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

[IvyBirds]

I've just posted videos of hardware synths where they are making tones that software still can't match.

No you didn't you posted a bunch of videos with software based effects and when you listened to them you were hearing the sound of software

[SoftSynthLover99]

You can in fact use Logic Pro or GarageBand live as I have done so on multiple occasions in the past. MainStage is nice but Logic can do the same thing that MainStage and Gig Performer can do and more

iOS has some truly great software synths so who needs a laptop these days? Your laptop rig is ancient in comparison to what iPhones can do!

Only it's not. Garage Band and Logic are DAWs, their primary function is to be an audio workstation for recording

The same way a computer with a mouse and keyboard is not really designed to be a hardware synthesizer right?

I'm glad you understand that the primary function and design of something really matters. Because I was being sarcastic to point out that while yes you can use DAWs live like Logic Pro or GarageBand for live use, it really is not the intent and design of the program.

So while yes your computer can play synthesizer sounds and use various plugins to do so (just like I can use Logic Pro to play live shows) it does not replace a hardware synthesizer and is not designed strictly as a musical instrument like a hardware synthesizer or workstation. Glad you and I finally agree on something!

I think most people on this forum would consider the MKS-70 to be a musical instrument so why can't a laptop be?

I mean why don't you consider Logic Pro or GarageBand to be the same thing as Gig Performer or MainStage? They all can be used to play virtual instruments live and build patches and edit patches in real time. You can't do anything in Gig Performer that I can't do in Logic Pro, so are they all the same just because they can play sound in a live scenario?

The point I'm getting at here is that you seem to place value on a dedicated solution like Gig Performer that is built to do one thing really well (live performance) yet you don't apply that same "logic" to hardware synthesizers or real instruments that are built to perform a specific task.

My laptop keyboard can be a midi controller, so does that mean dedicated midi controllers are obsolete now? I know producers who think so. We are living in technology wonderland where most technology is capable of emulating real world experiences in a software environment, so just because something can be done on a laptop or phone, doesn't mean that's the best (or only) way to do it.

[zerocrossing]

I've just posted videos of hardware synths where they are making tones that software still can't match.

No you didn't you posted a bunch of videos with software based effects and when you listened to them you were hearing the sound of software

Unless you are showing an actual attempt, how the hell can you just declare something is not able to match something else? It's like a child's idea of an argument.

[kevinsparks]

Awesome sounds AND terrible sounds can be made with hardware synths AND software synths. That scientifically proves that they are equal. Sorry y'all had to fight for 40 pages every month for 15 years to realize that.

[Funky40]

You can't do anything in Gig Performer that I can't do in Logic Pro,

is this so ?
i think you are a little bit uninformed.

i would say quasi each "real" patch i made in GP would NOT have been achivable within any other host.


can you create "real" morph controls in Logic ?
one HW control mapped to many parameters, across different plugins, with each parameter getting its own curvature/remapping vs. that specifc CC/parameter ?


this is NOT a rhetorical question !
it IS what puts my SW-patches above any HW i ever used to use.....incl. my "Nice" Modular.


seriously: i´d be interested to know, IF logic can do that. .....tell me the page in the manual to look it up. But: if the workflow is not "super quick".....well, i´ll have a look in the manual anyway. Page ?

there is more in the play vs. GP. Much more !

[IvyBirds]

I mean why don't you consider Logic Pro or GarageBand to be the same thing as Gig Performer or MainStage? They all can be used to play virtual instruments live and build patches and edit patches in real time. You can't do anything in Gig Performer that I can't do in Logic Pro, so are they all the same just because they can play sound in a live scenario?

In a broad sense they are the same thing, they are both software that runs on computers, both of them act as hosts of software based musical instruments and yes both of them can be used to play live. The only point if contention is your idea that you can do everything in Logic that you can do in Gug Performer and that simply is not true, as Gig Performer has a ton of features that Logic doesn't have with regards to live performer and Logic has a ton of features that Gig Performer doesn't when it comes to multitrack recording and sequencing.

I never said you couldn't use Logic or Garage Band, or even an iPhone to play live, just that when it comes to hosting software instruments Gig Performer is better at ot

The point I'm getting at here is that you seem to place value on a dedicated solution like Gig Performer that is built to do one thing really well (live performance) yet you don't apply that same "logic" to hardware synthesizers or real instruments that are built to perform a specific task.

The difference being their are features in Gig Performer specifically designed for live playing, but if you don't need those features awesome use Logic I never said you couldn't. My point was you claimed incorrectly that you can do everything I do with Gig Performer with Logic and that is simply not true

My laptop keyboard can be a midi controller, so does that mean dedicated midi controllers are obsolete now?

Did I ever say it was? MIDI is just a computer networking protocol where data is generated transmitted somewhere and then interpreted by another computer to execute a command

I know producers who think so. We are living in technology wonderland where most technology is capable of emulating real world experiences in a software environment, so just because something can be done on a laptop or phone, doesn't mean that's the best (or only) way to do it.

And I never said it was, it seems you are putting words in my mouth because you backed yourself into a corner

You said

So while yes your computer can play synthesizer sounds and use various plugins to do so (just like I can use Logic Pro to play live shows) it does not replace a hardware synthesizer and is not designed strictly as a musical instrument like a hardware synthesizer or workstation. Glad you and I finally agree on something!

That is simply not true, for many many people including many people in this thread and on this forum Software absolutely positively has replaced hardware synths. As for computers they are designed to run software and when they run synthesiser software that turns them into musical instruments that yes can absolutely replace hardware synths

Now if you wish to drop the generalities of your argument, there are specific hardware synths that have features not found in software, and likewise there are features in software synths that have no equivalent in hardware

So it comes down to which features are important to you. Once thing is for sure in June of 2025 hardware and software based instruments are absolutely at parity, in the end it comes down to whatever unique features you are looking for

[pdxindy]

can you create "real" morph controls in Logic ?
one HW control mapped to many parameters, across different plugins, with each parameter getting its own curvature/remapping vs. that specifc CC/parameter ?

Never tried in Logic, but sure I can do that in Bitwig.

[IvyBirds]

can you create "real" morph controls in Logic ?
one HW control mapped to many parameters, across different plugins, with each parameter getting its own curvature/remapping vs. that specifc CC/parameter ?

Never tried in Logic, but sure I can do that in Bitwig.

Bitwig and Gig Performer are the only two tools that allow you to do this. The difference is the approach and how they are displayed in the screen. Bitwig is an excellent DAW and it's macro controls are tightly integrated into a DAW environment

Gig Performer isn't a DAW it's designed for live playing and real time manipulation. It's modular in nature with two main views, the first is very modular where you connect all your audio and MIDI together in whatever chain you want, interfaces, controllers, plugins, etc

The other screen is where you layout and assign widgets. You drag and drop knobs, faders, buttons, toggles, and lay them out anyway you wish in whatever colors you want. Each control can do one thing or an unlimited amount of things, so you can build whatever UI you want. Want to make it look like a bunch of pedals? Not a problem, want to make them look like a vintage synth? Not a problem. Want to make your own design however you can imagine it? Not a problem. Want to make everything easily to a controller and have it laid out exactly like the controller? Not a problem

[_leras]

As someone who has seen Van Halen live at least 75 times but probably closer to 100 times going back to the early 1980s I can tell you with certainty that patch is good enough for Van Halen itself. They have played that with a myriad of Synths over the years including with a D50

Eddie Van Halen himself cared so little about that synth sound that most of the time it's played off stage by a session player or especially in later years and tours was probably a recorded track

Nice, that must have been pretty Epic.

I bet he cared about the guitar tone though.

You make a good point though. Many people swap out the synths they used when playing live, and probably except a few electronic artists where the sound was the song, it probably doesn't make all that much difference.

[zerocrossing]

Awesome sounds AND terrible sounds can be made with hardware synths AND software synths. That scientifically proves that they are equal. Sorry y'all had to fight for 40 pages every month for 15 years to realize that.

We have always been at war with Oceania, Winston.

[crimsonwarlock]

Are you happy with a DX7 for analog sounds today?

That has nothing to do with the point I was making, and which you are constantly evading. My point was that most synthesizer sounds on famous records are so generic, that it is impossible to determine which synthesizer was used if it wasn't documented somewhere. And because those things were rarely documented, the actual performing artists can't even tell you if they don't specifically remember it. Look at the track breakdown videos by Alex Ball or Doctor Mix, and you'll see that even they can't always determine exactly what was used (and, in many cases, can't find out any other way). Or, they can't get the original instrument and use something else instead because, and here it is, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

As to your question: If I can use this DX7 patch that I just used as an example, in one of my tracks, I'm not going to try and use an analog modelled synth instead because that one could do it slightly better. The amount of 'better' is so ridiculously small, that it doesn't matter to the end result.

This whole 'analog hardware sounds better' discussion is basically about trying to prove that diminishing returns do matter, while every sane person knows they don't.

[Papuzzo]

Are you happy with a DX7 for analog sounds today?

That has nothing to do with the point I was making, and which you are constantly evading. My point was that most synthesizer sounds on famous records are so generic, that it is impossible to determine which synthesizer was used if it wasn't documented somewhere. And because those things were rarely documented, the actual performing artists can't even tell you if they don't specifically remember it. Look at the track breakdown videos by Alex Ball or Doctor Mix, and you'll see that even they can't always determine exactly what was used (and, in many cases, can't find out any other way). Or, they can't get the original instrument and use something else instead because, and here it is, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

As to your question: If I can use this DX7 patch that I just used as an example, in one of my tracks, I'm not going to try and use an analog modelled synth instead because that one could do it slightly better. The amount of 'better' is so ridiculously small, that it doesn't matter to the end result.

This whole 'analog hardware sounds better' discussion is basically about trying to prove that diminishing returns do matter, while every sane person knows they don't.

I'm still trying to understand what "better" actually is concerning sound. Is there some bonafide metric behind "better" that is universally accepted and standardized? Will 10 random people all agree on what sounds "better?" Or is "better" just something for people to argue about on the Internet rather than actually making music?

[crimsonwarlock]

I'm still trying to understand what "better" actually is concerning sound. Is there some bonafide metric behind "better" that is universally accepted and standardized? Will 10 random people all agree on what sounds "better?" Or is "better" just something for people to argue about on the Internet rather than actually making music?

Agreed. And basically the point I'm arguing (together with several others here). The things that some people state to be 'better', are never actually defined by those people, even though it has been asked by many. When someone posts videos about hardware and states that those videos demonstrate some kind of sound quality in analog hardware, seems to totally forget that those videos have rather badly compressed audio to begin with.

So the question, indeed, remains: in what way do these hardware boxes sound 'better'?

[vitocorleone123]

Also, for people who perform live (not me) a hardware synth can be a lot easier and reliable than something with a laptop or tether to something else.

As someone that gigs multiple times a week every week with a laptop who used to gig multiple times a week with hardware that simply is not true anymore

I have now done several hundred gigs with just a laptop and it's been 100% reliable in every way possible

As far as easier if I am playing a band gig we use DANTE for our FOH Mix and in ears. My entire setup is just plug my 3 controllers into a USB hub, then that hub into a laptop, and run a CAT5e cable from my laptop into our stage box

If I am playing a solo gig which is I often do I bring a pair of powers speakers, they are also DANTE so all I need is a CAT5

All my presets and plugins for the entire show are preprogrammed into Gig Performer and I use a MIDI foot controller to switch between presets

I can mix everything on the fly using faders on a MIDI controller.

As someone who has gigged for decades NOTHING has been more reliable or easier to deal with, absolutely nothing

“Can be”.

[vitocorleone123]

I'm still trying to understand what "better" actually is concerning sound. Is there some bonafide metric behind "better" that is universally accepted and standardized? Will 10 random people all agree on what sounds "better?" Or is "better" just something for people to argue about on the Internet rather than actually making music?

Agreed. And basically the point I'm arguing (together with several others here). The things that some people state to be 'better', are never actually defined by those people, even though it has been asked by many. When someone posts videos about hardware and states that those videos demonstrate some kind of sound quality in analog hardware, seems to totally forget that those videos have rather badly compressed audio to begin with.

So the question, indeed, remains: in what way do these hardware boxes sound 'better'?

I often prefer qualities of the way synths sound. Sometimes I prefer software to hardware.

If I’m wanting analog distortion, I find few software plugins that come close, and those that do, like analog, have a sound to them - sometimes not the sound I want, sometimes it is instead of hardware.

Resonance is another area that plugins generally can’t equal yet.

Finally, plugins even with drift and other things programmed in have to be programmed in and still don’t always match the “organic liveliness” of hardware that may not need that programming. This is the most squishy area I’ve listed. Clearly some analog hardware synths are less lively.