Soft synths that really sound 'alive'
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 457 posts since 2 Jun, 2015 from Belgrade, Serbia
Are there any software synths that, in our opinion, sound organic/alive/like an actual, acoustic instrument (in terms of livelihood, not timbre)?
For me, honestly, only Spire is half-way there. Others (including the venerable Diva), are somehow not. Unfortunately, there's no real soul in them, I would say. They just aren't there yet.
What's your take on this? (And sorry if there's already been a thread like this.)
For me, honestly, only Spire is half-way there. Others (including the venerable Diva), are somehow not. Unfortunately, there's no real soul in them, I would say. They just aren't there yet.
What's your take on this? (And sorry if there's already been a thread like this.)
- KVRAF
- 3879 posts since 28 Jun, 2009 from Wherever I lay my hat
No, no, this is the very first thread of its kind.
To be honest, I don't understand your question. A synth, by its very nature, differs from any acoustic instrument in a number of ways. I wouldn't even try to compare the two. To some, the holy grail of synthesis is to replicate real instruments, but I've always felt that that was a dead end. I'd rather embrace them for what they are than to try to make them into something they're not.
Now, as for sounding organic or alive, a lot of that's down to the programming. You can make completely static patches, and you can make very complex timbers that constantly evolve over time. A lot of synths will do for that.
In case you meant to say "hardware synths" instead of "acoustic"... do a search in the forum ("hardware vs software") and find lots of fascinating debates, edifying information, and serious and mature deliberation.
To be honest, I don't understand your question. A synth, by its very nature, differs from any acoustic instrument in a number of ways. I wouldn't even try to compare the two. To some, the holy grail of synthesis is to replicate real instruments, but I've always felt that that was a dead end. I'd rather embrace them for what they are than to try to make them into something they're not.
Now, as for sounding organic or alive, a lot of that's down to the programming. You can make completely static patches, and you can make very complex timbers that constantly evolve over time. A lot of synths will do for that.
In case you meant to say "hardware synths" instead of "acoustic"... do a search in the forum ("hardware vs software") and find lots of fascinating debates, edifying information, and serious and mature deliberation.
- KVRAF
- 1737 posts since 26 Feb, 2013 from Sweden
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 457 posts since 2 Jun, 2015 from Belgrade, Serbia
Yeah, I guessed so. Sorry.ariston wrote:No, no, this is the very first thread of its kind.
....
This is what I was getting at (although I do believe my question wasn't unclear).ariston wrote:.... To be honest, I don't understand your question. A synth, by its very nature, differs from any acoustic instrument in a number of ways. I wouldn't even try to compare the two. To some, the holy grail of synthesis is to replicate real instruments, but I've always felt that that was a dead end. I'd rather embrace them for what they are than to try to make them into something they're not ....
For example, the CS-80 synth is a synth (and not an acoustic instrument) in every way, shape or form, but it sounds simple and natural.
Today's software synth (and this is coming from someone who's a big fan of software synths and owns both DUNEs, Spire, the entire Korg collection and more) ... sound good .... some of the really good .... but even though you can program them in such a way that makes for an evolving sound .... it still doesn't feel right (at least to my ears/brain/heart).
Last edited by Ghost Dog on Fri Jan 01, 2016 5:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 457 posts since 2 Jun, 2015 from Belgrade, Serbia
I guess we all hear/feel things differently.Yorrrrrr wrote:I don't know what you mean. Spire doesn't sound any more "alive" than my other synths.
- KVRAF
- 3879 posts since 28 Jun, 2009 from Wherever I lay my hat
To make a long story short: I think the difference is in your mind. I don't think you'd be able to hear the difference in a blind test. Especially with synths like Diva, Monark, the TAL stuff, the Xils stuff... not to mention the physical modelling synths. They're all very much "there".
-
- KVRist
- 261 posts since 2 May, 2014
Roland SH-2 plugout sounds quite alive to me. If I understand the question as meant. NI Monark also. I like Spire, but don't really feel the sound is that alive.
Last edited by raymondwave on Fri Jan 01, 2016 5:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 322 posts since 19 Sep, 2005 from Los Angeles, CA
If you want it to sound more like a physical instrument - quirks, spatial interaction, hard-to-quantify-non-linearity, etc. - try running a synth (hardware or software) through Waves GTR3 Amp. Choose an amp/cabinet/mic combo that isn't distorted or overdriven. You'll get a fairly clean sound, but it will have some new dimension and character that makes it easier to fit in a mix, EQ, etc.
Waves has a free demo, so it won't cost you anything other than time to try it. And EveryPlugin.com has GTR3 on sale for <$50 right now (create an account to see price) if you decide you like this technique.
I tried Guitar Rig, Softube and a bunch of other amp sims before finally finding GTR3. There are many reasons why I did not like the others for synth-reamping work.
Waves has a free demo, so it won't cost you anything other than time to try it. And EveryPlugin.com has GTR3 on sale for <$50 right now (create an account to see price) if you decide you like this technique.
I tried Guitar Rig, Softube and a bunch of other amp sims before finally finding GTR3. There are many reasons why I did not like the others for synth-reamping work.
-
- Banned
- 454 posts since 30 Apr, 2013
Kontour, Bazille, Chromaphone, Aalto
- KVRist
- 409 posts since 26 Oct, 2004 from U.K.
As above
'and when we got bored, we'd have a world war...'
- KVRAF
- 21196 posts since 8 Oct, 2014
You and Fluffy should get together for drinks.
-
- KVRAF
- 6427 posts since 22 Jan, 2005 from Sweden
To me the topic sounds like it's about - how you can make modulations on velocity/aftertouch to just about anything.
This is alive in my view that timbre and dynamics reacts to how you play notes and ability to make that fit all over keyboard.
Modulation options for softsynths would be Waves Element as one candidate.
Hardware synths - KingKorg and the Nord's.
This is alive in my view that timbre and dynamics reacts to how you play notes and ability to make that fit all over keyboard.
Modulation options for softsynths would be Waves Element as one candidate.
Hardware synths - KingKorg and the Nord's.
-
- KVRAF
- 35439 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany
I do know what the OP means with alive though, and I also would agree that Spire is one of the few soft synths which is there. It has something like a permanent sweet spot, while other soft synths are much more limited in that regard.ariston wrote:To make a long story short: I think the difference is in your mind. I don't think you'd be able to hear the difference in a blind test. Especially with synths like Diva, Monark, the TAL stuff, the Xils stuff... not to mention the physical modelling synths. They're all very much "there".
-
- KVRist
- 367 posts since 18 Dec, 2006
absynth for sure as well as Kaleidoscopeliv wrote:Absynth.
but nothing tops the EaganMatrix (based on Kyma) inside the Haken Audio Continuum