We are living in a time where computers and computer software is replacing many of the traditional methods of audio production. Hardware is still available and strong but vsts are gaining and overwhelming use with new concepts and sounds, replacing much of our hardware devices. I was thinking the other day what would be a great hardware synth that just couldn't be replaced and a good friend of mine told me the axis virus would be his top choice. What would be your top choice for a hardware synth? I had a Roland jp8080 and it was glorious. The leads were incredible on that device. I still have some old tracks from back in 2002 I made with that thing and it just killed when it came to drum and bass.

 

Last edited: May 7, 2016

Too many to choose from

Nord Stage 2 EX 88, Dave Smith Instruments Prophet 12, Roland Jupiter 80, Moog Voyager with a Hammond B3 of course thrown in for good measure .

I guess it all depends on your specific needs and what sounds you are looking for etc combined with portability, upkeep etc all down to the individual.

Virus is great for sure but for some other choices could suit their personal needs better.

 

If I tell you that a certain soud was made in Massive, you will not be able to reproduce it. Heck, me neither - as the synth has no numeric values on most of the parameters - I will build a similar sound, but not the same. The point is, the discussion is not about one replacing other. VSTi & HW just sound different. Yes, you can go & buy the Access (not Axis) Virus Ti2, or Clavia Nord Lead A1R (both are awesome) but can YOU get better sounds with a Ti2 than YOU can get with Massive?

PS: Back in 2002 (with the most powerful CPU a Pentium 4 @ 1.3 GHz - a little slower than an iPhone) the VSTis & DAWs were nowhere near to what we have today.

 

Tons, especially Moog synths I find, like the Minitaur, Mother 32 tc. Hard to get that analogue growly dirtyness to sound the same using VSTs without a ton of work processing.

 

VSTis are just too clean and too accurate. <-- that's it. I don't like that. Perfect sound doesn't mean it sounds pleasing. That's why I've gone back to hardware again. It is harder to make tracks without total recall, but it is more gratifying in the end. For me. YMMV. It is possible to make a really great track with software only, though. I'm absolutely certain of that. However, I'm too oldschool and I tried doing just that for years, and I didn't like the results. Now I enjoy making music far more and I like the results. <-- simple as that.

 

That's the big question for me! I think VST's are really up there now and replacing hardware. I see all these "In the Studio" videos by FM and a lot of these guys aren't using their hardware devices. They are happy doing everything within their DAW!

 

I like this response. I'm really fond of Liam Howlett's (The Prodigy Producer) Experience album which was all hardware and Daft Punks album Homework, which was also done on all hardware. Those two albums I always go back to and never get tired of. They both present that analogue sound and I think since it was more challenging to produce and sequence back then, it pushed for a really good, solid production. I don't think Daft Punk could ever go back to that Homework sound again unless they decided to revert back to %100 hardware. No matter how repetitive some of those tracks were, it didn't matter - it had that groove and sound mixed with analogue that couldn't be replaced.

 

I might be wrong, but the Virus isn't really analog is it? I thought it was working off of DSP, creating virtual oscillators. It might sound great even if that's the case, but that would make it a software synth with a great hardware interface. It is late and I should be sleeping.

 

We are talking mainly about hardware vs software, not analog vs digital (since affordable digital synths exists since the 80s).

 

Yeah they just DSP powered i.e oscillators meant to recreate analog sound. In fact some of the waveforms they use sound totally opposite to what analog oscillators would produce. Very cold, very strerile in some aspects. All depends on the waveforms used. Still a cool piece of gear to have tho

 

Last edited: May 7, 2016

Access Virus C. You can get close with plugins; but the C has very powerful, clean bass.

 

But... I can hook up my Novation Remote SL or BCR2000 to a VSTi and have a very similar experience. In fact, that's what I do and why I got these two and MPD32 in the first place. To tell you the truth I hear the same difference between these hardware VA/DSP synths and real analogue synths, as between VSTis and real analogue synths. It's just like the DSP ones lack something and they're too accurate, sounding too good and too clean. Some describe it as sounding "thin".

On the other hand, I'm a real fan and use a lot of old hardware samplers. I don't own any of the real analogues any more. Where does warmth come from these from? Weird/bad sounding converters and noise. Virus probably sounds better than some typical VSTi due to converters and noise, too, but it is also a top of the line DSP synth. Real analogue synths are rare and very expensive. I don't think they are worth that kind of money. But one can choose carefully and acquire really nice hardware synths [also DSP] and a few FX for not much dosh, and get the same results. Also, processing VSTis through some external hardware gives their sound that "something" - nicely sounding imperfections. Don't be afraid to "ruin" their sound.

 

Last edited: May 7, 2016

Since I do agree that the VSTi's sound pretty much "sterile" compared to HW synths, there are good tools to break this sterility and take you pretty close to the HW sound.
Alongside some focused EQing/Compressing, Sound Toys's Decapitator and Crystalizer can work wonders putted after almost any VA-simulating plugin for example.

 

Im actually considering to dig out my old cassette recorder to run some plugins thru it.
I miss that old imperfect sound.
Digital music is ok, but its missing something I cant find.
My old tapes, noisy and badly recorded with only analog sources, they have something
thats non-exsisting in modern recordings.
Not sure what it is, but its very musical. Unstable pitch, some noise, rounded sound
from tape limitations and tape compression. Less compression, more dynamics, and
not a full audio-spectrum at all times. It is complex...

 

It's like literature; the flaws are what make it believable--like real life. In writing, when things turn out perfectly, it just isn't credible and belongs in the realms of novels. Real literature mirrors reality more closely and provides a contrast of bitter and sweet. Philosophically speaking, perhaps music follows some of these conventions... Just my ramblings. Feel free to ignore lol.

 

Yep.
Little by little,perfect vst`s,midi keyboards and pads(instead of real instruments and people playing),quantization,digital environment,add all this and you get material that just doesnt breathe,is rather mechanical and then we try to fix it with certain fx and automation but it still doesnt cut it.
Its the little things,imperfections that in the end make a huge difference.

 

my Virus (model C) is band limited - up to 25.5 kHz, and it has a lot of aliasing if you use extremely high resonance. It is not from ADC/DAC converters/algorithms/filters, but you can hear it even with "Virus + Headphones/Speakers/Monitors". So it is not only digital, it is very bad in high-end. I don't like low-end, it is not really bad, but it is not so excellent, something average. Not all basses are super there, but some can be used if they done fine, so 50/50, not always basses is easy to done and make them fit in the mix, either basses as leads, or basses are shitty in low-mids, no aggressiveness in lows. Aggressiveness is there - low mids, mids - so very-very-very excellent leads/pads/plucks/key sounds.

About frequency range and aliasing - turn your virus (if you have it) to your daw and put extremely fine spectrum analysers like voxengo span (blue cats, voxengo span+ or so) and work with cutoff/resonance. No any distortion goes higher than 25.5 kHz - it goes back into audible range. Even a lot of vstis have muuuuuch less aliasing/artifacts, like serum etc.
But virus can do sounds that most vstis cannot.

99% Analog-sounding VSTi is u-he Diva. There are also a lot of fine analog-sounding vstis

 

Stop using the term "too perfect" it is not perferct at all, it's characterless. It is much easier to get a great sound out of an analog synth, while you can get a decent sound out of VST's most of them require ton of processing and a busy mix to bury it in. Diva is alright.

 

Last edited: May 7, 2016

This thread and others like analogue v digital are telling me something again. I don't think we have really accepted or got our heads around what digital/electronic music or sound is meant to be all about. Those who are rejecting the digital and software sound have not really entered the new digital/electronic era, and I suppose I am referring to electronic sounding music, not emulations of musical instruments. I absolutley cringe when a EDM or trance producer talks about prefering 'that warm analogue sound' - it truly makes me frown with deep suspicion. If the master painters, sculptors could have found materials that could have allowed them to create even more perfect and natural-looking art do you think they would have been saying, 'Hmm, not sure about this new material, it all looks too perfect, I prefer the old matrials where the paint discoloured too easily or didn't mix well, or the plaster that dried too quickly or looked too rough to gte enough detail instead of this smoother new material, or whatever problem'? You know what they would have done. Those artists today looking for 'grit', 'dirt' or record scratches from poor quality equipment (that's all it was) are not, in my eyes, in pursuit of beautiful art, they are in pursuit of re-creating a past that had imperfections, this is not art.

 

For me, the differences between HW and SW are mainly how they feel and how I can operate them.
An old analog synth with 100s of knobs is just fun to tweak sounds with, no comparison to a BCR2000-controlled VSTi/AU:
Technically I would be doing the same thing, but it's just much less fun.

Sound-wise, I have yet to find an analog synth that cannot be replicated to 99.5% in digital with today's DSP knowledge.
Access Viruses, Nord Leads, later Roland synths - they all have a DSP inside that does nothing different from your computer's CPU, and if you want a difference, then use a bad USB audio interface with the same cheap components as the hardware synths
If you want some gritty aliasing, open an old USB audio interface, rip out the low pass filter, and if you want noise and non-linearities, replace the output stage with low-end op amps. Add some jitter by reducing the buffering caps' capacity and add digital artefacts by pouring some milk over the PCB