|
can u really tell the difference?? hardware/software.....
|
View this Thread in Original format
| richg101 |
this seams to be in my mind a lot recently as i come closer to picking up a sacred virus or nord with the money i got from selling my tt's..
is there really any point to it. honestly!? i mean hardware is nice cos you have a proper piece of kit you can actually touch. and having something so powerful/looked up to is bound to increace your confidence.
i listen to tracks by airbase and others of his caliber and then read he is pure software. and his tracks have all the warmth and power of tracks by ferry/mike/etc etc. so can you really tell between a hardware user and a software only person? as long as they are using 'professional' sequencer software. people say they can but i really dont know any more. i mean ive used discovery and it is very warm, if a bit power hungry..
its a poll so maybe you could select which statement most matches your view.... |
|
|
| PutBoy |
Digital is always based on increment steps of audio. If that makes sense.
Analogue is not.
also, analogue is not dependent on a processors speed, since it's mecanical.
But, if you can really hear a difference? Don't know, can't tell. |
|
|
| DeZmA |
| Hardware will make you pro, buy a virus and you'll get signed within a week. |
|
|
| richg101 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DeZmA
Hardware will make you pro, buy a virus and you'll get signed within a week. |
i gave up on being signed... at least to a label other than 101 recordings.
all i really want is to get the most power from my synthesiser array. - if a virus will ensure i get signed/become a sucessfull human being i guess i will have to get one! hehe |
|
|
| Nemesis44 |
Hey Rich,
Good Poll,
I'm not sure anymore, I used to think so but there are so many other parts as you well know what make something sound pro or not. I even think Airbase uses Reason 2.5 but not 100% sure, but I know he has shared some refils here.
Probably the one aspect that makes something sound really professional is how tightly everything fits together, and that is more down to EQ and placement as you know.
People are even sampling lo-fi Commodore 64 sounds thesedays and make pro sounding tracks, so I think although if you compare the sounds on an individual level you will perhaps be able to hear a differnce, I think once it hits the overall mix there are other factors that play a bigger part making the difference quite trivial.
Cheers
Karl |
|
|
| djms |
i think it all depends on what kind of sounds you want to make - hardware defo has a phatter sound but with a few layered VST's you could come close to that sound with EQ Saturation etc.
I like my Virus B but not overly convinced by it. Using the korg legacy cell has been fun and also the minimoog V whicyh can create some super phatt sounds |
|
|
| DeZmA |
| quote: | Originally posted by richg101
i gave up on being signed... at least to a label other than 101 recordings.
all i really want is to get the most power from my synthesiser array. - if a virus will ensure i get signed/become a sucessfull human being i guess i will have to get one! hehe |
Actually I was being sarcastic. It doens't matter what you use, I've even heard a convincing supersaw from Icone out the 3x osc. |
|
|
| Derivative |
| quote: | Originally posted by djms
i think it all depends on what kind of sounds you want to make - hardware defo has a phatter sound but with a few layered VST's you could come close to that sound with EQ Saturation etc.
|
Nah its not. G-Media impOSCar is an insane softsynth in that respect because as a virtual analogue instrument, it actually sounds analogue. The Virus does not although you can immitate quite a few analogue sounds on it, the dead giveaway is the filter and the raw oscillators. Especially when you sweep them.
impOSCar though - the filter behaves like an analogue filter does. It saturates nicely and a bit like an analogue filter does. The PWM square and square wave oscillators are powerful as and it imitates the really fast filter envelopes of the OSCar so that you get squelchy clicks when you set the amp envelope release and attack times too short.
If you want to make convincingly analogue sounds or virtual analogue OSCar type sounds - impOSCar is hands down more appropriate.
Virus sounds nice but only when you pile on the effects and make good use of the LFOs/mod matrix. The raw oscillators are really weak and the filter resonance behaves really weirdly when you crank it all the way up (but it doesn't kill the bass as much as impOSCar's filter at high resonance). It also doesn't staturate properly and my Virus B makes pops and crackles when using high resonance :( I think its dying or something because this cannot be a design feature.
I'll do a sound test tonight when I get home from work to show you what I mean. Nevertheless the Virus is better used for making harmonically complex, evolving sounds. Its just built to do that sort of thing. Whereas impOSCar isn't (it doesnt have the features or the routing).
In terms of workflow the Virus is the better designed synth. Once you get the hang of it, its really fun to program, whereas impOSCar I still think is kind of annoying. Setting the LFO to envelope and then modulating the pitch of 1 or both oscillators - its always slow. You can never make the envelope fast enough to synthesize a kick drum or really stacato synth sounds making it almost useless for me. Portmento is lame on impOSCar (but its kind of lame on the Virus too). Increasing the delay amount on impOSCar makes a sound quieter?! How the hell does that work?? And the GUI is really fiddly, even when you can type in CC values because the boxes are too small.
Other than that impOSCar is the most analogue sounding digital synth I have ever used. That includes hardware VAs as well as software VAs. |
|
|
| staticblue |
"you dont need hardware anymore - but i still want it"
I've owned a Virus B, and a novation Supernova 2 and they sound warmer than any VST synth i have used.
However a good producer will make good stuff, with or without hardware, and a not-so-good producer will make not-so-good tracks, even with hardware :) |
|
|
| Synchronicity |
| quote: | Originally posted by staticblue
"you dont need hardware anymore - but i still want it"
I've owned a Virus B, and a novation Supernova 2 and they sound warmer than any VST synth i have used.
However a good producer will make good stuff, with or without hardware, and a not-so-good producer will make not-so-good tracks, even with hardware :) |
There's a big flaw in that statement.
Would schumacher drive a less powerful car because he is a better driver? No, he'd still want the best. |
|
|
| Jason_R |
There is no doubt software is catching up but I don't think it's quite there yet.
I have the novation v station which is fantastic but I also have the KS rack which is the hardware version.
While they do have a very similar sound it's not an exact match.
I don't really know how to describe it but the rack just sounds a bit more full on. Like the sounds thicker / fater and more bottom end to it so I always program v station leads into the K station.
I wouldn't bother for effects though.
Also my virus c has a darker sound which I have not heard in software.
On the other hand I just got the rb3k1 supersaw and it's wicked .
And at the end of the day it's only us producers that would notice anyway. The clubbers / listerns couldn't give a |
|
|
|
|
