Long Live the Soft Synth, Hardware Synths are dead

[cryophonik]

I’m pretty sure the guys who design those little micro SD slots spend a lot of time researching the perfect spring tension to launch the card into an unreachable and poorly lit spot. There’s some serious engineering voodoo going on there…

[kobal]

for beeing productive hardware can be a big plus.. you don t have to bother with updates

well, strictly speaking, you dont have to bother with plugin updates either. but hardware certainly gets updates; i spent most of a saturday afternoon doing firmware updates on hardware and eurorack modules(*) a week or three back.

* and its certainly a damn sight easier to install most plugin updates than it is to update firmware that has to be installed via playing back an audio file. and dont get me started on the pains of trying to remove a micro-SD card from the tiniest slot on the edge of a module that's still in situ, because those memory cards... they're trying to jump inside the effing case or onto the floor.

yes true recent hardware is like software with updates so might be even worse, but it s just the newer stuff since few years.. with plugins i guess it still make me go on the inet more than i would like just cause i m 95% of the time in front the computer while making music but i also look for newer software ect ... sometimes i m thinking to resell all my plugins, get 3 hardware synths and i will be a lot more productive/ less distracted, if i m 100% satisfied sonically i don t need to look or be excited about newer tools also.

if i count since maybe 15 years or more all the plugins i bought to try to recreate the sound i had when using hardware.. the smart thing was just to rebuy hardware insteed of spending 100 here 100 there.. and not beeing satisfied totally with the sound

[Sinisterbr]

for beeing productive hardware can be a big plus.. you don t have to bother with updates, whats the latest plugin are ect.. you have your few synth and just make music like 10 years ago and in 10 years , also it could be cheaper.. you don t hav to find better alternatives as it s the real thing and if you cant do shit with it you can t blame the tools

I don't think hardware synths makes you more productive than soft synths. Each have their pros and cons.
Personally I prefer soft synths these days. They're far more integrated in the whole DAW ecosystem I own than a hardware could ever be.

[chk071]

Personally I prefer soft synths these days. They're far more integrated in the whole DAW ecosystem I own than a hardware could ever be.

That's the thing for me. I've been looking a lot in the last year or so, but, never really made a move, because there's always worries about the lack of integration, waste of desk space, having to have to wire the devices up, and, especially, the thought that hardware never comes alone , so, it's more of a case of "You may look, but don't touch" for me.

Especially considering that VA hardware is nothing but soft synths in a fancy box, and, frankly, I don't really see many current VA synths, if any, which could compete with software, and, as mentioned, they come with the drawbacks of hardware.

Actually, considering all this, I wonder why a part of me still likes to look every now and then. Seems like there is no way to turn off that silly, never satisfied part.

[kobal]

for beeing productive hardware can be a big plus.. you don t have to bother with updates, whats the latest plugin are ect.. you have your few synth and just make music like 10 years ago and in 10 years , also it could be cheaper.. you don t hav to find better alternatives as it s the real thing and if you cant do shit with it you can t blame the tools

I don't think hardware synths makes you more productive than soft synths. Each have their pros and cons.
Personally I prefer soft synths these days. They're far more integrated in the whole DAW ecosystem I own than a hardware could ever be.

same .. but in the end i was more productive in the hardware days in term of making music, now it s easy to get dispersed and i spend lot of time programing sound and production to make things sound good , but it s a general thing in lot of music genre and not related to the tools used.

[chk071]

TBH, at the moment, I'm a little bit concerned about some of my software, which wasn't tested or updated yet for use under Windows 11 or Mac OS. I don't mind much about Mac OS compatibility, it's just that audio software seems to have such a short life span... in the hardware world, 10 years is nothing, but, in the software world, you could well end up in that time with software which isn't tested and updated anymore for use under current OS's. That's definitely one of the downside, I have to say, with running software. Hardware will keep running until it breaks, at least if there are no drivers or software involved, which provide integration into computer systems. Which kind of proves the point: IF there is such software involved, it also becomes deprecated pretty quickly...

So, yeah, I definitely wished companies would think more long term. But, I'm afraid, it is like everywhere: It's becoming more and more short term. The market also dictates it, with all the people always into new and shiny, instead of habitual and reliable.

[audiouser720]

for beeing productive hardware can be a big plus.. you don t have to bother with updates, whats the latest plugin are ect.. you have your few synth and just make music like 10 years ago and in 10 years , also it could be cheaper.. you don t hav to find better alternatives as it s the real thing and if you cant do shit with it you can t blame the tools

I don't think hardware synths makes you more productive than soft synths. Each have their pros and cons.
Personally I prefer soft synths these days. They're far more integrated in the whole DAW ecosystem I own than a hardware could ever be.

And this is the reason why all the ‘electronic’ music of today sounds just like computer software midi ringtone and not actual electronic music.

[recursive one]

for beeing productive hardware can be a big plus.. you don t have to bother with updates, whats the latest plugin are ect.. you have your few synth and just make music like 10 years ago and in 10 years , also it could be cheaper.. you don t hav to find better alternatives as it s the real thing and if you cant do shit with it you can t blame the tools

I don't think hardware synths makes you more productive than soft synths. Each have their pros and cons.
Personally I prefer soft synths these days. They're far more integrated in the whole DAW ecosystem I own than a hardware could ever be.

If by "productivity" one means how many tracks one can complete in a specified period of time, then software wins in most cases.

On the other hand, the sound and/or worklfow of certain hardware may be peculiar enough and if you want this exact sound (or even this exact workflow - e.g. a 303 style sequencer) -- using the real thing may be easier than trying to nail this in sofwtare.

I'm mostly an ITB guy but I'm finding that incorporating some bits from hardware synths makes the whole process more interesting for me, and also it doesn't neccessarily sound better but it may sound somewhat different, and this difference is enough for me to justify the hassle.

I do prefer very simple analog synths with knob per function interface, like Microbrute or TD3, or synths with good DAW integration like Virus TI. It probably would be cool to have something more complex like Neutron or O-Coast , but I highly doubt I could actually inegrate it into music production

[Introspective]

So, yeah, I definitely wished companies would think more long term. But, I'm afraid, it is like everywhere: It's becoming more and more short term. The market also dictates it, with all the people always into new and shiny, instead of habitual and reliable.

Yeah, for me this falls under "new normal" and it's also one of the main reasons I think software costs 10% of hardware. You can't expect to be using ten-year old software (though it's nice when you can).

So, for me, it's "nice to have, would still buy without the promise." (And that is a REALLY hard promise for a company to make.)

I was just reading some reviews from Jexus the other day, and he was complaining about lack of support for WINDOWS 7. JFHC, man! I sure hope his machine isn't connected to the internet. ...I mean, unless he considered a virus-infected machine some kind of feature.

OTOH, if someone tells me they love their Supernova II that was made in 1998, to me that only seems "a little dated," not all that old. Comparing that to an OS made in 2009, which seems ANCIENT, it's kind of mind-blowing.

I don't want to make a new topic to ask this, but:

What's the oldest VST you have installed?

Not asking anyone to go look up the dates on all of their software, just to make an educated guess.

For me, I suspect it's U-He's Zebra 2. 2006, right? I can't think of anything older. ...and even that feels reeeeeeally old to me for software. ...and sure speaks to the quality of the synth (and the dev)!

[chk071]

OTOH, if someone tells me they love their Supernova II that was made in 1998, to me that only seems "a little dated," not all that old. Comparing that to an OS made in 2009, which seems ANCIENT, it's kind of mind-blowing.

Yep.

Wonder what I'm supposed to do when Largo refuses to work on a newer OS. Might have to buy a Blofeld, and hope they're still in production then... and, of course, adapt to the hardware workflow. Grrr...

Oldest VSTi I'm still using? Probably V-Station. It was updated until 2 or 3 years or so. Won't complain too much, it's very ancient. But, I'm still wondering if they couldn't get some free beta testers to test the software on Windows 11 (they have a compatibility list of their products here). Hell, I would love to do it, if they would want me. Just gotta get a Windows 11 machine first.

[audiojunkie]

By moving to Linux (with WINE + yabridge) all of your old plugins just keep on working.

[chk071]

With no support, or guarantee that they will work at all. Awesome!

[sQeetz]

What's the oldest VST you have installed?

I'd say it's Fabfilter One. It was the first plugin FF released wasn't it? In the about page it says (c) 2002 - 2021.

[cryophonik]

What's the oldest VST you have installed?

I'd say it's Fabfilter One. It was the first plugin FF released wasn't it? In the about page it says (c) 2002 - 2021.

Same here

[pdxindy]

Zebra is my oldest... but it has been constantly upgraded since I first bought it so it is very different than when it was released