Do Plug-Ins Sound Worse Than Hardware Equivalents?

[Anderton]

I received an interesting email from someone who took exception to my comments in a Keyboard column that some people feel hardware synths have more presence than software plug-ins. His argument wasn't with that statement, but that I didn't go far enough in saying that many plug-in instruments have horrible specs -- bad high frequency response, distortion, aliasing, etc.

 

My response is that an instrument is what it is. I have a Korg Mono/Poly analog synth I wouldn't trade for anything, but it has terrible intermodulation distortion of some kind in the upper octaves. Or, take the aliasing in the PPG wave...when Waldorf eliminated this in a next generation of synthesizers, people complained, so they put in a switch allowing the creation of aliased sounds.

 

Sometimes it is precisely the limitations of an instrument that give it character. A guitar going through an amp is no poster boy for hi-fi: you have lots of distortion, a frequency response curve that looks like the Alps, intermodulation problems, and the like. Yet how well a digital box reproduces these imperfections is considered the guideline by which the digital box should be judged.

 

So whaddya think? Do you care about fidelity problems with plug-ins? Have you noticed these problems? Will you only use hardware because it sounds better? DOES hardware sound better? Your thoughts, please...

[AudioMaverick]

The end result is whether you got the sound you really wanted. Not everything can be sonically pure from 20Hz to 20KHz. Tonal "character" is a direct component of a modified original sound. Few instruments play the entire audio frequency spectrum. Pianos are close. And, different ones have a different sound because of "sound shaping" designs.

 

People fly around the world to find the perfect place of ambience to record in. If a software or hardware plug-in can achieve the same end, what the heck? It is then up to the artist to decide whether they feel better knowing how they got that "sound".

 

Back in the late 1960's Scott had this home receiver/amplifier that was ranted over, because of its brilliantly warm and realistic sound. It had a distortion rating of 10% at rated power (about 35 watts).

 

 

------------------

AudioMaverick(.com)

"If it sounds good, well..."

[bg]

Yes, I can't stand the high-note aliasing of the soft synths I've tried--Dynamo, Vibra, Pro-52, Subtractor. I couldn't get TC's Mercury to run on DP (with Pluggo or VST Wrapper). I'm curious about Mercury, because it appears to be a processor hog, which is a good thing. TC even touts its pure, no-aliasing sound.

 

I've not tried Model E, but Pro-52 clearly doesn't sound like the hardware version.

[Guest]

I think that the whole issue cuts both ways. There's great hardware and great software. There's terrible software and terrible hardware. Of course, the funniest thing is that humans are so subjective. "Why did you get rid of that aliasing? Give it back! You're ruining the character of the instrument!" I have to laugh when I hear about these producers ranting and raving about the awesome character that their old 8-bit samplers had. "It was so raw and gritty! It was BEAUTIFUL." Ah, progress. Pretty soon, blackface ADATs will be sold for ten times their original value because they have that "vintage" sound...

 

-Danny

 

------------------

Of all the things that I have lost, I miss my mind the most.

 

This message has been edited by Danny At Tiara Music on 06-25-2001 at 02:39 PM

[-]

Sometimes the not-as-good-as-the-real-thing issue with plugins happens as a design compromise.

 

For example, most plug-in reverbs I've heard don't sound as good as a hardware equivalent. Since reverb is such a CPU-intensive algorithm, I'm sure the programmers of the plug-ins had to cut corners in order to allow real-time processing on today's computers. (I haven't used it, but I've heard that the Waves reverb is *very* CPU-intensive although it's supposed to sound great.)

[Hippie]

Hi Craig,

I have no real world experience with soft synths. However, one of the duties of my job is to evaluate new LAN/WAN communications technologies & determine if they are benificial to my company's objectives. I have noticed when I write knowledge base articles for the "adopted" hardware or software, I will often have someone questioning the "how, what & why" of my conclusions in the articles. I would get into some serious debates with people that did not even do the research! I have come to learn that there is a certain "fringe element" of people that will never be satisfied

with anyone's research/opinions other than their own. Now, when I see this argument coming, I just respond with something like, "you can go spend 3 days A/B'ing these products, and come to your own damn conclusions!" http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

-Hippie

[lisencocasema.net]

Hi,

 

I'm a big fan of plugins because it's so easy to work with them. Most external devices have a bad artifact: latency. That latency causes the audio to be a little facing.

 

One of the best plugins I've ever heard: Waves Renaissance VOX. Just two sliders and an amazing smooth and hard compressed sound. The best on vocals!

 

For the rest: I'm a Reason junkie! Most amazing software of the last two years.

 

------------------

[Ethan Winer]

Craig,

 

Great topic. As Danny said, there's good and bad in both hardware and software. Personally, I'll take my DreamStation soft synth over a real MiniMoog any day. It's abolutely clean, it never drifts out of tune, there's no hiss, all settings can be recalled and even automated, and it can write directly to a Wave file for burning to a CD or adding as a track in an audio sequencer.

 

Plug-ins can be as good as "hardware" too. Plug-in reverbs are usually not as good as the best digital stand-alone reverb units. But there's no reason they couldn't be! After all, in both cases you have a CPU running code that implements an algorithm. But when the host CPU has to do other things too - like read and mix audio files - the designers often opt to reduce the echo density, so the CPU has time for those other things too.

 

But I'll take a good plug-in EQ over any outboard analog EQ, if only because presets can be saved and recalled. Further, plug-in compressors or noise gates have an advantage over analog hardware because they can see the signal coming ahead of time and achieve virtually instant response.

 

--Ethan

[Electrok]

Craig

The point of what sounds better a plug in or the hardware equvilent doesn't matter. The point is that you can't physically touch a plug in and that sucks. For example, take an electric guitar through a marshall amp and compaire that to a midi controller guitar with some samples of a guitar played through a marshall amp. Even if they sounded the same it wouldn't matter because playing a midi controlled guitar sucks.

The intermodulation distortion of your Korg analog synth is the beauty of the beast. You can't get that kind of personality out of a plug in. You should embrace that and not try to get rid of it.

Electrok

[superphat]

back in the day, didn't people used to think that distortion was a problem? some awful sound defect byproduct of bad guitar amplifier design or something like that?

i like old FM synths, but some people think they're noisy -- i think they sound like that by design~

- p a u l

[Anderton]

<>

 

But that's changing. More and more of them respond to MIDI controllers, so you can use a keyboard, a fader box, and low latency drivers for a pretty decent experience. Fader boxes often give more control than what you get from a hardware keyboard.

 

<< For example, take an electric guitar through a marshall amp and compaire that to a midi controller guitar with some samples of a guitar played through a marshall amp. Even if they sounded the same it wouldn't matter because playing a midi controlled guitar sucks.>>

 

I think it's more that playing through a Marshall amp with a good guitar DOESN'T suck . MIDI guitar is a whole other thing, I don't think it can ever replace electric guitar, only supplement it.

 

<>

 

I've had the Mono/Poly since it was released. I hated the sound of the distortion then, and it hasn't mellowed with age. It has plenty of personality even without the distortion, believe me!!

[mattzen]

I think that plug "quality" is less of an issue with soft synths than with plugs that alter audio (EQ, compression, etc.) Most of the instruments I love the most are the ones with the quirks and are definitely not "pristine". I use Reaktor, Reason, Pro-52, B4, ES1, EVP88, almost every day. They all have something cool about them and they each have their own sound. The PRO-52 may not sound like it's analog father, but it is a cool instrument that has a lot of sonic capabilities, clocks effortlessly, and is very convenient to use. If I want a Prophet, I buy or rent a Prophet. The more tools in the arsenal the better, and the price of these soft-synths allow you more tools at a bargain price.

 

As for audio plug-in quality....that's a different story. Lexicon plug for PT stinks. So does the Megaverb. Give me a 91 or a M3000 any day. Waves ren verb is probably the best sounding native reverb but you can't do much else when you have one of those puppies running (it's not THAT good). Ren compressor is pretty good for a plug if you need it but it sure doesn't beat a good 'ol 1176, distressor, LA-2a, etc. Just use what you have or what is within your means.

 

Yes hardware sounds better. But I still like my soft-synths.

[gtrmac]

I think the technology will allow plugins to sound like whatever the designers want them to sound like very soon. Then the market will determine how far it will go. This stuff is still pretty new. I do agree that hardware is still better. I haven't heard any plugin synths with sounds that compare to new Korg or Roland hardware synths. The analog style emulations are fun to have but I'm still waiting for a JV-5080 or Trinity plugin. I see posts on some forums like "Is there a plugin for those lush pads?" That's what I wanna know too.

 

------------------

Mac Bowne

G-Clef Acoustics Ltd.

Osaka, Japan

My Music: www.javamusic.com/freedomland

[dansouth]

You have to be careful when evaluating the sound of a soft synth, because the sound of your audio card will color it to some degree. Likewise, the inherent "sound" of your DAW software. That said, I'm getting very good results with Logic Platinum and a MOTU 828.

 

Of the soft synths I've tried, the ES1 and the Pro-52 sound the most "analog". I haven't played the Pro-52 side by side with my old Prophet, but I've listened to recordings of the two side by side, and I prefer the plug in. Considering that it comes with effects, supports velocity sensitivity and up to eight simultaneous instances, and sells for about $150, I don't know see how anyone can complain about this program.

 

The ES1 sounds very rich and powerful - too bad it's monophonic. I'm anxiously awaiting the ES2.

 

I was less impressed with the Model E. It sounds thin to me. Orange Vocoder is a lot of fun, though.

 

Plug-in effects don't sound as good as stand alone units, but they're catching up and will get closer and closer within reason. I say "within reason," because it's foolish to assume that ANY plug in will ever sound exactly like an analog device like an LA-2A. I don't see why digital reverbs can't eventually catch up with their rack mounted counterparts, though, given enough raw CPU power.

 

The price and convenience of plug ins make up for a lot of minor shortcomings in sound.

[Anderton]

<>

 

Of course, there is a way to cheat: use hardware supplementation, like with the Korg OASYS PCI card. The synths with it sound great, but that's because the hardware's doing all the work; the software is just a front end for accessing the hardware. With UA, Waves, TC, Creamware, etc. introducing boards designed to run plug-ins, it could get interesting. Many of the Pulsar "softsynths" actually use the card's hardware to generate their sounds.

[dansouth]

DSP farms are the wave of the future. If someone can figure out how to connect one via Firewire (of Firewire II), they'll make a mint.

[bg]

Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com:

DSP farms are the wave of the future. If someone can figure out how to connect one via Firewire (of Firewire II), they'll make a mint.

 

Metric-Halo has done it with the DSP version of thier upcoming MIO (Firewire I/O). It includes ChannelStrip and Halo-Verb.

[mattzen]

Unfortunately, Metric Halo did not do it. They are not using the Firewire bus to gain access to more DSP. They're just using it as a bus to the I/O module. Just like the MOTU 828.

[Electrok]

As far a compression and eq go, analog still sounds better and is easier to use. But do plug ins sound good enough? Sure why not. At that point it comes down to the music and performance. I think it's more of a matter of how you like to work. I find Analog is much easier to get around on and if something breaks it's a quick fix and usually pretty obvious. I don't need 4 friggin choices for every move I want to make. Digital does some weird stuff. Things vanish, get corrupted, change randomly etc CRASH!! I think they both have stregnths and weaknesses.

Plug ins may or may not sound "good" or as "good" but they certainly don't operate or "feel" like their analog counterparts.

Electrok

[mr. rob]

Hey Ethan,

I'll buy a copy of dream synth and have it shipped to you if you send me your minimoog;-)

It would be interesting to do a close up comparison of things like Alesis andromeda, the soon to come Big Briar unit and Jomox Sunsyn to Dsp sinths wether software like Reaktor or hardware like the Q, Virus, and Supernova.

 

Personally, I think there's no quicker way to kill a song than to use a softsynth to imitate analog timbre's. Obviously the sound and texture is far different. Anybody who cares in the least can tell the difference between a chirping Jupiter and that VA squelch thats only good for beer commercials and worst of mp3.com "highlights". I mean theres whole genre's of music built around the analog sound, and if you do that music with VA synths it just sounds like a beer commercial. Could you imagine plastikman using rebirth? or Meat beat manifesto with like Reaktor or a nord modular? On the otherhand a group like Autechre seems to use these types of things quite effectively, as does someone like Kid 606. Its all in the eye of the beholder.

 

I've found software like Reaktor, or hardware like Waldorfs Q generally runs circles around most synths hard or soft. It all depends on how you use them. Obviously Rebirth sounds like shit compared to a Tb 303 and Ts 808. On the otherhand Virus TDM seems to be the same as any other Virus. however, with the lack of knobs that as much as a sound engine affects quality as often times precision tweaking is required to make the sounds of a song gel.

[KBP]

Originally posted by gtrmac@hotmail.com:

I think the technology will allow plugins to sound like whatever the designers want them to sound like very soon. Then the market will determine how far it will go. This stuff is still pretty new. I do agree that hardware is still better. I haven't heard any plugin synths with sounds that compare to new Korg or Roland hardware synths. The analog style emulations are fun to have but I'm still waiting for a JV-5080 or Trinity plugin. I see posts on some forums like "Is there a plugin for those lush pads?" That's what I wanna know too.

 

 

You should check out Sampletank at http://www.ikmultimedia.com I've got it and my Roland keyboard is for the most part and over glorified controller. Sampletank with is a software equivalent of say a JV2080 can also load up akai sample programs. Very cool.

 

I dig plugs, but as far as what is better that is so objectionable it's crazy. I must say that more creative stuff would flow if I had a roomfull of great synths and outboard effects processors, or it would all gather dust except for you're high end effect processors. But I don't have that kind of money, and I'm sure most other artists don't either.

 

You know that old saying It's close enough for Rock -n- Roll? Well plugs are a hell of a lot closer than that.

 

KBP

[mr. rob]

Im actually thinking of buying a pc as dedicated softsynth machine. I intend to look into gigasampler, Ive heard good things about it. I dont think you could even say a sound module is in the same category. Also, very interesting will be when physical modeling of a more ambitious type takes off. I believe Tassman has acoustic modeled sounds. For loops and samples a pc absolutely rocks. From sample editing using plug ins, to recycle, gigasampler, Acid, Fruity Loops...oh yeah! I mean, what the heck is there even to compare to that hardware wise? On the mac theres metasynth, max/msp, absynth:-)...

 

Whatever you say, if you compare the quality of the waves gold bundle with whatever hardware you got at the price software looks pretty good if your the type who likes to make music more than monthly payments. Also, the mcdsp plug ins, and bombfactory as well....Grm tools....

Even if you have big moeny and great equipment, software can nicely facilitate creativeness.

[DC]

One thing I love about plugs is the fact that you don't need to patch. Wires can slow things down, especially when you run into a short. I really like the waves and cake effects and in a thick arrangement, the quality is fine. I find I'm using my hardware less and less except for tracking.

[Ethan Winer]

rob,

 

> I've found software like Reaktor, or hardware like Waldorfs Q generally runs circles around most synths hard or soft. <

 

But Reaktor is a soft synth! Which was my main point. There's no reason a soft synth that is well designed can't sound wonderful. And again I'll argue that a good soft synth is better than an analog unit by avoiding the noise and distortion inherent in all analog hardware.

 

--Ethan

[Anderton]

<>

 

That seems like a good idea, especially for a program like Gigasampler...you'll have a much more cost-effective setup than buying a traditional sampler.

 

BUT for plug-in softsynths, you'll have to use the softsynths in stand-alone mode and go through the MIDI interface if you want to interface with a second computer running your sequencer. This removes the advantages of zero latency, saving patches within a sequence, etc.

[dansouth]

Originally posted by mr. rob:

Personally, I think there's no quicker way to kill a song than to use a softsynth to imitate analog timbre's.

...

I've found software like Reaktor, or hardware like Waldorfs Q generally runs circles around most synths hard or soft. It all depends on how you use them. Obviously Rebirth sounds like shit compared to a Tb 303 and Ts 808.

 

I don't see how a soft synth like the Pro-52 or Reaktor's SubTractor would be inferior to sample playback synths, and many people like the analog sounds that you can get from a Triton or a K2000. For my money, these soft synths sound BETTER than the analog modeling synths that I've used. I think ReBirth sounds pretty good as well, and it's a whole lot easier to use than the hardware versions. It comes down to personal taste, but I don't believe that soft synths in general are going to "kill" most recordings.

[mr. rob]

I think with a lot of electronic and post rock music equipment is important because it has a sound. The importance is not necessarily how good or costly it is but that undeniably everything has its own sound, and obviously has an impact on how you sound. Now, In my opinion its an undeniable fact that rebirth does not sound like a 303, the pro 5 doesnt sound like a prophet 5, and Model E does not sound like a minimoog.

 

If you want the sound of a 303 , arp 2600, a jupiter 8, monopoly, cs 80, minimoog, or prophet 5 the closest you'll get without delving into a past of synthpop casualties are synths like Studio electronics omega 8, Alesis andromeda, and jomox sunsyn, and one of the many boutique modulars.

 

Now Im not saying softsynths sound bad, or even that theyre worse. If you like the sound of a digital sample in a k2500, or dreamsynth, or the Q and you see that as fitting your sound then theres no problem. Theres no rule of thumb really here except this, if your trying to do acid techno, or goa, or something like Plastikman and meat beat manifesto does you should really do yourself a favor and get one or 2 actual analog synths, and good ones:-)

Most of the artists I really dig have actually been using laptops and digital synths mostly. I think there are new sounds to ge gotten from that aporach and thats the appeal of it for me. For the classic sounds nothings better than the real thing however.

 

-mr. rob

[bg]

Originally posted by mattzen:

Unfortunately, Metric Halo did not do it. They are not using the Firewire bus to gain access to more DSP. They're just using it as a bus to the I/O module. Just like the MOTU 828.

 

Dan wrote:

"If someone can figure out how to connect one via Firewire..."

Maybe I don't understand what Dan meant by "DSP farms." The MIO DSP version has a DSP reverb in the box and it's accessed via Firewire. What am I missing?

[dansouth]

Originally posted by mr. rob:

For the classic sounds nothings better than the real thing however.

 

I agree in terms of sound quality. Nothing can perfectly emulate something else. But in terms of control, reliability, interfaceability (is there such a word?), and bang for the buck, soft synths are amazing! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

[mattzen]

Originally posted by bg:

Dan wrote:

"If someone can figure out how to connect one via Firewire..."

Maybe I don't understand what Dan meant by "DSP farms." The MIO DSP version has a DSP reverb in the box and it's accessed via Firewire. What am I missing?

 

I have not heard a thing about this version of their MIO and couldn't find anything on their web site about it....if you have a link to info please inform. Thanx.