Posts: 26
Threads: 11
Joined: Aug 2007
Hey guys,
Just discovered this forum and noticed discussion about which hardware synths to get. I really want to create some quality progressive house, but thought i could get away with software synths. It seems the more i learn, the more i realise i don't know, and don't have!
My question is do I really need a good hardware synth?
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't most new synths completely digital anyway? - which would imply that anything that goes on in the synth hardware would be able to be achieved in software just not as efficiently?
thanks in advance..
james
Posts: 208
Threads: 19
Joined: Jun 2007
James,
Hi, welcome to the forums.
There are synths out there being made that are fully digital, like the Nord Lead 3 where you could get software that is identical in terms of what it can do, i.e. 2 LFO's, 3 OSC's, FM Mod, etc. where I guess the purpose of these today would be to take a load of your CPU in a studio situation, or in a live situation it serves the purpose of having a real synth to play and not just a midi controller and a laptop. Also a digital synth is slightly more reliable in live situation, as it is less likely to freeze on you, as a laptop might.
There is also a huge resurgence of analog components going into synths too. Everything from drum machines to keyboards, for instance Jomox Drum machines have analog OSC's for the kick, snare, H tom, L tom, the rest of the drum kit is 12 bit samples. Waldorf's Q or micro Q being digital has an analog Filter in the chain to smooth things out. Dave Smiths evolver is split between 2 Analog OSC's and 2 Digital Wavetable OSC's followed by an analog filter, then he also just re-releases the Prophet ('08) which from what I understand is pretty much all analog except for a few of the modulation components.
Hope that helps
Rambunkcious
Posts: 267
Threads: 52
Joined: Aug 2007
Honestly i don't think it's nessecary at all.
You can do all the same modifications/tweaks to a soft synth that you can to a hard synth. Actually sometimes more. I honestly think it really is a matter of really learning the DAW you use and the softsynths you choose.
I know someone who was dying to get a Moog, once he had it in the studio for about a month he sold it.
It can be great being "hands on", if you will, working with a piece of hardware or even to get away from the computer once in a while. But i don't think it is nessecary by any means.
I was having a similar discussion with Jesse recently. I won an MPC500 and was debating the worth of keeping it. Not really much to be honest.
I have everything i need at my finger tips. Plus, and this may skew my opion, I play drums in a band as well, so I still get away from the computer a couple times a week. There's just no reason to keep equipment around the studio i will never use.
Mess around with some demo's, find the softsynths you really like and would like to tweak and invest in those.
and so now that i've prolly ticked everyone else in this forum off..............
let the shitstorm begin.............hehe.
Posts: 1,251
Threads: 137
Joined: Jun 2007
James.
Hi welcome.
There is deffinatly nothing mandatory about using hardware synths (or any component to the studio in fact).
At this stage plugins have matured to the point to where you can make excellent tracks with them.
To answer your sub question, yes technically most hardware synths now are digital inside. As they are dedicated to just making sound they can sometimes do caluculations that plugin programmers might cut corners on. Also the time and cost of making a hardware synth also means that generally they will probably put more research and time into the algorithms which in turn might producer a better sound.
When it comes to all analog some of these can do certain sounds very nicely and perhaps "better" than softsynths.
A producer I know who has always been using plugins just got a few analog pieces such as a 101 and 106 and loves them. And knowing his sound I do hear a warmth that was perhaps not there before.
Personally I've had many analog synths over the years. For quite a while I considered them 'superior'. At this point though I just see them as different.
They certainly can be inspiring to work with which in of itself can end up producing better sounds.
You really have to judge them all on their own merit. There are plenty of analog synths that don't sound that great at all just like digital hardware and plugins.
So being analog/hardware/software etc... doesn't really matter, its how the person utilized that format along with probably a bit of luck that matters.
What you have to do is determine what sound you are looking for first, then you can start to narrow down choices. That's how studio 'gear' in general works, you must identify the strengths and weaknesses of each thing you encounter and then use them as they best fit.
Hope this helps
Posts: 25
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2007
If this means anything... I have a Motif and a Virus... I love them both, but they haven't been used in months... Since acquiring a lot of softsynths, and learning how to get a nice sound with them...I prefer the ease of use, and ability to get a wider variety of sounds... (cheaper too) I agree that it can be inspiring working on a hardware synth...and of course the hands-on is always fun... Will I use my 2 hardware synths again? You bet. Will I ever purchase another? (I've always wanted an Andromeda)
Posts: 1,251
Threads: 137
Joined: Jun 2007
stevenlibby Wrote:If this means anything... I have a Motif and a Virus... I love them both, but they haven't been used in months... Since acquiring a lot of softsynths, and learning how to get a nice sound with them...I prefer the ease of use, and ability to get a wider variety of sounds... (cheaper too) I agree that it can be inspiring working on a hardware synth...and of course the hands-on is always fun... Will I use my 2 hardware synths again? You bet. Will I ever purchase another? (I've always wanted an Andromeda)
I agree here. Softsynths are more convenient, hardware can be more fun.
There really is no right or wrong though.
