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

[Bunny_boy]

A fella has to have some emergency HP!

Like for when you run out of ketchup?

[HAL76]

So, yes, many people did sell off their "analog synths", aka, their keyboards, to buy a better keyboard, the M1. People who actually cared about analog synthesis for the sound, did not sell off their analogs to buy an M1, generally speaking. I'm sure there were cases where a synth hoarder sold off some of their old stuff to get the new thing to put with their old things.

Of course you are right that being able to produce analog synths cheaper plays a big part in the analog resurgence, but it is also in part because people realized over time that analog still has something they value.

I think we also have to see that "the whole game" has changed, especially since the late 90s when DAWs came up. Today a hobbyist can really produce a Song with analog synths. The situation was totally different back then and the workstations (=digital) offered possibilities that contributed a lot to reach musical targets. Despite of sequencing mixing, recording and saving were real challenges. I suppose that analog synths wouldn´t be that interesting anymore today if there wouldn´t be the "infrastructure" built around them to use them effectively. And since we don´t have trouble with all these little or bigger problems anymore we are focussed on the results and the sound. And the sound really still stands out. Even the sounds you can make with cheap analogs like the Pulse 2. I just checked some pads I made with it a while ago (Pulsewave unison poly mode) and they sound so sweet <3

[vurt]

*it's not that unusual, manual labour will play havoc with your body. Standing up sometimes sounds like jumping on a sheet of bubble wrap. Oh joy...

get on the medical weed like me!
turning my head sounds a bit like that, my neck and shoulders are ruined.

[dellboy]

In fact digital is still by far the main way of making music, only now its in a computer instead of a workstation or module.

do you mean recording? perhaps it is?
but one could argue the traditional "instruments" both acoustic and electric, outweigh synths as a whole i bet.

Good point, I actually do not know, I guess acoustic and electric recorded into a digital DAW is the way that most main stream music is made today? I was just thinking of the sort of sounds that an M1 could do and everyone wanted in those days. And like ghettosynth mentioned it was all about pianos back then.

[vurt]

In fact digital is still by far the main way of making music, only now its in a computer instead of a workstation or module.

do you mean recording? perhaps it is?
but one could argue the traditional "instruments" both acoustic and electric, outweigh synths as a whole i bet.

Good point, I actually do not know, I guess acoustic and electric recorded into a digital DAW is the way that most main stream music is made today? I was just thinking of the sort of sounds that an M1 could do and everyone wanted in those days. And like ghettosynth mentioned it was all about pianos back then.

but many m1 pianos, were used in bands alongside other instruments, piano, bass, guitar (maybe x2) and drums, thats 3 to 1 in favour of other instruments already

[ghettosynth]

So, yes, many people did sell off their "analog synths", aka, their keyboards, to buy a better keyboard, the M1. People who actually cared about analog synthesis for the sound, did not sell off their analogs to buy an M1, generally speaking. I'm sure there were cases where a synth hoarder sold off some of their old stuff to get the new thing to put with their old things.

Of course you are right that being able to produce analog synths cheaper plays a big part in the analog resurgence, but it is also in part because people realized over time that analog still has something they value.

Absolutely. Also, how people made music changed in many ways. An additional part of the resurgence was the divorcing of the keyboard either completely, or by reducing its importance, e.g., making it smaller. The role that the synth/keyboard played in music changed and even this was foreshadowed somewhat. I think that VA had a significant impact here. I'm not trying to plot the entire trajectory, I don't think that's possible, it's nuanced at every point in time.

Digital was seen as the future in the 80s, it wasn't really a dirty word. As near as I can tell the belief that FM synthesis could create any sound wasn't really a statement made about it, per se, rather, it was a general sense articulated by Max Mathews in the early 60s.

There are no theoretical limitations to the performance of the computer as a source of musical sounds. Any sound that the human ear can hear can be produced.

[ghettosynth]

In fact digital is still by far the main way of making music, only now its in a computer instead of a workstation or module.

do you mean recording? perhaps it is?
but one could argue the traditional "instruments" both acoustic and electric, outweigh synths as a whole i bet.

Good point, I actually do not know, I guess acoustic and electric recorded into a digital DAW is the way that most main stream music is made today? I was just thinking of the sort of sounds that an M1 could do and everyone wanted in those days. And like ghettosynth mentioned it was all about pianos back then.

but many m1 pianos, were used in bands alongside other instruments, piano, bass, guitar (maybe x2) and drums, thats 3 to 1 in favour of other instruments already

Well no doubt. The only reason that this was important for the idea of a piano is the size and weight reduction. This concern even sparked early instruments that we now see as classics. The Hammond organ is much smaller than a church organ but is huge compared to a Vox Jaguar. The Fender Rhodes was invented to be replacement for the piano on stage before it was possible to do it with electronics. It was invented by Harold Rhodes during WWII who created it to be a lightweight instrument for hospital bound soldiers.

[vurt]

In fact digital is still by far the main way of making music, only now its in a computer instead of a workstation or module.

do you mean recording? perhaps it is?
but one could argue the traditional "instruments" both acoustic and electric, outweigh synths as a whole i bet.

Good point, I actually do not know, I guess acoustic and electric recorded into a digital DAW is the way that most main stream music is made today? I was just thinking of the sort of sounds that an M1 could do and everyone wanted in those days. And like ghettosynth mentioned it was all about pianos back then.

but many m1 pianos, were used in bands alongside other instruments, piano, bass, guitar (maybe x2) and drums, thats 3 to 1 in favour of other instruments already

Well no doubt. The only reason that this was important for the idea of a piano is the size and weight reduction. This concern even sparked early instruments that we now see as classics. The Hammond organ is much smaller than a church organ but is huge compared to a Vox Jaguar. The Fender Rhodes was invented to be replacement for the piano on stage before it was possible to do it with electronics. It was invented by Harold Rhodes during WWII who created it to be a lightweight instrument for on board bombers, to entertain the pilots.

interesting, i had no idea!

[ghettosynth]

It was invented by Harold Rhodes during WWII who created it to be a lightweight instrument for on board bombers, to entertain the pilots.

interesting, i had no idea!

No, indeed. Harold Rhodes work eventually led to the Army Air Corps piano, a 29-note teaching instrument that was also installed on bombers right next to the radio. Since the communications specialist already knew morse code, he usually was pretty adept with music skills. In the thick of battle a great tune will cut through. So, the piano could be used to communicate important orders to the pilots, while also keeping up morale.

I'm not sure that everyone is aware of the lengths that the allies went to to win the war.

[vurt]

It was invented by Harold Rhodes during WWII who created it to be a lightweight instrument for on board bombers, to entertain the pilots.

interesting, i had no idea!

No, indeed. Harold Rhodes work eventually led to the Army Air Corps piano, a 29-note teaching instrument that was also installed on bombers right next to the radio. Since the communications specialist already knew morse code, he usually was pretty adept with music skills. In the thick of battle a great tune will cut through. So, the piano could be used to communicate important orders to the pilots, while also keeping up morale.

I'm not sure that everyone is aware of the lengths that the allies went to to win the war.

plus, a bit of organ beats that glenn miller business all day.

[ghettosynth]

It was invented by Harold Rhodes during WWII who created it to be a lightweight instrument for on board bombers, to entertain the pilots.

interesting, i had no idea!

No, indeed. Harold Rhodes work eventually led to the Army Air Corps piano, a 29-note teaching instrument that was also installed on bombers right next to the radio. Since the communications specialist already knew morse code, he usually was pretty adept with music skills. In the thick of battle a great tune will cut through. So, the piano could be used to communicate important orders to the pilots, while also keeping up morale.

I'm not sure that everyone is aware of the lengths that the allies went to to win the war.

plus, a bit of organ beats that glenn miller business all day.

It is hard to beat the organ!

[pdxindy]

It is hard to beat the organ!

Speaking of... On the album Agharta, Miles Davis played a Yamaha YC-45D organ. It had a really good tone and dynamic presence. Not sure what sort of signal path he had.

Do you know if there is a good software emulation?

[_leras]

will the balance shift to the thread with the poll?
should we have a poll to see what we think about that?
ad infinitum.

I think it was agreed on page 1 that the balance has already shifted in terms of usage.

It's also pretty clear, to anyone with hardware synths or modular, and even analog hardware FX, or just people who have listened to demos of hardware that there are aspects of the sound that just aren't met yet.

Probably 50% of the posts in this thread are from one person banging on the software can do anything and sounds as good as hardware in all situations.

Out in the real world it's a golden age of hardware synths and modular synthesis. People are getting these for the sound, no matter what the loud repetitive voices here keep saying.

[vurt]

will the balance shift to the thread with the poll?
should we have a poll to see what we think about that?
ad infinitum.

I think it was agreed on page 1 that the balance has already shifted in terms of usage.

It's also pretty clear, to anyone with hardware synths or modular, and even analog hardware FX, or just people who have listened to demos of hardware that there are aspects of the sound that just aren't met yet.

Probably 50% of the posts in this thread are from one person banging on the software can do anything and sounds as good as hardware in all situations.

Out in the real world it's a golden age of hardware synths and modular synthesis. People are getting these for the sound, no matter what the loud repetitive voices here keep saying.

but this thread is still the focus!
the balance is in balance.

[_leras]

Also well put. I don’t fully agree with your last sentence but it’s completely accurate to say when *trying* to model an analog filter, there will be gaps to an exact representation.

Whether or not those are really meaningful is open for debate though.

I think there is some overlap, and the difference is less for some types of sounds, but there's still a range of tones and sounds that it's noticeable.

I listen to and play a lot of techno, I think it's often pretty easy to pick out hardware sounds.