Quantcast
HELP! Please help me overcome my GAS for wavetable hardware. Can I achieve similar results with VST? - Page 9 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
HELP! Please help me overcome my GAS for wavetable hardware. Can I achieve similar results with VST?
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #241
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance ➡️
The Pigments factory patches tend to be more filtered, hence softer/darker. That's all.
Softer and darker is typical for VST in my opinion. VST are not that "sharp". I feel that HW often has more depth and especially more defined high frequencys. I think you can hear that quiet well in the Waldirf M demo they brought on the first day.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #242
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by romplix ➡️
Softer and darker is typical for VST in my opinion. VST are not that "sharp". I feel that HW often has more depth and especially more defined high frequencys. I think you can hear that quiet well in the Waldirf M demo they brought on the first day.
The archetypal GS argument!

It's weird... Supposedly Largo (Waldorf VST) and Blofeld (Waldorf hardware) are 95% the same... But the demos I hear of the Blofeld seem to have an extra dimensionality which I don't hear from Largo.

Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #243
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by romplix ➡️
Softer and darker is typical for VST in my opinion. VST are not that "sharp". I feel that HW often has more depth and especially more defined high frequencys. I think you can hear that quiet well in the Waldirf M demo they brought on the first day.
I find that to be true; most VSTs developed seem to have a rolled-off high end, to make them sound more “analogue,” I guess.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #244
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance ➡️
I find that to be true; most VSTs developed seem to have a rolled-off high end, to make them sound more “analogue,” I guess.
I guess that it´s rather because it is probably more CPU consuming to compute waves that swing around 16-20 thousand times per second. Especially those synths that are "strictly modelled after" an iconic analog synth frequently seem to miss the target here.

The result is just a different sound. They can "go that high" - but it´ll sound different in the end:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV7eHbpJkfY
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #245
Gear Head
 
QuiRobinez's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by romplix ➡️
Softer and darker is typical for VST in my opinion. VST are not that "sharp". I feel that HW often has more depth and especially more defined high frequencys. I think you can hear that quiet well in the Waldirf M demo they brought on the first day.
i agree with you too.

there is something in most hardware synths that does something different in the high frequency spectrum.

An exception in my opinion is uHe Diva, when using it in the highest quality mode setting i find the results comparable to hardware.

But also when you transfer VST sounds to hardware something magical seems to happen. That's exactly what i did in this video, i recorded some vst sounds and transfered those sounds to the korg wavestate and the korg modwave.

Especially the korg modwave did something special to that sound, i've created that wavetable in Serum and then imported it in the modwave, i was surprised that the modwave had a much more smooth and more detailed sound than the Serum version. That's probably the magic of the hardware components.

Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #246
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiRobinez ➡️
i agree with you too.

there is something in most hardware synths that does something different in the high frequency spectrum.

An exception in my opinion is uHe Diva, when using it in the highest quality mode setting i find the results comparable to hardware.

But also when you transfer VST sounds to hardware something magical seems to happen. That's exactly what i did in this video, i recorded some vst sounds and transfered those sounds to the korg wavestate and the korg modwave.

Especially the korg modwave did something special to that sound, i've created that wavetable in Serum and then imported it in the modwave, i was surprised that the modwave had a much more smooth and more detailed sound than the Serum version. That's probably the magic of the hardware components.

You exported files from the PC to Modwave and that changed something for you? That is good to know. I had expected that, but haven´t had a user report yet.

The Demo sounds pretty good for my ears. But I suppose that it´s maybe because of the FX of the Modwave. The Korgs know what they do.

Why are you interested in an other WT synth if you have those both and Serum? Isn´t that enough?

Corncerning HW sound from ITB my assessment is that NI FM8 and Absynth are surprisingly closest to that digi-HW-synth sound. I just bought them on sale at the boutique and I´m really glad to have done that although my list of vst synths is pretty long.

When it´s about analog sound my conclusion after many comparisons was that analog sound ITB is not really possible, while analog synths can be pretty cheap these days. The VSTs are not as consistant, present, 3D, "deep" and if desired yet metallic as the real thing. I want to say it with Marvin and Tammi

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz_D-greh8Q

you´ll find lots of samples of analogues @ modularssamples.com github by the way.

All the best!
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #247
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiRobinez ➡️
That's probably the magic of the hardware components.
I'm pretty sure that the modwave is generating its sound by using a computer that is capable of doing the exact same things as your pc.
The only difference between the modwave and a vst are the algorithms, the DACs and the analog output stage after the DACs.
And it's not magic, it's engineering.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #248
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer ➡️
I'm pretty sure that the modwave is generating its sound by using a computer that is capable of doing the exact same things as your pc.
The only difference between the modwave and a vst are the algorithms, the DACs and the analog output stage after the DACs.
And it's not magic, it's engineering.
Yeah... This was the primary gist of this thread, actually.

I can totally comprehend why a hardware real analogue synth might have an edge over VSTs.

It's not immediately clear to me why a hardware wavetable synth has an edge over VSTs, when *both* are essentially software running on a computer chip.... So I was wondering if any VST *does* meet that standard.
But yet it seems to me like even the humble old Blofeld sounds better than most, if not all VSTs and the Modwave almost certainly does.

Why is this?
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #249
Here for the gear
 
devonrosemusic's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance ➡️
Even the old JP-8000 Supersaw is unique, from its fellow in the JP-8080, as well as from every subsequent effort to recreate it, whether by others or even Roland itself. A close listening will confirm this. And skepticism will deny it, along with denying the impossibility of recreating, say, the sound of the M from any other wavetable-based instrument.
Interesting I've never heard anyone say that the JP-8000 and JP-8080 had different supersaw waveforms -- are there any comparisons or documentation between the two? I only own a JP-8080 so I can't perform any experiments against a JP-8000, but now I'm really curious about this.

Also Roland actually went backwards with a lot of their newer cheap digital synths as all of the ones I've used or heard didn't employ oversampling whereas the JP-8000/8080 do -- gotta save $$$ and cut corners somwhere I guess

Last edited by devonrosemusic; 1 week ago at 01:28 PM.. Reason: fixed typo
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #250
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️

Why is this?
Well, like i said, different algorithms and different analog output path.
In some cases maybe the sample rate also plays a role. A lot of modern digital hardware runs at higher rates.
And of course, some form of confirmation bias also plays a role. It just sounds better if you can physically interact with it.

Edit: Also consider that all VST's typically run out of the same audio interface outputs while hardware synths have their own dedicated analog outputs. I think that this kindof 'frames' a device in the mix. Mixing in the DAW is so transparent that you don't get the subtle distortion of each individual analog path and i think that maybe this distortion contributes to the experience of the synth being 'there' in the mix, a little bit as if the sound is 'projected'. But i could be talking out of my arse.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #251
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
The archetypal GS argument!

It's weird... Supposedly Largo (Waldorf VST) and Blofeld (Waldorf hardware) are 95% the same... But the demos I hear of the Blofeld seem to have an extra dimensionality which I don't hear from Largo.

More trancey sounds, but has the 'bite' in some places.

I think as with trying to compare VST sounds to the Modwave, different types of sounds make it hard to make an informed judgement.

I think this is why ease of use and ease to get the sound you are after from a synth are so important. I mean sound wins over use in some cases - but there's really a lot of overlap between synths - so ease of use does become a factor.

Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #252
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
try ad /da loop with plugins ,depending your converters you might get what you think is missing with the softwares, probably a little smearing / smoothing of transients giving the impression of more depth / more 3d sound and more stuff going on. what you miss is " artifacts" / coloration from convertion ( from a flattering converter it would be better/ less subbtle and more enhancing )
you can get same dimension as hardware while staying all itb it just need a bit more work , hardware as often softened transients but dosen t neceseray mean unpunchy, it can be more musical for the good hardware stuff.. also the sound is less statics and can be more filtered on top or not depends what you want to archieve and depends the plugs.

really like largo you add 2 / 3 processing plugins it sound as good if not better than dry blofeld easily... just 2 band of eq might be enought...but what if you add processing to blofeled.. it will sound even better also.. :D

from what i hear briefly from these demo above, largo sound more pure, blofeld as artifacts coloration , it s maybe the same code more or less as they are made by the same person, but one see 2 more convertion , could be just that.
maybe just like a virus C vs a Ti usb.. there is also that same sort fo difference, one is more pure and one has more coloration and often we like the coloration .. or just like a nord G1 vs g2 .. the better convertion of the G2 making it sound more like a plugin than the G1.
if you still have a digital card from the 90s try record with it ..it will probably work better if you want less pristine sound, you will turn a plugin to sound closer to a va from the 90s, as the nord family prooved it, the convertion is a big part of the sound, it s subbtle but not that subbtle for trained ears , it s almost like adding slight processing the more the convertion color .. and the more transparent it is the closer to a plugin it sound.

Last edited by Fred_Abstract; 1 week ago at 03:08 PM..
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #253
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
VST AD/DA like this? I haven't tried one of these - but I do get some nice results with some pre amp add ins. Can get a bit more edge sometimes

https://www.pluginboutique.com/produ...D-DA-Converter
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #254
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiRobinez ➡️
i agree with you too.

there is something in most hardware synths that does something different in the high frequency spectrum.

An exception in my opinion is uHe Diva, when using it in the highest quality mode setting i find the results comparable to hardware.

But also when you transfer VST sounds to hardware something magical seems to happen. That's exactly what i did in this video, i recorded some vst sounds and transfered those sounds to the korg wavestate and the korg modwave.
I run my DAW projects at 96khz. Various VST's sound better, especially in the high end, but in general, more coherent. Bazille for example, sounds amazing at 96khz.

Diva there is not much difference between 48 and 96.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #255
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
I run my DAW projects at 96khz. Various VST's sound better, especially in the high end, but in general, more coherent. Bazille for example, sounds amazing at 96khz.
Plus the added benefit of much lower latency.

Unfortunately, my machine doesn't have sufficient power to do this.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #256
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leras ➡️
VST AD/DA like this? I haven't tried one of these - but I do get some nice results with some pre amp add ins. Can get a bit more edge sometimes

https://www.pluginboutique.com/produ...D-DA-Converter
i was thinking to run a ad/da loop , to record your vst like it was a hardware synth and check the sound , result will depend about your soundcard, if you have pre amps might worth trying also , it will create more difference between chanels so you will have very slighty increased stereo for sure.. but it s something easy to get with plugins.. just try to see if the sound get sort of more "3d" , "depth" , this is with how transients are affected imo, very sharp transients like itb make sound more in your face, so more 2d, it s all in front, hardware often has softer transient leading to a less in front sound, so more 3d , the transients can be softer but as punchy, or even more punchy, it s not a soft coming from a low pass filter i think it feel more like a dynamic thing..

last test i did with synth plugins years ago , just runing a vsti into a analog cable i couldn t replicate it 100% totally itb what it does and how it feel more like a hardware synths, but test i did more recently i could replicate 100 % analog eq and compression (not pushed too much) with plugins and sculpting transients , so i m pretty sure now you don t even need to go outside a computer unless you want the caractere of a specific equipment, but not really for sound quality . the thing is to first know why you like some hardware equipment better, and then mimic it with a chain of plugins if possible.. so it s more tricky than just using the hardware that get a satisfying sound wihtout hassle.
if on many hardware va you find the same thing that is not there with plugins , it can only be the da/ad and how that color the sound or placebo
also 96 khz, most of the va run at 96khz if i m right, even the first virus and nords if i remember correctly (96khz / 18 bits for nord modular ) but this is better for the top and fm mostly, not depth i think.

Last edited by Fred_Abstract; 1 week ago at 05:17 PM..
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #257
Lives for gear
 
:Metaphor:'s Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by romplix ➡️
Softer and darker is typical for VST in my opinion. VST are not that "sharp". I feel that HW often has more depth and especially more defined high frequencys. I think you can hear that quiet well in the Waldirf M demo they brought on the first day.
Agreed, this has been my observation as well. I've always conceived of this as (pardon my use of non-technical buzzwords here) as HW being more "focused", "crisp", "coherent", and yeah, "sharp" in the high end. By contrast, my view of soft synths in the high end is that they are often more "splatty". They just seem to fall apart a bit up top and lack that same sense of smooth, bright focus.

I also suspect with my non-technical, complete lack of electronics knowledge that DA converters do a little something to the mids that may scoop them a tiny bit adding to this sense of "depth" and a difference in image vs software, which may be presenting the whole frequency spectrum all the way up at relatively the same ratios in the lows / mids / highs.

But I have no idea, that's just how it seems to sound to me.
Old 1 week ago
  #258
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
WRT the original topic, for my ears at least, hardware wavetable synths have both a clarity and punch that none of the software wavetable synths I've tried achieve. That could easily be due to the environment the latter live in, so it's not a concern for me; they just sound different, is all.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #259
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Disappearing up the DA/AD world of audiophiles! I think it probably makes some difference like a hard cutoff on lows/highs, a gentle eq curve of some kind and maybe some (minor) distortion.

Who knows, I think it's also not that prominent a difference in some sounds, it seems only for certain types.

Another factor could that digital synths may use an OS which has different limitations i.e 14 bit precision instead of 16 bit.

**Wasn't there an emulation recently of some old processors and a demo of the virus being emulated. If I recall, it definitely impacted the sound and I think the thread said this was due to less precision being available.
Old 1 week ago
  #260
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Want a DAC mojo? Just buy old audio interface. If it's old enough, it might in the ballpark of digital HW synth.

New midtier digital synth does not have new high end dac.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #261
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
if i redo a test i will post the result of totally in the box and same synth with ad/da loop + one ad/da loop runing just into some transformers.

to me it feel like the older the hardware digital synth the less it sound like plugins and vice versa , there is only 2 thing possible, aliasing and quality of dac. you can find this with fx as well , like eventide h3000 vs h8000 .

i see some plugins as too perfect.. like serum , vital.. it may need some imperfection but there is good thing about it, is that these are like blank start .. it s acutally very versatile source to begin with as the cractere can be adjusted to taste , a synth with lot of caractere you re stuck with that caractere more or less, if there is no high for example.. boosting them won t help much , if there are no high it s most likely cause these sounded bad so got cut from the oscillators, or these were looking bad on graph :D no it might be just taste to sound warmer.. but it make these synth less versatile for me

Last edited by Fred_Abstract; 1 week ago at 07:22 PM..
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #262
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
It's not immediately clear to me why a hardware wavetable synth has an edge over VSTs, when *both* are essentially software running on a computer chip.... So I was wondering if any VST *does* meet that standard.
But yet it seems to me like even the humble old Blofeld sounds better than most, if not all VSTs and the Modwave almost certainly does.

Why is this?
To my ears, the Waldorf M has a unique tone. I would say it is because the wavetables are calculated in an unusual way. Then of course it also has analog filters and stereo vca's.

Other hardware wavetable synths do not seem particularly unique to me in relation to wavetable softsynths.

I'd be interested to have the Modwave here for a week and do some comparisons. I do have a Quantum and it does not stand out to me as being better sounding than softwave wavetable synths. It has a unique set of tools, but that can be said about various software synths too.

Based only on Modwave audio demos, I'm not convinced it sounds different/better than software.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #263
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
To my ears, the Waldorf M has a unique tone. I would say it is because the wavetables are calculated in an unusual way. Then of course it also has analog filters and stereo vca's.

Other hardware wavetable synths do not seem particularly unique to me in relation to wavetable softsynths.

I'd be interested to have the Modwave here for a week and do some comparisons. I do have a Quantum and it does not stand out to me as being better sounding than softwave wavetable synths. It has a unique set of tools, but that can be said about various software synths too.

Based only on Modwave audio demos, I'm not convinced it sounds different/better than software.
How would you compare Quantum/M?
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #264
Quote:
Originally Posted by :Metaphor: ➡️
Agreed, this has been my observation as well. I've always conceived of this as (pardon my use of non-technical buzzwords here) as HW being more "focused", "crisp", "coherent", and yeah, "sharp" in the high end. By contrast, my view of soft synths in the high end is that they are often more "splatty". They just seem to fall apart a bit up top and lack that same sense of smooth, bright focus.

I also suspect with my non-technical, complete lack of electronics knowledge that DA converters do a little something to the mids that may scoop them a tiny bit adding to this sense of "depth" and a difference in image vs software, which may be presenting the whole frequency spectrum all the way up at relatively the same ratios in the lows / mids / highs.

But I have no idea, that's just how it seems to sound to me.
We´re both looking into the dark again as we are no pysicians, but me personally - I´m not twenty anymore, I always have my HQ headphones on and know them very well and I´m always open for excursions, comparisons and any kind of informations that will extend my horizon. And in the end it´s about personal taste anyway, so ...

VSTs usually have a "blurred" high end - I guess because of CPU consumption - and more or less lack certain qualities. That may be a question of the content used for sound creation, too - but I guess it´s mainly a problem of algorithm development. That topic is pretty hard, much harder than many want you to know, and as I know for sure really good algorithm developers would waste lifetime designing just VST. They are pretty rare and have lots of opportunities everywhere.

You can move a lot between 4-6 kHz when it´s about presence and do what ever to make the sound more exciting. But as I know for sure that will quickly fatigue you as well as your ears. And we should also not forget that the variety is quiet big on this market and you can also use different appproaches for sound design. I´ve just lately generated results of unexpected quality again that make me confident somehow - and show me again, that impact of the "content", the materials you use for sound creation should not be underestimatet. And that is also where companys with decades of experience will easily suceed over their startup competitors.

As we all know many people won´t even hear those differences and the quality of the content is frquently not even a criteria for consumer descisions. But I guess that everybody who knows a little bit about waveforms, wavetables and frequency spectrums will gladly chose quality over quantity because you´ll have more time for yourself, your music and maybe your family in the end ;-
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #265
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by El-Burrito ➡️
Want a DAC mojo? Just buy old audio interface. If it's old enough, it might in the ballpark of digital HW synth.

New midtier digital synth does not have new high end dac.
The DAC is the least important thing about the DAC...
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #266
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuiRobinez ➡️
That's probably the magic of the hardware components.
I think you mean the magic of the software components.
Hardware doesn't magically make your wavetables sound smooth.
Old 1 week ago | Show parent
  #267
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
To my ears, the Waldorf M has a unique tone. I would say it is because the wavetables are calculated in an unusual way.
I don't think it's calculated in a very unusual way.
But they say that in 8-bit mode the sample rate is 240kHZ, which is very high. And in that case you get kindof the same effect as an unfiltered variable frequency DAC.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #268
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
I've just placed an order for the Waldorf M... From Thomann and won't come for several months, but I'm still stoked.

I got a Blofeld last weekend.

I'm also ordering a 2600 Grey Meanie today.

Feeling quite <strike>sIutty</strike> spacey right now.
Old 3 days ago | Show parent
  #269
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer ➡️
I don't think it's calculated in a very unusual way.
But they say that in 8-bit mode the sample rate is 240kHZ, which is very high. And in that case you get kindof the same effect as an unfiltered variable frequency DAC.
i think oscs use variable sample rates to make artfiacts in tune or to get a more homogeneous natural sound with the artifacts but could be wrong
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 220 views: 93151
Avatar for Neptune45
Neptune45 13th February 2021
replies: 14045 views: 1136169
Avatar for Adam Ford
Adam Ford 18 hours ago
replies: 1401 views: 125315
Avatar for OnceTwiceMelody
OnceTwiceMelody 4 hours ago
replies: 123 views: 5426
Avatar for meh
meh 22nd October 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump