Have Modern VST Instruments Replaced Your Hardware Synths ?

[chk071]

The difference IMO is how I experience hardware vs. software. I love getting my dirty hands on a hardware synth, turning knobs, pushing buttons, and playing it as an instrument because that's what I grew up doing, and it seems so strange to me that this has pretty much gone entirely out of the discussion.

I wrote that more than once in discussions like these. Totally agree with you. The "hands on" is a big argument.

[pdxindy]

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

To my ears, VSTi's have surpassed digital hardware synths. Analog is a different conversation.

Wait a minute here.. I'm assuming your talking about more Modern Vstis, and rightly so, there's been some amazing progress, but in terms of digital for example, where's your cut off date? Lets talk modern digital, have you heard the new Waldorf Kyra ( originally the Valkyrie ) and Quantum yet?
I have, and they are amazing..I personally haven't found anything close to what those synths can do in the sound registers and frequency,so pure and clean.. I'm a lover of Vstis, but to say they've replaced all hardware synths, well not in my world, and not in many others as well my friend.

I've got a Quantum sitting right here. Had it since it was first available in the US. It is a beautiful instrument. In terms of pure sound quality I will still take my software instruments over it.

[tbugz]

I've got a Quantum sitting right here. Had it since it was first available in the US. It is a beautiful instrument. In terms of pure sound quality I will still take my software instruments over it.

Opposite w me regarding the Waldorf (in my case Iridium). Was one of the first on the SW preorder list and bought specifically for the purpose of replacing any comparable softs. I've produced more w it w less frustration about sound quality than softs (though it requires more effort to tame it in a mix).

[JoeCat]

Gotta differentiate somewhat between sound and workflow. I read on a Kindle but still love books, however I travel a lot (when there's no Plague), and the Kindle is just so much more convenient.

I was sampling Moog sounds into my Digitakt today - nothing really I couldn't do much quicker and easier farting with Monark, Diva, etc. in Live - maybe there are some sounds I couldn't exactly reproduce, not because the software can't, but just no one has designed that feature set, for example.

But there's something fun about tweaking the Subsequent37 and directly sampling the hits, then banging on the Digitakt.

I can't justify it as a necessity however. And as for sampling drums, even that's somehwat useless. I have so many free / cheap drum samples (the Reverb library, etc.), that virtually anything I make probably sounds like something else. Not a lot of "I've never heard a snare like that!" since maybe Phil Collins f'd up and created the 80s.

If I were producing commercially or even really with a specific goal in mind I wouldn't be wasting my time. It's more for fun.

And don't me started on Eurorak - hardware may sound way better than Cherry, VCV, etc. - but the ability to save patches and pay...almost nothing? It's insane.

(Playing live is different - I'm not yet comfortable with a laptop and controller on stage, though the power to have that much sound at my fingertips for a gig is pretty insane)

[GRUMP]

We shouldn´t ask this question anymore today. Thinking about this topic takes too much capacity for creativity and time for comparisons. In case of doubt just get both.

And this discussion is really strange somehow. You should never expect to get the same results from a "cheap" PC as from a hardware setup as well as you can´t expect to get the same sound from two VST synths (no matter what all those "nice guys" tell you).

I blew my HD up with HW samples of all types in the last year, compare a lot and can just say "memorys are treacherous, too". I can´t really say if I could compete with software - but I have to state again and again that these materials have their weaknesses, too. "Downmixing" is horribly time consuming and "flatness" was wide spread already back then.

I have not heard a software sounding like the Samples from Mars 909 kickdrums for example. But I have the samples and when I think of back then something indes me whispers "just do what you can do as you have done it back then". Exploit what you have. Many people have forgotten this principle and you can hear that everywhere. It´s the sound they´ll all miss in two decades as we do now.

But OK - no doubt - Yamaha, Roland, Korg - they play in a completely different league than any software developer on this planet and hardware DSPs wouldn´t sell if they didn´t have their advantages. But to be honest - I like it dusty and never go glossy.

[JoeCat]

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

To my ears, VSTi's have surpassed digital hardware synths. Analog is a different conversation.

Wait a minute here.. I'm assuming your talking about more Modern Vstis, and rightly so, there's been some amazing progress, but in terms of digital for example, where's your cut off date? Lets talk modern digital, have you heard the new Waldorf Kyra ( originally the Valkyrie ) and Quantum yet?
I have, and they are amazing..I personally haven't found anything close to what those synths can do in the sound registers and frequency,so pure and clean.. I'm a lover of Vstis, but to say they've replaced all hardware synths, well not in my world, and not in many others as well my friend.

I've got a Quantum sitting right here. Had it since it was first available in the US. It is a beautiful instrument. In terms of pure sound quality I will still take my software instruments over it.

I gotta admit the Quantum looks awesome and weirdly, I have the urge to screw with a Kyra even though (or maybe because) it looks like a piece of medical test equipment. Kinda wish I hadn't sold my Blofeld even.

[Arashi]

I feel like I end up saying the same thing in one form or another in every one of these types of threads, but to me, the difference between hardware and software has almost nothing to do with sound. My opinion is that EVERY synth available today can sound good. The difference IMO is how I experience hardware vs. software. I love getting my dirty hands on a hardware synth, turning knobs, pushing buttons, and playing it as an instrument because that's what I grew up doing, and it seems so strange to me that this has pretty much gone entirely out of the discussion. I don't get that same experience from clicking and dragging things with a mouse. What I do get with software is all that convenience, efficiency, more instruments and sounds than I'll ever have time to experience in my lifetime, a lower electric bill, etc., than I could ever have with hardware alone. I'm just glad that I live in a time when I don't have to prefer one over the other and can easily have and use both of them.

Totally agree. Hardware takes up space, occupies audio inputs, increases cabling mess, and adds other complexity in the form of sync, preset management (including manually capturing and recreating patches on synths that have no patch memory), backups, etc. It has to provide enough value to offset all of those downsides, and for me that means at least one of the following:

• It provides a hands-on experience that's superior to mapping a good MIDI controller to a plugin. (Not all hardware does.)
• It has a sound that has not been successfully emulated. (By "successfully" I mean whatever I personally deem "good enough".)

Half of my hardware is "just software in a box", because it provides a fun and engaging interface, like the System-8 and boutiques. I do have a bunch of analog synths too, and in a couple cases it's because there are no good emulations (OB-6, CS-10), but most of the others exist as software emulations that range from very good (TB-303, MS-20) to nearly perfect (ARP Odyssey), and I mostly have the hardware for the hands-on experience.

But software can actually provide a good hands-on experience too, with the right controller. I really like using NKS-compatible plugins with my Komplete Kontrol and Maschine controllers, because I can browse presets, access all the parameters and even see their values at a glance, and the knobs are never in the wrong position. Ableton Push 2 provides the same sort of thing for other plugins (and the app itself), and some of the stock plugins even have rich graphical interfaces on the controller now. I realize these aren't examples of hardware synths, but I like them for the same reasons.

[gentleclockdivider]

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.

My nord modular , and tg77 do not agree .
Maybe you ‘ve been using too much shitty gear to begin with , veteran

[BONES]

Both are made with software and digital samples running on dedicated hardware. It's just code, exactly like a VSTi. Any difference you think you hear is purely your imagination. That is especially true of the TG 77, which uses a highly compressed sample ROM that's not going to be a match for even free Kontakt instruments or Zampler soundsets. And as I've owned both a DX9 and a CS2x, I know exactly how the two engines in a TG 77 sound.

What kind of computer are you using for live performances?

When we started using PCs, I just used my desktop computer from home. The first laptop I used was a Dell M60, which was my work computer at the time (2003). In 2007 I bought my first laptop, a Dell XPS M1300, which we used for a couple of years. Since about 2010 I've been buying a new laptop every year, so we've used quite a few different ones and I've never had any problems at all.

I've used lots of different interfaces, too. We started with an Edirol thing, then bought a Line6 KB37, followed by using the Ultranova's on-board I/O. Then I bought Focusrite (which I never liked much), then a Zoom U24 (probably my favourite), followed by a Yamaha AG-06 (for the extra input channels), as well as the I/O device in the Analog Keys, and lately I've been using a Steinberg thing with 6 inputs and USB Type C.

I'd never had any problems at all until I bought my current laptop last year, which has a random but persistent problem I just can't track down. Every now and then, as in maybe once or twice every hour or two, there is a momentary glitch in playback. It happens with any of my current I/O devices and no matter where the audio is coming from - Studio One, Cubase, Orion, Audition and even from Zune or my browser. Its really annoying and I need to get it sorted before we play again, assuming we ever get to play again. But that's the first time I've had any kind of problem in 18 years or so. Everything else has always worked perfectly, with little or no effort from me.

A few things about the way I set up my PCs which may or may not help. Firstly, I have never used any form of anti-virus software, beyond whatever has been built into Windows. Last century it was a no-no for 3D animators, where you needed every ounce of performance you could squeeze from your system, so it's something I've never bothered with. In that vein, all my PCs are set-up for my work, so graphics performance, particularly 3D performance, has always been the focus. Whether that has helped with music is hard to gauge, but it means that music isn't the most system-intensive work I do on my machines. Not even close, really.

You are saying the Korg DW-8000 is better,even though it has the same kind of bad interface of the AJ.

I'm saying it sounded better but, yes, I think the Korg interface was a little easier to navigate. The DW's sounded huge, where the Alpha Junos sounded thin and weak by comparison.

You like its sound or not,it's very subjective.

Up to a point but if a synth sounds thin, there is not much you can do, whereas if it sounds huge, you can always tame it for softer timbres.

I like the Korg Poly61 for example too,even though it's not a sought after synth.

PolySix always had a great sounding filter.

That demo sounds very ordinary to me, something I imagine I could do with almost anything in my VST folder. It's likely that the subtleties that make it sound good to you are things I don't give a krap about, just as the things that make me hate ladder filters don't seem to bother a lot of other people.

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?

Don't be ridiculous. As I've mentioned several times already, no hardware can compete with the 384 stacked saw waves I can get from ArcSyn, which is only $89, and it's the same with dozens of other VSTi. The only way hardware can compete is if you force artificial restrictions on software, in a bullshit effort to make comparisons "fair". But the full potential of any half-decent softsynth, unleashed, will absolutely destroy the output from any hardware synth you care to name. Even emulations of classics destroy the originals. e.g. A hardware ARP Odyssey has one or two voices, Korg's ARP Odyssey VSTi has 16 voices and you can stack them all in unison to blow the hardware out of the water. It's no contest. It's not even in the same league.

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

What point? That it's a waste of time trying to emulate some ancient piece of krap? After all, the CS-80 wasn't revered because of it's sound, it was revered because of it's playability, with features like poly aftertouch that nothing else had at the time. So it's the perfect choice of synth to prove that you have no clue.

How about you take DUNE 3 and try to find an equivalent in hardware? That's a point worth making.

I don't care what you believe, there's truth in what I'm saying.

No, there isn't and the fact you have couched your argument is such quasi-religious terms, like "believe" and "truth", shows that it is an act of pure, unprovable faith on your part and nothing more.

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!

So what? There is nothing at all special about analogue. That's why everyone abandoned it in the 1980s. It wasn't important to anyone at the time, they had lots of other priorities. It's just become important to some people these days because they are stupid enough to think that the instruments used were what made their favourite music from those times good and that, if they collect up all those instruments, they'll be able to sound as good as their idols, which is clearly ridiculous. Simple Minds didn't make it big because Michael MacNeil had a Jupiter 8 (or whatever he used back in the day) and Ultravox didn't make amazing music just because Billy Currie had an ARP Odyssey. Those artists would have been successful no matter what gear they had, which is why they continued to be successful, and to make great music, long after they started using EMUlators, PPG Waves and Roland D-50s.

[Catharsis Cat]

95+% of what I do is software. I keep my Circuit because the interface is fun, and my Blofeld just in case I ever need hardware for some reason, and because my ex partner loved playing it and it has sentimental value.

Software is my preference due to less clutter, less cost and more synths that happen to interest me. My primary concern is workflow and usability, so I like to keep it in the box. Hardware can be cool if it keeps a streamlined setup and workflow, but I don't have much interest in trying to use hardware and VSTs on the same track or trying to use lots of different pieces of hardware together.

[zerocrossing]

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

Easy enough to find..

[zerocrossing]

"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."

Is there indeed a psycological element to all this?
I remember seeing my first Prophet 5 on a friend's table in 1982. It sounded wonderful. I couldn't imagine how much better it would sound if someone actually plugged it in and played a note or two.
Ther seems to be an expectation that something that looks like a musical instrument and also has impressive lights, knobs and switches in profusion is going to be superior to an anonymous black box.

The reason I believe there is this bias is because I also feel like hardware boxes sound better, even when it's a 90s digital rompler...

Plus, it doesn't sound as good anymore once it's an audio recording.

Yeah, you’re just taking crazy now. I’m with you if you’re saying that a perfect 1:1 emulation of an analog classic isn’t quite here yet, but of a 90s ROMpler? Hilarious. Also, if you’re recording doesn’t sound exactly the same as it did as it was being played, I’d suggest that you’re recording method sucks.

I also feel like it’s short sighted to look at all the progress software has made in the past 15 years and to not think that it’ll be perfect in the near future.

[Cro-magnon]

Both are made with software and digital samples running on dedicated hardware. It's just code, exactly like a VSTi. Any difference you think you hear is purely your imagination. That is especially true of the TG 77, which uses a highly compressed sample ROM that's not going to be a match for even free Kontakt instruments or Zampler soundsets. And as I've owned both a DX9 and a CS2x, I know exactly how the two engines in a TG 77 sound.

What kind of computer are you using for live performances?

When we started using PCs, I just used my desktop computer from home. The first laptop I used was a Dell M60, which was my work computer at the time (2003). In 2007 I bought my first laptop, a Dell XPS M1300, which we used for a couple of years. Since about 2010 I've been buying a new laptop every year, so we've used quite a few different ones and I've never had any problems at all.

I've used lots of different interfaces, too. We started with an Edirol thing, then bought a Line6 KB37, followed by using the Ultranova's on-board I/O. Then I bought Focusrite (which I never liked much), then a Zoom U24 (probably my favourite), followed by a Yamaha AG-06 (for the extra input channels), as well as the I/O device in the Analog Keys, and lately I've been using a Steinberg thing with 6 inputs and USB Type C.

I'd never had any problems at all until I bought my current laptop last year, which has a random but persistent problem I just can't track down. Every now and then, as in maybe once or twice every hour or two, there is a momentary glitch in playback. It happens with any of my current I/O devices and no matter where the audio is coming from - Studio One, Cubase, Orion, Audition and even from Zune or my browser. Its really annoying and I need to get it sorted before we play again, assuming we ever get to play again. But that's the first time I've had any kind of problem in 18 years or so. Everything else has always worked perfectly, with little or no effort from me.

A few things about the way I set up my PCs which may or may not help. Firstly, I have never used any form of anti-virus software, beyond whatever has been built into Windows. Last century it was a no-no for 3D animators, where you needed every ounce of performance you could squeeze from your system, so it's something I've never bothered with. In that vein, all my PCs are set-up for my work, so graphics performance, particularly 3D performance, has always been the focus. Whether that has helped with music is hard to gauge, but it means that music isn't the most system-intensive work I do on my machines. Not even close, really.

You are saying the Korg DW-8000 is better,even though it has the same kind of bad interface of the AJ.

I'm saying it sounded better but, yes, I think the Korg interface was a little easier to navigate. The DW's sounded huge, where the Alpha Junos sounded thin and weak by comparison.

You like its sound or not,it's very subjective.

Up to a point but if a synth sounds thin, there is not much you can do, whereas if it sounds huge, you can always tame it for softer timbres.

I like the Korg Poly61 for example too,even though it's not a sought after synth.

PolySix always had a great sounding filter.

That demo sounds very ordinary to me, something I imagine I could do with almost anything in my VST folder. It's likely that the subtleties that make it sound good to you are things I don't give a krap about, just as the things that make me hate ladder filters don't seem to bother a lot of other people.

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?

Don't be ridiculous. As I've mentioned several times already, no hardware can compete with the 384 stacked saw waves I can get from ArcSyn, which is only $89, and it's the same with dozens of other VSTi. The only way hardware can compete is if you force artificial restrictions on software, in a bullshit effort to make comparisons "fair". But the full potential of any half-decent softsynth, unleashed, will absolutely destroy the output from any hardware synth you care to name. Even emulations of classics destroy the originals. e.g. A hardware ARP Odyssey has one or two voices, Korg's ARP Odyssey VSTi has 16 voices and you can stack them all in unison to blow the hardware out of the water. It's no contest. It's not even in the same league.

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

What point? That it's a waste of time trying to emulate some ancient piece of krap? After all, the CS-80 wasn't revered because of it's sound, it was revered because of it's playability, with features like poly aftertouch that nothing else had at the time. So it's the perfect choice of synth to prove that you have no clue.

How about you take DUNE 3 and try to find an equivalent in hardware? That's a point worth making.

I don't care what you believe, there's truth in what I'm saying.

No, there isn't and the fact you have couched your argument is such quasi-religious terms, like "believe" and "truth", shows that it is an act of pure, unprovable faith on your part and nothing more.

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!

So what? There is nothing at all special about analogue. That's why everyone abandoned it in the 1980s. It wasn't important to anyone at the time, they had lots of other priorities. It's just become important to some people these days because they are stupid enough to think that the instruments used were what made their favourite music from those times good and that, if they collect up all those instruments, they'll be able to sound as good as their idols, which is clearly ridiculous. Simple Minds didn't make it big because Michael MacNeil had a Jupiter 8 (or whatever he used back in the day) and Ultravox didn't make amazing music just because Billy Currie had an ARP Odyssey. Those artists would have been successful no matter what gear they had, which is why they continued to be successful, and to make great music, long after they started using EMUlators, PPG Waves and Roland D-50s.

Ok,Ladder filters sound bad...
CS-80 sound bad too. Just use your ears and listen what did Jarre or Vangelis in the past with their vintage synths,and compare this music to the actual trap or EDM made with plugins.

In the past they abandonned analog because digital was something new,that's all.
That's funny you are saying analog sounds bad because software is what it is today (awesome,superior,according to you) by attempting to emulate analog devices,their subtle behaviors.

[BONES]

@bones...
hurry up with these covers ffs.
you keep mentioning new ones, just release some of the finished ones!

"Finished" means the music is done and I know how I'm going to sing it. I haven't even thought about recording any vox, mostly becausee my focus is on playing them live.

particularly interested in the talking heads and eurythmics. some of the others are already a bit more towards your sound, but those stand out as being different enough to make me more interested in what you have done with them?

Poor choices. I'm still not happy with Sweet Dreams, to the point I'm probably not going to continue with it. Once in a Lifetime, though, is definitely only for live, I have no plans to record vox for it.

I've put 26 of 'em into a pile to rehearse for live work. Then I've worked out which ones I want to record/release - a 6 track Mini-album (my favourite format) plus half-a-dozen 3 track EPs. That's 24 songs, yet only 8 or 9 are in both lists, which leaves 8, maybe more in the end, that I won't end up using at all. So, for example, we'll do Blue Monday live, because everyone knows it, but the New Order song I want to record is Chosen Time, off their first album.

Then there is probably another 5 or 6 where I spent an hour or so with the MIDI file, then decided I wouldn't be able to do a proper job and abandoned the attempt. e.g. Love Will Tear Us Apart - I can do most of it but trying to match the guitar just won't work and I couldn't find something else that did.

But I've been working more on remixing album tracks lately, to put up on BandCamp. As enjoyable as belting out old favourites is, NOVAkILL will always take precedence over anything else. That said, I did find time to bring Relax up over the weekend. It still needs plenty of work but I don't think it will take me as long as it took Trevor Horn to get the original right. (It's in the live pile.)

When I P-lock the analog distortion on the Rytm, the sound of it is gorgeous... crunchy and gritty without any of the digital harshness digital distortion adds.
I have yet to hear any digital distortion that comes close to that sound.

There are many different kinds of distortion. With the best ones, you don't even hear that it's been applied. With digital I tend to go for Overdrive, not Distortion, when I want something smooth/subtle.

I know it sounds better than any plugin for this kind of simple analog pads/polysynths.

If you think you know that, then you know nothing because I can guarantee you that in a blind test, neither you nor anyone else would pick it from a dozen low-end (sub-$50) VSTi, doing something similar.

I don't even consider it a low-end synth, its minimalist exterior is deceiving. I would not mind having an Alpha 2, together with one of those optional programming units

Are you kidding me? It is just about as basic as it gets - a single oscillator synth, with a sub, a low-pass filter, one LFO and one envelope. At the time, you could get a multi-timbral, 3 osc per voice ESQ-1 for about the same money.

The difference IMO is how I experience hardware vs. software. I love getting my dirty hands on a hardware synth, turning knobs, pushing buttons, and playing it as an instrument because that's what I grew up doing, and it seems so strange to me that this has pretty much gone entirely out of the discussion.

I wrote that more than once in discussions like these. Totally agree with you. The "hands on" is a big argument.

If that's your thing, there is nothing stopping you being hands on with a MIDI controller, is there? Personally, I don't see any value whatsoever in that but there are certainly plenty of options out there if it is important to you.

[BONES]

Not in sound quality for synths.

Yes, in sound quality. Do you know what devs do if they want something to sound more like a hardware synth? They add noise and distortion, things that producers and engineers have been trying to eliminate for 100 years, things that you don't have to deal with at all in software. About 15 years ago I put up some audio to see if anyone could pick the difference between my hardware K-Station and the VSTi version of it, the V-Station. The only people who go tit right, other than by guessing, were the two people who could here the line noise that's inevitable when recording hardware. That is, they picked the hardware because it sounded worse.

Now there may be some overlap in best software to worst hardware... which is probably what you meant to say..

No, I meant to say that the very best hardware synth still won't sound any better than a half-decent softsynth if you play them through the same system. Try it - plug your favourite hardware synth into your computer's I/O device and listen to it exactly as you would listen to a softsynth.

If you want to put your money where your mouth is, I am more than happy to record some of my favourite analogue hardware patches alongside some softsynths and post it up here so you can tell us which is which. In fact, I am going to record it tonight but I won't post it unless you agree to do your best to pick which is which. I've done this sort of thing a few times before it is amazes me how few people actually have the guts to try.