I love software but having any kind of key enabled hardware makes quite a difference.
Yes, I noticed that after I had submitted it. I was going to scrap it but decided not to. I don't really understand why anyone would even be looking at a thread like this after three years so it never occurred to me to look at the dates on the posts.
I'm sorry but I fail to see that at all. Those instruments, in particular, have nothing over software. They are all hard to access, hard to patch and incredibly limited compared to even the most modest ITB solution. There was a time when I thought that I could go back to my Trinity's sequencer but that changed a long time ago. Modern DAWs are so far ahead it's just not funny.
How is it any different in hardware? The process is pretty much exactly the same with your set-up, only you have to jump through a lot more hoops to get there.The same thing happened with the vst software but with less magic . Software is good but is always , play something , record , overdub , load another vst , play again.
Same with software. I turn on my PC, everything else powers up automatically (USB). I start Cubase and load a project in under a minute and it's all ready to go. I bet it's less time than it takes you to be playing. Plus, of course, if all I want to do is play an instrument, around half of mine have a standalone version so I can be up and running with those in seconds.Hardware is there , touch and play.
So you're running your computer on solar or wind power, I guess? Modern computers use anything from 200W to even 500W of power.
I think it is mostly in the mix, not anything inherent in the quality of the instruments. i.e. It's because Giorgio Moroder knows what he's doing, not because hes using a better set-up. After all, some of the other hardware versions sound much worse than the Zebra version.