|
The best Hardware Synths
|
View this Thread in Original format
| themohawk |
Whats your guys opinion on the best hardware synths(rack modules and keyboards) for producing quality trance?
Why is for example the Nord Lead 2 better than the Virus C(just an example), and so on?
Thanks. |
|
|
| soundscape_uk |
at the mo im saving for an access virus (any one, i dont care lol)
and im using a microkorg, they are lovely :D |
|
|
| Derivative |
the access virus line has a very complex mod matrix and lfo section - because of all the modulation options you have available to you, its possible to make sounds that have alot of movement in them - pads and atmospheres. although it can do anything. because of the mod matrix you can change the characteristics of the oscillators and filters to quite a large degree. as long as you are willing to get obsessive about it you can emulate most analogue or virtual analogue synth sounds fairly accurately. the virus is also bassy as hell and alot of the raw waveforms arent very bright so it always has this dark, warm and brooding quality to it. virus isnt really an instrument you just tweak a few settings and 'play.' more like its something you sit down and work with. it took me about a year on and off to get used to the quirks and particulars of the instrument (i have a virus b) but now that im starting to get it, im loving it.
nord lead 2 is much brighter than the virus. the layout is cleaner and its one of those instruments you can tweak for a few minutes and just start playing. its really fun to play and it sounds good but for different reasons to the virus. nord lead 2 to my ears sounded pretty hot without any effects. virus needed quite a bit more work to get here. that said, dont expect to emulate oberheims, minimoogs or make complex, evolving sounds on it. its just not that type of instrument.
the score: 'best' is a bull word in music production. it depends entirely on how you produce, what you like working with and what type of sounds you like.
if you want my advice you have to go down to your nearest pro music store and ask for a demonstration or maybe even try them out yourselves.
if you dont like fiddling around in a sub menu flicking back and forth between parameters on 3 x 1 inch lcd screen then you will hate the virus. period.
if you hate the fact that the nord has no patch naming scheme then suprise surprise - prepare to be annoyed at the nord lead where its sometimes impossible to find some of your patches without having to cycle through all of them.
dont like the fact that everything goes thin and quiet when turning the resonance up on a 4 pole low pass filter whilst increasing the cutoff? some people really hate the nord's 4 pole low pass filter.
dont like the unison on the virus? join the club - loads of people dont like it because its way messier than the unison you get on many other virtual analogues. sounds more like a souped up chorus :/ |
|
|
| RiCo |
| That's good stuff what Derivative wrote. There is no "best" synth...it's just what you need. I had a Virus B and I still have a Nord Lead 2...to me, each has its strenghts and weaknesses. Sometimes the Nord gave me results I couldn't achieve with the Virus, and same with the Virus...it gave me stuff that the Nord had trouble with. The Nord is easier to program but for that reason, sometimes the complexity of the Virus directs you to a patch that you cannot think how to program easy on a Nord, hehe. |
|
|
| gowansy |
| i think a better question would be, whats would you class as a good budget hardware synth. I'm new too production and theres so much stuff out there its hard to know whats good and whats not in the budget range. |
|
|
| Trancevision |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
dont like the unison on the virus? join the club - loads of people dont like it because its way messier than the unison you get on many other virtual analogues. sounds more like a souped up chorus :/ |
btw. the Unisono of the Nordlead II is absolutely . It sounds like
a souped a chorus :rolleyes:
It all depends on your personal taste ... |
|
|
| Derivative |
taste is one thing. i like the virus sound. but you cannot deny that the unison on the virus doesnt work how you expect it to based on the analogues and VAs that preceded it.
listen to the unison on a juno 106. nord lead 2 might not be to your 'taste' but the resulting sound speaks for itself. the nord behaves in a similar way. virus unison is...i dont know...'messier' is the only way to describe it. you can set it to play back monophonic. but it doesnt rip like the nord or 106 unison does.
i find that to get a more shredding unison lead sound i have to do alot of post processing. even then i lose the purity of the sound. and i havent ever made anything as bright and clean as the lead unison. most of the harmonic adding effects like distortion and saturation are wasted on unison leads on the virus - the raw sound from a unison'ed patch is already so rich with harmonics that adding saturation or distortion doesnt thicken or tighten up the sound - it just makes it even more harsh and disorganised. |
|
|
| thecYrus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
taste is one thing. i like the virus sound. but you cannot deny that the unison on the virus doesnt work how you expect it to based on the analogues and VAs that preceded it.
listen to the unison on a juno 106. nord lead 2 might not be to your 'taste' but the resulting sound speaks for itself. the nord behaves in a similar way. virus unison is...i dont know...'messier' is the only way to describe it. you can set it to play back monophonic. but it doesnt rip like the nord or 106 unison does.
i find that to get a more shredding unison lead sound i have to do alot of post processing. even then i lose the purity of the sound. and i havent ever made anything as bright and clean as the lead unison. most of the harmonic adding effects like distortion and saturation are wasted on unison leads on the virus - the raw sound from a unison'ed patch is already so rich with harmonics that adding saturation or distortion doesnt thicken or tighten up the sound - it just makes it even more harsh and disorganised. |
well, the virus does alias a lot. with the dull sound you can't hear it good but that's a very weak point of the viurs. but with proper eq'ing it's imho the most useable synth for trance/dance productions |
|
|
| bachatu |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
the access virus line has a very complex mod matrix and lfo section - because of all the modulation options you have available to you, its possible to make sounds that have alot of movement in them -... because of the mod matrix you can change the characteristics of the oscillators and filters to quite a large degree. as long as you are willing to get obsessive about it you can emulate most analogue or virtual analogue synth sounds fairly accurately. the virus is also bassy as hell and alot of the raw waveforms arent very bright so it always has this dark, warm and brooding quality to it. |
I completely agree with Derivatives stement on the Virus here. The key thing is to be experiment, but at the same time know how the parameter values effect each other... For instance, most of the deacreasing one parameter value, may result in you having to add more of another, to get it to "sound right". I can tell you that it can really go from sounding thin, to sound super fat, and sound good both ways, without sounding like its trying to hard. About the 'trying to hard' sound... I previously owned a Supernova II (pro x version), and to me, that thing was hard to make it sound nasty, dirty and/or fat - Don't get me wrong, it sounded very clean and clear, but those times that I wanted some fatter/agressive sounds, I had to go about it a much different route then progamming my Virus, or even my JP-80X0... just more difficult getting those fatter sounds. Back to the Virus- know which model you want, the Virus C has more modulation possibilities than the Virus A, B, classic (same as B),or power core (same as B). Meaning you have more sources to select from and more destinations available, and it does make a difference! Also, the Virus C includes EQ on each part, allows you aleviate some of that excessive bass from things that you may not want to have some much low end, and that can potential end up muddying up your mix. Again, just more flexible and more sound mangling, sound shaping capabilities. The point is, regardless of which virus you choose, its a pretty versatile synth, and you can get pretty much any type of sound out of it, with the right programming knowledge.
| quote: |
dont like the unison on the virus? join the club - loads of people dont like it because its way messier than the unison you get on many other virtual analogues. sounds more like a souped up chorus :/ |
I personally do like the UNISON on the virus- its a bit exaggerated ith the stereo depth effect (its at highest setting by default), thats prob why it sounds like chorus, but the stereo depth can be adjusted within the menus. If you want to talk about a UNISON that doesn't sound good, the UNISON on the supernova II synth was horrible IMO - it would cause the patch to easily clip and you had to make a whole bunch of adjustments to get it to sound decent, and then even at that, it sounded like it was being pushed to hard. For the Virus, i personally don't like the Chorus from the virus- just makes the sound "less defined" and muddy at times. The LED is ok. YOu have more knobs with the VIrus C, so you tend to use less submenus then with the Virus B or Classic, thats another plus for the Virus C.
Again, the key things were already said, but yes, its best to go out to your local store, demo the units... Some stuff is purely subjective - and interface that may be great for one, may be horrible for another person. Something that may sound great to one person, may sound like tin can to another. Also, another tip of advice, something I do when Im interested in a synth is visit or join their newsgroups. Most popular synths and modules have user newsgroups through Yahoo. There you can get the real deal on synths tips, tricks, common problems, what ppl hate and like about them. |
|
|
| IDarkISwordI |
Hey. I havent updated it for awhile but Ihave compiled a lot of info and my own personal views on the synths/hardware as well as the prices and some other useful info. You might want to check it out ;).
Official Hardware Synth Thread (compiled by DarkSword)
Cheers,
Zac
P.S. I really think it would be a useful sticky if the mods are reading this but thats just my opinion. |
|
|
| themohawk |
Uhm, okey... so maybe i should have asked in another way... Whats the preferable hardware synth for uplifting trance, like in the style of the releases on AnjunaBeats(Anjuna`s just an example)?
Thanks for all the great answers! :D |
|
|
| Derivative |
sigh. depends on what you want to do >____< if you want to make carbon copies of dubious trance tunes past then sure, get yourself a jp8000.
personally i dont see it like that. you can definitely learn from how other people write their music but in the end you dont go buying hundreds of dollars worth of professional grade music gear to copy them. make your own path and make your own sound.
my answer still stands. you can write really gorgeous, uplifting trance on a virus. just because it has an inherantly dark sound doesnt mean it can only produce evil bassy sounds. the effect is very subtle. same goes with the nord but for different reasons. same with every virtual analogue on the market.
you would have to try each of them out and see what you like best.
its all well and good getting a virus c to make uplifting trance (which is perfectly adequate for mosto f the stock sounds in all styles of dance music in my opinion) but if you dont like programming a virus c you will NEVER use it and never like using it. if you like 'playing' your instruments and jamming with sounds then a nord lead 2 is much better than the virus for that purpose. the control surface is better laid out, its easier to coax alot of blinding raw sounds out of it. but it also has areas where the virus is just better suited - evolving pads is one thing (but they can be somewhat difficult to make and with all the modulation going on its hard to tell how it will sound when you are designing it).
programming a virus c involves reading a massive manual repeatedly whilst flicking through an archaic backlit submenu. if you can get over that (and i nearly didnt) you'll love the mod matrix - but only when you get your head around the fact that you can modulate pretty much anything on the synth and that it will blow your mind for the first couple of months. oh and multimode on the virus is practically useless as well as being fiddly and confusing. it is on most virtual analogues but its another reason why people buy them thinking its gonna rock their world, only to find that when they try it out, its too fiddly for their liking.
please take this into account since too many of the virus b's and virus c's that get sold on ebay are from people that bought them on impulse or because someone said it was good for making . then they got it and realised there was more menu flicking than they had hoped. and that it was more difficult to coax a particular type of sound out of than they hoped but the virus can be a fiddly beast to program. so they sell it on again.
theres really no point in asking for other people's recommendations - we will only mention the synths we like and the ones which work for what we want to produce. this isnt necessarily what YOU want to produce. so do yourself a favour and go play on them all then buy the one you find the most fun to play with and which you like the sound of most? in the end the only important thing is that you enjoy the instrument you are playing. if you do, it'll show in the music you write i guarantee it.
ill post some raw sound samples so you can get an idea of what trance type sounds are like on a virus when i get the time. this one is all virus b except for the strings and soundfont guitar lead:
|
|
|
|
|
