Alchemy or Virus TI? for Progressive House, Trance

I love them both but there is something with the sounds on Virus TI that sounds better to my ears, or is it the programmers who program that way?

There is tons of sounds for Virus synths and not so many for the VA synthesis in Alchemy so the Virus has an advantage there.

The character for the Alchemy filters is pretty close to Virus and older Roland (JD-800, JX-8P) in my ears at least.

What do you think of these two, is it possible to program Alchemy to make as good sounds for Trance music as Virus?

The rest of the synthesis is way better on the Alchemy but I am more inerested in the VA synth.

Virus or Alchemy?

Are you just trying to get Kilon fired up or what?

Alchemy can do subtractive just fine, but manipulating Alchemy's additive resynthesis engine in realtime is the key to trancey bliss. Ambient bliss also.





Learn to program.

How can you compare a soft-synth VST to a hardware synth like the Virus?

The difference is light years.

You get what you pay for.

This has got to be the dumbest thread I have ever seen.

I have both and I wouldn't want to choose between them. Yes, they can both do trance just fine, but the major differences IMO are:

- Virus comes with 1000s of trance sounds ready to go and 1000s readily available on the web (most for free)
- Alchemy has some trance presets and more are available via expansions, but you'll probably need to roll your own most of the time - not that that's a bad thing, of course, but it's not trance-in-a-box.
- Alchemy's strength is in its additive and granular engines IMO and most of the samples that you've heard are probably using its additive, granular, and subtractive synthesis with sources from its sample library - don't discount that! IOW, buying Alchemy solely for its VA capabilities is sorta like buying a Virus for granular and additive synthesis - they each overlap in those areas, but the Virus wins in the VA category, whereas Alchemy wins in all the others (+ spectral synthesis). And, those other synthesis types can be, and are, very useful for trance.

So, the bottom line is........get both.

They're both digital, the only difference is that one is housed in a dedicated controller, end of story.

dfegad digital hardware synths

Somebody should tell Daft Punk how dumb they were for using it on the Tron soundtrack. If it were on a dedicated box I'm sure it would have been light years better.

For what it's worth I own Alchemy and still want a Virus, but in answer to the OP yes, it can do all the usual trancey stuff very well if you're just in a studio environment. There are dedicated trance banks available that sound really good. But I think ambient soundscapes is where it really excels.

Virus TI as the goto and has 100's+ of patches for your genre.

Personally if budgets not a problem I actviely use the following and know they will serve you well. As for best that's for your ear to decide.

My picks from current setup in no current order :

Virus TI
Sylenth1
Alchemy
Synth1 (it's got some nice sounds once routed via appropriate efx.)

Consider : Zebra, Massive, Vanguard, V Station, Z3ta+, Dune, JP8Superwave Ultimate.

If you're on a budget :

Access Snow
Slylenth1
Alchemy
Zebra
JP8Superwave Ultimate

Personally I really recommend Sylenth1, Alchemy (as you want it) and a Virus.

Good luck

And this is one of the dumbest replies I have ever seen.

Incidentally, there are demos of all the presets & soundbanks on Camel's site, they've got some really awesome sound designers working on them. This is the trance/dance one, though there are others that fit the bill:

Dance & Trance - Sound & Sample Library - Dance, Trance & Electro - Synths, Loops, Basses & Arps

Yes I have tried the Alchemy Demo and I think it sounds really good and it can emulate the Virus fairly well.

It is just hard to choose!

Well, if you've already got the cash for a Virus they don't do exactly the same thing, and Alchemy's only $250 and comes with a free soundbank pack of your choice, so why not get both? That's what I plan to do.

If you under that belief - then I guess you also subscribe to the idea of post #6 as the only difference between the two. LOL!

Clearly there are some people in here such as yourself who are not aware of the mass programming-related and mass algorithm-related differences in the capabilities of dedicated hardware DSP units, and the capacity of those units to carry out more intensive algorithms and calculations.

With your thinking a then a Line 6 Pod is would have to be in the same League as an Axe FX guitar amp modeler. And I guess free EQ VST plug-ins are as good as UAD hardware plug-ins, and finally - I guess that free Chorus and Delay VST you just downloaded competes with the Eventide H8000FW. heh

Incredible! Well, I must say - all the power to ya - and good luck with your professional audio expertise! Keep pumping out those top-notch sounding releases!

i disagree. there are far dumber threads on GS.

I just read the exact same thread on KVR...well, with subtle differences..

Anyway, what I don't get is...why is this a choice between them? Alchemy is what..€200 or so? That's change on a Virus, so why make two threads about it..?! Get both!

I have alchemy and love it to death, but I am still considering hardware - in fact a Virus TI2 and a Moog Voyager...and perhaps a DSI Prophet 08. See?

Apples and oranges. I have both and I like both.

Clearly you do. Care to describe one difference ?

What exactly do you think is inside these things? Like you actually think it can perform more calculations than your average Macbook?

It absolutely sounds great, but as a piece of computer hardware it has the advantage of being task-specific and nothing more.

I am truly amazed at your deductive abilities and your irrefutable train of logical thought.

And btw, I'd like you to support with proof the statement that a DSP chip has "the capacity to carry out more intensive algorithms and calculations".

Regardless of who has the most processing power, it's the algorithm that matters.

For example, Lexicon released PCM as a hardware unit, and than as native plugins. They state that the plugins have a smaller buffer, but the algorithms are identical, and according to some tests, they sound identical.

There is no "magic" about hardware units; they're just more expensive (ADC/DAC, actual hardware, dedicated DSP chips, manufacturing) and the guys making them can afford to work more on research and development. Also, the hardware guys have been doing this for a longer time than the software guys, so they have more experience.


Also, I have limited experience with Alchemy, but pick both, if you can.

Lately I was wondering why Tc electronic shutdown the powercore project, or why ssl duende has become available native (assuring you get same quality as hardware).

Even digidesign had to reconsider compatibilities of their products. Or the Lexicon example Susceptor just made.


The answer I gave to this is because few years ago multicore computers at low cost were not available, now you can get even 12 core computers at a very reasonable price.

I think it's only a matter of processing power, not that dsp does it better.

I would never waste one euro on dsp dedicated software cause their market is slowly dying.

But I have to say that yes the virus is not comparable to vst's. not because of the dsp's but for tha da converters (digital to analog)

As i said in other threads if you record with spdif or usb the quality is very close to vsts but (and it's why the virus is so expensive) if you record through analog outs and make the internal da converters of the virus work there is a huge difference.

My comparison was made on ff 400 pres and listening on A7x

If alchemy's software house decides to invest in developing their own hardware and their own da coverter it could be comparable to virus, before that there is not much to argue about.

I like trance music and got both Ummet Ozcan's presets for virus ti and then for sylenth. (ok it's not alchemy but it's a really good vst)
Some sounds have the same values so it is possible to do comparison. But the virus is simply better.

(of course i can provide audio examples)


Just listened to the link above on alchemy capabilities http://www.camelaudio.com/Dance-Tran...le-Library.php

Common guys the sounds in the preview are not even comparable to what a virus is capable of :(

Maybe I should have linked the pack that uses Virus sounds?

Viral Outbreak - Sound & Sample Library - Electronica, IDM & Dance - Pads, Loops & Synths

I can see an advantage live, but I'm not clear how converting a digital signal to analogue then back to a digital recording produces a vastly superior result to just running it directly into a DAW.

Pretty nice sounds on this link. Have to give alchemy a try...

I know, it's f***ed up... I have virus ti since 2007, and of course always recorded through usb.

Few months ago i even thought of selling it, got other gear and for the price wasn't that happy of how virus sounded.

Then looking around on forums (even posts by erez from infected mushroom, or here on gearslutz) I saw threads where a lot of arguing was going on, on which was the best pre for every different kind of sound of the virus.. then I thought let me try, and finally I got the dynamics this synth has to offer...
A Unique Jewel

As soon as I have time i'll upload examples of usb recording/analog recording

have you ever tried to run your computer using software drivers for your graphics vs a cheap 300mhz graphics card ?

What about the PhysX DSP engines that come built into the GPU chips ? Try turning that off while running a game and see what happens.

A processor or 2 which is dedicated to number crunching will work better than much more powerful computer running multiple tasks while trying to perform the same function.

I'm not saying the virus is more powerful than your quad cores or whatever, I'm just making a point that just because your computer has silly processing speeds that sometimes a dedicated unit can outperform it at certain tasks.

These software vs hardware things are pretty pointless. You can't buy a Virus in software form and you can't buy most VSTs in hardware form.

I prefer the hardware and I used my money to buy it. If you like it the other way then good for you.

I look forward to hearing it, curious how it comes out.

Honestly the converters on a Virus are not better than an RME interface, nor Access develops their own converters. They buy the converters from cirrus logic, just like they buy resistors and transistors from some other electronic parts manufacturer. If you have a TI, open it and you will see it for yourself.

Like this guy did
Inside - Poly Evolver, Nord Lead 3, Virus TI, pulse, XT & Andromeda (updated) - MIDIbox Forum


If the Virus sounds better to you than Alchemy it can only be attributed to those factors:
- most probably to coding (in the synthesis section or some kind of digital mastering)
- or maybe some analog magic mojo after the DA conversion
- or even self suggestion


I'm pretty confident that if you pass any of the top soft synths (Alchemy, Sylenth, DCAM, etc) through Ozone you could get something very similar to the TI.

I'm sure Access has some digital hidden tricks under their sleeve (besides good presets)... but people coding soft synths are getting better every day.

Virus fanboys aside, sound quality is a matter of taste, and to my ears there are certainly some softsynths that sound better. Of course, the Virus is just a softsynth in a box....

Muse Research : RECEPTOR 2+ - Hardware VST Plug-in Player: The RECEPTOR 2+ PRO and PRO MAX

heh

Both Access Virus TI and Alchemy are great products.

If you have the budget, get the Virus TI Desktop or Snow TI (low budget). Purchase Alchemy in the later stage. Then you have both to work with.

Btw, Sylenth1 is a good purchase as well. I use it frequently combi with TI sounds. I use Alchemy for Pads and some synths.

Cheers