Analog synth vs Vsti over at KVR!

[SamSpacey]

Join in the fun and debate he he......

On the one side we have...Virtual synths sound just like analog synths.

On the other side we have....ha ha ha ha aha ha no they don't

KVR: Most analog sounding softsynth

[jupiter8]

Before you go all "Haha,kids over Kvr don't know their ass from their ears"
this is what Howard Scarr (who did sound design for the new Batman movie)
wrote:

Hmmm. While in Santa Monica I got to play with the following whenever I liked, for 8 weeks:

1) A Moog 55 system
2) A Minimoog
3) A huge CMS system (see their website - yes, it was THAT one!)
4) A large Cwejman system
5) A large Doepfer system
6) An ARP 2500
7) A Buchla 200e

Forget 3) thru 7) - Zebra2 "pwns" them overall!

However, the Minimoog certainly is special, and the Moog 55 = !!!

[audiovisceral]

Originally Posted by jupiter8

Before you go all "Haha,kids over Kvr don't know their ass from their ears"
this is what Howard Scarr (who did sound design for the new Batman movie)
wrote:

zebra2 only wins for convenience/diversity. beyond that, it still lacks analog depth.

p8m, se1x, etc. are far more impressive imo but are also a lot more $$.

there's no debate regarding quality, only perhaps regarding budget and time.

[jupiter8]

Originally Posted by audiovisceral

zebra2 only wins for convenience/diversity. beyond that, it still lacks analog depth.

there's no debate regarding quality, only perhaps regarding budget and time.

That's we're you're wrong. Obviously you're entitled to the opinion that hw synth X is superiour to VSTi Y.

However HS opinion is that Z2 IS superiour in sound to synth 3-7. Not that it's more convinient.

I'm not fond of the "quote big name producer therefore i'm right argument" but i quoted him as he had expirence with said synths and still preferred Z2.

So there IS a debate regarding quality.

[Carey M]

Originally Posted by jupiter8

So there IS a debate regarding quality.

In my opinion, not a very fruitful one... The whole process of creating music is a very personal one. For some, the instruments used in this process is a very big factor affecting direction and inspiration. I see very little point in debating over such a personal issue.

Changing ideas is certainly worthwhile and constructive, that is why I'm writing on these forums

- CM

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by jupiter8

That's we're you're wrong. Obviously you're entitled to the opinion that hw synth X is superiour to VSTi Y.

However HS opinion is that Z2 IS superiour in sound to synth 3-7. Not that it's more convinient.

I'm not fond of the "quote big name producer therefore i'm right argument" but i quoted him as he had expirence with said synths and still preferred Z2.

So there IS a debate regarding quality.

Just to put your citing of Scarr as an example of why you are 'right' into perspective, here's a demo from the Zebra site featuring sounds designed and performed by Scarr himself;

http://u-he.logic-users.org/song/Kwe...p%20Squeak.mp3

Sounds fine for a softsynth. The filter sweep at the end sounds beyond weak to my ears but hey, to each his own. Enjoying Zebra on it's own merits is one thing but choosing it over an actual Moog or Arp? That's just crazy talk!

The softsynth vs. analog debate was already beat to death here if you'd like to revisit it;

Softsynths are just stepping stones...

[jupiter8]

I agree that this debate is pretty much useless. What i objected against was when he said there was no debate. Analogs are superiour to VSTis,period.

The reason i mentioned his name was:
1. He's not just "anonymous forum member 9961. He's a real person. You can probably find his e-mail adress and ask him question if you like.
2. He's not just some kid who has listened to some mp3s and thought "Hey,those old crappy synths can't even do a decent supersaw". He worked with them on a really big project and had access to arguably the most sought after synth collection on the planet. He still preferred Zebra2. For it's sound,not convinience.

After all this is just subjective stuff. There's no facts,just opinons. I just pointed out a different opinion.

PS I too find it hard to believe but that's what the guy thinks. One guy.

[Carey M]

Originally Posted by jupiter8

He's not just "anonymous forum member 9961. He's a real person.

Heeeey! I'm a real person, too!!!



- CM

[waveterm]

Howard who ?

WT

[pyvnd]

I listened to some samples from the Zebra website and I was not impressed. From my experience the only soft synths that sound good are the Korg ones and of course Reaktor. Reaktor 5 sounds great.

[chrisso]

Herbie Hancock obviously believes fake sampled Rhodes and soft synths are better than his old keyboard set up.
He's one of my heroes, but I reserve the right to disagree.
Each to their own.
Both analog hardware and 'virtual' software have a role to play in modern music.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by chrisso

Herbie Hancock obviously believes fake sampled Rhodes and soft synths are better than his old keyboard set up.
He's one of my heroes, but I reserve the right to disagree.
Each to their own.
Both analog hardware and 'virtual' software have a role to play in modern music.

Huh? Where do you get that? Maybe he uses it for gigging convenience or pure paid product endorsements, but faced with the choice in studio, that's not the case.

(I love name-dropping, so it's gotta be good tactic... when people don't REALLY know the context or downright truth).

And in the case of this other guy:

1. Who is he really, anyway?
2. Being paid by the company (which he is) sort of taints the validity of THAT argument.
3. Who is he really, anyway? (and who cares?)

-andrews

[jupiter8]

HOME

This is Howard Scarr.

On one hand, yes, having economical interests does taint his POV somewhat.On the other hand,if he was'nt a professional people would argue that his POV was'nt valid just because of that.

And why did he choose to make sounds for the Zebra2 in the first place ?
He's had much bigger sound designing gigs than that. U-He is just a one man company (actually they're two now). In the end you probably just choose to believe the one who reinforces you're own opinion in the matter.


Why do we care ? I don't know why but there seems to be a lot that do.
The mere thought that a digital (a VSTi nontheless) could actually be superiour to an analog synth seems to make quite a few heads boil.

But in the end this is just one mans opinion at this particual time. It was'nt that long ago people ditch their Memorymoogs, Elka Synthexes etc. in order to get a DX7 and that was'nt just because it had memories,midi,16 note polyphony.
It could also replace a whole symphony orchestra.

Remember the most sold synths of all time is the Korg M1 and the DX7 second.
And that was'nt jsut because they were affordable but of course that had a lot to do with it.

And lastly some more fuel for the fire

Originally Posted by Howard Scarr

Depends on how much time you want to spend on a project, and on how good your analog synth is. Zebra beats most of them IMHO in the discipline "analog sounds" (especially the polyphonic ones).

[Psyentific]

...

[feyshay]

There does appear to be elitist talk. Sort of like the guitarists talking about using amp sims. Like the classical instrument player talking about sampling.
I know there is a better sound, but it is not only money that drives the issue. Often times, simplicity, space and versatility are driving factors (as they are for sampling and amp sims).
For now, I'm quite content with Zebra 2, Reaktor 5, and Absynth 4. I could afford to buy a lot of synths. I'll probably get one at some point, having found something superior in some ways when playing on them.
I am quite sure that there are things that can be done with Absynth 4 that would be difficult to do with hardware.

[blaugruen7]

i very much like the sound of poly-ana
AdmiralQuality.com - Music Software

[Beermaster]

I don't think its elitist stating a common fact. ( or opinion of many who with experience know what they're talking about )

Given the money what has a better sound one or the other.

Stradivarius or Yamaha violins ? Jupiter or Selmer Saxophones ? Italian hollow body or Gibson Es-175. Roland 700 system or a computer simulation of it ?

I have a problem believing this chap who worked in Mr Zimmer's studio - for a start I doubt very much that he had much spare time on his hands whilst scoring that movie knowing how little time there is on movie time lines for getting things done. That being said, even If he had 8 weeks to spend playing with just ONE of thoes synths it wouldn't be enough to scratch the surface of what is possible and comprehend the limitless horizons ! ! But 8 of them ...whilst scoring a film..... in 8 weeks and come to that sort of decision is quite impossible !

There are many of us professional composers here on this board who own a lot of this kit and use it on a daily basis so I think there are enough equally valid opinions to balance out a fair judgment on this argument - if 'pro' opinions are the only one's that hold water ?

Beer

[sheever]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

Just to put your citing of Scarr as an example of why you are 'right' into perspective, here's a demo from the Zebra site featuring sounds designed and performed by Scarr himself;

http://u-he.logic-users.org/song/Kwe...p%20Squeak.mp3

Sounds fine for a softsynth. The filter sweep at the end sounds beyond weak to my ears but hey, to each his own. Enjoying Zebra on it's own merits is one thing but choosing it over an actual Moog or Arp? That's just crazy talk!

The softsynth vs. analog debate was already beat to death here if you'd like to revisit it;

Softsynths are just stepping stones...

sorry but did you hear that kind of filtering from real analogue synth?
if yes,you should know on the real one is not that fog* around the voice.
i cant believe any software can emulate the real voltage noises..
say that people Who tried almost all BIG*software instruments before...
today 100% HW.
btw why peoples wanna buy sw synth,if secondhand possible to find a cheap HW one?????????

[Psyentific]

Originally Posted by Beermaster

I don't think its elitist stating a common fact.


Beer

It is not elitist stating a common fact. IMO.

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by sheever

sorry but did you hear that kind of filtering from real analogue synth?
if yes,you should know on the real one is not that fog* around the voice.
i cant believe any software can emulate the real voltage noises..
say that people Who tried almost all BIG*software instruments before...
today 100% HW.
btw why peoples wanna buy sw synth,if secondhand possible to find a cheap HW one?????????

No need to be 'sorry' as you obviously misunderstood my post. When I said the filter in Scarr's example sounded 'beyond weak' that was not a compliment!

[sheever]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

No need to be 'sorry' as you obviously misunderstood my post. When I said the filter in Scarr's example sounded 'beyond weak' that was not a compliment!

yes,cose i focused too much to this kinda *Sounds fine for a softsynth*.
things....sorry is not going exactly to you only i hate this "SW rulez!" stuffs what is going everywhere.
zebra,gladiator,nexus,vanguard,albino whatever...crap.
peace!

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by sheever

yes,cose i focused too much to this kinda *Sounds fine for a softsynth*

I was just being polite!

[feyshay]

Originally Posted by Beermaster

I don't think its elitist stating a common fact. ( or opinion of many who with experience know what they're talking about )

Given the money what has a better sound one or the other.

Stradivarius or Yamaha violins ? Jupiter or Selmer Saxophones ? Italian hollow body or Gibson Es-175. Roland 700 system or a computer simulation of it ?

I have a problem believing this chap who worked in Mr Zimmer's studio - for a start I doubt very much that he had much spare time on his hands whilst scoring that movie knowing how little time there is on movie time lines for getting things done. That being said, even If he had 8 weeks to spend playing with just ONE of thoes synths it wouldn't be enough to scratch the surface of what is possible and comprehend the limitless horizons ! ! But 8 of them ...whilst scoring a film..... in 8 weeks and come to that sort of decision is quite impossible !

There are many of us professional composers here on this board who own a lot of this kit and use it on a daily basis so I think there are enough equally valid opinions to balance out a fair judgment on this argument - if 'pro' opinions are the only one's that hold water ?

Beer

I suppose that elitist has negative connotations. Hardware synth users (especially those with many of them) are elite synth users. I repeated an above phrasing. I suppose it may have more to do with a condescending tone, which is in some of the posts. The forum members on KVR know more about software synths than anywhere.

I try not to make negative judgments about people who are using lesser equipment than my own. There are reason that people use softsynths that are not necessarily related to ignorance or poverty. For some, they may sound good enough--as they might be for some using East-West sampling libraries, etc.

I probably should not have intruded into this particular forum discussion, since I am a hardware synth neophyte.

For me, ignorance is the limiting factor. Yet I still think there is value in softsynths, especially if you are not concerned about trying to sound analog.

[sheever]

one more thing...
if you guys working with sample libraries.
real hardware 100% flexible than any soft,or SAMPLER so you can use forex. couple moog sampling with different filter positions but thats all.(with sampler only ownself filters wich is not the same!!!)
is not a *free hand* while you work and try to give the best in your productions.

i tell you what
soft synth probably quite ok with FM synthesis sounds...cose you will not,and cannot categorized what do you listen.hundreds of variation for oscillators what especially you can make on the real one as well.(FM7,or Absynth)

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by Dirty Halo

Huh? Where do you get that? Maybe he uses it for gigging convenience or pure paid product endorsements, but faced with the choice in studio, that's not the case.

Why the aggressive tone?
I didn't specify studio or live. In fact I saw him in concert and his keyboard sounds sucked in my opinion (workstation keyboard and Mac computer in back). Obviously not for him, or he wouldn't be inspired to play them on a tour.
On his Future To Future album the Rhodes sounds were by and large NOT Rhodes - it used to be his signature sound. Around that time, he and his studio tech (or keyboard tech?) did a lot of publicity raving about Logic and the virtual instruments they were using.

From last year:
YouTube - Vinnie Colaiuta - Herbie Hancock

My real point was, it doesn't matter how esteemed someone is (like the Batman sound designer, or one of my musical heroes), I know what I prefer.

[todd_r]

From the Howard Scarr site

"2007 - Concentrated on sound design for Zebra2, joined U-HE team"

...just sayin

Guys, don't get too worked up again... it's been done and over with

Software is great. Hardware is great.
Software (for the most part) sucks at trying to emulate analog sounds. Analog Synths suck at trying to sound like Digital Goodness

Take the best of both worlds and you'll have an enormous palette of sound.

I'm pretty sure most people who rant about Absynth, Reaktor (and similar Digital Synths) have never even scratched the surface of what it can do. Stepping through the presets doesn't always show what an instrument really can do, folks

[chrisso]

Originally Posted by thx1138

Take the best of both worlds and you'll have an enormous palette of sound.

I'm in full agreement.

[Dirty Halo]

Originally Posted by thx1138

Software is great. Hardware is great.
Software (for the most part) sucks at trying to emulate analog sounds. Analog Synths suck at trying to sound like Digital Goodness

Ehhh... I'd STILL take something like the F1sr over most plugs!

-a

The secret to success with software is to use high sampling rates. Even the oldest plug-ins sound OKish when run at 88 or 96k.

The biggest downside of software (for me) is the lack of control.