Don't dismiss "older" synths (f.e. Zebra 2)

[eLawnMust]

I still use Zebra 2, Pentagon, Z3TA+, Rapture plus more... Don't see them lacking in the FX part... If you are really nit-picking the sound then you probably are a desktop dabbler... The musical can make great music without great sounding synths... Ever listen to good folk, ethnic, jazz, etc? Good stuff without 'fat sounds'...

Remember that newer synths are about sales, it's a friggin' business & they are all hoping/betting you won't go compare the old to the new...

[koalaboy]

One thing I've noticed is that older synths often have far less effects/processing as well, and as such tend to sound thinner or 'not as good' perhaps,

So not true....

You are obviously welcome to your opinion, as I am to mine. I'm just stating how I perceive many newer vs older plugins, and I have plenty to choose from.

By all means, be happy with whatever you use, but don't believe that your opinion is any more 'true' than others.

(And just in case there's any doubt, I am not diminishing 'older' synths. I use many of them as they are my favourites. I'm just pointing out that more modern 'marketing' and preset design often cater to the current sound expectations and therefore can make older presets sound less 'relevant')

[koalaboy]

I still use Zebra 2, Pentagon, Z3TA+, Rapture plus more... Don't see them lacking in the FX part... If you are really nit-picking the sound then you probably are a desktop dabbler... The musical can make great music without great sounding synths... Ever listen to good folk, ethnic, jazz, etc? Good stuff without 'fat sounds'...

I don't know if this was aimed at my post, which seems to have been misinterpreted, but again to clarify, I did not mean they lack in FX or processing capacity (generally - obviously some new innovations have come along), but more that the presets they ship with and/or the demos that may be presented (made at the time) are not produced to the same sonic character as more modern synths, and so anyone listening (without actually diving in), which is quite common as there is more 'choice', may find them to feel 'not as good'.

The only true way to know how capable a synth is, is to personally try it. However, we all know that marketing and 'Influencers' hold far more power these days, along with shortened attentions spans, and so that can be a constraint on older synths, especially as many people have less funds and/or want to 'keep up' with the latest things.

It's also not just about sound (although that's the main focus) but User Experience, and as we see with phones and other apps, an older experience or less usability can add to the perception of 'bad' despite it not being about the sound.

[Teksonik]

Age, at least after a certain point in soft synth development, has become less and less meaningful, to the point where it's meaningless today. Newer doesn't equate to better or come even close. At this point in the game, the age of most synths is about as important as what color the control knobs are.

So the quality of sound in soft synth's has not evolved at all in the last 20 years? If that was true it would be very sad indeed. Luckily it's not true.

So you're saying Zebra 3 will not sound any better than Zebra 2 which was first released in 2005? If that were going to be true a dozen years of development would be wasted. Like I said Zebra 2 is still a fantastic synth but I rarely if ever use it in a project these days because the newer options in my collection are simply superior.

Same with Sylenth 1 (2007). Still a great sounding synth but not nearly as great sounding as the other modern options I have and so on.

Newer doesn't equate to better or come even close.

It does here in most cases. That's why all the synths I use in every project are more recent releases or have been frequently updated and upgraded over the years.

For example I no longer use the original DUNE (2010), I have progressed over the years to using DUNE 3 because it's a far superior sounding synth with a far wider range of sounds than the original. DUNE 3 was released in 2018 but has received countless updates and upgrades over the years (unlike some other synths).

Like I said before use whatever sounds best to you regardless of age but to say there has been no evolution in the sound of soft synths over the last two decades or even in the last few years is just plain incorrect.

[Teksonik]

The musical can make great music without great sounding synths.

Then it's logical to think that "the musical" can make even greater music with great sounding synths.

Remember that newer synths are about sales, it's a friggin' business & they are all hoping/betting you won't go compare the old to the new...

All those older synths you mentioned were "about sales" as well in their day because even back then it was "a friggin' business".

they are all hoping/betting you won't go compare the old to the new.

I always compare the old with the new. That's why I end up buying the new because they are in most cases superior to me.

Once again use whatever you like best but don't make the mistake of thinking that the sound quality of soft synths has not improved over the years.

Can one make great music with old synths? Absolutely but then again it stands to reason one can make better sounding music with better sounding tools.

[mixyguy2]

You are obviously welcome to your opinion, as I am to mine. I'm just stating how I perceive many newer vs older plugins, and I have plenty to choose from.

By all means, be happy with whatever you use, but don't believe that your opinion is any more 'true' than others.

Likewise. But I suspect that you (or I or anyone else) would fail a blind test with flying colors.

[mixyguy2]

So the quality of sound in soft synth's has not evolved at all in the last 20 years? If that was true it would be very sad indeed. Luckily it's not true.

Also happily not what I said.

So you're saying Zebra 3 will not sound any better than Zebra 2 which was first released in 2005? If that were going to be true a dozen years of development would be wasted.

No it won't, because people will buy it regardless of how much better it is or isn't because it's new, and newer is better, or so they assume. It may or may not be true to varying degrees. I remember when Massive X came out and many people felt the earlier version was better. Newer things can be better, but they aren't automatically so, to say the least.

Newer doesn't equate to better or come even close.

It does here in most cases.

I would question "most cases," but the devil is in the details.

Like I said before use whatever sounds best to you regardless of age but to say there has been no evolution in the sound of soft synths over the last two decades or even in the last few years is just plain incorrect.

And again, not what I said.

[buffalo roam]

Alchemy (although restricted to Logic Pro) is still great and very versatile. So is Halion (not restricted to any one DAW). Omnisphere appears dated, but presets I hear on YouTube sound wonderful and have me saving up for it.

[Teksonik]

So you're saying Zebra 3 will not sound any better than Zebra 2 which was first released in 2005? If that were going to be true a dozen years of development would be wasted.

No it won't, because people will buy it regardless of how much better it is or isn't because it's new, and newer is better, or so they assume. It may or may not be true to varying degrees.

No, people will buy Zebra 3 because it's better than the twenty year old Zebra 2. People are already heaping praise on Zebralette 3 because it's a huge improvement on the older version. To think that Zebra 3 will not be a similar improvement is just not logical.

If you don't want upgrade that's fine but don't insult the intelligence of those who do by saying that they'll buy it blindly just because it's new.

Like I said before use whatever sounds best to you regardless of age but to say there has been no evolution in the sound of soft synths over the last two decades or even in the last few years is just plain incorrect.

And again, not what I said.

Here is what you said:

Newer doesn't equate to better or come even close.

You can try to walk that statement back or move the goal posts to further your argument but what you wrote in that sentence is incorrect. Period.

Now am I trying to say that every new synth is better than every old synth? No of course not but generally speaking evolution is a positive thing as developers become more skilled and CPUs become more powerful to handle new code.

I can't think of a single 20 year old synth I would use over a modern option and you can question that all you want. It won't change that fact one bit.

[mixyguy2]

No, people will buy Zebra 3 because it's better than the twenty year old Zebra 2.

That is opinion, not fact. And people will buy that because they assume it's true, not because they know it. PS it may very well be so, but it's not a given.

And some will buy it simply because it's a new, a new shiny toy with no clue if it's any better. If you don't think anyone is like that, you are tragically ignorant about people.

People are already heaping praise on Zebralette 3 because it's a huge improvement on the older version. To think that Zebra 3 will not be a similar improvement is just not logical.

It's your logic that needs work. "This was true for X, so it must be true for Y" doesn't hold up.

If you don't want upgrade that's fine but don't insult the intelligence of those who do by saying that they'll buy it blindly just because it's new.

That's true of some people, not all. This is not exactly a rare occurrence. For ex. it's the same with new versions of Windows, despite their highly spotty track record. If you want to pretend that isn't true, whatever, have fun.

Like I said before use whatever sounds best to you regardless of age but to say there has been no evolution in the sound of soft synths over the last two decades or even in the last few years is just plain incorrect.

And again, not what I said.

Here is what you said: Newer doesn't equate to better or come even close.
You can try to walk that statement back or move the goal posts to further your argument but what you wrote in that sentence is incorrect. Period.

And you think that equates to "there has been no evolution in the sound of soft synths over the last two decades or even in the last few years?" No walking back or goal post moving. Your reading comprehension needs work.

I can't think of a single 20 year old synth I would use over a modern option and you can question that all you want. It won't change that fact one bit.

Good for you. I don't think which synth works best has anything to do with how new or old it is and to favor something even a little just because it's newer is IMO ridiculous. I judge something based on its own merits, not its age...but to each their own.

[Alexander_D]

Zebra is an amazing synth! One of the best for me. Still use it with old Massive synth. For me the old Massive is better than Massive X.

[stoopicus]

Diva is still one of my main synths. For drums, Microtonic.

SQ-80V did replace SQ8L though.

[SebAV]

Diva is still one of my main synths. For drums, Microtonic.

When soft synths have reach such a level of quality, they’re becoming « Classic », « iconic », so they stop being compared to anything. So « old » doesn’t mean anything anymore.
Microtonic could improve on the sequencer and workflow although. Its UI/UX is quite « old » But the sound and synthesis are just great !
I don’t have Diva but I think Repro-5 is in the same league : a Classic model of a Classic synth.

[stoopicus]

Yes Repro is awesome too, have it as well. u-he doesn't make a bad product.

[markello]

I don’t listen to sounds much, I listen to music much more. Processed, effected, mixed, arranged. Music.

And for 99% of what I listen to, an old guitar could replace/be replaced by a new guitar, an old mic could replace/be replaced by a new mic, an old synth could replace/be replaced by a new synth. Those elements, on their own, are not what carries the most weight in the music I listen to.

Of course old synths still have a place.