Soft synths that really sound 'alive'

[jackmazzotti]

Absynth.

absynth for sure as well as Kaleidoscope and Alchemy
Omnisphere can organic "living" qualities to it as well depending how you program it
but absolutely nothing tops the EaganMatrix (based on Kyma) inside the Haken Audio Continuum

I would also add cakewalk rapture to the list because of its envelopes and step based modulators
Reaktor Molekular too

[pdxindy]

The most alive, organic and untamed (but musical) software synth I have used is Bazille.

[Ghost Dog]

.... I do know what the OP means with alive though ....

Honestly, I thought that synth playing people would have no trouble grasping this concept, but .... never mind ....

For example, when you buy a nice violin or a piano, each of those instruments has only one sound, but, if the instrument is really good, it inspires you and you can play it for hours and you aren't bored ... you're even more inspired.

I've played the actual Juno and Polysix synths and they are able to do that. Soft synths .... not so much (heck, even the modern hardware synths as well).

I'm not a snob or anything like that (and I'm not being negative or starting a thread just to make noise). Also, I do like soft synths. The sound is good, but somehow the feel just isn't quite right. IDK.

[BasariStudios]

Are there any software synths that, in our opinion, sound organic/alive/like an actual, acoustic instrument (in terms of livelihood, not timbre)?

For me, honestly, only Spire is half-way there. Others (including the venerable Diva), are somehow not. Unfortunately, there's no real soul in them, I would say. They just aren't there yet.

What's your take on this? (And sorry if there's already been a thread like this.)

LOL

[chk071]

.... I do know what the OP means with alive though ....

Honestly, I thought that synth playing people would have no trouble grasping this concept, but .... never mind ....

For example, when you buy a nice violin or a piano, each of those instruments has only one sound, but, if the instrument is really good, it inspires you and you can play it for hours and you aren't bored ... you're even more inspired.

I've played the actual Juno and Polysix synths and they are able to do that. Soft synths .... not so much (heck, even the modern hardware synths as well).

I'm not a snob or anything like that (and I'm not being negative or starting a thread just to make noise). Also, I do like soft synths. The sound is good, but somehow the feel just isn't quite right. IDK.

I also do think it has to do with experience, and knowing what the people want/having the same vision of what's good. For example, i hardly ever heard anyone complaining about the Virus hardware synths, to stick with vritual analogs for better comparison with soft synths. And if Access would do a soft synth, i'm sure it'd be a big success too, because they have a very successful hardware product, and know people want THAT sound. Soft synth developers rather also try to give their stuff a certain character, or sound, but often i feel like it's close but no cigar, maybe also because they sometimes lack a bit of experience, or feeling/ear to know what sounds good, or what it is that the people feel like is magic in hardware. Waldorf is a good example of a company with hardware/music background which do damn good soft synths too. And they also know how to get the feel and sound of their hardware synths into their soft synths. Largo sounds every bit like one of their hardware synths, you can really hear quite quickly that it's a true Waldorf synth.

[Meffy]

For me, physical modeling-based synths that are balanced at the edge of instability tend to seem most "alive." What some might view as flaws strike me as close relatives of the kind of variation that non-electronic/non-software instruments are subject to.

Then again, the impression of liveliness I get from recorded electronic music is often a matter of smart use of modulation. One of the favorite questions on The Old KVR was "How can I sound like Vangelis?" Just using a CS80 emulation doesn't do it. On lead and other foreground instruments especially, Mr. Papathanassiou works the aftertouch, modwheel, ribbon, levers, and so on for all they're worth. It can verge on sappiness at times but when done well it's wonderfully evocative.

[Astralp]

I get it too, for me the best in that sense is Xils PolyKB II, it feels like playing with a dusty old synth, there's something about the way the oscillators interact that is very special it always makes me smile. The fixed Modulators/Looping Envelope also make it lean towards Tangerine Dream/Vangelis type Sounds, I especially love the Noise source. In a mod matrix I wouldn't use it as much, but because it's premapped it feels insulting not to, it's brilliant for subtle character.

Also the PPG 2.v/3.v feel very organic and irreplaceable.

I think there is a sub conscious thing going on though, these 2 synths lend themselves really well to the types of sounds that fascinated me as a kid and let me indulge, so that probably has something to do with my perception

[e@rs]

Alive?

Aalto!

[pdxindy]

.... I do know what the OP means with alive though ....

Honestly, I thought that synth playing people would have no trouble grasping this concept, but .... never mind ....

For example, when you buy a nice violin or a piano, each of those instruments has only one sound, but, if the instrument is really good, it inspires you and you can play it for hours and you aren't bored ... you're even more inspired.

I've played the actual Juno and Polysix synths and they are able to do that. Soft synths .... not so much (heck, even the modern hardware synths as well).

I'm not a snob or anything like that (and I'm not being negative or starting a thread just to make noise). Also, I do like soft synths. The sound is good, but somehow the feel just isn't quite right. IDK.

With softsynths it also depends on what you are using to control them. A softsynth does not stand alone. Use a crap midi controller and it will not 'feel' as good as a quality one. A hardware synth provides you with an interface that is designed to work with the synth itself. With softsynths it is up to the user to put that together so they have a setup that feels well integrated and connects them to the sound...

[wagtunes]

For me, physical modeling-based synths that are balanced at the edge of instability tend to seem most "alive." What some might view as flaws strike me as close relatives of the kind of variation that non-electronic/non-software instruments are subject to.

Then again, the impression of liveliness I get from recorded electronic music is often a matter of smart use of modulation. One of the favorite questions on The Old KVR was "How can I sound like Vangelis?" Just using a CS80 emulation doesn't do it. On lead and other foreground instruments especially, Mr. Papathanassiou works the aftertouch, modwheel, ribbon, levers, and so on for all they're worth. It can verge on sappiness at times but when done well it's wonderfully evocative.

And it's the same thing with acoustic piano players and violinists. I've heard plenty that sound anything but alive.

Honestly, this whole thread just baffles the hell out of me.

Synths, by their very essence, are not acoustic instruments. They're not meant to be them or replace them. They are very electronic and robotic. Some, less so than others. What separates them is not so much the synth but the person using it. Because I can take the most alive synth, according to the OP's "definition" and make it sound like crap.

But I guess people will hear what they hear and start looking for that "magic sauce" that's going to miraculously make something sound like God opened up the heavens and the angels came flying down to earth singing hosannas.

I have yet to hear that in any synth ever made.

But I have heard musicians turn many synths into things of beauty.

LIke I said, the OP and Fluffy should definitely get together for drinks.

[pdxindy]

Synths, by their very essence, are not acoustic instruments. They're not meant to be them or replace them. They are very electronic and robotic. Some, less so than others. What separates them is not so much the synth but the person using it. Because I can take the most alive synth, according to the OP's "definition" and make it sound like crap.

The new controllers like the Seaboard and Linnstrument etc are bringing a level of expressive playing much closer to an actual instrument.

[fluffy_little_something]

I think alive might mean direct, immediate, agile, responsive, and to a certain extent even unexpected.

It already helps a lot when you use high values for velocity modulations. Aftertouch is cool as well, especially the polyphonic version, but few keyboards support that.

The lag between key action and sound can also ruin the fun. Before I used ASIO there was so much lag, it felt like the synth was in another room

[Ghost Dog]

.... LIke I said, the OP and Fluffy should definitely get together for drinks.

Would you please refrain yourself from making comments like this (we don't know each other and I do not know who Fluffy is).

With softsynths it also depends on what you are using to control them. A softsynth does not stand alone. Use a crap midi controller and it will not 'feel' as good as a quality one. A hardware synth provides you with an interface that is designed to work with the synth itself. With softsynths it is up to the user to put that together so they have a setup that feels well integrated and connects them to the sound...

This could be it in my case. Maybe I need to choose one of my two main synths (DUNE2 & Spire), stick with it and get to know it inside and out.

I know them pretty damn well, but of I continue pursuing both I probably won't really master either.

(And if I do stick with just one, it'll probably be Spire.)

[ThomasHelzle]

Because I can take the most alive synth, according to the OP's "definition" and make it sound like crap.

That indeed seems to be one of your abilities...

For me Chromaphone, Diversion, Aalto and Falcon would fall into the ops question.
Also some Reaktor ensembles.
I would also second the recommendation about the guitar effects after a less alive synth. I like the ones from the P&M collection for that - lightweight and versatile.

Cheers,

Tom

[wagtunes]

.... LIke I said, the OP and Fluffy should definitely get together for drinks.

Would you please refrain yourself from making comments like this (we don't know each other and I do not know who Fluffy is).

With softsynths it also depends on what you are using to control them. A softsynth does not stand alone. Use a crap midi controller and it will not 'feel' as good as a quality one. A hardware synth provides you with an interface that is designed to work with the synth itself. With softsynths it is up to the user to put that together so they have a setup that feels well integrated and connects them to the sound...

This could be it in my case. Maybe I need to choose one of my two main synths (DUNE2 & Spire), stick with it and get to know it inside and out.

I know them pretty damn well, but of I continue pursuing both I probably won't really master either.

(And if I do stick with just one, it'll probably be Spire.)

My, somebody is a bit touchy today. You can find Fluffy a few posts up. Great guy but kind of stuck in the 80s musically, not that there's anything wrong with that.

This place really needs to lighten up because life is too short.