The problem with soft synths is that you really don't own anything. Computers keep evolving and this means the soft synth company MUST keep updating or the soft synth eventually becomes non-functional and wasted money. And folks expect these infinite soft synth updates to be free. They don't want to keep paying for something they already "own". Not a good business model I'd say.
You can always go to eBay and buy a 20 year old Wavestation SR rack box for a great price and it still works all the way into 2012 same as it did the day it was made. You might have to replace the $3 backup battery every 10-15 years though. LOL.
Softsynths
Moderators: Sharp, X-Trade, Pepperpotty, karmathanever
Re: Softsynths
I don't think people necessarily expect infinite free updates. Example: I keep using Izotope Ozone in my studio, including buying an update to a newer version every couple of years. If Korg was to actually work on updating these synths, improving the interfaces to take advantage of higher screen resolutions, adding 64-bit, or (heaven forbid) new synthesis features, I think a lot of people would gladly pay for the upgrades. I certainly would. The problem is that Korg doesn't seem to be fully committed to these instruments as an ongoing revenue source … about all they've evidently done is patch a few bugs here and there. They could be doing so much more, and thereby adding value to the collection that users would pay upgrade fees for.bugzoo wrote:The problem with soft synths is that you really don't own anything. Computers keep evolving and this means the soft synth company MUST keep updating or the soft synth eventually becomes non-functional and wasted money. And folks expect these infinite soft synth updates to be free. They don't want to keep paying for something they already "own". Not a good business model I'd say.
You can always go to eBay and buy a 20 year old Wavestation SR rack box for a great price and it still works all the way into 2012 same as it did the day it was made. You might have to replace the $3 backup battery every 10-15 years though. LOL.
-
billbaker
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 2206
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 11:56 pm
- Location: Vienna, Virginia, USA
- Contact:
"computers keep changing"
Yes they do.
So for you to change your whole computer platform and not expect some changes from the previous system as a consequence is not realistic. In fact you paid for those changes - faster, better, new OS, more RAM, more storage, new interfaces, new technologies, etc. And for those changes to be free on your new system because you owned some version of it in the past is equally unrealistic.
You wouldn't drop a new/faster motherboard into your Triton and then expect Korg to update it's system for you for free. You expect (because that's the paradigm) that when you buy a hardware synth it and it's system will work now... and because both you and the company can count on the fact that you won't change it, it will continue to work forever... a perfect little continuous "now".
The same is true for soft synths, except that you have changed the "forever now" variable of hardware synths to "now and forever" where no matter what happens to the hardware the software is expected to work like a bunny on bass drum.
Unless you're willing to place your system in stasis (permanent now) the software will keep changing and you'll have to pay for the changes.
On the other hand soft synths like KLC sell for, conservatively, a 10th of what the hard synth equivalents do. So until you've bought it 10 times over there's not much basis for complaint, especially and foreseeably in the future realm of soft versions of synths whose hardware versions are fairly easily cloned digitally - can you say Rompler clone?
So I'd be surprised, in the long term, to see any significant synth completely disappear from the market once it had been converted to software. It might be gone for a while, but it will come back in cycles as long as theres a demand or a sufficiently motivated programmer to bring out a slightly mutated clone-brother. Witness how many excellent VA synths there are; way more than the big 3 Korg-Roland-Yamaha.
They've resurrected many of the niche favorites and innovated new systems as well. Your choices are not getting smaller, even if Korg chooses not to compete as hard as you'd like (or they should).
BB
Yes they do.
So for you to change your whole computer platform and not expect some changes from the previous system as a consequence is not realistic. In fact you paid for those changes - faster, better, new OS, more RAM, more storage, new interfaces, new technologies, etc. And for those changes to be free on your new system because you owned some version of it in the past is equally unrealistic.
You wouldn't drop a new/faster motherboard into your Triton and then expect Korg to update it's system for you for free. You expect (because that's the paradigm) that when you buy a hardware synth it and it's system will work now... and because both you and the company can count on the fact that you won't change it, it will continue to work forever... a perfect little continuous "now".
The same is true for soft synths, except that you have changed the "forever now" variable of hardware synths to "now and forever" where no matter what happens to the hardware the software is expected to work like a bunny on bass drum.
Unless you're willing to place your system in stasis (permanent now) the software will keep changing and you'll have to pay for the changes.
On the other hand soft synths like KLC sell for, conservatively, a 10th of what the hard synth equivalents do. So until you've bought it 10 times over there's not much basis for complaint, especially and foreseeably in the future realm of soft versions of synths whose hardware versions are fairly easily cloned digitally - can you say Rompler clone?
So I'd be surprised, in the long term, to see any significant synth completely disappear from the market once it had been converted to software. It might be gone for a while, but it will come back in cycles as long as theres a demand or a sufficiently motivated programmer to bring out a slightly mutated clone-brother. Witness how many excellent VA synths there are; way more than the big 3 Korg-Roland-Yamaha.
They've resurrected many of the niche favorites and innovated new systems as well. Your choices are not getting smaller, even if Korg chooses not to compete as hard as you'd like (or they should).
BB
billbaker
Triton Extreme 88, Triton Classic Pro, Trinity V3 Pro
+E-mu, Alesis, Korg, Kawai, Yamaha, Line-6, TC Elecronics, Behringer, Lexicon...
Triton Extreme 88, Triton Classic Pro, Trinity V3 Pro
+E-mu, Alesis, Korg, Kawai, Yamaha, Line-6, TC Elecronics, Behringer, Lexicon...
Time will prove me right or wrong. Let's see how many more updates Korg provides- paid or free to the Legacy collection. My point was that after a time, a company moves on to new things. Providing free or paid updates for a 10 year old soft synth for every new version of Windows or Mac OS eventually makes no sense from the busness standpoint and the soft synth dies and the users will be stranded. This does not happen with a hardware synth. Enjoy your synths and soft synths. I couldn't care less which you use. I'm just offering an observation.
-
billbaker
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 2206
- Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 11:56 pm
- Location: Vienna, Virginia, USA
- Contact:
Users are stranded only when they change their systems.
A user's upgrade-forced obsolescence is not the company's fault or responsibility.
(Projected) new sales driven by new features, and not simply new platform upgrades, would, I think, be the deciding factor for a software's longevity -- it has been for suites like Komplete, Logic/Mainstage, Cubase and others.
KLC is a collection -- as such, there are still more than a few items that could be added. I could easily see it becoming a competitor with Komplete since the Kronos is pretty much that now in hardware form.
We've seen the appearance of iKaossilator - perhaps a full featured version of that as a VST plug in. Guitar FX and amp modeling from the Pandora line? Trinity, Triton, Oasys, even a Kronos streaming piano on SSD are all possible additions.
The Oasys-on-a-card system was dead as soon as higher speed CPU changes hit the market, but now we're approaching the point where a separate processor board is not necessarily required to allow Oasys to run on a laptop.
Future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
BB
A user's upgrade-forced obsolescence is not the company's fault or responsibility.
(Projected) new sales driven by new features, and not simply new platform upgrades, would, I think, be the deciding factor for a software's longevity -- it has been for suites like Komplete, Logic/Mainstage, Cubase and others.
KLC is a collection -- as such, there are still more than a few items that could be added. I could easily see it becoming a competitor with Komplete since the Kronos is pretty much that now in hardware form.
We've seen the appearance of iKaossilator - perhaps a full featured version of that as a VST plug in. Guitar FX and amp modeling from the Pandora line? Trinity, Triton, Oasys, even a Kronos streaming piano on SSD are all possible additions.
The Oasys-on-a-card system was dead as soon as higher speed CPU changes hit the market, but now we're approaching the point where a separate processor board is not necessarily required to allow Oasys to run on a laptop.
Future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
BB
billbaker
Triton Extreme 88, Triton Classic Pro, Trinity V3 Pro
+E-mu, Alesis, Korg, Kawai, Yamaha, Line-6, TC Elecronics, Behringer, Lexicon...
Triton Extreme 88, Triton Classic Pro, Trinity V3 Pro
+E-mu, Alesis, Korg, Kawai, Yamaha, Line-6, TC Elecronics, Behringer, Lexicon...
I pretty much agree with billbaker....I personally won't upgrade again for many years....About a year and a half ago I got a MacBook pro, FW audio, and updates on all software....With all the soft synth programs and all the hardware keys and racks I sampled using sample robot, I don't see the need to upgrade for another 8 years at least....I don't do incremental upgrades in between....Too much headache....I get everything working stable and that's how it stays until I get another system....I started out with 4 track cassette and have had TONS of gear over the years...I can't even count the amount of keyboard workstations I've owned over the years but I can tell you the Yamaha XS was the last workstation I'll ever buy....I sold it about 5 months ago...There's just so many more options with Logic and all the third party plug ins all in a convenient little box.....I hope Korg understands I'm not buying their products anymore if I can't load it into my MB pro....So when the time comes to upgrade again, if Korg doesn't offer something like the Legacy collection, I'll go with whatever is supported and move on....One thing is for sure, DAWs are here to stay.....moon
Conversely, I find soft synths to be far superior. When I load up a song-in-progress in Logic, all the settings of my soft synths, including customized patches, just load up automatically, rather than me having to go out of my way to set up patch changes and/or sysex dumps (and having to update the latter every time I tweak a patch), so now I spend more of my time composing rather than setting up the hardware like I used to have to do. And where I would run out of polyphony on a hardware synth, with a soft synth I just load up another instance of the same instrument and keep going.
Also, since I mix in the box, with soft synths I am already there, and don't need to go through importing each external synth patch to an audio track by hand (which also locks me out of making any more changes to that hardware audio track unless I want to go through that whole import process again).
As far as patch programming on the Wavestation soft synth vs. picking up a WS-SR on eBay, I don't really have to explain to anyone why I wouldn't want to be editing sounds on an SR, right?
I still have half a dozen hardware synths in my studio, including a Wavestation EX that I bought brand new almost 20 years ago. I hardly ever turn any of them on any more. The only one I had been powering up on occasion was the WS-EX, and now thankfully I don't have to do that anymore either (because the old, whining LCD display had been driving me batty).
Also, since I mix in the box, with soft synths I am already there, and don't need to go through importing each external synth patch to an audio track by hand (which also locks me out of making any more changes to that hardware audio track unless I want to go through that whole import process again).
As far as patch programming on the Wavestation soft synth vs. picking up a WS-SR on eBay, I don't really have to explain to anyone why I wouldn't want to be editing sounds on an SR, right?
I still have half a dozen hardware synths in my studio, including a Wavestation EX that I bought brand new almost 20 years ago. I hardly ever turn any of them on any more. The only one I had been powering up on occasion was the WS-EX, and now thankfully I don't have to do that anymore either (because the old, whining LCD display had been driving me batty).
I'm not talking about loading up a song with patches saved. How do you scroll quickly through Multis in your soft synths to try new multis? Can you even send your DAW patch changes from your controller to scroll through Multis or layers that you have created? This sort of quick patch auditioning has been the norm with hardware for 30 years. There are definitely some advantages to hardware.
Some of my soft synths do have the ability to bind MIDI controllers to patch/performance steppers for quick auditioning. Others do not. For me, I don't feel that the absence of that capability in some of my soft synths hinders my efforts nearly as much as the need to get hardware configured when loading up a song to work on.bugzoo wrote:I'm not talking about loading up a song with patches saved. How do you scroll quickly through Multis in your soft synths to try new multis? Can you even send your DAW patch changes from your controller to scroll through Multis or layers that you have created? This sort of quick patch auditioning has been the norm with hardware for 30 years. There are definitely some advantages to hardware.
Perhaps the most salient point is that there are advantages and disadvantages to both types of synths, and which advantages matter most will vary based on the needs of an individual user. Clearly you find hardware synths to be a better fit for your own workflow, and there's nothing wrong with that. But I definitely do not subscribe to the original implication that hardware synths are a superior solution for every user.
"""But I definitely do not subscribe to the original implication that hardware synths are a superior solution for every user."""
I never said that. Please don't put words in my mouth.
As I said, I like and use both. But I do not find hardware and software synths to be the same. They each have strengths and weaknesses which I have tried to point out.
I never said that. Please don't put words in my mouth.
As I said, I like and use both. But I do not find hardware and software synths to be the same. They each have strengths and weaknesses which I have tried to point out.
I must not be seeing the part of this thread where (before this most recent post of yours) you acknowledged that soft synths have any advantages whatsoever. That's why I described it as an "implication". Nonetheless, since you've now said that both have strengths, I think we should agree on that much and let it go at that.bugzoo wrote:"""But I definitely do not subscribe to the original implication that hardware synths are a superior solution for every user."""
I never said that. Please don't put words in my mouth.
As I said, I like and use both. But I do not find hardware and software synths to be the same. They each have strengths and weaknesses which I have tried to point out.
I understand where you are coming from about easily scrolling the patches for trying out sounds on hardware versus software...It was lightning fast to throw together a sequence on the Yamaha XS and I enjoyed doing that once in awhile but ultimately I didn't like how small the overall mix was....It sounded really clean and good but it lacked the space of a commercial album type of sound...I've used Cakewalk and Protools before Logic and I still have Protools 9 in the Mac but I just prefer the workflow of Logic so much more....I haven't had issues of crashing on this current system like all my other systems...I remember how frustrating it was before that so I know where you are coming from....I'd be saving my work every 2 minutes because of being afraid of when the crash was coming.....I've also made MANY patch banks of LOT'S of Romplers I sampled that is in exs24 format to play back in Logic's sampler....Granted it took more hours than I'll ever know to put those libraries together but I can simply scroll through them now by turning a knob on the synth...It advances through the patches just like in a hardware synth.....It was worth the work to me to have the ability to scroll through sounds as you mentioned.... I agree though, if your not willing to take the time to setting a system up like this, then a hardware synth is the quickest way to have quick sounds on the fly....Many soft synth programs incorporate the "midi learn" function now so it is very easy to set up your +- buttons to scroll through soft synth sounds....It really comes down to what works for you....It took me ALOT of years of trials and errors to settle on a Mac running Logic before I found my ideal solution....moon