Softsynths sounding cleaner than hardsynths

I softsynths to compliment hardware synths, but most always I hear an extreme cleanliness in the sound of softsynths in general. Is that just the nature of softsynths to sound so clean compared to hardsynths, since the soft doesn't use special dedicated convertors?

Even when I heard some really nasty softsynth sounds or really deep basses, I still can hear that they are too clean, especially when you want those types of sounds to have a little rough edge to them.

Hardware analog synths have an inherent overdrive in them that is difficult to model in software. The intermodulation distortion that occurs with coupling of VCO/VCF/VCA is unique to hardware.

Bass sounds do indeed sound better with mild overdrive - the "rough edge" you speak of.

I assume that you are comparing soft synth with digital synths. It could be the quality of the DAC converters. I personally like this cleanliness, I use all my soft synth with 96k sampling rate. If you want the sound of cheap DACs, can't you just run the signal through some decimator effect? That'll do the job of dirtying up the sound, less invasive would be a slight touch of a tube compressor effect, or how about iZotope trash/Ozone?

Best.

Forget the converters. What about the noise floor?

SOS calls this "bringing some studio air into it".

In Logic, I add a tad of Clip Distortion to everything. It's not like it sounds, at least in small amounts it just warms things up. Of course, you can always add LOTS. There's also the Overdrive plug.

I think the problem is that VSTs in general lack detail and character (simplified modelling for CPU overhead?). I used the plusar2 platform for several years, and then tried out some VSTs to use in a live context with my macbook. I tried out minimonsta, minimoog V, oddity etc.. All the time I was thinking "What is wrong with this sound?"

It just sounded ehh... lame. It lacked something very basic to me, and had a rather fake and hollow tone. And then you read these keyboard magazines and websites who goes gaga over every new VST that is released by arturia and the others. Come one.. Take for instance the resonance on Minimoog V, it's absolutely crap. Get a creamware synth, or go hardware. Much more inspireing sound IMO. Maybe I'm very critical, and I guess it all depends on what kind of music/genres/sounds you're into.

Sorry for sounding a bit polemic, but you know what I mean I guess..

The CW ASB Pro-12 does sound really nice, but basically you'd have to disable the internal effects with every preset; effects are an art to get right, too.

i've only got 2 synths atm, not counting Virsyn Cantor, but between Imposcar and my doepfer A-100 mini, i'd say the Imposcar sounds by far the dirtier of the two... no idea what the original oscar was like, but do think some emulations go overboard sometimes...

Use a saturation plugin with a dial that reads something like clean on one end and mangled-to-{censored} on other end

Also welcome to the reason why some people think its a good idea to go and spend several grand on an external anaolog summing bus for you DAW mixes.

I didn't read the other responses- but this is 100% attributable to the OUTPUT SIGNAL CHAIN of hardware vs software- many often make the mistake of playing their soft-synths as-is with the software output going directly into the record sends and soundcard outputs-

a hardware's output signal is distorted/clipped/warmed by the pre-amp in it's output/ the pre-amps in the mixer/ and dynamics in the rack- you have to introduce similar gain stages of amp/dynamics processing for softsynths- you need to use instances of plug-ins such as PSP vintage warmer/ Voxengo Lampthruster/ professional quality dynamics/EQ/comp/limiting plug-ins/ etc for EACH and EVERY signal output from every softsynth- and you need to spend time to find out what dynamics make each patch you are using sound the best

edit: you can also use the Ol' Tangerine Dream trick for polyphonic sounds- instead of applying overdrive or comp to the summed output of a polyphonic synth- either use one with individulal outputs for each voice or use multiple instances of the synth in monophonic mode with monophonic sequencer channels to each voice [or a midi utility plug-in that allows you to split polyphonic chord data and note priority settings into separate monophonic signals] - then you process each mono voice SEPERATELY and combine them back into a polyphonic signal at the end

that's what i like about VST... no mud to mix for hours afterwards...

Its an irony that people for years wanted better signal to noise ratios, cleaner sound, less aliasing etc. etc. and now that instruments have improved in those areas some folks think they're too clean. No doubt 15 years from now, in an era of 1200khz sampling rates and 128 bit encoding some people will be nostalgic for the "warm" sound of 44khz and 16 bit.