Its because good ideas take time to develop.For example,its not humanely possible to write 5 scores yearly,sure you can write 5 very average scores with the help of 50 people,check out the credits for the Batman vs Superman score,its a little factory,yet the score itself pretty much sucks.You can not even calm down and rethink the next steps in such fast pacing.

 

The only Synth I can't recreate the sound of with plug-ins is the OSCar. Which is ironic seeing as it's a digital synth just with analog filter. It's such a nasty, cutting, harsh sounding bastard!

 

Nord Lead A1 , Access Virus Ti .

 

The difference between hardware and software is almost nothing to do with the sound. it's all to do with the workflow, having dedicated controls and the limitations of working with a single tool rather than a toolbox. Many people find that the lack of limitations ITB means they don't concentrate properly on the music, rather they jump from one option to the next (I am in this group quite a bit). However, if you define what you want to do in your head you can set your own parameters. Remember that a lot of old music was created in 24/23 or less tracks and avoid quantising - or limit your use of quantizing if you don't want to repeat a recording over and over until you get it 'right' - you will get a surprisingly hardware/analogue sound. Just define your own limits. Then treat your mix and fx the same way. Use a limited number of reverbs, don't overlimit or compress (at least until you come to the final mix where you will need to do a bit to match current music levels).
Saying that, I love my old hardware from the 80s (yes, I'm that old) and will often use a piece of gear as the hub around which I write, perform and record a piece. On the other hand, I can produce something just as good (with perhaps some small difference in the sound, not better not worse, just different) by keeping to my computer. The difference comes down to how I approach the process, not the sound producing equipment.
Having lived and worked through the move from analogue through digital tape, sampling and digital audio workstations I've learned that the cliche about the gear in front of the keyboard being more important than the gear behind it is actually the key.
Most of the 'great sound' we used to get was a result of factors we looked at as negatives and tried our best to remove. When we discovered that going full tech/ everything digital meant that the music felt like it lost some soul (eighties, early nineties) we scratched our heads until most people producing stuff realised that 1. the gear wasn't as good as we thought, it was just we weren't measuring the right elements and 2. we loved the distortions and errors in sound the old gear produced for many things. Nowadays emulations are so good there is no excuse for not getting what you want. You just need to know what that is. And if you don't, make up your own limitations - imagine what audio path a certain synth or guitar when through, and emulate this - within reason, of course. Too much faffing about and you'll lose any soul through micromanagement and too many tiny, non-creative decisions.
Be wary of thinking everything was better in the old days as well. Some things were easier, most things were harder. The easier things ususally came down to limitations which meant that 'less is more' wasn't a choice, it was just the way things were.
Oh, and 'perfect' sound is typically said in a scientific sense. Sound can be closer to perfect and not sound as good because we like the imperfections. There is good sound and there is near-perfect sound. Sometimes they are the same thing, sometimes not.

 

Last edited: May 8, 2016

My CS 80. It is so temperamentful, it tunes itself up on warm days like this and is difficult to tune on cold, moist days. The filters behave different too on hot days like this. I've tried running the Arturia AU version through my Roland jazz chorus (twin) and my Roland Cube and it does come close to the real thing but not quite.. the old beast has so much warmth and character that is nowhere to be found on the Arturia. So I'd have to say: my Yamaha CS 80

 

Far prefer the interface on the Akai and Roland as the Yamaha is enough to send you mad. Admit it sounds pin sharp though.

 

Times change. Sound changes. When synthesizer came into music, their sound was called steril and cold. Many people didn't like it. Now people talk about the great old sound that was warm and round.
What bothers me is that so many people seem to live in the past. I like the analog sound of old hardware, but I also like the new sound of digital hardware. You can make great art out of any of it, without hating on the other.

 

They don't live in the past. They just don't know proper parallel processing

 

You are right.
I read somewhere that in the musicindustry today there is no time to write songs! Incrdible...
So what they do is load samples,loops and phrases that are made by other companies and just put some "F***ing on the dancefloor" lyrics on top.
I miss the days when there were few, but amazing artists. When you had to pay shitloads of money to get the gear you needed. Only the most dedicated people did it. When Frankie Goes To Hollywood made Relax, it was normal for Trevor Horn to spend 1 week, just to get a bass sound right. Depeche Mode went to industrial junkyards with a portable recorder and made their own samples. There is something cool about a 12-bit, kilobytes sized piano sample, instead of the enormous GB ones today. The list goes on...

 

Interesting info regarding DM.
Cost a lot of money when we started a band in the mid 90s,today it would cost a fraction of that to get it going.
Today you can get quality instruments for cheap,add vst libraries and warez and you can be a winner.
But there is always a catch.
You still need to put shitloads of hours into the craft,there are no short cuts.

 

Last edited by a moderator: May 8, 2016

that.