KVR Audio

fluffy_little_something · Wed May 15, 2013 3:22 pm

As we all know, there are Ferrari's and Rolls Royce's in the VSTi world. Anyone can get the best sound quality using plugins from Xils, U-he etc. But not everyone has the latest computer as not everyone makes music for a living or is otherwise wealthy / ambitious / perfectionist enough.

So my question is, what are the plugins that offer the best balance between sound quality and CPU hunger? Most people don't really need the very best sound quality, but nevertheless want a pretty good sound, while still being able to run half a dozen or more instances on a standard computer. If we used American school grades (A thru F), let's say a synth should get a B in sound quality and a B or C in CPU efficiency.

Which synths fulfil these requirement?

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Wed May 15, 2013 3:33 pm

Your DAWs built in plugins are your best bet.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Wed May 15, 2013 3:38 pm

Just about anything within your preferred budget which is more than two years older than the CPU in your system.

docdued · Post by **docdued** » Mon May 27, 2013 10:08 am

To me, the real Ferrari in the plugin world would get an A in sound and an A in CPU efficiency... don't think that the pros don't care about how CPU hungry an effect is!

fluffy_little_something · Mon May 27, 2013 12:21 pm

docdued wrote:To me, the real Ferrari in the plugin world would get an A in sound and an A in CPU efficiency...

That's a bit unrealistic, don't you think?

I guess as a rule of thumb one might say that the better the sound quality, the bigger the CPU load.

tomtoo · Post by **tomtoo** » Mon May 27, 2013 1:36 pm

whyterabbyt wrote:Just about anything within your preferred budget which is more than two years older than the CPU in your system.

+1

Maybe 3 years ?

DuX · Post by **DuX** » Mon May 27, 2013 2:38 pm

Have you ever thought of Aspect, for instance? http://www.loomer.co.uk/ That is one very underrated VSTi, IMO, as well as the rest of Loomer plugins.

Then there's Korg Legacy Collection that gives you stunning quality for the CPU usage. Now you can even buy all the plugins separately, but I really don't see the point as all of them are fantastic! Even the MDE-X FX that can give you some really nice FX, and combinations of FX, quickly. I think KLC is the best bung for the buck around, regarding VSTis. Of course, if you like the kind of sounds they produce.

tibah · Post by **tibah** » Mon May 27, 2013 2:42 pm

I think Helix fits into the double A category. Saurus comes to mind as well. For newer ones that would still run decently on e.g. a dual-core machine made 4-5 years ago.

impOSCar 1 is still a great deal and it takes like 0 CPU on a somewhat modern computer.

fluffy_little_something · Thu Sep 18, 2014 1:27 pm

Was just playing around with some old patches I had made for TAL's Noizemaker, and I noticed what a CPU hog it actually is. It sounds good, but given the amount of CPU it consumes it should sound a lot better by modern standards. Just saying...

fmr · Post by **fmr** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 2:04 pm

I'd say that Synth1, z3ta+ 1.x (or any synth by rgc, for that matter, like Pentagon), Helix (already mentioned), impOSCar 1 (also already mentioned), Rhino and Wusikstation, all qualify. Maybe there are a couple more, but I have to get home and check my collection first

Zombie Queen · Post by **Zombie Queen** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 2:30 pm

fluffy_little_something wrote:I guess as a rule of thumb one might say that the better the sound quality, the bigger the CPU load.

I don't believe this, I would guess that big CPU load will mostly come from sloppy programming. It's best to check yourself, if it sounds good to you, it is good.

fluffy_little_something · Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:03 pm

fmr wrote:I'd say that Synth1, z3ta+ 1.x (or any synth by rgc, for that matter, like Pentagon), Helix (already mentioned), impOSCar 1 (also already mentioned), Rhino and Wusikstation, all qualify. Maybe there are a couple more, but I have to get home and check my collection first

Hurry, there is some severe weather warning

fluffy_little_something · Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:09 pm

Zombie Queen wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:I guess as a rule of thumb one might say that the better the sound quality, the bigger the CPU load.
I don't believe this, I would guess that big CPU load will mostly come from sloppy programming. It's best to check yourself, if it sounds good to you, it is good.

There might be exceptions (both bad sound + CPU hunger and good sound + high CPU efficiency), but when you look at what are considered the, say, top 10 synths in terms of sound quality, they all require a very powerful CPU.

rod_zero · Post by **rod_zero** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:19 pm

Zebra 2 is one, Massive too on modern computers.

But you can run Diva in draft mode and get good performance. And well you can always freeze and bounce (and I would argue that bouncing not only helps freeing up resources but to speed up workflow).

fmr · Post by **fmr** » Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:31 pm

fluffy_little_something wrote:
fmr wrote:I'd say that Synth1, z3ta+ 1.x (or any synth by rgc, for that matter, like Pentagon), Helix (already mentioned), impOSCar 1 (also already mentioned), Rhino and Wusikstation, all qualify. Maybe there are a couple more, but I have to get home and check my collection first
Hurry, there is some severe weather warning

Esquece... Esses avisos são um exagero, como de costume. Posso apanhar um pouco de chuva, mas nada mais. De certeza que chego vivo a casa

Sound quality - CPU efficiency equilibrium