KVR Audio

basslinemaster · Post by **basslinemaster** » Thu Dec 25, 2014 11:53 pm

So, Gadget Fiend has been telling us how hardware is better than software, and how his extensive collection of hardware synths is better than the software 'equivalent'. Care to post up some examples, Gadget Fiend? You said that software sounds "thin and weak", I haven't heard that from my VSTs. I would never use hardware, far too much cost and far too much hassle compared to VSTs. VSTs cannot be bettered, I buy one VST and can use twenty instances in a track, or a hundred, and it takes up no space in my room, who would want to use hardware, with all the hassle involved in recording, set up, cabling, etc.?
But please, post up some examples of what you are claiming hardware can do, which software can't.
On my side of the argument, I'll say: download the Dune 2 demo and listen to the presets. Then show us your hardware that sounds better than that.

trimph1 · Post by **trimph1** » Thu Dec 25, 2014 11:59 pm

I don't think this approach will work though.

He, alone, knows the truth. And none stands above him.

Tricky-Loops · Post by **Tricky-Loops** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:21 am

Be careful, if he listens to Hive, he might throw his Juno in the bin...

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:24 am

Wavestation plug-in is better than the hardware... it is exactly the same except it has a resonant filter and it is easier to edit. Software wins

penguinfromdeep · Post by **penguinfromdeep** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:39 am

pdxindy wrote:Wavestation plug-in is better than the hardware... it is exactly the same except it has a resonant filter and it is easier to edit. Software wins

M1 doesn't though

I don't know why but the software sounds more brittle than the hardware that is easier to sit in the mix.

Anyway I'm curious about this challenge! He said for example that Diva sounds bad compared to hardware

I think developers still need to continue pushing the envelope (as I'm sure they'll do)

Orbit-50 · Post by **Orbit-50** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:49 am

trimph1 wrote:I don't think this approach will work though.
He, alone, knows the truth. And none stands above him.

This is true basslinemaster. He's armed with the word of God. Be careful.

P.S. He's going to sling the epithet "KVR Low Rent" at you. Be careful man. I don't want to see you get hurt.

.-.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 12:57 am

penguinfromdeep wrote:Anyway I'm curious about this challenge! He said for example that Diva sounds bad compared to hardware

I think in a lot of cases, Diva sounds better than the hardware...

filter303 · Post by **filter303** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 1:04 am

penguinfromdeep wrote:
pdxindy wrote:Wavestation plug-in is better than the hardware... it is exactly the same except it has a resonant filter and it is easier to edit. Software wins
M1 doesn't though I don't know why but the software sounds more brittle than the hardware that is easier to sit in the mix.

Anyway I'm curious about this challenge! He said for example that Diva sounds bad compared to hardware

I think developers still need to continue pushing the envelope (as I'm sure they'll do)

When I had the Wavestation hardware and compared it to the software version I found out that the VSTI sounded brighter. I also preferred the software to the hardware version.
I am wondering the sound difference between M1 hardware and software could be caused by a D/A antialias filter?
I know people seem to think that converters give nice color for various synths but in the case of Wavestation it was not true, at least not for me.

RunBeerRun · Post by **RunBeerRun** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 1:11 am

I do think software "generally" is thinner, not to an ugly extent, but hardware is so incredibly basic. I mean you drink a cup of coffee...and it's not fun anymore.

Gadget Fiend · Post by **Gadget Fiend** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 1:45 am

basslinemaster, if you don't want to come across like a complete douche and a tool, at least try to accurately represent what I have said. Or is "copy and paste" beyond your limited skill set?

This all started when someone got all butt hurt over the seemingly innocuous comment that one solution to plugin-induced CPU overload is to use hardware synths which, aside from leaving your computer processing available for CPU-intensive FX and processing plugins have the added benefit of sounding better than their softsynth equivalents.

Of course, them's fighting words on KVR where the "experts" (who have often never even heard a hardware synth firsthand) get all bent out of shape because maybe, just maybe, their gear is not the be all and end all of studio setups. There is apparently a progression from ignorance, to denial, to envy and then on to argumentativeness, belligerence and stupidity (all of which have been on full display in the Spire thread).

And yet despite the vindictive idiocy and personal attacks, not one person has been able to provide a single example of a softsynth sounding as good as its hardware equivalent.

Here is what I wrote in the Spire thread:

As is clearly obvious to anyone who has actually heard any of the hardware synths mentioned below, there is not a single synth plugin that sounds as good as its hardware equivalent.

Analog-Style Subtractive Synths
This goes without saying. Diva, etc. are wannabe imitators compared to something like my MKS-80. Even my Prophet '08 rack blows every analog modeled synth plugin out of the water. The only synth plugin that sounds even remotely analog is the TAL U-NO-LX (and that's because it's modeling a really simple synth).

Wavetable Synths
The Microwave and Microwave XT crush every wavetable plugin including everyone's new fanboy favorite Serum (which is way too clean, sterile, and uninteresting sounding despite its excellent interface).

Hybrid Synths
The Prophet VS, DSI Evolver Series, Shruthi/Ambika, and even the Korg DW-8000 destroy the few synth plugins in this vein. (The Arturia Prophet-V is a complete joke in comparison.)

FM Synths
The DX7 series sounds noticeably fuller and warmer than FM8. Even the Nord Lead 3 (which is not strictly an FM synth but which has very capable FM synthesis features,) is a better option than FM8 and its ilk.

ROMplers
Although the synth patches in Omnisphere sound arguably better than the synth patches in something like the Roland Integra or Korg Kronos, the Integra and Kronos offer a much broader range of sounds including loads of acoustic instruments and cool hybrid synth/acoustic patches.

"Dance Synths"
This is the only category where it's even close. Sylenth and Spire do a decent job of covering the same terrain as a Virus. But the TI is still a better sounding synth AND doesn't chew through your CPU using a single patch.

Done and done.

I should have also added "Modular Synths" as an additional category. Although the plethora of software modular synths (including u-he's new "Bazille" modular softsynth) are great educational tools and can provide a really creative environment for experimentation, these "softies" don't sound anywhere near as good as a hardware modular. How that is even debatable is beyond me.

So, put up or shut up. Either name one softsynth that sounds as good as its hardware equivalent, or go back to your troll cave. And just so we are clear, no one is saying that softsynths don't have their uses or benefits (especially in terms of cost and convenience). They just don't sound as good as their category-leading hardware synth. Again, how is that controversial? It's just stating an obvious fact to anyone who has working ears.

Gadget Fiend · Post by **Gadget Fiend** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:13 am

Kind of quiet. I thought so.

Put up or shut up.

V0RT3X · Post by **V0RT3X** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:16 am

If i was a mod I would probably lock this thread, because its silly.

Synthetic Wav · Post by **Synthetic Wav** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:19 am

it would be intresting to hear a comparaison of the virus poco vs the hardware, probably sound close?

the thing about the topic is that you work on the sound in the end it don't make much difference with processsing...and once you re there the loudest is the better sounding

but yeah i have the feeling just a good analog saw with a good filter sweep could be unmatched by plugins,not sure..not time to loose for this ..i get sound i like with hardware and with software.

A point that might make sense they still can't nail a analog eq ? so a synth seems way more complex ? or maybe this resonating is totally flawded

ccDuckett · Post by **ccDuckett** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:24 am

Hold on, let me situated...

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Fri Dec 26, 2014 2:34 am

Gadget Fiend wrote:Kind of quiet. I thought so.

Put up or shut up.

I already did... you are ignoring it cause you got no answer...

The Gadget Fiend challenge