Software synths are just bundles of code, like most synths out there. You want an analogue synth? Don't use your PC for it.

I really enjoy software, but it irks me like you wouldn't believe when my 3.4GHz pc with insane ram and specs laggs from 2 instances of programmed z3ta+s.

That's the difference.

Maybe computers are the things that need to "catch up", since they obviously don't run the code as well as they should (or the programmers are lazier).

Are people always going to argue about whether or not hardware is "better" than software?

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about hardware here. It's not that "hardware" in general is better than "software" or vice versa, it's that each individual piece of hardware has its own completely unique sound.

To someone who's never used one of these things, they probably just look like a bunch of oscs, filters and effects - same as what you see in software. But the difference is, the filters and effects in software are "perfect". The filters and effects in hardware are not perfect - every manufacturer uses different designs and different components and that is exactly what makes them sound unique.

I can promise you that if you take a preset you made in z3ta+ or V-Station (with no plugin-specific effects), and reproduced it on a Matrix with the exact same parameters, it would not sound the same. At all.

Does that make the Matrix "better" than a software synth? No, it makes it different. The fact is that the unique character of filters and effects in hardware comes from its analog specifications, of which there are millions of possible combinations. It's nearly impossible to replicate these characteristics in a digital environment. It's easy to create sounds with software that are just as good, but not the same.

Software synths are getting better every year, and so are hardware synths. To all you software snobs, hardware is not going anywhere so you're going to have to learn to live with it. And to all the hardware jocks, you can spend $40,000 on the hottest new shit, but somewhere in the world there is a computer geek who can produce a better sound with $50 worth of crummy software. DEAL WITH IT!

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by -mk- Ye that always helps Just got reminded today why i love that sexy red beats so much. I did an square/saw/FM/unison lead with it fckin brilliant. Bites the hell out of other synths. Its so nasty sounding. GRAuuuu :P

WERD!!

I dont have a nord, but my microQ does some pretty farken cool FM things too. I programmed this awesome talking synth lead last night. Sounds similar to what you were doing. Used two saws and a pulse with ring modulation and envelopes and osc modulating the FM ammount.

It sounded hard as hell but at the same time, soooo silky smooth.

All I gotta do now is find a place for it in a track... lol..

___________________

Of course software is getting better and better, but people often forget what the charm of analog synths can be. The internal boards' overheating and discrepancies can lead to small pitch shifts and other inconsistences (which must be attended to when they are too bad), but otherwise, they add small amount of personality to the sound which isn't replicated in software.

That being said, I'm by no means a hardware-junkie, so don't whine at me that your software sounds as good as hardware. I'm sick of this argument.

edit: whoops, diginut covered it.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Are people always going to argue about whether or not hardware is "better" than software? I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about hardware here. It's not that "hardware" in general is better than "software" or vice versa, it's that each individual piece of hardware has its own completely unique sound. To someone who's never used one of these things, they probably just look like a bunch of oscs, filters and effects - same as what you see in software. But the difference is, the filters and effects in software are "perfect". The filters and effects in hardware are not perfect - every manufacturer uses different designs and different components and that is exactly what makes them sound unique. I can promise you that if you take a preset you made in z3ta+ or V-Station (with no plugin-specific effects), and reproduced it on a Matrix with the exact same parameters, it would not sound the same. At all. Does that make the Matrix "better" than a software synth? No, it makes it different. The fact is that the unique character of filters and effects in hardware comes from its analog specifications, of which there are millions of possible combinations. It's nearly impossible to replicate these characteristics in a digital environment. It's easy to create sounds with software that are just as good, but not the same. Software synths are getting better every year, and so are hardware synths. To all you software snobs, hardware is not going anywhere so you're going to have to learn to live with it. And to all the hardware jocks, you can spend $40,000 on the hottest new shit, but somewhere in the world there is a computer geek who can produce a better sound with $50 worth of crummy software. DEAL WITH IT!

quote:

Originally posted by RIPassion Of course software is getting better and better, but people often forget what the charm of analog synths can be. The internal boards' overheating and discrepancies can lead to small pitch shifts and other inconsistences (which must be attended to when they are too bad), but otherwise, they add small amount of personality to the sound which isn't replicated in software. That being said, I'm by no means a hardware-junkie, so don't whine at me that your software sounds as good as hardware. I'm sick of this argument. edit: whoops, diginut covered it.

Guys....WTF?! Who is whining? Were having a discussion about it, not an arguement. A banter if you will. An exchange of opinions.

Why is it that any time someone starts discussing software, hardware, sequencer hosts or anything remotely on topic, theres always some one who feels the need to come and rescue the innocent bystanders from the evils of the so called 'arguement'?! If you think this is an arguement... dude you need to read more forums, bucause a bunch of guys talking about software and hardware is by no means an arguement. I see the same debates coming up on KVR and Isratrance all the time, but no one feels the need to police them and go... "hey... you guys have talked about this before... stop it now"

Can everyone just chill the fuck out? It's a forum. One of the points of a forum is to shoot the shit when your bored. So if you dont want to add, then fair enough, but can people please not shut down discussions unless it seems like its getting out of hand.




And for the record, no one was talking about analogue synths. It was about current hardware (VA or otherwise, not 20 year old pieces of tech) and software... particularly sofware emulations of those hardware synths. Yes hardware is still infront... but how close are people finding the gap between them these days?

___________________

Last edited by Axolotyl on Jul-22-2005 at 02:23

quote:

Originally posted by Axolotyl And for the record, no one was talking about analogue synths. It was about current hardware

Dude, are you for real?

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Dude, are you for real?

Software is never going to catch up with analogue synths. Hardware isnt ever going to catch up with it for that matter. Its like comparing peaches and... er... apples.

Best software can do is try and catch up with hardware at this point in time...

So... yeah I guess I'm 4 real.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Axolotyl Software is never going to catch up with analogue synths. Hardware isnt ever going to catch up with it for that matter. Its like comparing peaches and... er... apples. Best software can do is try and catch up with hardware at this point in time... So... yeah I guess I'm 4 real.

I wasn't arguing that, but dude... modern synths still have analog components. They've just been enhanced with DSP and all that shizzity. If when you say "analog" you mean "100% analog, with no embedded software or DSP" then okay, that's in the past, but current hardware synths are NOT the same as just a piece of software sitting inside a keyboard.

And on an aside, I can hardly see how my post was trying to "shut down" the discussion. It's another point of view. It's no more righteous for people to yell and scream about which "technology" is best than it is for me to say you're comparing apples and oranges.

Why do you need to get so personal on this forum? We're all entitled to our point of view - if you don't agree, that's fine, but there's no need to attack us for expressing it.

___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut I wasn't arguing that, but dude... modern synths still have analog components. They've just been enhanced with DSP and all that shizzity. If when you say "analog" you mean "100% analog, with no embedded software or DSP" then okay, that's in the past, but current hardware synths are NOT the same as just a piece of software sitting inside a keyboard. And on an aside, I can hardly see how my post was trying to "shut down" the discussion. It's another point of view. It's no more righteous for people to yell and scream about which "technology" is best than it is for me to say you're comparing apples and oranges. Why do you need to get so personal on this forum? We're all entitled to our point of view - if you don't agree, that's fine, but there's no need to attack us for expressing it.

Yeah cool man, sorry. I was trying to express something, but it probably came out wrong. You wern't trying to shut it down, you raised some good points. I'm just sick of people getting all arsey when people are discussing a topic that has already been covered. Theres plenty of people on this forum that like discussing things over and over.. of which I am one of them... but theres an lot of peeps that shut down threads by going ... "this has been discussed before... or... this old arguement again!?" Not every V's discussion is bad and people can learn new things and express their views with different people each time.

I guess its just part of the culture of this forum... which is cool I guess. Its just been getting more and more like that recently for some reason. If we keep it up, were going to run out of topics to shoot the shit about.. lol. Anyway, its a small point, and I shouldnt have made such a huge fuss over it. Sorry if you took offence at it... that wasnt my intention. =)


Back to the analogue thing... I thought most modern synths were digital components. Even though they have physical circuits with certain characteristics, they don't actually use real voltage waveforms to make the sound. Its all 1's and 0's replicating a waveform. So that my definition of analogue I guess.

___________________

Last edited by Axolotyl on Jul-22-2005 at 03:07

"Dude, are you for real?"

Hehe

Um, sorry I didn't specify when I said I'm sick of "this argument."

I didn't mean the argument in this thread, because, technically, we're not really arguing, just vacillating stoicly (+10 points big words); rather, I meant the whole software vs. hardware debate because 99% of the time it comes up, people don't understand what diginut explained about uniqueness. Sorry for the confusion.

edit: Let it be known the only piece of hardware I own is a midi controller, heh. (That'll be chaning soon, however )

Last edited by RIPassion on Jul-22-2005 at 06:30