Discovery Pro synthesizer 6.4 to 8.0

[kobal]

Not a long time ago I unpacked my old Virus C to play a little bit around. Beside the fact, that all user presets were gone, because battery run out of power and that it is with today's standard a nervy fiddling in the menues, the sound was not really superior to e.g. a Hive or a Dune. I expected different. I had to recognize, that sounds, which had a wow-factor 20 years ago, do now sound pretty standard. That's why often in our memories, we still dream of the good old HW-synths which sound(ed) better. But listening habits have changed.

the thing is no plugins sound like it, not even some of the other virus , when it sound good it s good and it can come from the most crapy synth to the best one,
but the virus c don t sound like any plugins overall or any other hardware synth, just like serum or massive X .. some synth can be made to sound close on some spot but thats alls .

i testedt the dsp emulation of the virus C briefly , a synth i owned for years long ago and i have no plugins sounding like that, it made me think to rebuy one i like that oldschool sound early va thing that you can hear also on the olds nord leads and sometimes in reaktor as well..

in a way we are too influenced by hype ,we can make amazing music and have amazing production even with 15 20 years old synth and plugins.. a 10 years old plugins can be made to sound just as great as last hyped plugins on many sounds and sometimes better !

everyone should install back their old plugins to try them again, maybe at 96Khz as they don t use much cpu and you may wonder why you bought so many plugins since then ,some of these synth sound classic today and for many sounds great audiorate modulation and filters are not needed and what matter is the sound caractere , some of the old synth can have great raw sound cause i think it s not oversampled in real time , i could be wrong but i feel like reducing aliasing is good and bad at same time.. for example most people will enjoy more a synth with the highs less reduced and mroe aliasing than a synth with more filtered top end and less aliasing i guess , one synth will have better transients and raw sound, the mroe filtered one might sound sort of artifical and blurry vailed ( like virus C and many plugins )

[audiojunkie]

Today, there isn't much difference between hardware and software. In fact, many hardware synths are just Linux boxes packed with proprietary software.

Care to elaborate? Which "many" hardware synths are just Linux boxes packed with proprietary software?

In my quick, off the cuff comment above, I probably overstated quite a bit, although I do believe that more and more we are seeing pro audio hardware with microkernel embedded RTOS (Real Time OS) systems using custom configured Linux distros (such as ELK Audio's ELK OS), and integrated hardware such as Augmented Instruments Laboratory's BELA becoming the norm. I should also have stated "Pro Audio hardware", rather than narrowing to just "Synths", because that limits things a great deal more. Supposedly, Fishman, and Arturia are working on such products. I know that one of the mixer brands (IIRC, AKAI) uses a real time embedded Linux OS, as well. Many systems integrating wifi or bluetooth interface control systems are also using embedded microkernels using some form of customized linux or another. MUSE Research (owners of this site) produced the Receptor series. ELK Audio is developing the "Blackboard". SM Pro's VMachine was another, less famous, but similar synth. MOD has a whole series of table top devices and pedals that provides similar offerings. Seelake has their AudioStation series. The up-and-coming Zynthian project is another hardware device that comes to mind. There's the Critter & Guitari Organelle, Steinberg's Retrologue Hardware synth, Roland's System 8 Plug out synth, and some others that I can't think of off hand. I HIGHLY suspect that Behringer use this technology to some degree in some of their products. Over all, I think we'll see more pro audio hardware coming out this way because of how inexpensive it is to make compared to classic hardware synths, and how the sound quality is just fine for all but the most discerning musicians. I hope this corrects as well as clarifies my quick and maybe somewhat exaggerated comment above.

[zerocrossing]

the thing is no plugins sound like it, not even some of the other virus

It’s true. No modern commercial plugins sound as bad as any of the Virus models.

[zerocrossing]

Pls can some one explain to me. What is the big difference between a hardware and software.

Today, there isn't much difference between hardware and software. In fact, many hardware synths are just Linux boxes packed with proprietary software.

This is somewhat true, but mostly when talking about purely digital synths. I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times, unless you’re the type who hates to work with a computer. OTOH, an analog or hybrid (usually digital oscillators with analog VCF and VCA) synths are another story. These are definitely different than “a Linux box with proprietary software.” Of course, some of the behaviors of analog synths can be mimicked and there are a lot that do a pretty convincing job, but I find that there’s a certain rawness that most digital emulations lack.

Of course, this character that I’m talking about isn’t really essential to making good sounding music, but once you’re really familiar with it, you do sort of get hooked on it and then it becomes a thing that you find lacking in digital synths. I personally use both because sometimes I prefer the more polite sound of software.

[kobal]

the thing is no plugins sound like it, not even some of the other virus

It’s true. No modern commercial plugins sound as bad as any of the Virus models.

i didn t rate it very high when i had one cause i enjoyed more the crisp sharp sound of the nords but i remember enjoying the bp and hp filters on the virus , i don t rate high many plugins as well.. i still can make good sound on any of them so it dosen t bother me much.
i don t know about the Ti it seems more modern sounding and maybe less raw but virus is classic imo , so nostalgia of the timbre might be there for many people even psychosomaticaly by listening to it on many tracks, that might worth more than the last great sounding synth, it just have that sound.
i realize how good a synth is technically have nothing to do with good sound , on any synth it s posibble to make great sound , just not the same patchs, i guess even on albino that i was rating so low back in the days

[Introspective]

I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times...

[Modal Cobalt8 has entered the chat.]

[audiojunkie]

Pls can some one explain to me. What is the big difference between a hardware and software.

Today, there isn't much difference between hardware and software. In fact, many hardware synths are just Linux boxes packed with proprietary software.

This is somewhat true, but mostly when talking about purely digital synths. I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times, unless you’re the type who hates to work with a computer. OTOH, an analog or hybrid (usually digital oscillators with analog VCF and VCA) synths are another story. These are definitely different than “a Linux box with proprietary software.” Of course, some of the behaviors of analog synths can be mimicked and there are a lot that do a pretty convincing job, but I find that there’s a certain rawness that most digital emulations lack.

Of course, this character that I’m talking about isn’t really essential to making good sounding music, but once you’re really familiar with it, you do sort of get hooked on it and then it becomes a thing that you find lacking in digital synths. I personally use both because sometimes I prefer the more polite sound of software.

I would agree with this. The “digital” synths were chiefly the “synths” I was thinking about when posting. There will always be the $5000+ analog beauties that software can’t beat—but you must agree that software has come a long way since the late 90s—sound card bit rates and converters too.

[audiojunkie]

I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times...

[Modal Cobalt8 has entered the chat.]

Wow! This looks cool! And a good price too!

[kobal]

not sounding identical is the first reason one might go for a hardware or software synth.. each synths beeing different.. the programing expeerience is different and lead to different sounds on each synths , also emulation might still not be the same sound, like blofeld and largo, i think the da and maybe analog amp stage might round up the sound a bit more on blofeld but no idea really if it s that.. it dosent matter much anyway as long as the synth inspire you and is fun to use .. hardware or software..

[Introspective]

[Modal Cobalt8 has entered the chat.]

Wow! This looks cool! And a good price too!

It has quickly become one of my "from my cold, dead fingers" synths. There is something special about it. One of those "future classics," as they kids like to call them.

NOT that it's all peaches and cream. She has some sweet spots and can be temperamental. ...but that is part of what makes synths fun, neh?

And boy-oh-boy, it is a good-looking synth. Mmmmmn-mmmmn!

[zerocrossing]

the thing is no plugins sound like it, not even some of the other virus

It’s true. No modern commercial plugins sound as bad as any of the Virus models.

i didn t rate it very high when i had one cause i enjoyed more the crisp sharp sound of the nords but i remember enjoying the bp and hp filters on the virus , i don t rate high many plugins as well.. i still can make good sound on any of them so it dosen t bother me much.
i don t know about the Ti it seems more modern sounding and maybe less raw but virus is classic imo , so nostalgia of the timbre might be there for many people even psychosomaticaly by listening to it on many tracks, that might worth more than the last great sounding synth, it just have that sound.
i realize how good a synth is technically have nothing to do with good sound , on any synth it s posibble to make great sound , just not the same patchs, i guess even on albino that i was rating so low back in the days

I never liked Albino either. I figured the presets were just not to my taste and I’d enjoy it more when I dug in and started making my own patches, but I never really got into it.

I’m being hyperbolic when I’m critical of the Virus, much like I feel people are being hyperbolic in the other direction about it. It’s a fine synth. I had a C for a long time, and later got a Snow, but the Snow didn’t last too long. By that time I’d had a lot of experience with software and software had come a long way since Albino. Years later, software is even better and the Virus… well, it’s still the Virus. Part of it is my personal taste. The Virus has that sort if clinical sound that made it the darling of the Trance scene, but I’ve always hated Trance and it’s permutations. I like a synth that’s got a lot more character. The Virus’ filters do filter, but the drive sounds lame and the “Moog” filter… was always a joke. So, if you love the sound, good for you. It sounds good, but not really my thing.

[zerocrossing]

I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times...

[Modal Cobalt8 has entered the chat.]

I’ve not heard anything from it that I felt moved me to buy it. I do have the 002, which despite it’s quirks is a f’n brilliant sounding instrument.

[zerocrossing]

not sounding identical is the first reason one might go for a hardware or software synth.. each synths beeing different.. the programing expeerience is different and lead to different sounds on each synths , also emulation might still not be the same sound, like blofeld and largo, i think the da and maybe analog amp stage might round up the sound a bit more on blofeld but no idea really if it s that.. it dosent matter much anyway as long as the synth inspire you and is fun to use .. hardware or software..

Huzzah! It doesn’t matter if your inspiration comes from a Moog One, Yamaha PSR or some stock module SynthEdit plugin that you run using jBridge because it tickles your fancy. I know we like to quibble about minutiae, but the truth is, it’s trivial compared to good writing and playing.

[zerocrossing]

Pls can some one explain to me. What is the big difference between a hardware and software.

Today, there isn't much difference between hardware and software. In fact, many hardware synths are just Linux boxes packed with proprietary software.

This is somewhat true, but mostly when talking about purely digital synths. I personally can’t find a good reason to buy a 100% digital synth in modern times, unless you’re the type who hates to work with a computer. OTOH, an analog or hybrid (usually digital oscillators with analog VCF and VCA) synths are another story. These are definitely different than “a Linux box with proprietary software.” Of course, some of the behaviors of analog synths can be mimicked and there are a lot that do a pretty convincing job, but I find that there’s a certain rawness that most digital emulations lack.

Of course, this character that I’m talking about isn’t really essential to making good sounding music, but once you’re really familiar with it, you do sort of get hooked on it and then it becomes a thing that you find lacking in digital synths. I personally use both because sometimes I prefer the more polite sound of software.

I would agree with this. The “digital” synths were chiefly the “synths” I was thinking about when posting. There will always be the $5000+ analog beauties that software can’t beat—but you must agree that software has come a long way since the late 90s—sound card bit rates and converters too.

I sort of feel like we’re even past that. For $50 I feel Tranzistow sounds very reminiscent of a Solaris, and Uli Behringer is quite adept at churning out wonderful sounding clones. We’re really living in a time when you can get quality in any format for any budget.

To bring it around, I had a Nord Lead 2x that was one of my favorite synths and when DiscoDSP remodeled the filter I did a side by side and after realizing that the “bite” the software was missing was due to it having a higher oversampling rate than the hardware, I turned it off and was able to recreate my favorite sounds to close enough for me. It wasn’t like I sold the 2x and felt remorse in any way. I really never gave it much thought after that.

Over time, though, I feel like my general tastes are different. Then, my music was much more guitar based with synth being a much smaller element. The pure digital synths were a nice contrast to everything else. Now it’s flipped and synths are more at the core of what I do, so they need to be more expressive and have more character. It’s funny, when I was a subscriber to Roland Cloud I was excited when they released the D50 and then the ROMplers, but when I actually went to use them, they did nothing for me. It’s just not my thing, these days.

[jacqueslacouth]

Huzzah! It doesn’t matter if your inspiration comes from a Moog One, Yamaha PSR or some stock module SynthEdit plugin that you run using jBridge because it tickles your fancy. I know we like to quibble about minutiae, but the truth is, it’s trivial compared to good writing and playing.

In fact, a Yamaha PSR (can't remember the number now) was instrumental in starting a 10 year playing career with the best band I ever played with...we had the shittest of gear, we weren't the most accomplished players, but we wrote pretty good fun songs that the punters enjoyed at gigs and that was reward in spades.