VA Vs A

[fluffy_little_something]

You can set a vst to mono mode (one string in your example) as well if you want to.
Keytracking is much more expressive on a plugin. You can set it up any way you like, including inverse, but also natural like on a piano.
Sorry, but on a modern plugin with an complete modulation matrix you have more control over your sound and playing than on a piano. The piano is actually not nearly the most expressive real instrument, an electric bass is much more expressive because your playing is not limited to the vertical movement of the finger. So, emulating an electric bass on a synth is much more of a challenge in my view.

[treebeard]

In many ways I think that the difference in the sound generated by a Softsynth or Analogue Synth is not the most important aspect. They can both be made to sound pretty darn close to each other and even if you dispute that, some certainly will, they both are capable of sounding equally amazing and awful.

For a terrible sounding analogue synth look no further than the Timbre Wolf...

For fantastic sounding softies there is Lush101, Diva ect...

One factor for me is the inexplicable connection you feel with your hardware instruments - It may be silly but they feel like they each have an individual "persona" and uniqueness. I feel an attachment to them which I don't have with Software.

Another factor is simple convenience. When I have the urge to play I have two options.

1. Turn on the PC, wait a bit, Load up DAW, wait a bit, Load chosen VST synth and begin playing. (and that is after all the fairly boring prep work needed to assign and save relevant parameters to a midi controller ect - a new VST would take a lot longer to be ready)

2. Turn on the Synth and start playing.

Hardware is so direct and instant when you need it to be. I also don't think emulations can be compared to the experience of the real thing. Sure, they are useful and can give fine results but if I want to play a piano or guitar I would rather play a piano or a guitar. Sadly, I dont have a piano so I must use an emulation but I would still rather use a piano given the choice.

Bottom line is that we use what we can, often we must compromise - but I'm pretty sure that most of us, if offered the choice between a copy of TAL101 or an SH101, would pick the latter without too much hesitation or regret!

[fluffy_little_something]

I guess would pick TAL's emulation because it is polyphonic and also because I would not be bound to the tiny keyboard of the original. I could not imagine spending a single cent on a hardware MONO synth.

[ghettosynth]

A good synth plugin combined with a good midi controller with pedal allows for more expressive playing than on a piano. After all, you can set up velocity, aftertouch, and keytracking to modulate all kinds of parameters such as cutoff, resonance, pulse width, envelope times, etc.

On a piano, you have a pedal to control resonance (sustain pedal, which lifts up the dampers, allowing all the strings to resonate freely), a pedal to play just one string, instead of the regular two or three, and you have natural keytracking and envelope times controlled by "velocity" (depending on the way you play, you can get many different "envelopes"). Besides, the way you attack the notes, also allows many different timbres too. It's subtle, but it's real.

And no matter what you do, it still sounds like a piano. Seriously, can you take this off-topic nonsense elsewhere? This isn't a conversation about you, it's about synthesizers.

[treebeard]

I guess would pick TAL's emulation because it is polyphonic and also because I would not be bound to the tiny keyboard of the original. I could not imagine spending a single cent on a hardware MONO synth.

Wow, really? If I offered you for free an SH101 or a copy of TAL101 you would take the software emu?

Regardless of the polyphony or the size of the keys i'm surprised you cannot see the value in a hardware instrument - even if you only considered the re-sale value

Also - your not bound to the keyboard at all - you can still attach a controller if you really want to. Wheras with the software you most certainly are bound to an OS and entire system!! Each progressive update can threaten your softwares ability to even run.

A hardware synth has no such limitations.

[fluffy_little_something]

Well, I guess I would take the hardware synth for free if you threatened to throw it away, but I would probably not use it much or at all. I prefer to have my synths inside my computer rather than having to mess with cables etc. My soundcard only has one input, so I would have to plug and unplug stuff repeatedly. Since it was a portable synth, it was good for live shows, but for me it would be pretty much worthless, frankly.

TAL's emulation goes beyond the original in several ways. The arp is also improved if I am not mistaken.


Generally speaking, just like with plugin GUI's a hardware synth also has to appeal to me, which never applied to that ugly plastic Roland synth, which always came a cross as cold and cheap somehow.


PS: Just checked it out on the Internet, that thing did not even have patch memory. Crazy now that we are used to software patch managers

[fmr]

And no matter what you do, it still sounds like a piano. Seriously, can you take this off-topic nonsense elsewhere? This isn't a conversation about you, it's about synthesizers.

No need to be rude. OK? Let's keep things polite. And I have to remind you it was YOU who brought the piano to the table. But I'm OK talking about synths, that's why I am at KVR

[pdxindy]

First: "A piano has an extremely limited timbre variation". Not true: The piano has an infinite timbre variation, if played by a skilfful pianista. Agreed that it is subtle, but it has. Just try to listen three really good pianists playing the same piano, and you'll see (and hear).

Compared to a synth, a piano has an extremely limited timbre variation...

Compared to a synth, a piano has an extremely limited timbre "range", not timbre "variation"

heh... every single thing has infinite timbre 'variation'

but you are pointing out something... a piano is analogue. It is not a fixed set of ones and zeros.

[treebeard]

Fair enough fluffy, I thought you would take the SH in a straight this or that situation , but you seem pretty determined to dislike hardware instruments for some reason. I don't accept your single input interface as a valid one though, ! Nor, the looks argument - the SH is admittedley one of the least beautiful synths, I'll give you that, but there are tons of gorgeous synths and they are all always more aesthetically impressive than a graphical rendering on a monitor. But your avoiding the important positive aspects inherent to hardware instruments.

Valid negatives are the price, weight and size. The tuning on some, sure. Not much else though.

I mean, compared to the hassle involved if your computer ever goes down or gets sick, forget it!

I just cannot see why anybody would consider software which depends on having another piece of compatible hardware as having more intrinsic value than hardware which does not have this dependency. Thank god the markets seem to agree!

[fluffy_little_something]

Well, for me the soundcard is one aspect to consider because I just do this for fun, without any aspirations, so I am not willing to buy more gear such as interfaces and what not.

Don't get me wrong, there are definitely a couple of hardware synths I would like to have, just for the sake of it. I listed them a couple of pages ago. The SH101 is just not one of them.

Especially since hardware synths are stand-alone devices, I want to be able to at least play chords on them. Another reason why the SH101 is worthless to me. I do like bass lines, but I don't need a dedicated hardware to play them.

But really, I would prefer a Rhodes piano to any hardware synth

[ghettosynth]

I guess would pick TAL's emulation because it is polyphonic and also because I would not be bound to the tiny keyboard of the original. I could not imagine spending a single cent on a hardware MONO synth.

Yes, in general, i.e., perhaps not your exact choices in this case, per se, I would also prefer to use a VA for the same reasons. This might sound strange coming from someone who argues that there is significant and important differences, yet, but I don't think that it is.

The case where I would choose the SH-101, a synth that I have used live and still own two of, is exactly that, when I'm playing live and want the immediacy and subtlety of an analog synth. It's a simple synth with a great filter, but, one that is modeled reasonably well. Unless you add them externally, it has no significant FM or rapid resonance modulation. In other words, the cases where it really starts to matter, are less frequent on the SH than they would be on something with a more complex architecture.

[treebeard]

But really, I would prefer a Rhodes piano to any hardware synth

This I can understand - on my wish list of dream kit too

[fluffy_little_something]

But really, I would prefer a Rhodes piano to any hardware synth

This I can understand - on my wish list of dream kit too

Was playing that legacy Lounge Lizard Session plugin today, it is not bad for the money (20 bucks), but just doesn't give me goosebumps the way the real Rhodes sound does

[ghettosynth]

And no matter what you do, it still sounds like a piano. Seriously, can you take this off-topic nonsense elsewhere? This isn't a conversation about you, it's about synthesizers.

No need to be rude. OK?

Seriously guy, if you don't like rude, keep your condescending tone in check. You've been droning on about obvious things that all of us understand, e.g: that a piano has pedals that control real time expression, and yet you fail to grok the shared point of view.

And I have to remind you it was YOU who brought the piano to the table.

No, it was jopy, making a point about how instruments must be approached as a device meant to be played. I agreed with him and elaborated on my abstraction of expression, which, includes everything that you are talking about AND the ability to play controls in real time. You took that as an invitation to tell me about DX scaling and to remind me that most humans have only two hands, seriously? I have owned enough DX instruments, and still do, I know how important velocity is in expressiveness of DX sounds. You can read some of my thoughts on this in the threads where I talk about tines patches in Bazilla.

As far as two hands, do you really think that anyone here needs a reminder of this simple limitation? You vastly underestimate the friction that interface has in real time performance when it extends beyond keyboard and pedals. I think that it's because that isn't a part of your performance experience. In any case, you cannot play an envelope or a filter on a DX, or a piano <insert eyeroll here> in the same way that you can on many, if not most, analog synthesizers. It is not automatically an equivalency in expression to move one hand from the keyboard to the knobs.

The bottom line is that I am talking about how you cannot limit the usable interface of a synthesizer, as an instrument, to the keys and pedals. That is not an invitation to reach for your grammar school teaching voice to tell us all about the infinite possibilities of the piano.

In other words, if you want other people to respect your input, respect theirs. Seriously, you're missing the plot and talking to everyone else like they are and I find it annoying.

[treebeard]

But really, I would prefer a Rhodes piano to any hardware synth

This I can understand - on my wish list of dream kit too

Was playing that legacy Lounge Lizard Session plugin today, it is not bad for the money (20 bucks), but just doesn't give me goosebumps the way the real Rhodes sound does

Agreed, I thought the Neo-soul suitcase was alright, as was the scarbee one, but your right - no goosebumps here either.

We'd best get back on topic before gettosynth notices our thread departures..