deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
Does anyone know of a plug-in where the hardware it is based on is not any better or perhaps where the plug-in is even better sonically? Have you reached this point? I assume someday we will.
Certainly, the advantage of a plugin in cost versus a hardware unit, and the fact that it can be used on multiple tracks without added cost.
|
markyzno
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1216
- Joined: 2011/02/08 06:40:20
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 03:05:21
(permalink)
Sonar Platinum 64 bit > Pro tools 10.3.2 >Intel i7 3770K > 16Gb Ram > Gigabyte Z77-D3H Motherboard> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2 GB > ATi RADEON HD5700 > 240GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD> Win 10 home 64 bit> Delta 1010 > MOTU Audio Express > MA-15D's > NI Ultimate 9 > NI Kontrol S61 1.1 > NI MAschine Studio 2.3 / KORG MS-20 Mini - Arturia MicroBrute > KORG SQ1 - KORG Kaoss Pad KP3 > iPad and IO Dock 2 running various bits > Bunch of guitars >Sound Design on IMDB --
|
tenfoot
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2186
- Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
- Location: Qld, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 03:15:32
(permalink)
Maybe not - but many do have additional functionality. I think the more that plugins are developed independently of any hardware modelling it is certainly conceivable that they will become superior.
I think there are already many vsti's that are better than any hardware.
Bruce. Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
|
pwalpwal
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3249
- Joined: 2015/01/17 03:52:50
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 03:35:36
(permalink)
tenfoot
I think there are already many vsti's that are better than any hardware.
i agree, although these are the plugs that aren't trying to "emulate" hardware
|
tenfoot
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2186
- Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
- Location: Qld, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 03:37:36
(permalink)
pwalpwal
tenfoot
I think there are already many vsti's that are better than any hardware.
i agree, although these are the plugs that aren't trying to "emulate" hardware
Very true. This may well be true of fx plugins in the future.
Bruce. Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
|
mixmkr
Max Output Level: -43.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3169
- Joined: 2007/03/05 22:23:43
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 03:54:41
(permalink)
deswind
Does anyone know of a plug-in where the hardware it is based on is not any better or perhaps where the plug-in is even better sonically? Have you reached this point? I assume someday we will.
Certainly, the advantage of a plugin in cost versus a hardware unit, and the fact that it can be used on multiple tracks without added cost.
Since it seems most hardware emulated has a "sound" to it so to speak, (and that's why it is typically emulated) it's hard to say therefore the plug might be sonically superior in that regard. {for instance} Lots of compressor emulations as an example, and although they might not be as "colored" as their hardware counterparts, I don't think it's 'wrong' to say that they might be sonically superior in some regards...especially with noise floors, freq responses and actual parameters on plugs that weren't available on the hardware. I'm not really aware of any "plain Jane" hardware emulations... Like old Tapco mixer preamps!!
|
markyzno
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1216
- Joined: 2011/02/08 06:40:20
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 04:05:27
(permalink)
Cant beat circuits for sound.
Sonar Platinum 64 bit > Pro tools 10.3.2 >Intel i7 3770K > 16Gb Ram > Gigabyte Z77-D3H Motherboard> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2 GB > ATi RADEON HD5700 > 240GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD> Win 10 home 64 bit> Delta 1010 > MOTU Audio Express > MA-15D's > NI Ultimate 9 > NI Kontrol S61 1.1 > NI MAschine Studio 2.3 / KORG MS-20 Mini - Arturia MicroBrute > KORG SQ1 - KORG Kaoss Pad KP3 > iPad and IO Dock 2 running various bits > Bunch of guitars >Sound Design on IMDB --
|
tenfoot
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2186
- Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
- Location: Qld, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 05:05:15
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby markyzno 2016/04/17 07:35:13
markyzno
Cant beat circuits for sound.
Which is no doubt what someone once said about the phonograph cylinder:)
Bruce. Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
|
markyzno
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1216
- Joined: 2011/02/08 06:40:20
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 07:19:14
(permalink)
tenfoot
markyzno
Cant beat circuits for sound.
Which is no doubt what someone once said about the phonograph cylinder:)
i wanted to report you for abuse :D
Sonar Platinum 64 bit > Pro tools 10.3.2 >Intel i7 3770K > 16Gb Ram > Gigabyte Z77-D3H Motherboard> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 2 GB > ATi RADEON HD5700 > 240GB OCZ Agility 3 SSD> Win 10 home 64 bit> Delta 1010 > MOTU Audio Express > MA-15D's > NI Ultimate 9 > NI Kontrol S61 1.1 > NI MAschine Studio 2.3 / KORG MS-20 Mini - Arturia MicroBrute > KORG SQ1 - KORG Kaoss Pad KP3 > iPad and IO Dock 2 running various bits > Bunch of guitars >Sound Design on IMDB --
|
LJB
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1502
- Joined: 2009/07/29 10:31:31
- Location: South Africa
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 07:46:47
(permalink)
Many claim that Steven Slate is nailing it - I don't have the hardware to compare with, but then again, I also don't have the noise issues, dust, recall issues and the heat in the control room :O)
Ludwig Bouwer, One Big Room Studios.
--------------------
Cakewalk with all the trimmings / Win 10Pro 64 / Intel i7-7700 / Asus Prime Z270k / 16GB DDR4 / RME HDSP9652 / RME UFX / Black Lion Audio ADA8000 / ART MPA & ART Pro Channel / Focusrite Voicemaster Pro / Aphex 107
Check out my work at www.onebigroom.co.za
|
tenfoot
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2186
- Joined: 2015/01/22 18:12:07
- Location: Qld, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 07:51:30
(permalink)
markyzno
tenfoot
markyzno
Cant beat circuits for sound.
Which is no doubt what someone once said about the phonograph cylinder:)
i wanted to report you for abuse :D
Haha. No offence intended! Pure speculation on the shifting sands of truth:)
Bruce. Sonar Platinum 2017-09, Studio One 3.5.3, Win 10 x64, Quad core i7, RME Fireface, Behringer X32 Producer, Behringer X32 Rack, Presonus Faderport, Lemure Software Controller (Android), Enttec DMXIS VST lighting controller, Xtempo POK.
|
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5139
- Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
- Location: Ballarat, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 08:13:37
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby deswind 2016/04/17 13:08:33
I have found the Korg Wavestation plug-in matches the hardware and it can even be said it is slightly nicer. One reviewer made the same comment as well. It does sound amazing. I have just recently got the Korg M1 plugin and it also sounds terrific. They have made some modifications to it which actually can make it sound different to the hardware. Due to more advanced programming so on that front it could be said it has the potential to be better. Korg have done a killer job on their own synths here.
I have had real Oberheims and also the Sonic Projects OPX Pro II and it is also another one that sounds stellar too. And due to advances in programming better in some respects.
In some cases plugins like New Sonic Arts Granite go into places no hardware circuits could even contemplate. That is when they sound interesting to me.
Circuits don't make the music your ideas and playing does. If you are moved emotionally at the end of the day then the music has done its job. It's not about whether hardware did the job or software did the job. It is job itself being done that is really important.
When Tangerine Dream came to Melbourne at the end of 2014 they brought a lot of hardware and software as well. They blurred the lines between the two. It was very hard to tell what was what. It is the music that counts. Edgar's tunes are so great they just transcend the hardware and software. It did not really matter. It was all that great TD music that really counted..
Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
|
Rob[at]Sound-Rehab
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2819
- Joined: 2011/02/03 04:31:35
- Location: Sound-Rehab, Austria
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 08:52:59
(permalink)
Jeff Evans
Circuits don't make the music your ideas and playing does. If you are moved emotionally at the end of the day then the music has done its job. It's not about whether hardware did the job or software did the job. It is job itself being done that is really important.
Very well said ... and I would like to add that real inspiration does not come from driving a mouse around. So it makes sense to have some decent hardware synths, real instruments, real tubes that heat up the rehearsal room, and whatever else it takes to get people playing together. On the other hand what regards actual production I'm very happy with the digital options at hand. I could never ever afford any of the units that my plugins emulate in each project, but here I am with an arsenal of tools to choose from ... couldn't be better, but hey these things also recall all settings, don't induce any hum, don't need external patching ...
GOOD TUNES LAST FOREVER +++ Visit the Rehab +++ DAW: Platinum/X3e, win10 64 bit, i7-3930K (6x3.2GHz), Asus Sabertooth X79, 32 GB DDR3 1600MHz, ATI HD 5450, 120 GB SSD OCZ Agility3, 2x 1TB WD HDD SATA 600 Audio-Interface: 2x MOTU 1248 AVB, Focusrite OctoPre, (Roland Octa-Capture) Control-Surface: VS-700C VSTi: WAVES, NI K10u, FabFilter, IK, ... (too many really)
|
Razorwit
Max Output Level: -66 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1235
- Joined: 2003/11/05 18:39:32
- Location: SLC, UT
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 09:27:54
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby deswind 2016/04/17 13:09:18
deswind
Does anyone know of a plug-in where the hardware it is based on is not any better or perhaps where the plug-in is even better sonically? Have you reached this point? I assume someday we will.
Certainly, the advantage of a plugin in cost versus a hardware unit, and the fact that it can be used on multiple tracks without added cost.
Hey Deswind I've always thought the question of "better" is kinda tricky. It depends on what you're doing. For example, I really like the UAD and Slate plugins but I don't think their 1176 emulations sound like my 1176's. Same goes for Slates SSL compressor emulation (I don't own the UAD version), and the SSL console emulators particularly don't sound like my SSL. I've always thought Slate in particular was a bit too heavy handed when it came to his plugs...my SSL doesn't do anything close to as much coloration as his console emulator. That said, I still like and use all that stuff, and I like my hardware. It just depends on what I'm doing. Since you're in my neck of the woods, if you ever want to try it out you're welcome to drop by some time and poke at the hardware I've got. BTW - even all these years later I still regret not taking you up on that microphone deal we talked about back in the day. It remains "the one that got away" :) Dean
Intel Core i7; 32GB RAM; Win10 Pro x64;RME HDSPe MADI FX; Orion 32 and Lynx Aurora 16; Mics and other stuff...
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 09:45:54
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby deswind 2016/04/17 13:09:43
Jeff Evans
I have found the Korg Wavestation plug-in matches the hardware and it can even be said it is slightly nicer. One reviewer made the same comment as well. It does sound amazing. I have just recently got the Korg M1 plugin and it also sounds terrific. They have made some modifications to it which actually can make it sound different to the hardware. Due to more advanced programming so on that front it could be said it has the potential to be better. Korg have done a killer job on their own synths here.
My understanding is that in the case of the Wavestation and M1, Korg simply ported the algorithms over from hardware to software, so the algorithms that generate the sounds are essentially identical. However, the software versions aren't limited by the quality of the D/A converters that were built into the keyboards, which probably accounts for why you think the plug-ins sound better - they actually do  . But "better" is subjective. When I reviewed Waves' emulation of the Aural Exciter, I asked why they included a switch to introduce the noise of the original...seemed like part of the appeal of plug-ins is that you don't have to put up with that stuff. They said that in blind testing, without the noise some people said the emulation didn't sound "right" but couldn't explain why. When Waves switched in the noise, they then said the emulation sounded right. Go figure. The other issue is the "My software emulation of the XYZ doesn't sound like the hardware version of the XYZ." However remember with analog circuitry, my hardware XYZ probably doesn't sound exactly like your hardware XYZ. When Line 6 models their amps, they get a bunch of the same amp and make a subjective call as to which one is the one, because they all sound different.
|
Sycraft
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
- Total Posts : 871
- Joined: 2012/05/04 21:06:10
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 10:15:10
(permalink)
Anderton
The other issue is the "My software emulation of the XYZ doesn't sound like the hardware version of the XYZ." However remember with analog circuitry, my hardware XYZ probably doesn't sound exactly like your hardware XYZ. When Line 6 models their amps, they get a bunch of the same amp and make a subjective call as to which one is the one, because they all sound different. Also there's the conflating of the concept of accuracy with being good. An accurate emulation of something may not actually be the best sounding result. It is fine if the idea is trying to emulate something accurately, but you can't say it is only a good sound if it emulates an existing device accurately. It can very well be possible to improve on something. Heck, in the digital world it is possible to flat out do things you just can't in the analogue world. Personally I think that there's too much worship for some "vintage" gear in the audio world. If something was expensive to build and rare, there's this idea that it HAS to be amazing, where in reality sometimes it was just the best that could be had at the time and we now can do better. I don't mind if a piece of gear has a particular sound that people like and they want to get that sound but it gets silly when that gets conflated to "This is the best sound and anything different is inferior."
|
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14070
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 10:20:52
(permalink)
Sycraft
Also there's the conflating of the concept of accuracy with being good. An accurate emulation of something may not actually be the best sounding result. It is fine if the idea is trying to emulate something accurately, but you can't say it is only a good sound if it emulates an existing device accurately. It can very well be possible to improve on something. Heck, in the digital world it is possible to flat out do things you just can't in the analogue world. YES!!!! For example with the CA-X guitar and bass amps, I didn't want to model existing amps - we already have Guitar Rig, Amplitube, etc. for that. I wanted to model the "idealized" amp sounds I hear in my head. The analogy I use is that conventional amp sims are film, and the CA-X amps are CGI.
|
carlman
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 17
- Joined: 2015/01/12 22:51:22
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 10:33:38
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby deswind 2016/04/17 13:10:25
When needing a brickwall limiter digital can be a better choice over analog.
|
Sacalait
Max Output Level: -79 dBFS
- Total Posts : 552
- Joined: 2008/01/01 16:59:28
- Location: South Louisiana, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 11:04:31
(permalink)
If one considers the price of the hardware unit over the plugin, then I'm not sure whether they sound 'very similar' (or not) is the most important consideration. I seem to be stuck on hardware reverbs and it's probably my imagination.
www.pershingwells.com www.facebook.com/pershingwells Sonar Platinum, PC- Intel i7-4770K w/16 Gig RAM Windows 8.1, Solid State Drive and eSATA drives, Mytek, RME UFX, RME Multiface II, Roland VS700, A-Designs Pacifica, UA LA610, Presonus RC500. A-Designs Hammer EQ, DBX, AKG, Neumann, Roland, JBL, Fender, Gibson, G&L, Marshall, Korg, Martin, Shure, Electrovoice, Yamaha, Chameleon Labs comps.
|
FCCfirstclass
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 969
- Joined: 2003/11/15 15:02:42
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 11:10:58
(permalink)
☄ Helpfulby mettelus 2016/04/17 13:08:13
I would say the development of VST's are approaching or equal the "sound" of various hardware units, otherwise why would we now have plug ins that add in distortion, noise, clicks and crackles of analog sources?
Win 10 Pro x64, 32Gb DDR3 ram, Sonar Platinum, Cubase 9.5, Mackie MCU Pro, Cakewalk VS 100, Roland Octa-Capture, A 800 Pro, Carver M-1.5t amp & C4000 pre amp, various mics, drums and brass instruments. And away we go!
|
slartabartfast
Max Output Level: -22.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5289
- Joined: 2005/10/30 01:38:34
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 12:43:22
(permalink)
markyzno
Cant beat circuits for sound.
If you are saying you like the sound of circuits, then there is no argument. The distortion and design limitations inherent in using electronics to process sound creates a result that has a personal appeal to many people, and if you are one of those people, your preference is unassailable. If you intend to imply that circuits produce better fidelity to the real world sound that is being recorded, you are demonstrably incorrect. At some point turning sound into signal requires it to go through an analog stage, but once you pass into the digital realm, properly designed algorithms can definitely introduce less artifact than circuits that attempt to do the same thing.
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 12:57:38
(permalink)
I love this response. How can analog see the future and be prepared to limit before the passage arrives? In the digital world, this can be done. I had a wire recorder from WWII as a kid. Trust me, it sounded really bad. We have come a long way. I have to believe, that if human civilization continues, there will be nothing analog that cannot be emulated, if desired, in the digital world. Afterall, it is marketed digitally as a final product these days and unlikely to return to tapes being played in cars. carlman
When needing a brickwall limiter digital can be a better choice over analog.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 13:09:06
(permalink)
I find I increasingly don't care about accuracy of emulation. I'm only really interested in whether any given tool is useful and of quality. And I simply don't buy that there's an inherent superiority to analogue.
The task is to make good sounding recordings of good music, and there are a whole heap of ways to do that. The brush isn't the painting.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
deswind
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 952
- Joined: 2003/11/23 14:07:13
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 14:46:32
(permalink)
And here is another though I have had - not matter how good hardware eqs are, there is nothing like seeing it graphic form (Whether a graphic or parametric hardware compressor - in fact a parametric hardware compressor is hard to visualize the curve.)
So why not have a hardware compressor that has a screen on it, so that while adjusting the parameters, once can see the curve like in a digital eq?
Anyway, this is one ore example where digital currently beats analogue on eqs. At least for me, see what is going on, helps me use it better, and if I can use it better, then that can affect the product.
|
panup
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2538
- Joined: 2006/05/23 09:34:35
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 16:19:55
(permalink)
My hardware 1176s, SSL bus compressors, Telefunken tape machines and Pultec EQ clone sound better than their software emulations. So do all my guitar pedals versus Axe FX II emulations. Axe FX II is very, very close but there's still something going on in the analog circuits with the harmonic distortion software can't reach.
|
Soundwise
Max Output Level: -62 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1419
- Joined: 2015/01/25 17:11:34
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 16:59:45
(permalink)
Anderton
Sycraft
Also there's the conflating of the concept of accuracy with being good. An accurate emulation of something may not actually be the best sounding result. It is fine if the idea is trying to emulate something accurately, but you can't say it is only a good sound if it emulates an existing device accurately. It can very well be possible to improve on something. Heck, in the digital world it is possible to flat out do things you just can't in the analogue world.
YES!!!!
For example with the CA-X guitar and bass amps, I didn't want to model existing amps - we already have Guitar Rig, Amplitube, etc. for that. I wanted to model the "idealized" amp sounds I hear in my head. The analogy I use is that conventional amp sims are film, and the CA-X amps are CGI.
My thoughts exactly! Correct emulation of analogue gear often has nothing to do with getting the right sound. The same is true with samples and VIs. Many times super accurate super clean samples sound sterile and artificial rendering otherwise perfect instrument almost useless.
|
subtlearts
Max Output Level: -53.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2200
- Joined: 2006/01/10 05:59:21
- Location: Berlin
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 17:26:18
(permalink)
My approach to not worrying about whether software emulations are as good as the hardware they're emulating is to not have any hardware to compare it to. So my Arturia SEM is way better than the original Oberheim I don't have. My T-Racks Fairchild is a million times better than the real Fairchild I will never be able to afford, and likely wouldn't buy even if I could, because $30000? Really?
I used to own a real Yamaha CS80, in wonderful condition, which I bought for $600 in 1987 and have always regretted selling for the same amount a few years later before its value, like that of every vintage analog beast of its kind, went through the roof. It was 100% awesome. But if I had it now it would take up half my studio. The Arturia emu doesn't sound just like it, I'm sure, but it sounds pretty good, and it takes up a few MB on my hard drive and I have it and can use it and make music with it. I would probably use it half the time even if I still had the real one, since that had exactly 4 memory slots and no presets and no MIDI and sometimes I just need to work fast.
Or I can use Iris or Chromaphone, which do things no hardware I've ever met can do, or Kontakt which is so far beyond any hardware sampler it's hard to even know where to begin...
|
bitman
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4105
- Joined: 2003/11/06 14:11:54
- Location: Keystone Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 18:25:13
(permalink)
|
Jeff Evans
Max Output Level: -24 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5139
- Joined: 2009/04/13 18:20:16
- Location: Ballarat, Australia
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 21:44:59
(permalink)
Anderton
My understanding is that in the case of the Wavestation and M1, Korg simply ported the algorithms over from hardware to software, so the algorithms that generate the sounds are essentially identical. However, the software versions aren't limited by the quality of the D/A converters that were built into the keyboards, which probably accounts for why you think the plug-ins sound better - they actually do . Thanks Craig that explains a lot. There are two types of synths too. Ones that are all purely digital and everything is just 1's and 0's inside and the sound is simply converted back to analog right at the last minute. eg a DX7. These sorts of machines should be able to be work in pure software because that is what is happening anyway. So FM7 sounds identical to me to a DX7. Anyone who believes otherwise I would say is just suffering a rather large amount of placebo. All analog beasts are another story but the fact we have such power now and nearly all aspects of analog circuits can be modeled is rather interesting. The fact that some virtual versions of these things such Arturia devices and Sonic Projects etc clearly shows that to be the case. Dave Smith is even using digital oscillators now in most of his new analog synths because as he says they sound fantastic! Plus more interesting options available too.
Specs i5-2500K 3.5 Ghz - 8 Gb RAM - Win 7 64 bit - ATI Radeon HD6900 Series - RME PCI HDSP9632 - Steinberg Midex 8 Midi interface - Faderport 8- Studio One V4 - iMac 2.5Ghz Core i5 - Sierra 10.12.6 - Focusrite Clarett thunderbolt interface Poor minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas -Eleanor Roosevelt
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re: Plug in versus hardware - anything identical or better yet?
2016/04/17 22:16:56
(permalink)
I have been very pleased where DSP effects have taken me.
how ever the one that is still elusive is the tube. the mic pres tube pre amps.
they haven't yet nailed that yet. but even over the past 2 years we are seeing things I never thought I would ever see.
Bias FX and Bias Amp. those plug ins for guitar are amazing and really kicked it up a notch for me in the re amp, guitar sims world.
what used to be an SM57 mic'ing a marshall now is very close to Bias Amp.
typically now I mix and match with both. (marshall, Peavey 6505+, Vox and mixed with amp sims gives a full thick sound.
so I still rely on hardware as well. using mic pre amps, guitar amps, rackmount compression in the recording stages to tame gain fluctuation.
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|