|
Can soft synths ever sound as good as hardware? Post your opinion. (pg. 13)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie
that's why EXCEPTIONS was in bold. :o
Nothing wrong with VSTi's in their own right. but there are 2 big misconceptions:
1. VSTi's who emulate hardware come close.......
2. mixing ITB is easy.......
i have to laugh when people say I've used that MOOG in my bassline... What MOOG? that preset121 in Pro53.... :haha: :haha:
Though I've can get some very nice unique sounds out of Vstation and NEXUS is perfect for bread and butter instant Trance. However the filter and ADSR from a Minimoog is TOTALLY different than the filter section on NEXUS, Artuaria or Pro53
It's not trolling, it's experience. and I really don't understand how people who've never played beyond a few VSTi's can give an educated opinion while never have touched a piece of hardware, don't believe the marketing hype, use your own ears and listen....
That would be the same as 14 year olds without a driverslicense debating that a Porsche drives better than a Ferrari or the other way around.... Experience first than conclude...
At the end of the day, whether you are using Magix Music Maker, Band in a Box, FLStudio, Cubase, Logic Ableton, and you are happy with your results then it's ok. THAT's what it's all about.
If your not happy than you may ask yourself do I suck? or can't my software bring me what I want.
If it's the first, don't even bother buying anything else
if it's the latter, go listen en buy what suits you.
Not because you HAVE to, but because you want to.
But as said before clever programming and proper mixing can bring you a long way with software alone. |
What a tool.
Its pretty clear to me that you get a much better variety of sounds in software, because you have physical modelling, FM, VA, HCM, Additive, Wavetable, Wavescanning, and any other type of synthesis you like. VSTs do NOT sound the same. Hardware does mostly sound the same. With Max/MSP or Reaktor, a talented programmer could passably emulate any analogue synth you like.
Also, Echo is completely right, a modern vst is completely superior to an old Novation nova or roland JP8080, the algorithms are better and they have faster hardware to work with.
Of course a Pro53 is not going to sound like a Moog, its going to sound like a pro 53. Thats the point. If it sounded like a moog, then it'd be a moog emulation. Arturia emulations do sound a fair bit like a moog. And they sound really awesome.
And NO, DA's do not EVER impart pleasant distortion, the most you can hope for is transparency. |
|
|
| Hydroid |
Phew its been ages since i entered this forum! saw this thread and just had to comment!!
i'v had these arguments for years!
so yeah the codes are the same , indeed! software "can" sound like hardware! but it never will!
and you know what's the reason??? cuz anybody with enough skills to program something that will sound like a virus won't invest his time putting it on a AU/VST which will leak to the net in 2 days....end of the story!
other then that , no CPU can handle codes like the Virus TI or others in that style. your CPU would just collapse and die (as for now of course).
I had the very same argument on Reverbs. and boy plug in reverbs sounds like ! if you compare it to any good hardware reverb (good lexicons , bricasti . EMT or even the Eventide).
so yeah you can tweak the hell out of this soft synths with tons of eq's and but getting a good sound starts from a good source!! and besides people who don't want to put any money on a synth probably won't invest in good Eq's , Compressors , Reverbs etc so the result can only sound like ........a living proof is todays trance scene :( :( |
|
|
| echosystm |
ok there a few a few dumb things in this post Hydroid...
| quote: | Originally posted by Hydroid
cuz anybody with enough skills to program something that will sound like a virus won't invest his time putting it on a AU/VST which will leak to the net in 2 days....end of the story!
|
ok, so which company do you think turns more profit - nord or native instruments?
(it's not nord)
| quote: | Originally posted by Hydroid
other then that , no CPU can handle codes like the Virus TI or others in that style. your CPU would just collapse and die (as for now of course).
|
again, this is ABSOLUTE BS. the powercore card has enough grunt to run a number of instances of the virus b plugin... do you have any idea how little processing power a powercore card has?
people were saying this back when oxford plugins were only available on dsp cards... "you could never have an oxford plugin running native, cpus aren't fast enough"... then they released the native versions and they used about 2-5% cpu. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hydroid
Phew its been ages since i entered this forum! saw this thread and just had to comment!!
i'v had these arguments for years!
so yeah the codes are the same , indeed! software "can" sound like hardware! but it never will!
and you know what's the reason??? cuz anybody with enough skills to program something that will sound like a virus won't invest his time putting it on a AU/VST which will leak to the net in 2 days....end of the story!
other then that , no CPU can handle codes like the Virus TI or others in that style. your CPU would just collapse and die (as for now of course).
I had the very same argument on Reverbs. and boy plug in reverbs sounds like ! if you compare it to any good hardware reverb (good lexicons , bricasti . EMT or even the Eventide).
so yeah you can tweak the hell out of this soft synths with tons of eq's and but getting a good sound starts from a good source!! and besides people who don't want to put any money on a synth probably won't invest in good Eq's , Compressors , Reverbs etc so the result can only sound like ........a living proof is todays trance scene :( :( |
Well, personally, I think that the Virus' oscillators and filters (for example) are very weak, and I think a lot of people agree. The virus has a huge advantage in that it gives you 80 or so reasonable sounding voices at no cost to your CPU. Thats it. Something like z3ta, Massive or Predator, even FM8 or absynth blows the virus away from what I've seen, in terms of both features and quality. I also hear that Gladiator and circlesynth are up there in that respect too.
And CPUs are immensely more powerful than DSP chips. So I disagree completely on that.
I think you might have a point about reverbs though, I'm still looking for a really good one in software. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by kitphillips
Well, personally, I think that the Virus' oscillators and filters (for example) are very weak, and I think a lot of people agree. |
Take a single saw, decrease the filter and put a slight unison detune on it.
And it will already sound better than most softsynths, add some delay and you are a mile ahead. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
OK, enough. http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...901#post9565901 go here, put your money where your mouth is.
Hydroid; I love your stuff dude, please don't take me and echo's comments as offensive, I know we come off a bit harsh, but we've been putting up with raphie's comments the whole thread:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Hydroid |
Well , first of all of course Native Instruments makes alot more profit then Clavia , so is behringer over SSL i assure you that! you gotta understand most of the people can't afford those kind of stuff.
its like comparing Ferrari cars to Fiat. i bet fiat makes alot more money as most of the people can afford their cars , ferrari is alot more limited.
2nd thing the powercore itself is alot weaker then a good computer now days but it meant to handle only limited stuff like his own plugins or virus for example. if you ran those on your cpu which already need to handle your Windows / mac + your sequencer and other plugins you'll kill it in NO TIME!
as for the osc and filters of the virus or nord (or any quality Hardware synth actually) take a saw osc of the nord lead and zeta or whatever (without any distortion or saturation) , and see which one is better.
the nord filters sounds 10000000 times better then all the vsti's i'v checked.....by FAR!
i'v tried all those soft synths you guys are talking about...predator and massive does'nt even come close to a virus TI or any nord lead i'v heard. yeah it has a lot of cool features but sound wise?? NO FUKING WAY! its rubbish i'v checked it more then once!
btw , non taken personally of course! its a discussion and i'm glad to hear other people thoughts
:D :D :D |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hydroid
Well , first of all of course Native Instruments makes alot more profit then Clavia , so is behringer over SSL i assure you that! you gotta understand most of the people can't afford those kind of stuff.
its like comparing Ferrari cars to Fiat. i bet fiat makes alot more money as most of the people can afford their cars , ferrari is alot more limited.
2nd thing the powercore itself is alot weaker then a good computer now days but it meant to handle only limited stuff like his own plugins or virus for example. if you ran those on your cpu which already need to handle your Windows / mac + your sequencer and other plugins you'll kill it in NO TIME!
as for the osc and filters of the virus or nord (or any quality Hardware synth actually) take a saw osc of the nord lead and zeta or whatever (without any distortion or saturation) , and see which one is better.
the nord filters sounds 10000000 times better then all the vsti's i'v checked.....by FAR!
i'v tried all those soft synths you guys are talking about...predator and massive does'nt even come close to a virus TI or any nord lead i'v heard. yeah it has a lot of cool features but sound wise?? NO FUKING WAY! its rubbish i'v checked it more then once!
btw , non taken personally of course! its a discussion and i'm glad to hear other people thoughts
:D :D :D |
The problem I'm having understanding is people keep coming in and saying "THE CODE IS THE SAME THE CODE IS THE SAME!!!"
*****SO WHAT*******
They DO NOT sound the same.
The difference between a moog emulation and a moog
is the SAME difference between imatation cheese and real cheese.
Trust and believe imitation can taste good but NEVER as good as the REAL cheese. Thats WHY they are called "imitations" or "emulations".
They are aspiring to be something but always falling short.
Once they ARE that something, they are no longer an emulation.
If we turned THAT into a debate, the software deluded people would come in here saying BUT THEY HAVE THE SAME INGREDIENTS!!, milk, dairy, blah blah.
Great, that doesn't mean I'm gonna live on imitation cheese, or ever buy it in the supermarket, or ever even attempt to believe software sounds better. Its CHEAP, and it sounds cheap.
Same as the cheap cheese you put on your burgers when you cook.
And the reason NI makes more money (if they do, noones even validated this fact) is because people are CHEAP.
Not because NI is better than Clavia. Thats a joke. |
|
|
| Low Profile |
Your PC has the capability to do the same thing as a DSP, it just does it differently but the output is the same (except maybe roundoff error but that's NOT the source of difference, I promise)
So hardware compared to software is not:
a) The difference between a moog emulation and a moog
b) the SAME difference between imatation cheese and real cheese.
Neither of these are good analogies for software running on DSP and software running on an x86 system.
The difference lies in the recipe behind the synth.
Think about it, the first VA synths were coming as early as '94! The first VST softsynth were starting to show around 2002 (those that are stil considered any good, that is). The VA makers, like Access, Clavia, Waldorf etc. have an EIGHT YEAR head-start on the software developers! eight more years to fine-tune THEIR recipe for synth-goodness.
I truly do think that some of the higher end virtual-analogs out there sound better than most of the software products, but that's because they've spent 3-4 times more man-hours developing their product! That's why hardware often sounds better!
... oh, and that is the ONLY logical explanation I will accept. If you try to give reasons for "the DACs being more quality" or "the code runs faster" or any other bull technical reason like that I will bury you in a wave of counter-evidence :P Softsynths have the potential, they just need someone to spend 14 years working it to perfection :)
PS: analog vs. digital is not comparable, they're apples and oranges, while DSP vs. PC is apples to apples... |
|
|
| Numb |
| quote: | Originally posted by Low Profile
Your PC has the capability to do the same thing as a DSP, it just does it differently but the output is the same (except maybe roundoff error but that's NOT the source of difference, I promise)
So hardware compared to software is not:
a) The difference between a moog emulation and a moog
b) the SAME difference between imatation cheese and real cheese.
Neither of these are good analogies for software running on DSP and software running on an x86 system.
The difference lies in the recipe behind the synth.
Think about it, the first VA synths were coming as early as '94! The first VST softsynth were starting to show around 2002 (those that are stil considered any good, that is). The VA makers, like Access, Clavia, Waldorf etc. have an EIGHT YEAR head-start on the software developers! eight more years to fine-tune THEIR recipe for synth-goodness.
I truly do think that some of the higher end virtual-analogs out there sound better than most of the software products, but that's because they've spent 3-4 times more man-hours developing their product! That's why hardware often sounds better!
... oh, and that is the ONLY logical explanation I will accept. If you try to give reasons for "the DACs being more quality" or "the code runs faster" or any other bull technical reason like that I will bury you in a wave of counter-evidence :P Softsynths have the potential, they just need someone to spend 14 years working it to perfection :)
PS: analog vs. digital is not comparable, they're apples and oranges, while DSP vs. PC is apples to apples... |
I agree with a lot of this. Personally I don't use softs to emulate anything but rather it's own color of the rainbow. I own both softs and hards, for me and what I do they both have a use or "color".
Sorry for not staying strictly on topic. :toocool: |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hydroid
as for the osc and filters of the virus or nord (or any quality Hardware synth actually) take a saw osc of the nord lead and zeta or whatever (without any distortion or saturation) , and see which one is better. |
Z3ta Naked saw > Virus naked saw
I prefer the sound of the Z3ta, I am not unqiue. :D
This guy is one of those people who thinks hardware sounds better because it cannot be pirated and thus technicians are willing to put more work to make it sound better.
As a note, many, if not most programmers are paid initally for their work, once the product is released, the guy that made it [if you work for a huge company] has likely already been paid everything, and wether it sells or not is not of his concern.
"Hardware sounds better because of VSTi piracy" *Chuckle* |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
is the SAME difference between imatation cheese and real cheese... Trust and believe imitation can taste good but NEVER as good as the REAL cheese... If we turned THAT into a debate, the software deluded people would come in here saying BUT THEY HAVE THE SAME INGREDIENTS!!, milk, dairy, blah blah... Great, that doesn't mean I'm gonna live on imitation cheese, or ever buy it in the supermarket, or ever even attempt to believe software sounds better... Same as the cheap cheese you put on your burgers when you cook.
|
you come up with the most retarded analogies lol |
|
|
|
|
