Sylenth1 teaser on Facebook

[Teksonik]

All three at once, that sounds like overkill, and together they will use quite some CPU after all.

Not if you program complementary patches......... CPU is not a problem here.........

[Teksonik]

Now that people are finally able to program "clean" sounding synths without artifacts, people want to have the imperfections back and a lot of people are programming emulations of old analog synths...

That's my point........people are chasing rainbows. They can't even describe what it is they are reaching for.....

If people want to use analog hardware then fine please do so just don't come along and tout how superior it is to software. I've owned both and I'd never go back analog hardware.

[sfd]

You can hear it. Well, obviously not you. But that's something you've to deal with yourself.

See that's the kind of hilarious answer we always get..........."ooooh you can hear it and if you can't it's your fault". What is "it" ? You can't describe "it" because it doesn't exist. I've owned analog synths........as in the past. I've moved on because they no longer hold any appeal to me......

So...what doesn't appeals to you (assuming that it includes your ears) doesn't or shouldn't appeal for the rest of us? Or, what are you after?

[Tricky-Loops]

Now that people are finally able to program "clean" sounding synths without artifacts, people want to have the imperfections back and a lot of people are programming emulations of old analog synths...

That's my point........people are chasing rainbows. They can't even describe what it is they are reaching for.....

If people want to use analog hardware then fine please do so just don't come along and tout how superior it is to software. I've owned both and I'd never go back analog hardware.

There was an interesting quote from Dave Pensado...

Pride of place in his room at Larrabee goes to an SSL console, which he laughingly says he uses mainly for "psychological reasons — it makes me feel like a big-time mixer!" Apart from the very occasional Logic session, almost all his mixes come in as Pro Tools files, including the songs for the Pussycat Dolls' first album, PCD.

Maybe that's one of the (psychological) reasons why some people are still collecting hardware synths - because they look more impressive?

[pdxindy]

So give your real answer. I'm not trolling anyone. Give us a cogent argument that supports your statement "As for analogue, it has sonic characteristics that digital cannot match". What "sonic characteristics" ?

analogue doesn't alias...

[samsam]

```

[pdxindy]

Now that people are finally able to program "clean" sounding synths without artifacts, people want to have the imperfections back and a lot of people are programming emulations of old analog synths...

That's my point........people are chasing rainbows. They can't even describe what it is they are reaching for.....

If people want to use analog hardware then fine please do so just don't come along and tout how superior it is to software. I've owned both and I'd never go back analog hardware.

You are lumping everyone into one crude category. Just because there are some people who are chasing rainbows or who may think analogue is superior just cause they read it somewhere, does not then mean all are that way nor does that disprove the point that analogue has some advantages.

And saying that analogue has some advantages is not the same as claiming it is superior. Digital has its advantages as well and I think most people would say the advantages of digital outweigh the advantages of analogue. I got no problem with that claim. No way I am getting rid of my DAW or softsynths.

Nevertheless, analogue has some sonic advantages... when I start pushing the lfo up into audio rate territory, or playing sync sounds up around C6 and higher, analogue stays smooth and digital starts to get brittle and thin sounding. Softsynths are better at 96khz than at 44.1, but it is still there. Analogue essentially has an infinite sample rate. The more you push out to the boundaries, the more there is a sonic difference.

Now whether those differences matter to someone is entirely subjective, but there is no question that there are differences... just like film still has differences in the way it behaves compared to digital cameras.

[wagtunes]

Now that people are finally able to program "clean" sounding synths without artifacts, people want to have the imperfections back and a lot of people are programming emulations of old analog synths...

That's my point........people are chasing rainbows. They can't even describe what it is they are reaching for.....

If people want to use analog hardware then fine please do so just don't come along and tout how superior it is to software. I've owned both and I'd never go back analog hardware.

You are lumping everyone into one crude category. Just because there are some people who are chasing rainbows or who may think analogue is superior just cause they read it somewhere, does not then mean all are that way nor does that disprove the point that analogue has some advantages.

And saying that analogue has some advantages is not the same as claiming it is superior. Digital has its advantages as well and I think most people would say the advantages of digital outweigh the advantages of analogue. I got no problem with that claim. No way I am getting rid of my DAW or softsynths.

Nevertheless, analogue has some sonic advantages... when I start pushing the lfo up into audio rate territory, or playing sync sounds up around C6 and higher, analogue stays smooth and digital starts to get brittle and thin sounding. Softsynths are better at 96khz than at 44.1, but it is still there. Analogue essentially has an infinite sample rate. The more you push out to the boundaries, the more there is a sonic difference.

Now whether those differences matter to someone is entirely subjective, but there is no question that there are differences... just like film still has differences in the way it behaves compared to digital cameras.

Essentially, this. There absolutely differences. Better or worse, however, are subjective terms as it really depends on what it is you're trying to achieve and what it is you're willing to deal with or without.

I grew up during the hardware synth era beginning with my first Moog in 1979. I've owned Moogs, ARPs and Yamahas. I can honestly say that the "advantages" of old analog hardware are simply not great enough for me to ever go back there.

Why?

Where do I even begin?

1) Sound Possibilities - The early synths were very limited in what they could do relatively speaking to some of the VSTs we have today with thousands of waveforms, samples, modulation matrix slots and what have you. I pretty much maxed out what I could get out of my Moog in a week.

2) Storage - As in there was none. You had patch sheets. The ARP ones were a scream. I don't even remember how many of those I used. Forget changing programs quickly. It just didn't exist unless you were spending a crap ton of money on a CS80.

3) Reliability - Staying in tune was a challenge. Sliders and knobs not breaking was a challenge. Keeping the synth in working order, unless you were a tech guy yourself (I wasn't) was expensive.

4) Price - Of course let's not forget what all that hardware cost. This needs no further comment. I went through 10 grand like it was nothing. Today, 10 grand buys me a whole lotta stuff.

5) Size/Weight - Ever try to lift a Yamaha and take it on the road?

Now as the years went buy and we got digital workstations and all the really cool stuff, hardware became more attractive. But now we're not talking analog. At least I don't know of any analog workstations. And I owned plenty of digital hardware synths and rack mounts. More money shot to hell and I'm talking 10s of thousands of dollars. A little lighter than the vintage monsters but still not stuff I enjoyed lugging around, which is why mostly I just stayed in the studio.

Today? I have over 100 VSTs inside a box the size of a small suitcase. I have a whole recording studio in that same box. My keyboard controller and studio monitors take up more room than all my synths.

I wouldn't, for all the money in the world, give up what I have now and have to go back to the days of hardware synths. The limitations, as far as sound quality, of PC VSTs, are acceptable for me. I don't care if the high end of a lot of my synths alias. I don't usually use that high end anyway. And some synths are better than others.

In short, the sound quality is "good enough" for me to not miss my hardware days at all.

But like I said, everybody is different. Everybody has their own priorities. If somebody uses hardware over software, or analog over digital or everything for that matter, great.

Ultimately, we're just here to make music.

[pdxindy]

1) Sound Possibilities - The early synths were very limited in what they could do

2) Storage - As in there was none. You had patch sheets. The ARP ones were a scream. I don't even remember how many of those I used. Forget changing programs quickly.

3) Reliability - Staying in tune was a challenge. Sliders and knobs not breaking was a challenge.

4) Price - Of course let's not forget what all that hardware cost.

5) Size/Weight - Ever try to lift a Yamaha and take it on the road?

In short, the sound quality is "good enough" for me to not miss my hardware days at all.

But like I said, everybody is different. Everybody has their own priorities. If somebody uses hardware over software, or analog over digital or everything for that matter, great.

Ultimately, we're just here to make music.

You are talking about old synths...

a Moog Sub 37 today is reliable, stays in tune, can save presets and can function well as a midi controller. I have an Elektron Analog Keys and the sequencer is more fun and creative to use than any of the dozens of software sequencers I have. By far...

And speaking of changing presets quickly, with the Elektron sequencer, I can set a different preset for each sequencer step and it switches instantly and glitch free. There are also no latency issues. No digital clipping to worry about. The Analog Keys also works well as a midi controller with modwheel, breath, pitch, velocity and aftertouch... plus transport, and the main rotary knobs send midi CC values. There is also performance mode where I can do realtime modulation on multiple tracks at once. It is a fantastic performance machine!

And there is just something about real analogue filters!

Software keeps advancing, but so does hardware. The capabilities of software have forced hardware developers to get more creative as well... I am so happy I bought the AK.

[wagtunes]

1) Sound Possibilities - The early synths were very limited in what they could do

2) Storage - As in there was none. You had patch sheets. The ARP ones were a scream. I don't even remember how many of those I used. Forget changing programs quickly.

3) Reliability - Staying in tune was a challenge. Sliders and knobs not breaking was a challenge.

4) Price - Of course let's not forget what all that hardware cost.

5) Size/Weight - Ever try to lift a Yamaha and take it on the road?

In short, the sound quality is "good enough" for me to not miss my hardware days at all.

But like I said, everybody is different. Everybody has their own priorities. If somebody uses hardware over software, or analog over digital or everything for that matter, great.

Ultimately, we're just here to make music.

You are talking about old synths...

a Moog Sub 37 today is reliable, stays in tune, can save presets and can function well as a midi controller. I have an Elektron Analog Keys and the sequencer is more fun and creative to use than any of the dozens of software sequencers I have. By far...

And speaking of changing presets quickly, with the Elektron sequencer, I can set a different preset for each sequencer step and it switches instantly and glitch free. There are also no latency issues. No digital clipping to worry about. The Analog Keys also works well as a midi controller with modwheel, breath, pitch, velocity and aftertouch... plus transport, and the main rotary knobs send midi CC values. There is also performance mode where I can do realtime modulation on multiple tracks at once. It is a fantastic performance machine!

And there is just something about real analogue filters!

Software keeps advancing, but so does hardware. The capabilities of software have forced hardware developers to get more creative as well... I am so happy I bought the AK.

Wonderful. You've named one synth that doesn't have most of the drawbacks of my list. Except it's still one more piece of hardware that I don't need. Will this synth miraculously change my world? I seriously doubt it.

I'm still fine with going 100% software outside of my one keyboard controller which is more than enough hardware for me.

[Teksonik]

analogue doesn't alias...

Oversampling.............

Nevertheless, analogue has some sonic advantages... when I start pushing the lfo up into audio rate territory, or playing sync sounds up around C6 and higher, analogue stays smooth and digital starts to get brittle and thin sounding. Softsynths are better at 96khz than at 44.1, but it is still there. Analogue essentially has an infinite sample rate. The more you push out to the boundaries, the more there is a sonic difference.

See now that is an actual answer. Can you post an example of "analog smooth" and digital "brittle and thin" ? I'd genuinely be interested in hearing the difference.

And there is just something about real analogue filters!

Such as...............

[Teksonik]

a Moog Sub 37 today is reliable.....I have an Elektron Analog Keys

And the combination is $3,200 before any taxes and gives you a whopping two notes and four notes polyphony respectively.

The computer/software system you could build for that same money would blow that combination away even if we take the tiny differences in sound as being in favor of the hardware.

[Teksonik]

Anyway somewhat back on topic.........Ruben is there any time line on the release of a new version of Sylenth ? Any official list of new features ?

[fluffy_little_something]

On their site it says:
"The oscillators perform extremely well in both the very low (down to 0.01Hz and below!) and very high (all the way up to half the samplerate) frequency regions without losing their sharpness, liveliness or character."

What does 0.01 Hz sound like?

[Lotuzia]

Essentially, this. There absolutely differences. Better or worse, however, are subjective terms as it really depends on what it is you're trying to achieve ....
.....
But like I said, everybody is different. Everybody has their own priorities. ....
Ultimately, we're just here to make music.

My Yamaha CS-70m had memory sticks, and my Juno 60 still has some memories too, as my Matrix. But yes CS-80 is one of the top synths, and was/still_is very expensive. So, a real harp is also expensive, or a Grand Piano, or some guitars; Should we abandon these instruments because they cost more than the price of two hamburgers ?

In an analog synth, everything happens simultaneously, and, equally important, interacts simultaneously. Not to enter into too much complicated explanations, there are many problems to translate all these endless factors into the digital word. ( Similar to the thing labelled as *0df filters* ) Then, not everything is emulated. Then you have non linearities at almost every stage, etc etc. So its not only aliasing.

People who think in terms of *inferior*/*superior* are completely missing it. They are different. Can compliment each other, and offer more diversity than ever. You can make some *good music* in the box, and you can make *bad music* -bad and good possibly beeing different for you and me- using analog synths, or guitars.
Music=Diversity=life. And that's it.