| Author
|
can a software studio stand up to commercial productions ?
|
yumade40
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
95
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 01:51
|
dont understand why you have to be ironic......everybody has its opininon anyway....
peace |
|
|
Sektor666
Offtopic posts:
12
Posted: Aug 9, 2004
|
|
Fat not means better that is the real deal behind the words , i don't like fat girls , are you ? |
|
|
|
Input
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
24
Posts :
456
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 01:54
|
Software hardware WTF,
Make the music and make it sounds good- that's what important
 Space is the place
http://www.megabit.co.il |
|
|
|
orange
Fat Data
Started Topics :
154
Posts :
3918
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 02:04
|
when i said fat i meen : full,strong,punchy,very clean and bright and also very stimulating
and i sey that because i use hardware and good hardware synth's but i also can sey that i can do the same quality sounds in soft to
understand one thing:if soft is not compare with hard why slowly companies like korg,roland,moog,tc,novation etc.. start to make plug ins for the computers maybe it isnt worth it??? no because its the future.and i sey slowly because they cant just stop sopporting and making hard because people still relay on hardware but most of them are the oldest generation of musicians that learn to make music with hard .
youngest generation use much more computers in theyr music and the next gen i think will use hard even less then we do maybe not at all.
orange
http://www.landmark-recordings.com/
http://soundcloud.com/kymamusic |
|
|
|
fuzzikitten
Annunaki
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
603
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 06:24
|
One thing that is worth considering, in favor of software synthesis, is that compared to hardware synths it is relatively young.
I think analogue has an advantage on some sounds, given the characteristics that hardware components add to the sound.
But software synths, and I think we'll see this become an increasing strength, offer uncomparible flexibility.
With the only limit being CPU, and given how quickly CPU speeds increase, I think we'll continue to see softsynths grow and develop to acheive sounds that a hardware synth can only dream about.
It all comes down to flexibility, being able to route this to that and have LFO25 modulating the frequency cutoff of filter 1 delayed by LFO 16 and the output being routed through a ring mod which is modulated by... you get the idea.
We've seen the amazing, AMAZING sounds that are capable with hardware synthesis. What we haven't seen is the maturation of the sounds capable with software synths.
The best is yet to come.
-Alex |
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 06:32
|
I would agree on 1 thing. The factory presets that you get in Hardware synths are usually very good. Much better than what you get most of the time in software synths. When i first heard the factory presets of A1 VST i thought i wouldn't touch it again. But when i started to play with it's knobs i managed to make some wacky sounds. Whoever judges the quality of hardware or software synths by the quality of its presets doesn't really have the right to debate. Sorry guys. The dry specs of software product such as Reactor blows out EVERY hardware synth that exists on the earth.
The question is do you know what to do with it.
If you're just a musician who needs his rom-based synth than you should go for some Roland or Korg product. If you are an experienced Synth freak with little more knowledge in synthesis than you wouldn't even argue. Unless you're Hans Zimmer and you own a huge wall to wall Modular Synth.
My extra 4 cents
And i don't pretend to be neither of those btw, i just quote some very experienced (and not old-fashioned) ppl i know. Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
deejayridoo
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
14
Posts :
309
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 14:29
|
you cannot use the phattness of a sound, remember that. cause it´s a matter of shaping the sound into the mix and therefore you´ll ever have to make it thin....
and for weird psychedelic soundz (i´m not talking about the big ravelike soundz like f.ex. atmos´klein aber doctor) you need soooooo much effect and processing that the original sound isn´t important at all. it´s all a matter of making things as weird as possible and there hardware synths often aren´t as flexible as software.
the only argument that i can accept is that real old analogue monsters do sound more interesting because they synthesize with a very different method - it´s pure voltage control (electricity is much closer to that)
but all virtual analogue or digital synths are the same...
BUT
there is one big difference though:
you buy a hardware synth and put a lot of love and devotion to it.
and this love pays off.
it´s not the same as using all those cracked warez 
it´s all about knowledge and devotion.
stop about spending to much time thinking about what you want to have. |
|
|
|
yumade40
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
95
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 14:48
|
|
so so true deejayridoo.......your last six lines.... |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Aug 9, 2004 14:48
|
i also think that the plugin market is filled with uninteresting instruments.,
a lot of people making their first synthesizer n stuff..,
so you get a lot of those osc->filt->amp things with uninteresting modulation capabilities.,
i think that most plugin synths fall in that category.,
simple and hardwired VA designs.,
not nessesary bad but not very flexible either.,
with dedicated hardware someone needs to invest a lot of money to bring it on the market.,
so they NEED to sell enough of them.,
so they make sure many people will be happy with it.,
(lots of good presets and extensive editing capabilities)
with plugin synths you can just dump it on the market for a cheap price and see if you make money off of it., you dont have to invest in developing hardware and the distribution costs are much much lower.,
so someone with little experience and quality in synth making can sell their own plugin with only software developement costs., that's why there are so many crap vsti's out there.,
still, it doesnt mean plugins are bad., it only means that you have to look more carefull at what tools you choose..,
and learn to trust your ears.,. if you think it sounds crap then it propably does sound like crap.,
ooh, and i just thought of the most important thing about dedicated hardware synths.,
they are DEDICATED.,
you always know the capabilities of the box.,
you know the polyphony and multitimbrality.,
you know what sounds it has and what character it has.,
you can plan things out., this sound on this box, that sound on that box.,
often, it's best to know what the exact limitations are of your studio so you can think of a track that 'fits' in your studio.,
bouncing and stuff is all very nice but it's also very time consuming., it's much easier to know what kind of performance you can expect.,.,
greets.,
aka., |
|
|
|
other_reality
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
43
Posts :
365
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 17:52
|
There is no need to turn this subject into a battle...! Come on, we're just sharing opinions and ideas *This goes for Sektor and yumade" . And, as I spent some quality thinking time in front of my speakers listening to some fresh Iboga tracks, I think that, actually, what software really needs is quality compression ! Maybe with a top class analog-like compressing tool/plugin, all those hardware freaks will subtly change their minds !
Bring yourselves into the light
www.youtube.com/otherreality |
|
|
|
AvS
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
464
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 19:17
|
"I bet that most of the low budget producers out there rely on software for the most if not the entire of their productions. My question to the pro's out there is : Can a modern PC based on a good soundcard,-P4 with an RME Hammerfall-, loaded with Cubase,Reason Vsti's and VST effects, quality midi controllers and audio mastering software, stand up to commercial standards?"
Definetly not!
Especially when it comes to mastering the sounds really need to leave the realm digital to get a softer, smoother and more pleasent sound. If you can make the same production on a computer, then cow come all big sound studios have expensive outboard gear?
Software synth are also not quite there yet. They have really improved during the last couple of years but they just need the last tiny bit to nail it. |
|
|
|
Sektor666
Inactive User
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
439
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 19:57
|
|
other_reality you right about compression . also it need to be redesigned to sound close to hardware fatness . think of ways how can you increase the sound level but stay on same dB . |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 20:22
|
"Especially when it comes to mastering the sounds really need to leave the realm digital to get a softer, smoother and more pleasent sound. If you can make the same production on a computer, then cow come all big sound studios have expensive outboard gear?"
eeh.,., sorry for saying so but that's a load of bull 
some very expensive ('warm' sounding) processors actually sample the analogue signal internaly , process it in digital and convert it back to analog at the outputs., you would not recognise it by the sound.,
also, i've used mastering grade monitors with digital inputs.,.,
so there you go.,
analog certainly has some good points too .,
but don't expect warmth from an ssl.,
they have such low distortion that they are even more precise than 192/24 audio.., (so they add virtually NOTHING to the sound!!!)
you could choose analog for the sound of some vintage processors.,
these processors do not exist in digital so if you want that sound you can only use the real stuff.,
big studio's have a big history so have a big stack of vintage equipment.,
the engineers at big studios are usually very experienced people.,., and they learned to mix/master with analog devices., so that's what they know., so that's what they will use (a very smart decision, imo, why build a new toolset when the one you've got is already very good.,.,)
it's not analog that adds smoothness to the sound, it's GOOD DESIGN!!.,
and there are more good analog designs than digital ones (some analog designs are over 50 years old!).,
a lot of companies that have this know-how are only producing analog devices., (they have done so for the last few decades so why change a good thing?)
now i ask you, have you ever seen anyone master on a Beringher eurorack ??.,
no?.,
., but it's ANALOGUE so why not ?.,
a badly designed analog system can seriously f*#k your sound up.,.,
and a good digital system can make you want to lick the monitors cause you just cant get enough of that flava ,.,
greets.,
aka., |
|
|
|
Pavel
Troll
Started Topics :
313
Posts :
8649
Posted : Aug 10, 2004 20:51
|
So, shall we agree atlast that what counts in the end is the operator, the human being, and not the quality of the DA convertors?
Zildoggo--> Gee, those Behringer Eurorack surely suck. Everyone in the world is doing something without me |
|
|
|
AvS
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
464
Posted : Aug 11, 2004 22:42
|
"now i ask you, have you ever seen anyone master on a Beringher eurorack ??.,
no?.,
., but it's ANALOGUE so why not ?., "
Because Behringer is far from pro. Nobody said that when it's analog it's automaticly good. Well I shure did'nt because that's bullshit.
"a badly designed analog system can seriously f*#k your sound up.,.,"
And a badly programmed digital can not?
IMO badly programmed digital is worse than crappy analog because digital has a tendency to hurt your ears with nasty harsh frequencies.
"a good digital system can make you want to lick the monitors cause you just cant get enough of that flava"
And a good analog system can not?
|
|
|
|
|
