Is virtual analog an advertising ploy?

[Unaspected]

so your options are
do nothing because you have no gear
or
make do, get things done!

best to go with option two for now, get the music done and out, then maybe, just maybe, you get noticed, then you get new options...

Get to know people with a hardware based studio. Hang out - IRL or online. Ask if you can use said gear in any way. Obviously not befriending to that end but I don't see why someone wouldn't be cool with that. Just depends on your relationship. Most everyone I've met who are involved in the industry at every level has been cool.

There are also websites that offer this kind of service (remotely) for a small fee.

Hiring a studio is an option - or hiring some specific piece of gear for a day or two.

Get some work in a studio as a tea boy/cable winder and see if you can get some after hours time with the gear. Whenever those hours might be. Always have your USB stick with you, just in case.

[noiseboyuk]

so your options are
do nothing because you have no gear
or
make do, get things done!

best to go with option two for now, get the music done and out, then maybe, just maybe, you get noticed, then you get new options...

Get to know people with a hardware based studio. Hang out - IRL or online. Ask if you can use said gear in any way. Obviously not befriending to that end but I don't see why someone wouldn't be cool with that. Just depends on your relationship. Most everyone I've met who are involved in the industry at every level has been cool.

There are also websites that offer this kind of service (remotely) for a small fee.

Hiring a studio is an option - or hiring some specific piece of gear for a day or two.

Get some work in a studio as a tea boy/cable winder and see if you can get some after hours time with the gear. Whenever those hours might be. Always have your USB stick with you, just in case.

I'd advise none of these things. It may have been true in 1978, but totally unnecessary now.

Seriously, look at any Finneas video. For Billie's first songs he just used the stock stuff in Logic and did brilliantly (now I think it's a free session). As they got success he got more stuff, but it's all the same as anyone else uses - Omni, Battery etc. He is just creative enough to make everything his own. If he'd have gone the tea boy route, likely nobody would ever have heard of Billie Eilish.

[vurt]

so your options are
do nothing because you have no gear
or
make do, get things done!

best to go with option two for now, get the music done and out, then maybe, just maybe, you get noticed, then you get new options...

Get to know people with a hardware based studio. Hang out - IRL or online. Ask if you can use said gear in any way. Obviously not befriending to that end but I don't see why someone wouldn't be cool with that. Just depends on your relationship. Most everyone I've met who are involved in the industry at every level has been cool.

There are also websites that offer this kind of service (remotely) for a small fee.

Hiring a studio is an option - or hiring some specific piece of gear for a day or two.

Get some work in a studio as a tea boy/cable winder and see if you can get some after hours time with the gear. Whenever those hours might be. Always have your USB stick with you, just in case.

I'd advise none of these things. It may have been true in 1978, but totally unnecessary now.

Seriously, look at any Finneas video. For Billie's first songs he just used the stock stuff in Logic and did brilliantly (now I think it's a free session). As they got success he got more stuff, but it's all the same as anyone else uses - Omni, Battery etc. He is just creative enough to make everything his own. If he'd have gone the tea boy route, likely nobody would ever have heard of Billie Eilish.

while i completely agree with you, it would at least maybe give the op an idea of why software is maybe more useful than a single piece of hardware for every job.
or that the difference isnt in the technology.

[noiseboyuk]

while i completely agree with you, it would at least maybe give the op an idea of why software is maybe more useful than a single piece of hardware for every job.
or that the difference isnt in the technology.

Maybe a day?

I guess I'm rejecting the premise of the thread. Or rather, it's very useful to be able to deconstruct marketing blurb, but it is not useful to over-analyse differences between analog and hardware. It's essentially irrelevant for music-making in 2022.

[vurt]

while i completely agree with you, it would at least maybe give the op an idea of why software is maybe more useful than a single piece of hardware for every job.
or that the difference isnt in the technology.

Maybe a day?

I guess I'm rejecting the premise of the thread. Or rather, it's very useful to be able to deconstruct marketing blurb, but it is not useful to over-analyse differences between analog and hardware. It's essentially irrelevant for music-making in 2022.

again, total agreement here
i ignore blurb, i listen.

trust your ears.

[Unaspected]

I'd advise none of these things. It may have been true in 1978, but totally unnecessary now.

Seriously, look at any Finneas video. For Billie's first songs he just used the stock stuff in Logic and did brilliantly (now I think it's a free session). As they got success he got more stuff, but it's all the same as anyone else uses - Omni, Battery etc. He is just creative enough to make everything his own. If he'd have gone the tea boy route, likely nobody would ever have heard of Billie Eilish.

There were remote hardware processing options in 1978?



I'm not saying he should take up a career in studio work but could develop the kind of rapport with a studio that would allow for him to use the gear some time.

I'm just rolling with what the OP feeds us: He's dead set on going down the hardware route so I thought I'd list some options as he expressed that cost is an issue. Otherwise, I've long been ITB and favour software but that doesn't mean it's right for the OP. If using hardware inspires him then he should explore those options.

Experience might embolden his decision or cause him to desire software more. Whichever works for him is the most important point.

But indeed - as vurt suggests: Use of software would be both empowering and most flexible at this stage. Of course, quite a few pop acts and plenty of EDM has been mixed purely with stock plugins for a while now - but there is probably difference between artists and engineers.

[noiseboyuk]

That's fair - if, despite everything, the OP is absolutely adamant that only hardware will do,then agreed - I don't know how else you'd experience it. I suspect it would be eye-opening how much producers use ITB plugins rather than the aging hardware

[vurt]

That's fair - if, despite everything, the OP is absolutely adamant that only hardware will do,then agreed - I don't know how else you'd experience it. I suspect it would be eye-opening how much producers use ITB plugins rather than the aging hardware

this is quite true, i did a few years at a long established studio in manchester, they had racks of old equipment, that would impress the young bands for sure, but the engineers were all using the joe meek tdm plugins

[Unaspected]

That's fair - if, despite everything, the OP is absolutely adamant that only hardware will do,then agreed - I don't know how else you'd experience it. I suspect it would be eye-opening how much producers use ITB plugins rather than the aging hardware

Oh, for the OP, certainly. Especially those with a wall of hardware toasting their backs as they sit in front of a DAW - probably not even running a single emulation of anything in the room.

I think that the 500 system is quite elegant and can integrate nicely with a small, mostly software based studio. The OP already mentioned this.

Hiring some gear is probably the most logical thing to do - but not something to do often - otherwise the cost of a good hardware unit will soon be met. Getting a few tracks finished and mixed as well as possible in the DAW before hiring would, of course, be essential.

There really aren't any cheap options in this area. Software will certainly take you further at a greater rate than waiting to get hold of a dream processor. And I don't think the OP has even sorted their monitoring solution.

There is so much to learn that, if focused on that and immediate goals, dreams of hardware might quickly become secondary.

At the same time - with the mentality of both an artist and engineer - I can be kinda fussy to get in a creative mood as well. Maybe the OP is an expensive date and we have to accept that.

[T-CM11]

Of course, quite a few pop acts and plenty of EDM has been mixed purely with stock plugins for a while now

If I cared about what other people do, then this would be a reason to stop using plugins.

The only emulation effect plugins that I have are in the Arturia FX Collection 2. I got it because they sound great, have a fun interface, and it was a really cheap crossgrade. I care the least about the included compressors... or compressors in general.

[Pilonsky]

That's fair - if, despite everything, the OP is absolutely adamant that only hardware will do,then agreed - I don't know how else you'd experience it. I suspect it would be eye-opening how much producers use ITB plugins rather than the aging hardware

I’m not adamant that only hardware will do. The point I was trying to make was not digital versus analog. Digital is great — I’m not trying to trade in my daw for a tape machine or anything like that. And I love logic and the included plug ins.

What I’m talking about is virtual analog versus the equipment they supposed to replicate. First their is the marketing narrative and the GUI’s that can lead a newbie down a certain road. Then their is the fact that these plug ins can get expensive real quick. UAD and Softube plug ins can get you in the thousands real quick. Then there is the harassment and outright hostility by these plug in companies if you want to sell “your” license. Then their is the more abstract conversation of the virtual versus reality, and whether they will always be different, or can ever be said to be the same thing. Also their is the tactile and the tangible: knobs, cables, etc . . . And the way one interacts with those things. And the ability to get into a flow, which is the point of any creative activity. And finally their is the sound, both the way it sounds in isolation and in a mix (I know those are different, but they are related. And I got no problem with mixing analog and digital instruments. Contrast is a big part of mixing).

So I’m not adamant about hardware. I got plenty of digital, that’s a given. What I’m talking about is considering all the things stated above, wether it might be a good choice to save up for some hardware as opposed to the virtual analog route. There is a decision to be made there, that I would say I’m adamant about. I’m not so convinced this virtual analog versus the hardware it seeks to emulate consideration is over. I think their is a choice to be made there. And it involves considering multiple factors.

So if you decide virtual analog is just as good, or better than the hardware it purports to replicate, then I’m sure you have your reasons. Considering all the things there are to consider, virtual analog plug ins might be the better choice for some. But I also think hardware might be the better choice for others. And a hybrid system is not worth mentioning. We all have hybrid systems.

But for me, moving forward, I think the better choice is to put my money in hardware. Hardware synths and samplers (and yes I’m sampling old vinyl cause it just sounds good), but also hardware EQ’s and preamps for basic tone and prep on the way in (compressors are a little trickier).

You can get a dbx three band Eq 500 series for $300. An API 550a will run you $1100. A basic stripped down 500 SSL channel strip will run you $500. In comparison, UAD has a sale of 3 plug ins for $299 — that’s real money. For the money I spent on plug ins I could have bought a single SSL channel to bounce all my tracks through on the way into the computer. And now I’d have one piece of hardware in which to build on (and if I wanted to resell for a better piece, I could get 90% of my money back, and not have to get anyone’s permission).

I think that’s a sound decision. And again if it doesn’t work, I can get almost all my money back with little hassle or loss. But I’m pretty sure it will work. There has to be a reason all these software companies emulate hardware. I’m pretty sure it’s cause hardware sounds good.

[Pilonsky]

so your options are
do nothing because you have no gear
or
make do, get things done!

best to go with option two for now, get the music done and out, then maybe, just maybe, you get noticed, then you get new options...

Get to know people with a hardware based studio. Hang out - IRL or online. Ask if you can use said gear in any way. Obviously not befriending to that end but I don't see why someone wouldn't be cool with that. Just depends on your relationship. Most everyone I've met who are involved in the industry at every level has been cool.

There are also websites that offer this kind of service (remotely) for a small fee.

Hiring a studio is an option - or hiring some specific piece of gear for a day or two.

Get some work in a studio as a tea boy/cable winder and see if you can get some after hours time with the gear. Whenever those hours might be. Always have your USB stick with you, just in case.

I'd advise none of these things. It may have been true in 1978, but totally unnecessary now.

Seriously, look at any Finneas video. For Billie's first songs he just used the stock stuff in Logic and did brilliantly (now I think it's a free session). As they got success he got more stuff, but it's all the same as anyone else uses - Omni, Battery etc. He is just creative enough to make everything his own. If he'd have gone the tea boy route, likely nobody would ever have heard of Billie Eilish.

Bro, an exception to the rule only reinforces the rule. Finneas is an anomaly, an outlier — that’s why you bring him up. What other chart topping, Grammy winning producer/engineers do you know that use only logic?

And yes talent and skill trump equipment. But talent all skill also often end up in million dollar studios, for some reason.

Andrew Scheps says he mixes with only a pair of Sony headphones. I believe him. But that doesn’t mean we should all mix in headphones.

Bob Marley could make a hit record with a guitar and a tape recorder. That doesn’t mean we all could. Or should. He’s an anomaly.

(Also not everyone likes Billie Eilish. The Grammies are basically the billboard awards with a suit. It’s all record sells. Yes Finneas sold a lot of records. But so did T.I. TI has three Grammys)

[Pilonsky]

Of course, quite a few pop acts and plenty of EDM has been mixed purely with stock plugins for a while now

If I cared about what other people do, then this would be a reason to stop using plugins.

The only emulation effect plugins that I have are in the Arturia FX Collection 2. I got it because they sound great, have a fun interface, and it was a really cheap crossgrade. I care the least about the included compressors... or compressors in general.

Hey! Are those Arturia three modulations you can use any good? I’ve been looking at those. Or which ones are good? You can get them on the cheap sometimes.

[BONES]

Ok, after spending close to $500 on virtual analog plugins, including both processors and effects, I feel like maybe this virtual analog thing is a sham. An advertising ploy of sorts. I can’t help but feel that that money would have been better spent on some actual analog hardware. Like maybe it’s a better idea to get the analog tone and saturation you want going by using preamps and such going in the box, and then just using digital Eq, compression and effects for mixing purposes? Maybe analog is analog and digital is digital, and each serves its purpose? Maybe this idea of virtual analog is a pipe dream?

No, it is not. It is simply a descriptive term that describes a digital synth that works the same way as an old analogue synth works. i.e. It has oscillators that run through a mixer, into a filter and then through an amplifier, with modulators like envelopes and LFOs. As opposed to say, a ROMpler like a Roland D-50 or Korg M1 or a properly digital synth like a Yamaha DX-7. The term pre-dates VSTi and software synths by several years. The first time I heard it, it was applied to hardware synth like the Yamaha AN-1x and Korg MS2000 in the 1990s.

Let's be honest here, too, in 99.9% of situations, nobody will be able to tell the difference between a V/A and a proper analogue synth anyway, so I'm not quite sure what your problem is. And I speak from a position of knowledge, as I currently own four fully analogue hardware synths and a hybrid (digital osc, analogue filter). None of them sound any more analogue than bx_oberhausen or Korg's ARP Odyssey. Evwn some low-cost synths, like OB-Xtreme or some of the FBM VSTi, sound convincingly analogue most of the time. Sure, there will be a tiny number of cases where the real analogue synth will be able to do things a V/A cannot but, on the flip-side, there will be orders of magnitude more things that a V/A can do that no analogue synth could hope to manage. e.g. An Oberheim 8 voice can sound ridiculously huge, but bx_oberhausen with 32 voice unison can sound even bigger.

You do not need 50 third party compressors. You need about... 5

Really? I do as you advise and I get by with exactly none. They all seem to me to do the same job, I don't even know why you'd bother. It's a matter of using the right settings more than the right compressor.

If an effect is fully digital no analogue emulation at all then it will clip the audio instead of saturating it.

No, it won't do either because it will have virtually limitless headroom. You only need to clip stuff to emulate the inferior behaviour of analogue circuits. e.g. the mixer in every DAW I've used never, ever clips. The other day I loaded up a MIDI file and played it in Studio One and even though the meters were showing +220dB, the output was pristine. It was really loud but still pristine.

[Pilonsky]

Ok, after spending close to $500 on virtual analog plugins, including both processors and effects, I feel like maybe this virtual analog thing is a sham. An advertising ploy of sorts. I can’t help but feel that that money would have been better spent on some actual analog hardware. Like maybe it’s a better idea to get the analog tone and saturation you want going by using preamps and such going in the box, and then just using digital Eq, compression and effects for mixing purposes? Maybe analog is analog and digital is digital, and each serves its purpose? Maybe this idea of virtual analog is a pipe dream?

No, it is not. It is simply a descriptive term that describes a digital synth that works the same way as an old analogue synth works. i.e. It has oscillators that run through a mixer, into a filter and then through an amplifier, with modulators like envelopes and LFOs. As opposed to say, a ROMpler like a Roland D-50 or Korg M1 or a properly digital synth like a Yamaha DX-7. The term pre-dates VSTi and software synths by several years. The first time I heard it, it was applied to hardware synth like the Yamaha AN-1x and Korg MS2000 in the 1990s.

Let's be honest here, too, in 99.9% of situations, nobody will be able to tell the difference between a V/A and a proper analogue synth anyway, so I'm not quite sure what your problem is. And I speak from a position of knowledge, as I currently own four fully analogue hardware synths and a hybrid (digital osc, analogue filter). None of them sound any more analogue than bx_oberhausen or Korg's ARP Odyssey. Evwn some low-cost synths, like OB-Xtreme or some of the FBM VSTi, sound convincingly analogue most of the time. Sure, there will be a tiny number of cases where the real analogue synth will be able to do things a V/A cannot but, on the flip-side, there will be orders of magnitude more things that a V/A can do that no analogue synth could hope to manage. e.g. An Oberheim 8 voice can sound ridiculously huge, but bx_oberhausen with 32 voice unison can sound even bigger.

You do not need 50 third party compressors. You need about... 5

The problem is that part of making music, aside from melodies, harmonies, rhythm, etc . . ., involves choosing our sounds (timbre, tone, etc). So we have these discussions because we have to make choices, and some thought has to be put into those choices. That’s the problem: choices require deliberation (if you do it right). And since making a choice involves picking better over worse, then we wanna make the better choice. Which requires us to think and seek the opinions of others to make the best decision.

You say V/A is the same as analog, so that means there is no choice to be made. They are the same. If that’s your input, then so be it. It’s all the same, nothing to see here.

And as far as not being able to tell the difference in 99% of situations, I don’t know what kind of standard that is. Again you’re leveling everything. If one can’t tell the difference between one thing and the other, then again they are the same. And since they are the same their is no choice to be made. So their is no better or worse, it’s the same, so no choice to be made. No choice, no thinking, no problem.

If it’s all the same it’s all the same. Not much else to be said.


Sorry that was made to be a reply to the post from BONES. I’m still trying to figure out this out.