they possibly can.

Any direct emulation obviously has the real thing to stand up against. More recent softsynths like Diva close the gap, despite not being a direct 'emulation' so to speak.

I'm sure we can both knock off a long list of emulations that don't quite cut the mustard as an emulation, even if they do sound great.
[redacted]

I'm equally sure we could both rattle off a list of awesome sounding synths that are not direct emulations of anything, i.e.:
absynth
massive
largo
alchemy
DCAM
Ace

Not being emulations of anything its much easier to just appreciate these for the quality of sound they make.

Personally, I'd definitely take that second list over the first. In fact I'd take just Reaktor on it's own over only analog emulations... (that didn't make my list as it's really 100's of synths and not just one...).

Speak for yourself Fat Boy!



.

Synthedit > hardware.

(My first post in this thread.)