Why do people here hate on cherry audio?

[Echoes in the Attic]

I don’t think there’s “hate,” as much as there is conflict between people giving valid criticism and die hard fans.

In 2023, there’s an expectation among people who use analog synths that an emulation will have a level of detail and lack of artifacts that are as good as Repro, Model 72, etc. While Cherry Audio plugins can sound very good, they don’t provide the same level of detail and sometimes show noticeable artifacts. When that’s stated, it’s not taken as an unemotional observation, but as an attack.

I don’t think that an emulation has to be accurate to be useful for making music. I don’t even think everything should sound “analog.” However, when you announce yourself as an accurate emulation, you have opened the window to analysis and criticism.

Pretty much how I feel about them. I tried a few a smile back like the dco106 and wasn't impressed compared to other offerings. That being said I feel like therenisnsome inconsistency in their emulations as far as accuracy, which may be down ti the difficulty of the analog model. For example they tend to be decent on some synths thatndont have too much audionrate modulation or extreme filters. I think their eight voices stacks up very well against the gforce one. And their mercury 4 and 6 are good too. Arp 2600 and ms20 not too convinced by. Nor the 106 (which doesn't fit the rule I just described but it's just not that good).

[plexuss]

My issue with Cherry is they changed their policy to no license transfers. For people like me who enjoy the ability to transfer licenses, this soured me on Cherry and I no longer buy their products. I have a significant investment in their products up until they changed their policy to NFR. No more Cherrys for me.

[machinesworking]

In 2023, there’s an expectation among people who use analog synths that an emulation will have a level of detail and lack of artifacts that are as good as Repro, Model 72, etc. While Cherry Audio plugins can sound very good, they don’t provide the same level of detail and sometimes show noticeable artifacts. When that’s stated, it’s not taken as an unemotional observation, but as an attack.

I don’t think that an emulation has to be accurate to be useful for making music. I don’t even think everything should sound “analog.” However, when you announce yourself as an accurate emulation, you have opened the window to analysis and criticism.

Personally I tried them out for the first time when they released the Memorymoog clone, and frankly it's absolute garbage, it sounds nothing like a Memorymoog, it's an insult to us as customers that they even claim it comes close. It sounds like someone used the basic ensemble parts in Reaktor and made a Memorymoog GUI and called it good. It's also CPU heavy, even though it sounds like a cheap knockoff in SynthEdit from 2003.

I like their non emulation plug ins so far, their modular system has PSP plugins as add ons which is really cool, but so far I haven't bitten, I'm still insulted by the idiotically bad cash grab emulation that their "Memorymoog clone" is.

[theviirus]

fine ill say it. Cherry Audio (silently) modified their license transfer terms during a humble bundle offering and a diligent KVR user (BBFG#) here let everyone know. All CA licenses, even ones purchased before the change, are now non-transferable. This is hostile to users. CA could have made the humble bundle licenses NFR and CA could have informed people directly of the upcoming change -- instead we found out via KVR without an official statement.

I was happy with CA, but then I realized I wasnt using their tools as much as I had hoped I would. Its past the point where I could have transferred my licenses, even with fees its not like the profit margin would have been more than $5-10 anyway. SO... in the interest of moving on, giving tools to someone who may want them, AND heading off the whiners who will say "dur you had ur chance", Ill go ahead and put my money where my mouth is.

Whoever wants my CA acct can have it free of charge. (includes stardust, rackmode fx, dco106, and the mg1 emu). OR if some CA admin sees this, contact me and I'll give you the info to delete my account and invalidate my licenses. (whichever comes first really)

Vocoder? I have hardware. Space echo? Its ok, I have others. Juno emu? Moog emu? Over it.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of their products which are ok but saw little to zero use...and everything to do with unilaterally modifying the license terms surreptitiously. Had their license terms been like this from the start, I would have not chosen to spend money with them.

[Robmobius]

Probably because they are assholes...

[ramseysounds]

To the OP, because people on here can be priks, like life in general
Personally, take the synths for what they are. If you don’t like, move on

[machinesworking]

To the OP, because people on here can be priks, like life in general
Personally, take the synths for what they are. If you don’t like, move on

I think my reasons for not liking them and theviirus's reasons are perfectly valid, you can disagree of course but try countering the actual reasons why you disagree, not generalized ad hominem attacks.

Personally I kind of like their original 'not trying to copy analog relics' synths, but their analog emulations are the worst ones out there. They may be useful, they just don't sound much like what they claim to sound like. Arturia, Softube, Synapse Audio, and U-He all do better emulations of old gear. It's not being a prick, it's preventing someone from wasting their time if they want "that" sound.

[zerocrossing]

I don’t think there’s “hate,” as much as there is conflict between people giving valid criticism and die hard fans.

In 2023, there’s an expectation among people who use analog synths that an emulation will have a level of detail and lack of artifacts that are as good as Repro, Model 72, etc. While Cherry Audio plugins can sound very good, they don’t provide the same level of detail and sometimes show noticeable artifacts. When that’s stated, it’s not taken as an unemotional observation, but as an attack.

I don’t think that an emulation has to be accurate to be useful for making music. I don’t even think everything should sound “analog.” However, when you announce yourself as an accurate emulation, you have opened the window to analysis and criticism.

Pretty much how I feel about them. I tried a few a smile back like the dco106 and wasn't impressed compared to other offerings. That being said I feel like therenisnsome inconsistency in their emulations as far as accuracy, which may be down ti the difficulty of the analog model. For example they tend to be decent on some synths thatndont have too much audionrate modulation or extreme filters. I think their eight voices stacks up very well against the gforce one. And their mercury 4 and 6 are good too. Arp 2600 and ms20 not too convinced by. Nor the 106 (which doesn't fit the rule I just described but it's just not that good).

I don’t know about Mercury 6, but I thought 4 was really weak compared to Roland’s Jupiter 4, which actually sounds a lot like a Jupiter 4, except they get the VCA distortion wrong. I mean, it sounds OK, just not like a Jupiter 4, which can sound great.

[zerocrossing]

To the OP, because people on here can be priks, like life in general
Personally, take the synths for what they are. If you don’t like, move on

See? Here it is. This is why there is perceived “hate” on Cherry Audio. People express their opinion, and then are attacked as being “pricks.” Those “pricks” start providing reasons for their assessment and come off as angry haters, but really they’re angry that their opinions are being gaslit, and invalid.

Here’s my guess. The people who think people who are critical of Cherry Audio have never used an analog synth, or hasn’t in a really long time, and really don’t care about the sound of analog synths. Because of that, they just see Cherry Audio as good sounding plugins that are very cheap, and anyone who criticizes the plugins is really criticizing them for being ignorant of what an actual analog synth sounds like, and they feel bad. They can’t hold two things in their head at one time: Cherry Audio plugins sound good, and Cherry Audio Plugins are not great emulations.

[ramseysounds]

I stand by my comments

[DrGonzo]

I tried them out for the first time when they released the Memorymoog clone, and frankly it's absolute garbage, it sounds nothing like a Memorymoog, it's an insult to us as customers that they even claim it comes close. It sounds like someone used the basic ensemble parts in Reaktor and made a Memorymoog GUI and called it good.

That reminds me of the good old Reaktor days when the user area was full of activity and things like that appeared all the time. Virus clones, TB303 clones, even Roland romplers. I liked the sketchiness of those ensembles. But I agree. If a company does a clone in 2023 it should be really close. That being said, I don't mind Cherry one bit. I don't take their emulations as gospel but for what they are - and I generally like them.

[DrGonzo]

They can’t hold two things in their head at one time: Cherry Audio plugins sound good, and Cherry Audio Plugins are not great emulations.

Zero - not being a spring chicken any longer, I've started to realise that very few people can hold two things in their head at the same time. Especially when it at first glance seems the two are seemingly opposing each other, which more often than not, is just an oversimplification of the mind.

[chk071]

I don't hate Cherry Audio, I just think they could do a better job at modelling the original synths their emulations are based on. Especially with the competition there is these days with these specific types of soft synths, it takes more than just to slap a GUI on them to make them look like the original, slightly adjust their existing oscillators and filters, and then sell it as a Minimoog.

You know, it's fine, they do their thing, and some people by it. No hard feelings. It's just that I wouldn't buy them. I already found their free MG-1 emulation pretty mediocre, and, the payware I demo'd sounded equally mediocre to me. Just not my cup of tea.

[Vortifex]

..

[Echoes in the Attic]

I don’t think there’s “hate,” as much as there is conflict between people giving valid criticism and die hard fans.

In 2023, there’s an expectation among people who use analog synths that an emulation will have a level of detail and lack of artifacts that are as good as Repro, Model 72, etc. While Cherry Audio plugins can sound very good, they don’t provide the same level of detail and sometimes show noticeable artifacts. When that’s stated, it’s not taken as an unemotional observation, but as an attack.

I don’t think that an emulation has to be accurate to be useful for making music. I don’t even think everything should sound “analog.” However, when you announce yourself as an accurate emulation, you have opened the window to analysis and criticism.

Pretty much how I feel about them. I tried a few a smile back like the dco106 and wasn't impressed compared to other offerings. That being said I feel like therenisnsome inconsistency in their emulations as far as accuracy, which may be down ti the difficulty of the analog model. For example they tend to be decent on some synths thatndont have too much audionrate modulation or extreme filters. I think their eight voices stacks up very well against the gforce one. And their mercury 4 and 6 are good too. Arp 2600 and ms20 not too convinced by. Nor the 106 (which doesn't fit the rule I just described but it's just not that good).

I don’t know about Mercury 6, but I thought 4 was really weak compared to Roland’s Jupiter 4, which actually sounds a lot like a Jupiter 4, except they get the VCA distortion wrong. I mean, it sounds OK, just not like a Jupiter 4, which can sound great.

8 have both and actually quite like the cherry mercury 4. Got a little more punch than the roland (which is very nice too and they added osc shapes so more flexible)