Software vs. Analog in 2025 – Has the Balance Shifted?

[zerocrossing]

I find it so telling that nary a comment is made about all the demos shown where software is sounding awfully similar to the hardware it's emulating. Not a peep about how when they are off, it's not always considered worse. How the one person who took the blind test I posted isn't one of the "hardware is always better" cult members. Identical to other times I've posted things to people making absolute claims. Ignored. Always ignored. "X is the best!" "Can you tell the difference between X and Y in this demo?" [crickets]

Anyway, I may as well argue politics with bots on X. Someone who came to their stance without evidence won't be swayed by evidence. This is human nature. Anyway, I love hardware, I love software. I even think the Moog One can't be properly modeled with current CPU limitations. Not and maintain as high an analog modeling standard and maintain 16 voices with that kind of modulation ability and effects.

But the plugins that are easily as good, and in some ways better as my analog hardware have limited voice counts. The ones that interject a lot of modulation in a similar manner to a Moog One will break at extreme settings. I've said why I passed over it, and I'd still not consider it. If you're charging $10,000 and can't be bothered to implement the full MIDI spec, I say, "good day sir." I'll wait until Behringer copies it and sells it for $1,200 and laugh at everyone who tells me how wobbly the knobs are.

[zerocrossing]

What am I supposedly uniformed over? It's 3 Oscillators per voice x 16 voices for a total of 48, sorry 3 Oscillators going into a ladder filter is boring as hell

I'm going to side with the hardware cult on this one. That's pretty reductionist. There is also an analog state variable filter per voice as well, ring mod, three EGs, four LFOs, 3 way oscillator w/hard sync and filter FM on both filters. Nicely implemented mod matrix and an Eventide effects processor. As I've said, I don't think CPUs are powerful enough to make that a reality in software for 16 voices.

I want 6 per going into a ladder filter with MSEG and MPE. I also want unlimited polyphony. I get that with software, the $10,000 Moog One is a joke and doesn't come close. It's only powerful if you compare it to other weak hardware synths

There's no such thing as "unlimited voices," and you know it.

Shall we compare the specs of that with HALion7. I can use it to make an analog style patch with 768 oscillators if I wanted with unlimited polyphony. Shall we then talk about Falcon?

There's a lot of daylight between "analog" and "analog style." It seems like you don't care about actual analog character that much, which is fine. It's really just another flavor, but if you're looking to get it in a very high degree, you will find yourself limited by features and voice count, and CPU load will be high. As you go into higher note ranges, things like filter FM will start sounding pretty terrible on something like Minimonsta 2. Totally usable in lower ranges, though. Anyway, acceptable to me for many things, but we should not say that these things are equal.

[jlgrimes11]

I find it so telling that nary a comment is made about all the demos shown where software is sounding awfully similar to the hardware it's emulating. Not a peep about how when they are off, it's not always considered worse. How the one person who took the blind test I posted isn't one of the "hardware is always better" cult members. Identical to other times I've posted things to people making absolute claims. Ignored. Always ignored. "X is the best!" "Can you tell the difference between X and Y in this demo?" [crickets]

Anyway, I may as well argue politics with bots on X. Someone who came to their stance without evidence won't be swayed by evidence. This is human nature. Anyway, I love hardware, I love software. I even think the Moog One can't be properly modeled with current CPU limitations. Not and maintain as high an analog modeling standard and maintain 16 voices with that kind of modulation ability and effects.

But the plugins that are easily as good, and in some ways better as my analog hardware have limited voice counts. The ones that interject a lot of modulation in a similar manner to a Moog One will break at extreme settings. I've said why I passed over it, and I'd still not consider it. If you're charging $10,000 and can't be bothered to implement the full MIDI spec, I say, "good day sir." I'll wait until Behringer copies it and sells it for $1,200 and laugh at everyone who tells me how wobbly the knobs are.

Yes.

I remember about 20 or so years ago there difference was fairly obvious.

Arturia had a promotional video of one of their synths in like 2005 and on fairly simple patches it was fairly easy to distinguish.

It is less so these days. There are times now going to stores playing real analogs liking the sounds but realizing I have VSTis at home that does those sounds.

That was often less the case in the earlier years. I think alot of naysayers still have those memories of 2003 when we were told these VSTis were supposed to sound like the hardware.


There are still differences namely in FM on Analog synths where emulations can break down but there are VSTIS that specialize in that type of stuff.

[IvyBirds]

What am I supposedly uniformed over? It's 3 Oscillators per voice x 16 voices for a total of 48, sorry 3 Oscillators going into a ladder filter is boring as hell

I'm going to side with the hardware cult on this one. That's pretty reductionist. There is also an analog state variable filter per voice as well, ring mod, three EGs, four LFOs, 3 way oscillator w/hard sync and filter FM on both filters. Nicely implemented mod matrix and an Eventide effects processor. As I've said, I don't think CPUs are powerful enough to make that a reality in software for 16 voices.

Sure they are why wouldn't they be?

I want 6 per going into a ladder filter with MSEG and MPE. I also want unlimited polyphony. I get that with software, the $10,000 Moog One is a joke and doesn't come close. It's only powerful if you compare it to other weak hardware synths

There's no such thing as "unlimited voices," and you know it.

Sure there is, and it's easy to pull off with software. Even if the developers of a plugin have limited its polyphony you can just run multiple instances. In this case we are talking about "The Legend HZ". Synapse has given it 12 voices of poly. All I need to do is run two instances of the same patch and have 24 voices. That it 8 more than Moog One. All I have to do is set up a split or MIDI filter. The playing experience would be transparent. Especially as I only have 10 fingers

I can then add another and I have 36, add another and I have 48, I can keep on going indefinitely and have unlimited polyphony. My most recent PC could easily run 20 or more instances. That's 240 voices of polyphony. Moog One ships with a 61 key keyboard. That 240 voices of polyphony would mean I can make a layered patch with 4 layers and trigger it with pretty much every single key of that keyboard with no issues

If I want more than that, I can just add another computer as a DSP Server on the network, need more than both of those combined? I can add a third and then fourth. Again that's the power of software, but before I add a DSP Server I have already exceeded the available polyphony if the Moog One by 4x, and could probably do it by 5 or 6 times at least

Shall we compare the specs of that with HALion7. I can use it to make an analog style patch with 768 oscillators if I wanted with unlimited polyphony. Shall we then talk about Falcon?

There's a lot of daylight between "analog" and "analog style." It seems like you don't care about actual analog character that much, which is fine. It's really just another flavor

Only I wasn't ask about character I was given a list of specs to compare. But please define what "analog character" is and tell me how we measure and quantify it? If it exists please explain if this mythical "analog character" is the same for every analog synth. If that is true why would anyone drop $10 Grand on a Moog One when you can get a 16 voice Analog Poly like the Behringer UB-Xa brand new for 1/10th of that?

If we can't measure it or quantify it, and if that same mythical "character" doesn't exist on every analog synth, than its not an "analog" thing at all. What you are saying is that the Moog One sounds different than your Deepmind did even though they were both analog synths. You are saying the Moog One Sounds different than the Prophet 10 resissue, and the Moog One Sounds Different than a Jupiter 8 and of course the Moog One sounds different than the VA Synth inside of HALion7

So what! Again I was given a list of specs nothing more nothing less. If we are going to compare the specs of even the most expensive modern polly, to software, software wins easily

Now if you want to talk about a very specific sound, awesome then we are down to discussing what you as an individual find pleasing which is fine, but that must certainly is subjective and doesn't translate even among hardware synths and it then becomes a conversation about Synths in general


,

but if you're looking to get it in a very high degree, you will find yourself limited by features and voice count, and CPU load will be high. As you go into higher note ranges, things like filter FM will start sounding pretty terrible on something like Minimonsta 2. Totally usable in lower ranges, though. Anyway, acceptable to me for many things, but we should not say that these things are equal.

Awesome so every analog synth can do those things? I have a Behringer Model D in my closet as well as a Volca Keys. Both of those are Analog Synths tell me how I do that

[whassup]

It has nothing to do with him being German.
But it might have helped a bit.
Hilarious to the core.

[zerocrossing]

I find it so telling that nary a comment is made about all the demos shown where software is sounding awfully similar to the hardware it's emulating. Not a peep about how when they are off, it's not always considered worse. How the one person who took the blind test I posted isn't one of the "hardware is always better" cult members. Identical to other times I've posted things to people making absolute claims. Ignored. Always ignored. "X is the best!" "Can you tell the difference between X and Y in this demo?" [crickets]

Anyway, I may as well argue politics with bots on X. Someone who came to their stance without evidence won't be swayed by evidence. This is human nature. Anyway, I love hardware, I love software. I even think the Moog One can't be properly modeled with current CPU limitations. Not and maintain as high an analog modeling standard and maintain 16 voices with that kind of modulation ability and effects.

But the plugins that are easily as good, and in some ways better as my analog hardware have limited voice counts. The ones that interject a lot of modulation in a similar manner to a Moog One will break at extreme settings. I've said why I passed over it, and I'd still not consider it. If you're charging $10,000 and can't be bothered to implement the full MIDI spec, I say, "good day sir." I'll wait until Behringer copies it and sells it for $1,200 and laugh at everyone who tells me how wobbly the knobs are.

Yes.

I remember about 20 or so years ago there difference was fairly obvious.

Arturia had a promotional video of one of their synths in like 2005 and on fairly simple patches it was fairly easy to distinguish.

It is less so these days. There are times now going to stores playing real analogs liking the sounds but realizing I have VSTis at home that does those sounds.

That was often less the case in the earlier years. I think alot of naysayers still have those memories of 2003 when we were told these VSTis were supposed to sound like the hardware.


There are still differences namely in FM on Analog synths where emulations can break down but there are VSTIS that specialize in that type of stuff.

Oh sure. The Arturia stuff was notoriously bad. I remember demoing them and I was making notes to figure out what to spend with my budget, and I think I wrote something like, "dead sounding." I'd also say that even in modern times, their emulations are... off. Don't get me wrong, they are very capable of making some great sounds, and Prophet VS V is spot on, but some of their stuff sounds a bit weak at extreme settings/range. Some of the legacy plugins still haven't been updated, like the Moog Modular. (that was always one of the better ones, though, IMO) What is great about them is their modulation systems, which IMO excuses any lack of detail in the emulation quality. I just think of them as their own thing.

[zerocrossing]

What am I supposedly uniformed over? It's 3 Oscillators per voice x 16 voices for a total of 48, sorry 3 Oscillators going into a ladder filter is boring as hell

I'm going to side with the hardware cult on this one. That's pretty reductionist. There is also an analog state variable filter per voice as well, ring mod, three EGs, four LFOs, 3 way oscillator w/hard sync and filter FM on both filters. Nicely implemented mod matrix and an Eventide effects processor. As I've said, I don't think CPUs are powerful enough to make that a reality in software for 16 voices.

Sure they are why wouldn't they be?

I want 6 per going into a ladder filter with MSEG and MPE. I also want unlimited polyphony. I get that with software, the $10,000 Moog One is a joke and doesn't come close. It's only powerful if you compare it to other weak hardware synths

There's no such thing as "unlimited voices," and you know it.

Sure there is, and it's easy to pull off with software. Even if the developers of a plugin have limited its polyphony you can just run multiple instances. In this case we are talking about "The Legend HZ". Synapse has given it 12 voices of poly. All I need to do is run two instances of the same patch and have 24 voices. That it 8 more than Moog One. All I have to do is set up a split or MIDI filter. The playing experience would be transparent. Especially as I only have 10 fingers

I can then add another and I have 36, add another and I have 48, I can keep on going indefinitely and have unlimited polyphony. My most recent PC could easily run 20 or more instances. That's 240 voices of polyphony. Moog One ships with a 61 key keyboard. That 240 voices of polyphony would mean I can make a layered patch with 4 layers and trigger it with pretty much every single key of that keyboard with no issues

If I want more than that, I can just add another computer as a DSP Server on the network, need more than both of those combined? I can add a third and then fourth. Again that's the power of software, but before I add a DSP Server I have already exceeded the available polyphony if the Moog One by 4x, and could probably do it by 5 or 6 times at least

Shall we compare the specs of that with HALion7. I can use it to make an analog style patch with 768 oscillators if I wanted with unlimited polyphony. Shall we then talk about Falcon?

There's a lot of daylight between "analog" and "analog style." It seems like you don't care about actual analog character that much, which is fine. It's really just another flavor

Only I wasn't ask about character I was given a list of specs to compare. But please define what "analog character" is and tell me how we measure and quantify it? If it exists please explain if this mythical "analog character" is the same for every analog synth. If that is true why would anyone drop $10 Grand on a Moog One when you can get a 16 voice Analog Poly like the Behringer UB-Xa brand new for 1/10th of that?

If we can't measure it or quantify it, and if that same mythical "character" doesn't exist on every analog synth, than its not an "analog" thing at all. What you are saying is that the Moog One sounds different than your Deepmind did even though they were both analog synths. You are saying the Moog One Sounds different than the Prophet 10 resissue, and the Moog One Sounds Different than a Jupiter 8 and of course the Moog One sounds different than the VA Synth inside of HALion7

So what! Again I was given a list of specs nothing more nothing less. If we are going to compare the specs of even the most expensive modern polly, to software, software wins easily

Now if you want to talk about a very specific sound, awesome then we are down to discussing what you as an individual find pleasing which is fine, but that must certainly is subjective and doesn't translate even among hardware synths and it then becomes a conversation about Synths in general


,

but if you're looking to get it in a very high degree, you will find yourself limited by features and voice count, and CPU load will be high. As you go into higher note ranges, things like filter FM will start sounding pretty terrible on something like Minimonsta 2. Totally usable in lower ranges, though. Anyway, acceptable to me for many things, but we should not say that these things are equal.

Awesome so every analog synth can do those things? I have a Behringer Model D in my closet as well as a Volca Keys. Both of those are Analog Synths tell me how I do that

I'm not going to go back and explain everything, but you're not thinking about this correctly.

[IvyBirds]

I'm not going to go back and explain everything, but you're not thinking about this correctly.

Sure I am. I was given this list of specs

"There are something like 14,000 components in the Moog One which together add up to 48 oscillators and 32 filters on no fewer than 16 printed circuit boards, plus three arpeggiators and three sequencers, five effects units, all comprising three separate polyphonic synthesizers"

Those specs are EASILY outdone with software, but let's go through them one by one

1.)1400 components? I have 25 billion transistors just in my CPU

2.)48 Oscillators? Wow that's three per voice. Wow am I supposed to be impressed by that? As I said I want 6 running into a ladder filter per voice

3.)32 filters? Wow am I supposed to be impressed by 2 per voice? I can think of dozens of plugins that meet or exceed that and even offer multiple types

4.)16 PCBs or one per voice. Again am I supposed to be impressed by the fact they used 1970s technology and have the resultant heat issues so they have to use a fan so we have fan noise? Again with my software based setup I don't have that issue

5.)Three arpeggiators? I can't begin to to express how much of a total joke that is compared to what's available in software and not just in total count but in feature sets as well

6.)Three sequencers? Wow three whole sequencers with a pathetic 64 step limit, again I can't even begin to express how much of a total joke that is compared with software options

7.)five effects units? Wow should I be impressed with the Eventide Effects? They are software based you know? I have a shit ton of Eventide Effects I can run on anything as software in my system, and not just Eventide I have world class effects from Strymon, Lexicon, Valhalla and many many more having 5 from one vendor is a joke

And you can use all of that to split your 16 voices of polyphony into three separate Synths with greatly reduced polyphony, again I am supposed to be impressed? I can run 20 instances if the Legend HZ and get 20 polyphonic Synths with full polyphony

What am I missing? Oh that's right MPE I would be missing that with the Moog One. How about the looooooong warmup time to have stable tuning? You got me there if you want that the Moog One is the way to go, I don't have any warmup time so I don't miss having to wait just to play things in tune.

Maybe it's something else I am not thinking about correctly?

[pekbro]

[vurt]

It has nothing to do with him being German.
But it might have helped a bit.
Hilarious to the core.

the "monster" face, reminds me of this...

[whassup]

It has nothing to do with him being German.
But it might have helped a bit.
Hilarious to the core.

the "monster" face, reminds me of this...

Yes! Malkovic!

[zerocrossing]

Maybe it's something else I am not thinking about correctly?

That is correct. I don’t know the science behind it, but for whatever reason, audio distortion is very resource intensive to do well. The analog signal path of an analog synthesizer seems to have a number of places where it happens, like overloading the VCA or VCF. That’s different than a global distortion effect, because it’s per voice. This is also why, in the past, self oscillating filters were not great. Companies like Arturia seemed to find a way around this by band limiting the spectrum to limit aliasing, but this made things sound muted in the highs. Their new plugins seem to have less band limiting and are internally oversampling.

If you read my diatribe about matching my ATC-X, you’ll see that only one plugin, nailed it. And I mean, really nailed it. I guarantee no one here would be able to tell the difference, and I’m doing filter FM with some resonance. That plugin, UAD’s Minimoog, is a single voice. It makes sense to assume that they weren’t able to nail it and get that degree of accuracy at high voice counts. I’ve done this test with The Legend, and it’s not quite as good. This is doubly true for the famous Minimoog feedback trick. UAD does great, and everyone else… not so much.

Should you care? No, and evidently you don’t, but for the record, I’m not making this up. Starsky Carr does a similar shoot-out and comes to the same conclusions, so I’m just “peer reviewing” his experiment. It’s repeatable.

[IvyBirds]

Maybe it's something else I am not thinking about correctly?

That is correct. I don’t know the science behind it, but for whatever reason, audio distortion is very resource intensive to do well. The analog signal path of an analog synthesizer seems to have a number of places where it happens, like overloading the VCA or VCF. That’s different than a global distortion effect, because it’s per voice. This is also why, in the past, self oscillating filters were not great. Companies like Arturia seemed to find a way around this by band limiting the spectrum to limit aliasing, but this made things sound muted in the highs. Their new plugins seem to have less band limiting and are internally oversampling.

If you read my diatribe about matching my ATC-X, you’ll see that only one plugin, nailed it. And I mean, really nailed it. I guarantee no one here would be able to tell the difference, and I’m doing filter FM with some resonance. That plugin, UAD’s Minimoog, is a single voice. It makes sense to assume that they weren’t able to nail it and get that degree of accuracy at high voice counts. I’ve done this test with The Legend, and it’s not quite as good. This is doubly true for the famous Minimoog feedback trick. UAD does great, and everyone else… not so much.

Should you care? No, and evidently you don’t, but for the record, I’m not making this up. Starsky Carr does a similar shoot-out and comes to the same conclusions, so I’m just “peer reviewing” his experiment. It’s repeatable.

And I get that, I really do, and I appreciate that you are into that but again "distortion" and "saturation" is not something that was presented in the list I was provided

When listening to demos of the Moog One I don't really any examples of that and I don't really hear people talking about that, and I have never heard of anyone dropping $10 Grand on a Moog One for its Distortion capabilities, maybe they do I don't know. Honestly I don't see very many people at all dropping $10 grand on one and view it just like the Alesis Andromeda for Alesis, the Moog One resulted in the final nail in the financial coffin for Moog

For me personally I haven't been enamored with that in forever. I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s hard rock and metal scene, and played keys in many hard rock and metal bands. So it's not like I don't appreciate analog distortion, but it reminds me of my metal guitar friends arguing over which Vintage 30 the green backs or the black backs sound better and if you should put them in a Marshall, Mesa Boogie, or Peavy Cabinet, or the need to have certain woods on your neck for proper tone. I get the fact that they care immensely for such things but the audience down at the bar I played at tonight certainly didn't give two shits about that or the fact I used a "The Legend HZ" on my laptop to play the Minimoog solo when we covered ELP's Lucky Man either. But my back enjoyed showing up with two lightweight Arturia Controllers over the 40 pound beast that is the Moog One

[kevinsparks]

a-simpsons-podcast-may-have-revealed-the-identity-of-the-v0-OsotHSvvP4Jx37yvnydlU3v4tAvRSUtmIiSks1YUKwc.jpg

[zerocrossing]

Maybe it's something else I am not thinking about correctly?

That is correct. I don’t know the science behind it, but for whatever reason, audio distortion is very resource intensive to do well. The analog signal path of an analog synthesizer seems to have a number of places where it happens, like overloading the VCA or VCF. That’s different than a global distortion effect, because it’s per voice. This is also why, in the past, self oscillating filters were not great. Companies like Arturia seemed to find a way around this by band limiting the spectrum to limit aliasing, but this made things sound muted in the highs. Their new plugins seem to have less band limiting and are internally oversampling.

If you read my diatribe about matching my ATC-X, you’ll see that only one plugin, nailed it. And I mean, really nailed it. I guarantee no one here would be able to tell the difference, and I’m doing filter FM with some resonance. That plugin, UAD’s Minimoog, is a single voice. It makes sense to assume that they weren’t able to nail it and get that degree of accuracy at high voice counts. I’ve done this test with The Legend, and it’s not quite as good. This is doubly true for the famous Minimoog feedback trick. UAD does great, and everyone else… not so much.

Should you care? No, and evidently you don’t, but for the record, I’m not making this up. Starsky Carr does a similar shoot-out and comes to the same conclusions, so I’m just “peer reviewing” his experiment. It’s repeatable.

And I get that, I really do, and I appreciate that you are into that but again "distortion" and "saturation" is not something that was presented in the list I was provided

When listening to demos of the Moog One I don't really any examples of that and I don't really hear people talking about that, and I have never heard of anyone dropping $10 Grand on a Moog One for its Distortion capabilities, maybe they do I don't know. Honestly I don't see very many people at all dropping $10 grand on one and view it just like the Alesis Andromeda for Alesis, the Moog One resulted in the final nail in the financial coffin for Moog

For me personally I haven't been enamored with that in forever. I grew up in the 1970s and 1980s hard rock and metal scene, and played keys in many hard rock and metal bands. So it's not like I don't appreciate analog distortion, but it reminds me of my metal guitar friends arguing over which Vintage 30 the green backs or the black backs sound better and if you should put them in a Marshall, Mesa Boogie, or Peavy Cabinet, or the need to have certain woods on your neck for proper tone. I get the fact that they care immensely for such things but the audience down at the bar I played at tonight certainly didn't give two shits about that or the fact I used a "The Legend HZ" on my laptop to play the Minimoog solo when we covered ELP's Lucky Man either. But my back enjoyed showing up with two lightweight Arturia Controllers over the 40 pound beast that is the Moog One

When I talk about distortion, I'm not necessarily talking about what you hear from cranking the gain up on a Mesa Dual Rectifier, though it can be, but it's usually a lot more subtile, and I can hear it all over One demos, and it's all over Legend HZ as well. It's more like a pushed preamp. It's why you'd use it over some other VA plugin. It can get pretty dirty if you engage the feedback.

Anyway, I'm not trying to sell Moog Ones, that's for sure. I'm just trying to make this conversation as precise as we can. If you want a Moog One in software, I don't think we're really there... yet. Not because it's impossible, but because computers don't commonly have the resources to run it, at least at the same time as a DAW, and all the other plugins needed in a modern production. But all the music made prior to the release of the Moog One was made without it, so it's clear that it's not necessary. Now, what you could do is make a 1-4 voice Moog One with Softube Modular that I bet would nail it. Throw some Eventide plugins after it and off you go. I'll never have a One in my possession to see, but some industrious influencer could do it and make a video. The issue is, no one with a Moog One will dare do that because it would devalue their property.