Hardware vs. Software aka why do VST sucks?

[Urs]

also, you guys dont know how to use interger units. [...]

Strong statement. Doesn't account for me though

Like Torben said, the cool thing about native is the ability to use whatever maths you prefer in the appropriate situation.

Only because x86 fpu works, uhm, suboptimal - to say the least -, doesn't mean that it sounds worse. But things change. Due to the weak implementation of integer in SSE I'm considering to switch algorithms that used to be integer/fixed point over to floating point.

Cheers,

Urs

[bagginz]

Hi Torben
nice question.

From my perspective as an artist, the way sound sources are generated is pretty much irrelevant to me.

Software, hardware , vst, analogue, floating point , integer , whatever.

My main concerns are:

1. Do I like that sound? i.e Does it create a pleasing emotional response in me?

2. Does it combine (mix) well with the other sounds that I may already have?

3. Does it fit in nicely with what I am trying to create.

I take the approach that sounds generated by different methods analogue, digital, hardware, VST are just that: different, and do not posess some inherent better or worse quality.

Same holds true for effects and processors.

Do I like how it effects the sound? If yes, then I use it - whether it is a freebie VST plug or an expensive UAD plug.

But that's just me.

However, if one is interested in emulating old synth classics for whatever reason, then some VST synth emulations have now evolved to the point that there is no significant difference in sound between the originals and the VSTs. A case in point: I recently made a track at a friend's studio. One of the synths sitting behind us in the rack was his beloved hardware Oscar which had featured on many of his past released tracks. But we chose to use the ImpOscar in it's place. Neither he nor I can perceive any quality difference in sound between the Hardware and the ImpOscar VST.

I have been slowly selling off all my effects processors and hardware synths (most of which were just boxes full of dsps - specialized computers) to the point where I have replaced most of my hardware with software VSTs and added many more so I now have a far greater sonic palette to work with plus the added advantage of convenience.

About the "visual sense stealing processor cycles from the ears" idea, I totally agree. It figures - with vision being the dominant sense. I have always mixed down under very dim lighting conditions as I cannot completely focus on sound in a bright studio even with my eyes closed for some reason... I may well have to start turning off the monitor too.

Cheers,
Bill

[kritikon]

Why do VSTs suck as compared to software hardware?

I think you pretty much only find that attitude in the more inexperienced section of musicmakers. (And I'm not being snotty at all...)

There are an awful lot of people making music that really have little or no experience with h/w (sure, there are plenty who do, but in terms of numbers - especially on fora such as this, dedicated to DAW music) I'd be surprised if the older h/w users weren't outnumbered quite heavily by predominantly s/w users.

So those people naturally can only go on rumours, net-disinformation, some truth, and general hype. It ain't their fault they never used much h/w - some can't afford it, some don't want it, some have only just started out and haven't reached that stage yet.

So...those people have experienced a whole pile of crap VSTs (amongst the less numerous good ones) and simply assume that the myth of h/w being better is true. They simply haven't had the chance or funds to experience how much crappy h/w there is out there too. It used to be you pretty well demoed any piece of h/w extensively before buying it - you had to, because it was so expensive if you wasted your money...whereas s/w is comparatively extremely cheap and you can happily buy with few consequences. If you happen to buy a bad one...well, it was only $150 or whatever (not alot in the scheme of things...as opposed to $1000 for the h/w).

So the h/w purchasers tend to find out a bit more about their kit simply because it costs more. Consequently you are more likely to buy a better piece of kit. The figures are naturally skewed that way. If you want to spend $750 on a compressor...you're not going to actively risk buying a shit one, are you? You'll make sure that $750 kit does something you want before buying it. And partially maybe that is where some of the myth comes from that h/w is naturally better...because more h/w owners have carefully chosen a character piece that actually is better than the average run-of-the-mill plugin. If you're prepared to spend $750 you damned well make sure it's what you want first.

Those of us who have been around a fair while, have gone through all the periods where crap h/w was for sale. We lived through the nasty 80s, when FM synths were the thing, then all those nasty S&S synths that sounded so thin and lifeless. And then all those cheap and nasty multiFX units with added hiss and grainy reverb. We actually know that there is tons of crap h/w. We know that s/w in a box is still s/w. And that it's either good s/w or bad s/w.

I'll happily equate some of your own plugins with h/w Torben...I rather use GUP1 than most of my h/w compressors if truth be told. It can't compete with some real character ones, but at the price, I'd be a complete numbnut to expect it to. I don't differentiate between UAD plugins and some of yours, or URS or Waves or any of the really good ones. They each do their own thing, and it doesn't matter to me whether it's in a black box with 2-line LED, a PCI card, a USB box, or inside the PC. But I only buy the selected good ones, irrespective of source, simply because I have bought so much crap h/w in the past to have learnt the hard way that it's the sound that matters, not how it is packaged.

Whereas the ones who think VST is somehow inherently worse than some flashy s/w-in-a-box are probably the ones who have never actually blown 4 months wages on a crap mixer, or a crap h/w synth, or a tinny but expensive multiFX box.

I also know that things like Viruses (not that I actually like them...I don't) JP 80whatevers only sound the way they do because of dedicated programming - nothing to do with the DSP chips or anything else in them. I also suspect owners views on them are strongly biased because they're actually alot more FUN to play with - they can twiddle knobs and feel they are interacting - fun things sound better, even if they sound the same. It's human nature.

I still am going to get as UAD card (well...I think I'll wait to see what the UAD2 is about first). I'll be buying it purely on the quality of the sound output of specific plugins. But I will still be using GUP1. I'll still use any other VST plugin that does the job.


I wouldn't worry too much about any perceived concept that VST is inferior to other formats because of the h/w. Those kids will grow up and spend money and waste some of that money on crap, and finally realise how mistaken they were. And the myth will continue down the chain...but it won't actually affect the sales, I suspect. Because the kids simply can't afford most of the h/w...so they dream about how good it must be. But in the meantime they still need to make music, and they can afford the better VST plugins.

Same way I still dream about nice cars etc. I've never driven a Ferrari...probably never will - and that is exactly why I dream that they must be so fantastic to drive. When I actually sit down and think about some of the nicer cars I have driven, the things that cost the money tend to be flashier comforts, deeper leather seats, thicker carpet, more electronic buttons to press. Not an awful lot to do with the actual driving capability...because a Jaguar double the price doesn't do much more than an MX5 on the road. And it's only when you get to the supercar range that there is serious difference (often that you can't actually take advantage of - who cares if I can do 0-150 in 7 seconds? The moment the cops see me do that, I'll get pulled over for dangerous driving.) Doesn't stop me wanting a supercar though...and also doesn't stop me buying the usual mid-range car that I can afford.

Don't worry Torben...it's only the kids doing their wish-list thing. We all did it.

[aciddose]

i was talking in a general sence as usual about the integer thing. what i really wanted to say, and what i really should have ONLY said, is that talking about it at all is really a waste of time if you only talk about the negative parts of each side. if we were instead talking about the positive aspects of each, we might be creating some better code instead of wasting time wanking each other's ego off.

[Torben]

kritikon, very good and informative thoughts on this matter indeed.

Thanks
Torben

[Debutante]

As a newbie I have never had the benefit of trying really good hardware. I had a 49(?) key CASIO of some kind once. But from the very first INSTANT I learned how to use vst, I was completely convinced of their power, and remain very skeptical of the notion that software is somehow utterly inferior.

I think what people rave about hardware stems mainly from the actual contact with it. Physical control of a unit is absolutely fantastic. I felt it recently for the first time using a MIDI controller on the Frohmage by Ohm. I could have sworn it sounded different . The conrol was so smooth, the incremental changes felt so much more refined by the inertia of the controller knobs... it felt much more alive and so completely different, and for the first time I could FULLY concentrate on the sound that was being made, instead of worrying a little bit about dragging my mouse in a straight line.

As for whatever sound differences there may be, without knowing for sure, I'd say they are fully negligible. They may cater to a fine taste or something, but I hardly think they can stop you dead in your tracks from completing whatever project you are trying to do.

[AndrewSimon]

Are UAD plugs better then the Native ones?
In general no.

Are there some UAD plugs that are way beyond anything available in native format?
Yes, Plate 140 for example.
I also feel that a DSP solution is perfect for Reverbs.
Even if someone will make a super high resolution native Reverb plug
I still won't be able to run 5 of them at once with a 5% CPU hit.

Are there some VST plugs that are way beyond anything available in DSP format.
Yes, and some of them are made by you Torben.
GAC-1 is way better then any channel strip that I have seen.
MPL-1 is better then UAD Precision Limiter.
And Amplitube2 is way better then the AmpSims available in UAD and Poco.

Also wanted to add that the URS plugs are also superb and probably better then what is available in DSP format.
Too bad they are priced beyond what a hobbyist like me is willing to pay.
Ahh and then there is the dongle thing.

And while I'm on that subject I keep on hearing that UAD is nothing more then a dongle.
This might be true from a developers prospective but for me, at least a DSP card adds muscle to my system, a dongle just takes away resources.
The only dongle I have is for Amplitube2 (I just had to)
Since it was installed it forced my system to run at 128 samples as oppose to 64 samples I was using before.

[defjamm]

@uad: let's take the eqs. people forget that the uad ones like pultec were the first ones using upsampling(to 192khz). compared to what was available at this time it's no wonder that people liked it more + the native cpus where not strong enough to handle this.

i owned 2, sold them. they are great for the money but imho not better than anything native. i think, that people concentrate WAY to much on things like eqs and compressors. most of the magic happens with the right composition, a nice recording and a great performance. imho people should talk more about rooms, skill and monitoring than about eqs and compressors.

[.jon]

Debutante,

great post. Spot on.


[/quote]

[defjamm]

@urs-eqs: imho great marketing...i would take a voxengo gliss over any of them.

[sounddesigner]

I think the 'hardware is better view' is placebo. As a low budget engineer i could'nt run fast enough from my cheap hardware set-up. The hardware i had sounded like crap compared to my vst's/vsti's.Sure if you buy a hardware reverb for about $8000 it will probanbly embarass software vst's, but look at the price difference. If you keep prices the same then by far software is better in quality,flexibility,no storage space, no cords,no repair bills etc
I get the results i want with software and am proud of my software studio.With talent a software tools owner should'nt have problems with hit records.
I don't only buy software that emulates hardware either, I buy some vst's because i like their unique sound, for me music is about my own unique personal expression and not trying to sound like someone else.
And as far as hardware excellerated plugins, i don't think their better then vst's. I've heard some great vst's that are equal to uad's in my book, it just depends on the sound i'm going for and quite often vst's get the job done just fine.I'd rather make a hit song with a compressor or eq that few people used then something like fairchild or pultec, but ultimately i have little say as to what goes on a track the track calls it.
In the software studio age i can get a new synth or effect of great quality almost anytime i want because their so cheap.In the hardware days i owned one keyboard for $600, for $500 i could go to applied acoustics systems website and by their synth bundle of four high quality synths that embarasses the hardware keyboard.I want a new compressor all i need is about $100.Although software takes up no space my studio looks alot fatter now.
Thank you Aleksey,Torben,Wave arts etc for bringing us great affordable tools and ending the low budget hardware nightmare!

[beej]

One thing we can all agree on - in terms of tools for making music, we've never had it so good...

[dasdeck]

if you listened to your favourite album throgh a cheap onboard soundcard and then listened through a high end soundcard, you'll hear a big factor for differences, the DACs (Digi.-Analog-Converter).

hardware VAs most of the time have their own DACs so there is an analog interface part in almost every hardware va, wich can add or remove some serious character to the sound.

this is just a guess of course

D3CK

[D-Fusion]

One thing we can all agree on - in terms of tools for making music, we've never had it so good...

I agree and i use both hard & Softsynths together

[feyshay]

if you listened to your favourite album throgh a cheap onboard soundcard and then listened through a high end soundcard, you'll hear a big factor for differences, the DACs (Digi.-Analog-Converter).

hardware VAs most of the time have their own DACs so there is an analog interface part in almost every hardware va, wich can add or remove some serious character to the sound.

this is just a guess of course

D3CK

With hardware, you're playing for plastic, casing, converters, etc. If you already have good converters, well...
I have a lot of VST's. I ended up getting a couple of units (plastic with digital interior)--a Kurzweil KSP8 and a POD XT Pro. I generally connect digitally, thus the money that I have spent on the converters is relatively useless. (I don't buy the arguments about wanting to run through an extra conversion of D/A and A/D because the converters on whatever Lexicon or Kurzweil device "adds" to the sound.) Yet, I really love the effects on that KSP8 device, and although I have GR2 and have tried all the amp emulations, I've come back to the POD because no one does this better yet.
I consider VST's to be a better value in getting from you from nothing to 80%. You get a lot for the buck. The hardware devices take you further, though.
I don't think we'll be seeing Lexicon releasing the work that they have done for many years in software format--so that it can be stolen by some pirate.