Synths you regret buying

[DocSnyder]

Avenger. I bought it very early because I put faith in Vengeance (I own a few other products from them). Well, obviously I was not more than a beta tester Even after 3 months there were massive issues. I totally felt disappointed and punked. From the support I once got told to buy a new graphics card or display XD Meanwhile they've focused only on Avenger and their other products got abbonded. I was happy to sell Avenger without a big loss and I'll definitely think about selling their other products, too.

I like Synthmaster (and its ui ) and going to stick with that or mayba Rapid if they fixed their licence transfer.

[Bodhisan]

Am I the only person who likes Synthmaster's ui?

I like it too

Yes. Especially now that it's larger. It's clinical looking - no "wow" factor, which doesn't bother me at all - it's rather like Alchemy.

Back to the thread - I just regret buying too many synths...

[Dasheesh]

I really like the default skin of synthmaster. It reminds me of Hive a lot. I like to load synthmaster and Hive together.

[chk071]

if you buy a vintage synth for a good price, then you can't really regret buying it because you can sell it for around what you paid for it. i'd buy a virtual synth as soon as i found one that replaces Charlatan or Synth1. i almost bought a u-he synth license, but even zebralette takes just too long to dial up a sound, can't get podolski to make a single tone that i am trying to, and zebra you need a PhD in sound design to understand. (and many consider U-he to be the best in the business.).

Try Spire for Synth1 replacement

That, and try Monark or Diva as Charlatan replacement. If you still think that it's just a dense set of features which justifies the price then, well...

Don't get me wrong, Charlatan is a nice synth, but, Monark and Diva are just better. And Synth1 and Spire, well, just no comparison. Spire simply blows it out of the water IMO. It's really not just the features which separates the wheat from the chaff.

[Dasheesh]

...and for all you amateurs bitching about Blofeld. That's what Monstrumfeld is for!

[chk071]

...and for all you amateurs bitching about Blofeld. That's what Monstrumfeld is for!

And why should i not just use Largo, or any soft synth then? Especially having the luxury of 256 voices, and as many instances as i like then. Frankly, i don't get why i should buy an expensive box, just to use a software editor then. Kind of paradox. If it's a synth with one knob per function on the device itself, we're talking. But, it gets really pricey then.

[Bump1]

...and for all you amateurs bitching about Blofeld. That's what Monstrumfeld is for!

And why should i not just use Largo, or any soft synth then? Especially having the luxury of 256 voices, and as many instances as i like then. Frankly, i don't get why i should buy an expensive box, just to use a software editor then. Kind of paradox. If it's a synth with one knob per function on the device itself, we're talking. But, it gets really pricey then.

Agreed...and while I agree with the poster who said Largo isn't a 1:1 replacement for the Blofeld....I'd no sooner use a software editor than just find a plugin replacement....1:1 or not.

For me, hardware is all about interfacing with the instrument physically

[ghettosynth]

...and for all you amateurs bitching about Blofeld. That's what Monstrumfeld is for!

And why should i not just use Largo, or any soft synth then? Especially having the luxury of 256 voices, and as many instances as i like then. Frankly, i don't get why i should buy an expensive box, just to use a software editor then. Kind of paradox. If it's a synth with one knob per function on the device itself, we're talking. But, it gets really pricey then.

Agreed...and while I agree with the poster who said Largo isn't a 1:1 replacement for the Blofeld....I'd no sooner use a software editor than just find a plugin replacement....1:1 or not.

For me, hardware is all about interfacing with the instrument physically

Indeed, especially when, like the Blofeld, it's just a software instrument running on a dedicated computer in the first place. I have a metric assload of hardware, so don't get me wrong, I appreciate it for what it is, especially when it has a great U/I or its hardware nature is somewhat special, e.g. some analog. But, I've never quite understood the seeming fascination with hardware for it's own sake when it's nothing more than a plugin in a box with a few knobs.

[Dasheesh]

Blofeld has a lot more grit and warmth then the stunning, yet hyper digital Largo ever will.

[Ed A.]

Likely has to do with the Waldorf DA converters in the Blofeld that you can't duplicate with Largo. I like the sound of Blofeld (and other Waldorf hardware) but not Largo or Nave.
I notice the same thing with the Korg Wavestation EX I had for many years vs the software version.

[chk071]

Funnily, i read more than once in Youtube comments how people complained about the Blofeld being colder than the older Waldorf synths. And, what people consider that "airy" warm sound of older Waldorf synths IMO has a lot to do with a lack of high frequency content (and probably a fair amount of aliasing), compared to the newer Waldorf synths. Anyway, each to his like, but, i compared the Blofeld to Largo here, and, except for a tad of more highs in Largo, i could hardly hear a difference. Wolfram Franke said himself that a lot of the Blofeld DNA is in Largo. IMO, they sound more or less the same. If you guys think it doesn't, well, fair enough. I can only speak for myself when i say that the difference for me was small enough that i thought "WTH should i put up with such a tedious programming, if i have all that in software form with a lot of advantages already".

[ghettosynth]

Likely has to do with the Waldorf DA converters in the Blofeld that you can't duplicate with Largo. I like the sound of Blofeld (and other Waldorf hardware) but not Largo or Nave.
I notice the same thing with the Korg Wavestation EX I had for many years vs the software version.

This seems to be the goto argument but I don't think that it holds up really. What sort of magical DA converters would be in a budget synth such that they would outclass a wide variety of audio interfaces?

There really isn't as much difference in DA converters as people like to imagine. With older hardware it's possible that lower quality converters contribute to perception, however, Blofeld isn't old enough such that would really be the case here. I mean almost all of us have at least one source of cheap DA converters at our disposal, e.g., the onboard converters in our laptops and desktops.

What's far more likely is that any difference one hears beyond actual algorithmic differences is hardware bias. I think that people really underestimate the power that bias plays in our perception of sound.

[Dasheesh]

It's not hard ware bias as much as a less sterile and precise sound with more depth, and you seriously cannot underestimate the power of ownership and self discovery that comes from not having everything done for you and spelled out for you. I'll admit there have been some rocking damn fine digital distortions let loose on the world lately though. My comments were basically poking at you guys in jest and giving you something to talk about more then anything but I have a serious need for grit and warmth in my instruments as well as the cold digital other side of the spectrum.

The classic argument against Waldorf amungst hard ware guys back in the day was that it was too high in the high ends and buzzy funnily enough. Those youtube comments are just people who don't really know what the hell they are talking about yet.

[Ed A.]

It's not that they would outclass better transparent audio interfaces, it's that they have their own special character that colors the sound.

[Dasheesh]

It's not that they would outclass better transparent audio interfaces, it's that they have their own special character that colors the sound.

^^^ ding ding ding