Softsynth similar to Pulse 2?

[roman.i]

I was always wondering why people buy ugly cars. Once I asked one of the ugly car owners why he bought this ugly car, he looked at the car and told me that it's a regular car and didn't understand what I'm talking about.
Same story here, if sound design and synthesis is not your interest then you don't hear any significant difference.
The difference is obvious to those who actually patch these synths, not for presets-playing musicians that only care about their performance.
What kind of "blind test" you are talking about? Pressing few notes in a very basic patch and comparing between the real thing and the modeled software version? Well, of course there will be no difference because it's no different than playing a rompler.
But try to create a sound FX with an extreme modulation and you'll hear the beauty of analog circuits.

[chk071]

Here's a A/B for you which surely wouldn't be so easy if you had to blind guess which is which (and, it isn't just simple raw oscillator A/B as well, which I agree makes no sense really):

https://soundcloud.com/nativeinstrument ... comparison

You're talking about "ugly" cars, but, beauty is pretty much in the eye of the beholder. Not to mention that you might want to consider that what you call ugly here isn't ugly to other people. I do get your point, partly, and, I'm sure that some analog synths will surely have the edge over analog emulations, but, especialy between hardware and software, there's more to it than sound. And, I also don't think that the differences are as big as you make them.

But, hey, why not just go for it then. Hardware is really affordable, so, with a bit of cash, you can get as much as you want.

[roman.i]

Here's a A/B for you which surely wouldn't be so easy if you had to blind guess which is which.

Maybe first is the raw sample recorded from the hardware and the same sample played through Monark, considering this A/B quality test.
It's impossible to compare this way these instruments, because they are very unstable, and each sample will be slightly different from a previous one.
I had an experiment with Neutron playing series of kicks, without touching the synth each kick was different, and Neutron is pretty stable synth, while the Model D is a complete madness in terms of stability. Even after a warm-up oscillators don't stabilize.

[Distorted Horizon]

Even after a warm-up oscillators don't stabilize.

Part of the charm

I have one VCO synth, but I prefer DCO.

[chk071]

Here's a A/B for you which surely wouldn't be so easy if you had to blind guess which is which.

Maybe first is the raw sample recorded from the hardware and the same sample played through Monark, considering this A/B quality test.
It's impossible to compare this way these instruments, because they are very unstable, and each sample will be slightly different from a previous one.

Actually, I'd agree that such comparisons/tests are often made by making the sounds as close as possible, rather than making the synth behave as close as possible with the same parameter values etc. (doubt that is even possible, ever, anyway). But, these are at least some extreme sounds, and the softie really sounds very close with those. That's why it's by far my most preferred Minimoog emu. It just oozes the same character.

[layzer]

No, analog synths are light years away from software.

i want your bionic hearing and $5000 headphones that confirm this fact.

[grandmasterbird]

I'm fairly certain that if a track is good then no one is going to give a shit if it was made with software or hardware.

With regards to the op, if you like the Waldorf sound but want software then surely Largo is where it's at

[chk071]

I'm fairly certain that if a track is good then no one is going to give a shit if it was made with software or hardware.

TBH, I don't think that's the point (ever). The thing is rather that the musical creation part should be fun. And, how much fun is it, to have to work and work and work to get the "right" kind of sound out of bad equipment? Rather torture for me.

Anyway, not that I'd want to argue the same "analog is better" stuff , it's just that I can comprehend it from my experience with soft synths. I don't feel like there is a point to fiddle with, in my opinion, inferior stuff. As the sound example I posted above proves though, some stuff is scarily close to analog. Or, is proudly digital, and sounds great as well.

[AnX]

I'm fairly certain that if a track is good then no one is going to give a shit if it was made with software or hardware.

stop being so reasonable

[grandmasterbird]

I'm fairly certain that if a track is good then no one is going to give a shit if it was made with software or hardware.

stop being so reasonable

Forgive me!

[Cinebient]

There are hardware synths which sounds better than software and there are software synths which sounds better than similar hardware.
But at the end everyone should use whatever. Mostly it is a placebo effect anyway

[Meffy]

I was unaware that some synths are naturally occurring. Which ones are they? Are they hunted or is it more like a farming thing?

Fishing. Route an electric eel to your vcf thing, you'll be amazed how the natural saw wave sounds. Fat and punchy.

Not a sawtooth wave but bursts of pulses, up to 500 or 600 volts, at around 500 Hz.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 2215011471
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 2217310722

Don't mistake the graphs of prey muscular contraction (which somewhat resemble low-frequency sawtooth waves) with the pulse-train stimuli.