Due to routine maintenance, the search features of Gearslutz may not work as expected. This is only temporary and the maintenance is expected to finish within the next few hours. Thank you for your understanding.
I had both at the same time and I found very little in the Blofeld that I couldn't do in the Virus. I also prefer the Virus interface by a wide margin, so the Blofeld sold.
The most important thing for me is the sound: the Blofeld sounded like a midrange VST in a box. Everything had a sameness to it and the overall sonic fingerprint was small and "boxed in" to my ears.
The Virus TI2, while not as big sounding as one of the best analog polysynths, definitely has a more dynamic sound IMO. It also has a higher resolution sound with more depth and variation. It just feels more alive.
Two entirely different beasts. IMO not even comparable. On Blofeld you can mangle samples and load your own custom wavetables (there's an editor for creating them). That's not possible on a Virus at all. So, horses for courses, but I think NEXUS-6 was unfairly biased in his comment.
I ask because I want a new board and been checking out the 2 for evolving pads and atmosphere sound scapes. Its not a need but a want and trying to figure out if the virus is worth the 2000 more price tag
I've played Blofeld, and tried to record with it... However, it's not in the same league as Waldorf Q (filters, dynamics, overall sound quality, more outs etc.). I've found the Q more competitive to Virus TI (Snow user here - same sounds as the rest of TI range), but they are really complementing each other. There is a reason for Snow having that price over Blofeld...
I don't get the whole "Virus vs Everything Else" mentality. I have a Virus TI Snow and I used to have a Blofeld. Ended up selling the Blofeld to try out some other gear because of the MIDI sync problems. I figured if I want an approximation of that sound again, there's always Largo.
Really liked the Blofeld sound. You can get some nice wide pad sounds, old school analog sounds and interesting wavetable sweeps (the wavetables are more interesting than those in the Virus). In terms of modulation options, it's far more flexible than the Virus (16 modulation slots + all those modifiers, it's crazy!).
The Virus sounds great too, but it's not in a totally different league than the Blofeld. Even the Snow (not to mention the TI2) has much greater polyphony, up to 4 stereo outputs (3x USB+1xAnalog) and the VST integration of course, but in terms of synthesis power, they're quite similar but still different.
Well I own a Blofeld and a TI2. They are not either/or synths. They can be complimentary because they both have significant areas where they are strong and the other is weak.
Effects - Big win for TI2. The effects are not only excellent but the modulations are a big win also.
Wave Table synthesis - Not even a comparison here so if you want this you have to go with the Blofeld. It does a great job with this. To the person that said a Q blows it out of the water...Huh???.....I have a Q and a Q+ and neither one does wavetable synthesis as more than an afterthought. Unlike the XT or XTk you can have separate wavetables on each oscillater. Big win.
Real time tweakability - Virus at first glance but if you use the Blofeld a lot you can really whip around with it quickly. I actually think the TI2 has a bit more convoluted structure than I would like. Here a Q/Q+ is just masterful.
Modulations - Blofeld has 16 slot mod matrix which is awesome including operator functions which are really useful once you get to know them. TI2 has mod matrix but more limited. Big win for TI2 though is the ability to use the excellent arpeggiator as a mod source without it sounding.
Envelopes - With the newest OS release you have to give it to the TI2 because it now has extra envelopes which are definitely useful.
Filters - This is really a matter of taste. I happen to like the Blofeld filters and all the options better. Others may completely disagree. At the very least, they are different and sound different.
Midi - Just wanted to mention that with the latest release the Blofeld does not have the same midi sync issues it had way back when I first bought it.
Software integration - Clearly the TI2 is a winner but the Blofeld does have a VST editor. I personally do not like the Virus VST because you can only instantiate it once in a project. Access really also makes an assumption that your total hardware setup consists of a computer and a TI2. Kind of silly. I don't want to use my ASIO driver for the Virus audio, that is why I have my other audio interfaces for.
Overall sound - The most important thing obviously. To me they are different. The stock patches on the Blofeld do nothing to show it off which is too bad. The TI2 has much better stock patches so it is easy to say it is a better synth. I happen to like the sound of the Blofeld better but if I wanted to play in a pop band the TI2 is better suited (and no...that was not a putdown of the TI2). I think the Blofeld can do some really complex soundscapes that go beyond the TI2 but there is not a lot of call for that in pop music.
Gigging - Definitely the TI2. Because the effects are great and in the box and you have multiple outputs it is much more suitable for live playing for gigs. Also, you don't want to have to read a display in low concert light. You want to grab knobs and go!!!!!
Ok....enough of my lengthy opinion....gotta go play now. A threesome with my synth mistress and wife ;-)
Well, I presume my English is pretty much bad, so obviously I was misunderstood (after all, it's not my native language)...
I didn't say anything about Waldorf Q wavetables. Of course, Blofeld has MUCH more, but I've said something about sound quality. As a Q user (and TI Snow user, and user of some other synths), as I said, I've tried Blofeld in the studio and found it somewhat lacking in pure sound quality. After all, Q has three processors insted of one (for all functions) on Blofeld. That was my point. In terms of sheer programablility, I've also found Q to be excellent, and not only because of knobs (as you know, Q has those wicked between-filter movements etc). Blofeld IS a good synthesizer, but for me, having a Q and TI, is just not in the same league. Of course, if you are good at programming, just about any synth will do (assuming it has at least basic building blocks and reasonable number of modifiers). After all, it's the music that matters...
It's surprising me how the tiny and cheap Blofeld keeps being compared with the great and terrible, also expensive as hell Virus TI.
From what I've learned Virus TI is very advanced and cool, still it's digital and very expensive.
Blofled is cool too, lack of external audio processing is a little disappointing though.
Without objective criteria a Blofeld vs Virus thread is hard to respond to. At least a category would help. For instance, Cost? Blofeld wins. Modulation possibilities, Blofled. Wavetable - again, Blofeld.
And this is what I gleaned right from this thread. I have only owned a Virus b, TI II Polar and a MicroQ but I still can't understand the X vs Y synth threads.
It always seems like someone who wants a Virus but can't afford it so they want to justify in their minds that a Blofeld is as good if not better.
One thing is for sure, if a synth sounds great, its usually not simply the synth but the person operating and playing it.
So I strongly suggest getting whichever you like or can afford or whatever and then spending allot of time learning it, experimenting with it, playing it, composing with it, for it, in conjunction with it, etc. etc. etc.
So many great synth programmers and players have proven over the years that just about any synth can sound good. These modern synths are so functional and advance that if you can't get something good out of it, its probably not the synth.