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

[cryophonik]

You guys are talking apples and oranges and this really shouldn’t be that difficult. Ivybird ‘s (very correct) point is that it’s exponentially faster to call up a known and existing patch that you have previously created by simply pressing the preset button(s). This is almost imperative for live bands because nobody on the dance floor (or in the band) wants to wait for the keyboardist to reprogram a synth between songs. If you’ve ever played keys in a live band, you know that we each have a way of knowing that Song X uses Patch D073, etc., and we can recall it nearly instantaneously without randomly fumbling around to find a similar sound.

Everybody else’s (also correct to some extent) point is that it can be quicker for someone experienced in sound design to just create a sound from scratch in the studio than it can be to first find a similar sound by randomly or systematically going through your patches to find something to start with then tweaking it. In practice, that falls apart when you’re talking about a complex synth with a complex patch and you already know which preset will get you close to the sound you’re looking for. But, this isn’t what Ivybird is talking about.

[D-Fusion]

You guys are talking apples and oranges and this really shouldn’t be that difficult. Ivybird ‘s (very correct) point is that it’s exponentially faster to call up a known and existing patch that you have previously created by simply pressing the preset button(s). This is almost imperative for live bands because nobody on the dance floor (or in the band) wants to wait for the keyboardist to reprogram a synth between songs. If you’ve ever played keys in a live band, you know that we each have a way of knowing that Song X uses Patch D073, etc., and we can recall it nearly instantaneously without randomly fumbling around to find a similar sound.

Everybody else’s (also correct to some extent) point is that it can be quicker for someone experienced in sound design to just create a sound from scratch in the studio than it can be to first find a similar sound by randomly or systematically going through your patches to find something to start with then tweaking it. In practice, that falls apart when you’re talking about a complex synth with a complex patch and you already know which preset will get you close to the sound you’re looking for. But, this isn’t what Ivybird is talking about.

You explained it better than me

[IvyBirds]

So you are at the gig and finish one song and need to start another one using a different patch, sorry not having recall is not faster that's just silly

You're making a number of poor assumptions here yourself. He doesn't gig. But I do and it's easy enough with a sufficiently simple synth. Last time we played in Germany, I used my Waldorf Rocket on most of the songs and it was no more effort to patch live than a guitarist trying to keep his guitar in tune through a set.

No I am not. You are the one making incorrect assumptions. It was stated as fact that "Analog without recall is faster than Synths with recall", you are making the assumption that only meant specific locations and circumstances that were not shared

There were no qualifiers given, so I simply provided an example of how that statement about no recall being faster was incorrect

I can also point out that recall in the studio is faster. I can also point out that recall in your living room is faster, I can also point out that patch recall on a rocket ship heading to another galaxy would be faster

As far as your experience with a mono synth with very limited controls, that is so basic that it makes just two waveforms and doesn't even have ADSR envelopes, awesome have fun with that.

Most synths are not rocket science.
They usually have the Layout of a SH-101 or a Juno or have 2 oscillators with a Saw, Square and a triangle waveform, 1 filter, 1 Lfo and 1-2 Adsr envelopes and even the Model D with 3 oscillators is so simple to use that Presets are not needed.

Maybe but having patch recall would still be faster would it not?

Again the statement was made that Synths without recall is faster. That is simply not true is it?

Why is that so hard to grasp? Why are you moving the goal posts to something else entirely away from the original statement?

If you know your synths well enough it takes less time to create the sound you want compared to browsing thru 100s of presets in hope that you will find the perfect one and then you realize that that synth doesn't have the sound you are after and then you have to try another one until you find the sound you want.

And there you again moving the goal posts. If you know the patch you want to recall you can pull it right up. It only takes a second or two and will always be faster than rebuilding it from scratch

Why has the goal post shifted now to preset surfing?

If I know how to roll my sounds on a synth I can build it and then I can save it. In the future if I want that sound again I can recall it in seconds which will always be faster even if the synth is extremely basic and limited than reproducing it with the control surface. Having recall doesn't make it slower

if you don't know how to roll your own patches or don't know what sound you want preset surfing will also be faster than sitting down and experimenting with the physical controls

[D-Fusion]

You're making a number of poor assumptions here yourself. He doesn't gig. But I do and it's easy enough with a sufficiently simple synth. Last time we played in Germany, I used my Waldorf Rocket on most of the songs and it was no more effort to patch live than a guitarist trying to keep his guitar in tune through a set.

No I am not. You are the one making incorrect assumptions. It was stated as fact that "Analog without recall is faster than Synths with recall", you are making the assumption that only meant specific locations and circumstances that were not shared

There were no qualifiers given, so I simply provided an example of how that statement about no recall being faster was incorrect

I can also point out that recall in the studio is faster. I can also point out that recall in your living room is faster, I can also point out that patch recall on a rocket ship heading to another galaxy would be faster

As far as your experience with a mono synth with very limited controls, that is so basic that it makes just two waveforms and doesn't even have ADSR envelopes, awesome have fun with that.

Most synths are not rocket science.
They usually have the Layout of a SH-101 or a Juno or have 2 oscillators with a Saw, Square and a triangle waveform, 1 filter, 1 Lfo and 1-2 Adsr envelopes and even the Model D with 3 oscillators is so simple to use that Presets are not needed.

Maybe but having patch recall would still be faster would it not?

Again the statement was made that Synths without recall is faster. That is simply not true is it?

Why is that so hard to grasp? Why are you moving the goal posts to something else entirely away from the original statement?

If you know your synths well enough it takes less time to create the sound you want compared to browsing thru 100s of presets in hope that you will find the perfect one and then you realize that that synth doesn't have the sound you are after and then you have to try another one until you find the sound you want.

And there you again moving the goal posts. If you know the patch you want to recall you can pull it right up. It only takes a second or two and will always be faster than rebuilding it from scratch

Why has the goal post shifted now to preset surfing?

If I know how to roll my sounds on a synth I can build it and then I can save it. In the future if I want that sound again I can recall it in seconds which will always be faster even if the synth is extremely basic and limited than reproducing it with the control surface. Having recall doesn't make it slower

if you don't know how to roll your own patches or don't know what sound you want preset surfing will also be faster than sitting down and experimenting with the physical controls

I do sense some frustration going on on this subject so i will give you a Friendly to calm you down a bit...since it seems that we can't agree on this issue so there is no reason to discuss this any further

[mothra]

Sorry but, coming from an actual gigging perspective.. If we're in between songs and the band has to wait for you to 'reprogram' every patch in between, the synths are out and we'll just put the electronics on a DAT or bring a laptop to play back the tracks instead. Stage time isn't a 'let's show off our studio wizardry' thing. You've got an alloted amount of time to get up, get your shit done and get out of the way for the next band. Nobody wants to watch you jerk off with your synth and listen to you tune your 'special' bleeps and bloops in between every number.

Can you imagine Skinny Puppy having to repatch everything in between each song? The whole set would be 3 songs, a jam session and good night folks!

[cryophonik]

What mothra said^^^

Also, it's probably not quite as relevant today as it was 20+ years ago, but paid studio time isn't time to be dicking around with sound design, either. Studio time back in the 80s-90s was not cheap and the last thing a band wants to spend money on is waiting for the keyboardist to dial in patches that should have been created and saved before the session. It's bad enough that the diva guitarists can never get their sh!t together and always want 20 extra takes before finally settling on the first or second one,...but I digress.

[IvyBirds]

I do sense some frustration going on on this subject so i will give you a Friendly to calm you down a bit...since it seems that we can't agree on this issue so there is no reason to discuss this any further

There is no frustration at all, I just find it pathetic that you have to constantly move the goal posts to "prove" someone wrong

The goal posts were established right at the beginning. It was stayed that Synths with recall are slower, and that anal Synths without recall are faster. I disagreed with that and all kinds of people have jumped in and said how wrong I was by moving the goal posts and putting words in my mouth

How can we agree or disagree with anything on this issue as your default position is to move the goal posts and then be condescending and play the role of the victim

So my point is this and only this recall doesn't make a synth slower it makes it faster. Loading a patch from memory will always be faster than building it from scratch

It doesn't matter if you are in a live gig or in the studio, or on the moon recall is faster

This has zero to do with preset surfing as that is but the subject at hand that you seem to think we need to agree on

Please don't give me a friendly hug, just have some integrity to stop moving the goal posts

[DJErmac]

Sorry but, coming from an actual gigging perspective.. If we're in between songs and the band has to wait for you to 'reprogram' every patch in between, the synths are out and we'll just put the electronics on a DAT or bring a laptop to play back the tracks instead. Stage time isn't a 'let's show off our studio wizardry' thing. You've got an alloted amount of time to get up, get your shit done and get out of the way for the next band. Nobody wants to watch you jerk off with your synth and listen to you tune your 'special' bleeps and bloops in between every number.

Can you imagine Skinny Puppy having to repatch everything in between each song? The whole set would be 3 songs, a jam session and good night folks!

There’s an easy workaround : one patch per synth. If you need 35 different patches live, simply bring 35 synths with you. No need to repatch anything live, simply run everywhere on stage. Easy !

[IvyBirds]

One interesting point that seems to be getting raised a lot in this thread is the idea that simple little synths with a single oscillator, simple envelopes, limited modulation options, all going into a basic resonate filter is fun and useful especially if you like to roll your patches

I couldn't agree more, but this is where once again software and patch recall has a clear advantage.

For example it's pretty much impossible to turn a simple single VCO or DCO synth into a multiple oscillator, modulation powerhouse, but really simple to turn the powerhouse synth into a basic synth, where you have everything turned off but a single oscillator, a basic envelope or two, maybe a single LFO and a basic filter

Once you do that you then save it all as a preset. It takes literally a minute at most to do that

For me I have close to two dozen synths set up exactly this way, and I took them all a step further in that each one is mapped in the exact same way to the exact same knobs and faders on my controllers

So if I want to turn a monster Oberheim poly I to a basic single osc synth I can easily, same with. The Prophet 5, Minimoog, Jupiter 8, CS80, etc

I can do the same with non vintage clones like the VA Engine in HALion7, Falcon, DIVA, or even synths you wouldn't think like the Korg M1 and Triton, or even Omnisphere

A lot of those already have a chorus of some kind built into the software synth, but it's easy to add one if they don't

This is incredibly easy to set up, and lots of fun and can be as hands on and instantaneous as you want and moves you beyond the SH-101 and Juno's of this world, when you just want basic synth parts

[Uncle E]

For example it's pretty much impossible to turn a simple single VCO or DCO synth into a multiple oscillator, modulation powerhouse, but really simple to turn the powerhouse synth into a basic synth, where you have everything turned off but a single oscillator, a basic envelope or two, maybe a single LFO and a basic filter

This is blasphemy. Maximum polyphony unison or STFU.

[DJErmac]

Yes but . Everybody in the crowd instantly recognizes that analog touch. Totally worth it.

Ah. Whatcha gonna say ?

(I’m being ironical, just in case.)

[crimsonwarlock]

There’s an easy workaround : one patch per synth. If you need 35 different patches live, simply bring 35 synths with you. No need to repatch anything live, simply run everywhere on stage. Easy !

[Uncle E]

The multiple Kronos's sums it up in the best possible way

[DJErmac]

There’s an easy workaround : one patch per synth. If you need 35 different patches live, simply bring 35 synths with you. No need to repatch anything live, simply run everywhere on stage. Easy !

Yes, I was thinking about another man I deeply respect while posting.

jean-michel-jarre-performs-in-monte-carlo-harbour-monaco-as-part-of-G4D3NW.jpg

Just to be serious for a second, there’s no way I’m gonna teach anybody what to do any day. Just build your setup on stage the way you want, why would I care ?? I was just trying to exaggerate the idea.

[crimsonwarlock]

The multiple Kronos's sums it up in the best possible way

Yep, he doesn't even have time to switch presets

Yes, I was thinking about another man I deeply respect while posting.

Aaah, Mr. Jarre. I had the pleasure to seeing him live