Have Modern VST Instruments Replaced Your Hardware Synths ?

[foosnark]

I don't like that it always ends up being about cost when comparing things.

Given software and hardware were the same price, what would you get for yourself?

At this point I've spent the money and I've got all the hardware I really want for my studio. There's a good-sized Eurorack setup, a couple of cheap synths and a bunch of software. No expensive vintage synths or tube compressors or whatever -- that stuff just isn't fun enough for the expense and size.

I really do think a combination of hardware and software brings the best of both worlds.

Physical space is another factor beyond cost. I like that everything I have is in arm's reach, and I have no trouble controlling drones and sequences on the modular and tweaking mix levels and FX in the DAW while playing a part on the Medusa.

If money was really no object, I might toy with the idea of setting up a second, DAWless "mini studio" upstairs, just to f**k around. Let's say, a Buchla Easel, a Matriarch, a couple of Elektron boxes, and an OP-1 or a tape machine. It'd be interesting/amusing to see just how different the results would be, but it also might kind of mess up my flow, and I'd start to want to bring the two things together... so it's honestly probably not even a good idea.

[BONES]

I really do think a combination of hardware and software brings the best of both worlds.

I'm sorry but the best of hardware is still below the worst of software so "the best of both worlds" would be all of the software world and a MIDI controller or two.

[pekbro]

Another thing is that many people just don't get on with computers, period. As hard to believe as that is,
for whatever reason. Even when honestly trying very hard. These same people get on with hardware, no
problem. I know some of them who are more successful at the music thing than any one around here,
possibly ever was or ever will be in fact. Choose what works for you, that's the way to go.

[BONES]

People who "don't get on with computers" are people like my mother who simply refuse to try, which makes them idiots from the get-go. (Thank Dog I take after my dad.)

[zerocrossing]

I do feel like I have more hardware synths than I like, for ergonomic reasons. I’ve got an L shaped setup that I wish was just a simple desk. I’ve gone though each one of my instruments to see if there was really a substitute for it in hardware... but there isn’t. Shall we?

002. I spent a solid week trying to replicate a simple patch with the help of an owner. I got close with Diversion, but only with the anti-aliasing up so high that I could only get a few voices out of it. That doesn’t even cover the pole morphing, which is amazing and unlike anything except for maybe Filterscape VA. (Which really deserves a sequel, if you ask me.)

ATC-X. It’s an analog monosynth with Model D osc clones (2) and a quartet of classic analog filter clones (Model D, SEM, 303 and ARP) You’d think that Diva could cover it, but you’d be wrong, and Diva sounds puny and dull when trying to do the cross mod and filter FM things the ATC-X does, plus the gent’s at Studio Electronics were nice enough to throw in a third EG, which I’ve been begging Urs to add on for years. Super useful.

Prophet 02 REV2. For a while I tried to do without a modern Curtis analog and I turned to Oxium and other synths that had good mod sequencers, but nothing got me there. 16 voices of DCO goodness. Matrix 12 V actually sounds pretty similar at times, but lacks the modulation options.

Prophet 6. Even the brilliant sounding Repro lacks the high pass filter, MPE support and the distortion algorithms alias like a stuck pig, while the 6’s remains rich and sweet.

Analog Four. Sold it. Missed it. It’s got a weird quirky sound and that feedback oscillator is right up my ally. Picked one up for $400 and it’s worth every penny and you shan’t find a software instrument with feedback that sounds as good. YOU SHAN’T!

Analog RYTM. I love a lot of software instruments, but when it comes to aggressive drum sounds, they all come up somewhat short.

Peak. This is one that would be the most likely to go, but I do love the per voice distortion. I probably could use Massive X for a lot of what I use it for.

Prophet 12. So weird, I don’t think any plugin developer would really make a synth that has a similar character. I might be able to squeeze something similar out of Dune 3 or Massive X, but the tunable feedback is unlike anything I’m aware of in the software world.

PolyBrute (soon?) I was instantly taken by this one. The sound and feature set it great, but the ability to do the patch morphing with a pure VCO based analog synth with all that modulation... that’s going to be an ambient playground that would be hard to find in a plugin, and you’d not get the interface which is pretty special, from what I can tell.

[zerocrossing]

Another thing is that many people just don't get on with computers, period. As hard to believe as that is,
for whatever reason. Even when honestly trying very hard. These same people get on with hardware, no
problem. I know some of them who are more successful at the music thing than any one around here,
possibly ever was or ever will be in fact. Choose what works for you, that's the way to go.

People do have a hard time believing that others are unlike themselves.

[Jkist]

ATC-X. It’s an analog monosynth with Model D osc clones (2) and a quartet of classic analog filter clones (Model D, SEM, 303 and ARP) You’d think that Diva could cover it, but you’d be wrong, and Diva sounds puny and dull when trying to do the cross mod and filter FM things the ATC-X does, plus the gent’s at Studio Electronics were nice enough to throw in a third EG, which I’ve been begging Urs to add on for years. Super useful.

You've mentioned that synth a few times. I am very curious. Could you post a few examples of the sound you are talking about? I am curious how well I might match it in Diva or similar. I keep hearing things like this but yes, nobody posts anything to actually back up what they are saying. Not saying I don't believe you, or that you are wrong, I am just selfish and want to see for myself

[BONES]

002. I spent a solid week trying to replicate a simple patch

Why? I am now one shy of 50 covers and I haven't spent more than five minutes trying to recreate any of the sounds in any of them. It's the feel that matters and once I get that going, I'm ready to move on. Even when moving from Orion, through Cubase into Studio One, I never spent a lot of time trying to get exactly the same sounds everywhere. If near enough isn't good enough, then the song isn't worth playing ever again. And if the only way to tell the difference is in an A/B comparison with the original, then there is no meaningful difference.

Analog Four. Sold it. Missed it. It’s got a weird quirky sound and that feedback oscillator is right up my ally. Picked one up for $400 and it’s worth every penny and you shan’t find a software instrument with feedback that sounds as good. YOU SHAN’T!

I had the same thing with Rocket, although I paid more for my second one (new) than the first (used). I probably wouldn't have bought another one if they hadn't been discontinued. I sorta panicked. But I can't say any of what you mention has ever leapt out at me with Analog Keys. Care to point me to a factory patch or two that demonstrates this amazing feedback? I like mine, a lot, I just never use it because hardware is a PITA and there are a dozen VSTi I like at least as much.

Analog RYTM. I love a lot of software instruments, but when it comes to aggressive drum sounds, they all come up somewhat short.

What do you mean by "aggressive drums sounds"? To me that would be lots of metal percussion and distortion, which I can do easily with anything.

[deastman]

People who "don't get on with computers" are people like my mother who simply refuse to try, which makes them idiots from the get-go. (Thank Dog I take after my dad.)

Quoting this more or less at random...

Bones-
What kind of computer are you using for live performances? Every PC laptop I’ve had for the last fifteen years has sucked in one way or another which proved to be a dealbreaker. I could see using my aging MacBook Pro, which at least has been more reliable. I have a new band and we’ll hopefully be able to start playing live within the next year or so (depending on the state of the rest of the world). I’m not thrilled with the prospect of buying a new Mac right now.

[Cro-magnon]

Do you know Ctrlr free plugin editor for synths with a bad interface?Or Alphabase?All 80's synths had a crappy interface anyways,not just the Alpha Juno.Oberheim Matrix 6-R,Yamaha DX-7,Roland JX line,etc...You are saying the Korg DW-8000 is better,even though it has the same kind of bad interface of the AJ.
You like its sound or not,it's very subjective.For my music I like very much the Alpha Juno.I like the Korg Poly61 for example too,even though it's not a sought after synth.

[Cro-magnon]

Quick example of a Poly synth 16 Bars Alpha Juno,with a bit of reverb and delay:
https://sndup.net/85t9

I automate the LP cutoff and the chorus.

[ScrLk]

Aliasing is a really good argument in favor of hardware. On the other hand I don't believe people get hardware synths over softsynths for MPE, that's not even exclusive to hardware.

Quick example of a Poly synth 16 Bars Alpha Juno,with a bit of reverb and delay:

If you want to show benefits of hardware then reverb and delay are a huge distraction...

[trusampler]

I love my Cpu's,but to say VSti's have surpassed Analog or Digital synths is laughable. More features don't mean a better sound,and that's what this is all about right? Hardware easily trumps Vsti's in every area other then recall. It'll ALWAYS be this way. Take a Vintage CS80 vs any clone in software.. Point made

[ScrLk]

I love my Cpu's,but to say VSti's have surpassed Analog or Digital synths is laughable. More features don't mean a better sound,and that's what this is all about right? Hardware easily trumps Vsti's in every area other then recall. It'll ALWAYS be this way. Take a Vintage CS80 vs any clone in software.. Point made

"Hardware is still better, it obviously just is and doesn't need proof because it's an expensive box and we all know those will always sound better."

It is what they call an unfalsibiable argument.

The unfalsifiability fallacy occurs when someone makes a claim that is impossible to prove false.

So the question becomes: what would a softsynth need to do in order for it to be as good as hardware? And how could this challenge for softsynths be met in an objective (provable) way?

[trusampler]

You're not going to prove anything different to me, I'm in the Know.. lol I don't care what you believe, there's truth in what I'm saying. These aren't emulations, these are the real thing, so they will never sound 1 to 1, unless it's direct code, and even then,dacs change it by a large margin, and digital will never sound like Analog, ever! ever!