|
SOFTWARE vs. HARDWARE (Strength's & Weakness - Your opinion is welcome!) (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by Existo22
I thought this way until I moved to San Francisco.
I think their cd section is far more then any edm fan could ask for. |
In Austin, TX, I went into a music store and the Electronica section completely disorganized. It pissed me off so much that I alphabetized EVERYTHING in each of the individual categories. It was also very small and fairly out of date. |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| A Hybrid setup of Hardware + Software is win. |
|
|
| alanzo |
I was thinking about this last night as I went to bed ... software just feels so not permanent. It's like, I can say to myself, almost not matter what, I have that Andromeda (for example). I just can't really say that with software because something new might come out or the software might stop working with a new DAW or lose support for upgrades, or I might just not use it! But my real synths are always there, staring me in the face.
Having real synth just feels a lot more substantial than a bunch of software. It's not like it's any secret that every soft instrument is just trying to be the real thing. When you can get the "real thing" for so little money... just in' do it!
DSI MoPho : $350
Virus A : $400
Nord Lead Modular Rack : $400
Bam! All you really need...
Top reasons to use only soft instruments :
1. You're cheap/poor
2. You're a software snob
3. You don't feel you're at the level where a real instrument would be of benefit
4. You don't feel like learning how to properly use them
So everyone stop your bitching and accept the fact that soft instruments are just crappy emulations of the real thing. The real thing being an ANALOG synthesizer.
Alesis Andromeda, Prophet 08, DSI MoPho, DSI Evolver, Moog Voyager, Moog Little Phatty... those are you picks of analogs currently in production. Stop your ing bitching, whining, and comparing because it's all futile. Just get the real thing or settle with an emulation. Because that's all it's every going to be ... a ing emulation.
Furthermore, why is no one comparing ANALOGS to Virtual Analogs. They're both "hardware"! And Virtual Analogs add tons of analog (don't they!?!). Really, Virtual Analog "hardware" synths are just another ing emulation. So why not say they suck? |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| meh double post |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by alanzo
I was thinking about this last night as I went to bed ... software just feels so not permanent. It's like, I can say to myself, almost not matter what, I have that Andromeda (for example). I just can't really say that with software because something new might come out or the software might stop working with a new DAW or lose support for upgrades, or I might just not use it! But my real synths are always there, staring me in the face.
Having real synth just feels a lot more substantial than a bunch of software. It's not like it's any secret that every soft instrument is just trying to be the real thing. When you can get the "real thing" for so little money... just in' do it!
DSI MoPho : $350
Virus A : $400
Nord Lead Modular Rack : $400
Bam! All you really need...
Top reasons to use only soft instruments :
1. You're cheap/poor
2. You're a software snob
3. You don't feel you're at the level where a real instrument would be of benefit
4. You don't feel like learning how to properly use them
So everyone stop your bitching and accept the fact that soft instruments are just crappy emulations of the real thing. The real thing being an ANALOG synthesizer.
Alesis Andromeda, Prophet 08, DSI MoPho, DSI Evolver, Moog Voyager, Moog Little Phatty... those are you picks of analogs currently in production. Stop your ing bitching, whining, and comparing because it's all futile. Just get the real thing or settle with an emulation. Because that's all it's every going to be ... a ing emulation.
Furthermore, why is no one comparing ANALOGS to Virtual Analogs. They're both "hardware"! And Virtual Analogs add tons of analog (don't they!?!). Really, Virtual Analog "hardware" synths are just another ing emulation. So why not say they suck? |
All the hardware synths you mentioned, fail compared to z3ta.
They are completely, utterly, peices of scum left behind from a date between michael jackson and richie rich, compared to FM8.
They are the reason house music exists.
They are the reason children in africa are starving. When you see a poor little kid in some african country, with flies on his face, and nasty ty crust on his leg, unable to find a single scrap of food. It is because everyone in that country is so depressed they don't want to feed him, because they had to listen to analoug hardware.
You remember Dusty the Cat? The cat that retarded 15 year old tortued and put the videos on YouTube? That kid did those horrible things because he had to listen to a real Virus and not z3ta. The virus makes people harm animals.
When ever you play the virus c specificly, a box of kittens literally...explodes.
Hardware synths cause aids.
Hitler did everything he did because he was RAEG at the fact that his anthem had to be made with ty analoug hardware.
Truth.
Proof.
Hardware...
By Kalvin Kline |
|
|
| atxbigballer1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
People do listen to Jazz don't they? |
I LOVE JAZZ! I LOVE ANY THING IF IT SOUNDS GOOD!:D |
|
|
| atxbigballer1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Well perhaps, but do you know a rap song that uses the Virus?
Interesting note. I wonder of all these hardware fanbois, how many actually have hardware and make solid tunes. :P |
LiL JON has a ACCESS VIRUS TI for one! :D |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
This argument is becoming absurdly fetishistic. It's beginning to remind me of the arbitrary position adopted by guitar players who believe that the only reason anyone wants to own a synth is so they can play sounds that emulate a guitar.
If I could afford them, I would own NI Komplete 5 and a few of the instruments on your list, alanzo.
What I'm not going to be involved with is a pissing contest to see who can come up with the best argument, for or against ANY position, including that of BOTH (Hard and software). It's pointless.
This is, quite literally, a 'virtual' debate. There simply aren't enough reasons for or against any position to affirm one as more valid than any other. It's a matter of preference, and that's it.
On Erasure's Circus album, Vince Clark used analogue, entirely, from a controlled voltage sequencer to his synths - the entire path was analogue. Then, he was right when he maintained that Dave Smith's MIDI had peculiar timing deficiencies.
Now, there are a number of features throughout various DAW's that allow for timing correction, should a producer find that necessary. Resolution, so far as bit-depth and frequency range is proving itself very subject to Moore's law. There are a number of tricks a producer can use to "fatten" up a sound that might not be up to snuff, left on its own.
Yes. If I could afford them, I would buy them. For all practical purposes, having owned physical gear (the best of which was a Kurzweil K2000 back in 1992), I can only assure you that I'm satisfied with the results I've been able to achieve on a very, very modest ( < $1000.00 + a Pentium 3) system.
Programs like Massive and Zeta aren't trying to sound like an Alesis Andromeda let alone an Alesis Ion. They're not trying to replace it, either. They provide a completely different and, in certain aspects, for more adjustable interface. In a lot of ways, they're just more versatile as well as portable.
That versatility and the utilities provided for in the software GUI still can't replace virtually ANY hardware synth's ability with specialization. Hardware synths (virtual analogue or otherwise) are designed to do one thing (albeit with a variety of applications), do it well, and do it with rock-solid reliability in addition to maintaining a readily predictable physical user interface that allows for control of specific parameters.
In as much as Mr. Clark put on aires about the issues of timing related to MIDI, his sound, for that album, was utterly defined by his choice in equipment. If your sound is defined by the equipment you use, outstanding. If you're trying to out match another producer because their preference or financial wherewithal doesn't correlate with your own, what is the point?
What, precisely, does it prove, that is so relevant that it must be proven? |
|
|
| atxbigballer1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
In Austin, TX, I went into a music store and the Electronica section completely disorganized. It pissed me off so much that I alphabetized EVERYTHING in each of the individual categories. It was also very small and fairly out of date. |
I am from the ATX what muisc store was it? |
|
|
| cronodevir |
| quote: | Originally posted by EddieZilker
This argument is becoming absurdly fetishistic. It's beginning to remind me of the arbitrary position adopted by guitar players who believe that the only reason anyone wants to own a synth is so they can play sounds that emulate a guitar.
If I could afford them, I would own NI Komplete 5 and a few of the instruments on your list, alanzo.
What I'm not going to be involved with is a pissing contest to see who can come up with the best argument, for or against ANY position, including that of BOTH (Hard and software). It's pointless.
This is, quite literally, a 'virtual' debate. There simply aren't enough reasons for or against any position to affirm one as more valid than any other. It's a matter of preference, and that's it.
On Erasure's Circus album, Vince Clark used analogue, entirely, from a controlled voltage sequencer to his synths - the entire path was analogue. Then, he was right when he maintained that Dave Smith's MIDI had peculiar timing deficiencies.
Now, there are a number of features throughout various DAW's that allow for timing correction, should a producer find that necessary. Resolution, so far as bit-depth and frequency range is proving itself very subject to Moore's law. There are a number of tricks a producer can use to "fatten" up a sound that might not be up to snuff, left on its own.
Yes. If I could afford them, I would buy them. For all practical purposes, having owned physical gear (the best of which was a Kurzweil K2000 back in 1992), I can only assure you that I'm satisfied with the results I've been able to achieve on a very, very modest ( < $1000.00 + a Pentium 3) system.
Programs like Massive and Zeta aren't trying to sound like an Alesis Andromeda let alone an Alesis Ion. They're not trying to replace it, either. They provide a completely different and, in certain aspects, for more adjustable interface. In a lot of ways, they're just more versatile as well as portable.
That versatility and the utilities provided for in the software GUI still can't replace virtually ANY hardware synth's ability with specialization. Hardware synths (virtual analogue or otherwise) are designed to do one thing (albeit with a variety of applications), do it well, and do it with rock-solid reliability in addition to maintaining a readily predictable physical user interface that allows for control of specific parameters.
In as much as Mr. Clark put on aires about the issues of timing related to MIDI, his sound, for that album, was utterly defined by his choice in equipment. If your sound is defined by the equipment you use, outstanding. If you're trying to out match another producer because their preference or financial wherewithal doesn't correlate with your own, what is the point?
What, precisely, does it prove, that is so relevant that it must be proven? |
Why argue?
That is why....
Think about all those kittens man!
The Horror...
OH THE HUMANITY!@!!! |
|
|
| Blake_Jarrell |
what a tired argument
hardware doesn't "sound better" than software, it sounds DIFFERENT. its exactly comparable to the other tired debate of CD vs Vinyl. some listeners decide what they prefer better either with their ear. some people have to have their opinion given to them. these people usually read www.residentadvisor.net.
honestly the "best sounding" tracks to me are Prydz and Jerome Isma-Ae tracks. These guys only use software, better yet, only the inbuilt synths and fx in logic. their mixdowns blow everyone out of the water. again, this is just my own opinion.
then there are albums like Telefon Tel Aviv - Immolate yourself that were done completely with hardware. I think this album sounds amazing as well, but in a totally different way.
i also find alot of people are defensive of analog because its such a huge investment. its like buying a brand new car. when you buy that new mustang, you swear to ing god its the best car on ing earth and faster than everyone elses. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by atxbigballer1
I am from the ATX what muisc store was it? |
Waterloo Records.
| quote: | Originally posted by cronodevir
Why argue?
That is why....
Think about all those kittens man! |
Ah, the last resort of a failed debater: Do it for the kitties! What an utterly weak argument that has been used to prop up a multitude of dismal human practices such as going to the store to purchase cat food and calling the fire department to get an errant kitten out of a tree.
Feh!
Here's what I think of that argument!
;) |
|
|
|
|
