tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post1568125903516686939..comments2023-10-07T15:14:51.699+05:30Comments on Digital Music Recording: Hardware Vs. Software Synth / SamplerSarveshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15307057584744494091noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-8196246993560773392014-07-05T09:37:31.120+05:302014-07-05T09:37:31.120+05:30Hi There, I have to say you are wrong. .second th...Hi There, I have to say you are wrong. .second the art of making music its all about ideas and feelings. if your using analogue synth are softsynth it comes down to choice. what ever works for you and no NEW ENIGMA ALBUM IS COMING OUT IS NOT 100% VIRTUAL STUDIO.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-50382521823398082392011-09-05T09:46:57.451+05:302011-09-05T09:46:57.451+05:30Biased!
Yes software synth's are good If you...Biased! <br /><br />Yes software synth's are good If you have a limited budget or little space... but lets just compare a software synth with an analogue beast like a Roland Jupiter 8 or a Juno 106. Software synths are extremely flat boring and digital sounding and have no character, while the analogue beasts sound a thousand times more gritty, uncontroled and real. Even "emulation" sounds nothing like the real thing. <br /><br />And if soft synths are so wonderful then how come every single real band (you know the ones that are talented enough to perform live, not just play a post-production recording) use hardware synths? E.g the prodigy use Moogs and things and they sound brilliant... Their not just talent-less DJ'sAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-85881973900189800672011-06-17T22:01:35.969+05:302011-06-17T22:01:35.969+05:30I have a couple top modern hardware synths (kurzwe...I have a couple top modern hardware synths (kurzweil, korg) and many software emulations like SampleTank, Atmosphere, Omnisphere, Hypersonic, Kontakt and many more... <br /><br />What is the truth?<br /><br />Giggin' musician will always use hardware on stage and software in the studio. Software synths have better sound and are more intuitive but are less stable than hardware. Guys... Try run during concert 6-7 software synths inside one PC/MAC in any host program. Then try to change patches... It's not impossible, but it takes a lot of time. To much time in case of playin' live! And remember... we have only two hands. What if you play a piano part and need to add strings as a layer? Laptop/Receptor is too far to make it quickly! So... software maniacs, I see Your point o view (I am also one of You!) but anyone who plays like me 200-250 concerts a year will say that hardware is quite enough and we don't need software force! For example, in my K2600, Korg Oasys and Korg M3 I have arsenal of sounds, that will fill my next 10-20 albums. I don't need software because it doesn't bring anything new to my keyboard rig. Think... how many leads, brasses, pads, strings do you need? Listen to e.g. Van Halen and write down sounds from any album to see that the key is... good music and good arrange! Even the best synths will sound like a shit in terrible composed & mixed, crappy songs. <br /><br />Last but not least ;)... Buy 2 hardware synths, record and than publish your album. When you start playin' your tour - belive me that sofware will be a relaxing toy (almost like vodka) for fun between shows ;))<br /><br />I think, that in not far future, software synths will be just a part of hardware's OS. It would be a dream... One keyboard with power of 10 PCs. Stable, powerful, compact, light weight, intuitive, with miolions of factory/user sounds, packed into one, sexy metal box ;). <br /><br />Greetings to All!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-68189553503398869312011-06-16T03:10:16.249+05:302011-06-16T03:10:16.249+05:30You should rename this blog SOFTWARE SYNTH'S A...You should rename this blog SOFTWARE SYNTH'S ARE BETTER THAN HARDWARE SYNTHS. Where are the plus points for hardware?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-78466902181892528782011-05-23T08:35:11.493+05:302011-05-23T08:35:11.493+05:30A great mix can be done with both software and har...A great mix can be done with both software and hardware synths. Good processing can make soft synths sound pretty good because it is all in the digital domain. <br /><br />Hardware synths need good converters. If hardware synths are D.I.'ed into something like a 1073 and a great compressor, hardware is King because the sonic from transformers are like mojo. The sound is much superior and more professional. However, an engineer can take software synths and bus them out for the same processing as hardware. People made million of dollars with both. The workflow is great in the digital domain. <br /><br />Nevertheless, a good producer can make a mix sound good with anything.<br />--AlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-29750029569547355952011-03-30T16:46:36.861+05:302011-03-30T16:46:36.861+05:30And the software synths may sound some how thin &a...And the software synths may sound some how thin & plastic( if they sound thin at all because there is a software synth wich sound is fat and warm like the most warm and fat analog synth) tell me with what that make them less good compare to every hardware and analog synth! There is nothing what make them less good.<br />Thin!? PLastic!? Nasal!? EXACTLY!!! Are they so beautiful. Exactly that's why they are so remarkable wonderful synths with so beautiful sound with so fine colors and nuances of soft and creamy binary sound. Absynth, Reaktor, Vanguard, Massive, Albino. Wich hardware or analog synth can sound like the software? Tell me if you can.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-74979870061483145582011-03-30T16:30:04.635+05:302011-03-30T16:30:04.635+05:30ha ha ha ha ha!! you make me laugh! You are very c...ha ha ha ha ha!! you make me laugh! You are very congested..are you?<br />The mean of existing of the software synthesizers is not to replicate or imitate the hardware synths! Programs like Arturia Oddity, Korg Legacy collection or Predator are lateral case.The software synths are THE THIRD GENERATION of the synths & electronic music evolution!!! And that's why they open another endless world of sonic tape of expressions....you stupid head!!!! The Arturia synths may not sound absolutely like the analog but the difference is so small so it's insignificant so far to achieve the effect you achieve the result.....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-89976041335858513382011-03-22T04:37:42.321+05:302011-03-22T04:37:42.321+05:30We do have to admit that software has come a huge ...We do have to admit that software has come a huge deal from 1980. Matter of fact, you can make a pretty rocking song from all software. I've done it for years. <br /><br />The problem is the technology, equipment, and time spent in hardware based applications like the Korg M3 are just gonna sound better. Not because hardware is better but because their resources available. <br /><br />The article above is lopsided to software and we all have to acknowledge it. The big boys who spend the time tweaking the sounds on the boards have done all the work for us. It's just that the software based instruments that are sampled will not sound as good because they dont have the environment and money it takes to sample a sound like roland, yamaha, korg, and kurzweil can. <br /><br />If you are using a vsti that uses synthesis then you can tweak it to sound just as good as a hardware based synth provided they provide you with enough parameters to adjust. But it is extremely difficult for a home user to replicate a sound because of the analog techniques used that the soft synth cant replicate. <br /><br />And while it is true that all sounds are software based these days (Some are just played back as raw samples from the hardware and this is considered software based), we must not be confused with software based vs software generated. <br /><br />My qualifications:<br />I am a sound engineer, own a recording studio, and travel as a touring musician. <br /><br />Other than that I know nothing about sound.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-6156675388309071802011-02-02T03:59:57.238+05:302011-02-02T03:59:57.238+05:30One more point...
For about the same amount of $$...One more point...<br /><br />For about the same amount of $$$ that you'd pay for a Minimoog Voyager or a Roland Fantom you can get 2-3 used PCs, with good quality sound cards(ie m-audio audiophile) and a half dozen, or MORE, top software synths plus some professional DSP effects. The output of the PCs can be routed into a USB sound module with multiple inputs(8 or more, typically) with built in mixing capabilities. Of course, you'd need MIDI controller/s, but those are cheap these days.<br /><br />That entire setup could be fitted onto a relatively small DESK, without the need for external instrument racks, cables, boxes(of many types) and the processing hardware(reverbs, compressors etc.) that populates those racks.<br /><br />Note: I say 2-3 PCs because it's not recommended to run ONLY ONE PC when using soft synths. The CPU overhead is way too costly and if you plan on running your soft synths on the same PC as your DAW, you WILL experience hangs and crashes. When I hear people talking about running their soft synths on the same box that they run their DAW, I always say: spend a bit more $ and get ANOTHER PC(or 2, or 3!) for your soft synths!jr@novusrex.nethttp://www.novusrex.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-64948225851080955192011-02-02T03:42:14.480+05:302011-02-02T03:42:14.480+05:30Sound quality with soft synths is no longer the is...Sound quality with soft synths is no longer the issue. Latency is no longer the issue. <br /><br />The ONLY issue is CPU laod, or more precisely OVERLOAD.<br /><br />(The following assumes that the DAW and soft synths are running on different computers)<br /><br />What if you make music that is longer than your average commercial or pop song? Not short burst of synth washes, strings and throbbing sequences, as you would hear in a typical movie soundtrack, but music where the song clocks in at over 10 or 20 minutes long? If your soft synths are dragging your CPU down to, say, 80% load, yet there are only 2-4 patches running, what are you going to do when your composition demands that you CHANGE patches? <br /><br />Well, with soft synths you can't do as you would with hardware synths and send a program change MIDI message to swap the sound out of memory for a new one. Soft synths take way too long to unload/load patches, so patch change is out of the question. <br /><br />I hope you can see how that becomes a problem when music gets complicated, requiring MANY patch changes. Unless you make music that only uses, say, 6-10 patches per song, then you're OK. But if your songs are very long and complex, requiring 20, 40 or more different sounds, soft synths are problematic.<br /><br />Of course, some will say that it's not a problem at all and that soft synths can be recorded to audio tracks as the song progresses, thus nullifying the need for program changes. Once recorded, the user can replace old patches with new ones and keep composing and recording.<br /><br />Yes, that works. But, we're still not escaping the CPU overload monster. By rendering most, if not all, soft synth patches/instances to audio we stand the chance of overloading the CPU that's running the DAW! If a song is very long, it could result in hundreds of audio tracks and that kind of recording gets out of hand real quick.<br /><br />Why are hardware synths "better" in that case? Well, for starters, h/w synths swap their combinations(in Korg parlance) or programs as fast a lightning! They are dealing ONLY with chips and not a hard disk. So, when you send a program change from a MIDI track on your DAW to a hardware synth, the change happens nearly instantaneously. Something that is physically impossible for software synths to do, because most of their sounds live on the hard disk. Although some soft synths may allow pre-loading of sounds into RAM, the program switching doesn't occur fast enough to allow for continues and fluid program switching.<br /><br />A second problem with Software synths...they cost less, but are MORE expensive in the long run. There is no guarantee that XYZ s/w synth, that runs today on Win 7 or Mac OS X, will run TOMORROW on Win X or Mac OS XV. Software synth vendors will either discontinue a product or ask us to fork out more $$ to upgrade to a newer version that is compatible with your latest OS.<br /><br />NONE of those are issues with h/w synths. You buy a Triton, Fantom, Motif or Virus and unless it physically gets damaged, it SHOULD run for ever! Well, as long as MIDI is around ;-)<br /><br />So, am I a h/w guy? Not really. Am I a s/w guy? Not really. I look at both for what they are and each has its pros and cons.<br /><br />If you're able to render your s/w instances to audio without much problem and doing so addresses your personal music goals, then go for s/w. If, on the other hand, you find yourself punching holes in your studio's walls each time a CPU crashes or you run out of tracks on your DAW because your s/w instances take up most of your audio, then DO NOT get rid of your h/w.<br /><br />~ J.R.jr@novusrex.nethttp://www.novusrex.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-48492738146820946962011-01-28T19:07:53.232+05:302011-01-28T19:07:53.232+05:30About your softwares being 100 % in having the bot...About your softwares being 100 % in having the bottom end is also puzzling to me..Thats is the exact position of problem ...shallow low end....tanmoynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-49269883617317281832011-01-28T18:49:46.924+05:302011-01-28T18:49:46.924+05:30Thanks Ethohumanoid,
That was a good link.
I want ...Thanks Ethohumanoid,<br />That was a good link.<br />I want to ask a question.Is it possible for you personally to achieve good sytnh sound out of software only...I cannot ..Rapture Dimension pro,stylus etc. I have.But after the mix why does it sound cold though the human factor is more present in softwares (like dif. controls for everything etc.)<br />I need to find a way because I have invested a lot of money in softwares also . Those are lying idle.<br />if u can give ur site ..where you have music done with ur software that will bbe a great help.<br /><br />cheerstanmoynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-33233358505241094542011-01-28T17:44:00.302+05:302011-01-28T17:44:00.302+05:30....many people have just attitude to not recogniz.......many people have just attitude to not recognize the software full potential because they spend money in luxury hardware studio or just are easily under the influence of prejudices of many people around or just they are pretty conservative..........There is a many reasons but every one is no objective.........The day when the software can produce good sound quality already past before 7-8 years wich are long distance of time for the computer technology.<br /><br />by the way I don't see modern synthesizer wich can sound warm more than the software synthesizer. Indeed they may in their own way but if you want warmness like analogue can do then I suggest you to buy Doepfer Dark Energy.....analogue synth with 100% analog engine from Doepfer <br /><br />http://www.doepfer.de/home_e.htm<br /><br />...and it's very affordableEthnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-63698025318755989412011-01-28T15:36:11.475+05:302011-01-28T15:36:11.475+05:30Ok....I'm shure you don't hate the compute...Ok....I'm shure you don't hate the computers...My mistake is to said so many things but the conclusion was not fully... I think it can't be so keep in mind all my post like one big conclusion.<br />About "the warmness" you are talking I mentioned some thing..........<br />The analog synthesizers sound like that because their sound is a result of the inventions of the technology in the 70's...their sound is not a result of achieving the best sound or instrument! Their sound is what technology is allowed.....in those days. They sound really warm but this is only a characteristic like every other........and I think here is exactly one of the speculations.Ethnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-17292566510255117392011-01-27T11:32:37.605+05:302011-01-27T11:32:37.605+05:30I have compared soft synths in Mytek converters.St...I have compared soft synths in Mytek converters.Still not warm enough.Even big productions like Enigma (if they used softsynths)will sound cold compared to the earlier releases.<br />Same results applied in case on softsynth running on my fireface.Now fireface cannot be said to be a lousy ad-da converter.<br />Maybe in the future softwares will produce good sound quality.<br />However mixing in the box (daw) can provide excellent results if approached the right and disciplined way.<br />cheers,.......<br /><br />I dont have any bias towards my pc.<br />I love computers like anything .<br />I know what it can do and what nottanmoynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-32867619466573863422011-01-27T05:13:22.541+05:302011-01-27T05:13:22.541+05:30.....but I also compare it and compare so many oth........but I also compare it and compare so many others software synthesizers : Rapture, Gladiator2, FM8, Massive, MS20(Korg Legacy) with Roland Juno 106......and мy observations are that even in this situation to compare synths with so different characteristics there is no lack of fatness in the soft synths. When it's the same gain, octave and even when the sound is very different some software may sound more bright & clear but still wide and "the bottom" the low frequences are there 100%. Now I'm even more convinced about soft synths and have the feeling that even I underestimated them a little.....comparing to them Roland Juno 106 have no that clearness and wideness and gives an impression of shrink and cloudy picture.<br /><br /> My conclusion is that people who reject the software or software synthesizers just are slaves of prejudices or probably try to discredit the software because they hate the computers by many reasons.....and that's why they search a explanation wich can look plausible and the same time comfortably for them.<br /> Don't believe to people hwo describe the software synthesizers as "tinne, plastic, toys simulations wich are not real" or "the quality of processors are not the same" or "they are not warm" and so on..............Ethnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-56595623472946643452011-01-25T01:55:35.864+05:302011-01-25T01:55:35.864+05:30I think the anonymous post underneath is very inte...I think the anonymous post underneath is very interesting. He actually repeat the sense of my words ....approximately.<br /><br />Actually many people from the music business & industry repeat that words and I missed the moment when Scott mention FL Studio......Actually Mike Oldfield using exactly FL Studio on Lite & Shade album wich is (how he say) every thing software based! May be he have a difficult time getting out of their domain.....let see what he say about HERE <br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CcEK_7GJZE&feature=related<br /><br />Or just see the new studio of Michael Cretu (The father of Enigma) HERE<br /><br />http://www.enigmaspace.com/Gallery.229.0.html<br /><br />FL-Studio are very very talented programmers. Their Sytrus is one of my favorite and I often compare it with Albino but Sytrus have better color nuance and somehow concentration of detail in sound.<br />There is a dark bronze sound nuance specially in the new Harmless......lovely!!Ethnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-28788079398456649172011-01-24T20:18:26.283+05:302011-01-24T20:18:26.283+05:30Its true that people working with soft synths have...Its true that people working with soft synths have a difficult time getting out of their domain.Scott was right 200%.Just close ur eyes and compare any 2 instruments sound .Its bound to be in favour of hardware.I would have left recording completely if hardwares were absent now days.<br />NOTHING MATCHES HARDWARE FOR MUSIC..<br />if its plastic sound waves ...its soft synths...<br />the emulation ..not the REALtanmoynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-19854412957828188712011-01-18T14:23:13.136+05:302011-01-18T14:23:13.136+05:30The question is not in that are the software synth...The question is not in that are the software synths thin or thick because Waldorf PPG also is extremely thin. The question is you do not form its assessment in objective conditions.<br />EXAMPLE: Imagine you are musician in electronic music with career in the 70's. The only you know, the only you saw is short piece of the electronic instruments through the last 10 years....only analog. You work many years with that analog Moog, Oberheim, Elka synths and your idea about computers in that time was simply as ENIAC....a ugly big room with bunch of cabels and systems wich process very slowly.SO.....naturally you think Roland Jupiter is the best electronic instrument in the galaxy and think ENIAC is capable only for calculations........SO your conclusion is that Juipiter is the best & ENIAC is incapable crap. That's OK! But through the years & distant of time your observations became bias (prejudgement) SO..... you form your assessment influenced by many subjective factors. But how you can?? you still have not seen anything !! You dont know nothing about the electronics! You know only short part......you don't realize that the analog synths are that what they are because the electronics was that what they WAS (were). Nothing more than that....the quality of the digital oscillator is better than the analog oscillator...but you dont realize it's because your predjudice wich are absolutely subjective SO THEY ARE NOT TRUTH!........" the analog synths are great because they are warm & fat and vibrant and tick and.....""..........what does it mean that??????????? Nothing!!!!!!<br /><br />In my country In the early days of electronic instruments many people was underestimated synthesizers because they are not natural sound like the viola and violin .......that's ridiculous naturally. The synths are not simulations of the acoustic instruments they are just other type of means of expression in the music. When you have idea to make col-legno you will use Violin but when you have idea to modulate you will use synthesizer. Yes we have simulation synthesis but it is a secondary phenomenon.......... The principles of the modern music are different.......it does not matter to sound natural it does matter to sound better than natural when some times the artificial sound can achieve better results!!<br /><br />I explore the hardware synths also by audio demonstrations and loops & sample library like Gorgio Moroder Synths from Akai S but converted through soundfont for my Halion3....it's possible because the samples for hardware samplers are rarely compressed & processed and as professional engineer I can hear when something is processed. The hardware samples are very RAW....i mean they are just raw looped audio tracks!!<br /><br />OOOOOOOOOOOO! stop bullshit!!!!!!<br />THE SOFTWARE SYTHESIZERS ARE THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<br /><br />that's it.Ethnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-82429451409759952072011-01-15T02:51:22.769+05:302011-01-15T02:51:22.769+05:30The Hardware wins!!!! REALLY! Do you know that if ...The Hardware wins!!!! REALLY! Do you know that if there were no computers there were no Yamaha DX7 ??? Yamaha DX7 was constructed on computer when the first FM synthesis technology was invented on computer??? Do you like Yamaha DX7 ??? Yamaha DX7 was computer development adapted in portable keyboard box !!!! The early digital synths was computer development. In fact the processors also are computer development from long long time ago before the first virtual analog synth and they are responsible for the the whole development of synthesizers! About the CPU & DSP the difference are formal but from CPU came DSP!The processor is a computer itself...everybody computer engineer know that!!<br />And with wich softsynth you compare Waldorf Blofeld? It's very easy to me to compare some of my best softsynths with Yamaha PSR78 and to conclude that the software wins. I have no problems with programs simply because i use System Mechanic 4 and clean every junk in the system with the PC maintanence Wizard function, I have a friend who help me sometimes and my computer never block because I know how to exploit cearfuly.<br /> And what do you know ! I was thinking to buy exactly Waldorf Blofeld but soon I changed my mind<br />The nature of the softsynths have different touch so they sound creamy & sweet compare to almost every hardware synth but tinne! plastic! NO. Here I hope we are professional and compare only the high class......Yamaha PSR also sound tinne & plastic and it's hardware!...not the origin is what make a good synth but how the engineers construct that instrument.<br /> <br /> Your evaluation is simply the result of deep prejudices and attitudes to reject the software synthesizes regardless of objectivity or truth you reject in advance ... and then you are fooling that compare and deny something that never really actually compare EVER !! Because you already reject!!But you never will confess to yourself it's because your haughtiness.......do you ?<br />You thing only what is satisfy and comfort for you........<br />I'm not like that. I can't tell you how to thinking & I must not BUT LET MY POSTS & COMMENTS BE A MODEL FOR MANY CONFUSED ARTISTS & MUSICANS FOUND THAT WEB-PAGE SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS.........................Ethnohumanoidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05002517725374130990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-17798340629037768732011-01-07T04:12:25.437+05:302011-01-07T04:12:25.437+05:30And I don't talk what happens when you need to...And I don't talk what happens when you need to reinstall OS and you use X number of softsynths ....Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-6904874379298087212011-01-07T03:28:51.020+05:302011-01-07T03:28:51.020+05:30I totally agree with Sarmad ... I will go to buy n...I totally agree with Sarmad ... I will go to buy next week workstation ... in my case it is Kurzweil PC3X ... I think that after more than 10 years playing with softsynths, I will not have a lot of problems to get inside VAST. My style is ambient, downtempo, acid jazz and I found that this station realy fits me and sounds totally amazing ... none of my soft synths sounds like this without additional painfull processing ... and I'm not talking about mastering in studio ... lot of those soft synths become total pain when comes to the final master ... I have Spectrasonics set, NI komplete, and more other ... I have Quad Intel with 8GB RAM, NI Kontrol card, 10k rpm disks and DAW is Cubase. But I'm totally confused when I'm in the mood and soft suddenly crashes or produce harsh and whatever ... and I must restart Cubase ... it realy sucks and all the ideas just go out and I'm only pissed off ... So I go to the hardware ... first buy is Kurz, next in the plan is V-synth and than I will see ... may be Virus TI2, but I'm not sure that I will need this ... adio VSTi ... and for all who things that VA is the same as their PC, please read something about DSP and dedicated systems ... and the development of DSP was not discontinued ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-37024839893128677292011-01-05T14:19:49.165+05:302011-01-05T14:19:49.165+05:30After 6 years of using VSTs, last week I bought a ...After 6 years of using VSTs, last week I bought a YAMAHA MOTIF XF8 and I tell you why.<br /><br />1-Using too much VSTs in a project will results in more crashes and errors. I had enough of that.<br /><br />2-Finding a suitable sound for a particular song sometimes was a pain in the ass, I had to process the sound to be able to use it. With hardware it's not the case.<br /><br />3-the overall quality of hardware is better than the softwares.<br /><br />Believe me I have experience with both and I will tell you don't fully rely on PC for making music. Computer should not turn into musical instrument. The best way is to buy a good hardware workstation and use some VSTs to compensate for your hardware shortcomings.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03151896667762606490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-25379642966323320682011-01-04T17:24:03.083+05:302011-01-04T17:24:03.083+05:30after comparing my hardware with softsynths all da...after comparing my hardware with softsynths all day, i can confidently conlude that hardware does sound better. i made the exact same patches on my blofeld and softsynth, the hardware wins. but what i dont understand is that when analyzing the sound spectrum of both the hardware and software, the frequencies look almost the same...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3126851002065918677.post-64824563010004004652010-12-23T18:54:26.609+05:302010-12-23T18:54:26.609+05:30My main concerns is that in order to loop/synch/tr...My main concerns is that in order to loop/synch/trim my samples with the S5000, i will loose so much time ... compared with softsamplers, which have a lot of tools for that i guess.<br /><br />I am into dance and electro, so not sure the S5000 is still a good tool ...Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02092011505075026058noreply@blogger.com