Software vs Hardware

[Gam456]

2. Nope! The right hardware synth can make any sound a soft synth can and far beyond. Prophet X/XL is one example of a synth that goes far beyond anything a soft "synth" can do, and goes into Kontakt territory very easily. As well as a workstation like the new Montage M. Pretty much unlimited potential that goes beyond capabilities of a VST.

3. As a keyboardist and piano player, feel is important and no midi keyboard even the most premium, has a good feel for real time playing in my opinion. Which midi keyboard would you say has a great keybed?

4. As I have a Moog One 16-Voice, what I can do goes far beyond just a minimoog LOL

I can transform any mono soft synth into a poly. I can transform any synth into a workstation. Layer, split, any effect i want in send, insert. use any step, arp I want.

Montage M ? You can easly get the same even way more with Halion or Falcon, Reaktor. Granular, resynthesis, wavetable, additive, modeled. Btw Montage is now a dodgy vsti.

[_leras]

Funny thread - I think it depends a lot on individuals, what instruments they have 'and' their processes.

I love the hardware synths I have, they cover a lot of ground, but all have their own limitations and there are limitations in what you need to do to record them. The sound is though, often more distinct and present. There's always an amount of hands on tweaking, a fair bit of struggling to get the exact sound, but it's engaging and worth the effort for the sound and presence. It also take a push and focus on getting it right, as it's unlikely that the part would be redone in a later session.

I also use a lot of software synths, and often I'll load one for speed of composition, and if I get what seems the right sound for a part it will usually stay as the soft synth and not be replaced by a hardware synth as I've settled on the tone and timbre and it can be hard to switch something and think it fits properly. For soft synths, for me, there's also a post recording phase of tweaking a sound and I'll often go through multiple versions of a sounds dialing something in. So in some ways this gives a more refined final outcome sonically, though perhaps with a little less sonic presence and spontaneity.

Of course, some soft synths can also do things that my hardware synths simply can't do. e.g. I don't have a 303. But, my hardware synths are instruments that can be played.

Whatever people prefer - there's never been a better time for synths - hardware or software.

[D-Fusion]

There is no right answer to this question.
Some people prefer HW over anything and Some Prefer SW and some people like a mix of both.

If this was 2001-2002 I would have gone for HW only but SW is so good these days that HW is more of a luxury Item now and you buy it because you want it and not because you need it.

I have a mix of both and i don't feel that my HW has a more Hands on feel than my SW.
HW has static knobs and buttons and with SW you use a Mouse and the arrow keys on your Keyboard to browse thru presets and a Midi keyboard.

We only have 2 hands so we are limited in what we can do at the same time so it doesn't help me that my HW Has X amounts of knobs and buttons.

[foosnark]

Seems to me a waste of resources (and money), since you can perfectly emulate these in the digital domain, which then is cheaper, better to handle, feature-richer...

You can theoretically perfectly emulate analog synths in the digital domain.

There will always be a gap between theory and practice. A few emulations are really great, perhaps even "perfect enough" in terms of sound. Most emulations are more in the range of "generally good enough for most purposes but not perfect."

But there's a lot of gear that isn't emulated at all, or isn't emulated well. And some that, due to the physical interaction, arguably can't be emulated without building custom hardware for it that probably costs as much as the real thing anyway.

For example: if you've ever owned a Soma Lyra-8, it's incredibly obvious how pathetically short of the mark its software imitators are. Even if someone convincingly emulated that PT delay (which hasn't happened yet) and the distortion and all of the bizarre cross-modulation its oscillators do, I don't think even MPE pressure is going to quite behave the same way as those conductive touch plates on the hardware instrument.

I haven't even heard a wholly convincing BBD delay yet in software. Choruses and flangers that are BBD-like, sure, filtered down so you don't hear the (nonexistent) clock whine and you can't underclock them and get that analog aliasing (discrete-time "samples" but stored in capacitors). Sinevibes' Integer is kind of inspired by that but not an emulation, it comes out as its own different beast (and I like it for that).

Frankly I like software (and hardware) that doesn't try to imitate something else, just like I prefer musicians who don't try to imitate other musicians.

[Hanz Meyzer]

Nope, analog synths are obsolete from now on. Obviously. Just try the new VAs, you will see.

[YnJ]

I have already returned to hardware regarding my guitar amps. VST amps and cabinets are very practical, and all the different options are a lot of fun when you first start out feeling as you have access to all these high end amps you'll never afford in real life, not to mention all the effects and combinations you have available. After a while they all start to sound as variations of the same amp though. I got my old Marshall amp and 4x12 cabinet out of storage and picked up a few pedals, and was just amazed at how much better this sounded than any VST amp. I don't even have a proper microphone yet, I got better results recording with a budget microphone though, and I can do more variations with the sound with just a single amp and a couple of pedals than all my VST amps combined, not including other effects than overdrive and distortion pedals which with a few exceptions are crap in the plugin world. I'm not saying I would never use a VST amp again, if not for recording at least some of them are fun to play around with and have effects I don't have in hardware format. I can still use VST effects on my recorded tracks though

I'm afraid I sold all my hardware synths, and I'm now starting to wonder if I might be better off with hardware synths as well. I didn't even have any particulary expensive synths. The closest were my Juno 106 and a Korg Wavestation, the most used was an Ensoniq SQ1 though. The Juno 106 was easy to program, though a tad limited soundwise compared to the Ensoniq which also had very good effects for it's time. I spent hours programing sounds on the Ensoniq, I really don't miss the small window though. Any suggestions to a nice not too expensive polyphonic synthsizer with at least 49 keys? It does not have to be analogue. Nothing I have on my computer is. They may call themselves analogue, they are all digital though

[pdxindy]

So, we're unanimous that midi controllers are still universally shit then? Good to get that cleared up.

Clarification: I'm not referring to keyboards for playing. For example, my Linnstrument is great and I also use my Osmose to play softsynths, as well as one of my hardware synths to play softsynths.

Just any midi controllers that are a bunch of knobs and buttons presented as a means to control stuff on screen.

[pdxindy]

While there's no equivalent to Moog One in software world, many VSTis sound pretty good.

I got rid of my Moog One because I was disappointed with the sound. The final straw was when I compared the Moog to Repro and I liked Repro better.

[SoftSynthLover99]

2. Nope! The right hardware synth can make any sound a soft synth can and far beyond. Prophet X/XL is one example of a synth that goes far beyond anything a soft "synth" can do, and goes into Kontakt territory very easily. As well as a workstation like the new Montage M. Pretty much unlimited potential that goes beyond capabilities of a VST.

3. As a keyboardist and piano player, feel is important and no midi keyboard even the most premium, has a good feel for real time playing in my opinion. Which midi keyboard would you say has a great keybed?

4. As I have a Moog One 16-Voice, what I can do goes far beyond just a minimoog LOL

I can transform any mono soft synth into a poly. I can transform any synth into a workstation. Layer, split, any effect i want in send, insert. use any step, arp I want.

Montage M ? You can easly get the same even way more with Halion or Falcon, Reaktor. Granular, resynthesis, wavetable, additive, modeled. Btw Montage is now a dodgy vsti.

I can transform my guitar into a Poly Synth OR Mono Synth by running it through effects pedals. Create any kind of step sequence and arp with my guitar. I guess that makes all software AND hardware synths obsolete? lol

I use Falcon in every session I do, love it! But Montage M is a different beast. Doesn’t even sound the same as the MODX and is not even comparable to a VST. Sample rates, DAC etc all matter.

[pdxindy]

2. Nope! The right hardware synth can make any sound a soft synth can and far beyond.

I spent far too much money trying to get the sound of Bazille in hardware. Never came close, including with modular.

There is a lot of unique stuff in both hardware and software that cannot be replaced by the other. Nothing in software comes remotely close to my Elektron Analog Rytm.

That's why I use both.

[SoftSynthLover99]

While there's no equivalent to Moog One in software world, many VSTis sound pretty good.

I got rid of my Moog One because I was disappointed with the sound. The final straw was when I compared the Moog to Repro and I liked Repro better.

Im calling BS. Love repro and have all the u-he synths. The Moog One sounds light years beyond Repro though lol. I would have to absolutely need the money in a life or death situation to even consider replacing my moog one with repro. And even then it would be tough to let go haha

Did you have difficulty programming your Moog One? I know some users can’t really get with the work flow. But the raw sound? Repro ain’t close lol.

[Ah_Dziz]

I've got zero interest in the majority of hardware outside of live performance. Even most good hardware synths have a form of macro control so you don't have to worry about fiddling with menus and shift functions while performing. When using soft synths I prefer mouse control since that was what they were designed for.
Basically if you're live music is so improvisational that your making your sounds from scratch as you perform, then go with whatever works for you. Otherwise, still just do what works, but softsynths give far more options than piles of hardware synths.

In a normal (playing songs you've already written) performance the difference between hardware synths and software synths is minimal provided you've prepared.

Hardware can make sounds software can’t (yet) and the other way around, too. Why limit yourself if you don’t want to?

I've not encountered this in synthesizers.

In order to say that you must have very limited experience with different hardware and software synthesizers. Or perhaps we're talking about slightly different things.

I have 4 hardware synths. Not one of my dozens of software synths sound just like any of the hardware. Perhaps you are happy settling for approximation. Not everyone is.

It's okay if you don't like hardware - it isn't for everyone.

I grew up on hardware synths, samplers, and sequencers. I still have plenty of hardware in my studio, but it's a pain in the ass to use it especially when working to a deadline and not just playing around. Count yourself lucky you've never had to knock out a demo using a rack of hardware samplers, there's nothing "fast" about it. There's also nothing interesting sounding about it. I don't begrudge anyone using anything to do whatever they want, but I've never had problems making any sound I want with software (not in the last 12 years or so anyway). I haven't heard anybody play me a sound from a hardware synth that sounded so amazing and unique that it could only have come from their hardware since I was a kid and VAs were the newest trend in hardware. I have brief bouts of nostalgia for my room full of synths in racks and on every available surface and they generally last right up until I go to a friend's place and remember exactly how much of a pain in the ass it was.

My job is delivering finished product (songs) to clients. I've never once had a client bother to ask me what was used to make a sound let alone request "something that sounds like hardware". I've also never met anyone with any noticeable talent, that couldn't get the sounds they need to make a great track out of whatever you put in front of them.

Anyway, use what you like. I'll use what I like. Nobody listening to the finished product will care which synth made which sound unless they want to get into electronic music themselves, and then they can come here and argue about whether the exact same waveform sounds different depending on its source.

[pdxindy]

While there's no equivalent to Moog One in software world, many VSTis sound pretty good.

I got rid of my Moog One because I was disappointed with the sound. The final straw was when I compared the Moog to Repro and I liked Repro better.

Im calling BS. Love repro and have all the u-he synths. The Moog One sounds light years beyond Repro though lol. I would have to absolutely need the money in a life or death situation to even consider replacing my moog one with repro. And even then it would be tough to let go haha

Did you have difficulty programming your Moog One? I know some users can’t really get with the work flow. But the raw sound? Repro ain’t close lol.

I was one of the first buyers of the Moog One 16. At that time, it was by far the buggiest synth I ever purchased. I also couldn't stand the fan noise. My studio is super quiet and the Moog One was so loud and obnoxious, I felt relief when I turned it off.
Those were the primary reasons I passed it on.

However, I was also disappointed with the sound. I found it boring and overly tame. I would have gotten rid of it based solely on the sound. And no, I didn't have difficulty programming it... I can design sounds on anything.

Sound is subjective and for my ears, the Moog One just has no juice.

[Scotty]

I have a couple of rooms filled with hardware and I don't disagree with you. The hardware angle is purely preference now. In my case, I do derive a benefit from the tactile nature of hardware that motivates me to create and I tend to commit more to decisions given that hardware settings are not as easily recalled as software. That luxury is not afforded when I am being paid to create. Pragmatism tends to win when pushed by a deadline and bills have to be paid. Apart from monetary concerns, no one is forced to work in the box and vice versa. Play on.

I grew up on hardware synths, samplers, and sequencers. I still have plenty of hardware in my studio, but it's a pain in the ass to use it especially when working to a deadline and not just playing around. Count yourself lucky you've never had to knock out a demo using a rack of hardware samplers, there's nothing "fast" about it. There's also nothing interesting sounding about it. I don't begrudge anyone using anything to do whatever they want, but I've never had problems making any sound I want with software (not in the last 12 years or so anyway). I haven't heard anybody play me a sound from a hardware synth that sounded so amazing and unique that it could only have come from their hardware since I was a kid and VAs were the newest trend in hardware. I have brief bouts of nostalgia for my room full of synths in racks and on every available surface and they generally last right up until I go to a friend's place and remember exactly how much of a pain in the ass it was.

My job is delivering finished product (songs) to clients. I've never once had a client bother to ask me what was used to make a sound let alone request "something that sounds like hardware". I've also never met anyone with any noticeable talent, that couldn't get the sounds they need to make a great track out of whatever you put in front of them.

Anyway, use what you like. I'll use what I like. Nobody listening to the finished product will care which synth made which sound unless they want to get into electronic music themselves, and then they can come here and argue about whether the exact same waveform sounds different depending on its source.

[SoftSynthLover99]

While there's no equivalent to Moog One in software world, many VSTis sound pretty good.

I got rid of my Moog One because I was disappointed with the sound. The final straw was when I compared the Moog to Repro and I liked Repro better.

Im calling BS. Love repro and have all the u-he synths. The Moog One sounds light years beyond Repro though lol. I would have to absolutely need the money in a life or death situation to even consider replacing my moog one with repro. And even then it would be tough to let go haha

Did you have difficulty programming your Moog One? I know some users can’t really get with the work flow. But the raw sound? Repro ain’t close lol.

I was one of the first buyers of the Moog One 16. At that time, it was by far the buggiest synth I ever purchased. I also couldn't stand the fan noise. My studio is super quiet and the Moog One was so loud and obnoxious, I felt relief when I turned it off.
Those were the primary reasons I passed it on.

However, I was also disappointed with the sound. I found it boring and overly tame. I would have gotten rid of it based solely on the sound. And no, I didn't have difficulty programming it... I can design sounds on anything.

Sound is subjective and for my ears, the Moog One just has no juice.

Fair enough. I came to the Moog One a bit later after all the firmware issues got sorted and did not pay the initial full price. I haven’t had any of the issues most people talk about with it so my experience has been headache free for the most part.

It’s not even my favorite go to hardware synth, but the sounds I get from it are huge and not able to be recreated by Repro or Diva or software in general. If you think the Moog One is tame I would say that’s down to patch design, because it can get pretty gnarly sounding!