Wait for the TI is Too Long... I've Turned to the DARKSIDE!!

[Derek]

Well I?m sick of waiting for the TI to materialize? So I?ve turned to the darkside? YES soft-synths. Maybe turned is a strong word? after all there?s still room for a TI desktop in my rig :wink:

However, I?m not missing the Ti dream anymore because my Komplete 2 package arrives today. Komplete 2 is a software bundle that includes eleven separate programs in one massive package. So looks like I?ll be plenty busy trying to figure all those new programs out. To add to this I currently I have the Korg Legacy Collection (KLC), its up and running and it sound even better than it did when I first installed it. Turns out there have been a few revisions that really helped the responsiveness of the synths. I would dare to say it sounds perfect now.

This might be of interest to some here. My system is setup using two PCs, one for standalone synths the other for Cubase and VSTs. I?m not sure if anyone here is running a similar setup? However, if you are, you need to look into an application called MidiOverLan CP. It allows you to use your network interface card for MIDI. You can get up to 64 MIDI ports and 16 channels per port using this tiny software driver. Better still you can get all these ports and channels (1024 MIDI channels!) though one cable? Sweat! All this for $169. Not too bad. I was able to replace two M-Audio 8x8 hardware MIDI interfaces with this software. The icing on the cake is everything works perfectly. The company claims their driver has the lowest latency of any MIDI solution, hardware or software. I was skeptical but honestly it works fantastic? If you have two computers that you want to talk to one another via MIDI there is no way better than MidiOverLan CP. You can go to their website and download a fully working demo of their software. It works for 14 days? after that you have to pony up the $$$.

Well I must say I?m a bit in shock. I still can?t believe its all working so well and my Cubase SX3 is rock solid. In the past I would have scoffed at the idea of replacing real hardware synths with software. I was an early adopter of Propellerhead?s Reason? And I hated it so much that I swore off software synths. Well times have changed and these new soft-synths sound just as good and in many cases better than their hardware counterparts. If you are a hardware person such as me, you will need to make sure you have enough hardware MIDI controllers, so you can have that tactile feel of knobs, buttons and sliders. Provided you do, the soft-synths really don?t feel any different than using hardware.

Yes there is still room in my rig for a TI, but I?m not in dire need of one anymore? (As I type this last line I am in disbelief) The TI will merely add to my already vast sound palette 8O :D 8O

[Smag]

But, pray tell, what software synths are the really good ones - the new generation that people are talking about. I was going to get the Hartmann Neuron software and controller until I read a Future Music review that gave it 3/10.

Which software synths are worth getting if you're comparing it to hardware?

[acid1]

for teh most part i'm really getting tired of using a mouse in general

[MADSTATION]

I agree that softsynths are great nowdays and they can do 98% of what their hardware counterpart can do BUT they still drain the CPU and that's why I tend to prefer hardware :)

[Derek]

But, pray tell, what software synths are the really good ones - the new generation that people are talking about. I was going to get the Hartmann Neuron software and controller until I read a Future Music review that gave it 3/10.

Which software synths are worth getting if you're comparing it to hardware?

Well obviously the Korg Legacy Collection is great. But that assumes you're looking for soft versions of classic synths. If so I would suggest the Pro-53 (Prophet 5 emulation) and the B4 both by Native Instruments (NI).
I purchased the Komplete 2 bundle. This bundles eleven separate software packages into one massive package.
NI KOMPLETE 2 comes with ABSYNTH 3, REAKTOR 4 and 5, B4 Organ, FM7, PRO-53, KONTAKT 2, KOMPAKT, INTAKT, BATTERY 2, VOKATOR and NI-SPEKTRAL DELAY and you get the gigantic sample libraries of KONTAKT 1 and 2, INTAKT, KOMPAKT and BATTERY 2.

In short more sounds than any one human could hope for. That sounds like a lot of stuff, but you don?t know the half of it. It?s even more than you think. Reaktor for example includes literally hundreds of synths.
It can be a little overwhelming, but it?s OK because you don?t have to learn it all at once. You can take your time and learn and explore each synth and each package at your own leisure. But the possibilities are hugh.

I agree that softsynths are great nowdays and they can do 98% of what their hardware counterpart can do BUT they still drain the CPU and that's why I tend to prefer hardware

I?m not sure what you mean. I know the TI will be a great sound creation tool, but compared to Reaktor it pales in raw capability. While the TI will let you shape and sculpt your sound by comparison, Reaktor will allow you the ultimate flexibility, by allowing you to build your own synths from the ground up? Not just shape sounds. What hardware synths let you do that?
From what I can tell, software is so far ahead of hardware at this point that it just getting silly. Yes you need the CPU power to get the most out of it, but fast computers are cheap these days. I run two PCs one exclusively for softsynths, the other for VST and Cubase SX3, so its really not a problem.

for teh most part i'm really getting tired of using a mouse in general

ME TOO. That?s why I recommend you get lots of controllers. I have three controllers and more knobs and sliders than you can shake a stick at. I never have to use a mouse to control my softsynths. If you know you?ll hate using a mouse buy lots of controllers and you won?t need to use the mouse. In essence it will be a lot like using the TI with it?s VST interface.
Another positive when using the VST version of softsynths is they have sample accurate timing, something no existing hardware synth can claim. And yes I know the TI supposedly will also, but right now it?s really just vaporware so it doesn?t count does it.

[MADSTATION]

I?m not sure what you mean. I know the TI will be a great sound creation tool, but compared to Reaktor it pales in raw capability.

You can't compare a VA with Reaktor, they are 2 very different products.
Reaktor is great and I really enjoy it but it's complex arthitecture makes it hard to predict how it's going to sound in the end.

In your setup, do you have to use more than 1 soundcard?
I've been looking for a way to network a few computers and use computer 2 and 3 for softsynths and my main computer just for sequencing.

[reno08]

However, if you are, you need to look into an application called MidiOverLan CP. It allows you to use your network interface card for MIDI. You can get up to 64 MIDI ports and 16 channels per port using this tiny software driver. Better still you can get all these ports and channels (1024 MIDI channels!) though one cable? Sweat! All this for $169. Not too bad. I was able to replace two M-Audio 8x8 hardware MIDI interfaces with this software. The icing on the cake is everything works perfectly. The company claims their driver has the lowest latency of any MIDI solution, hardware or software. I was skeptical but honestly it works fantastic? If you have two computers that you want to talk to one another via MIDI there is no way better than MidiOverLan CP. You can go to their website and download a fully working demo of their software. It works for 14 days? after that you have to pony up the $$$.

It looks like you have this functionality built right into the heart of Mac OS X Tiger, out tomorrow.
Thus, I'd say $169 is a rip-off given Mac OS X's $129 price tag (and free with a new Mac) :D

[Derek]

I recall years ago people used an ancient device called the ?typewriter?. These devices were the dominate machine for rendering text to paper. Later they became more sophisticated and added many new features. The new devices were dubbed ?word processors?. Some of these word processor could save information to a floppy disc. They were in a way, hybrids of old and new technology, just as the TI is, in that it is part VST. But inevitably someone figured out how to do the same thing on a computer and slowly but surely the typewriters and the word processors became extinct.

It is likely that hardware synths are tomorrow's typewriters. They're progressing to word processor level, but the end is in site and cannot be avoided. Still I find myself here with the rest of you. My interest peaked by TI's promise. Perhaps we are sentimental fools or just too set in our ways at this point.

PS: Rno08, I know MidiOverLan is part of Tiger now. But I run PCs now, so paying $169 is still better than $600 for two MIDI interfaces. Plus what if you want your MAC to talk to PCs? For say GIGASTUDIO? I wonder if the MAC version will let you do this?

[Derek]

I?m not sure what you mean. I know the TI will be a great sound creation tool, but compared to Reaktor it pales in raw capability.

You can't compare a VA with Reaktor, they are 2 very different products.
Reaktor is great and I really enjoy it but it's complex arthitecture makes it hard to predict how it's going to sound in the end.

In your setup, do you have to use more than 1 soundcard?
I've been looking for a way to network a few computers and use computer 2 and 3 for softsynths and my main computer just for sequencing.

I have two sound cards. A Motu Traveler and an RME Digiface. They both work great and have been rock stable. Using MidiOverLan is the best way to get two computers to communicate via MIDI. As stated earlier it is now included as part of the new Mac OS. I would need sixteen, eight port hardware interfaces to do what this tiny driver is doing. I don't know of a cheaper or more effective way to get the job done on a PC platform.

[Gopal]

Which software synths are worth getting if you're comparing it to hardware?

The Albino!!!

Thats the only one I've found so far.

Have heard great things about the Vanguard and the Minimonsta but haven't had a chance to try them yet.

The Minimoog vst is nay too shabby either.

[Merlot]

I am digging the minimonsta. A little on the cpu hungry side, but fucking amazin results. Personally i like it 10x better than arturia's version. Not to mention it has the Gmedia (impOSCar) filters that are silky for being digital filters.

[Hollowcell]

I?m not sure what you mean. I know the TI will be a great sound creation tool, but compared to Reaktor it pales in raw capability. While the TI will let you shape and sculpt your sound by comparison, Reaktor will allow you the ultimate flexibility, by allowing you to build your own synths from the ground up? Not just shape sounds. What hardware synths let you do that?
From what I can tell, software is so far ahead of hardware at this point that it just getting silly.

Now all software needs is the "sound". No denying software has some great capabilities - it's just the sound in most cases doesn't match up. There are some exceptions however, but still nothing matches a nice analogue or even a tried and true VA. It is getting closer though.

Features, voices, total intergration - I'm so sick of people ramming this shit down my throat. I've read people arguing because in their unnamed softsynth you can have sooo many OSCs running - this makes it phat you know. But get a single OSC mono analogue, plug it straight into a path with no AD/DA conversion and get a softy to match that - not gunna happen.

And by the way - V-synth. That's the answer to "what hardware synth lets you build sounds from the ground up?"

[DIGITAL SCREAMS]

^ true

All you need is one of two analog oscilators and it sounds alot nicer and naturally deeper/warmer than 20 stacked software/virtual ones. If you like a 2D wall of noise...then be my guest....

DS

[Derek]

I?m not sure what you mean. I know the TI will be a great sound creation tool, but compared to Reaktor it pales in raw capability. While the TI will let you shape and sculpt your sound by comparison, Reaktor will allow you the ultimate flexibility, by allowing you to build your own synths from the ground up? Not just shape sounds. What hardware synths let you do that?
From what I can tell, software is so far ahead of hardware at this point that it just getting silly.

Now all software needs is the "sound". No denying software has some great capabilities - it's just the sound in most cases doesn't match up. There are some exceptions however, but still nothing matches a nice analogue or even a tried and true VA. It is getting closer though.

Features, voices, total intergration - I'm so sick of people ramming this shit down my throat. I've read people arguing because in their unnamed softsynth you can have sooo many OSCs running - this makes it phat you know. But get a single OSC mono analogue, plug it straight into a path with no AD/DA conversion and get a softy to match that - not gunna happen.

And by the way - V-synth. That's the answer to "what hardware synth lets you build sounds from the ground up?"


I'll agree that a real analog OCS is hard to beat for phatness, but the TI is not an analog synth. It?s a VA. Its hardware driven by software, just as a computer is hardware driven by software. I'll bet the TI at it best, will be no better than a top shelf softsynth. Now keep in mind that if you don't have a top shelf sound card you won't get the top shelf sounds you're looking for. So don't complain because your Sound Blaster isn?t making the grade.

And BTW I had a V-Synth, and know it's very capable, however unless you program for Roland you're not gonna be using it to build entire new synths from the ground up. You'll be $$$ buying $$$ the new VC cards like the rest of the world, if you want that level of change.

Why do some people get angry when it?s suggested that software has surpassed hardware? Personally I think it?s great! More bang for the buck. More cool sounds. I really don?t care how I?m making music so long as it sounds good. I embrace anything that can inspire me. Back in the day I experimented with the early softsynths, and I hated them. I felt the sounds were artificial and two dimensional. However the newest softsynths are a world of difference. The technology has matured significantly. If you fall into the trap of being a hardware snob you?ll be denying yourself the pleasure of playing a lot of truly wondrous synths, samplers, drum machines, effect and so much more. You?ll miss out on a wealth of new sounds.

Anyway who said using softsynths means you need to give up hardware synths? You can have both. I do, and they live quiet happily together in my studio. :D

[Hollowcell]

I'll agree that a real analog OCS is hard to beat for phatness, but the TI is not an analog synth. It?s a VA. Its hardware driven by software, just as a computer is hardware driven by software. I'll bet the TI at it best, will be no better than a top shelf softsynth.

I still am finding that the top of the line VAs still have more characture and presence than softsynths. It may be personal preference though I guess. I just find software needs a heap more processing and FX that hardware. Filters lack charcture in 90% of cases too.

Now keep in mind that if you don't have a top shelf sound card you won't get the top shelf sounds you're looking for. So don't complain because your Sound Blaster isn?t making the grade.

How did you know I was using a soundblaster?! 8O :wink: :D

And BTW I had a V-Synth, and know it's very capable, however unless you program for Roland you're not gonna be using it to build entire new synths from the ground up. You'll be $$$ buying $$$ the new VC cards like the rest of the world, if you want that level of change.

Now this depends on what you mean when you say "build new synths". Even in reaktor you still are using modules designed by the software programmers.

Why do some people get angry when it?s suggested that software has surpassed hardware? Personally I think it?s great! More bang for the buck. More cool sounds. I really don?t care how I?m making music so long as it sounds good. I embrace anything that can inspire me. Back in the day I experimented with the early softsynths, and I hated them. I felt the sounds were artificial and two dimensional. However the newest softsynths are a world of difference. The technology has matured significantly. If you fall into the trap of being a hardware snob you?ll be denying yourself the pleasure of playing a lot of truly wondrous synths, samplers, drum machines, effect and so much more. You?ll miss out on a wealth of new sounds.

In many ways software has surpased hardware - no way I'd argue that. But the main area in which it hasn't is the sound. You mentioned inspiration, there aren't many softies which give me any honestly. The thing I've found with softies is the fact they don't have that instant joy that I find with many hardware synths - specially analogue. I haven't sat there and jammed for hours on any softsynths yet (except playing with FX style sounds). The best software seems to be the software that's not trying to be analogue. I got into the FM7 for a while actually - making patches and resampling turned out some cool results - same with the guitar sims too come to think of it (if you listen to the "heavy electronic" mp3 on my sound click site you'll hear what I did with that). It just takes more work to get something gutsy out of SW is all.

As far as FX and samplers go. I do use some soft FX, some of the latest are quite nice. Softsamplers I haven't given much of a go as yet. When I run output gain high on the EMU then I compare a mid or bass hit against a softie it seems to lack the presence - again the options on the softies are great!

There are a few drum style machines (eg DKFHS) which I would love! These rompler sort of things in software can't be beat. The grand pianos now!!!

Anyway who said using softsynths means you need to give up hardware synths? You can have both. I do, and they live quiet happily together in my studio. :D

No body.

I love these hard VS soft threads. :D

[DIGITAL SCREAMS]

Ok, So exactly why do you think computer based softsynths 'sound' any different to VA? They are basically the same thing arent they. Do you really think the hardware of say a Nord or Virus suffiently colors the sound...which then makes us percieve it to sound better? Or is it down to the fact that coders who work for hardware manufactures are more talented?

DS

[Hollowcell]

I'm guessing your aiming that question at me DS?

I think each peice of hardware has some characturistics based on it's hardware parts - even the software based hardware. :wink:

If it was possible to run...say the MS2000 software Ocs and filters on a Nord hardware platform, then it would sound different to what they were on the MS. Just like when you run a softsynth on a good sound card or a bad one.

I think there is still a characture with a lot of VA hardware that doesn't seem to be matched in software.
Maybe buying a different sound card for each softie a person has on their computer might help.

It's personal preference though. Maybe I'm just trying to hang onto the analogue days a little longer. :wink:

[techno_7]

But, pray tell, what software synths are the really good ones - the new generation that people are talking about. I was going to get the Hartmann Neuron software and controller until I read a Future Music review that gave it 3/10.

Which software synths are worth getting if you're comparing it to hardware?

Well the Korg LegacyCell is pretty cool...and hmmm the Arp2600V, not to mention MinimoogV they're really great made emulations to an affordable price...