VSTis as good as hardware? Similar to Access Virus Quality?

[tony tony chopper]

As far as I am aware Sytrus is an fm synth and has no pwm available for its oscillators

Sytrus isn't only an FM synth, and you don't need built-in PWM to do PWM. There are at least 3 ways to do PWM in it:

-saw + inv saw with detuning
-saw + inv saw with FM (better because you have full control over the modulation) (check the 'synth string - pure PWM' patch)
-saw + inv saw with phase modulation through an env
I think there's a 4th way I forgot, I think it wasn't involving saws.


That then makes it a 3-oscillator synth with PWM instead of 6, if you're picky.

[fgimian]

As far as I am aware Sytrus is an fm synth and has no pwm available for its oscillators, that would rule it out straight away for me.

No 2 synths sound the same, I have used/own pretty much all the vstis mentioned in this thread including the Virus Powercore, Z3ta, Albino and Zero Vector(no pwm though) and imo the ones I have just mentioned can sound like the Virus in certain situations although none of them will be a direct replacement for one.

Zebra 2 does interest me though, I have the demo sitting on my drive, I think its gonna have to get a little test drive fairly soon.

Please let us know what you think. Would you be able to share some sounds that the Virus Powercore produces which you think VSTis can not ? I would love to hear some raw Virus sounds.

Cheers
Fots

[tony tony chopper]

Oh yes here's the fourth way in Sytrus: a pulse oscillator ring-modulated by another detuned (or FMed) pulse oscillator

[kritikon]

Oh also, did anyone check out that filter sample I posted above ?

That was OK I suppose...the filter sound was alright, but personally I thought it was a big grainy and digital. Probably the oscillators and/or distortion that let it down, rather than the filters.

BUT...in terms of sitting inside a track, It's perfectly useable and wouldn't make that much of a difference if you used some fancy analogue with extra distortion on it. And that's where alot of the argument between h/w and s/w falls down - unless you're making a very sparse track, the listener can't easily discern the difference (even if they were bothered to start with).

The grainy digital character is often what lets digital synths down for me. In some cases it's the saturation/distortion effect that is the real weak point - nowadays decent filters can and have been coded, but digital distortion is generally quite nasty. It's one of the real strong points of impOSCar - they managed to emulate the filter overdrive really well (it sounds like proper overdrive, not digital distortion - check out any guitar overdrive pedal to hear the difference between overdrive and distortion/fuzz...it really is a big difference) - and some old analogue units used noise and overdrive as part of the character of the whole synth. I assume that MP3 you posted was Z3ta? Z3ta is a very capable synth - but to my mind, its waveshaping is both its strong AND weak point.

If you try to use Z3ta as an analogue emulator, then it's a weak point - it sounds obviously digitally distorted, and no self respecting analogue sounds that harsh. If you use Z3ta to make specifically modern Z3ta noises, then it's a strong point. If I were to buy Z3ta - it would be specifically to make modern waveshaped digital sounds. That is what it can do that no old analogue can do. And if you use an analogue and add a digital distortion FX over the top, the result is different. I find it a bit odd to use something as obviously modern as Z3ta to try and make retro sounds - you're on a mission to fail if you do that. It's obviously modern waveshaped sound is it's whole selling point, so use that to an advantage.

My MS20 makes some wonderful noises when you overdrive the input and filter by feeding back the output into the external input. Even better if you use the headphone out jack, as it has an even higher output, so will distort the external input even more. But that type of distortion is a completely different type to the waveshaping that something like Z3ta uses. It's different to the type of subtle overdrive that impOSCar (and the real OSCar) uses. And it's a whole world away from VST distortion. BUT...I still can't make some Z3ta noises on an MS20. So use Z3ta for those noises and be pleased it is unique for that.


The best of the best emulations do the job. I seriously use impOSCar in preference to any OSCar - I wouldn't buy another OSCar - how could I when impOSCar now is a fully polyphonic synth and has the same sound? I still love OSCars to actually use and play on - I once considered buying 2 more of them just so I could play 3-note chords . Stupid idea, really Now I don't have a real OSCar, and I don't miss it apart from the knobs. But something as characterful as an OSCar - it seems silly to me to try and recreate that sound on something like Z3ta, or a Virus or anything that isn't specifically attempting to be an OSCar emulator. Same as the MS20 - if you want to get MS20 sounds, then use the Korg VSTi. And even that can't emulate an MS10 - some of those synths have very specific characters (you'd imagine an MS10 and MS20 would be similar, if not the same, eh? But they sound quite obviously different).

So I can't stress to much that some of the modern VSTi don't sound remotely like some of the old analogues, but they generally are alot more flexible and you can make a wider palette of sounds with them. If you want specific analogue character of a certain synth, then buy that specific VSTi emulation or the real thing. If you just want some generic type sound, then use the glorious VSTi that are so multi-featured now.

Alot of the hoover/tarnce type sounds - you can't do them on most analogues. You'd be pretty dumb if you tried. They have a harsh distort-y character that fits with the style. So give up the analogue envy if you make that type of music. A Virus can make good saw patches, so use it, but just don't tell me it sounds like a Jupiter or a Juno etc, because you can't make those digital saw patches on those synths. If you'd played with them, you'd know. (Well - you can get something similar-ish with synced oscillators on a Jupiter6, but it's still not the same thing).

Anyway - yeah, that MP3 is quite nice. Digital, but nice.

[Robr]

As far as I am aware Sytrus is an fm synth and has no pwm available for its oscillators, that would rule it out straight away for me.

No 2 synths sound the same, I have used/own pretty much all the vstis mentioned in this thread including the Virus Powercore, Z3ta, Albino and Zero Vector(no pwm though) and imo the ones I have just mentioned can sound like the Virus in certain situations although none of them will be a direct replacement for one.

Zebra 2 does interest me though, I have the demo sitting on my drive, I think its gonna have to get a little test drive fairly soon.

Please let us know what you think. Would you be able to share some sounds that the Virus Powercore produces which you think VSTis can not ? I would love to hear some raw Virus sounds.

Cheers
Fots

Not sure if I have the time, if I get the chance I will though.

If you can afford it and want to go the hardware route I would get a second hand Virus C and a Jp-8080(which I prefer to the Virus), if you don't like them you can always sell them for the same amount.

Software wise then Z3ta and possibly Zebra 2(although I haven't tried this yet), should do the trick.

As far as I am aware Sytrus is an fm synth and has no pwm available for its oscillators

Sytrus isn't only an FM synth, and you don't need built-in PWM to do PWM. There are at least 3 ways to do PWM in it:

-saw + inv saw with detuning
-saw + inv saw with FM (better because you have full control over the modulation) (check the 'synth string - pure PWM' patch)
-saw + inv saw with phase modulation through an env
I think there's a 4th way I forgot, I think it wasn't involving saws.


That then makes it a 3-oscillator synth with PWM instead of 6, if you're picky.

Oh yes here's the fourth way in Sytrus: a pulse oscillator ring-modulated by another detuned (or FMed) pulse oscillator

Imo that may sound similar to pwm but would not give you the same amount of control as modulating an oscillators pulse width that has a dedicated control.

[tony tony chopper]

Imo that may sound similar to pwm

it's not similar, it IS PWM by definition and by result.

In fact, I'm quite sure that several softsynths out there produce band-limited pulses using 2 bandlimited saws.

but would not give you the same amount of control as modulating an oscillators pulse width that has a dedicated control.

You can link the modulating osc to the XY controller. In fact, it's done in 2 clicks, pulse ring-modulated by pulse, and link X controller to pulse phase.

[kritikon]

Oh...Soundpalace. I'd happily send you some MP3s, but there's a few reasons why I don't post any.

Firstly my DAW is not connected to the net (never will be). Which poses a few problems.

To post any MP3s, I'd have to burn them to CD, transfer them over to another PC and then post them.

...I don't have a website. I'm just not interested in posting up any of my music. That's just not what I make my music for - I make it solely for me nowadays, not anyone else. I have no interest if everyone else in the world thinks my music is utter shite - I don't make my utter shite for them in the first place.

So, to be honest, it's a real pain in the arse to make up some MP3s then transfer them across, then attach them to e-mails etc. But maybe I'll do a few and post them to you (it would have to be that way, because as mentioned, I have no website - not interested in starting one either...).

But, you never know - I might make a few MP3s of the odd analogue synth, and added distortion FX and overdriving inputs, and whatnot to show the difference. But then you'll probably get an inbox full of .wavs - I personally don't either see the point in listening to MP3s when one's talking about sometimes subtle differences - because MP3 quality is pretty poor for that.


So I'm not just being evasive or whatever. It really is a PITA for me to do anything like that. Especially as at the moment all of my synths, all the patchbays that I'd need to route them etc are all stored away until my workshop is fitted out into a studio (I moved house around 3 months ago... ) My MS20 is bubble-wrapped in the attic. My MC202 is boxed in the garage. My Juno106 is on the top of a wardrobe boxed. My Alpha Juno is f*ck-knows-where to be honest...I have no idea where I put it. My MS10 is lent out to a mate.

[vvanrij]

Hey Soundpalace, are you getting anywhere near a conclusion for this topic? I'm quite interested tbh!

[martian]

kritikon,

my daw isnt connected to the net either nor do i have a site. its not that much hassle really mate. heres some instant quick free one click hosting: http://www.yourfilelink.com/

mp3 quality is fine if you set it up right. use lame encoder (not fraunhofer ie. the one in cubase) highest quality encode and 320kbps. cdex is free and good: http://cd-to-mp3.audiolaunch.com/cd-ripper/

i want to hear some examples.

[martian]

Oh also, did anyone check out that filter sample I posted above ?

That was OK I suppose...the filter sound was alright, but personally I thought it was a big grainy and digital. Probably the oscillators and/or distortion that let it down, rather than the filters.

..etc rant

i dont think soundpalace used zeta for that example, if he did then the distortion would cause the grainy sweep. personally i think its incredibly difficult to do a pad filter sweep running into distortion and for it to not end up with rough grainy poppy edges above the filter cutoff, simply because of the type of sound youd need a really soft knee to the saturation i guess, maybe some incredibly gentle tape sat could work?

anyway heres a zeta sweep: http://www.yourfilelink.com/get.php?fid=147194

also i think zeta works as good as recreating analog sound quality as any other digital synth with objectively high sound quality. sure its forte is new sounds, but they only sound digital because analog cant create them, surely?

the distortion effect is the only place i have found zeta aliases but with 2x oversampling its far less than (i think) any other vsti ive tried to date.

[knot0fvipers]

soundpalace, for pure sound quality there is the korg collection, arturia, and Minimonsta. Thats it. all the other synths mentioned sound like shit if your talking "just" sound quality.
None of those though can touch a virus filter. Just save up and get a used virus b if you want something like the virus, there is no other choice.
Thats not to say that alot of the synths mentioned here are not amazing. Take absynth for example, the sound quality of the oscilators is terrible but when the whole thing comes togather absynth can make sounds a virus could not touch.
Buy a real virus, then look for softsynths that make other sounds to compliment the virus.
The truth is that these smaller software companies can't compete with a whole team of mad german DSP gurus. There is no sense for the softsynth companies to spend the time/money in refineing the algorithms to the point of a virus or good hardware korg synth, most people can't hear the difference anyway.

Another stamp collector. No tunes. No www. No clue. Same M.O. as all the other stamp collectors.

I'll bet he's got an apogee.

sorry your ears are not as refined. Really though I don't think this is a good thing. Its highly distracting from actually making music. I hardly have no clue though. I started with synths programming csound in 1995, started with generator in 1999, have owned a kurzweil k2000, virus b, q, korg oasys and nord modular. I don't own any hardware right now because even though i can hear the extreme difference between albino and a virus, the ease of use of the albino/softsynths and the fact that no one who just listens to electronic music and isnt into synths would even care.

This is a stupid topic, if you can't hear the difference between a good hardware synth vs softsynths sound quality wise its because you either don't know what you are listening for or you simply can't hear the difference period.You are in the same boat as basically 99.9999% of the people who will listen to your music so who cares. Same with analog vs digital synths, they sound totally different but no listening to the final product would care what made the sound, just if it sounds interesting or not.

I am not knocking softsynths, i'm just knocking the idiots who come on boards like this and tell the people who can hear the difference that they can't.

[kritikon]

I am not knocking softsynths, i'm just knocking the idiots who come on boards like this and tell the people who can hear the difference that they can't.

No argument with that. I totally agree that there are many analogue h/w synths that sound quite different to softsynths.

have owned a kurzweil k2000, virus b, q, korg oasys and nord modular

Hmmm...problem with that is that all those synths are software. They are all digital (i.e. software) synths that just happen to be in a black box with a set of keys attached. And some of them use samples as oscillators, not even calculated waves. The only difference between a s/w synth in a PC and a h/w digital synth is:

A) the lack of CPU in a h/w synth compared with even a modest PC CPU (which does beg the question why so many of the run-of-the-mill s/w VSTi synths are so poor... )

B) The DACs. And on many PC DAWs the DACs will likely be of a higher quality than many a slightly older h/w digital synth.

So the only two areas I can see where any h/w digital synth can be better than any s/w synth is A) better software coding, and B) worse sound quality on the converters must be better.

I sure hope it's just the better coding (i.e. there is no magic in h/w digital - they merely employ better coders than the average - not too sure about that though), because otherwise I'll have to get rid of my soundcard and go out and buy a SoundBlaster or something to improve my sound.

[Algorythm]

soundpalace, for pure sound quality there is the korg collection, arturia, and Minimonsta. Thats it. all the other synths mentioned sound like shit if your talking "just" sound quality.
None of those though can touch a virus filter. Just save up and get a used virus b if you want something like the virus, there is no other choice.
Thats not to say that alot of the synths mentioned here are not amazing. Take absynth for example, the sound quality of the oscilators is terrible but when the whole thing comes togather absynth can make sounds a virus could not touch.
Buy a real virus, then look for softsynths that make other sounds to compliment the virus.
The truth is that these smaller software companies can't compete with a whole team of mad german DSP gurus. There is no sense for the softsynth companies to spend the time/money in refineing the algorithms to the point of a virus or good hardware korg synth, most people can't hear the difference anyway.

Another stamp collector. No tunes. No www. No clue. Same M.O. as all the other stamp collectors.

I'll bet he's got an apogee.

sorry your ears are not as refined. Really though I don't think this is a good thing. Its highly distracting from actually making music. I hardly have no clue though. I started with synths programming csound in 1995, started with generator in 1999, have owned a kurzweil k2000, virus b, q, korg oasys and nord modular. I don't own any hardware right now because even though i can hear the extreme difference between albino and a virus, the ease of use of the albino/softsynths and the fact that no one who just listens to electronic music and isnt into synths would even care.

This is a stupid topic, if you can't hear the difference between a good hardware synth vs softsynths sound quality wise its because you either don't know what you are listening for or you simply can't hear the difference period.You are in the same boat as basically 99.9999% of the people who will listen to your music so who cares. Same with analog vs digital synths, they sound totally different but no listening to the final product would care what made the sound, just if it sounds interesting or not.

I am not knocking softsynths, i'm just knocking the idiots who come on boards like this and tell the people who can hear the difference that they can't.

Well, you have a point, but you are not absolutely right..Think about playing in a record with a cheap student violin (I play violin ). This instrument won't have sweet brilliant and deep sound, and this is something that is difficult to be corrected in the mix, because it has to do a lot with harmonics etc..and yes, audiophiles and good listeners will hear this! When we have though a vsti that its quality is 95% close to a hardware synth's quality, then its absolutely normal to get rid of that hardware and get the software. Some software synths though have much less quality than 95% of a hardware one.These are not good. I believe that we are in a good way with freeware or indepented developers that make better software than the big companies.Software sound gets better day by day. It's already fabulous in many soft synths!!!

[james0tucson]

I have long suspected that the perceived quality of synths often is a result of its effects and filters, more than anything else. Turn off effects and filters on some of your favorite Virus patches, and see if you still think the sound is too amazing to be done by software.

[vvanrij]

I know that the osc's are very important in a synth, but when you put on the effects and put it in a mix, you'l have a hard time saying which is which. And as I said earlier, if you make music for other people, they both won't hear or care what synth it is. This is an interesting topic though, since I both own a virus and some softsynths, I like to hear people's opinion on which you think is closest. I don't understand all the negatives on Albino though, sure you could pick one thing out of a synth and say that it sucks, but its not like you ever just gonna use a solo non changed saw wave? And the end results of albino sound good, z3ta+ too! But ofcourse everybody is entitled to his/(her?) opinion, and different taste is also unquestionable!

-Victor