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

[enCiphered]

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.

You're both nuts.

Ive done two things for examples in the thread

1. Shared examples of where I felt the analog sounded better than the software.
2. Shared examples of synth demos that I enjoyed hearing the tones and sounds from different synths.

One of you is saying an analog/hardware synth with a reverb added in a DAW makes it software. Or that a clearly analog synth is software because it happens to have a few basic FX included. It's just weird.

The other is suggesting I've gone out of my way to share demos that are misleading because some of them may have had some basic FX applied in the DAW. None of the demos had particularly over the top FX, and nothing beyond standard treatment.

But my gosh you both completely ignore that all softsynths, and most of their demos, have even more FX because adding FX to a software synth is standard. A modern softsynth patch would have distortion, reverb and a shit ton of OTT.

It's not even clear what points you're trying to get across. You think software is better? You think hardware sound terrible? You think hardware only sounda good with a bit of reverb?

I feel for you both. Especially if you can't appreciate some of those synths like the Teo 5, or the dreadbox stuff.

On a more serious note I think this kind of back-and-forth easily slips into absolutes that don’t reflect how most people actually work. What gets lost in these debates is that sound isn't created or judged in isolation. Whether it’s hardware or software, most of what we hear in real-world use includes some kind of processing. And that’s not a flaw, it’s the nature of modern production.
We can compare tones all day, but it’s the musical intent, not the purity of the signal chain, that makes something compelling.

Using hardware often leads me to commit early. I’ll print audio, bounce effects, make decisions quickly because the gear doesn’t wait. With software, I end up with 50 automation lanes and 10 versions of a track because the flexibility encourages endless tweaking
But I love both ways to work! Sometimes I want the focus and limits of hardware, sometimes I want the infinite creativity sandbox of software.

[SoftSynthLover99]

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.

You're both nuts.

Ive done two things for examples in the thread

1. Shared examples of where I felt the analog sounded better than the software.
2. Shared examples of synth demos that I enjoyed hearing the tones and sounds from different synths.

One of you is saying an analog/hardware synth with a reverb added in a DAW makes it software. Or that a clearly analog synth is software because it happens to have a few basic FX included. It's just weird.

The other is suggesting I've gone out of my way to share demos that are misleading because some of them may have had some basic FX applied in the DAW. None of the demos had particularly over the top FX, and nothing beyond standard treatment.

But my gosh you both completely ignore that all softsynths, and most of their demos, have even more FX because adding FX to a software synth is standard. A modern softsynth patch would have distortion, reverb and a shit ton of OTT.

It's not even clear what points you're trying to get across. You think software is better? You think hardware sound terrible? You think hardware only sounda good with a bit of reverb?

I feel for you both. Especially if you can't appreciate some of those synths like the Teo 5, or the dreadbox stuff.

.
We can compare tones all day, but it’s the musical intent, not the purity of the signal chain, that makes something compelling.

I don’t think that’s completely true. Coming from the perspective of a guitar player as well as keyboardist, tone is often as important as the musical intent or idea itself as they often inspire each other (assuming one has reached a degree of mastery with said instrument of course).

In fact I would say having poor signal chains and sonics could damage your artistic intent if you are not careful, and make whatever you are doing less compelling than it would be if you had chosen the right gear.

Now that is no excuse to stop creating with what you have, but to recognize that certain albums and records SOUND amazing because of the signal chain and gear used from the mics and console down to the synths guitars and drums etc etc.

You’d be surprised at how many music fans actually care about how a record was made. Growing up I wanted to know what guitar and what amp was used on what song, what synth was used to play what part etc etc. So IMO Music is about the SOUND not just the musical intent

[IvyBirds]

So would any modern software synths benefit in any way if they were made into hardware?

One piece of software that I think would not benefit from making into hardware is Synth1. I like it just like it is. Its free, its tiny (871 kilobytes zipped download), it can be run on any old computer, and no license to spoil the fun. It sounds great. It runs on Windows and Mac. Its range of sounds is amazing.

https://daichilab.sakura.ne.jp/softsynth/index.html

From the KVR page on Synth 1:

"Synth1 is a software synthesizer. Functionally it is modelled on the Clavia Nord Lead 2 Red Synth."

You do realize that the Nord Lead 2 is software right? It's literally 100% software running in a computer inside of a MIDI controller and that you can run the EXACT code on your computer

You also realize that Synth 1 has extra features not on the Lead 2 right?

LOL, yes my friend, I think I understand that it's software.

viewtopic.php?p=5782805&hilit=Clavia#p5782805

I bought a G1 brand new, sight unseen, the minute that my guy could get his hands on one right after they came out.

And in 1997 that made sense because you couldn't run an instrument like that along with a DAW and other things in a computer

However this thread exists in 2025 and 28 years later computers blow away the the speed, ram, threads, and hard drive capacity than we had in the Windows 95, and Mac OS 8 era

So in 2025 would it make sense for anyone to make a hardware synth like that, it would be a commercial failure

[whassup]

You’d be surprised at how many music fans actually care about how a record was made. Growing up I wanted to know what guitar and what amp was used on what song, what synth was used to play what part etc etc. So IMO Music is about the SOUND not just the musical intent

Yeah, I think it is a combination of things.
I remember pivotal moments where I heard certain sounds and was totally floored by the combination of sound and music.
Some of it long before I had a grid for gear or anything like that.
But I knew that certain things impacted me massively.
This is what I am looking for.
And if some of those personal likes give me the shits on KvR: Be my guest!

[IvyBirds]

My credo is to never having something in hardware that can be done as well or better in software

Is it possible for a copy to be better than the thing it is copying without becoming something else?

It absolutely is, without a doubt. For example polyphony counts, stereo outputs, and the ability to run multiple instances for different timbres

That last one is killer, most people can't afford 20 CS80s but I can easily use software emulations to have 20 playing at the same time

With software I also have the ability to have as many physical controls as I wish, laid out exactly how I wish something I can't do with hardware which is even more killer if you are running multiple instances

[SoftSynthLover99]

My credo is to never having something in hardware that can be done as well or better in software

Is it possible for a copy to be better than the thing it is copying without becoming something else?

That last one is killer, most people can't afford 20 CS80s but I can easily use software emulations to have 20 playing at the same time

You can record 1 CS-80 20 times though (or however many times you like) and have them all playing back at the same time with no tax on your CPU. With something like the Arturia CS80 v4 which is a "pretty good" CS-80 emulation, you would be killing your CPU resources with that many instances playing at the same time.

So personally I would much rather have 1 CS-80 and record it as many times as I like with different patches and timbres and no CPU cost, vs 20 instances of a CS-80 plugin playing at the same time taking up massive CPU resources I could use for other processes.

[SoftSynthLover99]

You’d be surprised at how many music fans actually care about how a record was made. Growing up I wanted to know what guitar and what amp was used on what song, what synth was used to play what part etc etc. So IMO Music is about the SOUND not just the musical intent

Yeah, I think it is a combination of things.
I remember pivotal moments where I heard certain sounds and was totally floored by the combination of sound and music.
Some of it long before I had a grid for gear or anything like that.
But I knew that certain things impacted me massively.
This is what I am looking for.
And if some of those personal likes give me the shits on KvR: Be my guest!

Yeah certain sounds can definitely have an impact on the way you react to music. Most fans won't know why they love the sound of a guitar running through a fuzz face into a Marshall stack or a Juno 106 running into a Neve Console with a Bricasti on the Aux send, but they definitely feel it in the music although they won't have the technical knowledge to understand why.

And if something impacts you musically that's all that matters regardless of what anyone thinks on Kvr or beyond

[IvyBirds]

My credo is to never having something in hardware that can be done as well or better in software

Is it possible for a copy to be better than the thing it is copying without becoming something else?

That last one is killer, most people can't afford 20 CS80s but I can easily use software emulations to have 20 playing at the same time

You can record 1 CS-80 20 times though (or however many times you like) and have them all playing back at the same time with no tax on your CPU. With something like the Arturia CS80 v4 which is a "pretty good" CS-80 emulation, you would be killing your CPU resources with that many instances playing at the same time.

So personally I would much rather have 1 CS-80 and record it as many times as I like with different patches and timbres and no CPU cost, vs 20 instances of a CS-80 plugin playing at the same time taking up massive CPU resources I could use for other processes.

You will notice I said "PLAY" at the same time. Also In my home studio setup in my studio I would have also have zero issues running 20 instances of the Arturia CS-80 at the same and still have plenty of CPU a available to run whatever I want. In fact if I really wanted to I could probably run 40 instances

But the reality is playing and recording the same synth multiple times is a massive pain over just doing it by having multiple instances of the same plugin especially when it comes to layered sounds

[vitocorleone123]

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

Which plugins? What hardware synths are you comparing them to?

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.

What do you mean by "have to be programmed?" What hardware synths have "organic liveliness" that can't be matched? Is organic liveliness better than conventional liveliness that's achieved with pesticides and nitrogen based fertilizer?

It’s an opinion as part of a discussion. Like your opinions. What I hear is what I hear - if you don’t, then okay.

I think it’s only a matter of time before software can match or even exceed hardware across the board in all aspects of the sound. I just don’t hear that yet.

[_leras]

I feel for you both. Especially if you can't appreciate some of those synths like the Teo 5, or the dreadbox stuff.

On a more serious note I think this kind of back-and-forth easily slips into absolutes that don’t reflect how most people actually work. What gets lost in these debates is that sound isn't created or judged in isolation. Whether it’s hardware or software, most of what we hear in real-world use includes some kind of processing. And that’s not a flaw, it’s the nature of modern production.
We can compare tones all day, but it’s the musical intent, not the purity of the signal chain, that makes something compelling.

Using hardware often leads me to commit early. I’ll print audio, bounce effects, make decisions quickly because the gear doesn’t wait. With software, I end up with 50 automation lanes and 10 versions of a track because the flexibility encourages endless tweaking
But I love both ways to work! Sometimes I want the focus and limits of hardware, sometimes I want the infinite creativity sandbox of software.

It really both - the best musical intent won't even get heard if it sounds really terrible. It takes an effort to get the best sound. This holds for singing and playing instruments too, whether in practice, or imparting energy.

For electronic music, part of this is searching for the best sound, and it has been the whole time. People have long sought out certain bits of gear, or best production tricks. This search for the best sounds, is a big part of electronic music.

I don't think it's coincidence that many of the best, and more unique, sounding electronic artists have used hardware.

(Not that people haven't made great sounds and tracks with software)

[D-Fusion]

I don't think it's coincidence that many of the best, and more unique, sounding electronic artists have used hardware.

(Not that people haven't made great sounds and tracks with software)

Most of the songs that are loved by many where made in a time where software wasn't a option so they had to be creative with what they had at hand so they used any Hardware that they could get their hands on.

Software would be the hyped option if it where used on peoples favorite hit songs from the past If we started the other way around and Software came first when the Electronic pop music age started.

[IvyBirds]

I don't think it's coincidence that many of the best, and more unique, sounding electronic artists have used hardware.

Is that why you have posted so many videos where we are listening to software?

If you truly want something that sounds unique you are not going to get it with vintage classics from the 1970s and 1980s and you are not going to get it from the vast overwhelming majority of modern analog synths that rip them off

Sorry in 2025 what is unique about two VCAs going through a ladder filter?

If you want unique sounds you will find those in software which is able to do unique things that hardware only dreams about

[dellboy]

My comment was with respect to the absurd statement that someone wouldn't turn Synth1 into "hardware" as if they didn't realize that it was a weak clone of an existing VA.

LOL! I Played on a Nord Lead 1 at the London Music Show in 1995. Now I think about it, I used to collect the free brochures at music fairs and I might even have an original brochure in my attic.

[wikter]

BTW: At only 46 pages this thread is still in noob territory for this topic.

viewtopic.php?t=338195&start=1425

Since post 1 both threads are noob & a waste of internet bandwidth.

This waste of bandwidth seems to have triggered a full-length guest appearance from you.

Sorry, never meant to compete against anyone, It was just a point of view from a young boy with just 3 years producing.
The thread has a clear personal bias, there's plenty of aesthetic content. Adding one more to the count of 500+ posts wasting bandwidth.

[IvyBirds]

For electronic music, part of this is searching for the best sound, and it has been the whole time. People have long sought out certain bits of gear, or best production tricks. This search for the best sounds, is a big part of electronic music.

Which is why you just spent hundreds of dollars in software because you think it's the superior choice right?

Thanks for reminding about that voucher. For my extra I got the OTO Biscuit. Very much a bargain considering how good Anthem is.