Hardware vs. Software

[OfficialDAPT]

I know this topic has been beaten to death all over the internet, but I'm writing my college research paper on basically how well software can replicate hardware in this day and age. I haven't decided what specific instrument I'm doing yet or if I'm going to do a paper on the topic as a whole. Do you guys have links to anything I might be able to use as sources? For example, online articles, magazines, testimonials from famous musicians/engineers, etc. etc. I've found a couple cool SoundOnSound articles but they seems a little outdated. I'm looking for sources within the past 5 years preferably. Thanks in advance!

[mks]

This is exactly why they train pilots with flight simulators.

It's cheaper and easier if they crash a plane using software rather than hardware.

http://www.x-plane.com/desktop/home/

[lovebeat]

Good point for Software is
1. If save time for testing and editing
2. save more money.
3. You can insert special feature into that software.

Poor point for Software is
- You will not get mood and sense from usage that device at all such as weight, taste, skin, gravity etc...

Good point for Hardware
- You will get mood and sense of that device compleately

Poor point for Hardware
- Waste time
- Waste more money for testing

Conclude
You must use both HW and SW because each part has good point and poor point

[test_recordings]

I think you waste more time with software! Using a single mouse to click on things is annoying, I work a lot faster with hardware - everything's ready to go and I can get a proper feel for it.

Software still can't replicate hardware's synthesising capabilities in terms of audio richness and depth, either. Fair enough, digital has FM synthesis, but I'd still run FM oscillators through a modular synth with everything else analogue to make the most of it...

[VirtualMark]

I owned a Virus TI - initially I was disappointed about the limited signal path and the fact that I couldn't assign anything to anything like in a lot of softsynths. But now I miss the hands on side - every parameter was super smooth. I have been trying to replicate that experience, but midi controllers just aren't able to do it.

I am using the Novation 25SL MK2 which uses Automap, and have mapped out many synths - it's not the same.

Software advantages:

Producing in the box - handy if you're using a laptop.

Use as many copies of a plugin as you can handle - whereas with hardware if you only own 1 compressor you have to choose where you use it.

Modern drag and drop interfaces - these are designed for computers and allow a superior view of things like routing. I.e on Massive or DCAM Synth Squad you can see how much you're modulating a parameter.

Quicker and easier to change plugin order.

Accelerated bouncing of parts - with hardware you have to do it in real time.

Software updates with added functionality - some hardware allows this too but most analog synths don't.


Hardware advantages:

Hands on experience - it is a lot nicer than using a mouse or touchpad.

Purpose built - related to the hands on, each parameter has a control and you can learn it well.

No CPU usage.


Some of the arguments brought up in this thread are nonsense:

Poor point for Software is
- You will not get mood and sense from usage that device at all such as weight, taste, skin, gravity etc...

What? Yes, because I always wonder about the GRAVITY of a device, that's the most important thing. And I always lick my synths SKIN to see what they TASTE like, then I bench press them to see if the WEIGHT is ok. Only then can I make music.

Poor point for Hardware
- Waste time

Again, WHAT? How is making music wasting time?

Software still can't replicate hardware's synthesising capabilities in terms of audio richness and depth, either.

Unless of course you read the manual and learn to program it properly. Your lack of skill does not mean that software can't make great music, or that someone else can't get great sounds coming out of software:



Watch some more of the vids on this channel, they do demos of a lot of synths with some great examples.

This is exactly why they train pilots with flight simulators.

It's cheaper and easier if they crash a plane using software rather than hardware.

I don't think this really applies here does it tho mate. How do you crash a synth? I can throw it round the room all day but I doubt I could do the same damage as crashing a jumbo jet.

[hifi]

soffware > hardwar cuz i can torrent it x)))) l o l ! ! !

[skimpi]

Software still can't replicate hardware's synthesising capabilities in terms of audio richness and depth, either.

Unless of course you read the manual and learn to program it properly. Your lack of skill does not mean that software can't make great music, or that someone else can't get great sounds coming out of software:

he didnt say anything about software cant make great music and hardware can, or that software cant make great sounds. He said that software cant emulate the richness and depth of hardware (presumably analog?) Although sometimes terms like this get lost on me, and I dont really understand wat makes a sound deep and rich, but im sure with effects and layering whatever, you can get a sound pretty much equal to analog hardware, the only thing is that the analog will sound like it off the bat and you dont have to fuck around with it. Straight up, soft synths wont sound as phat as analog, but like i said you can work with it in the box.

[VirtualMark]

he didnt say anything about software cant make great music and hardware can, or that software cant make great sounds. He said that software cant emulate the richness and depth of hardware (presumably analog?) Although sometimes terms like this get lost on me, and I dont really understand wat makes a sound deep and rich, but im sure with effects and layering whatever, you can get a sound pretty much equal to analog hardware, the only thing is that the analog will sound like it off the bat and you dont have to fuck around with it. Straight up, soft synths wont sound as phat as analog, but like i said you can work with it in the box.

Yes I read his post, which is why I posted a video showing that modern softsynths can sound great. Did you watch it?

[skimpi]

he didnt say anything about software cant make great music and hardware can, or that software cant make great sounds. He said that software cant emulate the richness and depth of hardware (presumably analog?) Although sometimes terms like this get lost on me, and I dont really understand wat makes a sound deep and rich, but im sure with effects and layering whatever, you can get a sound pretty much equal to analog hardware, the only thing is that the analog will sound like it off the bat and you dont have to fuck around with it. Straight up, soft synths wont sound as phat as analog, but like i said you can work with it in the box.

Yes I read his post, which is why I posted a video showing that modern softsynths can sound great. Did you watch it?

does it sound analog though? im not saying it sounds shit lol, no one is saying that software sounds shit, just that it doesnt sound like gritty analog hardware

[alphacat]

I always think of the Eno quote (that I can't for the fuckin' life of me source) about something being lost in the transition from instruments requiring physical discipline over control of nuanced things like gesture in order to be played to instruments where all physical interactions were filtered out and reduced to one button on a mouse...

I started on hardware, became a software zealot, and now realize the folly of being a purist on either. I'd even go so far as to say that treating them as being mutually exclusive is problematic at best, because on the back end all that counts is sound: if it sounds good to you (and you're not just saying that because you don't know any better) then argument is moot; on the front end, it's all about ease of workflow... and neither analog or digital has complete dominance here either, only a set of preferences that they're catering to.

[VirtualMark]

does it sound analog though? im not saying it sounds shit lol, no one is saying that software sounds shit, just that it doesnt sound like gritty analog hardware

Gritty?

It's not designed to sound gritty or whatever words you're using. It's modelled after a few famous synths - my suggestion would be to do a bit of research as you don't appear to know anything about it. KVR and Gearslutz have some good threads and sound quality comparisons.

EDIT: Unless of course, you'd like to post some examples of "gritty" sounds that Diva can't reproduce? I'd be interested to hear this.

[VirtualMark]

I always think of the Eno quote (that I can't for the fuckin' life of me source) about something being lost in the transition from instruments requiring physical discipline over control of nuanced things like gesture in order to be played to instruments where all physical interactions were filtered out and reduced to one button on a mouse...

I started on hardware, became a software zealot, and now realize the folly of being a purist on either. I'd even go so far as to say that treating them as being mutually exclusive is problematic at best, because on the back end all that counts is sound: if it sounds good to you (and you're not just saying that because you don't know any better) then argument is moot; on the front end, it's all about ease of workflow... and neither analog or digital has complete dominance here either, only a set of preferences that they're catering to.

Yeah I think you're right. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. After using both, I'm glad that they both exist.

If I had the cash, I would own a shitload of both. Pretty much like Deadmau5, with his room full of modular synths and computer crammed with software.

[test_recordings]

does it sound analog though? im not saying it sounds shit lol, no one is saying that software sounds shit, just that it doesnt sound like gritty analog hardware

Gritty?

It's not designed to sound gritty or whatever words you're using. It's modelled after a few famous synths - my suggestion would be to do a bit of research as you don't appear to know anything about it. KVR and Gearslutz have some good threads and sound quality comparisons.

EDIT: Unless of course, you'd like to post some examples of "gritty" sounds that Diva can't reproduce? I'd be interested to hear this.

Sorry mate, nice synth but it still can't cut in comparison to analog. Have a taste of this...



TB-303 with Devilfish mod was pretty extensively used by The Prodigy and softsynths still don't sound 'phat' as far as my ears can tell.

If you did an A/B test between a softsynth and an analog synth you'd be even able to feel the difference, especially in the bass frequencies. You even gave it away with the Diva being 'modelled' after other famous synths - it's not a proper replication, just a mathematical imitation, even two famous synths of the same model will sound different due to the slight physical differences of the components.

[VirtualMark]

does it sound analog though? im not saying it sounds shit lol, no one is saying that software sounds shit, just that it doesnt sound like gritty analog hardware

Gritty?

It's not designed to sound gritty or whatever words you're using. It's modelled after a few famous synths - my suggestion would be to do a bit of research as you don't appear to know anything about it. KVR and Gearslutz have some good threads and sound quality comparisons.

EDIT: Unless of course, you'd like to post some examples of "gritty" sounds that Diva can't reproduce? I'd be interested to hear this.

Sorry mate, nice synth but it still can't cut in comparison to analog. Have a taste of this...



TB-303 with Devilfish mod was pretty extensively used by The Prodigy and softsynths still don't sound 'phat' as far as my ears can tell.

If you did an A/B test between a softsynth and an analog synth you'd be even able to feel the difference, especially in the bass frequencies. You even gave it away with the Diva being 'modelled' after other famous synths - it's not a proper replication, just a mathematical imitation, even two famous synths of the same model will sound different due to the slight physical differences of the components.

Lol, I've been listening to the Prodigy since the early 90s, I love their music.

Anyhow, your knowledge is out of date - there are some great software emulations out now! Diva is just one - from what I've seen people couldn't tell the difference when it was compared to hardware. I'll try and find the test. Other good ones I like are the Vaz modular and some of the Xils synths. I also quite like the new Waves Element.

But I won't argue further - if you'd like to post an example of a sound that software can't make I'd be interested to hear it. It's such an old argument and I've had it before, yet nobody ever posts examples.

EDIT: I've found this comparison, the sounds a bit shitty so you might want to download it. Can you tell the difference? Which is which?

Soundcloud

[VirtualMark]

it's not a proper replication, just a mathematical imitation

ALL softsynths are 1s and 0s, the same as the music you listen to - this is what computers do! What did you expect?

[hifi]

can't really refute what someone thinks they're hearing though, some ppl just buy analog synths as a sort of gimmick/because it's cool, nostalgia, or just actually like the purported "warmth" of the sound, honestly i personally think tht some software emulations are so close tht there's a very diminutive difference in perception but i guess i can be one of those materialistic ppl who wants the "real" thing, like the hands on experience , something u dont get w/ software. that's always fun

[Artie_Fufkin]

you'd be even able to feel the difference, especially in the bass frequencies.

I find this hard to believe. Bass frequencies are the simplest part of the spectrum.

[NinjaEdit]

Do your own homework.

[test_recordings]

you'd be even able to feel the difference, especially in the bass frequencies.

I find this hard to believe. Bass frequencies are the simplest part of the spectrum.

Go A/B it yourself. I actually have so fuck you trying to tell me how it is

If bass is the simplest parts of the spectrum and soft synths can't even get that right, what hope do they have?

[mthrfnk]

I have no experience with analog synths really, however it wouldn't surprise me if they have more clarity in the low end... I've found with a few soft synths once you start going down too low the signal can start to become garbage (prime example in my mind right now is some of Massives more complex waveforms) just because of the way in which the software generates the sound.