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.

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?"

^ 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

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

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.

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

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.

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!!!

No body.

I love these hard VS soft threads. :D

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

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:

VSTi's worth getting
 

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...