06-04-2002, 09:17 PM	#1
taliz Registered User Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 1	vst instruments Getting to grips with Cubase, and using Neon & Hallion. What other VST Instruments are out there ? Are they any good ? :help:

08-04-2002, 04:30 PM	#2
lady-j Fit Bird DJ Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 970	loads and yes. www.kvr-vst.com also check out www.dancetech.com and look in their VSTi forum. where all your questions will be answered.. tell them lady j sent you ever since i discovered Vitrual Instruments i've sworn off buying any hardware sound modules, etc. that money is better spent on memory, mics, preamps, DSP stuff, and monitors lady-j

08-04-2002, 06:20 PM

Sen

Da Elda Moderata

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 4,513

“
Originally posted by lady-j

ever since i discovered Vitrual Instruments i've sworn off buying any hardware sound modules, etc. that money is better spent on memory, mics, preamps, DSP stuff, and monitors

”

I agree for the most part - but to me, the biggest saving is in time...time that you spend learning each new synth/sampler etc in HW format usually takes longer just do to the un-ergonomic interfaces as opposed to softsynths/samplers which have nice things like rollover functions and on-line help menus is time that you can spend on writing tracks.

To really make VSTi's work for you though, you need a smoking computer...

08-04-2002, 09:38 PM	#4
DJ Fat Zed Analogue Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 543	But they sound $$$$.............. For very basic production, yeah, maybe they're useful. But computers are not analogue, so they do not do analogue well. I'm not knocking them for the beginner, but real synths should be what you aspire to.

09-04-2002, 04:10 AM	#5
Sen Da Elda Moderata Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 4,513	You can come up with some reasonable sounding hand drawn facsimiles But you're right...you can't replace true analogue...you can, however imitate it for a fraction of the cost/space/effort/etc. Pale maybe, but for some, it's better than nothing. When i come to the UK Dan, you're going to have to school me all over again in analogue synthesis.

09-04-2002, 07:44 AM	#6
DJ Fat Zed Analogue Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 543	With pleasure........ You can come round.

10-04-2002, 12:37 AM

lady-j

Fit Bird DJ

Join Date: Nov 2001

Posts: 970

“
Originally posted by DJ Fat Zed
But they sound $$$$..............

For very basic production, yeah, maybe they're useful. But computers are not analogue, so they do not do analogue well.

”

does a Supernova do analogue well? or a Nord Lead? or a Virus?? my point is who cares. it's whether the end result sounds good, and for Garage (this is a garage site after all) we are generally talking about sample based stuff outside of Basslines....

“
I'm not knocking them for the beginner, but real synths should be what you aspire to.
”

lol

that's right keep the myth going...more money spent on hardware = better quality (er maybe not)...

this boys and girls is how 'the big shots' discourage those with less money and more brains and creativity from production (not accusing you of that Fat Zed). they put forth this myth that in the sound production arena nothing equals having a box of hardware that costs more than you can afford.

Fat Zed may not know this but i've played around with loads of analogue things and digital things and virtual analogue in-between things. and i will tell you this, there is very little difference in using Reaktor or a good VSTi with a good sound output device (i use Emagic's EMI 2/6) than using dedicated hardware.

there are many records released in the arena of Hip Hop, Garage, Pop, Drum n Bass, House and other music that were done just with Logic, or Cubase and a bunch of plug ins.

yes you DO need a fast computer but not terribly fast. my 350 Mhz iMac did an alright job. now i have a 500 Mhz iBook which smokes it

best part is i can transport my whole studio in a backpack. moral of the story, don't believe the lie. it made sense and was true 2 years ago. not now. be prepared to pay for memory and good audio DSP stuff.

Halion is as good if not better than my Emu E5000 which will likely be sold unless i think of a good reason to have it shipped to the UK.

Neon is a good little bass synth

Tau Pro - is a basstation essentially...

Pro 52 - does a very good job replicating the real Pro 5

FM7 - IS the Yamaha DX 7... 80s sounds all around

and there are other very realistic plug ins which i will keep to myself.

the best thing about VSTis is that you can get some that are not available as dedicated hardware.

and now they are making HARDWARE that emulates software:

Waldor - Attack
Antares - Mic Modeler
Antares - Autotune

are a few that come to mind.

yes to get professional results you do have to spend some money, but the price of entry into the Pro Audio arena has fallen significantly since the 80s due to computers processing power doubling ever 6 months, and MIDI and VST and virtual instruments and an increase in low priced hardware.

this trend is likely to continue so disregard the purists. i hear alot of music from their lot and it is usually dry since they focius too much on how a sound is created than writing a good song which, at the end of the day. what this is all about.

right.. that's enough of my book for now

lady j

10-04-2002, 12:49 AM	#8
BREAKER Registered User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 445	The Analog v's Digital Debate is the most hair pulling debate in the world, it beats politics. My persoanl opinion is, if it sounds good then its worthy of credit.

10-04-2002, 12:52 AM	#9
lady-j Fit Bird DJ Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 970	true.2nd only to the PC vs Mac debate.. i am all about the end result i use wot works for me and am not discouraged by jealous people who spent more money than they probably should have. personally i rather walk in to a pro studio with a laptop full of software and access to a firewire interface or my little 2/6 box than try to buy and assemble a pro studio on my budget. it cost nuff money just to live than to worry about buying a whole studio of hardware lady j

10-04-2002, 01:00 AM	#10
Sen Da Elda Moderata Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 4,513	That's my idea as well...i sold all of my pure analogue to pay for school but I love the thought of having my tracks in my backpack, taking that to a pro studio with all the Focusrites, the Antares, the DBX multibands, the TC electronics, TLA etc etc. stuff I can only dream of affording and using their equipment and skills (that I can only dream of having) to make my tracks better. to write the songs at home and mixdown at the studio - that's the way to do it for me on my budget etc.

10-04-2002, 07:49 AM

#11

DJ Fat Zed

Analogue

Join Date: Feb 2002

Posts: 543

“
Originally posted by lady-j

that's right keep the myth going...more money spent on hardware = better quality (er maybe not)...

lady j
”

No manufacturers are making money out of old synthesisers being sold now, that's why they're making virtual analogues and VSTis. Even the people selling them aren't making that much considering the original price of these synths. eg. Rhodes Chroma 1982 price £3500, Rhodes Chroma 2002 price £1000. Now take inflation into account.

Look at the price of software. N.I. Fm7 is £150, anyone can pick up a DX7 which is THE definitive article for less than £100. And the DX7 wont stop working when you inevitabley move over to OSX or whatever. You might say that you can download the cracks but when writing pro music this is very dodgy considering licensing matters.

The fact is that to get these softsynths to work, they have to slim down the DSP algorithms. The president of Roland was asked in interview why real analogue sounded better, he said that both hardware and software simply don't have enough DSP yet to emulate the intricacies of the real thing.

Even on my protools Mix3 system, which has the equivalent DSP of 6 G4 macs, I can only get 5 instances of access virus with full polyphony per card (3 cards).

If you can't hear the difference then fine, but I can hear it a mile off. I'm very happy having over 1000 knobs and faders instead of one mouse, and the ability to make music that doesn't stop once my CPU gets overloaded.

.......finally.........do softsynths appreciate in value............

10-04-2002, 07:54 AM	#12
Sen Da Elda Moderata Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 4,513	there is something sexy about lots of knobs and faders, but alas, simplicity has won out here...my wife keeps threatening to make me move my studio into the Garage...

10-04-2002, 09:48 AM	#13
J Laurence Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 161	lady j do you use a laptop then?

10-04-2002, 01:56 PM

#14

lady-j

Fit Bird DJ

Join Date: Nov 2001

Posts: 970

“
Originally posted by DJ Fat Zed

No manufacturers are making money out of old synthesisers being sold now, that's why they're making virtual analogues and VSTis. Even the people selling them aren't making that much considering the original price of these synths. eg. Rhodes Chroma 1982 price £3500, Rhodes Chroma 2002 price £1000. Now take inflation into account.

”

perhaps its that but i find it more likely that with the progress of technology both analogue and digital since 1982 it would be VERY hard to sell people on what are essentially 'one-trick ponies' for over £1000.

“

Look at the price of software. N.I. Fm7 is £150, anyone can pick up a DX7 which is THE definitive article for less than £100. And the DX7 wont stop working when you inevitabley move over to OSX or whatever.

”

The FM7 was never intended to JUST be a replacement or clone of a DX7, it is often assumed by people who have never used it that that is ALL it is when in fact Native Instruments have stated: the FM7 is not a simple DX7-clone. It *can* easily reproduce DX7-sounds. But it also contains a nice filter-section, different waveforms, far more complex envelopes, onboard fx (delay).
It continues the idea of DX7 and goes far beyond any SY-77s and SY-99s...

think of adding filters to your DX? and outboard effects? you will pay more than 100 quid and you won't have access to any of the new waveforms, or upgrades, updates so it it isn't hard to move over to another operating system. the best thing is your patches don't all disappear with that internal battery invitably dies. you have to uplug from mains sometime...

“
You might say that you can download the cracks but when writing pro music this is very dodgy considering licensing matters.

”

see my response to this at the top of the board. all that needs to be said on the subject really.

“
The fact is that to get these softsynths to work, they have to slim down the DSP algorithms. The president of Roland was asked in interview why real analogue sounded better,

”

brilliant: let's all draw conclusions from a predictable answer to a loaded question put to an obvious 'hardware' person with much to loose if people stopped buying Roland hardware. i doubt the president of Roland makes music any more than the president of America mows his own lawn.

“

he said that both hardware and software simply don't have enough DSP yet to emulate the intricacies of the real thing.
[QUOTE]

hasn't stopped Roland from entering both the virtual analogue and VSTi arenas, and what does this have to do with Garage? how many analogue sounds do you hear in garage?! lol Garage is very digital...the most analogue you are likely to hear on a record now days is the mic and a driven valve preamp.

[QUOTE]

Even on my protools Mix3 system, which has the equivalent DSP of 6 G4 macs, I can only get 5 instances of access virus with full polyphony per card (3 cards).

”

isn't one enough? i suppose it depends on how you work.

“
If you can't hear the difference then fine, but I can hear it a mile off.

”

most people listening to a tune on the radio or in a club could care less.what we are talking about isn't a difference in quantifiable terms anyway. it's all subjective. my ears are different that yours.

“
I'm very happy having over 1000 knobs and faders instead of one mouse, and the ability to make music that doesn't stop once my CPU gets overloaded.
[QUOTE]

good for you. some people prefer another way which still may involve 1000 knobs and faders (Logic Control, Control Freak, etc...)

generally though i've found that i don't need more than 8 faders and 24 knobs on most tunes. if you are so obsessive about control then i think i've sussed the reason

[QUOTE]
.......finally.........do softsynths appreciate in value............
”

do any synthesisers these days other than a few obvious pieces of 'vintage' boxes? not every piece of vintage analogue kit is fetching £1000 or more. i suppose you are emotionally attached to your boxes in the same way some people are emotional attached to certain trains with certain numbers or certain makes of discontinued, radios, which is fine. i rather just make a bumpin tune on the cheap that sounds as if it used a whole room full of kit. i don't care about how it is done or what is used, so long as it's funky.

regardless, if you are looking for things that appreciate in value, why not certain stocks, precious coins, or perhaps you could consider antiques and collectables? or art? they look much better in your home have a higher value to your average non-muso and a larger market share.

lady-j

clever.bird.dj

Last edited by lady-j : 10-04-2002 at 01:58 PM.

10-04-2002, 02:00 PM	#15
lady-j Fit Bird DJ Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 970	yes. i just use an iBook. which gets certain people's feathers ruffled lady-j

10-04-2002, 02:09 PM	#16
lady-j Fit Bird DJ Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 970	Sen. i don't blame her. most studies have the potential to look very unsightly and downright ugly. im in to aesthetics, i would rather it look good and sound good than have a billion and one possibilities which i will likely never used. also keeping it simple as one other advantage: speed. you can write music in MUCH less time if you are not transfering samples back and forth unplugging cables and fussing with dodgy little displays on outboard effects boxes and generally the finished product will sound better. and as you know by now, i'm all about the finished product not what it took to get there. lady-j

10-04-2002, 03:21 PM

#17

Sen

Da Elda Moderata

Join Date: Jun 2001

Posts: 4,513

“
Originally posted by lady-j
brilliant: let's all draw conclusions from a predictable answer to a loaded question put to an obvious 'hardware' person with much to loose if people stopped buying Roland hardware. i doubt the president of Roland makes music any more than the president of America mows his own lawn.

”

Actually, Roland current has no true analogue synths on the market. They are also in the process of developing several HQIs (High Quality Instruments) that are VSTi/DXi compatible.

Also, the virtual analogue and the new (what's it called?) "Hyperwave" thingee (I think...??? Delfino, help me out here) [which is a combo fo PCM + virtual analogue synthesis kinda...] that Roland is coming out with may make you believe in the strengths of dedicated hardware again.

10-04-2002, 03:25 PM	#18
Sen Da Elda Moderata Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 4,513	You know what I hate the most about analogue synths? I work on something like 6 different songs a day, bits at a time - constantly switching between sound sets and stuff. My virtual stuff REMEMBERS what was what sound/parameter/etc. My analogue stuff never did, sadly My virtual stuff may have to boot up, but never had to warm up to be in pitch I love the precise nature of control I can get with my virtual stuff and the automation - I can do things like pitch the harmonics of the filter in different keys in different spots...not something I'd want to try to replicate in realtime on tape with analogue. That all said, my analogue stuff was more fun to play with though...especially in real time. And definitely had that live sound to it...I do miss it... As for my wife, it's more with space for things like babies and whatnot...not aesthetics...that's more my thing my rat's nest of cables really traps dog hair...

10-04-2002, 03:32 PM	#19
lady-j Fit Bird DJ Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 970	right i get you. what i mean is that most people do not have the space for 5 keyboard and a mixer desk and stuff so it all ends up shoved in a corner somewhere and it just looks and works bad.

10-04-2002, 05:14 PM

#20

DJ Fat Zed

Analogue

Join Date: Feb 2002

Posts: 543

I seem to have re-entered the debate a little late here, but.........

“
right i get you. what i mean is that most people do not have the space for 5 keyboard and a mixer desk and stuff so it all ends up shoved in a corner somewhere and it just looks and works bad.
”

That's absolutely fair enough. Space, cost and learning curve issues make VAs win hands down.

But, my argument is this: If something is an emulation of an original, it can never truly be of the same quality as the original, always just a percentage of it.

For the hobbyist/part-timer and where space and budget is limited, these virtuals are great. But my point is that the real thing sounds better.

There are arguments here saying that most people can't tell the difference between them so why bother.

If this is the case, take the example of mastering. Most people can't tell the intricacies of how a track's been mastered, so why then do all good mastering places use Pultecs and Fairchilds worth an arm and a leg.

Yes, your average Joe on the street couldn' tell you which is a VA and which is the real thing but they do have a surprisingly discerning ear for overall sound quality, of which these things contribute to a great deal. Otherwise studios wouldn't spend half a day deciding whether to record with a U87 or a C414.

Also, in my experience, the people who sign music know an awful lot about quality. I've had label people commenting on how much they love the Jupiter 8 in my track, with no prior knowledge that it's there.

I've never tried to knock VAs but my point is that there is a difference, and a negative one.

The "all in a box solution" is great in theory, but the fact is that if you record all your music on and within one computer you are subjecting the entire track to the same artefacts. Using a variety of outboard brings in all sorts of different qualities such as analogue saturations within outputs, transistors and cables, and the intricate carachteristics of the circuit design of equipment. This gives a much more balanced sound, the sole reason why all major studios still use analogue desks like SSLs and Neves.

The accuracy of the human hearing system is far greater than any microphone that has ever been produced and that is why it's still not possible to realistically synthesise acoustic instruments without highly extensive physical models involving up to 100 input parameters (beleive me, I've programmed a couple in the past).

Regarding your earlier point

“
brilliant: let's all draw conclusions from a predictable answer to a loaded question put to an obvious 'hardware' person with much to loose if people stopped buying Roland hardware. i doubt the president of Roland makes music any more than the president of America mows his own lawn.

”

I was never talking about people buying current hardware. In actual fact, hardware virtual analogues are only marginally better than software ones. I was talking about people buying old hardware. What does the president of roland have to gain by people buying something his company made 30 years ago?????

Join now to reply to this thread or open new ones for your questions & comments! UKMUSIC.com is the largest online community about music in UK. Registration is open to everyone and FREE. Click Here to Register!

Page 1 of 3

« Citronic PRO 10 | Views on this Behringer mixer? »

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Rate This Thread