im working class to the core! even in time travel situations
Software vs. Analog in 2025 – Has the Balance Shifted?
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
-
- KVRAF
- 26968 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
The irony is in both cases, we would bet all our money, and only then find out it is a parallel world with different outcomes... hehehe
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
dammit! foiled again 
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2068 posts since 13 Dec, 2016
The real limitation back then wasn’t gear. It was no undo button.
Its over for Bitwig--CUBASE WON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- KVRAF
- 7688 posts since 2 Sep, 2019
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
my main limitation in 1980, was being six. not many clubs would let me in to play gigsenCiphered wrote: Fri Jun 06, 2025 7:12 pm The real limitation back then wasn’t gear. It was no undo button.
-
- KVRAF
- 18447 posts since 26 Jun, 2006 from San Francisco Bay Area
Yes and no. I think when you're dealing with sounds that rely on saturated VCAs and VCFs, you find few plugins that can recreate that magic, and when they do (and I do feel like some do) they are computationally hungry. So, for a lot of things I think something like Massive X, Serum 2 or multi/poly hold their own with hardware hybrids, you can easily run out of resources on a crowded track. Having some hardware to play lead roles (not just leads) in a track is helpful. I'd honestly put Korg's 2600 up against any modern hardware analog, but again it's not computationally cheap._leras wrote: Fri Jun 06, 2025 7:26 amFor me though, I think there's still a little extra to get got out of hardware synths in terms of Sonic's and presence in the sound.
Just listening to e.g. software preset examples against 'analog' synths you can feel the difference. I think that for some things my analog/hybrid synths sound better than software.
I can't speak to very high end gear, but I got a bee in my bonnet about building an analog pedalboard for guitar stuff. The zipper noise in Amplitube's wah emulations was bugging me, so I put together a bunch of pedals from Electro-Harmonix, Gamechanger, etc. Good stuff, for sure, but none of it struck me as better than software equivalents. In the end, I sent it all back and got a Line6 HX Stomp Xl, which is identical to the Helix software.For FX, I think it's closer, but for sure hardware distortion still (just) have an edge, and things like analog delays and filters can have a super present sound. But as they are not tone generating it's less important.
I use tons of software 60-80% of instruments and like 97% of FX are software. I surely don't need the analog synths and pedals, but I also feel lucky to have them and appreciate them very much.
*electrons are not alive, and also present in computers.The balance has long shifted, but the moving electrons are still more alive.
Zerocrossing Media
4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~
4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~
-
- KVRAF
- 5271 posts since 2 Jul, 2005
People have been doing modular since always and forever. There is a bunch out there. There's also tons of new software out there. An analog OTA core filter with outputs for each filter type is about the same as it was on the data sheet when those chips were first released. I haven't seen or heard of a neat new analog processing technique in ages. Lots of the cool digital modules are running on a little arm chip or one of the other embedded processors, but I can run that code in my computer as well. I'm not a huge collector. So eurorack never grabbed me. I do enjoy jamming with my buddies on all the modular gear they've collected.vurt wrote: Fri Jun 06, 2025 6:43 pmnot much has happened with anything since the last thread.
not even sure ive passed what i ate since the last thread tbh...
Don't F**K with Mr. Zero.
-
- KVRAF
- 8705 posts since 24 May, 2002 from Tutukaka, New Zealand
Just a few random thoughts:
1.Some sw is very much easier to program than hw - my most glaring examples are Wavestate sand Opsix. I have both in hw and sw and the native ones are so much easier to program than either hw version
2. Most analogue synths however are far easier to program. Give me simple knob-per-parameter analkogues any day. I can run up a patch from scratch way quicker than pages of tedious esoteric details in sw synths.
2. Sw still sounds very thin, brittle and nasty in many cases. I recently did a whole track in sw, none of my analogues in it. TBH it sounded thin, lifeless and glaringly worse than other tracks I do. Example also - Serum, it's added whole gazillions of extra stuff that still sounds thin, metallic, nasty and brittle.
3. Pricewise it's not such a difference nowadays. When you see the price of some of the Behringer stuff and compare to the big sw synths - not so different.
4. Computing power - still very much a limitation. That Steinberg spectral thingy can only [play one note on my laptop. pretty well impossible to play chords, let alone have it run live in a track.
5. FX - sw all the way. I wouldn't go back to hw for either sound or ease of setup. Hw Fx are no easier to program than sw either.
6. FX and computing power - again a huge limitation. A clipper I use kills the laptop when I go to high power oversampling. I have no choice but to render if i want decent oversampling.
7. As mentioned, digital still has sonic limitations. Sync is getting better but still often grating in sw, audio rate mod is just downright awful in sw, ringmod is patchy in a lot of cases. Distortion - hmmmmm nothing sw wows me yet, especially simple things like filter drive - usually lifeless in sw
8. Expense. Yep hw costs more. Having said that, I have a studio full of gear that cost thousands. When I see lists of sw that people have, I strongly doubt they spent any less than I did on my hw. It seems hundreds of plugins is very much the norm. HW collectors get called out for being collectors - sw collectors seem way worse, whereas I get called elitist because I have a few expensive hw items
9. Controllers - don't get me started on those awful things. They're still useless.
10. The one that negates all of the above. I have painless fun using my analogues. Diddling with a mouse for hours in sw synth is both painful AND JOYLESS. That's where it ends for me. No joy in sw, I doubt there ever will be. I do music for fun, my own pleasure. Why would I battle against a pleasureless medium?
1.Some sw is very much easier to program than hw - my most glaring examples are Wavestate sand Opsix. I have both in hw and sw and the native ones are so much easier to program than either hw version
2. Most analogue synths however are far easier to program. Give me simple knob-per-parameter analkogues any day. I can run up a patch from scratch way quicker than pages of tedious esoteric details in sw synths.
2. Sw still sounds very thin, brittle and nasty in many cases. I recently did a whole track in sw, none of my analogues in it. TBH it sounded thin, lifeless and glaringly worse than other tracks I do. Example also - Serum, it's added whole gazillions of extra stuff that still sounds thin, metallic, nasty and brittle.
3. Pricewise it's not such a difference nowadays. When you see the price of some of the Behringer stuff and compare to the big sw synths - not so different.
4. Computing power - still very much a limitation. That Steinberg spectral thingy can only [play one note on my laptop. pretty well impossible to play chords, let alone have it run live in a track.
5. FX - sw all the way. I wouldn't go back to hw for either sound or ease of setup. Hw Fx are no easier to program than sw either.
6. FX and computing power - again a huge limitation. A clipper I use kills the laptop when I go to high power oversampling. I have no choice but to render if i want decent oversampling.
7. As mentioned, digital still has sonic limitations. Sync is getting better but still often grating in sw, audio rate mod is just downright awful in sw, ringmod is patchy in a lot of cases. Distortion - hmmmmm nothing sw wows me yet, especially simple things like filter drive - usually lifeless in sw
8. Expense. Yep hw costs more. Having said that, I have a studio full of gear that cost thousands. When I see lists of sw that people have, I strongly doubt they spent any less than I did on my hw. It seems hundreds of plugins is very much the norm. HW collectors get called out for being collectors - sw collectors seem way worse, whereas I get called elitist because I have a few expensive hw items
9. Controllers - don't get me started on those awful things. They're still useless.
10. The one that negates all of the above. I have painless fun using my analogues. Diddling with a mouse for hours in sw synth is both painful AND JOYLESS. That's where it ends for me. No joy in sw, I doubt there ever will be. I do music for fun, my own pleasure. Why would I battle against a pleasureless medium?
-
- KVRian
- 888 posts since 9 May, 2005
This subject will never have a clear/definitive answer.
Recently, I've gone down the rabbit-hole of trying to make a 100% software rig work for my live needs (70s/80s Rock cover band).
I've invested a LOT of money in computers, MIDI controllers, Gig Performer, and all the more popular virtual-instruments.
My existing live rig (after going thru many hardware instruments) consists of a pair of Nord Stage 4 keyboards (88 on bottom tier, Compact on top tier).
While certainly not perfect, this combination has been extremely effective; best overall sound I've achieved... and allows me to get things done quickly. That's important, as I don't have a lot of free/spare time.
Back to the original question, how particular (picky) do you want to get?
A better question might be, "How picky can you afford to get?"
I don't have any other "hobbies" (I loathe that word)... and I pretty much eat/breath music/technology... so I've allowed myself to acquire a fair amount of gear.
At this point, it's typically, "if one substantial thing comes in... one existing thing goes" to both make physical room and to offset cost.
I'm fairly picky about my sounds... as they're a distillation of many years playing/programming.
Software wise, I think the better Acoustic Pianos sound fantastic... and are a clear winner vs hardware. Synth sound wise, software has come a long way... BUT... if you're extremely particular, I think there is still a gap. There may always be a gap (just like there is with a real acoustic grand piano vs playing a great sample library). Some won't (don't) care... others will find it a major stumbling block.
ie: The software MiniMoog instruments are sounding pretty decent.
When I fire up my Geddy Lee MiniMoog, it's FAR more immediate (fun) to program... and instantly has THAT sound. The software instruments are pretty close... but the real MiniMoog has something a little more.
To my ears, it's more Filter/Envelope/Non-Linear related (vs Oscillators).
Is that difference worth the cost? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
There is no universal correct/right answer.
Playing in the context of a Rock band, I don't need ever-evolving pads... or sounds with mega-modulation options. I need simple Analog type synth sounds... that sound great.
Using Autograph's "Turn Up The Radio" as an example: I need that big/bright/thick, Sawtooth comp sound. With any of my hardware keyboards (and especially the Stage 4), it's quick/easy to dial-up this sound. With software instruments, it's far more tedious to dial-in (even using controllers and touch-screen monitor)... and the end result often sounds more like a modern EDM Rave/Trance super-saw sound (vs a more classic Sawtooth synth sound). The hardware options (even though they're also VA) seem to have a more forgiving top-end. The sawtooth sounds are bright... but not harsh... and (at least the instruments I'm using) don't suffer from much/any aliasing (which can get really nasty on higher notes).
I've been spending a lot of time with Gig Performer 5... mapping virtual-instrument parameters to widgets... and mapping my MIDI controllers.
This takes a fair amount of time/effort.
I don't mind spending that time... if the end result warrants.
Using MIDI controllers certainly makes programming/tweaking more like a dedicated hardware synth... but I have to constantly look at widget labels in Gig Performer... as my MIDI controllers don't have LED labels. Verses programming the Stage 4 (which has dedicated controls for basically everything), it's comparatively slow/tedious.
About MIDI controller keyboards:
I just got a Keylab 88 mk3 and a Novation 61SL mk3.
Got both because they have onboard knobs/faders/pads... well-suited for use with virtual-instruments.
The Keylab 88 mk3 keyboard (thankfully) is less stiff/sluggish than the mk2.
However, I can not get velocity-response to my liking.
I've tweaked the Custom Curve for many hours (comparing directly to M8x and NS4-88).
With Montage M8x and Stage 4-88, velocity response of acoustic pianos (no tweaking involved) is fantastic. Lots of dynamic range... and smooth transitions from softest to loudest notes.
With the Keylab 88 mk3, it always feels like I'm missing shades of dynamics.
Another thing I've noticed (and it's happened too many times to be a fluke or me being obsessive); occasionally a stream of notes will be ever so slightly delayed. It doesn't happen often, but it's really annoying when it does. This has never happened with any of my hardware instruments (whether using onboard sounds or just as a MIDI controller). In my scenario, all keyboards mentioned are connected via USB.
My guess is that Keylab's onboard processor sometimes has issues keeping up.
The issue with not being able to get dynamic (touch) response of the keyboard sounding "right" or smooth/natural is not just limited to MIDI controllers.
The Korg Nautilus 73, and 88 are a good example.
Had them both (still have Nautilus 88AT); the acoustic pianos (dynamic wise) feel like they're in "never never land".
Dynamic response is awkward... and (to my ears) just sounds off/wrong.
No amount of tweaking has resolved the issue.
It's a fundamental thing. For me, it really impedes the playing experience.
Regarding the Nord Stage 4 Compact, I've never particularly cared for its Waterfall style keybed.
They claim it's great for playing organ sounds.
If you've played a recent make Hammond (SK Pro), the Compact's keybed is nothing like the Hammond. With Hammond's keybed, it's far easier to play trills and quick licks.
For most of what I do, the Compact's keybed is fine. The small size/weight and other features are why it stays as my tier-two.
The logistical advantages of software are obvious.
Speaking strictly for myself, if I go 100% software, I don't want to take any steps backward vs my existing hardware rig (latency, sound, programming, etc).
Part of me wishes I was much less particular about everything.
Many folks are running 100% software rigs live (including touring players).
Thus far, I much prefer my dedicated hardware keyboards.
Kronos 3 88 will be here on Tuesday. That will replace the Nautilus 88AT.
I could make the 100% software rig work... and 99% of the audience would likely not notice/care. We try to not make the gig/show about us (the band)... rather it's about the audience and them having a good time.
I guess this is one area of playing live that is "about me".
In the end, play what moves you.
We all have to live within some means.
There also has to be some practical consideration (partly why my M8x stays at home - HUGE/HEAVY).
Bones mentioned being able to fly with his entire rig in carry-on.
The logistics of that has to be amazing.
When we're playing songs like Don't Stop Believing, I need weighted keys... or it sounds really stilted (dynamic wise).
Getting ready to head to a gig tonight.
We'll see what the future holds.
Recently, I've gone down the rabbit-hole of trying to make a 100% software rig work for my live needs (70s/80s Rock cover band).
I've invested a LOT of money in computers, MIDI controllers, Gig Performer, and all the more popular virtual-instruments.
My existing live rig (after going thru many hardware instruments) consists of a pair of Nord Stage 4 keyboards (88 on bottom tier, Compact on top tier).
While certainly not perfect, this combination has been extremely effective; best overall sound I've achieved... and allows me to get things done quickly. That's important, as I don't have a lot of free/spare time.
Back to the original question, how particular (picky) do you want to get?
A better question might be, "How picky can you afford to get?"
I don't have any other "hobbies" (I loathe that word)... and I pretty much eat/breath music/technology... so I've allowed myself to acquire a fair amount of gear.
At this point, it's typically, "if one substantial thing comes in... one existing thing goes" to both make physical room and to offset cost.
I'm fairly picky about my sounds... as they're a distillation of many years playing/programming.
Software wise, I think the better Acoustic Pianos sound fantastic... and are a clear winner vs hardware. Synth sound wise, software has come a long way... BUT... if you're extremely particular, I think there is still a gap. There may always be a gap (just like there is with a real acoustic grand piano vs playing a great sample library). Some won't (don't) care... others will find it a major stumbling block.
ie: The software MiniMoog instruments are sounding pretty decent.
When I fire up my Geddy Lee MiniMoog, it's FAR more immediate (fun) to program... and instantly has THAT sound. The software instruments are pretty close... but the real MiniMoog has something a little more.
To my ears, it's more Filter/Envelope/Non-Linear related (vs Oscillators).
Is that difference worth the cost? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
There is no universal correct/right answer.
Playing in the context of a Rock band, I don't need ever-evolving pads... or sounds with mega-modulation options. I need simple Analog type synth sounds... that sound great.
Using Autograph's "Turn Up The Radio" as an example: I need that big/bright/thick, Sawtooth comp sound. With any of my hardware keyboards (and especially the Stage 4), it's quick/easy to dial-up this sound. With software instruments, it's far more tedious to dial-in (even using controllers and touch-screen monitor)... and the end result often sounds more like a modern EDM Rave/Trance super-saw sound (vs a more classic Sawtooth synth sound). The hardware options (even though they're also VA) seem to have a more forgiving top-end. The sawtooth sounds are bright... but not harsh... and (at least the instruments I'm using) don't suffer from much/any aliasing (which can get really nasty on higher notes).
I've been spending a lot of time with Gig Performer 5... mapping virtual-instrument parameters to widgets... and mapping my MIDI controllers.
This takes a fair amount of time/effort.
I don't mind spending that time... if the end result warrants.
Using MIDI controllers certainly makes programming/tweaking more like a dedicated hardware synth... but I have to constantly look at widget labels in Gig Performer... as my MIDI controllers don't have LED labels. Verses programming the Stage 4 (which has dedicated controls for basically everything), it's comparatively slow/tedious.
About MIDI controller keyboards:
I just got a Keylab 88 mk3 and a Novation 61SL mk3.
Got both because they have onboard knobs/faders/pads... well-suited for use with virtual-instruments.
The Keylab 88 mk3 keyboard (thankfully) is less stiff/sluggish than the mk2.
However, I can not get velocity-response to my liking.
I've tweaked the Custom Curve for many hours (comparing directly to M8x and NS4-88).
With Montage M8x and Stage 4-88, velocity response of acoustic pianos (no tweaking involved) is fantastic. Lots of dynamic range... and smooth transitions from softest to loudest notes.
With the Keylab 88 mk3, it always feels like I'm missing shades of dynamics.
Another thing I've noticed (and it's happened too many times to be a fluke or me being obsessive); occasionally a stream of notes will be ever so slightly delayed. It doesn't happen often, but it's really annoying when it does. This has never happened with any of my hardware instruments (whether using onboard sounds or just as a MIDI controller). In my scenario, all keyboards mentioned are connected via USB.
My guess is that Keylab's onboard processor sometimes has issues keeping up.
The issue with not being able to get dynamic (touch) response of the keyboard sounding "right" or smooth/natural is not just limited to MIDI controllers.
The Korg Nautilus 73, and 88 are a good example.
Had them both (still have Nautilus 88AT); the acoustic pianos (dynamic wise) feel like they're in "never never land".
Dynamic response is awkward... and (to my ears) just sounds off/wrong.
No amount of tweaking has resolved the issue.
It's a fundamental thing. For me, it really impedes the playing experience.
Regarding the Nord Stage 4 Compact, I've never particularly cared for its Waterfall style keybed.
They claim it's great for playing organ sounds.
If you've played a recent make Hammond (SK Pro), the Compact's keybed is nothing like the Hammond. With Hammond's keybed, it's far easier to play trills and quick licks.
For most of what I do, the Compact's keybed is fine. The small size/weight and other features are why it stays as my tier-two.
The logistical advantages of software are obvious.
Speaking strictly for myself, if I go 100% software, I don't want to take any steps backward vs my existing hardware rig (latency, sound, programming, etc).
Part of me wishes I was much less particular about everything.
Many folks are running 100% software rigs live (including touring players).
Thus far, I much prefer my dedicated hardware keyboards.
Kronos 3 88 will be here on Tuesday. That will replace the Nautilus 88AT.
I could make the 100% software rig work... and 99% of the audience would likely not notice/care. We try to not make the gig/show about us (the band)... rather it's about the audience and them having a good time.
I guess this is one area of playing live that is "about me".
In the end, play what moves you.
We all have to live within some means.
There also has to be some practical consideration (partly why my M8x stays at home - HUGE/HEAVY).
Bones mentioned being able to fly with his entire rig in carry-on.
The logistics of that has to be amazing.
When we're playing songs like Don't Stop Believing, I need weighted keys... or it sounds really stilted (dynamic wise).
Getting ready to head to a gig tonight.
We'll see what the future holds.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
yup, but all of that was happening, during the last 20 iterations of this threadAh_Dziz wrote: Sat Jun 07, 2025 12:23 amPeople have been doing modular since always and forever. There is a bunch out there. There's also tons of new software out there. An analog OTA core filter with outputs for each filter type is about the same as it was on the data sheet when those chips were first released. I haven't seen or heard of a neat new analog processing technique in ages. Lots of the cool digital modules are running on a little arm chip or one of the other embedded processors, but I can run that code in my computer as well. I'm not a huge collector. So eurorack never grabbed me. I do enjoy jamming with my buddies on all the modular gear they've collected.vurt wrote: Fri Jun 06, 2025 6:43 pmnot much has happened with anything since the last thread.
not even sure ive passed what i ate since the last thread tbh...
jamming is fun, even alone on modular. so much can go wayward, with the slightest tweak
or you tweak the wrong lfo and wonder why the delay is suddenly going haywire, when you where expecting subtle panning somewhere 
so much fun
-
- KVRAF
- 5271 posts since 2 Jul, 2005
I'm with you Vurt. Just not enough to spend the time money and space. I do quite enjoy working things up in out of control ways in software for the same reasons. It's far cheaper and less time consuming as well.
The only hardware I'm into fiddling with these days is some guitar effects I've been building with my son. We've been doing lots of abusing ttl logic chips for octave effects and fuzz. We have half of a 4 pole wah with a core made from logic inverters on the bread board now. I got hung up trying to find fast enough LDRs to add voltage control for some lfos.
The only hardware I'm into fiddling with these days is some guitar effects I've been building with my son. We've been doing lots of abusing ttl logic chips for octave effects and fuzz. We have half of a 4 pole wah with a core made from logic inverters on the bread board now. I got hung up trying to find fast enough LDRs to add voltage control for some lfos.
Don't F**K with Mr. Zero.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111297 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
awesome! dunno how old he is, but father son bonding sessions are greatAh_Dziz wrote: Sat Jun 07, 2025 7:26 pm
The only hardware I'm into fiddling with these days is some guitar effects I've been building with my son. We've been doing lots of abusing ttl logic chips for octave effects and fuzz. We have half of a 4 pole wah with a core made from logic inverters on the bread board now. I got hung up trying to find fast enough LDRs to add voltage control for some lfos.
mines 30, so im doing the fun stuff with two granddaughters these days (5 and 3) cant wait till theyre old enough to reach the rack