|
Can soft synths ever sound as good as hardware? Post your opinion. (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Kimset7, you never answered my question...
What analog synths have you used or what are you favourites? name 5+ |
I saw your question, and I wondered whats the purpose of that question? And you had skipped my comment in the thread that I indirectly replied to one of your arguments. I dont have 5+ favorites, I have 3 favorites at the moment, but interest in quite a few. I'll probably own 4-5 synths at the point where I can say "i LOVE my setup." Anyhow why do you need to know 5+ synths im most interested in? How would that help your argument? |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
It's not about what the producers are using. It's just as easy to make a ty, boring, talentless track with hardware synths.
The drop in quality has happened because the quality filters for a release are so much lower because labels don't have to press a track to vinyl to put it out anymore. Vinyl is an investment. A digital release really isn't. Labels know that and treat digital releases accordingly by lowering their standards. Or in many cases producers who get rejected by a bunch of labels simply start their own digital labels and release stuff that never would have seen the light of day ten years ago, which is why we have mountains and mountains of crap on the market today.
This is never going to change now, so people need to quit complaining about it... |
Well the actual hardware software debate is sound quality. But I'd put money on better music being created by people who have invested their money on hardware, because they have no choice but to make the best of it, than the people who downloaded the newest VST's and carelessly throw things around and call it music. If you've spent $5,000-$10,000 on hardware there is a good chance you are going to be passionate about getting the most out of it (unless your simply a talentless hack). So the difference here is the investment made that drives creativity versus no investment made that doesn't drive creativity, unless the person is just insanely passionate about making the best out of the software, a hardware investor is probably passionate about his/her music by the default of a big investment.
That said, how did what I say differ from what you said? The accessibility of getting music out there has gotten too easy, and labels are putting out music by producers who really weren't meant to be making music with their time. And then the labels who shouldn't be labels are also existing because of the ease of putting music out there due to computers and the internet. So standards have to get higher to make up for the ease at which music is created and distributed online. I really wish Vinyl would make a big big comeback. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
I saw your question, and I wondered whats the purpose of that question? |
Because someone who makes a moronic statement like the one below has no idea what they are talking about.
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
VSTs and Analogue Synths might be doing the same maths but their not running through the same veins.
|
Analog synths don't do any math, they are analog. I wanted to see if you actually knew the difference between analog hardware and VA hardware... Methinks you don't, but no matter, you can go and Google it now and pretend that you do. I've automatically disregarded any of your opinions.
The same applies to Raphie's arguments below:
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie
- VSTI's always sound harsh in the high end (metalic)
- VSTi's sound "thin/hollow" compared with hardware VA's they lack the density of HW VA alogrithms.
- outboard has different DA stages (not neccecarily better specced, but being a better match with the synth)
|
If you understand how a DSP processor works, you understand that they do nothing special, they just do it faster than a desktop CPU. That is not to say that this is better than a desktop CPU, because outboard gear HAS TO do it faster because of the enormous midi delay. The said operations are easily implemented at a higher level on a desktop CPU. People argue that VSTi algos are weak because the developers have less resources... LOL. Native Instruments vs. Nord? What a joke.
Outboard does have different DA stages, that is true. VSTi's have no DA stages at all... Guess what? ALL DA DOES IS INTRODUCE DISTORTION. VST: all digital, no distortion. VA: digital, analog, then back to digital - two points of added distortion. Seriously this is the dumbest argument I've heard yet lol.
VSTis vs. analog synths, like I said, I really can't comment.
However, VSTis vs. VAs, I can. If you don't have an understanding of microprocessors, assembly language and at least one higher level language, get out of this discussion because you have no idea what you are talking about.
While I'm on a roll... Kimset7, music quality has degraded because more noobs can get into music (vsts - cheaper) and distribution is easier. Seems like everyone knows this other than you. It has nothing to do with the MERITS of hardware over software. Modern VSTis are algorithmically superior to the old VA hardware that was around before "music degraded".
I mean, , Cyrus on this forum (Solar Project) sold his JP8080 because a freeware VSTi (Xhip) does better supersaws.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox
The best hardware VAs piss on the best softsynth VAs, if you can't hear the difference maybe you played your music too loud for a few years and damaged a part of your hearing. No jokes, I'm serious.
...
And finally, hardware simply sounds better.
|
So... Any empirical facts to back up all of this puffery and ignorance? It's hilarious that this is all coming from someone who's only synth is a Xiosynth. LOL.
My advice: never join a debating team. No jokes, I'm serious. |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Because someone who makes a moronic statement like the one below has no idea what they are talking about.
Analog synths don't do any math, they are analog. I wanted to see if you actually knew the difference between analog hardware and VA hardware... Methinks you don't, but no matter, you can go and Google it now and pretend that you do. I've automatically disregarded any of your opinions.
The same applies to Raphie's arguments below:
If you understand how a DSP processor works, you understand that they do nothing special, they just do it faster than a desktop CPU. That is not to say that this is better than a desktop CPU, because outboard gear HAS TO do it faster because of the enormous midi delay. The said operations are easily implemented at a higher level on a desktop CPU. People argue that VSTi algos are weak because the developers have less resources... LOL. Native Instruments vs. Nord? What a joke.
Outboard does have different DA stages, that is true. VSTi's have no DA stages at all... Guess what? ALL DA DOES IS INTRODUCE DISTORTION. VST: all digital, no distortion. VA: digital, analog, then back to digital - two points of added distortion. Seriously this is the dumbest argument I've heard yet lol.
VSTis vs. analog synths, like I said, I really can't comment.
However, VSTis vs. VAs, I can. If you don't have an understanding of microprocessors, assembly language and at least one higher level language, get out of this discussion because you have no idea what you are talking about.
While I'm on a roll... Kimset7, music quality has degraded because more noobs can get into music (vsts - cheaper) and distribution is easier. Seems like everyone knows this other than you. It has nothing to do with the MERITS of hardware over software. Modern VSTis are algorithmically superior to the old VA hardware that was around before "music degraded".
I mean, , Cyrus on this forum (Solar Project) sold his JP8080 because a freeware VSTi (Xhip) does better supersaws.
So... Any empirical facts to back up all of this puffery and ignorance? It's hilarious that this is all coming from someone who's only synth is a Xiosynth. LOL.
My advice: never join a debating team. No jokes, I'm serious. |
Well the only moron is you, I was talking about the Emulation of Analogue Sound by the VSTs, they might be doing the same thing in theory "maths" but they arent running through the same veins, analogue board/circuits/chips/etc.
You mean while your on the fail. Who cares if new VST's run better algorithm's than older Virtual Analogue synths? I'm not defending Virtual Analogue synths here, when I talk about Analogue/Hardware im talking about actual Analogue synths that Virtual synths dream of emulating. The Korg MS-20, SCI Prophet 5, Arp, Moog Minimoog, Yamaha synths, the list goes on. And there has been a definate decrease in the quality of music and the amount of poorly made music out there due to the computer/internet and the rise of ITB production. But of course your ridiculous and blind enough to argue otherwise. And to add to your fail...many producers that create amazing sound look for that distortion or "color", so clean =/= greatness. The best sounds are made with a bit of distortion that comes naturally from analogue gear. Don't let your empirical fact handbook hit you on the head when it comes to making music. |
|
|
| EgosXII |
you're hilarious kismet :haha: :haha:
echo, i'd vote for you if you wanna take over rudd when his term's up. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
Well the only moron is you, I was talking about the Emulation of Analogue Sound by the VSTs
|
I wasn't - so why did you rebut a non-existent argument?
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
Who cares if new VST's run better algorithm's than older Virtual Analogue synths?
|
You argued that the quality of music has degraded because VSTs sound worse than hardware. Modern VSTs are better than the hardware that was used for the overwhelming majority of edm classics. Hence, your argument got shut down.
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
there has been a definate decrease in the quality of music and the amount of poorly made music out there due to the computer/internet and the rise of ITB production. |
...and now you're trying to argue that music quality has degraded because of distribution and too many noobs (which is exactly what I said to rebut your original argument)? man, choose a position and stick with it lol. You're making yourself look a bit silly mate...
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
The best sounds are made with a bit of distortion that comes naturally from analogue gear. |
No.
Analog hardware is praised for things like oscillator drift, flutter in the filters, the character of the equipment at extreme settings or imposing the character of some certain device (eg. Tape). This is not the same as blatant loss in quality from being converted from digital, to analog, then back to digital again - this distortion is not one of the merits of hardware VAs lol...
You're really grasping at straws now, just let it go ;) |
|
|
| dannib |
| quote: | | Modern VSTs are better than the hardware that was used for the overwhelming majority of edm classics |
That is debatable. i mean in theory, better algorithms probably exist in newer products but older synths & effects have a character to them for the most part. Many modern vsts sound very similar to one another, only they have different effects, modulation options and interface etc.
Compare for example an eventide h3000 (1980s) to any modern software vst effects. It has true character and sounds alot better to my ears than the "sonically perfect" vst effects.
Same goes for synths. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by dannib
That is debatable. i mean in theory, better algorithms probably exist in newer products but older synths & effects have a character to them for the most part. |
Of course, but that isn't really what we are talking about. We're talking about the advancement of the technology - software is on par with modern VA hardware because they are effectively the same... That is my point. Some people will always like the "crap" quality of old VAs, but some people will also always like the "crap" quality of old VSTs too. Anything that can be done on a DSP chip can be done on a desktop CPU, and it is. One sounds no better than the other.
| quote: | Originally posted by dannib
Many modern vsts sound very similar to one another |
Uh... it's the other way around man. Almost all hardware synths sound identical, because they are mostly just reiterating the same concepts: analog, virtual analog, sample-based, FM, wavetable.
VSTs are far more innovative, with things like Gladiators HCM, granular synthesis, hybrid synthesis like Omnisphere, etc. |
|
|
| dannib |
What older VAs would you consider to have a crap quality then?
What synths do you own and what are you comparing?
Obviously things can be more innovative in newer vsts. It is far easier to edit and tweak parameters on screen when it comes to heavy FM, additive, granular etc synthesis. Hardware synths wouldn't be very intuitive and easy to program as you would probably have to dive through hundreds of menus etc.
I MYSELF think that MANY vsts sound too perfect, clean and tinny. I find myself having to use eq and effects often. On my older synths, especially analogue ones, they seem to fit right in the mix and i NEVER have to "phatten" them up as somebody else said.
That applies to both synths and effects. They have no character in my opinion. That is a personal opionion that may differ from yours. There is no point in arguing this.
Would you say the same goes for effects like in my example of the H3000? |
|
|
| echosystm |
I didn't mean literally they are crap lol... that's why I put quotations around it. I meant "crap" figuratively - in the sense that they are older and classified as somehow technically inferior. They have the sound of something old and outdated and some will love it, some will hate it. The point was, it does not matter if its on a DSP or CPU.
I'm basically agreeing with you on the topic of oldness + character, except that old non-analog hardware is no different from old vsts with a certain character. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by Kismet7
Well the only moron is you, I was talking about the Emulation of Analogue Sound by the VSTs, they might be doing the same thing in theory "maths" but they arent running through the same veins, analogue board/circuits/chips/etc.
|
Emulations of analog synths sucks!
But dont forget that there are tons of romplers who offers exact same sound as analog by sampling.
I find myself using Trilogy more than my Moog for basslines.
And a Virus, can sound alot like analog synths, even better, and its physically possible for Access to make that a VST Instrument of it if they wanted to.
And then we have Omnisphere, which is without doubt the most feature packed synthesizer/rompler ever! The capabilities of this thing is nothing but amazing. |
|
|
| Raphie |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
The same applies to Raphie's arguments below:
If you understand how a DSP processor works, you understand that they do nothing special, they just do it faster than a desktop CPU. That is not to say that this is better than a desktop CPU, because outboard gear HAS TO do it faster because of the enormous midi delay. The said operations are easily implemented at a higher level on a desktop CPU. People argue that VSTi algos are weak because the developers have less resources... LOL. Native Instruments vs. Nord? What a joke.
Outboard does have different DA stages, that is true. VSTi's have no DA stages at all... Guess what? ALL DA DOES IS INTRODUCE DISTORTION. VST: all digital, no distortion. VA: digital, analog, then back to digital - two points of added distortion. Seriously this is the dumbest argument I've heard yet lol.
However, VSTis vs. VAs, I can. If you don't have an understanding of microprocessors, assembly language and at least one higher level language, get out of this discussion because you have no idea what you are talking about.
So... Any empirical facts to back up all of this puffery and ignorance? It's hilarious that this is all coming from someone who's only synth is a Xiosynth. LOL.
My advice: never join a debating team. No jokes, I'm serious. |
Ok, you're taking shortcuts here...... and you're trying to ridicule people which is another hobby of me, so be nice... please...
DA = Character, compare Lavry to Apogee, to Yamaha etc... different DA different results.... which means you can mix & match to deliver a "signature sound" a Pro53 sounds ty on a SBLive, but gritty on a Steinberg MR816 if you know what i mean.
Remember the "quality mode" in Massive?!? see outboard DSP's with native coding as super super super quality mode... hence they sound denser with more detail less alliasing etc......
And if you can't hear the difference between a Nordlead 1 or 2 or a wannabee Nordlead VSTi like that crappy discovery... then i have no ing clue why you are into producing in the first place....
Geezzzz apart from some exceptions most ITB crap sounds thin harsch, clipped summed and dither wrongly...... If that sound is in fashion then heehoo that's the way to go, but it still sounds like crap.
So please don't mistake taste or fashion with quality. :whip:
there are lot's of things that PC's can do, simulate planes, cars, synths...... you get the point: it comes close, but it's still no cigar..... |
|
|
|
|
