Softube CS-80 ? - Model 77 Dual Layer Synth

[Dombaeb]

As for me, I came to Softube synthesizers precisely because I was tired of digging into uber digital synthesizers that can do everything at once. If you try to push Softube ones with sound design and strange unconventional actions, you will notice that their virtual components interact with each other *almost* like real ones. This is a great achievement. I really hope that Softube will build on their success and expertise in analog synthesizer modeling further.

[zvenx]

....

Some people view Softube emulations very highly, but they're pretty expensive and rudimentary compared to what's offered from competitors. In my opinion, they aim for a romanticized, exaggerated vintage sound rather than what's accurate, and the UIs are unnecessarily limited.

Definitely wouldn't consider them expensive, because they usually have a decent intro price and their sale prices are 'outrageous' ($35 come on)...
But you may be stating why i love them so..
I haven't had the opportunity to compare them to the actual hardware, except in my memory, and maybe they are exaggerated romanticized and probably that may be why I think they are the best sounding virutal analog emulations... and the UI and lack of much extra than the original hardware, is why I love them too.. of course I wish the Model 84 had an arp, and in general they had more polyphony than the hardware... but the no effects and no fancy extra modulation etc.. is part of what I love about them.
Different strokes for different folks.
rsp

[bonch]

Perhaps it's the appropriate angle for them to take. A "mix-ready" romanticized flavor that matches nostalgic expectations and sounds good.

[jtsterays]

Nothing wrong with romanticized flavor, infact these softube synths sound f*cking beautiful. The problem is that people keep calling these synths the peak of accurate analog modelling when they're not. The more accurate ones, which sound more lame are then called inferior emulations, bashing the efforts that were put into those. People are mistaking the movie/cinema look as real life.

[twal]

Nothing wrong with romanticized flavor, infact these softube synths sound f*cking beautiful. The problem is that people keep calling these synths the peak of accurate analog modelling when they're not. The more accurate ones, which sound more lame are then called inferior emulations, bashing the efforts that were put into those. People are mistaking the movie/cinema look as real life.

That makes sense and has brought a lot of clarity to the situation for me. A lot of the "lame sounding" synths people on kvr call out, a lot of the time are the ones actual artists praise. It's one of the reasons that Cherry and U-He get talked about. Softube and Xils to me overall sound "warmer and creamier" but that's only one part of the equation.

[beely]

I agree with many of these sentiments and it's one of the reasons I didn't much like Softube's Minimoog. Their emulations are generally very good quality, but the Minimoog for me sounds so vintage and crusty that it's way too much, and just sounds old and knackered in a way that I don't really like, and doesn't really match the aesthetic of the music I want to make with it. (I'm a child of the 80s, not the 70s!). And you can't make it sound newer/more stable, if that's your preference.

I much prefer Minimoog emulations that at least let you tailer how much "character" you get, from a factory fresh as-new calibrated one, all the way to something left in a garage for 45 years and way off for those who want to go that far.

But I do think that the "wobblyness" convinces some people it's more genuinely "analog" in a way that more stable emulations by default (say, Legend for the Minimoog, or Repro-5 for the Prophet 5) don't instantly evoke. At least with Legend and Repro, by default they sound newer, and can be *optionally* made to sound less stable easily enough. But some people never get that far, and just assume they are "less analog" or less authentic than the ones that sound wonky by default.

(I did like and buy the Softube Juno 106 though, which doesn't to my ears suffer from this effect as much, as the original hardware was generally more stable anyway).

However, for those people that want that kind of character, the fact that you generally get it without effort from the Softube emulations is a good part of their appeal, for those that want that, I think.

[mholloway]

Nothing wrong with romanticized flavor, infact these softube synths sound f*cking beautiful. The problem is that people keep calling these synths the peak of accurate analog modelling when they're not. The more accurate ones, which sound more lame are then called inferior emulations, bashing the efforts that were put into those. People are mistaking the movie/cinema look as real life.

So let me get this straight: Softube emulations are the ones that have no included FX, no additional behavior beyond the original, but they are, according to you, less accurate because they sound too good?
In that case, what actual properties of "sounding f*cking beautiful" are Softube applying to their synths, specifically, that result in a reduction of emulation accuracy with an increase in perceived sound quality? You're asserting they're doing something causing these inverse results: What information, evidence, or examples support this ridiculous assertion?

[twal]

Nothing wrong with romanticized flavor, infact these softube synths sound f*cking beautiful. The problem is that people keep calling these synths the peak of accurate analog modelling when they're not. The more accurate ones, which sound more lame are then called inferior emulations, bashing the efforts that were put into those. People are mistaking the movie/cinema look as real life.

So let me get this straight: Softube emulations are the ones that have no included FX, no additional behavior beyond the original, but they are, according to you, less accurate because they sound too good?
In that case, what actual properties of "sounding f*cking beautiful" are Softube applying to their synths, specifically, that result in a reduction of emulation accuracy with an increase in perceived sound quality? You're asserting they're doing something causing these inverse results: What information, evidence, or examples support this ridiculous assertion?

I think they mean that the softubes are coloring the originals with added warmth and clarity while leaving out idiosyncrasies that were in the original which "sound bad" in comparison to some.

[twal]

I don't think subtracting the fx was the point.

[zerocrossing]

Nothing wrong with romanticized flavor, infact these softube synths sound f*cking beautiful. The problem is that people keep calling these synths the peak of accurate analog modelling when they're not. The more accurate ones, which sound more lame are then called inferior emulations, bashing the efforts that were put into those. People are mistaking the movie/cinema look as real life.

So let me get this straight: Softube emulations are the ones that have no included FX, no additional behavior beyond the original, but they are, according to you, less accurate because they sound too good?
In that case, what actual properties of "sounding f*cking beautiful" are Softube applying to their synths, specifically, that result in a reduction of emulation accuracy with an increase in perceived sound quality? You're asserting they're doing something causing these inverse results: What information, evidence, or examples support this ridiculous assertion?

What is most funny about this is that I’d bet money that jtsterays has never been in a room with a CS-80. However, let’s say that they have. You have so much room for variation. Component variables, calibration values, component age, etc. If you’re talking about recordings, then you have to make sure you match the entire signal path and any processing, including trips to tape.

Then there’s the human element. Let’s say you are modeling your fully restored and calibrated CS-80 and as you are analyzing it you notice that it sounds crappy at certain settings. Could you help yourself from making a change that extends the sweet spot? Keep in mind that the percentage of the market that’s got a CS-80, or has any actual experience with one is minuscule. So the people who would care about the perfect emulation… of their specific CS-80… You’re smart if you disregard those people and make as good a product as possible for the target market.

Me? I just pick the synthesizer that I like. Caring about emulation accuracy is for chumps. A vague and moving target that can never be hit. If you want a perfect CS-80, buy one. Make sure you have an annuity to cover the ongoing maintenance costs. Would a good emulation need periodic maintenance?

[El°HYM]

They do sound good, yet not including micro tonality is still big bummer.

[bonch]

So let me get this straight: Softube emulations are the ones that have no included FX, no additional behavior beyond the original, but they are, according to you, less accurate because they sound too good?
In that case, what actual properties of "sounding f*cking beautiful" are Softube applying to their synths, specifically, that result in a reduction of emulation accuracy with an increase in perceived sound quality? You're asserting they're doing something causing these inverse results: What information, evidence, or examples support this ridiculous assertion?

Plugmon's Model 80/Repro-5 comparison video explains Softube's approach.

[mholloway]

Damn. That plugmon video might be the most informative, well crafted, grounded video about software emulations I've ever seen. Thank you for sharing, that was enlightening.

[loctune]

So what's the case with CS-80 now? Arturia, Cherry Audio, Softube or XILS Lab?

[Nug Wrangler]

So what's the case with CS-80 now? Arturia, Cherry Audio, Softube or XILS Lab?

And Memorymoon