# What's the worst vst synth you own?



## José Herring (May 14, 2022)

I know it's an odd question. But, I have my reasons. Tell me not the best synth you own but the worst one you own or ever tried.


----------



## José Herring (May 14, 2022)

3DC said:


> All the old ones.
> I've seen FL Studio users make unbelievable sounds out of simple 3xOSC. Its not the tool, its what the artist does with the tool.


There are a lot of great simple 3 osc synths. Minimoog for example. But, what's the worst one you've played?


----------



## José Herring (May 15, 2022)

I found the worst rated synhts. It's an eye opener. My little experiment is paying off. More soon.


----------



## cedricm (May 15, 2022)

Orb synth, absolutely not worth its $5 tag price - there are way better free synths.

Initial Audio 808 Studio 2, no documentation, uninteresting. I should have know better, I purchased on sale on audioplugindeals thinking it was a cheaper nicki romero kick 2, which it isn't.


----------



## José Herring (May 15, 2022)

cedricm said:


> Orb synth, absolutely not worth its $5 tag price - there are way better free synths.
> 
> Initial Audio 808 Studio 2, no documentation, uninteresting. I should have know better, I purchased on sale on audioplugindeals thinking it was a cheaper nicki romero kick 2, which it isn't.


On the Orb synth, what is that you hate about it? Listen to a few demos, kind of a thin 8 bit sound. But, did you find the controls unfamiliar and not intuitive?


----------



## cedricm (May 15, 2022)

No it's just that anything it does can be done at least as well with synths coming with any DAW or Freeware. Nothing per se that's wrong with it but I fail to see its relevance.
Originally it was the fallback synth for their composition software, not sold separately.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

On the understanding that you have a good reason for asking...

Cherry Audio's Memorymode. It's very good, especially for the money when on sale. But it is also the least interesting sounding (to me) of all the Moogalikes I've tried.

So, it's a bit of a case of 'buy cheap, buy twice' for me. 

I love Voltage Modular by the same company, though.


----------



## liquidlino (May 15, 2022)

Probably unfair, but I don't really like my Cherry Audio PS-20 (their Korg MS-20 synth). Never warmed to the sound of it, and the controls and patch bay are just mystifying. I might give it one final try and then sell it. Weird, as Voltage Modular is so good and easy to use, and so is for DC-106 (their juno 106), so I was expecting great things from PS-20.


----------



## TomislavEP (May 15, 2022)

My main source of VI synths is definitely Komplete. Massive X, Prism, Kontour, plus a number of Kontakt-based synths are my favorites and go-to's. On the other hand, I was never a fan of "classic" synths by Native including the original Massive, Absynth, and FM8. Never did like their GUI aesthetic and organization. Also, most of the included presets in those are either too busy or abstract for my taste and needs. I know that VI synths (and the synths in general) shouldn't be judged primarily on the included presets, but I rarely program something from scratch. In most cases, I tweak the presets as needed or just use them as they are if they fit something I'm working on. But even when it comes to programming, I never found the mentioned VI's particularly inspiring to work with.


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 15, 2022)

L


----------



## el-bo (May 15, 2022)

Can't really offer anything juicy, as in the seventeen-or-so years I've been using VSTi I don't think I've ever come across a synth that couldn't somehow be used effectively within a piece of music (Makes it all the more tragic, given the amount I've spent chasing the 'New;Shiny').

It's not that I don't recognise the sound of great synths, though.

I suppose the closest I could get to answering the question would be that some synths have sounded sterile, boring etc. But even then, there's use-cases for that, sometimes.



**Incidentally (and off-topic, somewhat), I went searching for an age-old British advert, by way of adding a touch of humour to my post (As is my wont). But searching for, "advert with kid saying "I'm not being much help, am I daddy?"" bought up loads of responses about how narcissistic parents be fuckin' up their kids. Tell me...what is the world coming to? 

So yeah...If anyone want to confirm or deny that such an advert existed, and perhaps furnish me with more searchable details, I'll amend my post


----------



## gamma-ut (May 15, 2022)

Sonivox Twist.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Can't really offer anything juicy, as in the seventeen-or-so years I've been using VSTi I don't think I've ever come across a synth that couldn't somehow be used effectively within a piece of music (Makes it all the more tragic, given the amount I've spent chasing the 'New;Shiny').
> 
> It's not that I don't recognise the sound of great synths, though.
> 
> ...





You can take the link and I'll delete my post.


----------



## Crowe (May 15, 2022)

The ancient synths in Cubase are some I just can't really get to work for me. I adore Retrologue and Padshop is one of my favorite vsts on the planet but the rest of 'em just don't inspire me.

I don't think they're 'bad' though. I really couldn't say one way or the other.

As a sidenote, I do not have this problem with many other old synths. FM8 and Absynth are some of my favorites.


----------



## MartinH. (May 15, 2022)

el-bo said:


> **Incidentally (and off-topic, somewhat), I went searching for an age-old British advert, by way of adding a touch of humour to my post (As is my wont). But searching for, "advert with kid saying "I'm not being much help, am I daddy?"" bought up loads of responses about how narcissistic parents be fuckin' up their kids. Tell me...what is the world coming to?
> 
> So yeah...If anyone want to confirm or deny that such an advert existed, and perhaps furnish me with more searchable details, I'll amend my post


@Bee_Abney Oh, so that's what he meant! I misunderstood and thought he was looking for one of those old printed ads and I was gonna suggest adding "vintage" to the search query. Found lots of outrageously offensive stuff, half the time I legit can't tell if it's historic or satiric (and apperantly a lot of them are Photoshop fakes), or it's so sexist I dare not post it. Here's a tame one:


----------



## el-bo (May 15, 2022)

Bee_Abney said:


> You can take the link and I'll delete my post.



Haha! Brilliant! I guess it was my search results that were at fault, then. Not only did I fudge the line, but I'd completely forgotten the context in which it was used...and how the 'iconic' "He's a very nice man!" came from the same ad.

Also, pretty good CGI work on Gerald...especially for the time


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

MartinH. said:


> @Bee_Abney Oh, so that's what he meant! I misunderstood and thought he was looking for one of those old printed ads and I was gonna suggest adding "vintage" to the search query. Found lots of outrageously offensive stuff, half the time I legit can't tell if it's historic or satiric (and apperantly a lot of them are Photoshop fakes), or it's so sexist I dare not post it. Here's a tame one:


Television - it's the extra parent in the home (and the only one you like when you're young!)


----------



## bigrichpea (May 15, 2022)

Hexeract. Nice sounds, unusable laggy interface.


----------



## Cdnalsi (May 15, 2022)

The worst synth I've ever worked with was Synister. There was an One Synth Challenge over at KVR with it a couple of months back. Here's my entry with it:


----------



## el-bo (May 15, 2022)

Cdnalsi said:


> The worst synth I've ever worked with was Synister. There was an One Synth Challenge over at KVR with it a couple of months back. Here's my entry with it:



Interesting. I think the composition of the track was excellent (Full of surprises). My only reservation about the actual sound would be if it wasn't meant to (or it wasn't your intention) sound lo-fi and crunchy.

What about it made it the worst synth you worked with?


----------



## Maxime Luft (May 15, 2022)

Cdnalsi said:


> The worst synth I've ever worked with was Synister. There was an One Synth Challenge over at KVR with it a couple of months back. Here's my entry with it:



The 1:27 part sounds like the good old PES 6 theme from Konami - awesome


----------



## Cdnalsi (May 15, 2022)

el-bo said:


> Interesting. I think the composition of the track was excellent (Full of surprises). My only reservation about the actual sound would be if it wasn't meant to (or it wasn't your intention) sound lo-fi and crunchy.
> 
> What about it made it the worst synth you worked with?


Thanks for the kind words. I tried to make the best of it, but the sound it produces is just of really bad quality, even in that lo-fi crunchy kind of way.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

Cdnalsi said:


> The worst synth I've ever worked with was Synister. There was an One Synth Challenge over at KVR with it a couple of months back. Here's my entry with it:



I like your piece a lot. It's that kind of jazz that people who say they don't like jazz don't like! But I do.

I like how you leant into what the synth was giving you - even if it was a struggle to get that out of it.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

MartinH. said:


> @Bee_Abney Oh, so that's what he meant! I misunderstood and thought he was looking for one of those old printed ads and I was gonna suggest adding "vintage" to the search query. Found lots of outrageously offensive stuff, half the time I legit can't tell if it's historic or satiric (and apperantly a lot of them are Photoshop fakes), or it's so sexist I dare not post it. Here's a tame one:



I have found that this public information film has saved me from a lot of bad choices.



As has the edifying advice in discussions about orchestration that one should study orchestration. Of course, how silly! One should never discuss a question about orchestration but simply study it!


----------



## el-bo (May 15, 2022)

Cdnalsi said:


> Thanks for the kind words. I tried to make the best of it, but the sound it produces is just of really bad quality, even in that lo-fi crunchy kind of way.


But if you read the comments, most have zero issue with the sound. Quite the opposite, in fact


----------



## Cdnalsi (May 15, 2022)

el-bo said:


> But if you read the comments, most have zero issue with the sound. Quite the opposite, in fact


Yeah I guess that was the whole point, to try to make _something_ with the shitty sounding synth


----------



## AceAudioHQ (May 15, 2022)

from the ones I actually use, probably u-he diva since it's a massive cpu hog. sounds great though.


----------



## Loïc D (May 15, 2022)

I had a fart plugin that I never actually used. Much.


----------



## NekujaK (May 15, 2022)

I use synths fairly conservatively and am not really a "synth guy". My qualifications for a "good" synth are ones that offer a wide spectrum of rich sounds, are loaded with tons of presets, and as an added bonus, have a good random patch generating engine.

I'm fairly picky about VST synths, so fortunately, there aren't any real clunkers in my collection. However, back in the day before Reason supported VSTs, I went a little crazy buying nearly every RE synth that hit the Reason shop, and sadly, there were quite a few disappointments. Mostly due to mediocre uninspiring sounds and lack of sonic versatility.

It's hard for me to recall most of them now, but a few I remember were Blackpool Station, Aurora, Vibro, Solaris, and many of the Mixfood synths.


----------



## Gerbil (May 15, 2022)

Poly-Ana. It's an older synth, but even back when I bought it, I found that looking at it gave me a headache. It makes me feel like I'm organising a heist.


----------



## dunamisstudio (May 15, 2022)

I can't say any of my synths are bad. That's like saying one of your children are bad


----------



## el-bo (May 15, 2022)

Gerbil said:


> Poly-Ana. It's an older synth, but even back when I bought it, I found that looking at it gave me a headache. It makes me feel like I'm organising a heist.


I guess if we're talking about GUI/UX, then I might have to amend my earlier comment.

Never owned Poly-ANA, but i did demo it at one point. That GUI was terrible. I think it might've eventually been improved, but for many years the developer dug in his heels, refusing to accept any criticism about it :(

All those mismatched, skewed perspectives. It completely screws with my mind. Makes me feel like I'm having an LSD flashback


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

dunamisstudio said:


> I can't say any of my synths are bad. That's like saying one of your children is bad


But sometimes, well, you just have to be glad that some of your children are alright, and write the others off as a loss..


----------



## proxima (May 15, 2022)

I'm going to stretch the question a bit by saying Absynth: I love what it can do, and I've heard some great preset packs. But the interface is so absolutely awful that I don't want to learn it at all. So rather than actually being "worst", it's more frustrating because I _want_ to want to use it, if that makes sense.

Probably not a useful answer for you though.


----------



## cuttime (May 15, 2022)

Zoyd. Despite its pedigree, obnoxious and useless. Depreciated with good reason


----------



## method1 (May 15, 2022)

Synthmaster - I have tried many times to like it, nope.

Poly-Ana but mainly from a GUI perspective, it actually sounds pretty good.
I used to use this attached skin but since switching to 4k it's basically unusable.
Also the dev has dropped apple support.

Arturia V-collection - for some reason I never gelled with the synths in the collection and a lot of them sounded basically the same, their latest releases do seem to be an improvement.

In defence of Cherry Mermorymode - it sounds a helluva lot like my memorymoog, who knows maybe mine is broken


----------



## José Herring (May 15, 2022)

I am finding to conversation fascinating. I am so sorry I can't respond properly. I will have time tonight to respond fully. Thx.


----------



## Trash Panda (May 15, 2022)

FM8. Good god that UI hurts my eyes as much as my brain.


----------



## KarlHeinz (May 15, 2022)

Avenger.

Not cause of the synth and the sounds which are great (especially some third party ones) but simply because of this bs copyprotection. And the ignorance of the develloper with any user opinions (not only dealing with this crazy copyprotection which you have to renew all three month - at least that was the point where I finally left -) that dont fell into the category "praise".

Its a shame in a way but gladly there are so many great synths out there, who needs even such a good synth that comes with that behaviour ?


----------



## kgdrum (May 15, 2022)

Bee_Abney said:


> But sometimes, well, you just have to be glad that some of your children are alright, and write the others off as a loss..




That reminds me,please send my regards to your folks! 😘


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 15, 2022)

kgdrum said:


> That reminds me,please send my regards to your folks! 😘


I shall, if they ever start talking to me again.


----------



## kitekrazy (May 15, 2022)

Wusikstation 10 - no updates but wanting you to buy v11. Part of the issue is the developer.


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

Thanks.
I actually got a lot from this thread.

I was kind of under the impression that since it's all kind of digital that all synths are roughly equal but varying maybe in superficial ways. I too have only gotten synths that are generally well rated and have not really much experience with the bad stuff.

So I listened to a lot of the synths you mentioned you didn't like. Tried to find out why. Downloaded some really poorly rated synths. Watched a few youtube videos with people making music with the "worst" vst gear. Kind of surprising that there are so many. Ect...
Here's my brief conclusion on just analog model style synths I tested and heard and studied:

1) Quality of sound.
Seems like there' a big difference between the great, good and the bad with the bad being actually rather bad, the good not as good as the great.
2) User experience.
More subjective but plays a big roll. There are many good and even Great synths that are hard to produce the intened results witch taints the impression of the synth.
3) GUI
A difficult GUI makes it hard for people to understand the synth. The synth may even be basic but a cluttered hard to decipher GUI makes things really hard.
4) The psychological effect.
That which looks good and is fun to work with generally tends to make the user want to spend more time on it thus creating better results.

In my brief experiment I used 6 different synths to do an experiment. Programmed the same bass line on each synth and worked with the synth until it got to be as good as I could make it. Level matched by driving them all into the same limiter so that volume wasn't an issue.

The synths used:

ANA 1000 synth
Deduktion synth
Obsession
Legend
Reason's Subtractor
Expanse RE (rack extention Reason)
Vital

I picked these synths to compare and contrast, synths I knew were great, synths I felt could be really bad and synths that I was unsure about.

Ana 1000 synth. Not to hurt the makers feelings but, hard to work with, unfun, sound is not great. On the plus side everything functions properly. The FX actually pretty decent.

Duduktion-- Fairly highly rated. Thought for sure I was going to like it. Started off actually great but after working with it for about 2 minutes, sounds thin, weak, dull and terrible aliasing. Not pro sounding

Obession -- Blast to work with. Sounded great even after 30 seconds. Took me about 2 minutes to get a great sound. Big knobs. Easy to work with.

Legend -- Hard as fuck to work with. Wow. Always had a hard time with it even though I knew it sounded good. Took 15 or more minutes to get the sound I wanted, easy to overshoot the dials then under, then over, ect... But... After that it sounded better than all of them combined. Worth the effort and it will let you know if you suck only to reward you when you get it right. Unforgiving and honest.

Reason Subtractor-- One of the first included synths in Reason so must be 20 years old now. Not a great GUI still circa 2000 but it actually sounded great. Surprised at how well it stood up to the Legend. Snappy EG's, good mono focused sound.... Don't know what Reason did back them to get thier stuff right but they did. Aliasing though so you have to watch the high end but a good bass synth for sure and good arps.

Expanse RE -- Hidden gem that not even Reasonistas talk about. It's a Serum killer and can even read Serum wavetables, has one more osc than Serum and sounds fantastic. Took a little while to get the envelopes to behave correctly, almost gave up until I realized that it has 10 different evelops in one. Set it to the right one and set the EG and it did really, really well. Lots of bass, nice highs, no aliasing..Wow!

Vital -- Vital is free....Vital is King.....It is Vital that you have Vital in your arsenal. It's that good.

So it was a comparison of synths I knew where great with synths that I knew could be bad to synths that I was unsure about.

The synths that were bad were bad for good reason. The Reason synths that I was unsure of held up nicely with the best of the best.

And, it doesn't matter what you pay. Great synths can be had at any price point which is making the market even harder.

Synths that are hated seem to be hated first on the sound quality. Bad sound or unwanted sound quality leads to people not liking it. Next the GUI. Hard to work with GUI's make it impossible to relate to the synth. Hard to read, ect.... Seems at time this is more important than sound quality. One of the best sounding VST synth makers is actually Melda but few people use their synths. The GUI not to their liking I suppose.

So I now kind of rank synths in 3 catagories:

At the bottom you have synths that just you can't get what you want out of them.

In the middle tier are synths that may not be that fun to work with but that can get you want you want. Here for me are the synths like MSoundFactory and Zebra2.HZ. Can do just about more than any other softsynth, not the most fun but well worth the effort.

A submiddle tier are synhts like Subtractor. Will get you there, maybe stuff can be handled better but if that's all you have, you're in good shape.

On the top are synths that get you there and are fun and enjoyable to work with. Probably the most subjective category but ultimate the most rewarding music making experience on a personal level. Luckily we have plenty to chose from so that you can find your synths that gets you what you want.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 16, 2022)

I’d have to say Pigments (sold it) because despite it being pretty, I also found it flat and boring. And Massive X (sold) for sounding great but also too frustrating to bother using.

And also Omnisphere, mostly because I’ve found that I like simple interfaces and would rather use 10 simpler synths than one Omnisphere doing 10 things. Plus they made some bad UX design choices. And then the price…. At least I’ll get 80% of it back to put toward hardware.

Side note: a user interface is a component of the user experience.


----------



## liquidlino (May 16, 2022)

José Herring said:


> Thanks.
> I actually got a lot from this thread.
> 
> I was kind of under the impression that since it's all kind of digital that all synths are roughly equal but varying maybe in superficial ways. I too have only gotten synths that are generally well rated and have not really much experience with the bad stuff.
> ...


All those words and no audio examples?


----------



## NekujaK (May 16, 2022)

Thanks for that analysis @José Herring 

Subtractor is the little engine that could. Simple, effective, and always reliable - like a classic VW Beetle. I still use Subtractor for sub-bass, even tho I have tons of modern bass VSTs, Subtractor still delivers better results.

Legend, Expanse, and Viking are superb RE synths - the only ones I still use to this day.

While we're talking Reason synths, just want to mention Thor. For me, it falls into the category of great sounding synths crippled by a cluttered and confusing GUI. It sounds great, and lots of folks have done great things with Thor, but I could never fully wrap my head around it.


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

José Herring said:


> In the middle tier are synths that may not be that fun to work with but that can get you want you want. Here for me are the synths like MSoundFactory and Zebra2.HZ. Can do just about more than any other softsynth, not the most fun but well worth the effort.



Zebra is definitely not a very “fun” synth to work with like Serum is but man, if you know how to use it to its fullest potential…


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

NekujaK said:


> Thanks for that analysis @José Herring
> 
> Subtractor is the little engine that could. Simple, effective, and always reliable - like a classic VW Beetle. I still use Subtractor for sub-bass, even tho I have tons of modern bass VSTs, Subtractor still delivers better results.
> 
> ...



I’m now getting Viking just because of the fact that it’s called Viking, I love anything Norse!! I would get Thor too just based on that same principle but I don’t use Reason


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I’m now getting Viking just because of the fact that it’s called Viking, I love anything Norse!! I would get Thor too just based on that same principle but I don’t use Reason


Yeah, I felt exactly the same way when I first heard of these synths!


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

Bee_Abney said:


> Yeah, I felt exactly the same way when I first heard of these synths!



I’ve always had this idea in the back of my mind to create a Norse mythology named synth, something that has the sound of Serum with the layout and workflow of Zebra


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I’ve always had this idea in the back of my mind to create a Norse mythology named synth, something that has the sound of Serum with the layout and workflow of Zebra


Do it. Become a hero worthy of Valhalla.


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

KarlHeinz said:


> Avenger.
> 
> Not cause of the synth and the sounds which are great (especially some third party ones) but simply because of this bs copyprotection. And the ignorance of the develloper with any user opinions (not only dealing with this crazy copyprotection which you have to renew all three month - at least that was the point where I finally left -) that dont fell into the category "praise".
> 
> Its a shame in a way but gladly there are so many great synths out there, who needs even such a good synth that comes with that behaviour ?


ahh geezzz.. you had to remind me. I opened an instance and yep.. noooo thanks. I dont know if its that i left as is and never dealt with it or if have to renew. But theres always something w that copy protection that for any serious producer you cannot be able to open old projects up due to this. Hope they switch to another copy protection scheme.


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

Bee_Abney said:


> Do it. Become a hero worthy of Valhalla.



I will be when I marry a beautiful Swedish girl, or at least hire one to walk on the red carpet premieres of all the Hollywood films I score


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

Id say the worse for me is arturia analog stuff. At least V8 (not sure the new one) but everything sounded very soft synth and way too many uselsess patches trying to please everyone and nailing none. 
Im seeing Korg wavestate on that same path although there some cool presets out there.


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

The Waldorf stuff in general.


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> The Waldorf stuff in general.



I’m interested in Largo but it’s so old


----------



## method1 (May 16, 2022)

Falcon. I get that it's very capable etc but it's another one I just can't click with, the included presets & expansions feel oddly dated to me, I'd say this one is my biggest regret due to price.


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> All those words and no audio examples?


It was the stupidest little one osc bassline just to judge the sound of the synth, filter and osc with chorus. Nothing fancy.


----------



## timbit2006 (May 16, 2022)

I just tried to find one but I just learned that VST4FREE.com is now gone. That really sucks, I got many really old VSTs from there.


----------



## mscp (May 16, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> Id say the worse for me is arturia analog stuff. At least V8 (not sure the new one) but everything sounded very soft synth and way too many uselsess patches trying to please everyone and nailing none.
> Im seeing Korg wavestate on that same path although there some cool presets out there.


Are you designing your own presets or just browsing?


----------



## Alchemedia (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I’m now getting Viking just because of the fact that it’s called Viking, I love anything Norse!! I would get *Thor* too just based on that same principle but I don’t use Reason


If KEM had a hammer...


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

mscp said:


> Are you designing your own presets or just browsing?


Id only would do presets for pigments. The analog emulation in arturia doesnt do it for me and rather jump to U-he stuff for that. (although the buckla did sound rather nice now that i remember).
And of course, anyone using arturia who is a good producer would still get something good from it.


----------



## Pier (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I’ve always had this idea in the back of my mind to create a Norse mythology named synth, something that has the sound of Serum with the layout and workflow of Zebra


Phase fucking Plant 

(and KiloHearts are from Sweden so they probably have Viking blood)


----------



## Pier (May 16, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> Id say the worse for me is arturia analog stuff. At least V8 (not sure the new one) but everything sounded very soft synth and way too many uselsess patches trying to please everyone and nailing none.


I've never liked their stuff either but have you checked out the new MS20?


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

So Here's the audio file. NOTHING FANCY. One saw wave, with filter. Agressive filter because I wanted to see if the filter could snap. 
A little Chorus, and verb and some slight compression because that's who I am. 

The order:

1) Ana-1000
2) Deducktion
3) Obsession
4) Legend
5) Subtractor
6) Expanse
7) Vital

Notice the sharp uptick in quality when I get to Obsession. Not sure about The Legend though. They say it's good. So it's gotta be me. I had better luck getting what I wanted for this simple little line with Reason's Subtractor.


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

Pier said:


> Phase fucking Plant
> 
> (and KiloHearts are from Sweden so they probably have Viking blood)



That’s true! I always want to support good Swedish companies, greatest place on earth so I’d be happy to show them some love!


----------



## Fidelity (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> That’s true! I always want to support good Swedish companies, greatest place on earth so I’d be happy to show them some love!


Phaseplant is amazing, but it's a definite CPU hog. Actually more of a diva than DIVA. Get the trial to make sure your PC can handel it (it kinda baroque my mac).


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

Fidelity said:


> Phaseplant is amazing, but it's a definite CPU hog. Actually more of a diva than DIVA. Get the trial to make sure your PC can handel it (it kinda baroque my mac).



I have an M1 Ultra Mac Studio, I’d imagine I’ll be fine lol


----------



## tressie5 (May 16, 2022)

I'll probably get a pox placed on my house, but yeah, Kontakt irks me. OK, I know, it's not a synth, but still. Oy! Here are the ways:
1. You need the eyes of a falcon to read some of its non-resizable print. Sometimes I have to lean so closely to my laptop's screen that I can feel the heat flying off the keyboard.
2. It's supposed to be a sampler but you have to jump through so much hoops, it's not worth it. At least importing your own samples aren't as convoluted as Wavestate Native (which I like anyway).
3. Kontakt does allow you to configure parameters of instruments like Falcon, but again, there's that heat flying off my keyboard I'd have to deal with. No fun.
4. Falcon's left-sided multi-timbral panel is much easier to navigate and simpler to populate, too.


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

tressie5 said:


> I'll probably get a pox placed on my house, but yeah, Kontakt irks me. OK, I know, it's not a synth, but still. Oy! Here are the ways:
> 1. You need the eyes of a falcon to read some of its non-resizable print. Sometimes I have to lean so closely to my laptop's screen that I can feel the heat flying off the keyboard.
> 2. It's supposed to be a sampler but you have to jump through so much hoops, it's not worth it. At least importing your own samples aren't as convoluted as Wavestate Native (which I like anyway).
> 3. Kontakt does allow you to configure parameters of instruments like Falcon, but again, there's that heat flying off my keyboard I'd have to deal with. No fun.
> 4. Falcon's left-sided multi-timbral panel is much easier to navigate and simpler to populate, too.


I felt the same way when I first got it. Now that I've used it for nearly 20 years though, I know the interface so well now I'm like Steve Wonder feeling my way on the keyboard.


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

Pier said:


> I've never liked their stuff either but have you checked out the new MS20?


no, i was wondering how the v9 was overall. Are you liking the sound of the ms20 and the others?


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> no, i was wondering how the v9 was overall. Are you liking the sound of the ms20 and the others?


My opinion after watching one review video is that the MS20 was the bright shining star. The other analog emulations didn't cut it, but the digital synths are top notch.


----------



## gsilbers (May 16, 2022)

José Herring said:


> My opinion after watching one review video is that the MS20 was the bright shining star. The other analog emulations didn't cut it, but the digital synths are top notch.


man.. i think its arturia just staying status quo on that older code. IT works for them and they have sales so dont bother toomuch w em sort of thing. 

ill check out the ms20. I actually like the buckla and how analog it sounded. i think its somehwat newer as well.


----------



## Pier (May 16, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> no, i was wondering how the v9 was overall. Are you liking the sound of the ms20 and the others?


I'm liking the demos I've heard of the MS20. Haven't heard the other ones.


----------



## outland (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I’m interested in Largo but it’s so old


I've got it. Yes, it's old (ancient, actually, in VST years), but it occupies a sonic niche that is somewhat unique. It's not as "industrial" as "Enzyme" (if you remember that) or Rob Papen's "Raw", but in a trajectory that lends itself in that (very) general direction without all the "in your face" distortion (not that that's a _bad_ thing). I'm not sure if there's a demo (I've had it that long), bit if there is, you should check it out.


----------



## outland (May 16, 2022)

José Herring said:


> Notice the sharp uptick in quality when I get to Obsession. Not sure about The Legend though. They say it's good. So it's gotta be me. I had better luck getting what I wanted for this simple little line with Reason's Subtractor.


Well, it might be you. There was a really interesting Mini Moog shoot-out on Youtube ( I' m sure it's still up), and the reviewer covered 5 different emulations (the Cherry Audio emu was not out yet) and showed the resultant waves and compared them to an actual Mini Moog model D.

Watch for yourself:


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

outland said:


> Well, it might be you. There was a really interesting Mini Moog shoot-out on Youtube ( I' m sure it's still up), and the reviewer covered 5 different emulations (the Cherry Audio emu was not out yet) and showed the resultant waves and compared them to an actual Mini Moog model D.
> 
> Watch for yourself:



Seen it many times. I just think maybe the minimoog isn't "my synth". I honestly have trouble getting what I want from any version of the minimoog. But other moogs I can do well with so not sure what the problem is really.

On the Monark, the fact that it doesn't have a release part of the envelope is a nightmare for me. 

I'll Keep trying though. I think if I just try and use it exclusively for a while I'll get it. Usually I just end up bailing on it and going for my other synths that I get on with better.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 16, 2022)

José Herring said:


> Seen it many times. I just think maybe the minimoog isn't "my synth". I honestly have trouble getting what I want from any version or the minimoog. But other moogs I can do well with so not sure what the problem is really.
> 
> On the Monark, the fact that it doesn't have a release part of the envelope is a nightmare for me.
> 
> I'll Keep trying though. I think if I just try and use it exclusively for a while I'll get it. Usually I just end up bailing on it and going for my other synths that I get on with better.


It’s not really my synth either. I sold The Legend because Model 72 sounded better to me within minutes of use - even after having had The Legend for a few years. Not sure how my I’ll use it because I have a hardware synth inspired by the Model D but going beyond it (SE-02) with a more modern sound.

I also sold Obsession because I may not really like the Xa all that much… or the UX was poor. Or a combo.

But I wouldn’t list either The Legend or Obsession as being among the worst!

But, yeah, Model D and related don’t have dedicated release, but a combo. Same with bx oberhausen. I’m used to it, and it’s not that big of a deal for common type sounds, but it does limit things in some ways.


----------



## tressie5 (May 16, 2022)

It's interesting how such a premium is placed on comparing software to hardware, as if the reviewer is simply saying, "Hardware is where it's at. Get used to it. Flush all your VSTi's now! " Me? I don't give a toss if a software D-50 doesn't sound like its hardware counterpart. If it sounds good, I'm using it.


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

tressie5 said:


> It's interesting how such a premium is placed on comparing software to hardware, as if the reviewer is simply saying, "Hardware is where it's at. Get used to it. Flush all your VSTi's now! " Me? I don't give a toss if a software D-50 doesn't sound like its hardware counterpart. If it sounds good, I'm using it.



I will probably never own a hardware synth in my life, I don’t think a 500x price increase is worth a 5% sonic difference, and that’s the thing, we’re at a point where hardware doesn’t even sound “better”, it just sounds “different”


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 16, 2022)

KEM said:


> I will probably never own a hardware synth in my life, I don’t think a 500x price increase is worth a 5% sonic difference, and that’s the thing, we’re at a point where hardware doesn’t even sound “better”, it just sounds “different”


I used to think that I’d never have hardware - that lasted 25 years, even. Now I just wish I wouldn’t have waited so long (I have 3 desktop hardware synths and may get one more and that would be it - otherwise Im all ITB… though I do have one hardware fx chain for when I want the screen off an to use only hardware).

I highly recommend having at least one inspiring hardware synth - it can lead you down different paths. Ideally, yes, it sounds different than any software you have, as well. That’s not too hard these days.

And most hardware analog synths that have direct emulations still sound more than 5% better. Software isn’t there - yet. But even if the musician is the only one that can hear the difference, that, too, can lead to results that otherwise wouldn’t occur. And even if a synth is just different, that’s also still a good reason to get hardware if you want the sound it provides and software doesn’t.

OT though


----------



## KEM (May 16, 2022)

vitocorleone123 said:


> I used to think that I’d never have hardware - that lasted 25 years, even. Now I just wish I wouldn’t have waited so long. I highly recommend having at least one inspiring hardware synth - it can lead you down different paths. Ideally, yes, it sounds different than any software you have, as well. That’s not too hard these days.
> 
> And most hardware analog synths that have direct emulations still sound more than 5% better. Software isn’t there - yet. But even if the musician is the only one that can hear the difference, that, too, can lead to results that otherwise wouldn’t occur. And even if a synth is just different, that’s also still a good reason to get hardware if you want the sound it provides and software doesn’t.
> 
> OT though



I would love to own a Virus, but only if they made their TI software useable without the hardware and made it native to Apple Silicon


----------



## José Herring (May 16, 2022)

There is something about twisting real knobs in the real world that I get a long well with.

For software though I noticed in my test I had an easier time working with sliders than twisting virtual knobs. So I was thinking of getting a hardware controller with real knobs to control virtual analog synths. That make make up the difference between analog and virtual analog for me anyways because honestly on blind test, I usually end up picking the virtual stuff over the real stuff.


----------



## Robo Rivard (May 16, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> L


Come on! The Delay Lama did quite an effective job on an old "massacre" track I did in a previous life. Happy customer here!


----------



## kgdrum (May 16, 2022)

Well what’s not being discussed enough or is being generally overlooked in this software vs hardware synth debate is the tactile response a player gets playing a hardware synth or in my case an eDrum kit. Even if the sounds are identical between a software based synth and it’s hardware cousin (which is usually not the case) a player is going to react differently and most certainly go down different avenues and directions than someone playing a virtual synth. Software does have some advantages like more patches,recall etc……. but I think it’s safe to say someone playing a hardware synth will get different results than someone playing a v-synth. This is another reason why I like the approach Spectrasonics has taken Omnisphere so people can use it with a hardware synth keyboard. Tactile response is a huge part of the player / synth equation and for me will be an important contributing factor inspiring any performance.


----------



## tressie5 (May 16, 2022)

I must say, my knob-and-fader heavy Nektar Impact LX88+ does come in handy in the "hands on" department, but truth be told, I do prefer programming software LFO's and MSEG's to do all the hard work. Things are more accurate that way.


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

NekujaK said:


> Thanks for that analysis @José Herring
> 
> Subtractor is the little engine that could. Simple, effective, and always reliable - like a classic VW Beetle. I still use Subtractor for sub-bass, even tho I have tons of modern bass VSTs, Subtractor still delivers better results.
> 
> ...


I used Thor as my only softsynth for so many years. I seriously know it like the back of my hand now. I had to stop at learning the Casio style Phase Modulation Osc.... Seriously, had to put it down and finally got MPowersynth in 2015 or so. But from Thor's release in Reason 4 until 2015, it was all Thor for everything. I can't imagine that the synth didn't really get is due. It was every bit as groundbreaking as any VSTi for its day and still in head to head with others delivers da bass and some many other things. 

I mean Thor even has a PPG in it. How cool is that!


----------



## liquidlino (May 17, 2022)

José Herring said:


> So Here's the audio file. NOTHING FANCY. One saw wave, with filter. Agressive filter because I wanted to see if the filter could snap.
> A little Chorus, and verb and some slight compression because that's who I am.
> 
> The order:
> ...


Interesting set of results. I too liked the Obsession and Vital examples the best (totally subjectively). Here's some of my synths, do any of these tick your boxes? There's eight here, back to back. I'll tell you which is which later  (same slight chorus, reverb and compression applied to all of them)

View attachment 2022-05-17 Bass Synths.mp3


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

KEM said:


> I will probably never own a hardware synth in my life, I don’t think a 500x price increase is worth a 5% sonic difference, and that’s the thing, we’re at a point where hardware doesn’t even sound “better”, it just sounds “different”



Sarcasm?


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Sarcasm?


No, he's dead serious 😂


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (May 17, 2022)

Izotope Iris, biggest waste of $10. Could have bought a nice Frappuccino instead.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 17, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> Interesting set of results. I too liked the Obsession and Vital examples the best (totally subjectively). Here's some of my synths, do any of these tick your boxes? There's eight here, back to back. I'll tell you which is which later  (same slight chorus, reverb and compression applied to all of them)
> 
> View attachment 2022-05-17 Bass Synths.mp3


Not that it has any bearing on anything; but I'll go on record as saying that I liked number two only. All the rest, I could imagine using in some specific context; but not because I liked the sounds in themselves.

I don't think that shows much, though, as any of these synths might be able to do all sorts of things that I'd love.

It is important, of course, not to judge synths in abstraction from the music you will use them for. I love Falcon on its own, but I would turn to Zebra2/HZ first for an orchestral setting. I love sounds with a lot of low end, but I wouldn't use them in conjunction with a big and deep bass guitar line. Thin sounds that are most active in a narrow frequency range can be the way to go if there will be lots of layering. All that stuff.

I accept that there are some synths that are badly designed and that there is such a thing as a bad user interface. But, there are also ones that some people get on with and others don't. Falcon feels very comfortable and easy to me; but not to everyone. Lots of knobs and an infestation of spaghetti wires can be fun to get tucked into for me; but it can be too busy and off-putting for some. A synth that sounds good however you set the dials could be synth that to some is missing all of the interesting possibilities. A synth with very few options can be a frustrating bore, and an absorbing beast with a distinctive character.

And so on, so forth, up the junction, out the spout, and everybody knows all this, and I should be getting some exercise.


----------



## el-bo (May 17, 2022)

gsilbers said:


> The Waldorf stuff in general.


I think that 'Attack' is a great drum-synth


----------



## LA68 (May 17, 2022)

el-bo said:


> I think that 'Attack' is a great drum-synth


Largo, PPG Wave and Nave are pretty good too. But all the other Waldorf softsynths suck


----------



## DoubleTap (May 17, 2022)

Cdnalsi said:


> The worst synth I've ever worked with was Synister. There was an One Synth Challenge over at KVR with it a couple of months back. Here's my entry with it:




Synister was unpleasant. But.... have you tried Monique? 😨


----------



## kitekrazy (May 17, 2022)

tressie5 said:


> It's interesting how such a premium is placed on comparing software to hardware, as if the reviewer is simply saying, "Hardware is where it's at. Get used to it. Flush all your VSTi's now! " Me? I don't give a toss if a software D-50 doesn't sound like its hardware counterpart. If it sounds good, I'm using it.


All those millions of people listening to music on their portable devices don't care or coudl even tell the difference. Analogue and tape emulations where designed to sell to producers. I have yet to hear my mom or any family member say, "I wished they used a real synth".


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

José Herring said:


> So Here's the audio file. NOTHING FANCY. One saw wave, with filter. Agressive filter because I wanted to see if the filter could snap.
> A little Chorus, and verb and some slight compression because that's who I am.
> 
> The order:
> ...


Of all these, my favorite was Expanse but honestly I don't hear much of a difference in quality per se. When I say quality I mean character, not better sounding which is a very subjective thing.

I mean, obviously these examples sound different. Some snap more, some have more low end, etc, but that's probably mostly caused by the envelopes and filter settings rather than a difference in quality?

I'm not saying synths don't have a character though. They certainly do. But it's not always obvious in all circumstances and there are sweet spots that make it obvious. Eg: A plucky short note will not make The Legend shine like a creamy fat bass would.


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> Interesting set of results. I too liked the Obsession and Vital examples the best (totally subjectively). Here's some of my synths, do any of these tick your boxes? There's eight here, back to back. I'll tell you which is which later  (same slight chorus, reverb and compression applied to all of them)
> 
> View attachment 2022-05-17 Bass Synths.mp3


The one at 5 sec sounds cool to me. Then again at 16 seconds. There seems to be a lot of repeats to my ears though. The like I heard the first one a lot and the one at 16 seems to come back. So whatever you used some of them sound almost identical.


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

kitekrazy said:


> I have yet to hear my mom or any family member say, "I wished they used a real synth".


I mean, they probably don't know what a hardware synth sounds like 

(assuming by real you mean hardware analog)

Although to be honest I've never heard a song and wished they hadn't used a plugin either. Never.

After you process a synth and bury it under other elements in the mix the raw sound matters less and less.

And even if I could tell with 100% certainty if someone had used hardware or software, I don't think I'd care. Maybe because I fell in love with electronic music at a time when digital synths were all the rage (Virus, Nord Lead, JP, etc).


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

Pier said:


> Of all these, my favorite was Expanse but honestly I don't hear much of a difference in quality per se. When I say quality I mean character, not better sounding which is a very subjective thing.
> 
> I mean, obviously these examples sound different. Some snap more, some have more low end, etc, but that's probably mostly caused by the envelopes and filter settings rather than a difference in quality?
> 
> I'm not saying synths don't have a character though. They certainly do. But it's not always obvious in all circumstances and there are sweet spots that make it obvious. Eg: A plucky short note will not make The Legend shine like a creamy fat bass would.


All subjective of course that's for sure. Mostly I was trying to get each one to get that snappy filter slap while still retaining that muted bass sound. I really do think that the psychology of it makes a big difference but the first synth the really poorly rated one, had no attenuators (env amount) on it so there was no way to get the filter to attack. It was just turn the knob up or down and even with the envelope it just never did what I wanted. 

Expanse rocks. I was surprised by that one really. I knew it was good but it really is a top tier synth that seems to be rather neglected even in the Reason community. Reasoners tend to use Europa instead. Which is another great synth and I'd use more if it had oversampling. It doesn't so it kind of works against me with too harsh a high end instead of clean like Expanse has. Expanse is just the cleanest sounding synth to me. But I like synths with no oversampling sometimes because it reminds me of the old school digital synths like the Ensoniq ESQ-1


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> Interesting set of results. I too liked the Obsession and Vital examples the best (totally subjectively). Here's some of my synths, do any of these tick your boxes? There's eight here, back to back. I'll tell you which is which later  (same slight chorus, reverb and compression applied to all of them)
> 
> View attachment 2022-05-17 Bass Synths.mp3


I agree with @Bee_Abney number two seems to have the most character here.

Although many of those could be achieved with just a bit of EQ 😂

I used to think some synths had this unicorn magic poop inside but in terms of sound probably most of it is in the programming and sweet spots I mentioned earlier.

It's like preamps and mics. Sure, they do sound different, but the recording engineer skill (where to put the mic, which mic to use, etc), the performance, and the acoustic space are still by far the biggest factors of a good recording.

This video comparing Serum and Diva really destroyed many preconceptions I had about synths. I would have never believed it was possible to make them sound so close. In many cases I actually preferred the sound of Serum. Heresy!


----------



## el-bo (May 17, 2022)

LA68 said:


> Largo, PPG Wave and Nave are pretty good too. But all the other Waldorf softsynths suck


I had Attack, back in 2006, and own both that and Nave, on iPad. The default Tom/perc sound from Attack is fantastic! Nave gets a thumbs-up, also. Unfortunately, neither have been updated in a while and given Apple's latest policies for the App-Store, the future is uncertain. 

Would be a shame to lose either :(


----------



## el-bo (May 17, 2022)

kitekrazy said:


> All those millions of people listening to music on their portable devices don't care or coudl even tell the difference. Analogue and tape emulations where designed to sell to producers. I have yet to hear my mom or any family member say, "I wished they used a real synth".


A counter to this: When a KVR'er infamously stated they'd leave a dance-floor if they heard (I can't remember if it was) stepping or aliasing, in a filter-sweep


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Pier said:


> No, he's dead serious 😂


Then it's time for him to stop by a synth shop and try some. lol.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 17, 2022)

el-bo said:


> A counter to this: When a KVR'er infamously stated they'd leave a dance-floor if they heard (I can't remember if it was) stepping or aliasing, in a filter-sweep


Hey, if you can't be bothered to upsample your 96kHz samples of genuine analog filter sweeps, you don't deserve my dancing!


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

el-bo said:


> I had Attack, back in 2006, and own both that and Nave, on iPad. The default Tom/perc sound from Attack is fantastic! Nave gets a thumbs-up, also. Unfortunately, neither have been updated in a while and given Apple's latest policies for the App-Store, the future is uncertain.
> 
> Would be a shame to lose either :(


Another reason why hardware is amazing. It never goes bad, until it stops working. hahahahaha.

The Machinedrum is an amazing drum machine that shares a similar vibe to Attack. Try it out. Every day that goes by, I regret having sold it. Now I'm searching for one but prices are off the wall.


----------



## KEM (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Sarcasm?





Pier said:


> No, he's dead serious 😂



Pier knows me so well lol

But yeah, I think hardware is a waste of money, I could buy 200 soft synths and I’d be spending less money than I would on the average hardware synths

The convenience of software > the sound of hardware


----------



## el-bo (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Another reason why hardware is amazing. It never goes bad, until it stops working. hahahahaha.
> 
> The Machinedrum is an amazing drum machine that shares a similar vibe to Attack. Try it out. Every day that goes by, I regret having sold it. Now I'm searching for one but prices are off the wall.


I'm not anti-hardware, but there's currently no money or space in my life for it. Even then, there're only a few things I really lust after. But then I just think about what I have access to on iPad, and all of that just disappears


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

KEM said:


> Pier knows me so well lol
> 
> But yeah, I think hardware is a waste of money, I could buy 200 soft synths and I’d be spending less money than I would on the average hardware synths
> 
> The convenience of software > the sound of hardware


Fair enough. I still prefer hardware for 7 reasons:
1. Sound (Most of mine are *day and night *while some would take weeks or even months for me to reproduce sounds that come close to my software plugins. I don't have that much time to waste now);
2. No need to sweat over EOL or paid software upgrades;
3. Every sound I sculpted is still there - after decades of use..don't need to think about recreating it anywhere else;
4. Resale value (think of how many plugins have you lost money on...I've calculated how much I've wasted and I was shocked to see the numbers...)
5. Tactile experience;
6. I can just patch external proc/fx (rackmount units, pedals, etc...) . I can do that through routing ITB too but the added latency is mega annoying;
7. Focus (this one is silly, but I like to sit down with one unit and a mini keyboard sometimes and just focus on one particular job without looking at a computer screen);


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Sound (Most of mine are *day and night *


Could you post an example?


----------



## liquidlino (May 17, 2022)

José Herring said:


> The one at 5 sec sounds cool to me. Then again at 16 seconds. There seems to be a lot of repeats to my ears though. The like I heard the first one a lot and the one at 16 seems to come back. So whatever you used some of them sound almost identical.


Well, thems some good ears you got there Jose. They were all Falcon, just using different combinations of oscillators and filters that it has. Used it's inbuilt thorus, waveshaper, IRverb and compressor very very lightly. 

It was meant to demonstrate the breadth of outcomes that capable soft synths can achieve. But you and your darstardly good ears spotted the similarities!


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Pier said:


> Could you post an example?


Just go to Youtube, type, I don't know...Dave Smith Evolver for example? Listen to a complex patch. Then create that patch ITB. Time how much time you'll waste. Same with the Machinedrum, and others.


----------



## liquidlino (May 17, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> Well, thems some good ears you got there Jose. They were all Falcon, just using different combinations of oscillators and filters that it has. Used it's inbuilt thorus, waveshaper, IRverb and compressor very very lightly.
> 
> It was meant to demonstrate the breadth of outcomes that capable soft synths can achieve. But you and your darstardly good ears spotted the similarities!


Hmm, interesting. I just listened on my phone with my Bluetooth headphones, and they all sound near identical! They sounded very different to each other back in the daw. I wonder if it lost something during the render to MP3, weird.


----------



## LA68 (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Just go to Youtube, type, I don't know...Dave Smith Evolver for example? Listen to a complex patch. Then create that patch ITB. Time how much time you'll waste. Same with the Machinedrum, and others.


Isn't Machinedrum just digital anyway?


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

LA68 said:


> Isn't Machinedrum just digital anyway?


Doesn't matter if it's analog or digital. It's the combination of algorithms written by the manufacturer, the hardware components used in the signal flow, .... you get the idea. A lot of variables that make something "special". Recreating some of that stuff is just *annoying* on software side. Everyone with amazing sound design skills can come close to it enough to fool a lot of people, but sometimes it just...takes...a...whole....lot...of....time.


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

KEM said:


> Pier knows me so well lol
> 
> But yeah, I think hardware is a waste of money, I could buy 200 soft synths and I’d be spending less money than I would on the average hardware synths
> 
> The convenience of software > the sound of hardware


Dude your hero Ludwig is all about the analog gear. I think I even spotted a Juno 60 in his studio. That's some old school 80's funk'a'log right there.

Softsynths are really good these days though. Honestly I stopped being able to tell the difference a long time ago. Once you go through your typical project studio converter your analog gear just sounds like a soft synth anyway. I use to A/B my modular stuff with digital stuff and the modular just had a slight more body to the sound until about last year when I couldn't even tell the difference. I just recorded a bunch of analog jams and also did a softsynth Jam and could tell. I blamed myself and that I didn't have ears for synth like I do for acoustic instruments, but if I have to strain to heard the difference then it's not worth it.


liquidlino said:


> Hmm, interesting. I just listened on my phone with my Bluetooth headphones, and they all sound near identical! They sounded very different to each other back in the daw. I wonder if it lost something during the render to MP3, weird.


I have a good enough listening system and there's like 3 distinctly different ones but it just proves the point again that there's just hardly enough difference to worry about once you get past a certain level of quality of a synth.


----------



## Bee_Abney (May 17, 2022)

liquidlino said:


> Hmm, interesting. I just listened on my phone with my Bluetooth headphones, and they all sound near identical! They sounded very different to each other back in the daw. I wonder if it lost something during the render to MP3, weird.


That can happen! Subtle differences can get lost when rendered to a lower quality format and with the compression. There were still differences, though; with number two sounding the most different to me.


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Just go to Youtube, type, I don't know...Dave Smith Evolver for example? Listen to a complex patch. Then create that patch ITB. Time how much time you'll waste. Same with the Machinedrum, and others.


Of course I've heard plenty of hardware demos (and owned a couple myself) but I was more interested to know what you considered "night and day" in terms of sound.


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

José Herring said:


> Softsynths are really good these days though. Honestly I stopped being able to tell the difference a long time ago. Once you go through your typical project studio converter your analog gear just sounds like a soft synth anyway. I use to A/B my modular stuff with digital stuff and the modular just had a slight more body to the sound until about last year when I couldn't even tell the difference. I just recorded a bunch of analog jams and also did a softsynth Jam and could tell. I blamed myself and that I didn't have ears for synth like I do for acoustic instruments, but if I have to strain to heard the difference then it's not worth it.


I've been working with hardware and software synths for decades.
I agree with you about how softsynth got better over the years. Classic analogue synth software replicas, depending who the coder is, are amazing indeed. 
Though, there are a lot of gems in hardware that are simply a pain in the butt to replicate to software without spending a lot of time analysing the audio for every single artifact that makes it sound "like it".
Converter-wise..it really depends on a plethora of things. Story for another thread.


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Pier said:


> Of course I've heard plenty of hardware demos (and owned a couple myself) but I was more interested to know what you considered "night and day" in terms of sound.


What comes out from the hardware analog outputs. The architecture, signal flow, and algorithms (if digital), are simply unique, to a point where you can easily spot the difference in a mix (e.g.:Dave Smith Evolver / Machinedrum / Make Noise's O-Coast / Minimoog / ...).
Try getting a DSI evolver. Sit with it. Initialize a patch. Craft a complex sound. Then, move on to ITB. Do the same. A/B. This is probably the easiest/simplest way to understand why I mentioned some hardware are night and day.


----------



## KEM (May 17, 2022)

José Herring said:


> Dude your hero Ludwig is all about the analog gear. I think I even spotted a Juno 60 in his studio. That's some old school 80's funk'a'log right there.



Well he’s also a millionaire, the cost isn’t much to him  but if you watch the TENET behind the scenes stuff most of it is all plugins, that’s all that needs to be said!


----------



## Pier (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> To be short, the evolver synth has some kind of sound that it's inexplicable...it's a bit muffled, yet clear, airy in the middle range in a slightly dirty "nerve-wrecking" way but sounds eerily tight....you should get one, sit down with it, and you will instantly get what I mean...
> Same thing with the Machinedrum, and some others. I have walls of synths in my studio. Some I barely touch because I can reach for the sounds I want ITB, but others...nah.


Wait a minute...

Weren't you arguing just a couple of comments ago that you preferred hardware over software? Even gave 7 reasons why.


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Pier said:


> Wait a minute...
> 
> Weren't you arguing just a couple of comments ago that you preferred hardware over software? Even gave 7 reasons why.


I've just edited my post...have a look at it now. Also, both the Evolver and Machinedrum are hardware units. I also originally wrote I don't touch some (few) hardware units because I can easily reach for the same sounds on Falcon. I have software synths, but I don't spend as much on it as I do with hardware because of those 7 reasons. It doesn't mean I have zero software. lol.


----------



## tressie5 (May 17, 2022)

@mscp - I'm confused. Originally, you wrote that it would take weeks or months for your hardware synths to sound close to your software, then here (^) you say you don't touch some (few) because the same sounds are on Falcon. Now, the question is, does your hardware sound close to Falcon or the sounds the same?


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

tressie5 said:


> @mscp - I'm confused. Originally, you wrote that it would take weeks or months for your hardware synths to sound close to your software, then here (^) you say you don't touch some (few) because the same sounds are on Falcon. Now, the question is, does your hardware sound close to Falcon or the sounds the same?


I think you're confused because you may be thinking about hardware and software as preset boxes, no? I rarely use presets. I craft my own "presets" based on sounds that either already exist somewhere else (nature, music, ... = influence) or from my own weird imagination. Some stuff from some synths are relatively simple to patch up, others are difficult and require a lot of time, and still don't sound super close to the "real thing" I was looking for, for obvious reasons.

Falcon is a synth/sampler. If I just want to play something like "that Juno 106 bass patch.", I know exactly how to patch things up in falcon fairly easily. Problem is, for the sake of this example, it doesn't sound the same as the hardware unit despite having done EXACTLY what I had to do from an engineering perspective. Then, what do I do? If I have the 106, I just use the hardware (period), and done! ... but if I patch something up and it sounds exactly the same or extremely close to what I did with my hardware, then, I use the software.

One thing people must understand is...hardware has a lot of stuff going on that alters the tonal quality of source oscillators, and I'm not talking about parameters involving the position of filters or EGs. I'm talking about components...pieces of electronics that make a difference when sketching the same exact sound, using the same parameters (from osc to filters, EG, mod, ...) and signal flow. Sure, I can spend lots of time trying to get super close to a sound by using numerous plugins that emulate 'this or that', but I don't have the patience, and most importantly...time. Logging on VI-C and typing a few paragraphs every now and then consumes *WAY* *less* time than clinically recreating a sound that is 90ish% close to some of the patches I've made with some of my synths. lol.

Is it clear now?


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 17, 2022)

I'd have to really love the hardware AND hear a noticeable difference between a hardware synth that has a direct, and high-quality 1:1 emulation to keep the hardware. This is why I chose hardware without an emulation available (if one becomes available, I'll have to re-evaluate), and why I spent time looking for an emulation and trying things out.

A lot of synth sounds are not any more interchangeable to me than a viola and a violin - sure, they have some overlap, but they're not the same sound or even the same to play (2nd-hand knowledge not 1st). Therefore, if you want a particular synth's sound, like someone might want a particular type of violin or even type of strings on a type of violin, you need to get that instrument - substitutes will work in a pinch, but it's not the same.

Using my OB-6 can be a sublime, transcendent experience as it's a masterful instrument crafted by masters of the craft. This is no different than fine orchestral instruments vs. something provided to beginner students. No software has ever provided me the same experience (and I have/have used a LOT of software synths), and no software is the same to use or sounds the same. Yes, sometimes other synths can overlap, but, back to the viola and violin, if I want the sound of the OB-6, I haven't found any other synth yet that I can substitute. The OB-6 is only an example - other people will have their own version of that experience with different synths. Maybe it's Zebra!

Even if you don't agree, hopefully that helps you (those without hardware and those questioning why one would ever bother) understand.

I can't see spending ~$2,000 USD on the Metropolis Ark series, but I think I understand. I can totally see spending $2,000 on a Sequential Pro3 (if I had the space).


----------



## outland (May 17, 2022)

KEM said:


> I will probably never own a hardware synth in my life, I don’t think a 500x price increase is worth a 5% sonic difference, and that’s the thing, we’re at a point where hardware doesn’t even sound “better”, it just sounds “different”


And this is a great point: if it sounds good, why worry about a plug-in's accuracy in recreating its inspiration. Just use it and be happy.

But this point, while cogent, also sidesteps somewhat the underlying premise: the plug-in is supposed to be able to "replace" (if you will) the hardware without fear of being identified as "only" an emulation. It's the way literally all of the software clones are marketed, of course. It's probably also the reason (or at least a contributing reason) why many of us finally decide to buy a given emulation.

It's a complex issue, actually. And I think that those who are centered on authenticity do so often out of concern for losing something of how they conceive their original artistic paradigm in some small way. If someone is nonplussed about the quality of a given plug-in's emulation, it may be because, while the "copy quotient" may be lacking, there is enough quality in the VST to merit incorporating the strengths afforded by the soft-synth into one's musical worldview with authenticity concerns taking a backseat to new opportunities being opened or, at least, more easily realized.

There is one issue, however, I rarely hear discussed when dealing with the efficacy of software synths vs. their hardware counterparts. When someone talks about, say, the sound of a Selmer Mark VI Tenor Saxophone made in the early 1960s with a serial number close to 100K, we are talking about a rather well-defined sound of an instrument that was designed and manufactured to be sold to musicians expecting that instrument to help them better realize their aspirations to get closer to their goal of producing a great tenor sax sound. It is granted that individual perception of the same was often wildly different, but at the end of the day, one was trying to get one's sound to be a better example of an ideal tenor sax and the Mark VI was more often than not (even to this day) the chosen "weapon" to do so. While there is some carry-over in this pericope to the discussion about synthesizer emulations, there is one huge difference: synthesizers were designed, without exception, to be able to sound ideally like many different things (or, in a sense, "nothing" at all.) If a synthesizer had a particularly limited scope of available tones, it was most likely unsuccessful financially (allowing, of course, for the limits of the technology extant at the time of its manufacture), so it's fair to say that while a given instrument may have had a distinctive sound to its oscillators or filters, its ability to somewhat transcend this quality (so to speak) was what originally set it apart if it was to be considered a "classic" synthesizer.

I was thinking of this as I took the recent Cherry Audio test to determine if a listener could tell a hardware Mini Moog from Cherry Audio's recent emulation. Full disclosure: I failed this test miserably, not once, but _three_ times. As I did so, I considered the causes of my rather unambiguous deficiency. First, I had never owned a Mini Moog. I had once played regularly with a keyboardist who used one in the fusion band we were both members of, circa 1979, but that was as close as I got to one, really, so the question of true "real world" familiarity wasn't a consideration: my acquaintance was at best minimal and, chronologically, rather remote (I feel so old...). I have a strong feeling, however, that this is exactly the perspective of many (maybe minus the "old" part.) We usually now rely on those who (hopefully) have access to a hardware example to inform us of a given emu's fidelity to the original. If we're totally honest about it, many of our own evaluations of a software clone (for numerous reasons) often contain more subjectivity or second-hand testimony than first-hand objectivity. This isn't "bad", _per se_, but should be recognized.

Secondly and third, I've heard a number of tracks containing Mini Moogs, no doubt, but never got to see placement of the dials for programming a sound on any of them and, of course, (and as time inevitably marched on), these recordings were themselves increasingly offered under the auspices of digital mediation of some sort: CD recordings, streaming, or some other representation of the wonders of A-to-D and D-to-A conversion. I took the Cherry Audio test on my computer via the internet (obviously, right?). Was it even possible at this stage to escape the digital quality (good as it is) of my sound interface? Wouldn't that tend to "level the playing field?" Was that the "real", if unstated, point of the test?

Are there clear answers here for any of this? _Do they even matter? _I'm really not entirely sure, but perhaps the idea is a bit of both perspectives: realizing the situations when as true a emulation is utterly necessary (like the Mini's squelchy bass sound, or Chick Corea's [RIP] lead, Lyle Mays' [RIP] Obie chorused ocarina, or Jan Hammer's faux electric guitar lead) for emotive effect, while trying to allow for each emulation's unique inaccuracies for musical advantage. I'm sure that we all fall somewhere on this spectrum, but perhaps it's a good idea to conceptualize away the extremes and remember that it really is a continuum, and its existence, as such, is inevitably and potentially a fortuitous opportunity for growth and expression rather than a hassle.

FWIW.


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

Would you ladies and gents mind popping over and taking the little survey?






Modular Vs. Emulation


Hello, So I wanted to do an informal little survey. I wanted to know if you could tell which one of these is analog modular (real) vs. 4 other emulations. Simple little bass phrase using one osc saw wave and some pretty aggressive filtering. I just made each one kind of sound as good as it...



vi-control.net


----------



## Randolph (May 17, 2022)

Anything Arturia or IK Multimedia. I know they're popular, but I've had nothing but problems dating back 15 or so years (I gave them lots of second chances). Especially IK. It doesn't matter if it's PC or Mac both constantly have issues and need regular re-installs as they randomly stop working. I just had to reinstall Pigments for the fourth time this year.

I have dozens of great synths that work without issues so I've ditched IK and only have Pigments left from Arturia. There's too many good synths to waste time on those. I hate that I wasted money on them, but it's not worth trusting them for my use. I still have more great synths than I can ever master to choose from.

Arturia does make great controllers though.


----------



## José Herring (May 17, 2022)

Randolph said:


> I hate that I wasted money on them, but it's not worth trusting them for my use. I still have more great synths than I can ever master to choose from.


That's the thing about money. There's always more in the future. I don't consider it a waste of money if you bought it, and learned from it. At least you found out that no matter what "they" say, that shit ain't for you. Priceless lessons imo. 
I'm about there with the minimoog. I don't care what they say maybe that's just not my synth. Though I'm willing to try one last emulation.......just one more. Softube's model 72. I'll decide after that.


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

In some agey asian Calligraphy schools, digital tools are not tolerated. Because its not yet possible to use a digital Stylus and Software to create the whole range of expressions and natural harmonies that lie within a perfectly executed stroke of a real brush or something that can be adapted for that process.

But if you look a bit closer at that philosophy, you will encounter that it doesn’t count which brush it is, as long as it has the ability to allow for its natural imperfections, to mask your human flaws without creating the space of comfort to an erroneous unfinished state of vision. The Calligraphy Masters will see and judge with ease if you chose a brush to hide your not so mastery skills.

Those Masters are truly able to see if you are ready to see through the brush, as like its not even present, and letting the act happen by influences of higher meanings.

Mhhh… ok enough justification to myself for being too poor to get hardware.

Edit: Oh, and i can now try „hearing through the synth“ as an excuse when failing at a hard-soft blind test.


----------



## vitocorleone123 (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> In some agey asian Calligraphy schools, digital tools are not tolerated. Because its not yet possible to use a digital Stylus and Software to create the whole range of expressions and natural harmonies that lie within a perfectly executed stroke of a real brush or something that can be adapted for that process.
> 
> But if you look a bit closer at that philosophy, you will encounter that it doesn’t count which brush it is, as long as it has the ability to allow for its natural imperfections, to mask your human flaws without creating the space of comfort to an erroneous unfinished state of vision. The Calligraphy Masters will see and judge with ease if you chose a brush to hide your not so mastery skills.
> 
> ...


While I encourage the ownership and use of a hardware synth, they're definitely not required to make great music! Or just "music", in my case. Heh.

For all my talk about hardware, this weekend I just started a few bars of a track I'm loving, and there's nary a hardware synth to be found (yet?) - instead, so far I'm only using TAL Bassline 101 and DiscoveryPro, along with blended hints of sound from AI Nucleus and Arturia Piano v2. Those count as synths I love, which is the antithesis of this thread topic, though!

Hmm. Not sure I can add to my list of worsts as I try to get rid of synths I don't use or love.

Careful on the bass if you listen to this mp3 as it's not mixed/mastered. I don't normally share music, let alone a fragment, but just wanted to drive home my point of how I select instruments, regardless of whether they're hardware or software (in this case: all software).


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> In some agey asian Calligraphy schools, digital tools are not tolerated. Because its not yet possible to use a digital Stylus and Software to create the whole range of expressions and natural harmonies that lie within a perfectly executed stroke of a real brush or something that can be adapted for that process.
> 
> But if you look a bit closer at that philosophy, you will encounter that it doesn’t count which brush it is, as long as it has the ability to allow for its natural imperfections, to mask your human flaws without creating the space of comfort to an erroneous unfinished state of vision. The Calligraphy Masters will see and judge with ease if you chose a brush to hide your not so mastery skills.
> 
> ...


If you're into Studio Ghibli, have you seen its latest CGI movie? Earwig And The Witch. Enjoy...


----------



## method1 (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> In some agey asian Calligraphy schools, digital tools are not tolerated. Because its not yet possible to use a digital Stylus and Software to create the whole range of expressions and natural harmonies that lie within a perfectly executed stroke of a real brush or something that can be adapted for that process.
> 
> But if you look a bit closer at that philosophy, you will encounter that it doesn’t count which brush it is, as long as it has the ability to allow for its natural imperfections, to mask your human flaws without creating the space of comfort to an erroneous unfinished state of vision. The Calligraphy Masters will see and judge with ease if you chose a brush to hide your not so mastery skills.
> 
> ...


But how do they feel about quantisation?


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> If you're into Studio Ghibli, have you seen its latest CGI movie? Earwig And The Witch. Enjoy...


 Disney bought them, no questions asked….


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

method1 said:


> But how do they feel about quantisation?


They tried to round it off.


----------



## method1 (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> They tried to round it off.


Just a bit.


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

method1 said:


> Just a bit.


yea they took a note at first.


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> Disney bought them, no questions asked….


Not controlling share in the Japan operation, nope. Only distribution and streaming rights. The last movie is all Ghibli's fault..100%. A list of bad decisions made.


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Not controlling share in the Japan operation, nope.


Thats good to hear, but fast easy dirty money makes Totoro raise more funds instead of trees.


----------



## mscp (May 17, 2022)

Snoobydoobydoo said:


> Thats good to hear, but fast easy dirty money makes Totoro raise more funds instead of trees.


Disney is only part of it so Studio Ghibli can get a little more revenue in North, Central, and South America. Extra bucks. Their CGI flick though..ugh. Miya-san is working on a new feature to bring back the soul of analog animation though.


----------



## Snoobydoobydoo (May 17, 2022)

mscp said:


> Disney is only part of it so Studio Ghibli can get a little more revenue in North, Central, and South America. Extra bucks. Their CGI flick though..ugh. Miya-san is working on a new feature to bring back the soul of analog animation though.


Extra bucks, ohhk. Totoro already chews on my macbook, must be greedy now. They bit the forbidden Apple.. :(


----------



## SupremeFist (May 18, 2022)

outland said:


> . When someone talks about, say, the sound of a Selmer Mark VI Tenor Saxophone made in the early 1960s with a serial number close to 100K, we are talking about a rather well-defined sound of an instrument that was designed and manufactured to be sold to musicians expecting that instrument to help them better realize their aspirations to get closer to their goal of producing a great tenor sax sound. It is granted that individual perception of the same was often wildly different, but at the end of the day, one was trying to get one's sound to be a better example of an ideal tenor sax and the Mark VI was more often than not (even to this day) the chosen "weapon" to do so.


The story goes that Charlie Parker often performed and even recorded with a horrible plastic alto because his main horn was so often in the pawnshop to pay for heroin or whatever. On one hand this goes to show that, as guitarists say, tone is mainly in your fingers. On the other hand Parker absolutely deserved and warranted the best possible instrument (whatever the alto equivalent of a Selmer VI was).


----------



## outland (Jun 1, 2022)

SupremeFist said:


> The story goes that Charlie Parker often performed and even recorded with a horrible plastic alto because his main horn was so often in the pawnshop to pay for heroin or whatever. On one hand this goes to show that, as guitarists say, tone is mainly in your fingers. On the other hand Parker absolutely deserved and warranted the best possible instrument (whatever the alto equivalent of a Selmer VI was).


This is true, but I don't think any thought that Bird sounded his best on the plastic alto (it was made out of the same type of plastic that Sousaphones are made from. Occasionally, you might even find one in a music store or an attic, but from what I heard, mostly they just fell apart after a while.)

When Parker died, the alto equivalent of a Selmer Mark VI, was also a Selmer Mark VI (the production run of the Mark VI model began in 1954.) He probably owned one as he seems to have pretty much owned every decent brand of alto made (and quite a few bad models as well due to his habit.) It was so bad, that when he and Miles were rooming together, he pawned Miles' trumpet.


----------



## hanysz (Jun 12, 2022)

DoubleTap said:


> Synister was unpleasant. But.... have you tried Monique? 😨


I enjoyed Monique! It has a certain ... personality ...


----------



## tressie5 (Jun 12, 2022)

At this time, I'd like to bow my head in shame over how I dissed a few instruments because using them in Studio One or Cubase brought my laptop to its knees. As it turned out, both S1 and C12 were the culprits because using the same instruments in Reaper was a walk in the park.


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 12, 2022)

IK syntronik is kinda garbage for me. Never use it. Much prefer Cherry Audio stuff.


----------



## sostenuto (Jun 12, 2022)

So far _ delighted with everything purchased todate. Omni2, Trilian, StylusRMX, Pigments, Repro, Vital Plus, Massive X, Spire, other .........

Maybe would list some never added _ even with broad-based support. Zebra, Diva, Hive, Serum, Falcon ??


----------



## tressie5 (Jun 12, 2022)

Interestingly, the best synth I've used (Falcon) is also the worst synth because it's so deep and intimidating and getting a casual usable sound is not as easy as, say, Diversion or Pigments. If I wasn't so dang lazy, I'd spend the next few days - or months - auditioning its various oscillators and wavetables.


----------



## PerryD (Jun 12, 2022)

dcoscina said:


> IK syntronik is kinda garbage for me. Never use it. Much prefer Cherry Audio stuff.


I love a lot of stuff from IK. I have to agree on Syntronik being disappointing. A very large download for a synth collection that is not very flexible.


----------



## MLaudio (Jun 12, 2022)

Pigments for me. Not because I don't find it capable but because i have never used another soft synth that hammers your CPU as much. Even a basic analog OSC I find drives the CPU way up. Where as with something like Dune 3, i can get deep into the modulation with very little CPU hit.

If i need granular, I just reach for Rapid.


----------



## dcoscina (Jun 12, 2022)

MLaudio said:


> Pigments for me. Not because I don't find it capable but because i have never used a soft synth that hammers your CPU as much. Even a basic analog OSC I find drives the CPU way up. Where as with something like Dune 3, i can get deep into the modulation with very little CPU hit.
> 
> If i need granular, I just reach for Rapid.


I am also not using Pigments that much either


----------



## DoubleTap (Jun 13, 2022)

hanysz said:


> I enjoyed Monique! It has a certain ... personality ...



I am glad someone enjoyed it! Tbf, this month’s OSC is similarly challenging.


----------



## EvilDragon (Jun 13, 2022)

AIR Music Tech stuff takes the case. They sound good and some even great, but they are buggy and have some weird limitations (6 voices only for Vacuum Pro, 8 voices for Loom - they could easily have 4x as much considering how easy on CPU they are).


----------



## LA68 (Jun 13, 2022)

EvilDragon said:


> AIR Music Tech stuff takes the case. They sound good and some even great, but they are buggy and have some weird limitations (6 voices only for Vacuum Pro, 8 voices for Loom - they could easily have 4x as much considering how easy on CPU they are).


Well, maybe the limitations were justifiable 10+ years ago. I had Loom running on my old PC and it'd really take a hit on the CPU at times. But you're right, these days it's just odd.

The old instruments seem to be abandonware, which is a shame. But I'm not keeping my hopes up with InMusic Brands behind AIR.


----------

