soft synth vs hardware synth

Page: 123 > Showing page 1 of 3
Author
Markus Copol
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 691
  • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
  • Status: offline
2006/06/04 16:58:53 (permalink)

soft synth vs hardware synth

Anyone can help with this ?
do you think that soft synths can replace a hardware synth ? For example if i have dimension pro , would buying a Triton Korg will help ?
can anyone tell me the differences and if both complete eachother . I am into it mainly for a hobby and exploration :)

am considering Korg TR61 61-Key Synth Worksation, not a triton maybe , but if anyone familiar with it .would it bring me anything to the table ?

usually its the other way around people have real synths asking about a software synth..but it seems i started with the software

thank you
post edited by Markus Copol - 2006/06/21 23:58:00
#1

83 Replies Related Threads

    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/04 17:10:59 (permalink)
    Man for a Triton you could but a lot of softies. I will say that hardware has that allure. I just love a new box with flashing lights and stuff. And if money were no object I have a few nice brand spankin new toys I could Play with. What's in your wallet? Ok I know- no money to burn. I got some leftover boxes but for the most part I stick to software these days as they tend to be a tad more affordable. Go within your budget.
    #2
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/04 17:20:09 (permalink)
    tend to be a tad more affordable.


    thanks lawapa. my budget is tight for now. but am trying to see if i need it later maybe. from what you are saying I understand that you can get away with the software synths and almost get same results. I can imagine then the hardware would be more for practical use , concerts , bigger sound libraries etc.

    I relaized somehow there is a slight difference while listening to a hardware demo. It felt somehow more real. I am still training my ear and I could be mistaken.

    I am happy with what I got , but just looking to expand options.

    #3
    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/04 19:55:24 (permalink)
    bigger sound libraries
    While the hardware has come a long way your computer should offer a larger selection both in type and size.
    #4
    AT
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 10654
    • Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
    • Location: TeXaS
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/04 20:01:06 (permalink)
    I think soft synths are the way to go, mostly. Nothing will replace a moog or other analog beast, but most modern synths are simply computers in a different body anyway. If I had the money and the time, sure. And there are some hardware synths out there that would be hard to pass up (theres that money thing again), and you can't beat em for live work, but in the studio it is mostly soft.

    I'd be loath to buy a rompler hardware esp., since the computer can do that as good, if not better (unless you need it for live performance). Try to get something a bit more esoteric, esp. with knobs, etc. that you can play like an instrument and is'nt so easily done by a computer. I'm thinking of a nord or prehaps ion (1st two that came to mind). A lot harder to model those on a computer than a rompler.

    my 2 cents worth - actually more. And of course, bear in mind I like real synths for weird noise, not emulation of acoustic instruments. You milage may vary.

    https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
    http://www.bnoir-film.com/  
     
    there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
    24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
    #5
    Frank@ProSounds
    Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 199
    • Joined: 2006/03/12 20:09:34
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/05 00:14:13 (permalink)
    Hey now, softsynths are real synths too. Now apologize before you hurt their feelings.




    #6
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/05 08:52:49 (permalink)


    soft synths are the best :)


    post edited by Markus Copol - 2006/06/21 19:17:45
    #7
    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/05 19:54:02 (permalink)
    Hardware is nice, I got nothing against it. But bang for buck and Frank knows this ;)+) Softies Rule.
    #8
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/05 23:12:51 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: Markus Copol
    do you think that soft synths can replace a hardware synth ?


    In some cases, yes, but mostly, nope.

    I know I'm going to get bashed for this, but to me, softsynths in general just don't sound the same as their hardware counterparts. Maybe it's the differences in DAC's or the warmth obtained from a partially-analog signal path, but when I make a song with only softsynths, something's always lacking.

    I think softsynths can replace newer hardware romplers and samplers, which also have a very clean, high-quality sound. But older HW synths with their own character, like my ESQ-1 or Waldorf XT, are just unique. Sure, there are some similar synths in the software realm, but most of them sound same-ish.

    The opposite is also true. Some softsynths are unique and have no hardware equivalent. So, hardware cannot replace software, either. If the budget allows, I like to have a combination of both worlds. These days I rarely use only HW synths or only SW synths. I use everything I have at my disposal.

    Besides that, there are the common advantages of each type: sotfsynths have unlimited storage capacity and instant recall-ability, whereas hardware is more immediate and adequate for live use.

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #9
    AT
    Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 10654
    • Joined: 2004/01/09 10:42:46
    • Location: TeXaS
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 00:21:47 (permalink)
    Right on, fac. I think hardware has more character, in many ways, and is more playable if it has knobs, etc. And in a softsynth, everything goes through the same engine, which I think is part of the sameness. I'm going to try to send some out and then record them back in one of these days.

    But whatever you can say bad about them, they are definately convenient.

    https://soundcloud.com/a-pleasure-dome
    http://www.bnoir-film.com/  
     
    there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
    24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
    #10
    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 00:54:19 (permalink)
    Turn it on and go/ my ol Yamai sy99 has that 12 bit grunge that kinda sparkles? I can't knock hardware from the perspective of, if I had the cash I'd have the toys. But for straight ahead bang for buck I can reamp a softie and get as close as I need But I just can't afford the retro market for all the wizoos I'd love to snag and use. But the overall allure of hardware will not go away. It weighs a ton has flashing lights and sounds so fine. And if you can afford the pipper I say snag that puppie.
    #11
    torhan
    Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 4271
    • Joined: 2003/11/20 13:48:44
    • Location: ex-NJ, PA
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 08:37:12 (permalink)
    Well -- there's a Colossus Group Buy now -- if that helps....hehehe

    Since getting Dimension Pro, my Trinities are seeing less and less work. And my finger is getting itchy on the Rapture buy button too, which may give my SuperNova II a rest

    Also remember, you can load "x" instances of DimPro, whereas you probably own only 1 Triton Not to mention there's no need for all those cables and interfaces...hehe

    Sonar Platinum
    Premier Tracks
    ASCAP
    #12
    pjl
    Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 796
    • Joined: 2006/02/28 00:36:53
    • Location: the land of Oz
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 09:13:45 (permalink)
    For me there isn't a definitive answer to this but I lean heavily in favour of soft synths for practical reasons.

    I still use some hardware synths but that is largely because I am an old bastard who has owned them for a number of years. If I were starting out I don't think I'd bother buying hardware. Good soft synths are far better value for money than hardware. I own Dimension Pro and a JV2080. I use both but, if I had to choose one or the other I would not hesitate to let the JV2080 go. In one sense it's simple arithmatic. Dimension Pro comes with 7GB of samples while the JV-2080 has 16 Mb expandable to 144 Mb via very expensive ROM cards. I paid $2100 for the JV2080 and $380 for Dimension Pro (Australian Dollars).

    I still use the JV because it has some sounds that Dimension Pro doesn't (it sounds amazing considereing the memory limitations it has) but I suppose what I am trying to say is that I wouldn't buy hardware synths these days because the right soft synth will give you much more for less $$. It is true that you need to have the processing power for the soft synth to do it's magic but a second PC to run soft synths is still a lot cheaper than the hardware alternative, and with the freeze function in SONAR I haven't needed that so far anyway.

    Another indicator is the availabilty of hardware synths. I own about 10 that were purchased over a period where several hundred were available. At the monent there are (comparatively) very few hardware synths available and I think that reflects the market. Hardware synths are only economically viable for manufacturers because there is still a significant number of people who aren't confident relying on a laptop for live performance. In the studio, there is little reason to buy hardware synths.

    Some people will say there is no substitute for the analogue sound of an original XXX. This argument has some merit but, as a consequence, an original XXX now costs a fortune and you still have to contend with the fact that it has very primitive (or no ) MIDI and is almost never in tune.

    Just an opinion but, offerred in good faith.

    Celebrate reason, sleep in on Sundays
    #13
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 10:42:08 (permalink)
    I don't want to turn this into a HW vs SW thread because I love both and they have their own merits each.

    But I would like to point out that gigabytes doesn't mean quality, and that real analog doesn't mean expensive.

    Sure, if you want a realistic orchestral library, then software is the way to go. But for common instruments like pianos, basses, winds, etc, which are to be heard in a mix (not solo), both HW and SW can deliver equally well. Same goes for most synthetic sounds.

    The "Dimension vs. Triton" debate goes more deep than just the number of instances one can have. The Triton is 16-part multitimbral, so you can have up to 16 different instruments playing at the same time. The Triton also has a sequencer, so you don't need a host. The cost of Dimension may be a fraction of a Triton, but you still need a powerful computer to run several instances, a decent host like Sonar or P5, and a controller keyboard (although once you have them you can load as many more softsynths as you want). One important distinction is what kind of musician you are. If you only compose music in your bedroom, the computer+softsynths approach is very attractive, but if you are gigging, it's much easier to carry a Triton (for which there are hard, protective carrying cases) than bringing a computer (even if it's a laptop). It's safer, too; you know the Triton is not going to crash or make clicks and pops just because.

    Now, the price issue. In my opinion, software synths have gotten quite expensive. I love the cheap gems like VAZ+, PlastiCZ, Wusikstation, DK+, etc. But stuff like Native Instruments, Arturia, and even our beloved Dimension Pro and Rapture can make quite a hole in your wallet. And don't even mention some of the sample-based synths out there like Colossus. Sure, HW synths are usually more expensive because they have a high manufacturing price (compared with SW), but you get a computer-independant synth and a control surface specifically designed for that synth. But there are also a few cheap gems out there: DSI Evolver, Waldorf Micro-Q, MFB synths and FilterBox, Alesis ION and Micron, Korg microX and X50. These synths don't necessarily cost 6x or 8x what softsynths cost. Only 2x or 3x.

    There's yet another issue: the second hand market. You can buy a HW synth and sell it later, sometimes for a good price (depending on the synth), but with software it's very hard to resell it. Cakewalk, for example, doesn't allow license transfers; once you registered the program, you're stuck with it. I've bought a few synths, both HW and SW that I either didn't like or was able to replace them later with something better. I was able to sell all those HW synths, sometimes even with a good profit, but I can't do the same with the softsynths without losing at least 50% what I originally paid. After a few years, I found that using softsynths can be just as expensive as hardware.

    This is not a rant. I'm just pointing out that each has their own reasons to prefer a particular tool, and those reasons do not apply to everyone. Just use what you feel more confortable with, whatever gets the results you want, and what your budget allows.

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #14
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/06 13:23:45 (permalink)
    thanks for the elaborate review. Its funny because you would have the pros in hardware synths asking about the transition to soft synths, while am a new b right here who started with soft synths and considering the importance of the hard synths I find the soft synths vert easy to use and very much content with it . I use cakewalk mainly , rapture and dimension with wonderfull results. I use it for a presonal hobby only , like I said 'am exploring my inner genious ' :) am joking so dont hate me on that.
    What made me think of the hardware is after listening to some demos I realized that there is a difference between the sof synth project and the hardware. I was not able to tell which is better because I dont have that quality ear, but am trying to get the full picture out of it.
    #15
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 13:22:48 (permalink)
    I just came across this article on sweetwater and it covered the topic mentioned.

    http://www.sweetwater.com/feature/virtual-instrument-guide/craigarticle.php

    I thought I would share it with you

    post edited by Markus Copol - 2006/06/07 13:32:55
    #16
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 14:06:40 (permalink)
    Good article, Markus. Would have saved me a lot of typing

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #17
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 15:10:10 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: fac

    Good article, Markus. Would have saved me a lot of typing


    Your review was very usefull Fac It helped.
    #18
    ajwmusic
    Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 55
    • Joined: 2006/04/05 03:51:44
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 19:45:51 (permalink)
    [/do you think that soft synths can replace a hardware synth ?]

    Soft synths are a clear winner for me..They take up less room,there's less cables and the parameters are integrated and easily controllable.They are also not limited by the same CPU and memory constraints that are evident in hardware synths....A very good example is Akai samplers v Gigasampler...That's a no brainer..Listen to Rene's beautiful z3ta+ and try to find one hardware synth that has the depth of that soundstage..A..there ain't one..
    I've been lucky enough to have had all of the best hardware toys in my time..Most of the serious classics..OB8s,OB4s,Linn 9000s,Mini Moogs,Memory Moog,JP8s,DX7s,TX816s,Akai
    and EMU samplers,OB Matrix 6 and 6R,Matrix 1000s,OBX,OBXA,DX and DMX sequencer,
    Oberheim Xpanders,Kawai K5000s and 5000rs,all of the Kurzweils -good connections :) Roland Modular System,Prophet 5,EX5s, EX5rs etc etc and my favourite of all-the Yamaha FS1r..4 of those..Most of those synths I have had several pieces of..So I've had a bit of a chance to check out a few of the hardware options..All I have left is a couple of Yamaha EX5s being used 99% of the time as controller keyboards.The rest of it is all inside a few boxes that are crunching numbers very quietly and efficiently.. Sonar Pro 5,Gigastudio 3 (Orchestral) and a collection of softsynths are the heart of the whole system..I'm not interested in sitting around getting a stiffy-stoking my ego looking at a bunch of museum pieces-trying to pretend that they sound good...There's a lot of crap thrown around in the vintage debate..Technology changes - and in the field of music technology-I'm happy to move with most of those changes..You could always go back to the Oberheim system-but I'm happy to embrace the advances that the speed and flexibilty of the new computer systems offer..Bang for the buck it's a no brainer..Do you remember how much it used to cost to upgrade our Akai samplers-or the time spent tuning the parameters of an OB8? How about the cost of the NED Synclavier updates?..Bear in mind- it all still comes down to the intellectual power of the composer/songwriter and the credibility of the music on offer...A sampled orchestra only sounds like a real orchestra when you score it properly- that means writing it all out..not just pushing a few keys that say strings,brass,woodwinds etc...That's never going to make it happen..The computers only groove if they have the human feel and musiciality behind them and the depth of software inside the brain of the human controlling those machines is the most important part of the whole equation..Of course-if I ever feel that I need a change back to more primative methods-I've still got my 8 million terrabyte wooden stick :) Boom boom...aj washington
    post edited by ajwmusic - 2006/06/07 20:28:29

    8 Million Terrabyte Wooden Stick
    5 Expresso Machines
    3 Plastic Egg Shakers
    1 Katana
    :)
    #19
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 21:12:19 (permalink)
    ajwmusic, thanks for sharing your thoughts man.
    #20
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/07 23:56:15 (permalink)
    Just to add to the confusion, I've just had a great time making percussion noises with an analog synth and sampling them with a cheap Yamaha SU-10 sampler. The synth's architecture is pretty basic: two oscillators plus noise going through a filter, and from there to the amplifier. One envelope for amplitude and another for cutoff, and that's basically it. The sampling process was really quick: tweak the knobs, press the record button, and sample a hit into a pad. I had a pretty cool electro kit all set in less than an hour.

    It was much more fun than using nPulse or Drumatic.

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #21
    lawapa
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1144
    • Joined: 2005/01/09 19:14:51
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 00:32:16 (permalink)
    I don't think anyone will dispute you can do it with hardware. And I will admit a well designed piece is a thing of beauty. I was on ebay tonight lookin ;)+). But very few synths will get my dollars. Cause While I do have a few dollars that's only because I didn't succumb to the urge. Not that I don't have the urge it's just I don't have the room or the space to accommodate anything else. Hardware will always have a place. It's not going away but I do think it will evolve as it always has to suit the taste of the buying public.

    My first softie was RGC audio's Pentagon. I was in heaven and totally blown away that this worked, worked that well, and sounded that good. I did use the LiveSynthPro demo In Sonar for fonts back then but it was the Pentagon that rocked my world. Using fonts was one thing but Pentagon was totally different.
    #22
    whitefalcon
    Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1161
    • Joined: 2004/06/21 19:21:47
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 02:09:43 (permalink)
    What do you think of those new hybrid hardware devices that play vsti synths but have the ease of hardware quick setups and controls for stage? I have never been able to afford a hardware synth. So I dont know all the advantages of them.
    I feel like I am getting a pretty good mix of software synths, Vanguard, Manytone, Many Guitar, Slayer2, Dimension, ZT3A, and many others. What it amounts to is alot of different sounds. Using Project 5's device chain I can really group the like sounds into a Supersoftware synth. It is the software version of what the hardware new controllers are doing. We can do it easily in P5. The hardware devices I dont think can combine effects with the synth banks like the Device chain can so right in P5 we really have an innovative solution to utilize the best of the vsti synths. For example in my Supersynth I have the best of the pianos of my Vsti synths, I have the best sounds that I added reverb effects to like MDA Piano and the best of Dimension Pianos, The darker Rapture Pianos and many other variations, also the same thing with organs, There are great organ sounds in Dimension and Rapture and there are many freeware cool organ sounds as well.
    #23
    whitefalcon
    Max Output Level: -67 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1161
    • Joined: 2004/06/21 19:21:47
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 02:18:24 (permalink)
    In one sense it's simple arithmatic. Dimension Pro comes with 7GB of samples while the JV-2080 has 16 Mb expandable to 144 Mb via very expensive ROM cards. I paid $2100 for the JV2080 and $380 for Dimension Pro (Australian Dollars).
    I have the JV1010 and I love it! But your right dimension certainly holds a flame to it. I was going to get the JV2020 instead of Dimension, But dimension Pro won out. The money I saved enabled me to buy more additional vsti synths. When ever there is a group buy I add to my collections. For examplle I added Sytrus recently and its a great vsti synth.
    #24
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 08:59:04 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: whitefalcon

    What do you think of those new hybrid hardware devices that play vsti synths but have the ease of hardware quick setups and controls for stage?


    They're definitely the next step. One downside of most HW synths is the lack of host integration, but things like the Access TI, Korg X50 and microX, and Lexicon MX-200 let you plug the device into the PC via USB and program it using a VST interface. This gives you access to many parameters not easily accesible from the front panel, and also saves programs as part of the project and gives you instant recall.

    For live use they're also a good idea. You can program, for example, a Korg X50 at home with your PC, save the programs into the synth, and it's ready for the road.

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #25
    fac
    Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 2427
    • Joined: 2004/06/15 10:08:48
    • Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 09:06:32 (permalink)

    ORIGINAL: whitefalcon
    I have the JV1010 and I love it! But your right dimension certainly holds a flame to it. I was going to get the JV2020 instead of Dimension, But dimension Pro won out. The money I saved enabled me to buy more additional vsti synths. When ever there is a group buy I add to my collections. For examplle I added Sytrus recently and its a great vsti synth.


    That's another thing with soft-synths. They're so attractive price-wise that one can easily get suckered into buying lots of them. There goes $100 here, another $100 there, and then another $100 for upgrades. After $500 or $600, I realize I could have bought instead a nice hardware device.

    http://facproductions.net

    Lots of gear. Not enough time.
    #26
    René
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1103
    • Joined: 2004/01/06 13:15:57
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 13:37:10 (permalink)
    ... and then spend $300 for the Orchestral Pack, $500 for the contemporary soundblock, $500 for 512k of more memory (which will move you to think if it's made of gold of what), $200 for the SCSI hard disk. Believe me, the "expansions" scene is much more painful in hardware also.

    I love hardware synths, and own many of them. Way too many, my wife would add. However, they're the past. For sure there're some fabulous sounding gizmos there, but I think the reason why they're so special for us is that they represent a slice of our lifes, which goes beyond any technical sound quality. I often play them and from time to time one of their sounds end in some of my tracks, in those rare cases that I can beat the inertia to turn them on and get all the connections running properly.


    There're some cathegories of hardware synths I won't be ever getting rid of. The DX7II, the K2000, the Triton and Trinity and other Korgs, etc. They're just icons and I love them as they are. I'm a sound geek, no fear in admitting that. The reasons to keep those sounds handy are the same why I keep my first Keyboard magazine, or my first kid's drawing.


    But when it's time to get that 4-minute commercial done ontime, have no doubt. It'll be 100% softsynths.



    -René
    #27
    Markus Copol
    Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 691
    • Joined: 2006/03/02 12:47:17
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 16:30:49 (permalink)
    Thanks Rene for sharing that with us. I am more confused now and in much pain, because not only I am prone to get the next new hit software that cakewalk is going to release some time later but I also have to live with the fact that a hardware has its good things too. and then I have to explaine to my wife why am I buying another software ( they all look the same for her )

    Pretty much am filling for bankruptcy soon because it is like chocolate. you just cant get enough .
    #28
    badbib
    Max Output Level: -56 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1921
    • Joined: 2005/04/08 21:31:03
    • Location: France, Lyon
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 16:56:02 (permalink)
    and then I have to explaine to my wife why am I buying another software ( they all look the same for her )

    Pretty much am filling for bankruptcy soon because it is like chocolate. you just cant get enough .


    I feel that it's sometimes hard to admit that you have enough gear, and that you can do well with what you have...

    On the hardware/software thing, I guess both have advantages, and both can be used for different purposes, and they can both do wonders...
    one of my highest wish now is to get a Nord Modular... maybe a micro one... They have this sound I could never get in software... dunno why... plus it's great for live use, since you're almost sure that it won't crash...
    anyway, good luck with your choice of gear...
    but now that you have a computer, I guess that you should think of what you could buy yourself in a Soft realm with the price of a TR...
    Cheers,
    #29
    René
    Max Output Level: -68 dBFS
    • Total Posts : 1103
    • Joined: 2004/01/06 13:15:57
    • Status: offline
    RE: soft synth vs actual real synths 2006/06/08 18:50:37 (permalink)
    ... and then I have to explaine to my wife why am I buying another software ( they all look the same for her )



    Well, one trick that works well is "Expensive Spare Parts for the Car". I know "a friend" who uses it from time to time ....





    -René
    #30
    Page: 123 > Showing page 1 of 3
    Jump to:
    © 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1