Are Soft Synths Ready For Prime Time?

[soapbox]

Im late to the game in using software synths. I have to admit, I like the fact that clients are impressed by my rack o synths and Im not sure of the quality of their virtual counterparts. However, I also like the idea of editing from a computer monitor instead of a tiny display, and virtual synths are more ergonomic and less heavy than their counterparts. On the other hand, a cabling problem in the real world is often easier to troubleshoot than computer conflicts.

 

What do you think? Are soft synths ready for prime time? If so, then which ones? I have a friend who really likes Reaktor. Another friend loves his Access Virus TDM plug-in. I, myself, have been eyeing Korgs OASYS. B4 has gotten glowing reviews, as has Tassman; but would any of you choose these over the new Novation Supernova II or the Alesis Andromeda, for example? Okay, lets say price was not a consideration. What would you choose, what have you chosen, and what are your experiences?

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by soapbox:

Are soft synths ready for prime time? If so, then which ones? I have a friend who really likes Reaktor. Another friend loves his Access Virus TDM plug-in. I, myself, have been eyeing Korgs OASYS. B4 has gotten glowing reviews, as has Tassman; but would any of you choose these over the new Novation Supernova II or the Alesis Andromeda, for example? Okay, lets say price was not a consideration. What would you choose, what have you chosen, and what are your experiences?

 

Well, I have not made any secret on this forum about the fact that I absolutely adore B4. It is frightening, and I am fully convinced that it sounds better than any other Hammond emulation that I have heard to date, period. Frankly, not only do I think that it's ready for prime time, I gravely doubt that I will ever use anything else to record Hammond tracks (other than an actual Hammond, if the opportunity presents itself).

 

As far as the synth emulations, I have heard the Virus, PPG, Reaktor and Prophet plug-ins; and, frankly, they're all pretty darn good - in some cases, they even exceeded my expectations. The Pro-52 is next on my list - I am definitely looking forward to owning it.

 

I am not sure how much of a difference there is in having a dedicated hardware box emulate a synth or having your computer do it - except that the computer is likely to be faster. If you're a hardcore devotee of the real thing and you want to get an Andromeda, Omega-8 or a Sunsyn, that's one thing. But if you're satisfied with the VA sound, then modelling is modelling - isn't it?

 

dB

[soapbox]

Originally posted by Dave Bryce:

if you're satisfied with the VA sound, then modelling is modelling - isn't it?

 

Good point. Of course sound design is another thing. Factory presets can make a decent keyboard a compelling experience to play. When I played the Novation Supernova II at NAMM a couple of weeks ago, I felt like dancing. I looked around and sure enough, my neighbor was bopping around while playing his Supernova II. I found no patches on the Andromeda that did that for me. On the other hand, I had more fun playing with the Andromeda knobs and marveling at the digital readout of analog parameters. Are there any soft synths with impressive patches that impel you to create music?

[dansouth]

A lot of the soft synth experience comes down to the interface. VST2 synths are easy to use within the context of Cubase, Logic, or another VST host application. Sound quality is limited by the quality of your audio card. Rewire seems a little cumbersome to me.

 

It's not a software synth, per se, but Orange Vocoder is very fat and warm. I've enjoyed using it. Does anyone know whether the ReBirth sound engine can be triggered directly from a sequencer to avoid the beat box interface? That would be a big improvement!

[marino]

Yes, the softsynths sound just as good as the humans that design them and the humans that play them, just like their hardware counterpart.

The big problem is still system stability. I don't think I'm ready to tour with only a laptop and a master keyboard. I would LOVE to, it would resolve a lot of practical problems. But that would mean to put your work and reputation in the hand of a single machine, and if that fails, you're fried.

Yeah, the hardware synth are just computers running one program only, but this is their main strenght also. They are stable, hardware- and software-wise. You can't say that about a computer system. Yet.

 

marino

[Guest]

Another issue in the soft-synth realm, especially with VA ones, is real-time control. With VA keyboards sporting more and more knobs, you sure as hell better get a knob box along with your soft synth, or you'll be sick of your mouse pretty quick. I am currently putting together a list of all the competing models since I need one myself.. But right now the best looking one is Doepfer's PocketControl - only $150 and has 128 patches, 16 knobs, and free software!

 

But when you say "ready for big time" I agree you have to take stability into account.. and the quality of your laptop. because big time means on stage - not just in the comfort of your favorite studio. It's pretty tough to get your Virus TDM to a gig. And even when you do, doesn't looking at a full screen monitor take you away a bit from the feeling of being on stage?

[D.Triny]

As far as I'm concerned traditional HW synths are dead. I heard Elton John is using GigaStudio on stage. B4 is the most incredible software, Pro52 is fabulous. Tassman is great. Now we're getting HAlion, EXS24, EVP88 - the game is over software synths will rule.

 

Plus you can record with them with sample accuracy either VSTi (Cubase/Logic) or DXi (SONAR, Fruity Loops 3.0 etc.)

 

A laptop and my Roland A90 is all I need.

 

-david abraham

[rdtmusix]

Have to agree with a lot of the previous posts. The soft synths I've heard are fabulous, however I would be a little wary about system stability in a live situation.

 

My personal fav in terms of modeling synths is the Pro 52 ... thick, fat sounds, just the way you like 'em!

 

The B4 is nice also, but I have to disagree that it's the best thing around. I own a VK-7, a Hammond B-2, and a Hammond A-100, and the VK-7 is still the closest (in my opinion) in terms of modelling. The B4 sounds great but it has a unique, indefinable "digital" sound that is not exactly like a tonewheel organ. But for sheer price-performance, the B4 is a great application.

[Jim Aikin]

Another advantage of softsynths is that if you instantiate one as a plug-in in your sequencer, your patch settings will be saved automatically with your song. This is much friendlier than booting an editor/librarian.

 

Just make sure you have an ASIO audio interface that's compatible with the softsynth you're using. I recently ran into a problem trying to run Reason on a Windows machine with an Aardvark Direct Pro 24/96, and had to use the Aardvark MME driver instead. Major latency: not usable for live work.

 

Propellerhead and Aardvark are working on this one, and it should be solved before long, but it's an example of the kind of problem you can run into.

 

And I second the comment about the box of knobs. I _hate_ using a mouse to control on-screen knobs and sliders.

 

--Jim Aikin

[D.Triny]

Originally posted by rdtmusix:

 

My personal fav in terms of modeling synths is the Pro 52 ... thick, fat sounds, just the way you like 'em!

 

 

I ordered Pro52 on a whim. Quick e-mail to studiocat.com and I had a brand new killer "synthesizer" on my doorstep the next day. It can't get any better than this!

 

-david abraham

[Alon]

I definitely agree that some of the SoftSynths out there are really good...

 

I'd like to see some of the "Big Boys" get into the game...(Roland,Korg,Yamaha,Emu,Akai etc.)

 

Seems like all the cutting edge stuff is coming from Germany nowadays...(Pro-52,Reaktor,PPG,B4,Virus etc.)

 

It'll be interesting when the Americans & Japanese finally play catch up...

 

Hopefully, there will be a lot of interesting SoftSynths making their appearance soon...

 

Alon Cohen

[D.Triny]

Originally posted by Alon:

I definitely agree that some of the SoftSynths out there are really good...

 

I'd like to see some of the "Big Boys" get into the game...(Roland,Korg,Yamaha,Emu,Akai etc.)

 

 

Well Roland/Edirol is taking baby steps with the Virtual Sound Canvas DXi

 

http://www.cakewalk.com/DXi/ED.html

 

maybe if all goes well we'll see some JV technology in softsynth form from them. But KORG KORG KORG needs to wake up! Imagine a Trinity/Triton in software...

 

-david abraham

[Guest]

Originally posted by Alon:

I definitely agree that some of the SoftSynths out there are really good...

 

I'd like to see some of the "Big Boys" get into the game...(Roland,Korg,Yamaha,Emu,Akai etc.)

 

Seems like all the cutting edge stuff is coming from Germany nowadays...(Pro-52,Reaktor,PPG,B4,Virus etc.)

 

It'll be interesting when the Americans & Japanese finally play catch up...

 

Hopefully, there will be a lot of interesting SoftSynths making their appearance soon...

 

Alon Cohen

 

There is a lot of great stuff coming out of Germany (and the rest of Europe). The Americans, while not particularly strong in soft synths, certainly know how to write software (music/audio and otherwise). I wonder if the Japanese are really motivated to participate in this area. I view Japan as this great manufacturing power, refusing to acknowledge that the world is changing (or has changed) fundamentally. They perfected the manufacturing process which gave us reasonably priced, highly reliable hardware products. Problem is, the world is deep in the information age (third wave) and our reliance on hardware is diminishing. While there were certainly other factors, one of the reasons Japan did not participate in the economic growth of the '90s, one is that they continued to rely on hardware production and never switched to software. I actually wish they would. If they could ever produce software of the same quality as their hardware, they would again rule the world (imagine bug-free software).

 

The efforts to date from the "Big Guys" have been largely unimpressive. Most have been simply software duplications of their hardware. I sense that they fear that software will eat into their hardware sales, so these are half-hearted attempts. The latency of Yamaha's software synth is off the chart. It's completely unusable and they've made no attempt to fix it, AFAIK. Also, much of what "comes from Japan" is actually done by software companies in the USA/Europe.

 

I also think that the Japanese manufacturers, to a degree, have lost touch with their customer. When the techno guys in Europe were screaming for Roland to reproduce the TB303 and XoX drum machines, the didn't respond. It took the a couple of guys in Sweden to come up with a great software solution (Re-birth). Most software companies have come to realise that they can turn the greatest problem with software (bugs) into an advantage. If they plan on staying in business, they know that they need to listen to their customers--to hear about the bugs, fix them, and incorporate enhancements that the customer wants. So via messages boards, email, etc, they interact. I've conversed with lead developers for several of products that I own and it's great. With hardware, this interaction doesn't seem to happen as readily. The product is shipped, then it's on to the next project. No forced interaction with the customer.

 

When I look back over the past 5+ years, it's software that has had the biggest impact on how I make music. PARIS, Digital Performer, GigaSampler, ACID, B4, Pro-52, Reaktor, sample CDs, various audio editors, MP3, etc., are the exciting additions to my studio. In comparison, the hardware synths/samplers that I own are largely just refinements of some fairly dated technology.

 

I had a Hammond XK-2 and sold it the day after I got the B4 (pocketing $1200 in the process). I had a near mint Prophet-5 which I also got rid of because it just wasn't worth it trying to keep a 20 year old piece of hardware running glitch-free. The Pro-52 is close enough for me (again about $1200 difference in price).

 

Yes, I think many of the soft synths are excellent. I do prefer to run them on a seperate PC that I use for GigaStudio and my soft synths. Using them on the same platform as my sequencer/DAW, while an attractive idea, just never seem to work as well for me.

 

Sorry to ramble.

[soapbox]

Originally posted by Alon:

I'd like to see some of the "Big Boys" get into the game...(Roland,Korg,Yamaha,Emu,Akai etc.)

 

Doesnt the Korg OASYS count? I realize that you need to buy their PCI card in order to use their soft synths; but if youre using a native hard disk recording system, this seems like a good way to leave your system resources free. In addition, it doubles as a dedicated effects card for mixdown. Any thoughts on this?

 

While were on the subject, I also notice no one has mentioned CreamWares Scope.

[Steve44]

I am really excited about EMagic's EVP88 - it's exactly what I thought the Nord Electro would be, but it turns out they use samples for the EP's. Modeled E.P. only exists in Korg's MOSS system and doesn't really approach it too well. I'll be happy to hear a modeled Wurly, and I love that they took the "realistic" look a la Bomb-Factory.

 

What's wonderful about softsynths is how much sooner they make it to market - and we all benefit by having these dream technologies on our computers without having to wait for marketing and production of big hardware boxes.

 

Originally posted by soapbox:

Doesnt the Korg OASYS count? I realize that you need to buy their PCI card in order to use their soft synths; but if youre using a native hard disk recording system, this seems like a good way to leave your system resources free. In addition, it doubles as a dedicated effects card for mixdown. Any thoughts on this?

 

While were on the subject, I also notice no one has mentioned CreamWares Scope.

 

I am a big fan (although not yet a user) of OASYS. I still remember the Keyboard picture of the prototype Oasys keyboard... I think it's an excellent value, and it's fabulous that you get 44 synths, cause I'm kinda partial to that number http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif. 135 effects ain't a bad number either, and it would be wonderful to try their piano-body resonance on a Bass Drum. Oh and according to my new ProView (it came today http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif) Jeff Lorber is using Oasys.

 

There was a thread a bit back on Creamware, stressing a lack of reliability. I dislike it because the plugins are expensive, they don't all come with the card as in Oasys. Also their sampler doesn't look any better than EXS24. The price of Scope rivals the price of Kyma which is scary - when I think of things that expensive, I have to compare them to buying a new G4 with Max & MSP.

[Dave Bryce]

Originally posted by burningbusch@home.com:

When I look back over the past 5+ years, it's software that has had the biggest impact on how I make music. PARIS, Digital Performer, GigaSampler, ACID, B4, Pro-52, Reaktor, sample CDs, various audio editors, MP3, etc., are the exciting additions to my studio. In comparison, the hardware synths/samplers that I own are largely just refinements of some fairly dated technology.

snip

Sorry to ramble.

 

No apology necessary.

 

Outstanding post, busch-man. Like you, the biggest revolutions in my gear this year were almost entirely software-oriented; and, the next few products on my hit list are either software plug-ins (What? A plug-in Fairchild? How cool is that...) for DP, or software synths - Pro-52, then Reaktor, I think...I kinda want the PPG plug, too...

 

The only piece of hardware that I think I'm going to buy this year is a fader box, in order that I might better control my software. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

Well said, sir. Thank you.

 

dB

[semitone]

I could only agree with that bk.I have almost all the soft synths and the results i get are amazing.My favs are Pro 52,B4 and PPG Wave,but there's one hardware synth that i really HAVE to get:Nord Modular.Way beyond anything else...

[DeeSquare]

Does anyone out there actually use a soft synth setup for playing live?

 

Also with regard to the B4. I totally agree it is THE best sounding emulator out there. I have an A-100, have owned an XB-2 and have listened to the VK-7, XK-2, V-5 and CX-3. I can say without a doubt the B4 beats them all. I just want to hear a B4 through my 145 Leslie.

[Jim Aikin]

Originally posted by burningbusch@home.com:

Problem is, the world is deep in the information age (third wave) and our reliance on hardware is diminishing.

 

This is a common viewpoint, promulgated by pop gurus, but it just ain't so. You can't make use of any of that sexy "third wave" software without good old-fashioned hardware, which has to be manufactured somewhere (with the attendant water pollution, etc.).

 

Ask Intel whether they're planning to close the doors anytime soon because the world no longer needs hardware.

 

--Jim Aikin

[D.Triny]

Originally posted by Jim Aikin:

Just make sure you have an ASIO audio interface that's compatible with the softsynth you're using. I recently ran into a problem trying to run Reason on a Windows machine with an Aardvark Direct Pro 24/96, and had to use the Aardvark MME driver instead. Major latency: not usable for live work.

 

--Jim Aikin

 

also if you're running Windows you'll want to look for a sound card that's basing it's drivers (ASIO/EASI/DSound etc.) on WDM technology that way:

 

1) you're not locked into any one driver api

2) the likelihood is that the driver(s) will be more stable because the author only has to maintain/optimize 1 kernel component.

 

-david abraham

 

 

This message has been edited by David Abraham Fenton on 02-02-2001 at 05:35 PM

[sagovbellatlantic.net]

How come nobody mentions Unity Ds1..The sounds are good,and the programming is deep..

I also love my B4!

[soapbox]

Originally posted by Jim Aikin:

This is a common viewpoint, promulgated by pop gurus, but it just ain't so. You can't make use of any of that sexy "third wave" software without good old-fashioned hardware, which has to be manufactured somewhere (with the attendant water pollution, etc.).

 

Ask Intel whether they're planning to close the doors anytime soon because the world no longer needs hardware.

 

--Jim Aikin

 

 

Point taken. Software doesnt work without hardware. However, if you buy five software synths instead of five hardware synths, less hardware will be manufactured on your behalf (unless you use the five software synths on five different computers, which I think we can all agree is highly unlikely!). Of course, I imagine people will likely buy five soft synths instead of one or two hardware synths; but it will still make at least a subtle difference.

[Jose Cobelas]

I agree with most things said, but I´d like to add:

 

1. I have to admit that I love old machines. ANY machines.

 

2. We are putting all the eggs in the same Wintel/Mac basket. Makes me a bit uneasy.

 

3. I like to have something to do while I defrag the hard disk.

 

4. When I am late at night in my home studio playing Gigapiano with headphones, and I take them off, the computer fan noise is suddenly DEAFENING. I HATE it.

 

JoseC.

[Alon]

Speaking of midi controllers, the Doepfer Pocketcontrol looks cool and cheap, however, you can't buy one yet.

 

The price is now $175 - I could of sworn it was listed as $125 or $150, when I checked out their site a while back.

 

It's not out until March/April.

 

Anyone check out the other controller they have that transforms a Nintendo joystick into a CV/gate & Midi controller ?

 

How does it work ? Do you use the buttons or the actual joystick to control ?

 

The good thing about the pocket control, is that it will come with presets for many softsynths included. I don't want to start programming stuff from scratch when I get a box.

 

Do the other controllers (Phatboy,Peavey etc.) come with a bunch of presets ready to use. ? (For all the Sofsynths)

 

I wouldn't even mind having seperate special made controllers, unique to each softsynth.

 

A pro52 controller, a PPG controller, etc.

 

It would be the next best thing to actually owning the original unit.

 

Who needs some big heavy thing that constantly drifts out of tune anyway ? (Just kidding, I love hardware stuff also)

 

Alon Cohen

[Guest]

Originally posted by Jim Aikin:

This is a common viewpoint, promulgated by pop gurus, but it just ain't so. You can't make use of any of that sexy "third wave" software without good old-fashioned hardware, which has to be manufactured somewhere (with the attendant water pollution, etc.).

 

Ask Intel whether they're planning to close the doors anytime soon because the world no longer needs hardware.

 

--Jim Aikin

 

 

Jim,

"Hardware" in my post was meant to define very broadly physical, manufactured objects. I can see where my use of the word is non-standard, hence a bit confusing. For me, in the audio/music realm, physical keyboards, modules, outboard FXs, mixers, speakers etc. are hardware as opposed to virtualized objects which are soft.

 

Software programs without a computer are as worthless as a computer without software. There will always be a need for a base hardware configuration (MIDI keyboard, computer input, computer, display, amp/speakers) in order for the analog human to interface with the digital music machine.

[Jim Aikin]

Originally posted by burningbusch@home.com:

There will always be a need for a base hardware configuration (MIDI keyboard, computer input, computer, display, amp/speakers) in order for the analog human to interface with the digital music machine.

 

It's always going to be a mix of the two types of stuff. Today's "hardware" synths are just as much software-driven as any softsynth. And vice-versa.

 

This point was driven home to me when I reviewed NemeSys GigaStudio. This "software" sample playback instrument requires just as much hardware, including RAM, as any "hardware" sampler.

 

One benefit of software-based instruments, as noted earlier in this thread, is that you can run six or eight of them on one set of hardware (though not necessarily at the same time). Another benefit is that by buying a faster computer you can increase your polyphony. Another is that they're generally easier to upgrade, since downloading a new version is usually easier than blowing a new OS into a hardware instrument.

 

On the other hand, my M1 still does everything it did ten years ago. I can still use it, and occasionally I do. The computers I owned ten years ago have long since become landfill. So is a software-based music setup really more ecologically friendly than a hardware synth? The jury is still out on this one.

 

--Jim Aikin

[soapbox]

Originally posted by Jim Aikin:

One benefit of software-based instruments, as noted earlier in this thread, is that you can run six or eight of them on one set of hardware (though not necessarily at the same time).

 

On the other hand, my M1 still does everything it did ten years ago. I can still use it, and occasionally I do. The computers I owned ten years ago have long since become landfill. So is a software-based music setup really more ecologically friendly than a hardware synth? The jury is still out on this one.

 

I guess that depends on whether or not one buys a computer for the expressed purpose of using software synths. Most likely that is the case with the NemeSys GigaStudio. On the other hand, Ill bet that there are few, if any, other cases like that one.

 

BTW, I sold my M1 after four years of use. I kept my Mac Classic until it died (after nine years).