|
SOFTWARE vs. HARDWARE (Strength's & Weakness - Your opinion is welcome!) (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Subtle |
Hardware
Pro: Sound, Fun
Software:
Pro: Workflow, Recall |
|
|
| orTofønChiLd |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Hardware
Pro: Sound, Fun
Software:
Pro: Workflow, Recall |
yeah, there you go subtle |
|
|
| MOK |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vortex_SA
why are people so obsessed with this nonsense?? do what you want... i heard that burping to a condenser is way warmer than softsynths AND hardware... go buy some soda people! |
^that. End results depend on the user so much more than the gear/software that this issue borders on irrelevance. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vortex_SA
why are people so obsessed with this nonsense?? do what you want... i heard that burping to a condenser is way warmer than softsynths AND hardware... go buy some soda people! |
:stongue:
I heard that you can warm up your tracks by burning them to a CD and letting them sit in the sun for a days.
:conf: |
|
|
| cryophonik |
I really hate the hardware vs software debates because: (1) those threads are always full of more misinformation than truth (the "other" thread here is a perfect example), (2) it's totally subjective, and (3) who the hell cares what someone else uses?!
That said, I've been collecting and using hardware synths for almost 30 years (yeah, I'm old) and I still love having hardware synths around me for a bunch of reasons, including:
- I hate being tethered to a computer and would rather have a real synth with keys and knobs in front of me. I find it much more stimulating to my creativity. I sometimes spend 8-10 hours/day staring at a computer for my job, and I find that it sucks the creative juices right out of me.
- when I'm composing, I want simplicity and as few distractions as possible. It's much easier to just fire up a "real" synth and start playing than it is to have to turn on my computer, sound card, MIDI controller, fire up my DAW, load a synth, etc.
- higher resale value = better investment.
- dedicated controls.
Does that mean that I think hardware is better than software? Hell no. Of the hundreds of synths (hardware and software) that I've owned in my lifetime, I would easily put Gladiator 2 and Blue, and possibly even Rapture and Massive in my top ten favorites. And, soft synths still make up at least 50% of the synth sounds in my productions.
As far as comparing the sound of soft synths to that of hardware synths, well the difficulty there is that not all hardware is created equally, nor is all software. A Virus sounds different than a Nord and they both sound different than a Moog, etc., just as Gladiator sounds different than Vanguard, etc., etc., etc. And anybody who claims emphatically that hardware is better than software has probably never owned anything as wretched sounding as a Roland D-10 or JV880 - I don't think that there's a soft synth out there that sounds as bad as those two hardware synths do.
The other thing that I find troubling in this whole debate is that the software-only guys have a tendency to refer to hardware users as "hardware snobs", when the converse actually seems to be more true. I don't know of anybody these days who uses hardware synths exclusively. Pretty much everybody who uses hardware also uses software synths and effects as well. But, I don't have to look very far to see people who use software only (by choice) and refuse to use hardware because "software can do everything hardware can do".
When it comes right down to it, I really don't care what anybody else uses and I find these comparisons of each synth's oscillators, filters, etc. to be pretty silly. The only thing it proves is that each person has an opinion. My opinion is that all of my hardware and software synths are great. |
|
|
| Existo22 |
| Why did you captain yourself out of my 14 page harware vs software thread? |
|
|
| Darkarbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
If hardware is better than software, then how come my TS404 sounds better than that ole busted TB303?
Here is a sample i made, of a 303 and a 404, both using the same default settings.
First is 303, second half is 404. Press the play button above the download button. |
:stongue: :stongue: :stongue:
Worst example ever. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by orTofønChiLd
Hardware will always be better than software. Hardware has warmer sound and rips software synths to pieces. Anyone usin software is wasting their time and life. |
You just turned this topic into a crapmonster. Thank you for unleashing it. |
|
|
| kitphillips |
If everything else is equal, I think hardware is better for live stuff, because its more stable and doesn't click and pop when its overloaded. BUT synths like the virus aren't particularly stable and do click and pop...
In the studio I can see that hardware is nice to have but can't see that its essential to make brilliant tracks. It is fun though as long as you don't get too caught up in it. |
|
|
| Vortex_SA |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
:stongue:
I heard that you can warm up your tracks by burning them to a CD and letting them sit in the sun for a days.
:conf: |
ah man you're such a n00b, here is some pro advice for ya: put some oil (preferably olive oil, to get a nice olivey tan) in the center of the CD (where the TOC is...) that keeps the kicks in sync, otherwise your track would be all over the place from the wrapping that occurs due to the exposure... |
|
|
| alanzo |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
Everything that cryo said |
w00t+1 |
|
|
| alanzo |
My biggest gripe with software (in general) is that it has little or no resale value. A non-physical object is not easy (or perhaps even possible) to resell. Because of this, I have 6 hardware synths and 0 software synths (except ROMplers)... but use all software FX because they sound great and are easy to use.
Here are my top reasons why I don't use native software instruments:
1. Little or no resale value
2. They're not as satisfying to play with
3. Vintage sounds... they're just not going to happen on software
4. It's easier to get "hardware" to sound great
5. Developers that are going for the "hardware" market are by nature going to have a larger budget... so they just put more time and thought into the interface and sound engine (most of the time)
6. CPU usage... not really a huge problem these days, but it could definitely peer its ugly head on even the most powerful systems
On another note, so many of the best computer scientist out there who specialize in digital sound engines are designing hardware... as Dave Smith (designer of the Prophet analog synthesizer(s)) said... hardware can't be ripped off.
But a few recent instruments are awesome. Arturia's instruments sound really nice... and the new Waldorf Largo looks like it could replace my Blofeld. But in general, software could sound ing awesome.. I don't know, I've never really given it a chance. ;) |
|
|
|
|
