The "I don't get it" or your 3 overrated synths thread

[eduardo_b]

And with that said, then wouldn't the real issue be with the hobbyist and not the synth?

I can agree that the issue is more with the hobbyist than a professional, with the caveat that even professionals have their preferences that could include how easy or difficult working with a synth is. But where would the soft synth market be without hobbyists? How many developers could stay in business selling only to professionals and really talented, avocational amateurs?

And, to play devil's advocate, if a hobbyist is able to work successfully with some synths but not others of equal capability but different work flow and so on -- even though both are highly rated by users, does this mean that the synth is not overrated for that hobbyist and others? It would seem that a synth is really only a great instrument if someone feels successful using it.

[RunBeerRun]

I didn't like: 1.superwave
2.anything based on pads
3.anything that crashes my 700mhz computer running barely w/asio4all

I do like:
1.synth1, it sounds like a great synth in a really cheap way
2.rob papen's blue
3.any drum machine that I don't have to manually program

[SARcazm]

Complexity shouldn't really be an issue when discussing something being over rated, except that if it takes 1/2 an hour to program a sound on synth x and only 5 minutes on synth y to get a similar but useable sound, then it shows that you'd rather spend your time programming rather than making music !

For me it comes down to the sound of the instrument as a whole, and whether I'd actually use it for making music or not. To use the guitar analogy, I can't stand Fenders. I hate the tone when I play them (tho there are many guitarists are able to coax great tones out of them, just not me), the necks are too thin for my long fingers and I can't move down the fingerboard smoothly. On the other hand, my old Yamaha SBG (a guitar that not many own at all) is close to perfect in all areas, tho I did add a JB pickup.

[pdxindy]

Complexity shouldn't really be an issue when discussing something being over rated, except that if it takes 1/2 an hour to program a sound on synth x and only 5 minutes on synth y to get a similar but useable sound, then it shows that you'd rather spend your time programming rather than making music !

Complexity does not always resolve into taking longer to make a sound. I can make a basic preset in Zebra2 in roughly the same time as in various synths that are much simpler.

I may have spent more time learning to use it than I might for a simpler synth, but that is different than needing time to make a sound, and of course that learning has resulted in a wider sound palette.

Plus people spend lots of time 'programming' the sounds for their guitar, working with different pickups, strings, amps, guitars, effects etc etc. And of course learning to play it. It seems that people expect to spend very little time with a synth, but somehow become good with it. Just as with any instrument, it takes time to get good at using the keyboard, controlling modulation, and making presets that integrate into the setup. The expectations with synths in general seem unrealistic.

[DevonB]

I can agree that the issue is more with the hobbyist than a professional, with the caveat that even professionals have their preferences that could include how easy or difficult working with a synth is. But where would the soft synth market be without hobbyists? How many developers could stay in business selling only to professionals and really talented, avocational amateurs?

Considering "professionals" are more likely to pay for their tools and hobbist tend to whine about "it's too expensive" or "I'll just pirate the software", it truely is the professionals that are vaguely keeping the developers in business. Yes, my statemne ti s very borad and sweeping, but I think you get my point and have heard it said many times on here, even if it's a bit too stereotypical.

Devon

[peter01]

Yes, my statemne ti s very borad and sweeping

I like. Chenkui!

[bmanic]

You never hear this kind of discussion when it comes to traditional musical instruments, do you? "Ah, that Steinway is rubbish. Can't do a thing with it!"

And I don't like the Steinway all that much. I'll take a Yamaha C7 any day. Much brighter sounding. (And yes, I'm being serious.)

Devon

.. but the action is MUCH worse than the Steinway (says me who has about 300 hours of playing Rachmaninow's piano arrangement of "Flight of the Bumblebee"). And yes, I'm being serious as well.

Cheers!
bManic

I much prefer the C7 also (says me who has 32 yrs of sitting at a piano all DAY)

Aww shit.. You just owned me!

However, I was not probably making a fair comparison. The steinway in question is a quite old Steinway D with real ivory keys. There's just something special about that bugger. There is actually a Yamaha C7 in the room next doors but I always hate it when the Steinway room is reserved and I need to play on the C7. (edit: yes, I realise that I'm a spoiled brat! )

Cheers!
bManic

[MotorMind]

1- Arturia synths- like others have said they sound lifeless and boring-

2-Reaktor- I have always wanted to like reaktor- I am very into modular synths and granular glitch sounds- it's just that at the end of the day everything made on reaktor sounds sameish and thin in a not-good way- to me NI's greatest acheivement is VOKATOR- a unique and powerful FFT spectral synth/processor/granular sampler

You forget Spektral Delay, a truly terrific plug-in that never quite got the praise it deserves.

3- moog emulations- I too don't really like the moog sound- I always found it to be like a muddy electric organ sound- moog never had that cosmic sparkle like the Arp/EMS synths had

That synth sounds different doesn't mean it's bad. Moogs are very nice for leads and basses.

After reading most of the replies I can only way one thing: if a synth sounds bland, bad or boring, it's because the programmer of that synth sucks. If you have anything like Absynth, Massive or the Arturia ARP 2600 and you still can't make anything good happen, than you just suck and should stick to using samples only. Period.

Well now... With quality posts such as that, I think this thread has pretty much out-lived its usefulness.

I think the common consensus here was that if a synth's sound didn't inspire the user early in the game, it was unlikely that they'd invest more time learning its 'complexities'...

Which I totally disagree with. Inspiration should not depend on the synthesizer, but should come from within. I can get inspired by a 1 oscillator SE synth as much as a huge, complicated Reaktor ensemble. All it takes is musicality and dedication.

[bluedad]

[


However, I was not probably making a fair comparison. The steinway in question is a quite old Steinway D with real ivory keys. There's just something special about that bugger.

Well, the ivory could be the difference. I love the feel of ivory keys if they're still in good shape.

[Tronam]

Aww shit.. You just owned me!

However, I was not probably making a fair comparison. The steinway in question is a quite old Steinway D with real ivory keys. There's just something special about that bugger. There is actually a Yamaha C7 in the room next doors but I always hate it when the Steinway room is reserved and I need to play on the C7. (edit: yes, I realise that I'm a spoiled brat! )

Cheers!
bManic

Of all the top tier piano manufacturers, Steinway has got to be the most random and inconsistent (overrated? ). I can't tell you how many lifeless, uninspired Steinways I've run across over the years. You get these occasional world class gems, but while I could probably mail order a Yamaha and have a pretty good idea of what to expect, I would *never* order a Steinway that way. Some pianos have that almost magical musical personality that endears and is endlessly inspiring, while others are outright dull no matter how expensive they might be. I don't have the space for a grand, but I hunted around for my upright for a long time before settling on one and it has more charm than many of the Steinways I've played. Now, we did have one at my college's music department that was truly a class act; which our choir director always horded for herself. Anyways, they all sound different. Steinways are like that.

[bmanic]

That's actually very good information. I have not played more than a hand full of different grand pianos and this particular Steinway is very good (now that you say it, it's probably a rare gem and yes, the ivory is in very good condition). However, it's good to know that Steinway, the company today, is not very consistent (I thought that was one of their trademarks a generation ago, consistency).

Tronam, may I ask what piano you decided to get in the end? We can't fit a grand piano in our house (nor can I afford one either!!) but a good quality piano might be worth taking another loan for. Especially now that our daughter is growing up rapidly I should have something for her that she can start enjoying after a couple of years. There's something magical with kids that hit it off with a piano.. it's such a fun instrument and relatively easy (compared to the violin for example).

Cheers!
bManic

[bluedad]

of course you know, Steinways are pretty much hand made which has a lot to do with the inconsistancy in sound between the same models. But you're right, Steinways are highly over-rated. I hate Steinway uprights, and my father has given me one, and keeps asking when I'm going to get it delivered.

[Urs]

Cool... Zebra is on par with Massive!

[laputa_sync]

Cool... Zebra is on par with Massive!

nobody except me thinks Optimus Prime is over rated though!

[vista]

nearly EVERY commercial vsti,
since there are enough good freebees
which are useful enough to
make a millionseller.