KVR Audio

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 1:26 am

I like the juno106

granted I hold it specially since it's the first synth with a real hardware interface I've ever played

Imposcar sounds better though

oblagon · Post by **oblagon** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 2:33 am

kritikon: Don't lie. Juno and Virus are devastating

fgimian · Post by **fgimian** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 3:46 am

kritikon wrote:
MP3 samples unfortunately for you are revealing. Unlike the rubbish tales you're spinning.
Believe what you want. No skin off my nose. You should realise you give your age away by what you say though. Even only 10 years ago, PC audio was not a big thing (apart from running the actual midi sequencer). You don't have to go back much further than that, and almost anyone who ran a studio of any kind with any degree of seriousness had a room full of synths. I probably never actually had more than 10 most of the time (and admittedly that was more than some of my mates back in the day). I think the most I ever had chained together was 11. So you see that you only need to know 2 or 3 studio owners to know how many synths you could be using. And of course you sell the odd one to make room for a different one.

You give your inexperience away by the fact that you assume I'm bullshitting about how many synths I've owned or had access to. The envy shines through...which is silly, because I'm seriously not bragging about how many synths I've used. It just was like that years ago. I was no different to many people I collaborated with. You can compare it to the sheer amount of VSTi you have access to today - there are hundreds out there - well, once upon a time the only difference was that they were h/w, not s/w, and if you wanted a wide palette of sounds, you bit the bullet and dug into your wallet. Anyone who was serious about electronic music through the 80s/90s will have used a whole heap of synths over the years. And it's not a matter of pride either...it just is. If I were to live those days again, do you think I wouldn't have killed to have access to cheap s/w with the huge range there is today? You're the one deluding yourself mate.

I listed those synths so that you and others who spout the usual rubbish about Viruses and Junos etc may know that some of us here actually do have the wide experience to know the difference with our ears. For any analogue die-hard, Junos really aren't worth the time of day. If you have one and enjoy it...good luck with it, I hope you make nice music with it. And I can also say with certainty that when you do actually get to play with the seriously good ones - well, I just wish I was there to say "I told you so". Because they're in a different league to crappy Junos. But, hey! I must be deaf through old age or something, huh? Because I actively choose to use free VSTi rather than my Junos. One day, you'll know why.

I just fail to see why the connection doesn't click with some people. There is good and bad analogue in just the same way there is good and bad s/w. It's as though just because it's analogue it has to be good? That's patently rubbish. You compare quality between h/w items in exactly the same way you do between s/w - I can see obviously there's a big difference between impOSCar and something like ModelE. Just as I can see there's a big difference between a Juno in unison and any decent mono synth, such as an MS10 (although an MS20 would be more of a like-like comparison, as at least it can stack oscillators like a Juno...in fact, with only 2 oscillators it can make far more noise than any Juno with 3 oscillators; and in unison that Juno then has 6 times 3 oscillators playing - and it still sounds pathetic compared to an MS20 self-oscillating with the output fed back into the filters). Or that there's a difference between a Pro-V and a Juno (if you keep the comparison between polys). Even between manufacturers there's a world of difference - compare a Jp6 and any Juno, and tell me you wouldn't every day rather use the Jp6. If you had one of those, you really wouldn't ever have any reason whatsoever to use a Juno again for the rest of your life. Straight-forward and simple.

I find your insights very interesting to read and I have no doubt that you have used all the synths you say you have, and that you know what you're talking about. However, without audio samples, it is hard to agree with you or relate to what's being said.

End of the day, you can talk experience and ages all day, but without audio samples, there is no way I can relate to what you're saying.

I thought the point of a forum was that you share your experience with people who are trying to learn ?

e.g. silly 23 yeard olds like me who haven't had te pleasure of playing with hundreds of synths

Cheers
Fots

P.S.: Keep in mind that a lot of us here are looking at creating trance or dance music to suit modern styles. I personally never found anything special about 90s music and especially not 80s music. Artists like Oceanlab, Above & Beyond, Alex M.O.R.P.H., BT, Deepwide, Airwave, Signum which mostly emerged in the 21st century are the sorts of artists I look up to.

I know I'm probably setting myself up for a "oh that's crap music, the real music you should be listening to is ??", but these are the sort of artists which I (and several others I hope) believe have a great synth sound.

vvanrij · Post by **vvanrij** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:16 pm

About that virus demo someone posted, it sounds great, thats true.. but is it really 'that different' from a VST sound, like for instance Albino 3? I personally believe they could become so close, that guru's like on this forum would indeed hear a difference, but your audience that hears the track, won't notice. Anyone any experience with this?

-Victor

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:37 pm

Create a preset on one hardware synth, and you will have a hard time duplicating it on another hardware synth. Create a preset on a software synth and you will have a hard time duplicating it on a hardware synth.

I can create beautiful sounding presets on String Studio that the Virus can never match. Someone else can create a preset on another hardware synth that the virus can never match. Someone else can create a Virus preset that some other hardware can never match.

High quality synths, whether hardware or software are unique and have their own character and sounds. That does not make one better than the other. Hardware synths are not better quality than software synths. The Virus mp3 that was posted does not sound fundamentally better to me than software synths. Mostly I think the desire to find it better is because it costs a lot more and people want to believe they purchased something exclusive.

I think it is valuable to have discussion about how to recreate a certain sound in a different synth because we can all learn more about editing sounds and improve our skills. Trying to define better or worse seems pointless.

The Chase · Post by **The Chase** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:43 pm

pdxindy wrote:Create a preset on one hardware synth, and you will have a hard time duplicating it on another hardware synth. Create a preset on a software synth and you will have a hard time duplicating it on a hardware synth.

I can create beautiful sounding presets on String Studio that the Virus can never match. Someone else can create a preset on another hardware synth that the virus can never match. Someone else can create a Virus preset that some other hardware can never match.

High quality synths, whether hardware or software are unique and have their own character and sounds. That does not make one better than the other. Hardware synths are not better quality than software synths. The Virus mp3 that was posted does not sound fundamentally better to me than software synths. Mostly I think the desire to find it better is because it costs a lot more and people want to believe they purchased something exclusive.

+1. Posting an MP3 of a virus patch and telling people to recreate it is retarded. I could do the same with software synth sounds that couldnt be recreated (And even if I did it wouldnt be a run-of-the mill trance lead sound like the clip posted).

Algorythm · Post by **Algorythm** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:46 pm

vvanrij wrote:About that virus demo someone posted, it sounds great, thats true.. but is it really 'that different' from a VST sound, like for instance Albino 3? I personally believe they could become so close, that guru's like on this forum would indeed hear a difference, but your audience that hears the track, won't notice. Anyone any experience with this?

-Victor

This is true, many times people argue about the quality of a softsynth in comparison with hardware synths and most of the times the differences (if they are any) disappear in the mix and always the average listener won't ever find out what is what...

nuffink · Post by **nuffink** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 10:49 pm

Algorythm wrote:
vvanrij wrote:About that virus demo someone posted, it sounds great, thats true.. but is it really 'that different' from a VST sound, like for instance Albino 3? I personally believe they could become so close, that guru's like on this forum would indeed hear a difference, but your audience that hears the track, won't notice. Anyone any experience with this?

-Victor
This is true, many times people argue about the quality of a softsynth in comparison with hardware synths and most of the times the differences (if they are any) disappear in the mix and always the average listener won't ever find out what is what...

The average listener couldn't tell an oboe from a kettle drum.

vvanrij · Post by **vvanrij** » Mon Jul 31, 2006 11:23 pm

I agree with all the replies, just to make some statements

-Every synth has its own characteristics (sound), hard- ánd softsynths
-Which one sounds better is personal taste, and totally depends on music genre, audience
-You can edit synths quite close to each other (provided they have same synthesis options), but can never get it spot on
-These small differences might not be noted by alot of people, nor do they care if it was an expensive Neuron, or a free FreeAlpha
-The virus is NOT the mother of all synths, its just a very popular, and absolutely gorgeous (the c was hot) instrument, but not the one-in-all solution

I personally both use hardware and software, but can't really tell which I prefer to use, neither if the sound 'quality' is better on hardware or software...

-Victor

pepelogu · Post by **pepelogu** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:15 am

You all just wait until i'm finished with my first Synthedit-made VST. It will have better filters than the Virus and Junos COMBINED!

...now taking preorders.

Just send cash please.

bryanf · Post by **bryanf** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:22 am

Why can't we compare samples so we can all hear how different synths sound? Everyone is keen to talk (mostly about their superior skills), but no one is posting samples.

I don't think the point of the virus mp3 was to 'dare' anyone to beat it with a VSTi. Its a chance for everyone to compare different hardware and software.

B

Ildon · Post by **Ildon** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:27 am

nuffink wrote:
Algorythm wrote:
vvanrij wrote:About that virus demo someone posted, it sounds great, thats true.. but is it really 'that different' from a VST sound, like for instance Albino 3? I personally believe they could become so close, that guru's like on this forum would indeed hear a difference, but your audience that hears the track, won't notice. Anyone any experience with this?

-Victor
This is true, many times people argue about the quality of a softsynth in comparison with hardware synths and most of the times the differences (if they are any) disappear in the mix and always the average listener won't ever find out what is what...
The average listener couldn't tell an oboe from a kettle drum.

That's a bit extreme, but pretty spot on. No one's going to care if you're using a Virus or if you're using WaspXT. They're going to care about whether your music is good or not.

Imagine that.

And you know what... that's exactly what your sig says.

jplanet · Post by **jplanet** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:30 am

Maybe if someone posted a midi file along with a sample, everyone could have a go at geting as close as possible with their chosen instrument...

(I missed a few page sof this thread, so forgive me if this has already been done!)

oblagon · Post by **oblagon** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:39 am

vvanrij wrote: -The virus is NOT the mother of all synths, its just a very popular, and absolutely gorgeous (the c was hot) instrument, but not the one-in-all solution

I think Virus can be one in all solution (for electronic music). One of the reasons Virus gained popularity is becase of rouneded off feature set. Poly Evolver sure as hell sounds better at typical synth sounds but you'll be hard pressed to make whole tracks with it. Not so with Virus. Massive polyphony, fx per part means that you can embark on creating LPs just with Virus.

Some people DO exactly that with excellent results.

pepelogu · Post by **pepelogu** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:41 am

oblagon wrote:
vvanrij wrote: -The virus is NOT the mother of all synths, its just a very popular, and absolutely gorgeous (the c was hot) instrument, but not the one-in-all solution
I think Virus can be one in all solution (for electronic music). One of the reasons Virus gained popularity is becase of rouneded off feature set. Poly Evolver sure as hell sounds better at typical synth sounds but you'll be hard pressed to make whole tracks with it. Not so with Virus. Massive polyphony, fx per part means that you can embark on creating LPs just with Virus. Some people DO exactly that with excellent results.

Yep, like Paul Oakenfold for instance... His production of Madonnas "What it feels like for a girl" being an excellent example.

VSTis as good as hardware? Similar to Access Virus Quality?