Some hardware I wait for to power up as long as my laptop.
I definitely have to do some navigation if I want to save or load anything.
Hardware with macros or a mod matrix tend to make the instrument shine a bit more when set up and used.
I used to say hardware is more accessible, but these days it seems more like the dedicated parameters (limitations) make it feel more focused.
I can definitely set up a default DAW situation where I can just open the app and it’s ready to get down. However, it still feels like a black hole of options if I let myself stray from established limits.
It’s weird to discover which I prefer, the convenience of software organization or the lack of that in favor of limitations inspiring creativity.
Did anyone mention the “making music with software is like looking at an excel spread sheet” comment made on here awhile ago?
Sums it well up for me, mousing around in a digital environment is just lifeless compared to twisting physical knobs and pressing buttons, much more fun, for me at least.
I often have the opposite problem, in that I have a greater mental barrier to getting going with my attic studio than I do plinking around in DAW downstairs.
loading VSTs can be quite faster than rewiring all.
The only tactile I can comment on ( as I dont really bother with music making )
Is mononoke vs soma lyra. The lyra would sound better but with an ec4 controller and x 2 ipad. You got 4 mononokes plus effects and probably way better to tweak because you dont have to set up a long table. Plus you save money but you wouldnt buy 4 lyras anyway. Just saying. Its more tactile to tweak a controller with a hand and x 4 mononokes with the other hand. Only would you make this if you bought an ipad anyway.
I wasn’t implying that anyone chooses an audience.
I was actually saying, If I’m happy with it, then the hardest part is done, let the chips fall where they may.
Over the years of experiencing this Vs. situation there has always been one thing that stands out more than anything else.
VST’s bend down and kneel to hardware. Companies try to recreate analog sounding VST’s. Every piece of marketing I see for digital recreations has an analog stamp. The AIRA line uses ACB. Arturia’s V Collection used an analog modeling algorithm. The list goes on…
There must be a reason for this; hardware is king.
I find it impossible to engage with VST synths as anything other than preset machines. I’ve basically only got what’s included in Komplete Ultimate and a bunch of iOS synths. I really enjoy flipping through presets and just playing and marking favs for the ones I find inspiring… but…
I never ever want to tweak them, ever… it just feels like there’s a glass wall between me and what controls the sound. I think on ipad it’s a matter of having to use quite precise movements to adjust things - it’s a mental barrier. Likewise with a mouse on a pc, nothing makes me want to tweak a sound… I think in this case it’s a visual layout thing. I appreciate a bit of midi learn but I don’t usually use it for programming just mucking about.
So, nothing against VSTs, it’s just the proof is in the behavioural pudding.
Now that Moog’s Model D app is out for Mac (previously it was an iOS app that would run on some Macs), I’m wondering why it is that we still love these old synths, even though they haven’t changed for decades.
We might just define the way a guitar/synth is supposed to sound based on the originals we’re used to hearing on all those classic records. Maybe we think moog sounds good partly because that’s what we heard for decades, and if the original synths wouldve sounded like a timbrewolf that would be the holy grail sound
Also: I do really feel like moog/fender just hit a home run in their first designs, but that might just be me suffering from the thing described above.
Yeah, I definitely feel it’s some of both causes at work —both familiarity and intrinsic potential. Moog and Fender created extraordinarily versatile, almost “necessary”, foundations that have been effectively iterated on for decades, while the same essential features also continue to be in demand.
In some contrast to that, looking at the centuries-long history of acoustic instruments, it seems that antique keyboard or guitar/lute designs are in very little use today… Perhaps mass manufacturing has a lot to do with this sort of paradigmatic design being able to emerge quickly
Its nice to own hard things. Especially if they are expensive. And no matter how real a model D vst ever will sound its not a real 70s model D. I like old stuff. I dont own an old Moog but a half broken dirty sh-1000 and its impossible to emulate the feeling in that drifty progsound, the smell, gunk and love. I like vsts for its convenience. I can play my Jupiter 8 and Moog modular on the bus. I love Surge because you can modulate everything and choose alot of trippy presets very fast.
I feel underqualified to discuss synths just yet but as others have mentioned; there are interesting parallels and differences with the guitar world.
When I was recording, the way I used VST amps was to get a sound I didn’t have the gear to create myself in the studio. Typically, this was cherry-on-the-cake stuff rather than the bulk of track itself which was usually done with old faithful sounds I’d gotten out of my own boxes. That said, I knew producers who were excited by the fact that there was less time and effort involved in setting up a VST amp, and more emphasis on getting to a sound that works. The only issue with that is bands who often like to play live also liked to at least somewhat replicate the studio sound on stage; which is somewhat easier with an amp you know than the endless world of VST amps.
To me there are a few very specific observations between these two ways of making music;
Guitars, amps and pedals are like presets in the sense that they all have a tone and a character that is baked in, which you can customise, but it’s not as choose-your-own adventure as a synth is where you start with a saw and see where you’ll end up.
Most guitarists I know have different guitars for different uses, where typically this break point doesn’t always exist in electronic music. There’s a difference in intent and sound between something like an acoustic guitar noodling round in your house for a quick demo, and recording a finished song in a studio with your best piece of gear.
The big parallel is that it’s really down to your specific needs as to whether you feel like a VST or a specific instrument works for you. The line between what each can create seems mighty thin these days. If you enjoy the tactility of hardware, you can do that. If you like the touchscreen thing there’s always an iPad. And if you like VSTs and their possibilities then a computer plus the option of a Midi controller works. (Plus it goes without saying that synths have space considerations too, which software is a big help with.) It seems to me that a mix of fun & practicality for your use case is the key to making a choice that works, and that’s the most important factor. To my mind, I’d want a blend of both for all the above reasons, which is probably a legacy of jumping between acoustic guitars and electric rigs for recording/live shows.
In some cases, ease of use. I’d much refer to patch FM8 over a DX 7. If you’ve got a DX7, I’d say FM7 / FM8 is essential (at leasy a big time saver!) as programmer.
Or, even if you had the cash, the real thing is unobtainable, like the Buchla 700.
