KVR Audio

standalone · Post by **standalone** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:30 pm

dsynth27 wrote:I agree with ghettosynth...
I have sold and bought many hardware synths and years after I bought them I was able to either make a profit or reclaim much of my money.

With good softsynths (Zebra, Omnisphere...) you cannot make a profit, but you certainly can recover much of your money. And we are not talking of 3000, 2000 or 1000 dollars or euros. I bought Diva for 106€. How much can I lose? 106€. How much have you lost selling a hardware synth?

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:47 pm

standalone wrote:I bought Diva for 106€. How much can I lose? 106€. How much have you lost selling a hardware synth?

Never lost a penny selling hardware ... I've always made a profit.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:52 pm

ghettosynth wrote:
I don't think Zebra particularly replicates an analog sound like Diva, but it does have a vast sonic landscape and makes sounds I love to play and listen to.

http://draigathar.org/sounds/Zebra3.mp3
Sure, lots of synths do that. Sounds a bit harsh to my ears. I think Zebra is decent, I just don't I need anything that isn't new. Reaktor fills most of my needs. I only buy new synths because they're innovative in some significant way. I love what Urs is doing lately, but I'm not really a fan of the Zebra UI.

So post a similar sound you made that does not sound harsh to your ears... I'd certainly be interested to hear

damoog · Post by **damoog** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:56 pm

dsynth27 wrote:
I see software as a constant investment of capital...you never feel that you can sit on the sidelines. You always seem to feel the need to buy the newest one or become left out of all the hype(whether justified or not).

i totally agree with you on that one....i have a jp8000 that gets switched on every 3 or 4 tunes that i do as well as my roland jd800(?)....i love it and ive been using it since 1997...soft synths are really great but they have the live span of a fly-at least in the eyes keen soft synth punters anyway

damoog · Post by **damoog** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:01 pm

standalone wrote:
dsynth27 wrote: How much can I lose? 106€. How much have you lost selling a hardware synth?

honestly the most i have ever lost is a korg prophecy(paid about 800 quid on release and sold for 500 in loot)

since the rise of soft synths i have WASTED prolly 2000 quid on stuff i really didnt need and i just dont use them(i have sold about 3/4 of them here)

hardware feels like you get your moneys worth,i am sat here looking at my jp8000 thinking'ive had my moneys worth out of you'

PAK · Post by **PAK** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:22 pm

damoog wrote:soft synths are really great but they have the live span of a fly-at least in the eyes keen soft synth punters anyway

Then those punters need some education. As I already pointed out (a few pages back) not only is this not true, history proves it isn't true. By your reckoning you shouldn't be able to run 30 year old music software now. Except not only can you run that 30 year old software, you can do it more easily than you could 30 years ago. Software is forever.

It's amazing how many people spout this stuff in the face of what's actually happened. It's true that, until emulated environments can more easily talk directly with hardware, this could present some problems for real-time instrument usage.

But, outside of some exceptions which are generally caused by bad installers, very very few VST's cannot be run now since they first came out - Provided you've stuck to the Windows platform (and including the fact that JBridge may be required purely due to the awful job some companies have made of their bit-bridging solutions).

trimph1 · Post by **trimph1** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:34 pm

Well, speaking of older soft synths running on older windows based systems...I've got a few that I garnered from this thread..http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=177407..that I am running on an older windows 95, or so, PII computer...or another more recent thing that we fell over ....running trackers and the like. So it is possible to do.

As for the investment on hardware..when I bought my Arp and Minimoog they were still pretty expensive at the time...early 1970's...both are still in excellent shape...considering that both were used on the road a fair bit...replaced all the caps on them...

....and, no, I ain't selling them to no body...my wife loves them too much

@Dean....I ended up buying one of them there Mesa's a few days ago.

quantum7 · Post by **quantum7** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:35 pm

damoog wrote:honestly the most i have ever lost is a korg prophecy(paid about 800 quid on release and sold for 500 in loot)

If you have bought hardware synths for the last 25 years like I have, you would know how many thousands of dollars you loose in value once you sell them years later. In fact, looking over my purchase records for the past 25 years I have lost well over 40k in value in all the hardware I bought and sold over the years.

damoog wrote:since the rise of soft synths i have WASTED prolly 2000 quid on stuff i really didnt need and i just dont use them(i have sold about 3/4 of them here)

If you didn't need the stuff to begin with then it was your own fault that you "wasted" your money.

damoog wrote:hardware feels like you get your moneys worth,i am sat here looking at my jp8000 thinking'ive had my moneys worth out of you

Anything can have value to anyone. You are choosing to place value on your JP8000. I had a JP8000 that collected dust in my closet for 2 years until I finally sold it for a fraction of what it originally cost new. I own many software synths now, such as Alchemy, Omnisphere and recently DIVA, and they have WAY more worth to ME than the JP8000 ever had.

tetsuneko · Post by **tetsuneko** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:50 pm

Softsynths don't have to disappear with the OS upgrades of time. If you'd really love certain softsynths, you could just enslave one computer for running them indefinitely.

But somehow, the idea of people saving their old computers is a taboo? Always ditching the older model for the newer one.. If you think like that about computers, of course you're gonna think like that about software as well.

The mentality that computers and software always improve prevents us from being contempt with computing accomplishments of the past. That's the problem of software.. With hardware you will have to accept the limitations and get things done. And actually that limitation is what many people love about hardware. Makes one think..

trimph1 · Post by **trimph1** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:54 pm

That is why we have an archived system here..two 'older' computers being used to house VST's deemed 'unworthy' of being used in a 'different' light'.

And this goes with those that are also not that old..why did Windows go with the idea of compatibility mode then...huh? Use it...

fmr · Post by **fmr** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:02 pm

DELETED

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:13 am

PAK wrote:
damoog wrote:soft synths are really great but they have the live span of a fly-at least in the eyes keen soft synth punters anyway
Then those punters need some education. As I already pointed out (a few pages back) not only is this not true, history proves it isn't true. By your reckoning you shouldn't be able to run 30 year old music software now. Except not only can you run that 30 year old software, you can do it more easily than you could 30 years ago.

It's not just about being able to run software in a VM, it's about how it becomes dated due to it's limited technology. It's also about not being able to compete C/R authentication and other similar issues. Being dated affects digital hardware synths as well, the MT32 sucks by today's standards but an analog machine 20 years old still sounds great.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:29 am

ghettosynth wrote:
PAK wrote:
damoog wrote:soft synths are really great but they have the live span of a fly-at least in the eyes keen soft synth punters anyway
Then those punters need some education. As I already pointed out (a few pages back) not only is this not true, history proves it isn't true. By your reckoning you shouldn't be able to run 30 year old music software now. Except not only can you run that 30 year old software, you can do it more easily than you could 30 years ago.
It's not just about being able to run software in a VM, it's about how it becomes dated due to it's limited technology. It's also about not being able to compete C/R authentication and other similar issues. Being dated affects digital hardware synths as well, the MT32 sucks by today's standards but an analog machine 20 years old still sounds great.

I really like the sound of my soft synths today. Since the sound will not degrade over time, the sound will be the same or better in 5 or 10 years.

dsynth27 · Post by **dsynth27** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:49 am

standalone wrote:
dsynth27 wrote:I agree with ghettosynth...
I have sold and bought many hardware synths and years after I bought them I was able to either make a profit or reclaim much of my money.
With good softsynths (Zebra, Omnisphere...) you cannot make a profit, but you certainly can recover much of your money. And we are not talking of 3000, 2000 or 1000 dollars or euros. I bought Diva for 106€. How much can I lose? 106€. How much have you lost selling a hardware synth?

How much have I lost selling a hardware synth? $0.00. However, I always lose money on software.

Just answering the question...

djanthonyw · Post by **djanthonyw** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:53 am

You might not lose money on hardware synths, but everyone certainly loses time since there's a lot of redundant tasks when it comes to working with it.

Diva Vs. Real Analog