The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Woodys challenge - Soft vs hardware - The results are in! Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 1 week ago
  #61
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkanah77 View Post
Next time, before you charge, do your homework first.

Thanks for watching :D
Hey man, sorry I trashed your work. Usually these software vs hardware comparisons are focused on analog synths so I thought it was kind of funny that the video began with a digital drum machine and dx7 and I tuned out after that. I apologize for expressing it in such a dickish way.

I'll never apologize for hating on the DX7 though. I grew up in the '80s and still haven't recovered.
Old 1 week ago
  #62
Gear Nut
 
Elkanah77's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by xamatsni View Post
Hey man, sorry I trashed your work. Usually these software vs hardware comparisons are focused on analog synths so I thought it was kind of funny that the video began with a digital drum machine and dx7 and I tuned out after that. I apologize for expressing it in such a dickish way.

I'll never apologize for hating on the DX7 though. I grew up in the '80s and still haven't recovered.
No problem man! Just had to point out the facts of what synths is actually in the track I recorded for this.
I have no problem with your hate of the DX7. For me it's a classic 80s synth and it still produces loads of sounds I cherish and love. That's the fun of music. We all like and love, and loathe different things :D
Old 1 week ago
  #63
Lives for gear
 
danielb's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkanah77 View Post
I have no problem with your hate of the DX7. For me it's a classic 80s synth and it still produces loads of sounds I cherish and love. That's the fun of music. We all like and love, and loathe different things :D
I certainly agree with that. I still remember my first jaw-dropping encounter with a DX7. I don't really get the hate, unless people still haven't forgiven it for driving all the analogue synth manufacturers into backruptcy

I consider it a true classic, and one of the most important synths ever. Also endlessly fascinating, great sounding, and utterly misunderstood by lots of people.

I enjoyed your challenge, although personally I find the constant fixation on trying to sound as close as possible to 30-year-old synths a bit baffling.

D.
Old 1 week ago
  #64
Lives for gear
 
playstation's Avatar
 

The tune sounds like an episode of Hunter

Old 1 week ago
  #65
Lives for gear
 
playstation's Avatar
 

Old 1 week ago
  #66
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
The really interesting question is how close will software be in 5 years? In 10 years?
Old 1 week ago
  #67
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by xamatsni View Post
Hey man, sorry I trashed your work. Usually these software vs hardware comparisons are focused on analog synths so I thought it was kind of funny that the video began with a digital drum machine and dx7 and I tuned out after that. I apologize for expressing it in such a dickish way.

I'll never apologize for hating on the DX7 though. I grew up in the '80s and still haven't recovered.
Don’t hate the synth, hate the player. I’m with you, or at least I once was. A combo of bad presets and a couple of fruitless editing sessions (to be fair, they were while I was out on a music store salesfloor and probably not as focused as I could have been) put me off on the DX7, though to be fair, I didn’t have the money for it anyway. I barely was able to come up with 1/4 of a Juno 106’s price, and that was with my employee discount. (When I was your age, people couldn’t afford synths on their own! We had to form coops! ) I later did get a DX100 for next to nothing and all I did was find the weirder presets and run them though lots of crazy effects including many guitar stomp boxes. When I got a DX200 (basically a DX7 II engine) I was surprised at how much better the presets were, but editing was something I thought was done by geniuses like Brian Eno.

Anyway, my point is, don’t be like I was. I blew off a classic due to pure ignorance and intimidation. When I made myself dig in, I was actually shocked at how easy it really is to make great sounds with FM synthesis. I’m not to a point where I can have something in my mind and know exactly how to get there, but I’m comfortable enough to dive in and start with an init patch and end up with something very cool. To think the DX is all FM bells and e-pianos with cheez string pads underneath them, is wrong.
Old 1 week ago
  #68
Lives for gear
 
Praxisaxis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by drockfresh View Post
The really interesting question is how close will software be in 5 years? In 10 years?
Hopefully doing something more interesting than tediously emulating 80s sounds.
Old 1 week ago
  #69
Lives for gear
 
midiquestions's Avatar
Q: What style of music was produced in the 80s?

A: "80s music."
Old 1 week ago
  #70
Lives for gear
 
drockfresh's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
Hopefully doing something more interesting than tediously emulating 80s sounds.
I hear ya bro. Here is my software challenge:

Old 1 week ago
  #71
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing View Post
Anyway, my point is, don’t be like I was. I blew off a classic due to pure ignorance and intimidation. When I made myself dig in, I was actually shocked at how easy it really is to make great sounds with FM synthesis.
Sorry, this is one prejudice that I'm too old to overcome. I'm like those mythical guys who threw minimoogs in the trash because "who would want that old obsolete junk?"

I have messed around with Ableton's Operator plugin quite a bit and I get what you're saying. FM can do some cool things. But for my taste and my music it's just not happening. I've never heard an FM sound that knocked my socks off. It can do a lot of nice bells, EPs, muted basses, and other sounds that are almost realistic, but I would prefer to just use the real thing. It can also make some sounds that are quite analog sounding but again, I'd rather go with the real thing. And then it can do some crazy FX style stuff but I always feel that it's a bit too sterile. And of course harsh digital sounds which are not my cup of tea at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by midiquestions View Post
Q: What style of music was produced in the 80s?

A: "80s music."
That's not fair. There was some good music being produced too.
Old 1 week ago
  #72
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by xamatsni View Post
Sorry, this is one prejudice that I'm too old to overcome. I'm like those mythical guys who threw minimoogs in the trash because "who would want that old obsolete junk?"
Well, I don't own Operator, but I think that you're maybe basing your opinion on inexperience and bad presets. I'm saying that as someone who made the same judgement at one point, but changed my mind based on interesting presets found in several software FM synths (FM8, Octopus, Toxic Biohazard, etc)

Have a listen though all of this:



That's from a relatively simple FM synth engine. Something like FM8 easily bests it and sounds great. Being able to modulate feedback on any operator can take that "cold" FM vibe and really make it seem organic. Anyway, obviously one can make lots of great electronic music without ever having to use FM synthesis, but I kind of feel like a "born again" zealot these days. Have you heard the news!?
Old 1 week ago
  #73
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsp804 View Post
Hello zerocrossing,
regarding the DX7 V paraphonic filter issue I was talking about:
I just re-installed the demo and yes, I was not imagining it.
Please find attached a short example clip that illustrates the issue.
OP1 filter cutoff is being modulated by the MOD 1 envelope.
As you can hear, the filter envelopes of older, sustained voices are retriggered when a new note is played.

Question is: Is it by design or is it a bug ?
I really liked DX7 V but this was a showstopper for me.

(sry for the offtopic post)
OK, my bad. I apologize. You're right. Maybe I was thinking of FM8 which I've also been using a lot lately. Seems like it's by design as the mod matrix isn't polyphonic like the operator envelopes. Seems like a big oversight, but not a deal breaker to me. It still includes a lot more functionality than the DX7, though less than something like FM8 where the filter is polyphonic. I'll put a request in for that feature because I agree that would really add a lot. Some extra filter types wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Old 1 week ago
  #74
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elkanah77 View Post
The Woody Piano Shack challenge where he was to re-create in software the track I made with only vintage hardware as come to en end.
Here is the final software version vs. my old school hardware version:

OK, I finally had a chance to give this a proper listen. Actually, I listened to it last night while I was unpacking and doing stuff, and on my Bowers and Wilkins P5 wireless headphones, it was pretty hard to hear a difference and I was totally fooled by the initial trick. Nice one.

But upon a listen via Mackie HR824s, the difference was a lot more clear... but it I felt the difference wasn't coming from the instrumentation as much as it was coming from big differences in the reverb. The hardware version has this really beautiful and very "open" sounding reverb which makes the track sound very big and lush. The software version has a more confined feel to it. I wonder if they redid this and used the same reverb plugin with the same settings if they'd come to a closer result. I know that I personally went though a lot of freeware reverbs and I never found a single one that I liked. (I mostly use B2, REFLECT and Blackhole [for special effecty stuff])

But anyway, considering that most people listen to music on Beats level (crap) headphones or worse, it's not likely that what I'm talking about would make any difference to people, but I do appreciate a high quality sound and I try to listen to my CDs when I'm actively listening to music. (as opposed to having music on during family time or social time) I think hardware can still have an edge over software, but from my experience that edge is more obvious in analog synths than digital synths, but just having a synth be analog isn't always a sure thing. People hate the Poly800. (I don't. I actually have a weird fondness for that weird sounding synth... probably nostalgia.)

I still think that something like this shoot out would be more informative if each mix was free to use the best tools at their disposal. I'd love to see it done using only Roland vintage synths and their new plugin versions and maybe agreeing on only using ITB reverb with the same settings. No high end external compressors or preamps.
Old 1 week ago
  #75
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Praxisaxis View Post
Hopefully doing something more interesting than tediously emulating 80s sounds.
Yeah the general premise that the point of software is to emulate hardware is very 2002. Hardware emulation is just one small piece.
Old 1 week ago
  #76
Gear Nut
 
Elkanah77's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by playstation View Post
The tune sounds like an episode of Hunter

Hunter was a great series! Can't have too many tunes sounding like 80s tv-series imo :D
Old 1 week ago
  #77
Lives for gear
 

So again:
Can anyone share the REAPER project or at least the MIDI, so i can concentrate on the sounds and production without repeating the MIDI programming work that was already done by Xavier ?
Old 1 week ago
  #78
Gear Head
Thanks to all three of you. Really enjoyed watching and listening to the challenge.
Old 1 week ago
  #79
Lives for gear
 
Acid Mitch's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
So again:
Can anyone share the REAPER project or at least the MIDI, so i can concentrate on the sounds and production without repeating the MIDI programming work that was already done by Xavier ?
It was asked for in the original thread and there is no MIDI to share.
Everything is played by hand or sequenced using hardware with no easy/convenient way to convert the data to MIDI files.
Old 1 week ago
  #80
Gear Nut
 
Elkanah77's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acid Mitch View Post
It was asked for in the original thread and there is no MIDI to share.
Everything is played by hand or sequenced using hardware with no easy/convenient way to convert the data to MIDI files.
I'm sure Woody would could answer on behalf of the two that put together the re-creation. Try contacting him directly through his site.
I did my thing completely live with just the pads and bass sequenced from the Roland MC50 so I have no MIDI files available.
Old 1 week ago
  #81
they did a great job on this, its not easy to make a test so close...

I think the hardware version does sound better but the sound of the software is decent and it does the job surprisingly well. As usual I think it comes down to how important each person thinks that 'hardware margin' is on sound, and what sort of interface you wish to use when making music, and how much dough you have to spend on gear...
Old 1 week ago
  #82
Lives for gear
 
login's Avatar
It would be interesting to make this challenge the other way around, make something with emulations and then recreating it with HW.
Old 1 week ago
  #83
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
It would be interesting to make this challenge the other way around, make something with emulations and then recreating it with HW.
I doubt anyone would care enough to put forth the effort.
Old 1 week ago
  #84
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
It would be interesting to make this challenge the other way around, make something with emulations and then recreating it with HW.
It could work if you limit the software to "emulation only," which is a small fraction of the software.

However, hardware can't get close to the full scope of software being used for what it does best. You cannot get anything close to the Skrillex or Justice sound using only hardware, as two easy examples.

Its only competitive in the soft emulating hard direction.
Old 1 week ago
  #85
Lives for gear
 
Barfunkel's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
It would be interesting to make this challenge the other way around, make something with emulations and then recreating it with HW.
I had the same thought. Like, take a modern EDM pop song and try to re-create it with hardware and I mean all hardware, synths, drums, sequencing, processing, mastering, everything, absolutely everything.

That would probably illustrate my point about this SW vs HW debate that's been going on in here for years. I'm pretty certain that if you had a HW song that has an 808 and 909 doing drums (with all the individual channels going through great EQ and compression, then the whole drum bus through an API 2500), Model D doing the bassline, Jupiter 8 and CS80 doing the synths (sequenced with a Circlon), effects from an eventide H8000, vocals recorded with an expensive Neumann (using a 5k mic preamp and some nice EQ and compression), mix the whole thing through a Neve desk, record to a Studer and tehen master it fully analog, it would sound better than doing the same thing with a laptop and a 50€ USB mic.

The point is, if you have any sort of a realistic budget and your aim is to make release quality, modern music, not just jam about with your expensive toys a SW setup completely obliterates a HW setup, in terms of getting stuff done and especially if you plan to make a living out of your music.
Old 1 week ago
  #86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barfunkel View Post
I had the same thought. Like, take a modern EDM pop song and try to re-create it with hardware and I mean all hardware, synths, drums, sequencing, processing, mastering, everything, absolutely everything.

That would probably illustrate my point about this SW vs HW debate that's been going on in here for years. I'm pretty certain that if you had a HW song that has an 808 and 909 doing drums (with all the individual channels going through great EQ and compression, then the whole drum bus through an API 2500), Model D doing the bassline, Jupiter 8 and CS80 doing the synths (sequenced with a Circlon), effects from an eventide H8000, vocals recorded with an expensive Neumann (using a 5k mic preamp and some nice EQ and compression), mix the whole thing through a Neve desk, record to a Studer and tehen master it fully analog, it would sound better than doing the same thing with a laptop and a 50€ USB mic.

The point is, if you have any sort of a realistic budget and your aim is to make release quality, modern music, not just jam about with your expensive toys a SW setup completely obliterates a HW setup, in terms of getting stuff done and especially if you plan to make a living out of your music.
@ohmicide did that once, quite a good test...EDM tune with analogue synths, and softsynths...
Old 1 week ago
  #87
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
It would be interesting to make this challenge the other way around, make something with emulations and then recreating it with HW.
Yes that would be more interesting. Especially if it was the same person like Espen.
Old 1 week ago
  #88
Gear Nut
 
Elkanah77's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
Yes that would be more interesting. Especially if it was the same person like Espen.
That's nice of you to say. :D
A challenge the other way around with me re-creating what software does isn't interesting though as I'd much rather continue my 80s synth-pop tutorials and continue churning out new tracks. WITH 80s hardware of course!
Old 1 week ago
  #89
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barfunkel View Post
I had the same thought. Like, take a modern EDM pop song and try to re-create it with hardware and I mean all hardware, synths, drums, sequencing, processing, mastering, everything, absolutely everything.
This is pretty good:
Old 1 week ago
  #90
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
This is pretty good:
That's a really cool cover actually. I dig it!

The production aesthetic is obviously way off the mark though (intentionally. . .its trying to be its own thing), to be any kind of actual comparison.

This type of hardware approach has a very cool sound to it, I definitely get the appeal. Its just not all that close to "the" sound of right now.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump