Software Synths vs. Hardware Synths

you know, it depends...frankly, i prefer hardware. i only use two soft synths: pro-52 and the one on reason, i'm very impressed with them, use them for writing and recording stuff but computers can't be trusted with 100% stability. not to mention i can't lug my computer to band practices or to a show.
 
I was skeptical at first, but now after playing with both Pro-52 and FM7, I 'm beginning to change my mind. These two pieces of software do sounds awesome and if you closed your eyes, you'l never know it was coming from your computer. I did an A/B test with my trusty old Yamaha DX7 and they sound identical (well, the FM7 sounds alot cleaner). I was very impressed with the Pro-52 sound/tweakability on the fly as well.

I do agree with sacred about stability though, but XP has been looking like a HUGE improvement in that dept. to me after using it for a couple of months

Just as an FYI, FM7 is not an analog synth, actually the total opposite. Yamaha's DX synths based on FM are considered the epitomy of DIGITAL synthesis. :)
 
I've answered this question before.

I personally like to use hardware exclusively, but from the many (many many many) other people that I know that use software, they LOVE it.

They rave about it like it's the greatest thing to ever happen to keyboards.

I repeat, this is a lot of people. They ALL flipped for software.

I'm too stubbern to get away from hardware, but I'd prolly agree with them if I ever do. They are all so adament.

Carl
 
I prefer my Prophet 600 for analog prophet-type sounds. It sounds better than the Pro-52, and it's much easier to quickly get a sound when you an actually grb the knobs instead of mousing over each one. However, I don't have a Prophet 5, so I have no noise generator, and the Pro-52 does. In comparing the sounds, they're pretty close, but I prefer the hardware Prophet because it seems to have a little more dynamic range.

The FM7 is another matter entirely. That is a monster synth. It does the FM thing very well, and faithfully sounds like a DX7 (well, really a DX7-II, because the original DX7's were 12-bit D/A, and thus pretty gritty). But it adds an X and a Z operator, one of them is some sort of distortion, and the other, well, I'm at work so I forget what it does. But suffice it to say that synth takes FM to a higher, and much more modern, level. And the FM7 also uses just a tiny sliver of CPU to make monster sounds.

Reaktor is also a devastating tool, I hve heard sounds come from that that are probably replicated nowhere else on earth. Native Instruments really makes some insane softsynths. The rest of the pack doesn't really do much for me, though I am partial to the built-in synths in FruityLoops, since I use it a lot. Butc compared to the monster power of Reaktor or FM7, they're toys.
 
i was lucky enough to buy both a KORG MS20 and a NORD RACK 2 during the last couple of weeks and i have to say after using softsynths extensively for the last year (and loving them), they shouldnt really be compared to their hardware equivelants. the reaktor emulation of the MS20 is great but it doesnt sound like the real thing. i think softsynths should be judged on their own cause they're always gonna come off worse when compared to the original (apart from stability). i hate all that 'sounds warmer' shit but it's sort of true. use em both i say!
 
I understand the Korg MS20 thing. I do think that real oscillators and filters sound better, they have better dynamic range, and they are a little bit warmer. But the Nord is just a softsynth in a box.
 
i know what you're saying, but WHAT A SOFT SYNTH! i dont much care for new hardware synths but the nord is a bit special i think. also, if u wanna use a softsynth live then it can be dodgy at best but a nord can do it for ya. i agree with you about reaktor and FM7, the only addition i would make is PENTAGON which is pretty amazing.
 
Yeah, everything Nord makes is freaking amazing. I feel the same way about the Access Virus, which is also software. I'm sure there will someday be a plugin version of the Nord Modular, once computers can crank out enough power for something like that.
 
B4 and other things

I have mostly hardware synths, Acces Virus, Waldorf Micro Q, Korg karma and some others, but I also have a Native Instruments B4 (B3 simulation soft synth). I will say that I do like the sound though it is a bit thin or something. This may, however, be a matter of routing, amplification, etc. Nevertheless, the big problem is stability. This program has been driving me crazy. For instance, i finally got it working right, not too much latency, the rotor control working off my modulation wheel, everything. Then I didn't use it for about two or three weeks and when I went back to it, bang, nothing worked. I tried to re-install, I did everything I could but no dice, it won't go. I cannot get the modulation wheel to run the rotor function anymore and the latency is out of whack. I have tweaked every parameter there is but to no avail. BTW, I am using it with a Mac G4, 733 Mghz, 256 RAM, Glyph 40 GIG Hard Drive, MOTU 2408 mkII and a Midi Timepiece AV. It should all work and has worked but, when problems arise, I wish I had the Korg C3. Then, when I need a Hammond sound, just play it and be done with it. No tweaking, no praying, no crashes (oh yeah, another thing, soft synths have a nasty habit of causing crashes).

All in all, soft synths may someday be the mainstay and we will be brining a controller to gigs with something resembling a lap top or a box into which we dump the necessary patches from all of our soft synths. But at the present time, there are compatability problems, CPU power prblems and such and for now, hardware still sounds a bit better. I guess real oscillators make a difference.Even though mahy of the modern synths are basically specialized computers, they still have certain hardware aparatus that creates sound in a certain way. Something computers just don't do. I don't know but if the populatrity of vntage synths and processing gear is any indicator, the person who said that both hardware and software have their place is probably closest to how things will ultimately pan out.
 
Response by Jack Hammer

I have two locations and thus two names (both ridiculous but whatever). In any event, this is Jack Hammer. In response, first let me clear up certain things. Digital and Module are not synonymous. Thus there can be an analogue module though there are few made if any these days. As a historical note, the original analogue synths were "modular" though these modules were the various functions of the synth so that an envelope would be a seperate module, a ring modulator another. Anyway, that is another discussion for another day. Most of the so called "analogue" synths nowadays are acutally analogue modeling synths. They are essentially digital recreations of analogue synths though I believe there are varying degrees of "analogue" parts. Anyway, for the purpose of getting the type of "fat" bass sounds that are useful in hip-hop and the like, analogue modling synths are fine. A very popular brand is the NOrd synths either the Nord Lead II or III. I believe they also have modules and possibly a bass synth. I do not have any experience with the Novation but I trust that the bass station or whatever it is called would give you what your looking for and you would be happy with such a synth. There are modules and keyboard versions of this as well I think or at least very similar synths in module and with keys form. There is also the Access Virus, my personal favorite. Very nice, fat bass sounds and it can be had in a module, with keys or software version. I have the module version.

I think that having modules and a controller is a very good way to go. It allows for great felxability and quite alot of control. Also, I suspect that eventually more and more synths will be plug ins and I think that controllers will be gbest suited for running these plug-in or "soft" synths.

As for the KARMA. The Motif has some great sounds, I heard it in a music shop and thought it was fantastic. However, the KARMA function is the thing that I think is so useful for hip-hop and rap music. It wil generate endless amount of grooves, truly cool grooves with limitless variations. The thing about these grooves that is so compelling for that kind of music is this. The KARMA function will take a basic drum groove, lets say, metamorphosize endloess subtle variations on it. This is perfect for laying down a rap for instance. The basic groove remains the same ins uch music as it does on the Karma with subtle differences here and there. Therefore, with little effort, you get a completely usable groove that, unlike a traditional drum machine, is generating subtle difference almost like a real drummer so that the track stays interesting and not boring. Also, these variations are controllable in real time. A better tool for hip-hop and rap has not been invented. Aslo, the sounds are very good and in fact, some are outright excellent.

The drawback on the KARMA is that it takes a bit of doing to learn the KARMA functions. You will need some time with it, however, there is a site called KARMA-LAB (or LABS).com that is very useful and is just for KARMA owners to share and exchange ideas. It is monitored by the inventor of the KARMA and he will answer your questions directly. This is very cool. I suggest you check out the site now and see if you are interested. Remember, you can ultimately get the Motif as well later one if you just like the sounds or wait for the module versions. The Motiff is nice but it is not something special and different like the Karma. The Karma is a world unto itself that many people are quite into. There is a feature in either Keyboard or EQ magazing this month about a guy who played keys for, among others, the Dixie Dreggs. Who and what they play is unimportant, the point is, this is another full time, playing working keyboard player who has come out with his own recording (who hasn't nowadays?) and he used the Karma extensively as well (recall Herbie Hancock). I think that there is so much that can be done with the instrument that we have only scratched the surface. But it is what it is and it is something I would recommend you learn about a bit more before deciding. If your decision was between the Triton and the Motiff, I would say go for the Motiff becuase it has some newer sounds that have not been so used but that is a small consideration since a guitar has been used over and over since the begining of time (rock musically speaking) of course, it is how you use the sound not the sound itself. A good sound is always a good sound as proved by the "vintage" keyboard phenomenon.

Anyway, I have gone on long enough. Obviously, I am a fan of the KARMA and for certain styles of music (not just hip-hop or rap but trance, dance music of any style, ambient music, hipnotice type music al las Phillip Glass and the like etc.) this is a can't-be-beat tool.

One more thing. The bass synths tend to be monophonic with small keyboards and not much additional functions such as sequencers, arppegiators and samplers and thus are cheaper than full blown synths. All of the new modeling synths and the bass models are great and have great and useful sounds. Big fat basses and the like. And, for bass, a good synth and a good compressor and you are set. By the way, there are still those that think the mini moog is still the king of bass sounds. It once was and many of the sounds are modeled after the mini moog type bass sounds but, functionally, it is a bit behind the times having no velocity sensativity and therefore, no dynamic ability.

So, whatever you choose, good luck.

(I doubt I answered anything but I sure wrote alot)
 
Thanks PhilMckracken,

Actually, you did help me out and you touched on topics I wouldn't have thought about asking (Thanks!!) I was looking at the Karma but I wanted to hear some hip hop that was done on it, so I went to the yahoo forum and posted the question and Stephen Kay didn't post any links, so I was skeptical about purchasing it because I didn't think it wood be a nice instrument for Hip Hop and R&B, because the songs I heard from it was Pop and Trance !!!
 
I've been a hardware die-hard until recently. I just bought SampleTank XL, and as far as all-round modules go, it really does put a lot of hardware modules and keyboards to shame(Roland JV series, Korg Triton etc...). The sheer realism of the sounds impressed the s**t out of me. Now I'm not about to sell my Trinity or anything, I'm still a big hardware fan, but damn... I have to give props were props are due.
 
many people love software synths for techno and shit, but they are way too stale and clear for me.. i need some dynamics... and try and punch 20+*6 oscillators on at once on a computer like i can on my supernova with extemely phatt sounds to follow... or try using a double formant filter on some nice squares and saws to get the most killer sweet ambient pad sound... you just can't do that on any soft synth... at least not yet..
and one definite thing... you can't have 8 parts on a computer, all running with different reverb, delay, chorus, distortion, eq, comb filter, filter, panning and.. and.. and.. not unless you pay an obscene amount of money for all the dsps needed..
 
Eh?

You can pick up an awsome system with a P4 1.8Ghz, etc.. for around $1000. Add all your DAW hardware/software and you'll be at $1600 tops. That can handle 8 tracks with all the FX, filters, yadda, yadda with ease.

Last time I checked, that was still cheaper than say a Virus kC or Waldorf Q keyboard...

Have you tried FM7 yet? It sounds fatter/richer than my original DX7!!!

Lets not forget that there is a Virus TDM plug-in that pretty much does everything the Hardware version does...

Ever heard of Kyma? It will let you do more than any hardware synth to date could do.

http://www.symbolicsound.com/brochure/index.html
 
erhm.. a supernova 2 with all the shizniz (and that's the biggest modular fucker you can get out there) cost 2300$ ... I'm a modular guy, not an fm guy. I like thousands of saws and squares and sweet ass filters...
and i KNOW that even a 1.8 gHz pc won't be able to do all that amount of work as a hardware synth like the supernova which have all the part effects running on their own dsps.. I've tried the virus plugin with a beefed up 1.2 kHz, i wasn't impressed. while the supernova runs everything at it's own clock instead of having to take one part, process it in an array of modulation and effect, then take another part and process it... that's usually how it will work since a computer cpu is strictly linear while a hardware synth runs on parallel dsps. Otherwise you'd have to get a card like the creamware pulsar, which is bugger ass expensive and demands a computer, and that works with parallel dsps like the hardware synth, it is actually a hardware synth so to speak, but with computer gui and no knobs and buttons...

having said that, i bet it's up and coming and it's getting better and better and definitely way more flexible. But damn if i care. I hate sitting infront of that stupid screen with that stupid mouse.
I want boxes, knobs and sliders.
 
Back
Top