Software Synths VS. Digital Hardware Synths.

[zerocrossing]

Well, let's not argue. You guys like hardware, and have adapted to the more tedious workflow. That's all. It's "different" for you, not more tedious. While, objectively, it actually is more tedious.

Some people live in Alaska, as self supporters. They vastly prefer that life to the life in "civilized" cities. That's fine. But, it doesn't change that it's a lot harder and more tedious. It's just more "pure" to them, and I can understand that.

As a user of both, hardware synths are really not that much more tedious to use, except when dealing with automation on some of the less feature full older synths. Re-recording a part if you change the sound a bit is very simple if you make sure you record the MIDI from the performance.

[pdxindy]

Literally all of the pros and cons of hardware and software synths are subjective.

I doubt that you can see having to bounce every sound you do on a hardware synth to audio before you can work with it in your DAW, or having to use cables to transmit audio or MIDI as a "subjective" workflow deficiency. It's an objective, real deficiency. It IS more tedious, and less flexible than doing it virtually. Same with stuff like hardware taking physical space, or lack of preset saving in purely analog hardware.

You don't have to bounce every sound with hardware. You can record and play back midi to hardware just like you can with software.

What you are calling a deficiency is a subjective view.

I built a desk for my studio. It would have been a lot more 'efficient' to just get on amazon and click 'buy' on a desk. But the thing is, I enjoyed making the desk, designing it, cutting and sanding the wood and so on. There was nothing tedious about it for me. I enjoy the labor of living.

A friend of mine is an extraordinary painter. She gets commissions constantly. According to your criteria, her studio is deficient, cause all those canvases both finished and WIP take up space. And she needs a sink to wash her brushes... how tedious. And the wood and tools to cut it and paints and so on. Some would say it would be so much more efficient if she just used a computer with a graphics tablet. Then she would have undo, multiple layers, no mess to clean, etc.

Walking into her studio is magic! It is a beautiful place that has its own living aura.

It's the same in a music studio... you see the synth as taking space. I see the synth as creating space.

[cryophonik]

... you see the synth as taking space. I see the synth as creating space.

[pekbro]

I think a good analogy would be real girls (or whatever floats your boat) vs internet porn.

[Constructed Identity]

I think a good analogy would be real girls (or whatever floats your boat) vs internet porn.

REALLY!? pLEaSe! -This is 2021 and EVERYONE has gone VR

[chaocrator]

software synths run on generic OSes.
generic OSes suck, they all are just piles of buggy crap.
i know for sure because i'm a system administrator.
digital hardware synths run on dedicated realtime OSes where all the crap is at least well hidden from end user.
that's why they are much more pleasant to use.
also, hardware synths, at least for now, are not dependent of remote activation servers (that are utterly buggy crap as well), so they won't stop working just because the vendor discontinued their support or bankrupted.

[whyterabbyt]

i know for sure because i'm a system administrator.
digital hardware synths run on dedicated realtime OSes where all the crap is at least well hidden from end user.
that's why they are much more pleasant to use.

System administrators dont necessarily know more about digital synth design than other people.

So, be assured that you will find ordinary Linux in digital hardware synths. And you'll probably find that an actual OS, realtime or not, is relatively rare in a digital hardware synth, because generic CPUS are relatively rare in a digital hardware synth. Digital hardware synths have ranged from dedicated digital processors, to 'bare metal' code on DSP chips, to generic CPUs on generic OS's, to microcontrollers to FPGAs and the like.

[chk071]

You don't have to bounce every sound with hardware. You can record and play back midi to hardware just like you can with software.

You can't have different instances of a hardware synth like you have with software synths. So, yes, you have to record the different parts, unless you only want to use one sound from the hardware synth.

You can, of course, just save the patch, and then get back to it, when you switch back to the MIDI track which controls that sound. Just as easy as with soft synths! The problem is just that you need to record the sound you tweakes before then, and when you want to get back to that sound, and want to tweak that one, you need to have it saved on the hardware too, remove the recorded sound, and then record the tweaked sound again. So easy and flexible, compared to soft synths.

[chaocrator]

System administrators dont necessarily know more about digital synth design than other people.

So, be assured that you will find ordinary Linux in digital hardware synths. And you'll probably find that an actual OS, realtime or not, is relatively rare in a digital hardware synth, because generic CPUS are relatively rare in a digital hardware synth. Digital hardware synths have ranged from dedicated digital processors, to 'bare metal' code on DSP chips, to generic CPUs on generic OS's, to microcontrollers to FPGAs and the like.

1) Linux is quite rarely used as an OS for synths, because there is a free & open source ChibiOS, that is much more suitable for this kind of application.
the only Linux-based machines i can remember are NI Machine+ and modern AKAI MPC series.

2) modern digital synths are mostly ARM-based, so technically they use generic CPU.

older generation of VA synths indeed was mostly based on M68k DSP chips, and firmwares often were unique, and used low level (assembly) code for algorithms quite a lot.

modern firmwares are mostly written in C/C++ for ChibiOS or similar proprietary OSes.

[whyterabbyt]

1) Linux is quite rarely used as an OS for synths, because there is a free & open source ChibiOS, that is much more suitable for this kind of application.
the only Linux-based machines i can remember are NI Machine+ and modern AKAI MPC series.

Korg used Linux in things like the OASYS and Kronos.

So which synths use ChibiOS, then?

modern digital synths are mostly ARM-based, so technically they use generic CPU.

But you didnt specify 'modern' the first time round.

[vurt]

I think a good analogy would be real girls (or whatever floats your boat) vs internet porn.

i often turn up at airports, offering to fly planes.
i prefer jet fighters mind, as this is where most of my in atmosphere flight experience is. obviously i have far more hours flight time in my xwing

some of the pilots there, mock me

[whyterabbyt]

obviously i have far more hours flight time in my xwing

cue photoshops of froghat vurt where an r2 unit would be.

[vurt]

obviously i have far more hours flight time in my xwing

cue photoshops of froghat vurt where an r2 unit would be.

nooooooo im a pilot (sullustan) not a droid!!!

[whyterabbyt]

obviously i have far more hours flight time in my xwing

cue photoshops of froghat vurt where an r2 unit would be.

nooooooo im a pilot (sullustan) not a droid!!!

a likely story.

[vurt]