Have Modern VST Instruments Replaced Your Hardware Synths ?

[audiouser720]

Beepstreet dagger is amazing , to bad the developer now only does ios stuff
Beepstreet Drambo also sounds bloody great

It does, but in the spirit of this thread, it won’t replace either of my analog hardware monos. Not because of the sound quality, which may be equal, but it plain and simply lacks a lot of the features that I have come to rely on. Both my monos have 3 EGs, two LFOs, ring and cross mod, aftertouch and velocity, etc. The third EG is especially useful, and I’m not quite sure why software developers seem to leave it out on software that does a great job of analog modeling. I get that the classics didn’t have it, but a number of new synths do, and the only way to get good modeling at this level and the modulation abilities that I often use is with Reaktor, and I still feel like it’s not quite there, and the CPU load is often massive when run at 96 kHz.

I read and appreciate your posts on geRslutz and it seems you have a good understanding/been using real analogs. The purpose of modelling an analog instrument accurately (as in not implementing additional features even though the digital domain allows you to do it) is authenticity. If you know how to use a real analog mono you will be able to program the plugin much better than someone who never used it.

For instance I can replicate so many things on Dagger that I do on my Grandma even though it’s different (filter type enevelope etc) but still. I don’t need additional EG and mods and stuff cos my analog hasn’t got it either.

If I needed that then I wouldn’t use analog model ITB. I then use something like Massive X OR Alchemy. There I can model analog with all the additional options it’s just not as tactical (but sometimes very creative).

Anyway this is the e reason why I never recommend anyone investing in UAD if they never worked in analog studio. You will give nothing by using a plugin SSL G if you never used the original, frankly. It never goes the other way around. You might tweak good sounds of it but IMHO these tools are for people who knows how to use the real processors or synthesisers and then you won’t need additional options (as long as it’s component modelled well).

To simply put. Software nowadays CAN replace hardware, but ONLY if you used and KNOW how to use the HARDWARE.

[audiouser720]

I don’t know how I did it but I just wanted to edit my post cos typo and grammar and I multiplied it as quote. Sh*t I hate typing on phones god damnit

[buzz1]

Massive X is one of the most underrated new synths out right now.

Is it underrated? I thought the general consensus was that it was great. I think so.

That general consensus certainly applies to the core sound. There is a great deal of debate regarding nearly every other aspect of it.

[zerocrossing]

Beepstreet dagger is amazing , to bad the developer now only does ios stuff
Beepstreet Drambo also sounds bloody great

It does, but in the spirit of this thread, it won’t replace either of my analog hardware monos. Not because of the sound quality, which may be equal, but it plain and simply lacks a lot of the features that I have come to rely on. Both my monos have 3 EGs, two LFOs, ring and cross mod, aftertouch and velocity, etc. The third EG is especially useful, and I’m not quite sure why software developers seem to leave it out on software that does a great job of analog modeling. I get that the classics didn’t have it, but a number of new synths do, and the only way to get good modeling at this level and the modulation abilities that I often use is with Reaktor, and I still feel like it’s not quite there, and the CPU load is often massive when run at 96 kHz.

I read and appreciate your posts on geRslutz and it seems you have a good understanding/been using real analogs. The purpose of modelling an analog instrument accurately (as in not implementing additional features even though the digital domain allows you to do it) is authenticity. If you know how to use a real analog mono you will be able to program the plugin much better than someone who never used it.

For instance I can replicate so many things on Daggar that I do on my Grandma even though it’s different (filter type enevelope etc) but still. I don’t need additional EG and mods and stuff cos my analog hasn’t got it either.

If I need that I don’t need analog model ITB. I then use something like Massive X OR Alchemy. There I can model analog with all the additional options it’s just not as tactical (but sometimes very creative).

Anyway this is the e reason why I never recommend anyone investing in UAD if they never worked in analog studio. You will give nothing by using a plugin SSL G if you never used the original, frankly. It never goes the other way around. You might tweak good sounds of it but IMHO these tools are for people who knows how to use the real processors or synthesisers and then you won’t need additional options (as long as it’s component modelled well).

To simply put. Software nowadays CAN replace hardware, but ONLY if you used and KNOW how to use the HARDWARE.

I’m not sure if I can speak to this because it’s impossible for me to erase my history. I’m an old duff who got frustrated in a recording studio in my teens, and went about going to a trade school to learn that technology... and it was really the only game in town, as digital technology was still pretty rare and very expensive. $300k for a Synclavier in 80s dollars... might as well be a Saturn rocket to a kid from my home town.

But it’s not like I had a ton of experience with high end compressors and instruments either... but I think what I did learn above all else is that you should try sh!t. Turn knobs. See what things do. Don’t be fast to discard results that weren’t what you were originally going for.

But I agree with you in that emulating simple analog synths isn’t always the best use of my money or CPU, and I’m more likely to look to something like Massive X because of how different it is from any hardware. I feel like I have the analog mono kind of sound covered in hardware that has superior feature sets. The Dagger synth might still be interesting because I don’t really have anything that does those filter models... I’d have to download the demo and put it up against what I already have. It’s pretty cheap, so it might be worth it, just to have that flavor in the pantry.

What I do think is silly is the people who are all excited about Korg’s new Modwave hardware synth. I guess if you’re allergic to software, it’s a good alternative, but for me it doesn’t seem to offer anything that I don’t already have.

[zerocrossing]

Massive X is one of the most underrated new synths out right now.

Is it underrated? I thought the general consensus was that it was great. I think so.

That general consensus certainly applies to the core sound. There is a great deal of debate regarding nearly every other aspect of it.

Huh, well I guess we’re really good at criticism. I’ve been critical of the UI, for sure. It seems like they over corrected for past heavily skeuomorphic looking designs, but in doing so removed too much information that’s useful in navigating a synthesizer. I like my displays to look like displays and my controls to look like controls, so I’m not having to guess that I can click and drag on a number. Frankly, Massive isn’t all that great at it either, but a bit better. I’m willing to put up with a lot of that kind of thing, though, if the sound is inspirational. You can learn any UI, but you can’t get a synth without a great sound to sound good.

[EnGee]

The question I'm asking myself these days is "Do I need to imitate exactly what I like? Isn't getting inspired enough?"

Yesterday, after spending enough time with Massive X, Wavetable and Operator, I felt I don't need any analogue emulation! So what if my music is lacking that analogue feel? Nothing!

I can do good old fashioned bass with any of the 3 synths mentioned. It is not a perfect copy of a famous sound or analogish 100%, but why it should be!

The only reason that I would keep those emulation synths is if I made a track with them. For now, it's only RePro and the Legend. Hmmm I might sell everything else! Hardware? Well, I'm using my MODX daily especially if I need sampled instrument. I absolutely don't need any hardware synth! Not even fun anymore, rather it's a burden (like a boring tiring relation for just few minutes sex! ).

[zerocrossing]

The question I'm asking myself these days is "Do I need to imitate exactly what I like? Isn't getting inspired enough?"

Yesterday, after spending enough time with Massive X, Wavetable and Operator, I felt I don't need any analogue emulation! So what if my music is lacking that analogue feel? Nothing!

I can do good old fashioned bass with any of the 3 synths mentioned. It is not a perfect copy of a famous sound or analogish 100%, but why it should be!

The only reason that I would keep those emulation synths is if I made a track with them. For now, it's only RePro and the Legend. Hmmm I might sell everything else! Hardware? Well, I'm using my MODX daily especially if I need sampled instrument. I absolutely don't need any hardware synth! Not even fun anymore, rather it's a burden (like a boring tiring relation for just few minutes sex! ).

How dare you!? How DARE you!?



I said this early on. If you’re not interested in the sound of analog, or maybe just somewhat interested in it, then you absolutely don’t need a hardware synth, and really it’s just going to end up being clutter. I highly recommend no one buy an analog synth out of curiosity, because if you take to it, you’re f’d.

That said, if I were playing live, I might buy something like a MODX or something, because if there’s one thing I learned after years of doing live shows is that the less you can bring to a gig, the better, and if that means not having to hook a controller into a computer and an audio interface into a computer, and the audio interface into a mixer, etc, then a single keyboard into a mixer is a very attractive setup. I’ve gigged with a laptop, and it worked fine, but having less to deal with is always a bonus.

[EnGee]

Actually, the MODX is not a good choice for a keyboardist! The 61 and 76 models I mean. They have cheap plastic feel. They are ok for a simple play or synth play but not for a pianist or keyboardist unless they used to fatigue in their hands.

The 61 keys of Montage or Kronos is an excellent choice for a gig. Still not cheap though. The cut down versions, MODX and Chrome are still popular due to their prices but the build quality is not high.

[BONES]

I said this early on. If you’re not interested in the sound of analog, or maybe just somewhat interested in it, then you absolutely don’t need a hardware synth, and really it’s just going to end up being clutter. I highly recommend no one buy an analog synth out of curiosity, because if you take to it, you’re f’d.

That's not even close to true. I love analogue-style sounds as much as anyone, probably more than most, and half the hardware I own is analogue, but the thought there is anything particularly special about hardware analogues, modern or classic, is just rubbish. And when it comes to software emulations, VSTi leave the classic synths in the dust.

The only arguments you have are to point to very specific things that a hardware synth might be able to do infinitesimally better than a VSTi emulation of it, which completely ignores the hundreds of things the emulation is capable of that hardware couldn't hope to match. It also completely fails to address the fact that a synth like Diva or DUNE can runs rings around any and all of them, in every way.

You've written pages and pages of comments in this thread but so far you have provided no evidence whatsoever to support your patently absurd claims. You have also studiously avoided trying to argue your case with me, or to refute anything I have said. I can only assume that, like Donald Trump, you know you've lost, you just aren't able to admit it, even to yourself, and maybe you think if you say it enough times, it might become true. It will not.

[layzer]

last on my list was my Yamaha SY77
lately i'm finding linplug Octopus seems
to cover it for me.

it was a very late discovery, i know.

[BONES]

Ha! Six vote downs in lieu of so much a single persuasive piece of evidence. Just the kind of pathetic response I expected from you deluded crazy people.

[revvy]

I think they are just disgusted by your anal obsession...

[recursive one]

I highly recommend no one buy an analog synth out of curiosity, because if you take to it, you’re f’d.

Idk, I got a little analog mono just out of curiosity (my wife asked me if I wanted a "real synth" for my birthday and I thought - why not?). I really enjoy jamming with it, making patches, tweaking knobs, record something every now and again, but for making actual tracks I still use software and (sometimes) Virus. The analog synth has made it into only one tracks so far. It does sound very good and it does sound different to software, but recording few takes for a simple acid line just to have the filter env knob moving perfectly is not really worth it.

[zerocrossing]

I highly recommend no one buy an analog synth out of curiosity, because if you take to it, you’re f’d.

Idk, I got a little analog mono just out of curiosity (my wife asked me if I wanted a "real synth" for my birthday and I thought - why not?).

Happy birthday! I... well I didn't get you anything.

I really enjoy jamming with it, making patches, tweaking knobs, record something every now and again, but for making actual tracks I still use software and (sometimes) Virus. The analog synth has made it into only one tracks so far. It does sound very good and it does sound different to software, but recording few takes for a simple acid line just to have the filter env knob moving perfectly is not really worth it.

There definitely is a different mindset that you need to be in if you're going to get an oldschool hardware synth in a modern DAW environment. Unless you've got something that's got a robust MIDI implementation, you're pretty much doing it by hand, which some consider to be more fun, but I'm with you. For a lot of things I just want to automate it. I did a track a while ago and I replaced a hardware analog for Legend because I got an idea of how I wanted the third oscillator (tuned an octave down from the other two) to be side chained to the kick. Possible with hardware? Maybe, but f that. I had what I wanted in Bitwig in a moment and it worked perfectly. OTOH, it can be like driving a manual sports car, really fun and hands on in a way that software isn't. Bottom line, right tool for the job, as they say. Most of the time I'm using hardware, I'm never capturing MIDI. I'm just going into an audio track, or maybe using an audio looper like MSuperlooper. There the performance is the main point and really what's fun. Drawing automation isn't as fun as wailing away on a keyboard.

[zerocrossing]

I wonder if Beepstreet Dagger is the only one which offers the Steiner Parker filter (together with some others filter types) in software land? Indeed Dagger is my favourite mono software synth. It cuts trough everything and lives up to the name. It just has cojones.
Must be the closest to a Brute in software land.
Its however nice that its so easy in software land to make it polyphonic if needed plus MPE if you want.
Dagger has indeed in general my second favourite sounding filters in software land.

I had a go with it earlier, and I agree that the filters do sound fantastic, but like most software, it falls apart in the upper octaves. It's also almost frustratingly simple compared to either of my hardware analog monos... not sure what one has to do to get a decent complement of modulation sources, but there you go. Sounds great for simple sounds though, and the filter FM holds up really nice. All in all, I may pick it up at one point, but to be honest, with a PolyBrute on its way, I don't think it really makes sense.