As both a guitarist and synth player I've learned over the years not to get too attached to your instruments. You are the real instrument that transcends all the others when they break, get lost or stolen, or become obsolete. Have a sort of nomadic attitude for them.
See tame impala Kevin Parker. With a fire he lost a lot of his old synths , but I think he was getting better after that because he had some new ones which also spike more creativity and so on.
Embrace it. We live in a fantastic to be a musician, especially a synth/keyboard player. To be able to have vsts that emulate classic synths and create new futuristic synths is just mind boggling. I love booting up my computer DAW and just loosing myself in the plethora of synthesis. At an affordable price too. Love it. Great videos Woody 👏👏👏
One thing that people simply fail to understand is that a midi controller, audio device, and computer with a DAW or Host.... is.....a hardware synth. The output at the 1/4 inch outs of my Focusrite audio device is no different that the 1/4 inch outputs of any hardware synth. The true power of a computer based synth is the ability to layer up any combination of VSTi's and play them simultaneously without the need for extra midi cables, audio leads and power plugs. If we look at each VSTi as a separate "Oscillator" in a larger synth we realize that incredibly complex sounds are possible that hardware could only dream of making.
I really like being able to use something like BeatMaker on iPad to host layers of stuff like a rompler, FM, and/or virtual analog in the mix. Example stuff I did just using iOS synths (except for the added vocals and Cajon on “Post Op”): soundcloud.com/rob-anderson-104336556/post-op-original-song-apr-2019 soundcloud.com/rob-anderson-104336556/interglacial-improv-for-open-mic-on-jan-11
Your right - The real difference is with 'software' synths you are using a general purpose CPU, while with 'hardware' you have single purpose chips (ASICs) or components that are limited in what they can do, and also quite a bit simpler/quicker.
You can't underestimate the 'good to go in seconds' on a hardware synth. I had a Korg M3 which took minutes to start up and it was such a pain. I have a Kawai ES8 now and it turns on almost instantly. When I want to play, try a new idea etc I can sit down and do it immediately.
Amazing video Woody! You broke down the two worlds perfectly. I am right there with you as far as utilizing both. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I love and use both Hardware and VST's. Thank you for always having fun and informative videos. Oh! and I love the plants. Brings a very colorful and peaceful vibe to the video.
The quality of VSTs over the hardware synths are almost identical and it’s good in musical production point of view but for a performer or an enthusiast, you will never get the same experience and satisfaction you get from playing the real synth, it’s just like this, why we would love to go to a live concert if we can listen to the same song in our media player.
@@williamtopping I'm really convinced that VSTs can immitate exactly the sound of the hardwares, there are VSTs that uses exactly the same algorithm as the hardware so you wouldn't hear any difference at all, if there's any, I believe it's very tolerable or you may need a scope to check that. 😂 Wow, a modular keyboard is a great idea, it would really help a lot of musicians to save plenty of dollars 😀. Imagine, I can layout my keyboard depending on my needs, or just simply replace a specific module for upgrade, no need to buy the entire keyboard, it' just really amazing to think but I don't think it's profitable for any company.
I wish this were true. Then I wouldn't have any hardware at all. The only software synth which sounds like hardware is the old Sylenth1. For many years, the Sylenth1 was also voted the best software synth of the year. The other software synths sound like a sock has covered the speakers. It's not bright and "in your face". I have lots of hardware synths and outboard effects because they sound better, not because of their latency, ease of use and features. Even the effects produce the same muffled sound. You get what you pay for.
@@kian9304 They may use the same algorithms, but no VST can emulate natural components and frequencies from an analog synthesizer. Digital is digital / Analog Is Analog. Try it by yourself - lend an analog synthesizer and compare it with a VST which tries to emulate that. Both variants have very different bandwidths and frequencies.
I tried software for live gigs and it wasn’t a great experience. Then I discovered the proper device for the job. iPad. Rock solid, cheap, portable, touch screen really adds to real time control. Some great cheap and free synths available. Works great in combination with hard synths using an external dac/mixer board and a USB hub. Can do some crazy midi control and routing with the right software making hardware and software blur and expanding both.
Absolutely this. I’m just a hobbyist, but I love having my iPad attached to my cheap arranger type keyboard for extra patches and outboard effects. Makes a great light rig to drag to open mic night.
An iPad is fine and offers a lot of reasonably priced synths. A full VST synth on a PC offers much greater variety in the kinds of synths available. Many of my favorite classic synths are not available in iPad format, but are for Windows. I've been gigging with PC soft synths for over 20 years. I've used my iPhone synths in combination too. iOS, Windows, etc. Each can have their own glitches about equal. I use both software & hardware for live gigs. Generally speaking, software wins. I did buy a MODX6 just like the one Woody has, mainly for backup if my software crashes. I also have a couple Korg M1's and other hardware.
You’re insane. iPad isn’t nearly stable enough and you can’t switch sounds easy at all, there’s nothing for live performance. I tried for almo year and it’s just not viable.
What kind of synths y made ? 70 been as a dark age for real poly and memory control by micro processor . At 78 some progress was made with J4 , P5 , OBX ...Yamaha CS from 50 to 80 - logic board , Poly Moog , kind combo of presets and waves under '' advance '' divide down poly .
I can't resist echoing the musical sentiments below, "what a time to be alive"! I grew up in the 50s and 60s playing piano, trumpet, and guitar. Got married in the 70s, lusting after Synths that were financially out of reach for me then. Now I have more Synths than I need, but love, love ,love every one of them. Currently: Hardware: Triton Exterme, KingKorg, Akai MPK249 Software: Reason Studio, Korg Synth Collection 4, Arturia Synths V Collection 9, Dune 3, ... The low cost of software these days, and what you get for your money is rediculous, especially if you wait for holiday deals, etc. As I do not perform, I find myself using software mostly because of it's convenience, versatility, and space savings. So I don't get lost in options, I make extensive use of favorite patches, etc. and can get lost playing these instruments for hours! Whatever you choose, Enjoy! There has never before been a time like Now for those who love to play and collect instruments!
This is such a good video! You mention so many awesome points. There seems to be endless pros and cons. For us as an indie synth-pop band, we like to have access to both hardware and software. So ultimately we get the best of both worlds. Thanks, Woody, enjoyed this one so much I'm going to watch it again. ❤♪♬♫🎤♩🎹
You reinforced my thinking here. I'm glad of that. The way I see it, DAWs are for composition, refinement, design, while hardware is for performance, practice, and improv. They're both excellent solutions... for different uses. There's also the matter of hyper-niche VSTs or hardware devices: I'm probably not gonna find a Plasma Drive or Motor Synth on PC.
My computer starts up fast due to an SSD and 6 core 12 thread cpu... My krome takes 1 min to start up ... But I like both vst and hardware. I can combine all of them so to me they all are just tools. Great video, thanks.
Some of those arguments, to me, sound like they are coming from someone with an emotional connection to hardware that attempts to rationalize it. There are generalizations, exaggerations, half trues, and some inaccurate statements. We just have to accept that for the most part, the desire to own hardware is just emotional, and not logical. And in some cases the sad truth is that we have to budget accordingly, even if we might not want to. If someone don’t want to play music on the same device they surf the web, and do their mails, perhaps considering getting a cheap laptop/tablet-hybrid, powered by Atom or similar is a solution. Such computers are often fanless, so they can be used next to the studio computer even when recording audio, if there is a need to have such services near the music making computer. Perhaps one should keep any such services away from the music making environment (except for the occasional tutorial, and then having a separate computer makes it much easier). It can also help to keep the system stable. If one is able to keep the music making computer offline, except for the occasional update, I would recommend that as well, but it does mean that back-ups have to be local, or uploaded from a server/separate computer that doesn’t make a direct connection for the studio computer to the web. Start-up times, well, there are several of synths that have a bit of startup times themselves. And some analog takes several of minutes to warm up. So the idea that the hardware synth is instant isn’t correct, in some cases it almost is, in others, far from it. A modern computer can start up really quickly. And if the goal is to quickly be able to start and just play, there are possible solutions, like the DAW can be put in the auto start scheme, and one can even start a session with instruments loaded as templates, to have the sounds load on start-up (yet again an argument for having a separate music computer, because having the DAW auto start may end up being irritating on ones internet/mail computer). There are software that comes with content similar to the hardware workstation. But Native Instruments with their Kontrol solution is building something that can be used as a workstation, but where the sounds might come from instruments and libraries that offer deeper levels and more realism than would be found in a workstation. Some synths have great interfaces, but many don’t. Several require digging through menus, with an interface that is way behind in terms of usability to a big screen VST. Some uses multi-function controls/softknobs, and Native Instruments NKS offers a similar experience for software synths (there is the VIP software by Akai and the other brands in the same group, as well as Novation’s solutions that also offer similar experience). Latency, depending on the system, may be noticeable with software, but in many cases it isn’t. Even though it probably is higher than on the hardware synth, if it isn’t noticeable, it isn’t noticeable. Sound switching, depending on how it is carried out, however might take longer on the computer, and some workstations lets the notes keep sounding while switching sounds. Hardware is often quite a bit more expensive compared to software, and they can easily drop in price as much or more than a software over time, especially if a newer version is introduced of the hardware, the fact that the software drops to 0% so that the percentage is higher doesn’t matter, it is the loss in actual money value that matters. Hardware can suffer from bugs. Sometimes they are fixed with software updates, other times not. With software fixes usually comes quicker, but it is also easier to move on, and cheaper, compared to having to sell a second hand product with a bug. Sometimes even hardware synths need a re-boot, just like the computer. Bugs and the need to reboot are occurring more often in computer based solutions, for sure. But in most cases it isn’t a big issue. Hardware can break to a state where it can’t be repaired, and that doesn’t have to take decades. So it isn’t given that hardware will last longer than software. And given the higher price of hardware, it is usually cheaper to buy a few replacement softwares over time. I’m a hardware software hybrid person, so I’m not writing this to say that hardware is pointless, because I too like to have hardware. But in most cases there is software counterparts to the hardware that does the same thing, perhaps even better (polyphonic sounds, where the hardware is monophonic, or higher sound quality and more features when it comes to various digital hardware synths). I’ve come to accept that hardware is often about the emotional connection, which perhaps doesn’t justify the price (rarely does). Sometimes it is about the interface, though, but then I’m talking hands on subtractive synthesis (analog or virtual analog), other form of digital synthesis if it exist in software form, will most likely be easier to use with the mouse than digging through menus. One can have endless debates about the sound quality. But I will leave it at; even if software would not do a perfect job, it would in most cases do a good enough job for the sounds to sit in a track (there is the exception with really poor software, but then we are talking about poor software, not some snobby opinion on software from for example Arturia) I would recommend someone that wants to get in to synthesis to get a hardware synth with good hands on controls. For that I would recommend any of the Korg Minilogues (perhaps the XD module, in order to not have to have a mini keyboard, that may not be used), or getting the Studiologic Sledge, that is digital, but offer better polyphony. Both also integrate in a cool way with the Omnisphere software. There are more expensive offerings, that would be even better, but I would not recommend someone starting out to spend a lot on a hardware synth. It is great to have something to touch and play around with, with a lot of dedicated hands on parameters. But when one has learned and understood, sometimes one might forego the hands-on experience for the extended capabilities of software. I would absolutely recommend going down the computer and software route primarily. An iPad could be an alternative to a traditional computer, and here I mean iPad and not tablet in general. For those that stumbled upon the concept of Dawless music making, I would say that should be a side project for someone that also makes music in the computer, as it isn’t very effective and quite expensive. And some of those dawless sequencers are actually computers running inside of a hardware that doesn’t look like a computer. Workstation keyboards are in some cases also computers. Today computers are simply much more effective when it comes to creating and recording music than specialized hardware, and they have been for some time. One thing that I think would help the synth community is for people to accept that a synth is a sound source and a separate way of controlling it. The controlling aspect sometimes is a built in keyboard, but the keyboard only sends signals to trigger the sounds in the sound source, there isn’t a physical trigger like the hammers hitting strings in the piano, it is just a signal. Sometimes the controller part is a midi-in connection on the sound source (software or hardware based, depending on if it is hardware or software), and it could even be a different interface than the piano styled. A synth isn’t an instrument, like an acoustic, where it has to be built in to a unit and there are many advantages to this; The sound source can be so many things, analog, virtual analog, sample based, physical modeling and so on, and it can be in the form of hardware or software (in a computer or tablet). And the controller doesn’t have to look a specific way, it can be piano styled, or grid based, or a ribbon controller, or anything else someone comes up with. And one can even use the same controller for several of different sound sources, if one finds a controller that suits them, whereas one can’t play ones favorite acoustic piano action and combine it with the sound of different brands of acoustic pianos. The controller + sound source in separate units is just as much an instrument as the synth with the sound source and the controller built in to a single unit. Thinking that having separate units, is somehow less of an instrument, could very well lead to misguided purchase decisions. A great interface is a great interface, and hands on controls can be part of that, but when actually playing, often a limited amount of hands on controls are needed, so, a midi controller might very well cover that if it has some programmable ones (the midi controller may then control software or another hardware). In some cases using foot controllers are even better, and the number of synths with built in foot controllers, is almost down to zero. Programming each software with similar parameters to react in a similar matter to the controls, takes less time, than learning where those controls sit on different hardware, and when it comes to soft-knobs, that may require setting it up in the hardware synth as much as it does with the software. If someone thinks an instrument has to be self-contained, they should take up an instrument where that is actually the case, rather than project that idea on to synthesizers, because that simply isn’t true for synthesizers.
I agree with most of what Jon wrote. I've been using software synths for 35 years! And they are still my preference. And unlike most soft synth fans, I'm primarily a live player. My software synths from 35 years ago still work! They were on the Amiga computer from 1985, the first major known computer platform that had software synths. I can run them either original, or emulate my Amiga! However, soft synths have really advanced since then, so it's not something I need to do often. I ran the very first major PC software synths such as Seer System's Reality & Bitheadz AS-1. I still have computers capable of running them, just as you can keep a hardware keyboard from the 90s running. There are plenty of options if you really want to do that. And what's the disadvantage of pulling out an old computer vs an old keyboard? The computer takes up less space! I've been running VSTs since they first came out roughly 20 years ago. And I still run many old ones even on computers that can run Windows 10, because it is possible to multi-boot OS's on Windows machines. I have drives setup with Windows XP, 7 & 10 that have i7 processors running at 3 ghz, 8 gigs of ram, SSD drives and plenty of space. Even better, the drives can come out as easy as a disc and boot another. I highly recommend cloning your drives, and ideally have a backup computer. Eventually, you will likely see the Korg Kronos as a VST once Korg has moved onto the next thing to market. VST's have amazing power and possibilities. I've replaced many hardware keyboards with software, and many classics that were way too impractical to own the real ones. If you gig and you are your own road crew, VST's and a laptop can't be beat. The number of hardware synths you can replace is staggering. Roland offers the same engines that power their brand new Jupiter X as VST soft synths and they offer nearly all of their classic synths as software now. Korg offers their classic M1, Wave Station, analog synths and recently their Triton Extreme as a VST. I use a Yamaha MODX so that covers most Yamaha sounds of the past 20 years & the latest Montage. Sample collections for Kontakt are available that include all factory sounds of the Korg Kronos, Yamaha MOTIF XF and many other synths. Companies like Arturia have cloned a bunch of analog & digital classic synths. The list goes on and on. Always have a hardware synth for backup just in case to get you through a show even if your not sounding your best. Because if your running only hardware, your probably not sounding your best as you probably can only carry so much gear.
n8goulet interesting point with the live gig point. I hear that most people prefer using hardware for live music but i think thats only for novelty of using a real instrument and not using a computer. Software is very much powerful and acessible
Reason, augmented with select pieces of hardware does it for me. I have an affection for the old synths from my younger days (Yamaha, Roland, Ensoniq), and so I like to keep them around. But some of the VA's in Reason are becoming classics themselves.
Watching synth videos you'll either encounter plastic plants, small toy figurines , color changing led lights or half of the screen is turned into a oscilloscope.
ato zee damn dude, I can never watch another synth video the same again 😂 I do I feel better about wanting real plants to grow fruit, veg and herbs with at least!
@* AnimalHeadSpirit * As noted, there are times when plastic plants make more sense. My fiancee is convinced plastic flowers just make more sense to use at our up coming wedding vs real ones. And since my bands play covers of famous songs and no band is ever going to sound "exactly" like the record and with different musicians than played on the records, providing the illusion of sounding like the record is what really matters. And software definitely gives you the same feeling listening to it at a live performance in a band situation as the original synths. Now if you want to compare them as solo instruments and hear which DACs sound better and compare them with an oscilloscope your wasting your time. No one at a gig is going to pickup on the differences. Software will provide the flavor of the famous sounds, where as hardware will give you a much smaller palette of sounds to choose from. With software, the sky is the limit. Unlimited sound engines, no road crew needed, and infinitely more affordable and practical.
My Roland JUNO DS has a built-in audio interface, so basically I connect my laptop to it, and the sounds from my laptop comes right out from the JUNO DS's L/R outputs. So convenient!!!
I learned a long time ago to have a dedicated PC for my music with a dedicated drive just for the operating system, most of the time it is not connected to the network so I can pick when it updates the OS and software. The system is a dual boot with Linux as the main OS and Windows 8 for when I cant use Ubuntu which isn't very often, I can't remember the last time it crashed!
Me too. I recommend the Dell Latitudes that are a little older. You can swap out the main hard drive just like putting in a disc. Boot Windows XP - Windows 10 and run synths that are 20 years old while running the latest too. I set one drive up that can boot all 3. Disable internet access altogether once everything is working.
I disagree with one of your points about user interface. The original DX-7 has a horrible user interface for modifying the sound. Dexed, the free VST surpasses the original in so many ways. I now program in the VST and export the patch to the hardware, purely to offload the CPU load from the PC. The reliability of hardware is not as high as you suggest. A broken F string on my CP-70 still haunts me 30 years later. That is as hardware an instrument as can be... Love your channel. Thanks for inspiring, thoughtful content!
But we’re talking about a synth from 1983 where digital components were costly and processing was limited. Take a ModX or a System8 and FM programming is even easier and you don’t need to shift form keyboard to computer all the time. The fact that you need to offload a very simplistic 5 operator FM synth is another potent problem with Soft Synths. You never know when it will start to glitch.
I agree with you, you can lower the latency, I built a gaming computer for power and bought an audio interface, I am getting low latency and crystal clear sounds.
From the point of view of someone who now owns and uses lots of hardware synths again, Omnisphere is still a top dog of the softsynths especially when you can get some hardware control over it ( I created a custom faceplate overlay for it which goes onto a 33 knob/slider midi controller and that was cool for me )
Dear Woody, it was one of the best videos I have seen for a while. Currently I play my Genos and had a few other arrangers throughout the years, as well as some DAW software systems, but I always preferred the real, physical keyboards. Thanks so much for sharing your ideas with us here.
I've pretty much stopped using my hardware virtual analogue synths in favour of Serum or FM8, but I've found myself using my hardware analogue synths more. With VCV rack you can now do some pretty amazing things integrating modular hardware with virtual modules. I like fiddling with things while making music, or having physical things to play. Most of the VST synths I use are because I'm looking to automate a lot of parameters or get a very specific (usually FM) sound. The big advantage (in my mind) to using hardware synths is the hardware effects pedals that you can use with them. There are some great digital VST effects (echo boy, Valhalla's range) but nothing comes quite as close as setting up a good physical effects chain on an analogue synth. The sweet spot is definitely a combination of both.
I went from hardware to all software many years ago in hopes of simplifying my studio life...but you know what happened? All the joy and creativity in sound creation went out the door. I'm happy to say that years latter I am back to a room full of hardware synths with glorious real knobs and sliders....and have never been happier. :)
Same, sold the Atari and all the hardware 15 years ago went with Reason then later Ableton, hardly finished any music with them, too many options and avenues to disappear down, although computers today are far superior, I like the limitations and rawness of hardware for getting ideas down, now have an MPC and a few hardware synths and an iPad the creative spark seems to be back again.
As someone who has and uses both, I just see it as a means to an end. As long as I get the sound I want at a particular instance, that's what should matter. I will say that if you pick the right MIDI controller, you can develop that sentimental relationship with it just like with the hardware. For instance, I upgraded my controller from a Novation ReMOTE 61SL to the Arturia Keylab 61 Mk2. I already own the V Collection (currently 7) and thus I love having a keyboard that will access directly 20+ synths. In a way, it's like having any synth you want within one keyboard. (Whoever has the real estate to accommodate that many synths? =] ). The key aspect (no pun intended) is whether the controller can be just as responsive as any other instrument. This also will add to the sentimental bond with the instrument (both controller and software). All in all, good job as always =]
I am 100% with you!!!! When I use hardware, I am getting faster into the flow and inspiration and I take my time listening to the vibe. VSTs are great, but they are like eating in a fast food restaurant.
I began this journey in 1980 with a little Moog Prodigy, which went through various trades - Yamaha CS30, SCI Pro-One and Roland JX3P. So I had what are now analogue classics the first time round and … they weren’t all that. Then there was this period around the late 80s early 90s when hardware stopped having knobs and you just peered at a little window to change parameters. Then there’s all the mess of wires and cables everywhere. I went off synths for a bit. I built my first music PC in 1995, painstakingly assembling components and using SMPTE to synch them all. Then Cubase VST came along a couple of years later and did in software what I was trying to do with hardware. But one bit of software got me back to knob-twiddling again - even if it was via a mouse and that was Reason. It’s grown to become a real mad professor’s Lab. So I’ve got what are now regarded as the best softsynths - and I’d regard the finest to be from Spectrasonics and U-he. But now I have the disposable income, I have a hankering for hardware with knobs again - and it’s made a return. I bought a Novation Summit, and one of the hidden benefits is that Omnisphere has hardware-profiled it so that you can use the knobs to control other models like Moogs and Prophets. The other hybrid is the Roland System 8, which has kind of reversed the trend, being essentially hardware storage and control of Roland’s own swapped analogue ‘plug-outs’. Want to swap the Jupiter 8 for an a System 100? You can in one bit of hardware. I really like that idea as it’s the best of both worlds. In idle moments, I look at the prices of your Prophets and Moogs (which ain’t cheap), but have to stop and ask myself whether they’d be better than what I have in the computer. It’s really just the nostalgia of when I was young and those names were everywhere. Not sure where I was going with that ramble. But if you’re in a band, get hardware. If you’re not, the computer is not inferior in any way.
I can understand that we are in a different era, where software is sometimes easier, and much cheaper. But the thing to understand, which you pointed out in this video, is that hardware is very reliable, built well, holds its value, increases in value from time to time, and it’s so nice to have the actual synth to play, touch, and have a sense of excitement that you own something that made music what it was, in the case of the vintage gear. I still believe in using hardware for studio use, and gigs as well. You have a clean, crisp sound, and you know it won’t let you down with a great feeling key action, we’ll built metal case, and an easy to use interface. If you want different sounds, you can always load them in through midi using sysex. I don’t know about you, but I feel so much satisfaction of owning vintage synths and being able to own a piece of gear that made music history. I will never sell my synths, and will make the best of them to the best of my ability! Ps, I know I have said this before, but I would die to see you start buying vintage gear again, and making videos. I was and still am so inspired by you. I have always loved playing the piano, and have always had a soft spot for professional synths, and your videos made me want to have them all! They sound so good, and I have many that you have had and others that you haven’t featured yet, and I hope you can maybe do the videos that inspired SO MANY PEOPLE! Including me, very much including me! I hope this comment finds you and others well! Have a good night Woody!
Thanks for this video Woody!!! Your so right about "focus"... What I do most of the time is play and compose my song and some little arrangments in my Motif's pattern sequencer, then move all pieces to Reaper so I can experiment in the software with new and more complex arrangements, add new instruments, and render the motif's sound to tracks, add voices, and so on. For me, it's a good mix between the two worlds...
At 14:00 you said exactly what I wanted to hear, thankyou. I feel like it is the next step to taking my music production to the next level. Thanks! :) I know there is a difference, my ears say different when people say isn’t any difference between vst and hardware. Even if there isn’t it’s the fact that it has lower latency better keys etc so you can get more in touch with the instrument thus being able to compose better . Thanks again for allowing me to finally decide to get a Roland jd-xA
Compromise, get a Yamaha Reface CS so you can jam without wires and even without headphones on the couch, but also get Synth1, Tal Noisemaker, VCV rack and whatever soft synths you like. That way you have a fantastic keybed to play whatever way you prefer. Btw I don't remember hearing you talk about Midi CC Learn which lets you use physical knobs to control soft synth parameters. Makes it less awkward to tweak a soft synth. Great video!
Editing patches on a digital synth, even a new one, still involves a relatively small screen pointed at the ceiling. It was fine when that’s all there was, but we don’t need to torture ourselves anymore. Also, VSTs can bring you the sounds of synths & other instruments you will be hard-pressed to ever encounter in your lifetime, and hardware keyboards are not yet evolved enough to hold.
I've developed connection to some vst. There is a delay plugin that has unique sound, I love it, and there is a pitch shifter that is equally brilliant. 32 bit sadly. As far as actual synth vsts, there are plugins that are usable tools. 303 emus come to mind first. Funny, but one of the best out there is free ' Delphine ' synth - it has this interaction between controls that is reminiscent of hardware. As far as polys go, Korg's polysix is one of the best out there. And of course samplers, there's just a worlds of kontakt and other multi GB libraries. Actual composers actually use those in 95% cases.
@@oOFTJOo I've already been doing it for 20 years with VST instruments. How is hardware any different? In 2030 with VST's you will have your choice of keeping your VST's running on an old PC, cloning the hard drive to ensure you could still run them on another computer, or similar near identical VST synths will exist, if not updates of the older ones. There are lots of enthusiasts running vintage Apple ]['s, C-64's and computers that are more than 35 years old. I fully expect in 35 years from now, we'll be able to run our VST's or have them replaced with ones that produce exactly the same sounds.
Just use both, you haven’t got to sit one side of the fence or the other. Yet so many people really like to argue on the subject, I just see it as different tools in a toolbox. My main gripe with virtual instruments is the availability of pirated versions, not only does that affect the plugin developers but it has a massive impact on synth hardware sales and thus retailers. It also pushes the mentality that you need high value products to produce music because piracy pushes people to seek out products they normally couldn’t afford. Sadly with that mentality people are bypassing the longer term enjoyment you get from slowing down and learning an instrument - no matter how cheap, instead are always looking to the next ‘big’ thing that will make them great.
The "focus" part is too true!! You look for a simple string sound, but have 8 different vsts that you can browse and get it from... Then you start to feel like damn, im neglecting this vst, why did I even buy it..
As much as I love your channel, I have to disagree with some of your cons of software synths. 1. Reliability. It's not exactly true that your computer fails you during the concert. I play softsynth on gigs during 2011 and it never failed. Of course, you have to be careful and treat your computer well, disable wifi and other things and have strong computer, but I guarantee you, it will not fail if you know what you're doing. On the other side, I've seen a lot of hardware synth going down during concerts, including flagship yamahas and korgs. Btw do you know that korg kronos is running on a pc unit? Open it and check, there is a computer inside, running on a custom operating system and it reboots like forever and crashes from time to time. 2. Tweaking and checking the sound on the computer are no more inconvenient: Arturia keylab have instant integration with software without mapping anything, it's ready to go on a fly. The same for NI komplete. Not mention about Omnisphere's hardware integration dedicated to hardware synths. 3. Distractions when playing? Just set simple rules: when I practice the piano on vst, I turn down the monitor. No distractions. 4. I do gigs when I use emulation of about 20 classic hardware synths. Imagine what cost and effort it would be if I would have to carry 20 synths with me? :D instead of this, I have 2 midi controllers and everything is easy and clean. Unless you have 20 technicians to do this job for you. I don't want to sound like not agree with all your thoughts, just this some :) At the end, I want to mention that I had yamaha dx7 and oberheim obxa, so I know the feeling of playing on a hardware synths, so I know both worlds :)
I feel a connection & relationship with my NI Massive software synth that's stronger than most of my dozen or so hardware synths (that go back to the 80s). The only synths I've fallen & stayed in love with as thoroughly as Massive have been my Nord Lead and my Access Virus C. The hardware knobs are awesome for live/improv performing, but for producing something truly special in my studio, Massive is my favorite go to synth. And I just started using an S61 Komplete Kontrol interface which feels like the best of both worlds. Of course, the all time winner of instant-on, immediate gratification, never lets me down (except for occasional intonation issues), has to be my actual acoustic piano.
It all depends on your use-case. If you are playing live gigs and need to be on the go, then Hardware synths are the best way to go. If you are in a studio, producing music, then the versatility of Software is your best option. Also, I have to take (another) issue with you on how software synths work and produce sound. With a synth like Helm, ZynAddSubFX/ZynAddfusion, FluidSynth, or any of a number of other synthesizers, you can make any sound you want and are not at all limited by what is provided to you with Hardware. I suggest you take a look at videos from Unfa or Underbelly who are fantastic at creating whatever sound they need using synths. All of the software synths I mentioned are free and open source, so there is no cost involved unless you want to contribute to their developers. I think most people that look at these things from a PC (Windows) vs MAC perspective forget that there is another "PC" operating system out there with plenty available for producing and playing music... Linux (which is also free and open source in most cases). Of note, there are also excellent soft synths for Android and iPhone. Latency is only an issue if you are using an under powered computer. I love your videos, but a lot of the things you attributed to software synths in this video are not an issue anymore with modern computers.
Excellent video Woody! The best of both worlds fused together. Mastering the instrument and system. Removing clutter in the studio and mind helps create inspiring musical art. Thx!
I have both cheap and expensive Software and Hardware sythersizors and to Me niether is better then the other so long as your computer is powerful enough. I have mostly always been a software guy but I have been wanting some real physical sythersizors so I got a cupple from Navation the MiniNova and The Peak.
I use both and they have their pros and cons. Software these days comes really close to Hardware and I doubt anyone would noticed the difference in a mix. For live stuff Hardware is still better, I just prefer real controls even over midi controllers. Just look at Dr Mix stuff, just listing I couldn't tell if he used hardware or VST. I really like Arturia's Analog lab and Apple/IOS has tons of great stuff. I use the Ipad a lot to work out an idea, sequences, etc using AUM. Then I control the hardware using AUM so I can have all that Analog knob turning goodness. Really you could do everything on a Ipad and a good Midi controller and the apps are so cheap.
I've been gigging with my laptop for a couple of years now and I've only had a couple of minor issues, barring a forced Windows update that destroyed my hard drive - luckily not at a gig, and I was able to use some vintage hardware for a couple of weeks while I had the repair done. I like the convenience of soft synths - having four Korg Polysixes and an Arp Odyssey in a live setting is rather good - and I'm very pleased with how they sound in a mix. After my Ableton Push 2 had a drink I learned not to get too attached to controllers and I now use affordable and replaceable Novation kit - great gear and perfect for my synth pop gigs. I use a dedicated music laptop now (sold a Fender Rhodes to pay for it...) and I also use Ableton's native amp sims when I'm playing live guitar because again, in a mix, they sound just great. I'd still like an additional hardware synth, though. On top of all other considerations it looks a lot cooler than "checking your emails".
I have run VST's at gigs for a year. Glitchy from time to time. I doubt it's the brand new Legion. Brand new MAudio pro 3 for a controller as well. Being an old synth player, I purchased a MODX7 to bring me up to new school.. Down the rabbit hole of menu diving I go. The tradeoff is no expensive laptop, cheap feeling controller and a bunch of extra cables to carry to the gigs. I am able to reproduce some of the old school synth sounds, with lots of patience. We shall see how the next year goes. I think the VSTs are best suited for the studio.
I was searching around for soft synth vids and found your great comparison - the music at times was more foreground than background - intentionally I suppose - I did notice you using the electric sunburst guitar as an example of a soft synth - I am new to this for sure (about 6 months) I thought that vst plug-in was more of a sample library - I love your style , delivery and attitude - keep doing what you’re doing - I’ll love adding you to my list of music production RUclips channel subscriptions
I love the ease of use of vsts, with hardware there always the fucking around with midi - which is documented woefully bad. I press play and suddenly 3 synths start to bang away, and it takes me a while to solve that. So often I forsake recording midi for hardware and go old skool audio recording several takes and do a composite. But I’ll take a physical synth over software anytime. As it gives a certain tangible tactile experience that sparks creativity. And you’re more likely to cause happy accidents in making patches. Hitting a pot or slider by accident as you reach of another one, has often caused me to explore new sonic possibilities
Have to agree that the hardware version of synths tends to favour the creative moments and are more intuitive in a live performance. That being said I do appreciate soft synths having license ownership of the Arturia V collection and KORG collection, though sometimes having too many options/patches can work against the flow (but they sure are incredibly fun to tinker with).
I use kontakt 6 with sound from motif Roland and so on. With some tweaks I can't hear that difference. Hardware looking good though when you see it in your studio.
Wood's back😎👍Controversial topic with no right or wrong answer and its case by case...swapping out VSTs for the real gear to squeeze out that little bit extra that hardly anyone will notice is a personal choice ..but having said that use what inspires you and suits your workflow
Great video amigo with a bit of nostalgia in it. I'm a Triton guy, and Korg has always been my number one for inspiration, but I can't argue with the versatility of soft synths, so VPS Avenger and NI are my regular friends when recording in the box. Once again, great content!
And now even the Korg Triton is available as a VST software synth from Korg including all Korg Expansion boards/cards. One thing they did wrong though was not provide the ability to import sysex banks as they did with the M1 and as most VST synths of digital synths can do. If enough people make a stink, maybe Korg will add that ability in a future revision.
Like some other commenters, I am old enough to have owned ‘vintage’ gear when it was new, and some of it I definitely regret selling (others were too fiddly, heavy and unreliable). BUT - as you mention, having the knobs and sliders right there to tweak allowed me to explore sounds in a way I simply don’t do in a soft-synth ... even the same models I had long ago! But at the same time, I love pulling up a VST in Digital Performer to use a sound type I have used in the past or to remake old stuff with newer sounds.
That is definitely the most objective review. Yes, the truth is that there is no clear winner in this battle...! The conclusion is, that everyone on business should do their own thing in their own way...!!
That part I agree with. Hardware is more fun to play with. Just seeing it is a joy. Software gets the job done though, and more practical in almost every way for those of us that need a wide variety of sounds. If you only need a few sounds, than hardware would be fine. But if you want the sounds of a Moog, Oberheim, ARP, Fairlight, Synclavier, Jupiter 8, D-50, Mellotron, B-3, and many others, it's just too impractical for most have have all those originals in your studio, on stage, and keeping up with the maintenance.
Overall Woody I think you did a fantastic job with this video ... I'm almost speechless at how well you looked at it from all angles. Of course, reading the comments below I can see some good counter arguments as well. Still ... well done (don't forget, bundles like SampleTank and Komplete give you practically everything you need in one fell swoop).
I've been using analogue for 35yrs, - personally i stick with hardware for modular and all things monophonic, but i don't mind using plugins for pad sounds and atmospheric textures...
Spend a fortune on Hardware Software is the way to go. Mainstage is a fully expandable workstation/Synth collection that’s with you for life. Propellerheads DAW Reason is a virtual Rack of Synths/Samplers/Drum Machines that’s rock solid. Reason is The best DAW for anybody coming to the software from a synth hardware background. Everything has a learning curve Once you get your personal custom Templates down, your ready to go.
I still have the Yamaha PSR-320 and the Roland PC-200 Mk II midi controller, both 20 over years still working well, especially the Yamaha, although the LCD is fading but still have great e.piano 2 and warm pad sounds.
Some hardware synths in the workstation class take longer to boot than your mac takes to boot. Which sort of makes you realize, that in fact, the Kronos is a great set of software on a shitty computer that lives inside the synth case.
If you already work in a DAW, software is usually faster and easier to set up and recall. With hardware, you have to set up MIDI and audio tracks and routing, Program Change messages etc. (and keep track of which preset you used in which track, if you modify it), where as a plugin is just a click or two, and then all the synth parameters are saved with your DAW session. Automation is also easier with plugins. Of course you could ditch the DAW completely and get a workstation keyboard, but that's an entirely different thing, IMO. I use both, but software more than hardware. With hardware synths, I tend to commit to audio much earlier in the process, which leads to a different (and sometimes more creative) workflow. With software, you can tweak the MIDI and parameters right to the end which can be a good or a bad thing.
Well, Woody, you certainly have initiated a wide range of views and opinions on this issue! I think the comments illustrate that whilst people strive to create a range of music using hardware synths or software, they are divided not just by their production methods but perhaps more by the type of music they are reproducing or creating. A friend of mine uses Cubase with software synths exclusively to reproduce classic songs and enjoys the challenge to find the right combination of sounds. I prefer to use hardware synths for the interaction and motivation to create songs, moods and grooves that I enjoy playing! However, I realise that software synths can be used creatively and hardware synths to reproduce songs just as well! If I am honest, I think I prefer hardware synths because I do not want to be distracted by the deeper aspects of sound production, preferring to "tinker" with preset sounds and develop simple digital recording techniques and styles. However, I do not have your deep technical knowledge which allows you to enjoy both soft synths and hardware synths. Excellent informative video!
Here I thought you were going to ask us which plants were real and which ones were synthetic? Seriously, the greenery does add to the ambience and certainly makes for some creativity assistance. While I held off until about a year ago from buying the boxed instruments, I have traveled down that trail and have not been overly disappointed with the better VSTis that I have found. Your comment that those VSTS packs aimed at reproducing a single instrument or type of instrument are far better than the all-in-one-box could not be more true. I still fall back to the hardware for gigs and software for home paradigm and may someday change, but for now, that's the way it goes. Thanks for another insightful video.
Some good points and useful stuff for a newbie. I have to say that you can also "develop relationships" with software just like you can with a hardware synth (like any newbie, I played with some synths but when I found Falcon things changed a bit, as fits my thinking very well. The same can be said about a high quality, high end MIDI controller (I have a Studiologic SL73 with a great metal construction and wonderful keybed and I love it, while I couldn't care for the plasticky NI KK M32). All that being said, I find a MODX to be very tempting indeed.
Serum Vst is better than all analog or digital synths. You can pretty much recreate any sound from a synthesizer in Serum. Best to use a synth as a midi controller and make custom sounds in Serum.
Woody, software got my attention first. I started using soft synths in 1985 on my Amiga 1000. Does anyone know anyone else that has been using software synths for 35 years? And 35 years later, I still prefer them to hardware over all but prefer to combine and use both. I had a MIDI interface, and a Casio CZ-101 as a MIDI controller. The Amiga platform had dozens of great soft synths. Even full emulations of hardware synths, like the Ensoniq Mirage which I was able to buy 30 Mirage floppies and load them right into my Amiga. It's a same Steinberg didn't choose wisely back then and start the VST format on the Amiga, the only computer capable of doing this sort of thing for many years. I used my Amiga 1000 in my early rock bands to save money on expensive hardware synths, samplers, etc. By the early 90s with my Korg M1 and other hardware synths, I had pretty much switched over to all hardware. Around the mid 90s Dave Smith of Prophet V fame developed "Reality" which I started using on a PC. I also had a wavetable soundcard with an Ensoniq chip that produced a better grand piano than my M1. In the late 90s I also bought Gigasampler & Bitheadz Retro-AS1 analog synth software. Then finally around 20 years ago, I started using VST synths in my bands, and I use them more now than ever. Sure I have a collection of hardware synths, but overall, I think software is the better route. I only perform live in bands. I don't record music. A few years ago I sold my prized 1973 ARP Pro Soloist analog synth, used by bands like Genesis, Styx, Kansas and others. Why? Because in A/B tests, my soft synth version of it sounded almost identical. And the few sounds that don't, are ridiculously close. Trying to gig with antique synths is very impractical. I play only classic music from the 80s & 70s. I can have a laptop full of almost any classic synths I need which get ridiculously close. I don't have to carry them or maintain them. I typically trigger 3 MIDI keyboards to the laptop at once. As for soft synths lasting. I still use many that are nearly 20 years old. With few exceptions, you can either get them working on newer computers, an update will be available, or someone else with mimic the same classic synth. Also, let's say they don't. You can always take a tiny netbook which would have enough power to run the old synths in addition to your laptop, just to keep them going. Still hardly anything to carry or setup vs a boat load of classic synths. And so many computers have been sold, that getting an older laptop/netbook working properly would be a much easier task them keeping classic keyboards running. As for the user interface, many keyboards included automap abilities for those that don't want to map soft synths themselves. I still highly recommend using a hardware synth in addition. Always have a backup plan. For that matter, have software synths that can backup your hardware synths in case they fail. Nothing is 100% reliable. I bought a MODX6 like yours, mainly for backup at shows in case the laptop crashes. I can quickly just to it and get in the ballpark of almost any sound. But still, if you want the sounds near exact to famous songs, the software route is best, cheaper & much easier.
Great comments from the "other guy" who knows what an Amiga is. As a former Wedding band musician/lead vocalist and MC, one must always have a fool proof back up plan. Equipment must never be allowed to shutdown such an important life event.
For me, software is pretty much the main option. Hardware synths require a lot of space that I don't have and are way more expensive than soft synths, simply can't afford them. I do love hardware synths, have a few, but for now, it's primarily software for me. :-)
@@oOFTJOo , nope, my computer was under $400, and maybe $150 for VST's so far. There are excellent VST options that are free, such as the Spitfire Labs stuff and lots of others. VST's are massively less expensive than vintage hardware synths.
@@oOFTJOo , Cakewalk by Bandlab, $0, Reaper, $60. Lots of people buy/want vintage synths. I have a few. They break, and when they break, they can be very costly to repair. I love them, but they take up too much space for me and are too expensive for me to consider adding any more of them. I also have stuff like the Volcas, Novation Mininova, etc., wonderful pieces of equipment, but I like VST stuff too. I use MIDI controller keyboards to play VST instruments, not a mouse or computer keyboard. Not sure, why you have an issue with me stating my opinion here, but it's clear that you do. I buy what I like, and I don't care what anyone else buys.
Thanks for your video, it is very enlighting. I began my synth collection just 16 months ago... Now I have 20+ hardware ones and lots more software ones. I enjoy quite a bit more the hardware ones but space is a big problem and you run out of it faster than you think. I will reduce my collection as soon as I decide which ones are keepers, but that is always tought. Wish me luck ;-)!
As a guy who spent years using just software, purely for it's accessibility and convenience, and is now converting more to hardware for it's real hands on experience, I can totally relate to what you talk about here Woody. I play live a lot more now using classic 80's and 90's hardware. I would never have dreamed of doing that when using just software. In fact the band I play in uses an awful lot of hardware synths combined with software. I think if you can find a happy balance between the two mediums you can reach a very happy place. The thing about using hardware in a "LIVE" situation in particular is the response you get from audiences. They like to see gear on stage rather than just a laptop and controller. The only downside is having to carry all that gear about. You can't just stick it in a rucksack, you need a BIG van LOL
And your point about connecting with hardware, I know what you mean. You can't help but connect with a D50. I absolutely that thing. It's my favourite synth in my collection and always take it on stage with me.
for me: plugout synths with hardware and boutiques for u.i hardware and price. i have 3 setups 1. DAW with plugout synths and some arturia synths 2.Fa-06 with hardware synths - roland boutiques, minibrute, nanozwerg 3.rc505 looper with roland jd-xi, system 1 and roland td30 e drumkit plus a yamaha multi 12 pad set up too
Thanks for the video! I think about this all the time. I think with more and more integration hardware synths are benefiting greatly from having VSTs that you can run with them. For example the Moog Minintaur has an update that expanded the capabilities enormously of the hardware synth. The Moog Sub 37 VST also makes it much easier to edit and manipulate. I use Reason and have way too many virtual synths and love them all. Mainly because of the Necktar Panorama keyboard that was designed to work especially with Reason. One of the benefits of this is most of those synths are completely mapped which was one of the main drawbacks you mentioned. I would hate to have to pick. But like you said we don’t have to. Having said all that I also agree there is nothing like a hardware synth. It’s an emotional attachment. My Moogs are almost like living things, or musical pets. The best thing about all of them(hardware and VST) is that each one is it’s own learning experience that builds on to the next one.
I have a Roland XP-50 work station but it has gotten old. I need to perform maintenance on it take it apart clean out the audio jacks & pods. You hear a lot of unwanted noise now a days not when it was new when I bought in 1995.I use the Arturia Keylab MKII Controller & V Collection 7 + Roland Cloud amazing soinding.The Software is reliable it is stable but I don't play live.I just record at home
Tim Weinheimer - I got good use out of mine, but it did start to go haywire, snapped an alpha-dial shaft, needed a power supply replacement. That keybed was loud too, XP-30 much quieter.
Definetly pros and cons of both worlds. I personly say, a sample workstation is the best solution for live useage. In the studio the 2 worlds blends together, but live and software synths ... even things have become better, I still wouldn't trust it unless I had a complete backup system with me for when the systems crashes .. not "if" .. but "WHEN"..
(For the fun of arguing) I'll demonstrate the contrary of your first argument. A hardware synth needs to be switched on, the amplifier too, the mixer too, the Fx too, you need to wait. To hope there will be no bad cables. You need to tune the synths. Then you can play. And then you have an idea a good idea. But alas, you have nothing to record... idea is lost. My computer is always on. My differents daws and synths are one click away on the desktop, I'm working, I've got an idea, I can immediately play, record, leave and go bac to the work I was doing. Between my screen and my PC keyboard I'v got a small Korg keyboard. This way is the quickest to play and keep ideas when they come. This software way beats hardware on this point. I've got big keyboard, mixers, 4 eurorack modular synth, beatbox, numerous hardware synths. And I'm old... I know what is a 4 tracks tape to record music... I know what is a Revox. So when I tell you software is helping creativity I think it is something that must be heard :-)
My mind says VSTs, by that was a good callout on Nostalgia. I yearn for my Dad's Yamaha SY77 - even my TG77 rack version does not fully scratch my nostalgia itch. And even though many midi controllers have many buttons, it still does not "feel" like the same experience. But day to day, I use the legions of VSTs and Kontakt samples. (plus, after 40 years, it's time to replace that LED). TY for the vid.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
As both a guitarist and synth player I've learned over the years not to get too attached to your instruments. You are the real instrument that transcends all the others when they break, get lost or stolen, or become obsolete. Have a sort of nomadic attitude for them.
Well said. The brain is the ultimate musical instrument indeed.
See tame impala Kevin Parker. With a fire he lost a lot of his old synths , but I think he was getting better after that because he had some new ones which also spike more creativity and so on.
@@christianschroer1999 i read it was mostly rent gear
@@andreq9327 interesting to know thanks
well said
Embrace it. We live in a fantastic to be a musician, especially a synth/keyboard player. To be able to have vsts that emulate classic synths and create new futuristic synths is just mind boggling. I love booting up my computer DAW and just loosing myself in the plethora of synthesis. At an affordable price too. Love it.
Great videos Woody 👏👏👏
One thing that people simply fail to understand is that a midi controller, audio device, and computer with a DAW or Host.... is.....a hardware synth. The output at the 1/4 inch outs of my Focusrite audio device is no different that the 1/4 inch outputs of any hardware synth. The true power of a computer based synth is the ability to layer up any combination of VSTi's and play them simultaneously without the need for extra midi cables, audio leads and power plugs. If we look at each VSTi as a separate "Oscillator" in a larger synth we realize that incredibly complex sounds are possible that hardware could only dream of making.
The components are different.
@@sircliff323 You long for the good old days of dozens of 741 OpAmps and 555 Timers. I am restoring a PAIA 4700 system and a Stringz and Thingz.
@@DBCisco Wish I was smart enough to do stuff like that. Keep up the good work
I really like being able to use something like BeatMaker on iPad to host layers of stuff like a rompler, FM, and/or virtual analog in the mix.
Example stuff I did just using iOS synths (except for the added vocals and Cajon on “Post Op”):
soundcloud.com/rob-anderson-104336556/post-op-original-song-apr-2019
soundcloud.com/rob-anderson-104336556/interglacial-improv-for-open-mic-on-jan-11
Your right - The real difference is with 'software' synths you are using a general purpose CPU, while with 'hardware' you have single purpose chips (ASICs) or components that are limited in what they can do, and also quite a bit simpler/quicker.
You can't underestimate the 'good to go in seconds' on a hardware synth. I had a Korg M3 which took minutes to start up and it was such a pain. I have a Kawai ES8 now and it turns on almost instantly. When I want to play, try a new idea etc I can sit down and do it immediately.
A Korg DSS-1 *might* take seconds, but unless you're poised with the right floppy disk it'll probably take a few minutes.
My Grandmother works immediately. Being in tune…we’ll.. that takes a few minutes😀
Amazing video Woody! You broke down the two worlds perfectly. I am right there with you as far as utilizing both. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. I love and use both Hardware and VST's. Thank you for always having fun and informative videos. Oh! and I love the plants. Brings a very colorful and peaceful vibe to the video.
The quality of VSTs over the hardware synths are almost identical and it’s good in musical production point of view but for a performer or an enthusiast, you will never get the same experience and satisfaction you get from playing the real synth, it’s just like this, why we would love to go to a live concert if we can listen to the same song in our media player.
@@williamtopping I'm really convinced that VSTs can immitate exactly the sound of the hardwares, there are VSTs that uses exactly the same algorithm as the hardware so you wouldn't hear any difference at all, if there's any, I believe it's very tolerable or you may need a scope to check that. 😂
Wow, a modular keyboard is a great idea, it would really help a lot of musicians to save plenty of dollars 😀. Imagine, I can layout my keyboard depending on my needs, or just simply replace a specific module for upgrade, no need to buy the entire keyboard, it' just really amazing to think but I don't think it's profitable for any company.
@@oOFTJOohaha, exactly, the perfect justification why many still preferred to buy hardware synths.
I wish this were true. Then I wouldn't have any hardware at all. The only software synth which sounds like hardware is the old Sylenth1. For many years, the Sylenth1 was also voted the best software synth of the year. The other software synths sound like a sock has covered the speakers. It's not bright and "in your face". I have lots of hardware synths and outboard effects because they sound better, not because of their latency, ease of use and features. Even the effects produce the same muffled sound. You get what you pay for.
@@kian9304shit noo my korg pa700 sounds destroys all those plastic sounds from software
@@kian9304 They may use the same algorithms, but no VST can emulate natural components and frequencies from an analog synthesizer. Digital is digital / Analog Is Analog. Try it by yourself - lend an analog synthesizer and compare it with a VST which tries to emulate that. Both variants have very different bandwidths and frequencies.
I tried software for live gigs and it wasn’t a great experience. Then I discovered the proper device for the job. iPad. Rock solid, cheap, portable, touch screen really adds to real time control. Some great cheap and free synths available. Works great in combination with hard synths using an external dac/mixer board and a USB hub. Can do some crazy midi control and routing with the right software making hardware and software blur and expanding both.
Absolutely this. I’m just a hobbyist, but I love having my iPad attached to my cheap arranger type keyboard for extra patches and outboard effects. Makes a great light rig to drag to open mic night.
I am loving it! iPad has become amazing to create music and super portable
An iPad is fine and offers a lot of reasonably priced synths.
A full VST synth on a PC offers much greater variety in the kinds of synths available. Many of my favorite classic synths are not available in iPad format, but are for Windows. I've been gigging with PC soft synths for over 20 years. I've used my iPhone synths in combination too. iOS, Windows, etc. Each can have their own glitches about equal.
I use both software & hardware for live gigs. Generally speaking, software wins. I did buy a MODX6 just like the one Woody has, mainly for backup if my software crashes. I also have a couple Korg M1's and other hardware.
You’re insane. iPad isn’t nearly stable enough and you can’t switch sounds easy at all, there’s nothing for live performance. I tried for almo year and it’s just not viable.
@@fairweatherfriends. Camelot Pro. Fantastic software. I haven’t had my iPad crash once. Although it hasn’t been a busy year.
I started building synths in 1973 and I own several hardware and software synths. "One hammer is not enough for a good cabinet maker"
What kind of synths y made ? 70 been as a dark age for real poly and memory control by micro processor . At 78 some progress was made with J4 , P5 , OBX ...Yamaha CS from 50 to 80 - logic board , Poly Moog , kind combo of presets and waves under '' advance '' divide down poly .
I can't resist echoing the musical sentiments below, "what a time to be alive"! I grew up in the 50s and 60s playing piano, trumpet, and guitar. Got married in the 70s, lusting after Synths that were financially out of reach for me then. Now I have more Synths than I need, but love, love ,love every one of them. Currently:
Hardware: Triton Exterme, KingKorg, Akai MPK249
Software: Reason Studio, Korg Synth Collection 4, Arturia Synths V Collection 9, Dune 3, ...
The low cost of software these days, and what you get for your money is rediculous, especially if you wait for holiday deals, etc.
As I do not perform, I find myself using software mostly because of it's convenience, versatility, and space savings. So I don't get lost in options, I make extensive use of favorite patches, etc. and can get lost playing these instruments for hours!
Whatever you choose, Enjoy! There has never before been a time like Now for those who love to play and collect instruments!
This is such a good video! You mention so many awesome points. There seems to be endless pros and cons. For us as an indie synth-pop band, we like to have access to both hardware and software. So ultimately we get the best of both worlds. Thanks, Woody, enjoyed this one so much I'm going to watch it again. ❤♪♬♫🎤♩🎹
You reinforced my thinking here. I'm glad of that. The way I see it, DAWs are for composition, refinement, design, while hardware is for performance, practice, and improv. They're both excellent solutions... for different uses. There's also the matter of hyper-niche VSTs or hardware devices: I'm probably not gonna find a Plasma Drive or Motor Synth on PC.
Great test. The best is the music you play in the video. I like the pad sounds.
My computer starts up fast due to an SSD and 6 core 12 thread cpu... My krome takes 1 min to start up ... But I like both vst and hardware. I can combine all of them so to me they all are just tools. Great video, thanks.
Some of those arguments, to me, sound like they are coming from someone with an emotional connection to hardware that attempts to rationalize it.
There are generalizations, exaggerations, half trues, and some inaccurate statements.
We just have to accept that for the most part, the desire to own hardware is just emotional, and not logical. And in some cases the sad truth is that we have to budget accordingly, even if we might not want to.
If someone don’t want to play music on the same device they surf the web, and do their mails, perhaps considering getting a cheap laptop/tablet-hybrid, powered by Atom or similar is a solution. Such computers are often fanless, so they can be used next to the studio computer even when recording audio, if there is a need to have such services near the music making computer. Perhaps one should keep any such services away from the music making environment (except for the occasional tutorial, and then having a separate computer makes it much easier).
It can also help to keep the system stable. If one is able to keep the music making computer offline, except for the occasional update, I would recommend that as well, but it does mean that back-ups have to be local, or uploaded from a server/separate computer that doesn’t make a direct connection for the studio computer to the web.
Start-up times, well, there are several of synths that have a bit of startup times themselves. And some analog takes several of minutes to warm up. So the idea that the hardware synth is instant isn’t correct, in some cases it almost is, in others, far from it. A modern computer can start up really quickly. And if the goal is to quickly be able to start and just play, there are possible solutions, like the DAW can be put in the auto start scheme, and one can even start a session with instruments loaded as templates, to have the sounds load on start-up (yet again an argument for having a separate music computer, because having the DAW auto start may end up being irritating on ones internet/mail computer).
There are software that comes with content similar to the hardware workstation. But Native Instruments with their Kontrol solution is building something that can be used as a workstation, but where the sounds might come from instruments and libraries that offer deeper levels and more realism than would be found in a workstation.
Some synths have great interfaces, but many don’t. Several require digging through menus, with an interface that is way behind in terms of usability to a big screen VST.
Some uses multi-function controls/softknobs, and Native Instruments NKS offers a similar experience for software synths (there is the VIP software by Akai and the other brands in the same group, as well as Novation’s solutions that also offer similar experience).
Latency, depending on the system, may be noticeable with software, but in many cases it isn’t.
Even though it probably is higher than on the hardware synth, if it isn’t noticeable, it isn’t noticeable.
Sound switching, depending on how it is carried out, however might take longer on the computer, and some workstations lets the notes keep sounding while switching sounds.
Hardware is often quite a bit more expensive compared to software, and they can easily drop in price as much or more than a software over time, especially if a newer version is introduced of the hardware, the fact that the software drops to 0% so that the percentage is higher doesn’t matter, it is the loss in actual money value that matters.
Hardware can suffer from bugs. Sometimes they are fixed with software updates, other times not. With software fixes usually comes quicker, but it is also easier to move on, and cheaper, compared to having to sell a second hand product with a bug. Sometimes even hardware synths need a re-boot, just like the computer. Bugs and the need to reboot are occurring more often in computer based solutions, for sure. But in most cases it isn’t a big issue.
Hardware can break to a state where it can’t be repaired, and that doesn’t have to take decades.
So it isn’t given that hardware will last longer than software.
And given the higher price of hardware, it is usually cheaper to buy a few replacement softwares over time.
I’m a hardware software hybrid person, so I’m not writing this to say that hardware is pointless, because I too like to have hardware.
But in most cases there is software counterparts to the hardware that does the same thing, perhaps even better (polyphonic sounds, where the hardware is monophonic, or higher sound quality and more features when it comes to various digital hardware synths).
I’ve come to accept that hardware is often about the emotional connection, which perhaps doesn’t justify the price (rarely does).
Sometimes it is about the interface, though, but then I’m talking hands on subtractive synthesis (analog or virtual analog), other form of digital synthesis if it exist in software form, will most likely be easier to use with the mouse than digging through menus.
One can have endless debates about the sound quality. But I will leave it at; even if software would not do a perfect job, it would in most cases do a good enough job for the sounds to sit in a track (there is the exception with really poor software, but then we are talking about poor software, not some snobby opinion on software from for example Arturia)
I would recommend someone that wants to get in to synthesis to get a hardware synth with good hands on controls. For that I would recommend any of the Korg Minilogues (perhaps the XD module, in order to not have to have a mini keyboard, that may not be used), or getting the Studiologic Sledge, that is digital, but offer better polyphony. Both also integrate in a cool way with the Omnisphere software. There are more expensive offerings, that would be even better, but I would not recommend someone starting out to spend a lot on a hardware synth.
It is great to have something to touch and play around with, with a lot of dedicated hands on parameters. But when one has learned and understood, sometimes one might forego the hands-on experience for the extended capabilities of software.
I would absolutely recommend going down the computer and software route primarily.
An iPad could be an alternative to a traditional computer, and here I mean iPad and not tablet in general.
For those that stumbled upon the concept of Dawless music making, I would say that should be a side project for someone that also makes music in the computer, as it isn’t very effective and quite expensive. And some of those dawless sequencers are actually computers running inside of a hardware that doesn’t look like a computer. Workstation keyboards are in some cases also computers. Today computers are simply much more effective when it comes to creating and recording music than specialized hardware, and they have been for some time.
One thing that I think would help the synth community is for people to accept that a synth is a sound source and a separate way of controlling it. The controlling aspect sometimes is a built in keyboard, but the keyboard only sends signals to trigger the sounds in the sound source, there isn’t a physical trigger like the hammers hitting strings in the piano, it is just a signal. Sometimes the controller part is a midi-in connection on the sound source (software or hardware based, depending on if it is hardware or software), and it could even be a different interface than the piano styled.
A synth isn’t an instrument, like an acoustic, where it has to be built in to a unit and there are many advantages to this;
The sound source can be so many things, analog, virtual analog, sample based, physical modeling and so on, and it can be in the form of hardware or software (in a computer or tablet).
And the controller doesn’t have to look a specific way, it can be piano styled, or grid based, or a ribbon controller, or anything else someone comes up with. And one can even use the same controller for several of different sound sources, if one finds a controller that suits them, whereas one can’t play ones favorite acoustic piano action and combine it with the sound of different brands of acoustic pianos.
The controller + sound source in separate units is just as much an instrument as the synth with the sound source and the controller built in to a single unit.
Thinking that having separate units, is somehow less of an instrument, could very well lead to misguided purchase decisions.
A great interface is a great interface, and hands on controls can be part of that, but when actually playing, often a limited amount of hands on controls are needed, so, a midi controller might very well cover that if it has some programmable ones (the midi controller may then control software or another hardware). In some cases using foot controllers are even better, and the number of synths with built in foot controllers, is almost down to zero. Programming each software with similar parameters to react in a similar matter to the controls, takes less time, than learning where those controls sit on different hardware, and when it comes to soft-knobs, that may require setting it up in the hardware synth as much as it does with the software.
If someone thinks an instrument has to be self-contained, they should take up an instrument where that is actually the case, rather than project that idea on to synthesizers, because that simply isn’t true for synthesizers.
Good comment!
Hahahahaha!!! Novel indeed 🤣
I agree Jon!
I agree with most of what Jon wrote.
I've been using software synths for 35 years! And they are still my preference. And unlike most soft synth fans, I'm primarily a live player. My software synths from 35 years ago still work! They were on the Amiga computer from 1985, the first major known computer platform that had software synths. I can run them either original, or emulate my Amiga! However, soft synths have really advanced since then, so it's not something I need to do often.
I ran the very first major PC software synths such as Seer System's Reality & Bitheadz AS-1. I still have computers capable of running them, just as you can keep a hardware keyboard from the 90s running. There are plenty of options if you really want to do that. And what's the disadvantage of pulling out an old computer vs an old keyboard? The computer takes up less space!
I've been running VSTs since they first came out roughly 20 years ago. And I still run many old ones even on computers that can run Windows 10, because it is possible to multi-boot OS's on Windows machines. I have drives setup with Windows XP, 7 & 10 that have i7 processors running at 3 ghz, 8 gigs of ram, SSD drives and plenty of space. Even better, the drives can come out as easy as a disc and boot another. I highly recommend cloning your drives, and ideally have a backup computer.
Eventually, you will likely see the Korg Kronos as a VST once Korg has moved onto the next thing to market. VST's have amazing power and possibilities. I've replaced many hardware keyboards with software, and many classics that were way too impractical to own the real ones.
If you gig and you are your own road crew, VST's and a laptop can't be beat. The number of hardware synths you can replace is staggering. Roland offers the same engines that power their brand new Jupiter X as VST soft synths and they offer nearly all of their classic synths as software now. Korg offers their classic M1, Wave Station, analog synths and recently their Triton Extreme as a VST. I use a Yamaha MODX so that covers most Yamaha sounds of the past 20 years & the latest Montage. Sample collections for Kontakt are available that include all factory sounds of the Korg Kronos, Yamaha MOTIF XF and many other synths. Companies like Arturia have cloned a bunch of analog & digital classic synths. The list goes on and on. Always have a hardware synth for backup just in case to get you through a show even if your not sounding your best. Because if your running only hardware, your probably not sounding your best as you probably can only carry so much gear.
n8goulet interesting point with the live gig point. I hear that most people prefer using hardware for live music but i think thats only for novelty of using a real instrument and not using a computer. Software is very much powerful and acessible
Reason, augmented with select pieces of hardware does it for me. I have an affection for the old synths from my younger days (Yamaha, Roland, Ensoniq), and so I like to keep them around. But some of the VA's in Reason are becoming classics themselves.
The background music examples from your devices are amazing!
Plastic plants V real plants, and when to use them.
Watching synth videos you'll either encounter plastic plants, small toy figurines , color changing led lights or half of the screen is turned into a oscilloscope.
ato zee damn dude, I can never watch another synth video the same again 😂
I do I feel better about wanting real plants to grow fruit, veg and herbs with at least!
@@CommissionerManu Lol yeah i'd also prefer real plants.
@* AnimalHeadSpirit * As noted, there are times when plastic plants make more sense. My fiancee is convinced plastic flowers just make more sense to use at our up coming wedding vs real ones. And since my bands play covers of famous songs and no band is ever going to sound "exactly" like the record and with different musicians than played on the records, providing the illusion of sounding like the record is what really matters. And software definitely gives you the same feeling listening to it at a live performance in a band situation as the original synths. Now if you want to compare them as solo instruments and hear which DACs sound better and compare them with an oscilloscope your wasting your time. No one at a gig is going to pickup on the differences. Software will provide the flavor of the famous sounds, where as hardware will give you a much smaller palette of sounds to choose from. With software, the sky is the limit. Unlimited sound engines, no road crew needed, and infinitely more affordable and practical.
My Roland JUNO DS has a built-in audio interface, so basically I connect my laptop to it, and the sounds from my laptop comes right out from the JUNO DS's L/R outputs. So convenient!!!
I learned a long time ago to have a dedicated PC for my music with a dedicated drive just for the operating system, most of the time it is not connected to the network so I can pick when it updates the OS and software.
The system is a dual boot with Linux as the main OS and Windows 8 for when I cant use Ubuntu which isn't very often, I can't remember the last time it crashed!
It's the only way really. Plus that stops ransomware (on Windows).
Me too.
I recommend the Dell Latitudes that are a little older. You can swap out the main hard drive just like putting in a disc. Boot Windows XP - Windows 10 and run synths that are 20 years old while running the latest too. I set one drive up that can boot all 3. Disable internet access altogether once everything is working.
I disagree with one of your points about user interface. The original DX-7 has a horrible user interface for modifying the sound. Dexed, the free VST surpasses the original in so many ways. I now program in the VST and export the patch to the hardware, purely to offload the CPU load from the PC. The reliability of hardware is not as high as you suggest. A broken F string on my CP-70 still haunts me 30 years later. That is as hardware an instrument as can be... Love your channel. Thanks for inspiring, thoughtful content!
But we’re talking about a synth from 1983 where digital components were costly and processing was limited. Take a ModX or a System8 and FM programming is even easier and you don’t need to shift form keyboard to computer all the time. The fact that you need to offload a very simplistic 5 operator FM synth is another potent problem with Soft Synths. You never know when it will start to glitch.
I agree with you, you can lower the latency, I built a gaming computer for power and bought an audio interface, I am getting low latency and crystal clear sounds.
Omnisphere with hardware integration... can't be beaten imo. Even without the hardware integration I love it.
From the point of view of someone who now owns and uses lots of hardware synths again, Omnisphere is still a top dog of the softsynths especially when you can get some hardware control over it ( I created a custom faceplate overlay for it which goes onto a 33 knob/slider midi controller and that was cool for me )
Yup - integrates really well with my Deepmind 12.
the hardware integration might just be the beautiful bridge
@@noiselabproject9659 what midi controller are you using?
Thanks Woody. Good video. You are right, it depends on the use or preference.
I asked once upon a synth. He says your video needs more plants
i love that channel
Dear Woody, it was one of the best videos I have seen for a while. Currently I play my Genos and had a few other arrangers throughout the years, as well as some DAW software systems, but I always preferred the real, physical keyboards. Thanks so much for sharing your ideas with us here.
thanks for the nice feedback, jealous of you genos owners, have yet to try one.
Its never bothered me. If a sound sounds good..who cares where it came from..
Exactly!
@Ryan Barker Who asked what?
@Ryan Barker I dont think you understand youtube comments.
@@pseudo-intellectualtroll6563 I don’t think you understand a joke
@@walterwhite6647 When it’s unique and funny, but otherwise no.
I've pretty much stopped using my hardware virtual analogue synths in favour of Serum or FM8, but I've found myself using my hardware analogue synths more. With VCV rack you can now do some pretty amazing things integrating modular hardware with virtual modules. I like fiddling with things while making music, or having physical things to play. Most of the VST synths I use are because I'm looking to automate a lot of parameters or get a very specific (usually FM) sound. The big advantage (in my mind) to using hardware synths is the hardware effects pedals that you can use with them. There are some great digital VST effects (echo boy, Valhalla's range) but nothing comes quite as close as setting up a good physical effects chain on an analogue synth. The sweet spot is definitely a combination of both.
Software for me is a gateway to understanding hardware .I use voltage modular and hope to migrate what I learn to when I get to hardware modular .
I went from hardware to all software many years ago in hopes of simplifying my studio life...but you know what happened? All the joy and creativity in sound creation went out the door. I'm happy to say that years latter I am back to a room full of hardware synths with glorious real knobs and sliders....and have never been happier. :)
Same, sold the Atari and all the hardware 15 years ago went with Reason then later Ableton, hardly finished any music with them, too many options and avenues to disappear down, although computers today are far superior, I like the limitations and rawness of hardware for getting ideas down, now have an MPC and a few hardware synths and an iPad the creative spark seems to be back again.
I love both. Neither can really entirely replace the other. Why debate which is better when you can embrace both?
As someone who has and uses both, I just see it as a means to an end. As long as I get the sound I want at a particular instance, that's what should matter. I will say that if you pick the right MIDI controller, you can develop that sentimental relationship with it just like with the hardware. For instance, I upgraded my controller from a Novation ReMOTE 61SL to the Arturia Keylab 61 Mk2. I already own the V Collection (currently 7) and thus I love having a keyboard that will access directly 20+ synths. In a way, it's like having any synth you want within one keyboard. (Whoever has the real estate to accommodate that many synths? =] ). The key aspect (no pun intended) is whether the controller can be just as responsive as any other instrument. This also will add to the sentimental bond with the instrument (both controller and software).
All in all, good job as always =]
I am 100% with you!!!! When I use hardware, I am getting faster into the flow and inspiration and I take my time listening to the vibe.
VSTs are great, but they are like eating in a fast food restaurant.
Elektro GOWK you didn’t finish your analogy. So hardware is like eating in a Michelin restaurant? Lol
I began this journey in 1980 with a little Moog Prodigy, which went through various trades - Yamaha CS30, SCI Pro-One and Roland JX3P. So I had what are now analogue classics the first time round and … they weren’t all that. Then there was this period around the late 80s early 90s when hardware stopped having knobs and you just peered at a little window to change parameters. Then there’s all the mess of wires and cables everywhere. I went off synths for a bit.
I built my first music PC in 1995, painstakingly assembling components and using SMPTE to synch them all. Then Cubase VST came along a couple of years later and did in software what I was trying to do with hardware. But one bit of software got me back to knob-twiddling again - even if it was via a mouse and that was Reason. It’s grown to become a real mad professor’s Lab.
So I’ve got what are now regarded as the best softsynths - and I’d regard the finest to be from Spectrasonics and U-he. But now I have the disposable income, I have a hankering for hardware with knobs again - and it’s made a return. I bought a Novation Summit, and one of the hidden benefits is that Omnisphere has hardware-profiled it so that you can use the knobs to control other models like Moogs and Prophets. The other hybrid is the Roland System 8, which has kind of reversed the trend, being essentially hardware storage and control of Roland’s own swapped analogue ‘plug-outs’. Want to swap the Jupiter 8 for an a System 100? You can in one bit of hardware. I really like that idea as it’s the best of both worlds.
In idle moments, I look at the prices of your Prophets and Moogs (which ain’t cheap), but have to stop and ask myself whether they’d be better than what I have in the computer. It’s really just the nostalgia of when I was young and those names were everywhere.
Not sure where I was going with that ramble. But if you’re in a band, get hardware. If you’re not, the computer is not inferior in any way.
I can understand that we are in a different era, where software is sometimes easier, and much cheaper. But the thing to understand, which you pointed out in this video, is that hardware is very reliable, built well, holds its value, increases in value from time to time, and it’s so nice to have the actual synth to play, touch, and have a sense of excitement that you own something that made music what it was, in the case of the vintage gear. I still believe in using hardware for studio use, and gigs as well. You have a clean, crisp sound, and you know it won’t let you down with a great feeling key action, we’ll built metal case, and an easy to use interface. If you want different sounds, you can always load them in through midi using sysex. I don’t know about you, but I feel so much satisfaction of owning vintage synths and being able to own a piece of gear that made music history. I will never sell my synths, and will make the best of them to the best of my ability! Ps, I know I have said this before, but I would die to see you start buying vintage gear again, and making videos. I was and still am so inspired by you. I have always loved playing the piano, and have always had a soft spot for professional synths, and your videos made me want to have them all! They sound so good, and I have many that you have had and others that you haven’t featured yet, and I hope you can maybe do the videos that inspired SO MANY PEOPLE! Including me, very much including me! I hope this comment finds you and others well! Have a good night Woody!
And the winner is....us. I have only begun (
Thanks for this video Woody!!! Your so right about "focus"... What I do most of the time is play and compose my song and some little arrangments in my Motif's pattern sequencer, then move all pieces to Reaper so I can experiment in the software with new and more complex arrangements, add new instruments, and render the motif's sound to tracks, add voices, and so on. For me, it's a good mix between the two worlds...
At 14:00 you said exactly what I wanted to hear, thankyou. I feel like it is the next step to taking my music production to the next level. Thanks! :) I know there is a difference, my ears say different when people say isn’t any difference between vst and hardware. Even if there isn’t it’s the fact that it has lower latency better keys etc so you can get more in touch with the instrument thus being able to compose better . Thanks again for allowing me to finally decide to get a Roland jd-xA
Compromise, get a Yamaha Reface CS so you can jam without wires and even without headphones on the couch, but also get Synth1, Tal Noisemaker, VCV rack and whatever soft synths you like. That way you have a fantastic keybed to play whatever way you prefer. Btw I don't remember hearing you talk about Midi CC Learn which lets you use physical knobs to control soft synth parameters. Makes it less awkward to tweak a soft synth.
Great video!
Editing patches on a digital synth, even a new one, still involves a relatively small screen pointed at the ceiling. It was fine when that’s all there was, but we don’t need to torture ourselves anymore. Also, VSTs can bring you the sounds of synths & other instruments you will be hard-pressed to ever encounter in your lifetime, and hardware keyboards are not yet evolved enough to hold.
Generally agreed, but disagree one last point - you can and do connect with certain VST's and they become essential parts of your musical repertoire.
@@oOFTJOo What about when your hardware synth needs to be repaired? Hardware does NOT last forever like you think it does.
I've developed connection to some vst. There is a delay plugin that has unique sound, I love it, and there is a pitch shifter that is equally brilliant. 32 bit sadly.
As far as actual synth vsts, there are plugins that are usable tools. 303 emus come to mind first. Funny, but one of the best out there is free ' Delphine ' synth - it has this interaction between controls that is reminiscent of hardware. As far as polys go, Korg's polysix is one of the best out there. And of course samplers, there's just a worlds of kontakt and other multi GB libraries. Actual composers actually use those in 95% cases.
@@oOFTJOo I've already been doing it for 20 years with VST instruments.
How is hardware any different? In 2030 with VST's you will have your choice of keeping your VST's running on an old PC, cloning the hard drive to ensure you could still run them on another computer, or similar near identical VST synths will exist, if not updates of the older ones.
There are lots of enthusiasts running vintage Apple ]['s, C-64's and computers that are more than 35 years old. I fully expect in 35 years from now, we'll be able to run our VST's or have them replaced with ones that produce exactly the same sounds.
Just use both, you haven’t got to sit one side of the fence or the other. Yet so many people really like to argue on the subject, I just see it as different tools in a toolbox.
My main gripe with virtual instruments is the availability of pirated versions, not only does that affect the plugin developers but it has a massive impact on synth hardware sales and thus retailers. It also pushes the mentality that you need high value products to produce music because piracy pushes people to seek out products they normally couldn’t afford.
Sadly with that mentality people are bypassing the longer term enjoyment you get from slowing down and learning an instrument - no matter how cheap, instead are always looking to the next ‘big’ thing that will make them great.
The "focus" part is too true!! You look for a simple string sound, but have 8 different vsts that you can browse and get it from... Then you start to feel like damn, im neglecting this vst, why did I even buy it..
As much as I love your channel, I have to disagree with some of your cons of software synths.
1. Reliability. It's not exactly true that your computer fails you during the concert. I play softsynth on gigs during 2011 and it never failed. Of course, you have to be careful and treat your computer well, disable wifi and other things and have strong computer, but I guarantee you, it will not fail if you know what you're doing. On the other side, I've seen a lot of hardware synth going down during concerts, including flagship yamahas and korgs.
Btw do you know that korg kronos is running on a pc unit? Open it and check, there is a computer inside, running on a custom operating system and it reboots like forever and crashes from time to time.
2. Tweaking and checking the sound on the computer are no more inconvenient: Arturia keylab have instant integration with software without mapping anything, it's ready to go on a fly. The same for NI komplete. Not mention about Omnisphere's hardware integration dedicated to hardware synths.
3. Distractions when playing? Just set simple rules: when I practice the piano on vst, I turn down the monitor. No distractions.
4. I do gigs when I use emulation of about 20 classic hardware synths. Imagine what cost and effort it would be if I would have to carry 20 synths with me? :D instead of this, I have 2 midi controllers and everything is easy and clean. Unless you have 20 technicians to do this job for you.
I don't want to sound like not agree with all your thoughts, just this some :) At the end, I want to mention that I had yamaha dx7 and oberheim obxa, so I know the feeling of playing on a hardware synths, so I know both worlds :)
PC or Mac?
@@Roboprogs PC
"when I practice the piano on vst, I turn down the monitor". thats a good idea
I feel a connection & relationship with my NI Massive software synth that's stronger than most of my dozen or so hardware synths (that go back to the 80s). The only synths I've fallen & stayed in love with as thoroughly as Massive have been my Nord Lead and my Access Virus C. The hardware knobs are awesome for live/improv performing, but for producing something truly special in my studio, Massive is my favorite go to synth. And I just started using an S61 Komplete Kontrol interface which feels like the best of both worlds.
Of course, the all time winner of instant-on, immediate gratification, never lets me down (except for occasional intonation issues), has to be my actual acoustic piano.
I enjoy your argumentations ! Thanks for the video !
That was exactly what I I needed to know. I use both. Great videos. Keep them coming. Thanks
It all depends on your use-case.
If you are playing live gigs and need to be on the go, then Hardware synths are the best way to go.
If you are in a studio, producing music, then the versatility of Software is your best option.
Also, I have to take (another) issue with you on how software synths work and produce sound. With a synth like Helm, ZynAddSubFX/ZynAddfusion, FluidSynth, or any of a number of other synthesizers, you can make any sound you want and are not at all limited by what is provided to you with Hardware. I suggest you take a look at videos from Unfa or Underbelly who are fantastic at creating whatever sound they need using synths.
All of the software synths I mentioned are free and open source, so there is no cost involved unless you want to contribute to their developers. I think most people that look at these things from a PC (Windows) vs MAC perspective forget that there is another "PC" operating system out there with plenty available for producing and playing music... Linux (which is also free and open source in most cases). Of note, there are also excellent soft synths for Android and iPhone.
Latency is only an issue if you are using an under powered computer.
I love your videos, but a lot of the things you attributed to software synths in this video are not an issue anymore with modern computers.
Excellent video Woody! The best of both worlds fused together. Mastering the instrument and system. Removing clutter in the studio and mind helps create inspiring musical art. Thx!
I have both cheap and expensive Software and Hardware sythersizors and to Me niether is better then the other so long as your computer is powerful enough. I have mostly always been a software guy but I have been wanting some real physical sythersizors so I got a cupple from Navation the MiniNova and The Peak.
I use both and they have their pros and cons. Software these days comes really close to Hardware and I doubt anyone would noticed the difference in a mix. For live stuff Hardware is still better, I just prefer real controls even over midi controllers. Just look at Dr Mix stuff, just listing I couldn't tell if he used hardware or VST. I really like Arturia's Analog lab and Apple/IOS has tons of great stuff. I use the Ipad a lot to work out an idea, sequences, etc using AUM. Then I control the hardware using AUM so I can have all that Analog knob turning goodness. Really you could do everything on a Ipad and a good Midi controller and the apps are so cheap.
I've been gigging with my laptop for a couple of years now and I've only had a couple of minor issues, barring a forced Windows update that destroyed my hard drive - luckily not at a gig, and I was able to use some vintage hardware for a couple of weeks while I had the repair done.
I like the convenience of soft synths - having four Korg Polysixes and an Arp Odyssey in a live setting is rather good - and I'm very pleased with how they sound in a mix. After my Ableton Push 2 had a drink I learned not to get too attached to controllers and I now use affordable and replaceable Novation kit - great gear and perfect for my synth pop gigs. I use a dedicated music laptop now (sold a Fender Rhodes to pay for it...) and I also use Ableton's native amp sims when I'm playing live guitar because again, in a mix, they sound just great.
I'd still like an additional hardware synth, though. On top of all other considerations it looks a lot cooler than "checking your emails".
I have run VST's at gigs for a year. Glitchy from time to time. I doubt it's the brand new Legion. Brand new MAudio pro 3 for a controller as well. Being an old synth player, I purchased a MODX7 to bring me up to new school.. Down the rabbit hole of menu diving I go. The tradeoff is no expensive laptop, cheap feeling controller and a bunch of extra cables to carry to the gigs. I am able to reproduce some of the old school synth sounds, with lots of patience. We shall see how the next year goes. I think the VSTs are best suited for the studio.
Nice vid, I'm actually looking at getting my first hard synth. Thanks for giving me perspective
I was searching around for soft synth vids and found your great comparison - the music at times was more foreground than background - intentionally I suppose - I did notice you using the electric sunburst guitar as an example of a soft synth - I am new to this for sure (about 6 months) I thought that vst plug-in was more of a sample library - I love your style , delivery and attitude - keep doing what you’re doing - I’ll love adding you to my list of music production RUclips channel subscriptions
I love the ease of use of vsts, with hardware there always the fucking around with midi - which is documented woefully bad. I press play and suddenly 3 synths start to bang away, and it takes me a while to solve that. So often I forsake recording midi for hardware and go old skool audio recording several takes and do a composite.
But I’ll take a physical synth over software anytime. As it gives a certain tangible tactile experience that sparks creativity. And you’re more likely to cause happy accidents in making patches. Hitting a pot or slider by accident as you reach of another one, has often caused me to explore new sonic possibilities
This was an amazing video, thanks man, truly! Chris.
Such a beautiful video, Thanks so much very well done.
Have to agree that the hardware version of synths tends to favour the creative moments and are more intuitive in a live performance. That being said I do appreciate soft synths having license ownership of the Arturia V collection and KORG collection, though sometimes having too many options/patches can work against the flow (but they sure are incredibly fun to tinker with).
I use kontakt 6 with sound from motif Roland and so on. With some tweaks I can't hear that difference. Hardware looking good though when you see it in your studio.
Wood's back😎👍Controversial topic with no right or wrong answer and its case by case...swapping out VSTs for the real gear to squeeze out that little bit extra that hardly anyone will notice is a personal choice ..but having said that use what inspires you and suits your workflow
Great video amigo with a bit of nostalgia in it. I'm a Triton guy, and Korg has always been my number one for inspiration, but I can't argue with the versatility of soft synths, so VPS Avenger and NI are my regular friends when recording in the box. Once again, great content!
And now even the Korg Triton is available as a VST software synth from Korg including all Korg Expansion boards/cards. One thing they did wrong though was not provide the ability to import sysex banks as they did with the M1 and as most VST synths of digital synths can do. If enough people make a stink, maybe Korg will add that ability in a future revision.
Like some other commenters, I am old enough to have owned ‘vintage’ gear when it was new, and some of it I definitely regret selling (others were too fiddly, heavy and unreliable). BUT - as you mention, having the knobs and sliders right there to tweak allowed me to explore sounds in a way I simply don’t do in a soft-synth ... even the same models I had long ago! But at the same time, I love pulling up a VST in Digital Performer to use a sound type I have used in the past or to remake old stuff with newer sounds.
That is definitely the most objective review. Yes, the truth is that there is no clear winner in this battle...! The conclusion is, that everyone on business should do their own thing in their own way...!!
The background music is beautiful, but too loud. For the rest of it, I totally agree with everything you said.
playing real hardware synths is a joy in itself.
That part I agree with. Hardware is more fun to play with. Just seeing it is a joy. Software gets the job done though, and more practical in almost every way for those of us that need a wide variety of sounds. If you only need a few sounds, than hardware would be fine. But if you want the sounds of a Moog, Oberheim, ARP, Fairlight, Synclavier, Jupiter 8, D-50, Mellotron, B-3, and many others, it's just too impractical for most have have all those originals in your studio, on stage, and keeping up with the maintenance.
Playing real software synths is a joy in itself.
and collecting them is another joy =)
Overall Woody I think you did a fantastic job with this video ... I'm almost speechless at how well you looked at it from all angles. Of course, reading the comments below I can see some good counter arguments as well. Still ... well done (don't forget, bundles like SampleTank and Komplete give you practically everything you need in one fell swoop).
I love the plants on your videos, man! Thanks for this video.
I've been using analogue for 35yrs, - personally i stick with hardware for modular and all things monophonic, but i don't mind using plugins for pad sounds and atmospheric textures...
That's my philosophy also 👊
@@or9anic_pro2uce19 feeling this more or less. mono hardware is dope
Love that piano in the intro
Spend a fortune on Hardware
Software is the way to go.
Mainstage is a fully expandable workstation/Synth collection that’s with you for life.
Propellerheads DAW Reason is a virtual Rack of Synths/Samplers/Drum Machines that’s rock solid. Reason is The best DAW for anybody coming to the software from a synth hardware background.
Everything has a learning curve
Once you get your personal custom Templates down, your ready to go.
I still have the Yamaha PSR-320 and the Roland PC-200 Mk II midi controller, both 20 over years still working well, especially the Yamaha, although the LCD is fading but still have great e.piano 2 and warm pad sounds.
Some hardware synths in the workstation class take longer to boot than your mac takes to boot. Which sort of makes you realize, that in fact, the Kronos is a great set of software on a shitty computer that lives inside the synth case.
If you already work in a DAW, software is usually faster and easier to set up and recall. With hardware, you have to set up MIDI and audio tracks and routing, Program Change messages etc. (and keep track of which preset you used in which track, if you modify it), where as a plugin is just a click or two, and then all the synth parameters are saved with your DAW session. Automation is also easier with plugins. Of course you could ditch the DAW completely and get a workstation keyboard, but that's an entirely different thing, IMO.
I use both, but software more than hardware. With hardware synths, I tend to commit to audio much earlier in the process, which leads to a different (and sometimes more creative) workflow. With software, you can tweak the MIDI and parameters right to the end which can be a good or a bad thing.
Well, Woody, you certainly have initiated a wide range of views and opinions on this issue! I think the comments illustrate that whilst people strive to create a range of music using hardware synths or software, they are divided not just by their production methods but perhaps more by the type of music they are reproducing or creating. A friend of mine uses Cubase with software synths exclusively to reproduce classic songs and enjoys the challenge to find the right combination of sounds. I prefer to use hardware synths for the interaction and motivation to create songs, moods and grooves that I enjoy playing! However, I realise that software synths can be used creatively and hardware synths to reproduce songs just as well! If I am honest, I think I prefer hardware synths because I do not want to be distracted by the deeper aspects of sound production, preferring to "tinker" with preset sounds and develop simple digital recording techniques and styles. However, I do not have your deep technical knowledge which allows you to enjoy both soft synths and hardware synths. Excellent informative video!
You can buy dedicated midi controlers for many vst synths.
Video starts at 02:30
Where can I listen to the tracks you played in this video?
The ~4:40 track Is bloody great!
i don't remember what the track was and don't want to rewatch, but all my music is on bandcamp, link in desc. thx for the appreciation!
Here I thought you were going to ask us which plants were real and which ones were synthetic? Seriously, the greenery does add to the ambience and certainly makes for some creativity assistance. While I held off until about a year ago from buying the boxed instruments, I have traveled down that trail and have not been overly disappointed with the better VSTis that I have found. Your comment that those VSTS packs aimed at reproducing a single instrument or type of instrument are far better than the all-in-one-box could not be more true. I still fall back to the hardware for gigs and software for home paradigm and may someday change, but for now, that's the way it goes. Thanks for another insightful video.
Very well done this whole video. Thanks for that.
Very informative and interesting, even helpful considering my situation ...
Some good points and useful stuff for a newbie. I have to say that you can also "develop relationships" with software just like you can with a hardware synth (like any newbie, I played with some synths but when I found Falcon things changed a bit, as fits my thinking very well. The same can be said about a high quality, high end MIDI controller (I have a Studiologic SL73 with a great metal construction and wonderful keybed and I love it, while I couldn't care for the plasticky NI KK M32). All that being said, I find a MODX to be very tempting indeed.
What an amazing video! I really enjoyed the sounds in it!
Thank you very much!
Serum Vst is better than all analog or digital synths. You can pretty much recreate any sound from a synthesizer in Serum.
Best to use a synth as a midi controller and make custom sounds in Serum.
And if you need analogue 'warmth', filters and fx are are great in DAWs.
Woody, software got my attention first. I started using soft synths in 1985 on my Amiga 1000. Does anyone know anyone else that has been using software synths for 35 years? And 35 years later, I still prefer them to hardware over all but prefer to combine and use both. I had a MIDI interface, and a Casio CZ-101 as a MIDI controller. The Amiga platform had dozens of great soft synths. Even full emulations of hardware synths, like the Ensoniq Mirage which I was able to buy 30 Mirage floppies and load them right into my Amiga. It's a same Steinberg didn't choose wisely back then and start the VST format on the Amiga, the only computer capable of doing this sort of thing for many years. I used my Amiga 1000 in my early rock bands to save money on expensive hardware synths, samplers, etc.
By the early 90s with my Korg M1 and other hardware synths, I had pretty much switched over to all hardware. Around the mid 90s Dave Smith of Prophet V fame developed "Reality" which I started using on a PC. I also had a wavetable soundcard with an Ensoniq chip that produced a better grand piano than my M1. In the late 90s I also bought Gigasampler & Bitheadz Retro-AS1 analog synth software. Then finally around 20 years ago, I started using VST synths in my bands, and I use them more now than ever. Sure I have a collection of hardware synths, but overall, I think software is the better route. I only perform live in bands. I don't record music.
A few years ago I sold my prized 1973 ARP Pro Soloist analog synth, used by bands like Genesis, Styx, Kansas and others. Why? Because in A/B tests, my soft synth version of it sounded almost identical. And the few sounds that don't, are ridiculously close. Trying to gig with antique synths is very impractical. I play only classic music from the 80s & 70s. I can have a laptop full of almost any classic synths I need which get ridiculously close. I don't have to carry them or maintain them. I typically trigger 3 MIDI keyboards to the laptop at once.
As for soft synths lasting. I still use many that are nearly 20 years old. With few exceptions, you can either get them working on newer computers, an update will be available, or someone else with mimic the same classic synth. Also, let's say they don't. You can always take a tiny netbook which would have enough power to run the old synths in addition to your laptop, just to keep them going. Still hardly anything to carry or setup vs a boat load of classic synths. And so many computers have been sold, that getting an older laptop/netbook working properly would be a much easier task them keeping classic keyboards running. As for the user interface, many keyboards included automap abilities for those that don't want to map soft synths themselves.
I still highly recommend using a hardware synth in addition. Always have a backup plan. For that matter, have software synths that can backup your hardware synths in case they fail. Nothing is 100% reliable. I bought a MODX6 like yours, mainly for backup at shows in case the laptop crashes. I can quickly just to it and get in the ballpark of almost any sound. But still, if you want the sounds near exact to famous songs, the software route is best, cheaper & much easier.
Great comments from the "other guy" who knows what an Amiga is. As a former Wedding band musician/lead vocalist and MC, one must always have a fool proof back up plan. Equipment must never be allowed to shutdown such an important life event.
For me, software is pretty much the main option. Hardware synths require a lot of space that I don't have and are way more expensive than soft synths, simply can't afford them. I do love hardware synths, have a few, but for now, it's primarily software for me. :-)
@@oOFTJOo , nope, my computer was under $400, and maybe $150 for VST's so far. There are excellent VST options that are free, such as the Spitfire Labs stuff and lots of others. VST's are massively less expensive than vintage hardware synths.
@@oOFTJOo , Cakewalk by Bandlab, $0, Reaper, $60.
Lots of people buy/want vintage synths. I have a few. They break, and when they break, they can be very costly to repair. I love them, but they take up too much space for me and are too expensive for me to consider adding any more of them.
I also have stuff like the Volcas, Novation Mininova, etc., wonderful pieces of equipment, but I like VST stuff too. I use MIDI controller keyboards to play VST instruments, not a mouse or computer keyboard.
Not sure, why you have an issue with me stating my opinion here, but it's clear that you do. I buy what I like, and I don't care what anyone else buys.
Brilliant! Thank you for this incredible comparison.
Thanks for your video, it is very enlighting. I began my synth collection just 16 months ago... Now I have 20+ hardware ones and lots more software ones. I enjoy quite a bit more the hardware ones but space is a big problem and you run out of it faster than you think. I will reduce my collection as soon as I decide which ones are keepers, but that is always tought. Wish me luck ;-)!
Excellent vid, Gareth!! even for veterans like me, it's always interesting to remind us all, how many options we got on today.
Thanks!
Cheerio.
Informative and enjoyable video. I can see you put a lot of time and care into this. Thank you!
As a guy who spent years using just software, purely for it's accessibility and convenience, and is now converting more to hardware for it's real hands on experience, I can totally relate to what you talk about here Woody. I play live a lot more now using classic 80's and 90's hardware. I would never have dreamed of doing that when using just software. In fact the band I play in uses an awful lot of hardware synths combined with software. I think if you can find a happy balance between the two mediums you can reach a very happy place. The thing about using hardware in a "LIVE" situation in particular is the response you get from audiences. They like to see gear on stage rather than just a laptop and controller. The only downside is having to carry all that gear about. You can't just stick it in a rucksack, you need a BIG van LOL
And your point about connecting with hardware, I know what you mean. You can't help but connect with a D50. I absolutely that thing. It's my favourite synth in my collection and always take it on stage with me.
for me: plugout synths with hardware and boutiques for u.i hardware and price.
i have 3 setups
1. DAW with plugout synths and some arturia synths
2.Fa-06 with hardware synths - roland boutiques, minibrute, nanozwerg
3.rc505 looper with roland jd-xi, system 1 and roland td30 e drumkit plus a yamaha multi 12 pad set up too
Very nicely done, Woody. 👍
As for my own preference, I love using both VST (Omnispeher and Alchemy Player) and harware (Roland, Arturia).
Thanks for the video! I think about this all the time. I think with more and more integration hardware synths are benefiting greatly from having VSTs that you can run with them. For example the Moog Minintaur has an update that expanded the capabilities enormously of the hardware synth. The Moog Sub 37 VST also makes it much easier to edit and manipulate. I use Reason and have way too many virtual synths and love them all. Mainly because of the Necktar Panorama keyboard that was designed to work especially with Reason. One of the benefits of this is most of those synths are completely mapped which was one of the main drawbacks you mentioned. I would hate to have to pick. But like you said we don’t have to. Having said all that I also agree there is nothing like a hardware synth. It’s an emotional attachment. My Moogs are almost like living things, or musical pets. The best thing about all of them(hardware and VST) is that each one is it’s own learning experience that builds on to the next one.
I have a Roland XP-50 work station but it has gotten old. I need to perform maintenance on it take it apart clean out the audio jacks & pods. You hear a lot of unwanted noise now a days not when it was new when I bought in 1995.I use the Arturia Keylab MKII Controller & V Collection 7 + Roland Cloud amazing soinding.The Software is reliable it is stable but I don't play live.I just record at home
Tim Weinheimer - I got good use out of mine, but it did start to go haywire, snapped an alpha-dial shaft, needed a power supply replacement. That keybed was loud too, XP-30 much quieter.
Definetly pros and cons of both worlds. I personly say, a sample workstation is the best solution for live useage. In the studio the 2 worlds blends together, but live and software synths ... even things have become better, I still wouldn't trust it unless I had a complete backup system with me for when the systems crashes .. not "if" .. but "WHEN"..
can i use vsts in my daw plus have a Roland TB03 connected up into the daw also?
(For the fun of arguing) I'll demonstrate the contrary of your first argument. A hardware synth needs to be switched on, the amplifier too, the mixer too, the Fx too, you need to wait. To hope there will be no bad cables. You need to tune the synths. Then you can play. And then you have an idea a good idea. But alas, you have nothing to record... idea is lost.
My computer is always on. My differents daws and synths are one click away on the desktop, I'm working, I've got an idea, I can immediately play, record, leave and go bac to the work I was doing. Between my screen and my PC keyboard I'v got a small Korg keyboard.
This way is the quickest to play and keep ideas when they come. This software way beats hardware on this point.
I've got big keyboard, mixers, 4 eurorack modular synth, beatbox, numerous hardware synths. And I'm old... I know what is a 4 tracks tape to record music... I know what is a Revox. So when I tell you software is helping creativity I think it is something that must be heard :-)
so many good and real things i heart from this video! thanks so much!
My mind says VSTs, by that was a good callout on Nostalgia. I yearn for my Dad's Yamaha SY77 - even my TG77 rack version does not fully scratch my nostalgia itch. And even though many midi controllers have many buttons, it still does not "feel" like the same experience. But day to day, I use the legions of VSTs and Kontakt samples. (plus, after 40 years, it's time to replace that LED). TY for the vid.
Really good overview of each!
Great video, loved it. Perhaps a little bit biased towards the hardware synths...
Hardware synths have had thirty years to capture our hearts...I imagine software will too once we've experienced more history with them.