I bought too many soft synths

Anything about MUSIC but doesn't fit into the forums above.
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

Michael L wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:30 pm I reject software if it requires so much mental bandwidth that I forget my original idea.
That’s basically where I’m at with Ableton and the Torso T-1. I keep trying and it just seems like they’re never going to become second nature. Instruments are usually easier to deal with, although I do wish I dabbled with Tal-Sampler sooner since it’s so much more intuitive than most.

Post

Jac459 wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:49 pm Funny that having 15 hardware synthesis you buy a softsynth that is emulating .... Hardware.
There aren’t many designs (be it hardware or software) that make more sense than a Jupiter-6 or Nord Lead. I don’t see why we stray from those paradigms, though maybe Myth will prove me wrong.

Post

BONES wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:47 pm You'd be a perfect candidate for Ujam's drums.
You’re right and I do love the Beatmakers and Finishers. Finisher Dynamo has pulled me out of more ruts than I care to admit.

Post

Jac459 wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:50 pm On my side, one way to improve my workflow was to go full software. This way I can work anywhere and I don't need to go in my "cave". Different people different workflows 😄.
Maybe try different controllers? That way your cave can go with you and you can transform your cave with a USB cable. I keep a keyboard in my car for just that reason.

Post

BONES wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:47 pm
machinesworking wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2024 9:04 pmThe process is like you describe, but the result is close to what I wanted to do all those years ago. I think that's true for you in a more round about way, you know what you like, you muck about until something close comes out.
Yeah but the thing for me is that, all those years ago, I had no idea EBM existed. When I started, all I wanted to do was sound like a whole rock band on my own. So my earliest covers were from bands like The Sisters of Mercy and Buzzcocks, not electronic artists. I used to karaoke the covers while my Fostex 4-track was loading up the next 3 or 4 songs from cassette - 2 tracks of backing and two tracks of data.
Yeah we have some similar trajectories, I hadn't yet heard Sisters of Mercy, but I was huge fan of the Buzzcocks least popular record in the states anyway, A Different Kind of Tension. I started off with Bowie as a little kid around his Berlin years, then heard Devo, knew I wanted to do electronic rock of some kind at that point. It was Throbbing Gristle that set the tone though, I wanted more structure than them, but the general malice they produced and textures. So I was happy about Front 242 when I finally heard them, but also glad they had no guitars, because that was the IMO defining difference, all these more structured beat oriented Industrial bands didn't really have guitar. We were already playing in a band with heavy sequencing and guitar etc. by the time I heard similar bands like them and Skinny Puppy. So I 100% knew what kind of sound I wanted straight away.
Performance isn't necessary, it's fun but I have to say the recorded product is the goal, the performance is the treat you get, but personally I'm just as comfortable in the studio, and the biggest rush to me is when a song you wrote is inspiring to you like the songs you love.
Yeah, I hate doing studio stuff. I find it tedious and boring. Once a song is in good enough shape to play on stage, I'm done with it. I have to force myself to keep at it until it's good enough to release. That's probably why my production process remains so minimal - if I felt I had to go to the lengths many of you guys seem happy to go to, I'd give it away for sure. If releasing new albums wasn't a great tool for getting us on overseas festivals, I'd happily stop writing tomorrow. The more songs we have, the harder it gets to choose a set list.
Believe me I hate the finishing touches, that's the boring part, the mixing and mastering etc. I like the initial completion of the song itself though, that's pure dopamine.

Post

Uncle E wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:52 pm
Jac459 wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:49 pm Funny that having 15 hardware synthesis you buy a softsynth that is emulating .... Hardware.
There aren’t many designs (be it hardware or software) that make more sense than a Jupiter-6 or Nord Lead. I don’t see why we stray from those paradigms, though maybe Myth will prove me wrong.
Don't you consider phase plant proved you wrong?

Also twin 3?

After, I am not saying that nord leads are not well done and sexy. They are!

Post

Uncle E wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:52 pm There aren’t many designs (be it hardware or software) that make more sense than a Jupiter-6 or Nord Lead.
not sure if serious. I'm sure you're happy with the lead but I can't think of a mainstream synth designed after the 80s with such a completely unorthogonal set of controls combined with an interface that demands six clicks on the same button to pick an lfo that you can only route to that particular oscillator. it's like they looked at the dx7 and said "yep, we want that for a virtual analogue".

the j6 has excuses as it's based on analogue circuitry but I can see no reason for accepting its restrictions in the software age.

Post

cryophonik wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:33 pm
Jac459 wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:49 pm Funny that having 15 hardware synthesis you buy a softsynth that is emulating .... Hardware.

Don't get me wrong, I am not judging or saying you are not right, I am just surprised. I would have gone to something with a workflow I can't replicate with hardware like phase plant.
I have a lot of soft synths that emulate hardware and many that don’t. Lush-2 emulates a hardware synth that I don’t own (and don’t plan to), but moreover, I wanted it for some of its specific features, like its arp, layering abilities, etc. :phones:
I find the generic one size fits all softsytnhs a bit charmless. I prefer the emulations, it makes me feel like I'm using classic hardware with those classic sounds I like.

Not bashing them, they are very well made and very good. Pigments for example has an incredible user friendly GUI, but for me it sounded a bit thin. I have Zebra Legacy which is capable of wonderful sounds, but I just don't use it.

Post

ghostwhistler wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 1:31 am
cryophonik wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:33 pm
Jac459 wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 3:49 pm Funny that having 15 hardware synthesis you buy a softsynth that is emulating .... Hardware.

Don't get me wrong, I am not judging or saying you are not right, I am just surprised. I would have gone to something with a workflow I can't replicate with hardware like phase plant.
I have a lot of soft synths that emulate hardware and many that don’t. Lush-2 emulates a hardware synth that I don’t own (and don’t plan to), but moreover, I wanted it for some of its specific features, like its arp, layering abilities, etc. :phones:
I find the generic one size fits all softsytnhs a bit charmless. I prefer the emulations, it makes me feel like I'm using classic hardware with those classic sounds I like.

Not bashing them, they are very well made and very good. Pigments for example has an incredible user friendly GUI, but for me it sounded a bit thin. I have Zebra Legacy which is capable of wonderful sounds, but I just don't use it.
That's the moment where I need to point you towards avenger 2 and spire, 2 sublime sounding softsynths.

But I clearly understand your point.
I stayed a long time within reason studios ecosystem young with their "true to life" synths emulation.

Then I discovered Bitwig. And I decided against hardware and hardware emulation, but it is just my tastes, I fully understand that your could feel opposite.

Post

Jac459 wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 12:41 am Don't you consider phase plant proved you wrong?

Also twin 3?
I don’t use them. :shrug:

Post

gaggle of hermits wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 1:01 am not sure if serious. I'm sure you're happy with the lead but I can't think of a mainstream synth designed after the 80s with such a completely unorthogonal set of controls combined with an interface that demands six clicks on the same button to pick an lfo that you can only route to that particular oscillator. it's like they looked at the dx7 and said "yep, we want that for a virtual analogue".
Was being serious. I find it to be super logical, although yes, I would expect a software version to let you click directly on a waveform, not cycle through them with a button.

Post

Uncle E wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 2:35 am
Jac459 wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 12:41 am Don't you consider phase plant proved you wrong?

Also twin 3?
I don’t use them. :shrug:
How dare you!?

Post

gaggle of hermits wrote: Thu Apr 18, 2024 1:01 am
Uncle E wrote: Wed Apr 17, 2024 7:52 pm There aren’t many designs (be it hardware or software) that make more sense than a Jupiter-6 or Nord Lead.
not sure if serious. I'm sure you're happy with the lead but I can't think of a mainstream synth designed after the 80s with such a completely unorthogonal set of controls combined with an interface that demands six clicks on the same button to pick an lfo that you can only route to that particular oscillator. it's like they looked at the dx7 and said "yep, we want that for a virtual analogue".

the j6 has excuses as it's based on analogue circuitry but I can see no reason for accepting its restrictions in the software age.
Yes but it is red and the wheel is in wood so stop it.... It is awesome. Period.

Post

I agree it's redundant. I sold Nexus because there was nothing there that I couldn't do with Massive or Omnisphere (old versions.)

Post

#metoo!

absynth
form
monark
r6 blocks
zebra
ace
noises

fx, i have even more :o

Return to “Everything Else (Music related)”