Members DrJustice Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 J3RKThere are plusses to both, and everyone's style could lean one way or the other, but making all-encompassing statement like HW is engineered to work "always and forever". is silly. Anyone who designs anything has that in mind, it's just that some people/companies are better able to realize it. I agree, that was too sweeping. However the statement itself is not silly. Some people/companies are indeed better able to realize it than others, mainly due to a difference in approach and execution. Embedded systems and desktop software are usually approached differently. darth_faderSmoke and mirrors, mi amigo...smoke and mirrors. A hardware synth stands the same chance of lasting "always and forever" as does a well set up laptop. Ah, well. I'm afraid any further points from my side on this will simply get lost DJ-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cnegrad Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Most soft synth developers allow license transfers. Not in my experience. Additionally, I have no desire to bring a laptop to a smokey bar. Also, laptop processors are underpowered for the amount of synthesis I require. And if I've got to carry a controller keyboard to perform live, I might as well carry a hardware synth, and leave the laptop home. Fast CPUs are getting completely inexpensive, so CPU usage is becoming less and less of an issue/excuse They are simply not powerful enough for live performance yet; at least not powerful enough to replace a large keyboard rig replicating acoustic instruments. For home use, ok. Then of course, there's the whole fun adventure of certain softsynths becoming instantly incompatable with a recent OS upgrade or host upgrade. Good luck performing live with only a computer rig in a venue that has voltage fluctuations. Yes, of course you could purchase power stabilizers, but who needs that kind of hassle and expense? We're not talking about a tour rig on a par with Madonna here. Oh, and 'ain't copy protection fun? I can just see someone stealing one of my software dongles at a live gig when I'm not looking. Both have their place, and one is not better at everything than the other. Bingo. Give that man a cigar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheRain Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 i was just thinking about this last night when i was using Reason 3 and playing with the Combi patches.... this software sounds awesome! Of the many hardware synths I've owned, the Motif ES and the Evolver are the only ones I've used that I have thought REALLY surpassed software. I used the Motif ES as mainly a preset machine anyhow, so there's not much different from using software besides the sound. I can say now that I think Reason 3 is a suitable replacement for something like the ES where editing is done at a minimum. On the other hand, you can do some pretty crazy editing in Reason if you use your creativitiy. The ES does have some great effects though. As far as the Evolver, at the moment there is no software synth I would use in it's place. I have a Roland V-synth coming soon, and I think that would be difficult to replace in software as well, at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cyanhue Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 I used to work with mainly hardware, I had a really outdated computer and softsyths werent really an option when I built the setup. I used it almost exclusively with midi. I still have this setup composed of used cheap gear I bought over the years at home, and I stll love it. plusses for hardware setup: 1. at the time software wasn't a viable option. 2. hardware still rules in terms of input and controll devices. 3. for reasons not entirely clear to me , hardware is just cooler. 4. if you have to perform, or move around a lot, an all in one hardware unit is a lot more convenient. 5. reliability is still sometimes an issue with computers (I dont care personally, I don't perform or make any mony off of music). recently I got a laptop, and now I'm playing around with my completely free software setup I have on it (tracktion-free promotion copy+ a tons of cool free synths for krv, which I'm trying to narrow down[i downloaded far too many and it's difficult to choose...] ) . I wanted a setup I coud use in the dorms at university, so my setup in the university is my laptop, an ensonic ts10 , and a midi interface. currently the ts10 serves as a controller, or for when I just want to play music without powering up the computer , and waiting for tracktion to load (this takes forever because of the insane amount of softsynths...). plusses for software setup: 1. you can do amazing things for free! 2. the versitility , and power is unmatch ed by all but the most outrageosly expensive hardware, and even then not really. 3. a lot of things are a lot easier to accomplish in software. so over all I use both and love both hardware and software, and they both have thier uses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by cnegrad Not in my experience. Your experience is quite limited then. I have extensive experience both buying and selling software, mostly through KVR, where much has been posted about which developers allow transfers and which don't. While some don't, the great majority do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cnegrad Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Your experience is quite limited then. Or simply different than yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Remember gents, just because the restriction is in the EULA doesn't mean it's legally valid or enforceable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J3RK Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by DrJustice I agree, that was too sweeping. However the statement itself is not silly. Some people/companies are indeed better able to realize it than others, mainly due to a difference in approach and execution. Embedded systems and desktop software are usually approached differently.DJ I agree that embedded systems CAN be more reliable, BUT not if the firmware has bugs in it. (Which is one of the reasons digital synth companies release updates.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by cnegrad Or simply different than yours. That's true. However, I've paid close enough attention to have a pretty good handle on what's available, and which of it can be transferred. Perhaps on your planet the rules are different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members J3RK Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by TheRain i was just thinking about this last night when i was using Reason 3 and playing with the Combi patches.... this software sounds awesome! Of the many hardware synths I've owned, the Motif ES and the Evolver are the only ones I've used that I have thought REALLY surpassed software. I used the Motif ES as mainly a preset machine anyhow, so there's not much different from using software besides the sound. I can say now that I think Reason 3 is a suitable replacement for something like the ES where editing is done at a minimum. On the other hand, you can do some pretty crazy editing in Reason if you use your creativitiy. The ES does have some great effects though.As far as the Evolver, at the moment there is no software synth I would use in it's place. I have a Roland V-synth coming soon, and I think that would be difficult to replace in software as well, at the moment. There is a semi-software synth that I'd use in place of the Evolver. Modular III for the Scope platform. It has Waldorf-licensed XT-style oscillators (which even include the tables out of the XT/MWII,) not to mention a bunch of generic wavetable oscillators. You can do table-sweeps as well. It sounds absolutely incredible. But then, I'd take an XT over an Evolver as well. (personal taste I suppose) I'm also curious to hear what you think of the V-Synth. I'm considering the rack version, but I think there would be a lot of overlap with my Creamware setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members cnegrad Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 droolmaster, Any chance you could have a conversation without the condescending tone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by cnegrad droolmaster,Any chance you could have a conversation without the condescending tone? I'd rate the chances as somewhere between 45 and 55% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by darth_fader I contend that it does not swing both ways. Name one piece of hardware that does one thing that I can't do with a softsynth...take your time. oh come on, thats easy! sherman filterbank, mutronics mutator, metasonix tm1 and 2... oh wait, those are effects:o alright, synths. Machinedrum, monomachine, evolver, Q...you can come close, but you cant recreate. Same thing with software, I cant think of one piece of hardware that can do what absynth does. waldorf XT comes close, but not that close...anyone saying that one or the other is better all the time is to close minded to participate in this discussion adequitly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DrJustice Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 It occurs to me that this issue is pretty much one of:"Dedicated embedded systems" VS "General purpose desktop systems"We all know that there is software in both types of systems. Also, the boundary between the two is sometimes blurred. However the development philosophies/processes/practices/cultures are different. The public is not aware of this to any significant extent. I know at least a little bit about this, having worked 23 years in the business, roughly half on embedded systems and half on general purpose systems. Lets contrast development for the two:Emdedded development: - the product is often designed to last for uptil tens of years - the hardware and software can be tailored for each othe - the (co) verification process is usually stringent - a recall is extremely costlyPure soft development: - the product is often designed to be replaced very soon - the hardware and OS may not be ideal for the application - the testing and QA is often very cheap & cheerful - there's no recalls, only patches or "upgrades" I hasten to add that I'm not out to diss any of these groups; I belong in both myself. The professionals at work have to respond to the demands put upon them, and in a pure soft environment it is known that managment culture emphasizes time to market above all things. In embedded systems the hardware can take as long to develop as the software, not that there aren't any pressures, and nobody wants a recall.Claiming that desktop systems are as stable as embedded systems is wrong IMNSHO.This is just looking slightly below the tip of the iceberg, but I digress. As it always is for interesting things, there's so much more to be said... However, I have to learn to keep out of the HW vs SW debate DJ-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BOBA JFET Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by darth_fader I contend that it does not swing both ways. Name one piece of hardware that does one thing that I can't do with a softsynth...take your time. Only when you don't consider the intangibles. If you don't think those aspects are important, okay. But why are you bothering with music if you aren't concerned with the ineffable and the immeasurable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DrJustice Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by darth_fader I contend that it does not swing both ways. Name one piece of hardware that does one thing that I can't do with a softsynth...take your time. Since this is a direct question: When I say _swing_ both ways, that is what I mean, i.e. you can make a new product in either realm that is unique at the moment of conception, but the SW parts of it can be matched or surpassed by the next product. It is a product implementation issue.If I must mention one as you request: Any Kurzweil with VAST.Then there is musical keyboards, inputs/outputs, knobs, wood, metal, blinking lights , nice feeling surface textures, a place to rest your eyes and mind. As BOBA notes, some are tangible, others are intangible. They all count for me in makiing up the qualities of an inspiring instrument. For what it's worth, I like DAWs and sequencers running on cheap PCs, very convenient and good.DJ-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Silent Heart Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Your reasoning for Soft Synth vs Hard Synth use? I asked the same thing when I was a noob on this forum. I don't play keys, so immediately any physical advantages of hardware such as response and feel are irrelevant. As far as sound and capabilities, software is much cheaper and can do everything plus way more than hardware can. In some rare circumstances, there is an analog phatness or warmth to a particular hardware synth that can't perfectly be duplicated by software, but that small con is far far outweighed by all the pros of software. Especially if you have a mega synth like Reaktor or Kyma (or even a free one like CSound), a high quality MIDI controller, and some good sample libraries, there's no reason ever to purchase a hardware synth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DrJustice Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Of course, there is a short answer for some of us:I dig gear! DJ-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by silentheart I don't play keys, so immediately any physical advantages of hardware such as response and feel are irrelevant. just a clarification, I think the "feel" the guys are talking about isn't from the manual, but they are talking more control surface type of deal -- I mean if you are playing clavier through a softsynth you still have the physical interface as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Boom Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by DrJustice Of course, there is a short answer for some of us: I dig gear! DJ -- That pretty much sums it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members droolmaster0 Posted July 27, 2005 Members Share Posted July 27, 2005 Originally posted by silentheart Your reasoning for Soft Synth vs Hard Synth use?I asked the same thing when I was a noob on this forum. I don't play keys, so immediately any physical advantages of hardware such as response and feel are irrelevant. As far as sound and capabilities, software is much cheaper and can do everything plus way more than hardware can. In some rare circumstances, there is an analog phatness or warmth to a particular hardware synth that can't perfectly be duplicated by software, but that small con is far far outweighed by all the pros of software. Especially if you have a mega synth like Reaktor or Kyma (or even a free one like CSound), a high quality MIDI controller, and some good sample libraries, there's no reason ever to purchase a hardware synth. I have a Kyma, I have other hardware synths, and I am a big fan of several soft synths. Sure there is a reason to buy hardware synths. In that they are a complete instrument, and the interface is more hands on, there is every reason to buy one if that is something that helps you create. If not, then there is no reason, unless you're into analog. My Microwave XT complements my Kyma, it doesn't compete with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MuzikB Posted July 28, 2005 Members Share Posted July 28, 2005 Software: Classic synths and super samplersHardware: Modern synths that hold my interests.Not much more to it. If it doesn't hold my interest in hardware and it isn't a softsynth rebirth of a classic, then it doesn't get purchased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.