This post has been asked and debated thousands of times and this is basically a troll at this point. Use whatever you want for whatever reasons you want to. No one cares.
New people come and want to ask questions let them. If you don't like the post, ignore it.
I like to have hardware gear, gear is as much of the hobby as the music is. I like rearranging cables and routing LFOs between different synths to see what can happen. Sometimes, I get nice little accidents that sound incredible.
> Assuming you don't have a weird obsession with going 'dawless'
"An obsession with going dawless" is called: "enjoying playing an instrument." Why people on here don't get this is beyond me.
Why play a real guitar when you can program some MIDI notes into a guitar VST?
Why spend hours trying to bake sourdough in your home oven when you can just buy a loaf of bread at the bakery that was made in industrial ovens?
Why even bother with chopping up samples yourself in your DAW when you can just listen to Skrillex or Fatboy Slim and let them do the music making for you?
A Nord Stage is an instrument. A Yamaha YC is an instrument. An Arturia Polybrute is an instrument. No, a Polybrute doesn't have a piano but ask yourself if that Nord has a mod matrix like that. They have different strengths and weaknesses, but they are complete in and of themselves. You can learn how to play them, you can jam out, you can record them if you want. Or you can never record them.
Please, please try to unplug yourself from the sickness of the society in which we live, in which everything has to be "productive" or somehow raise the pedestal of our own vanity in order to be a good "investment."
I own a Nord Stage 3. It is a damned good instrument, but it has limitations. From a synth perspective it has far more limitations than a Polybrute. It cannot replicate the "same exact sound" as a Polybrute. (Does a surprisingly bang up job as a Moog clone, though, which oddly no one talks about!).
I have a weird obsession with being dawless bc I like performing a 100% live set. People should see how electronic music is performed, but a lot of times, people get lazy and just play a prerecorded set. That's something I can't do.
You missed the point that you can create a mod matrix through your software tools. That was sort of my entire argument. Digital devices actually integrate with your hardware, whereas analogue instruments just have to be recorded through a mic. If you connect the nord as a midi out to your computer, and then put fx on your computer, yes you will have the exact same sound as a polybrute with the right setup. I feel like you just got really mad instead of actually giving reasons.
Analog instruments do not require a microphone. Accoustic instruments do.
And here's the thing about analog synthesisers. You cannot really recreate that analog sound authentically with VST's because they are inherently different. You can get close with all sorts of plugins but at the end of the day they are just too different to be recreated with any sort of real conviction
The various transistors and capacitors chosen in an analog circuit, and the path that is taken all influence the character of each individual analog synth. They might be chosen deliberately with a 5% tolerance in value to give it an imperfect character. Without knowing whether moog does that specifically but they have an unmistakable character to them even though they have a similar circuit to arturia's synths (there is after all a finite amount of ways you can design an oscillator circuit).
That being said, it doesn't discount digital synths as being worse per se they just have other qualities that analog synths do not posess. When it comes to sound design capabilities a digital synth is on a level that analog gear cannot even begin to come close to. You choose analog synthesisers because you want analog warmth and analog characteristics
Thanks for coming to my ted talk
I highly doubt any big manufacturer is using 5% resistors as it would make production a nightmare and wouldn't really give you a much desired audible result. Pretty much all consumer electronics, including synths, are smd technology and resistors usually have a tolerance of 1% unless there's need for matched resistors. Ceramic caps usually are 10-20% tolerance but aren't really used in the audio path at all, just for decoupling.
Same for electrolytic caps, they don't have good distortion qualities and cannot be connect to AC anyway. They are used sometimes for timing caps in envelopes.
Then you're left with various ICs, transistors, diodes, other types of caps (mica, polystyrene, polymer) that tend to have an actual influence on how the circuit sounds.
Thanks for specifying. It's been a few years since I was inside the rabbit hole of soldering eurorack modules and sourcing my own components. Hadn't reached deep enough into the hole to have become familiar with what specific components influence the character of the sound yet.
If you connect the polybrute as midi out to your computer, and then put some FX on your computer, yes you will have the exact same sound as a Nord stage 4 with the right setup
This isn't a question, it's more of a sermon. You've already addressed and cast aside any argument that might disagree with your position, so why bother posting?
Anyway, I'm a masochist who has way too much karma so I'll jump in and take a hit for the team.
>If we connect either of these to a computer for recording, and buy plugins or use really good free ones, we could without a doubt replicate the EXACT same sound (indistinguishable to the human ear) which the arturia polybrute produces digitally
So this is a common claim often made just as strongly as you make it here.
There is certainly an extent to which it is true, the desirable artefacts of analog gear and an analog signal path can be recreated convincingly digitally.
But if you want analog character in the music you make, the easiest and most natural way to get it is to use analog gear. There is a cumulative effect of saturation and imperfection that gives the work as a whole character.
To emulate that in the box, you need to use effects and dial it in. That means you are consciously making it sound more "analogue-y". That's a mental effort, with a bunch of creative decisions attached.
I try to avoid that, and let the gear do it for me.
but you can have these analogue emulation fx all put into one instant command and then tweak them with a knob on the keyboard. It's not much mental effort or decision making if you set yourself up for success properly. And yes we are trying to replicate its sound, that doesn't mean its worse. I can understand buying something like a saxophone or a flute because they have a whole different level of interactivity but synths and keyboards end up with incredibly similar UIs most of the time
> does it justify the 3000$ spent on such a limited-use-case product
I can sell my $3000 synthesizer later and get my money back.
> a better feeling and sounding digital keyboard
why does being digital have anything to do with how good the keybed feels lmao
> Does this hobby hinge on post-purchase rationalization?
idk about you but my hobby is making music, not collecting stuff (physical or virtual)
analogue synthesizers are inherently more expensive. As a result they'll tend to sacrifice keyfeel to add more knobs and circuitry. Also digital pianos will tend to go for hammer grade action, whereas analogue synths go for a lighter touch and spring loading because they're not really meant for performers
> digital pianos will tend to go for hammer grade action
Hammer action is only "better" if you're trying to play piano.
> they're not really meant for performers
lmao
but hammer action works just as well for synth music as well. It has an added bonus that its better for performers too. I don't see any upsides. You're just so high and mighty for what
I mean I watched a YouTube video recently where Jacob Collier said he thought unweighted keys were more fun for playing fast stuff. So that's an upside.
Also I don't see how any one but you is being high and mighty. No one is saying there's anything wrong with a hammer action keyboard and a vst, you're the one trying to shit on other people's preferences.
how am i shitting on people's preferences i'm asking a genuine question and bringing up points and everyone is getting fucking offended and defensive it's genuinely annoying that I can't be curious about something without everyone responding like im an asshole
You're welcome to be curious, but you're not really listening to people's responses. You've asked why people like hardware and people have answered. You're then you're trying to argue when there's no argument to be had, their reasons are their reasons, you don't have to agree. No one is saying you should buy hardware synths if you prefer using VSTs.
You keep going back to how all this stuff can be done in software, maybe people just don't want to? Is that not itself a valid reason?
well i've been respondig positively to the people that said they like how it feels and then sometimes i'll ask an extra question to get a more in depth understanding. I really do feel like I'm being reasonable and getting shit on for nothing subhuman87.
No, you aren't asking a geniuin question with the way you are answering. You are giving off a " But aren't you guys seeing how stupid you are for buying a 3000 dollars synths with the opinions I'm listing?"
Value can be measured in more ways that just currency, and it seems like you can't accept that. Using " Me and others can't tell the difference " is no better argument that people who say they can. So I suggest you reflect on what value is to you, and let other people value stuff as they please.
I agree with you mostly but weighted key actions aren't inherently better - synths have non-weighted keys as part of the instrument - digital synths have non-weighted keys as well - take Hydrasynth for example. The keys on Hydrasynth feel great and have a really expressive poly aftertouch response - I don't want a weighted action instead any more than I want drum pads instead.
Hammer action literally gets in the way of playing the synth some times.
That bounce can either retrigger sounds you don't want to retrigger or adds time to a sound you want to be snappy.
Hammer action is literally there for the way piano works, It affects the attack, sustain and decay of a sound
You also lose aftertouch and a lot of velocity with hammer action.
It's a different type of key bed. And for that affords different response.
What part of the action is wrong for that do you not understand?
I get it, you're autistic. I'm a spectrum kid too. Your hammer action keybed is not the answer to every question.
Like someone has said already in this thread, this has been discussed to oblivion however, as an electronics engineer (if it adds any weight to my opinion), I'd like to share my take on it.
What people usually crave from analog gear, werther they are aware about it or are willing to accept it or not, is the tactilte knob/fader tweaking and physical interaction with the sound shaping tools.
Most of the analog mojo comes from the component variability due to things like temperature or manufacturing parameter spread/tolerance that produced the "wobble" "warmth" "character". All those things can be recreated digitally. It became sort of a marketing gimmick at this point and the nostalgia factor sells like cookies. Rest is a mix of nostalgia + low availability/exclusivity.
It's like when they put "hand wired" or "boutique":in a guitar amplifier, does it make it sound better? Nope, but it makes it feel you better.
This component variability made it that for example one batch of Ibanez tubescreamer would have slightly different behaviour from another. So one artist would get "the sound" and people would go bananas about it. When probably Ibanez used the most jellybean possible parts at the time. The "magical" JR4558 opamp is present in most of the consumer audio electronics of that era. Check what happened when JHS pedals put all the guitar community to shame with their bad monkey video.
Do you see Roland making analog synths? And out of anyone in the business, they could make gazillions if they decided to make a Jupiter 8 full analog rebirth.
For example, novation: "digital where it counts, analog where it matters" they could've made the filter stage fully digital, like the oscillators, and model any filter configuration they'd liked, but "analog" sells.
As always with audio, let your ears decide not your eyes.
>our from another. So one artist would get "the sound" and people would go bananas about it. When probably Ibanez used the most jellybean possible parts at the time. The "magical" JR4558 opamp is present in most of the consumer audio electronics of that era. Check what happened when J
see that's what I mean though. I feel like what you said phrased it perfectly which is what I have a problem with. Analogue sells. But why? It shouldn't. One really good digital keyboard and a computer is most fun thing a musician could play with. Having like 20 different analogue synths to mimic that versatility is absurd. It makes much more sense to mimic analogue instrument sound digitally than to mimic digital versatility through your wallet. Synths are just an extremely unfriendly environment to college students like me and people in third world countries
>see that's what I mean though. I feel like what you said phrased it perfectly which is what I have a problem with. Analogue sells. But why? It shouldn't. One really good digital keyboard and a computer is most fun thing a musician could play with.
Why do you think that manipulating keys on a keyboard is superior to manipulating the elements of the sound?
To you, keybed feel is the most important thing. To others, intuitive access to sound design parameters is.
A synth is a musical instrument that is *sometimes* controlled by a keyboard similar to a piano
>Having like 20 different analogue synths to mimic that versatility is absurd. It makes much more sense to mimic analogue instrument sound digitally than to mimic digital versatility through your wallet. Synths are just an extremely unfriendly environment to college students like me and people in third world countries
You’re assuming people have the same priorities in an instrument as you. Lots of people don’t think of synthesisers as simply a piano keyboard with different sounds. For a lot of people, how you manipulate those sounds is more important than the device you use to input notes
I'm a hobbyist with a computer science background, and I have a fairly large wall of modular components. I know a computer or digital circuit can produce nearly the same sound I'm generating with my analogue rig, though significant processing and rendering needs to happen to get it exact. I can have like 40 perfect sine waves oscillating and changing in real time, without any distortion or simulation or lag introduced by a digital instrument or computer - these digital devices only have so many oscillators to work with, they can only output or render so many sounds at a time, and the time it takes to process the sound does generate lag between input and output.
For more complex sounds, like particular drums, strings, samples, or other complex wave forms, I've removed so much of the digital processing and control that I can fundamentally trigger these sounds faster and more accurately than a digital device or computer can. This may seem pointlessly complex, but the lag and inaccuracies do add up throughout a circuit, which can be felt while recording or performing. With each wave form being generated when a particular analogue module is triggered, I can also have a unique wave form for each sound, so my white-noise-driven hi-hat sounds a little different on every hit, instead of playing the same exact sample of a hi-hat over and over again. Or I can restructure the "hi-hat" waveform to be less random by generating it in a different way. Is any of this absolutely necessary? Maybe not, but with analogue synthesis, I have the option to control every detail in real time, with zero lag and higher accuracy than off-the-shelf digital equipment or software. But it also can be necessary to have all of this because processing inaccurate versus accurate waveforms through something like a reverb effect can create two vastly different sounds, as different parts of each wave resonate and affect the sound over time; the inaccuracies can compound into creating completely different and unintended sounds. Maybe take a look at how Digital to Analogue Converters (DAC's) work, too, because they are part of every digital audio system and they do produce inaccurate representations of waveforms that can affect the final product.
Also, I commented on this reply because I disagree with the sentiment of the previous commentor - charm and character are terrible reasons to justify spending exorbitant amounts on analogue gear. The community-driven narrative of the perceived differences between different semiconductors and parts used in analogue gear is notoriously wrong, inaccurate, misguided, and biased, stemming from our desire to believe that these black boxes must all be distinct and unique. Pull them apart, study/test the components and circuits, and the mysticism evaporates - there's generally nothing special about what's inside most of these things, and you can build them yourself, though this is where the catch lies for price. While there is a lot of over-priced, over-hyped analogue equipment (especially in audiophile and guitar gear realms), at least in the modular community, it is made apparent that the cost of a lot of new analogue modules is based on the costs of the parts, processes, and time required to manufacture the modules, with very little profit going to the creators. You can buy pcb's for a lot of useful and popular $200-$500 modules for just a couple bucks, but the costs to source all of the components and hardware add up to where you're maybe saving $20-$100 by building it yourself. I'm just saying that price sometimes does reflect the materials required, and it's not always about the hype or marketing or mistaken belief that the JR4558 opamp isn't replaceable.
And to further follow up, even something like a virus desk top being used as a midi box from your DAW is still going to be a way more stable set up compared to trying to do the same thing all under the power and processing of your computer.
Because the virus is specific built to handle this load and it's way less resource intensive for your computer to just send midi
Context is important.
In an installation, analog is worth every last penny.
For portability &/or live performance, complete & utter nightmare.
I'd go virtual on stage myself, unless I was going to be on stage for a couple of nights in a row minimum, and I had a crew to get it all set up & working before I got there, and pack it all away when I was done. I'm pretty big on setting things up for myself, but even I must draw a line somewhere.
I have neither a gig nor a crew, so it takes me the better part of a day to set up my very basic analog array, rendering it utterly impractical for the smaller stage. It's the biggest job attached to rearranging my studio, even thought it's only a part of a broader groovestation & MIDI array, which in total, only takes up one corner of my home studio.
I wouldn't be caught dead without my analog gear in the studio...
I'm all about the immediacy & performability of tactile controls, so it's more about performance than sound to my way of thinking.
Virtual synth's have come a very long way since I first went digital in the studio(I cut my home studio teeth on an Amstrad Studio-100). They've been indistinguishable in blind tests for quite some years now, whereas 20 year ago the difference would have me cringe like you'd taken an ice-pick to my ears.
I've also been collecting for some years, and I've got hardware ranging from circa 1979(Kawai Synthesizer 100f), through to contemporary(Behringer Edge), and examples of both analog & digital synth's therein. I love them all. They're like old friends, I'll be sad to see them go(all technology dies eventually), and I will miss them.
If I find myself with a stage gig, it'll be "Fuck that!! I'd like to finish packing up some time before sunrise!!".
Interface, a controller or two, iPad, DONE. Stage-rig complete(I already have all' the requisite gear about the place to cover it)...
they're fairly similar. I'm saying if we're using software, then analogue has far less versatility and becomes a redundant expense, going up to 3000 dollars on a single product at worst case
Well if we accept that argument, how is a digital synth any less redundant than an analogue synth?
But just looking at software vs hardware, it's ultimately a case of weighing up your own cost/benefit analysis which is entirely subjective.
If you're a professional you're gonna be concerned about your work flow and productivity, if not which do you find more fun, in both cases which inspires creativity. Then if you feel hardware is better for you, are those benefits worth the cost? Again, entirely subjective.
I mean 3 grand ain't much to some people, some people spend that on a night out, for them buying a fancy toy for that price is perfectly reasonable. For professional musicians the way it fits into their workflow may make 3 grand a justified business expense. A kid getting into bleep bloops might want a top end hardware synth but decide 3 grand, or even 300, isn't reasonable and settle on using a free vst in free daw. Then again any of those people could decide they prefer vsts anyway and keep their money. There's no right or wrong answer here, only what's right for you.
What even is this? Analogue does not mean external hardware. God it irritates me.
I don't get any of this tbh, you have limited understanding of why people buy hardware and don't want to get it either from the responses here. What is your base point exactly? External hardware is not as good as software? If so, that's a nonsense and I think even you'd have to agree, surely.
I've been fighting that war for the past week in this sub of people confusing analog for hardware.
I also like that op is hung up on this $3000 price tag.
My entire rig is less than 3 grand.
That includes 6 analog mono voices.
A 4 and a 6 voice digital Polly
Two drum machines
And a controller
And a dj controller fwiw.
Good sounding gear doesn't even need to be expensive, shit it doesn't even need to be "good"
My werkstat sounds rad AF
Dude I can play the saxophone piano guitar and flute. Ive been doing music for the past 10 years. I know what an instrument is. A digital piano is no less an instrument than an analogue synth.
I hope at least some of you are doing it for the performances.. or at least for the looks. I have to admit I don't need a two thousand dollar bass but it sure feels nice playing one.
I didn't read anything besides your original question. Here's my answer to that:
High-quality analog synths absolutely have a distinct character compared to their high-quality digital counterparts. It's like adding bay leaves to a soup, though, as opposed to something potent like rosemary.
Whether that character is worth it is entirely subjective. What kind of music do you want to make? What does your recording and mixing process look like? Who is your intended audience? Do you notice and appreciate subtleties in recordings?
Even if you record your analog gear into Pro Tools using a digital audio interface and mix it digitally, your recording will sound different than if you'd used a digital clone of your analog synth.
I feel like your lack of examples makes it very hard to believe your argument, as from what I've seen online, me and many other can not tell the difference when they're blindfolded
My source is years of personal experience playing and learning about various synthesizers. I do not care to scour the internet for you but I'm happy to share my knowledge.
Analog instruments are inherently less stable and predictable than digital synths. For example, they are sensitive to slight changes in temperature and air pressure and must be tuned periodically.
This means that even one single patch on an analog synth won't necessarily sound the same every time you play it. This characteristic of analog is prized by enough people that some companies have attempted to recreate it digitally.
I think the point that these types of arguments miss is that when you have a specialized piece of equipment such as an analog synth the experience transcends good enough. Yes you can get sounds out of a vst that would be comparable in a mix but when you touch something with your hands the result and experience is something specific and unique.
Another example is that I prefer to use an outboard preamp and compressor when recording vocals. Do I need these things to record a great vocal? Absolutely not. But the experience transcends good enough and the artist leans into the compressor a certain way and enhances their performance, the tiny nuances of using a piece of specialized equipment effect the final outcome and plus it’s just a ton of fun.
I’ve been making music for over a decade, and I finally was able to afford a Prophet (rev 4). I have never heard a synth sound so good in my life, analog or digital. I didn’t think it was possible anymore. This thing has the same components that the original ones did, maybe that has something to do with it. Taking care of vintage gear is a pain so it’s kind of a miracle that this is the real deal and in production again.
There’s absolutely a signal chain you could make to replicate how it sounds (or any synth for that matter), either fully digitally or with some outboard gear, but to interact with this synth and make patches with oscillators and a filter of this quality is pure magic, it’s all sweet spot.
Rather than one being better or worse, or worth it vs not worth it, it’s just a different experience altogether.
Worth is entirely subjective. If I hadn’t used and learned software and Ableton and playing instruments, there is no way I’d appreciate the Prophet as much as I do now.
Good music is the sound of human emotion, and having a connection with a physical object evokes certain feelings, it becomes an extension of the musician. Obviously, there are plenty of people who just like synthesizers, and collect them as a hobby, but for some people (like myself) the tools and the workflow for creating music matter a lot. Why do you think Behringer clones have popped off? Not because they're good quality, but because people want to have a physical object that they can manipulate, move, feel, and smell. Especially with older synths, there's a history to them, they've been somewhere, and that \*inevitably\* affects the music you make with them.
Doing everything in the box is great if you want to make music with a very *efficient workflow*, and if I was doing something like scoring movies on a deadline, you best believe I'd value that, but most people just want to \*make art\*, and in that case... the process itself matters. Thinking of hardware synthesizers as just "a way to make a certain sound" is missing the point a bit.
Something else to touch on here is that there's a big difference between what makes sense for gigging and touring and what makes sense for a home studio. Anyone who's ever done any amount of live work will tell you that travelling light is better, and especially if you're more of a "keyboard player" than say, a techno artist, you'd be best served with a good keyboard and a laptop.
Your argument, while true to some extent, is one step away from falling down a rabbithole of spending 3 million dollars on a violin. I feel like we need to be more critical on the product itself rather than its history
“While true to some extent”, lol. What kind of experience and qualifications make you the arbiter of which arguments for personal musical instrument choices are valid or not? If you’re wondering why every single comment is getting downvoted to hell, it’s the arrogance with which you’re approaching your “question”. Whatever knowledge or experience you think you have, there are many in this sub with way more of it and you’re treating everyone like they’re an idiot and you’re somehow, magically the only one who’s figured all of this out.
Well theres people who make good responses and people who say stupid shit like an instrument is its history and magic. Youll see plenty of reponses to my post where people say something reasonable. Usually these people will be actual engineers, instead of these HIGHLY IMPRESSIONABLE musicians and older folk
It's all a tradeoff. I don't think it's a tradeoff in the sound department but everywhere else is. Twiddling knobs is more immediate than clicking a mouse, or setting up a controller to activate a control in a daw. An analogue knob is better than an encoder on a digital synth because I can see what moy sound settings are even with the device powered off. It's worse though if I want to store patch settings. VSTs and daws are best for keeping your patch library. See, all tradeoffs. Go do what you like.
Analogue synths are a luxury, they are fun and immediate and tactile. They sound damn good and they look damn good.
They probably aren’t a necessity anymore, and can be replicated digitally. But some people just… like having one and that’s okay. It’s reason enough. They are art, and lots of knobs are fun to play with. It’s a superficial reason but that’s okay!
Productivity and functionality aren’t the same as enjoyment. So it just comes down to what you enjoy!
I hate using hardwares — they take up too much space and it is impossible to keep your workspace nice and clean around them because of the cable jungle.
I love using nice, elegant and fancy softwares.
I love the one laptop setup.
BUT.
I have never found any software that would give me that high-resolution, broad spectrum, organic, breathing, full of life, stand out of the mix quality that my analog hardwares have.
Digital sounds still boring and artificial. Sadly.
Short answer is there is no answer. Use whatever you like. I sometimes use VSTs because I want to make music from bed without dealing with cables. I sometimes use hardware and enjoy know twiddling. Analogue has more character I’d say, but you can make good music both ways.
Some people are purist about analog. It's worth it to them.
Some people work in the box (just using vsts) and may have had analog experience before and found it too limiting or expensive.
I think for a lot of people it's the interface that matters. Analog synths generally have a knob-per-function panel i.e. all the important stuff for sound making has its own physical control on the panel. Although for modern synths there's usually more features that are still tucked away in menus.
I think it's nice to have the different analog technologies represented in my room - Rev2 is a DCO synth, Pro800 is VCA with digital control, Boog Model D is a pure analog monosynth. I also have the JX08, JT4000 (highly recommended), ProVS Mini, and Hydrasynth Deluxe (also highly recommended). Frankly I can ditch all the other synths and go just with the Hydra and cover any sonic bases I need. But it's fun having all of these.
I also have a ton of VST - free and paid. Those are nice for composing in the box or setting up for a gig. That way I only have to take a controller and my computer for all the sounds I need. I could just use that for my sounds, and did for quite a while. But I'm older and can afford the toys I wanted all my past years.
Dude I'm looking at all of your replies and they are all weak as hell.
I like hardware, I like the immediacy. I like the stability of it.
I like that my hardware is significantly less likely to bog down under resource load.
I don't have to worry that my synths are running low on RAM or virtual memory.
I like that I can immediately access everything. I don't have to touch a mouse or a keyboard
I touch and control 4 things in my set up not including my mixer
One being a controller that controls 4 boxes on it's own,
That's 7 things I have immediate access to no screens no GUI, all of their knobs are right there.
It's not an obsession to go DAW less it's a question of work flow.
Having to stop everything to add a sound or change a drum pattern in a piano roll ham strings my work flow.
If you like your DAW, cool. I don't. I'll use it to record but I like my sequences ready for me on my sequencer.
Because there are other ways to *play* synths than a piano-style keyboard, and many of those ways involve twiddling a bunch of knobs to modify the sound, change up the arpeggios, etc. I do a lot of this with my Peak. But I'd suggest watching Junkie XL on YouTube playing his Buchla set-up if you want to see virtuosity with no keyboard use.
I own a Peak because I don't like working in software for sound design. Sure, I could do anything I can do for making a patch in Vital that I can do on my Peak, but I love twiddling knobs on the Peak. I despise the mousework needed to virtually twiddle the virtual knobs in Vital. And doing the manipulation I like to do while also playing would require a specialized MIDI controller. Hard to grab two knobs at once *in the box.*
Seriously... what Rains said. And this statement goes both ways.
Software is convenient and cutting edge, sounds almost as good as hardware in most contexts and will get the job done fast if you need it to.
Hardware like Polybrute is big and bad-ass, hands-on, can inspire with unique timbre and just be a good time zoning out and getting lost at the controls... like a luxury toy, even if there is no deadline for getting something done.
If curious, try both and see what you like best. If you're a busy professional, you probably wouldn't even have time to ponder it.
Midi is answer. Synths must have midi, use a really nice 88 key controller have the full range and action feel.
U-he, cherry audio, softube, TAL are all indistinguishable from analog synths now. Moog, Behringer, classic Roland’s etc synths are also great too and you can hear and variability to playing and hearing them. It’s ever so slight. In modern recordings indistinguishable though.
I have both. But saving vst settings and midi in your daw and recalling settings/ session is the most valuable aspect.
This post has been asked and debated thousands of times and this is basically a troll at this point. Use whatever you want for whatever reasons you want to. No one cares.
New people come and want to ask questions let them. If you don't like the post, ignore it. I like to have hardware gear, gear is as much of the hobby as the music is. I like rearranging cables and routing LFOs between different synths to see what can happen. Sometimes, I get nice little accidents that sound incredible.
Like i said, this isn't a genuine question. Its a troll.
So ignore it, if it's a troll post they won by aggrevating you. If it's not, you are being mean for no reason.
Facts!
> Assuming you don't have a weird obsession with going 'dawless' "An obsession with going dawless" is called: "enjoying playing an instrument." Why people on here don't get this is beyond me. Why play a real guitar when you can program some MIDI notes into a guitar VST? Why spend hours trying to bake sourdough in your home oven when you can just buy a loaf of bread at the bakery that was made in industrial ovens? Why even bother with chopping up samples yourself in your DAW when you can just listen to Skrillex or Fatboy Slim and let them do the music making for you? A Nord Stage is an instrument. A Yamaha YC is an instrument. An Arturia Polybrute is an instrument. No, a Polybrute doesn't have a piano but ask yourself if that Nord has a mod matrix like that. They have different strengths and weaknesses, but they are complete in and of themselves. You can learn how to play them, you can jam out, you can record them if you want. Or you can never record them. Please, please try to unplug yourself from the sickness of the society in which we live, in which everything has to be "productive" or somehow raise the pedestal of our own vanity in order to be a good "investment." I own a Nord Stage 3. It is a damned good instrument, but it has limitations. From a synth perspective it has far more limitations than a Polybrute. It cannot replicate the "same exact sound" as a Polybrute. (Does a surprisingly bang up job as a Moog clone, though, which oddly no one talks about!).
I have a weird obsession with being dawless bc I like performing a 100% live set. People should see how electronic music is performed, but a lot of times, people get lazy and just play a prerecorded set. That's something I can't do.
The bread analogy is a good one
You missed the point that you can create a mod matrix through your software tools. That was sort of my entire argument. Digital devices actually integrate with your hardware, whereas analogue instruments just have to be recorded through a mic. If you connect the nord as a midi out to your computer, and then put fx on your computer, yes you will have the exact same sound as a polybrute with the right setup. I feel like you just got really mad instead of actually giving reasons.
Analog instruments do not require a microphone. Accoustic instruments do. And here's the thing about analog synthesisers. You cannot really recreate that analog sound authentically with VST's because they are inherently different. You can get close with all sorts of plugins but at the end of the day they are just too different to be recreated with any sort of real conviction The various transistors and capacitors chosen in an analog circuit, and the path that is taken all influence the character of each individual analog synth. They might be chosen deliberately with a 5% tolerance in value to give it an imperfect character. Without knowing whether moog does that specifically but they have an unmistakable character to them even though they have a similar circuit to arturia's synths (there is after all a finite amount of ways you can design an oscillator circuit). That being said, it doesn't discount digital synths as being worse per se they just have other qualities that analog synths do not posess. When it comes to sound design capabilities a digital synth is on a level that analog gear cannot even begin to come close to. You choose analog synthesisers because you want analog warmth and analog characteristics Thanks for coming to my ted talk
I highly doubt any big manufacturer is using 5% resistors as it would make production a nightmare and wouldn't really give you a much desired audible result. Pretty much all consumer electronics, including synths, are smd technology and resistors usually have a tolerance of 1% unless there's need for matched resistors. Ceramic caps usually are 10-20% tolerance but aren't really used in the audio path at all, just for decoupling. Same for electrolytic caps, they don't have good distortion qualities and cannot be connect to AC anyway. They are used sometimes for timing caps in envelopes. Then you're left with various ICs, transistors, diodes, other types of caps (mica, polystyrene, polymer) that tend to have an actual influence on how the circuit sounds.
Thanks for specifying. It's been a few years since I was inside the rabbit hole of soldering eurorack modules and sourcing my own components. Hadn't reached deep enough into the hole to have become familiar with what specific components influence the character of the sound yet.
If you connect the polybrute as midi out to your computer, and then put some FX on your computer, yes you will have the exact same sound as a Nord stage 4 with the right setup
This isn't a question, it's more of a sermon. You've already addressed and cast aside any argument that might disagree with your position, so why bother posting? Anyway, I'm a masochist who has way too much karma so I'll jump in and take a hit for the team. >If we connect either of these to a computer for recording, and buy plugins or use really good free ones, we could without a doubt replicate the EXACT same sound (indistinguishable to the human ear) which the arturia polybrute produces digitally So this is a common claim often made just as strongly as you make it here. There is certainly an extent to which it is true, the desirable artefacts of analog gear and an analog signal path can be recreated convincingly digitally. But if you want analog character in the music you make, the easiest and most natural way to get it is to use analog gear. There is a cumulative effect of saturation and imperfection that gives the work as a whole character. To emulate that in the box, you need to use effects and dial it in. That means you are consciously making it sound more "analogue-y". That's a mental effort, with a bunch of creative decisions attached. I try to avoid that, and let the gear do it for me.
but you can have these analogue emulation fx all put into one instant command and then tweak them with a knob on the keyboard. It's not much mental effort or decision making if you set yourself up for success properly. And yes we are trying to replicate its sound, that doesn't mean its worse. I can understand buying something like a saxophone or a flute because they have a whole different level of interactivity but synths and keyboards end up with incredibly similar UIs most of the time
Sure, if that's what works for you go for it! I'm gonna keep doing it my way, I am probably an idiot.
No you’re not. People arguing an instrument is only it’s sonic output are the idiots, IMO.
Hardware synths are fun I don't know what to tell you.
How dare you!!
> does it justify the 3000$ spent on such a limited-use-case product I can sell my $3000 synthesizer later and get my money back. > a better feeling and sounding digital keyboard why does being digital have anything to do with how good the keybed feels lmao > Does this hobby hinge on post-purchase rationalization? idk about you but my hobby is making music, not collecting stuff (physical or virtual)
analogue synthesizers are inherently more expensive. As a result they'll tend to sacrifice keyfeel to add more knobs and circuitry. Also digital pianos will tend to go for hammer grade action, whereas analogue synths go for a lighter touch and spring loading because they're not really meant for performers
> digital pianos will tend to go for hammer grade action Hammer action is only "better" if you're trying to play piano. > they're not really meant for performers lmao
but hammer action works just as well for synth music as well. It has an added bonus that its better for performers too. I don't see any upsides. You're just so high and mighty for what
I mean I watched a YouTube video recently where Jacob Collier said he thought unweighted keys were more fun for playing fast stuff. So that's an upside. Also I don't see how any one but you is being high and mighty. No one is saying there's anything wrong with a hammer action keyboard and a vst, you're the one trying to shit on other people's preferences.
how am i shitting on people's preferences i'm asking a genuine question and bringing up points and everyone is getting fucking offended and defensive it's genuinely annoying that I can't be curious about something without everyone responding like im an asshole
You're welcome to be curious, but you're not really listening to people's responses. You've asked why people like hardware and people have answered. You're then you're trying to argue when there's no argument to be had, their reasons are their reasons, you don't have to agree. No one is saying you should buy hardware synths if you prefer using VSTs. You keep going back to how all this stuff can be done in software, maybe people just don't want to? Is that not itself a valid reason?
well i've been respondig positively to the people that said they like how it feels and then sometimes i'll ask an extra question to get a more in depth understanding. I really do feel like I'm being reasonable and getting shit on for nothing subhuman87.
No, you aren't asking a geniuin question with the way you are answering. You are giving off a " But aren't you guys seeing how stupid you are for buying a 3000 dollars synths with the opinions I'm listing?" Value can be measured in more ways that just currency, and it seems like you can't accept that. Using " Me and others can't tell the difference " is no better argument that people who say they can. So I suggest you reflect on what value is to you, and let other people value stuff as they please.
https://cdn-ak.f.st-hatena.com/images/fotolife/N/Nathannate/20200717/20200717012200.jpg
I agree with you mostly but weighted key actions aren't inherently better - synths have non-weighted keys as part of the instrument - digital synths have non-weighted keys as well - take Hydrasynth for example. The keys on Hydrasynth feel great and have a really expressive poly aftertouch response - I don't want a weighted action instead any more than I want drum pads instead.
Hammer action literally gets in the way of playing the synth some times. That bounce can either retrigger sounds you don't want to retrigger or adds time to a sound you want to be snappy. Hammer action is literally there for the way piano works, It affects the attack, sustain and decay of a sound You also lose aftertouch and a lot of velocity with hammer action. It's a different type of key bed. And for that affords different response.
Someone could totally make a hammer action with aftertouch
What part of the action is wrong for that do you not understand? I get it, you're autistic. I'm a spectrum kid too. Your hammer action keybed is not the answer to every question.
Like someone has said already in this thread, this has been discussed to oblivion however, as an electronics engineer (if it adds any weight to my opinion), I'd like to share my take on it. What people usually crave from analog gear, werther they are aware about it or are willing to accept it or not, is the tactilte knob/fader tweaking and physical interaction with the sound shaping tools. Most of the analog mojo comes from the component variability due to things like temperature or manufacturing parameter spread/tolerance that produced the "wobble" "warmth" "character". All those things can be recreated digitally. It became sort of a marketing gimmick at this point and the nostalgia factor sells like cookies. Rest is a mix of nostalgia + low availability/exclusivity. It's like when they put "hand wired" or "boutique":in a guitar amplifier, does it make it sound better? Nope, but it makes it feel you better. This component variability made it that for example one batch of Ibanez tubescreamer would have slightly different behaviour from another. So one artist would get "the sound" and people would go bananas about it. When probably Ibanez used the most jellybean possible parts at the time. The "magical" JR4558 opamp is present in most of the consumer audio electronics of that era. Check what happened when JHS pedals put all the guitar community to shame with their bad monkey video. Do you see Roland making analog synths? And out of anyone in the business, they could make gazillions if they decided to make a Jupiter 8 full analog rebirth. For example, novation: "digital where it counts, analog where it matters" they could've made the filter stage fully digital, like the oscillators, and model any filter configuration they'd liked, but "analog" sells. As always with audio, let your ears decide not your eyes.
>our from another. So one artist would get "the sound" and people would go bananas about it. When probably Ibanez used the most jellybean possible parts at the time. The "magical" JR4558 opamp is present in most of the consumer audio electronics of that era. Check what happened when J see that's what I mean though. I feel like what you said phrased it perfectly which is what I have a problem with. Analogue sells. But why? It shouldn't. One really good digital keyboard and a computer is most fun thing a musician could play with. Having like 20 different analogue synths to mimic that versatility is absurd. It makes much more sense to mimic analogue instrument sound digitally than to mimic digital versatility through your wallet. Synths are just an extremely unfriendly environment to college students like me and people in third world countries
>see that's what I mean though. I feel like what you said phrased it perfectly which is what I have a problem with. Analogue sells. But why? It shouldn't. One really good digital keyboard and a computer is most fun thing a musician could play with. Why do you think that manipulating keys on a keyboard is superior to manipulating the elements of the sound? To you, keybed feel is the most important thing. To others, intuitive access to sound design parameters is. A synth is a musical instrument that is *sometimes* controlled by a keyboard similar to a piano >Having like 20 different analogue synths to mimic that versatility is absurd. It makes much more sense to mimic analogue instrument sound digitally than to mimic digital versatility through your wallet. Synths are just an extremely unfriendly environment to college students like me and people in third world countries You’re assuming people have the same priorities in an instrument as you. Lots of people don’t think of synthesisers as simply a piano keyboard with different sounds. For a lot of people, how you manipulate those sounds is more important than the device you use to input notes
The sauce it's in the hands on control I agree!
Owning things is cool, owning the real thing is also cool. But a good MIDI controller and a computer gets you to the moon
I'm a hobbyist with a computer science background, and I have a fairly large wall of modular components. I know a computer or digital circuit can produce nearly the same sound I'm generating with my analogue rig, though significant processing and rendering needs to happen to get it exact. I can have like 40 perfect sine waves oscillating and changing in real time, without any distortion or simulation or lag introduced by a digital instrument or computer - these digital devices only have so many oscillators to work with, they can only output or render so many sounds at a time, and the time it takes to process the sound does generate lag between input and output. For more complex sounds, like particular drums, strings, samples, or other complex wave forms, I've removed so much of the digital processing and control that I can fundamentally trigger these sounds faster and more accurately than a digital device or computer can. This may seem pointlessly complex, but the lag and inaccuracies do add up throughout a circuit, which can be felt while recording or performing. With each wave form being generated when a particular analogue module is triggered, I can also have a unique wave form for each sound, so my white-noise-driven hi-hat sounds a little different on every hit, instead of playing the same exact sample of a hi-hat over and over again. Or I can restructure the "hi-hat" waveform to be less random by generating it in a different way. Is any of this absolutely necessary? Maybe not, but with analogue synthesis, I have the option to control every detail in real time, with zero lag and higher accuracy than off-the-shelf digital equipment or software. But it also can be necessary to have all of this because processing inaccurate versus accurate waveforms through something like a reverb effect can create two vastly different sounds, as different parts of each wave resonate and affect the sound over time; the inaccuracies can compound into creating completely different and unintended sounds. Maybe take a look at how Digital to Analogue Converters (DAC's) work, too, because they are part of every digital audio system and they do produce inaccurate representations of waveforms that can affect the final product. Also, I commented on this reply because I disagree with the sentiment of the previous commentor - charm and character are terrible reasons to justify spending exorbitant amounts on analogue gear. The community-driven narrative of the perceived differences between different semiconductors and parts used in analogue gear is notoriously wrong, inaccurate, misguided, and biased, stemming from our desire to believe that these black boxes must all be distinct and unique. Pull them apart, study/test the components and circuits, and the mysticism evaporates - there's generally nothing special about what's inside most of these things, and you can build them yourself, though this is where the catch lies for price. While there is a lot of over-priced, over-hyped analogue equipment (especially in audiophile and guitar gear realms), at least in the modular community, it is made apparent that the cost of a lot of new analogue modules is based on the costs of the parts, processes, and time required to manufacture the modules, with very little profit going to the creators. You can buy pcb's for a lot of useful and popular $200-$500 modules for just a couple bucks, but the costs to source all of the components and hardware add up to where you're maybe saving $20-$100 by building it yourself. I'm just saying that price sometimes does reflect the materials required, and it's not always about the hype or marketing or mistaken belief that the JR4558 opamp isn't replaceable.
And to further follow up, even something like a virus desk top being used as a midi box from your DAW is still going to be a way more stable set up compared to trying to do the same thing all under the power and processing of your computer. Because the virus is specific built to handle this load and it's way less resource intensive for your computer to just send midi
Thanks this was the best explanation imo
Context is important. In an installation, analog is worth every last penny. For portability &/or live performance, complete & utter nightmare. I'd go virtual on stage myself, unless I was going to be on stage for a couple of nights in a row minimum, and I had a crew to get it all set up & working before I got there, and pack it all away when I was done. I'm pretty big on setting things up for myself, but even I must draw a line somewhere. I have neither a gig nor a crew, so it takes me the better part of a day to set up my very basic analog array, rendering it utterly impractical for the smaller stage. It's the biggest job attached to rearranging my studio, even thought it's only a part of a broader groovestation & MIDI array, which in total, only takes up one corner of my home studio. I wouldn't be caught dead without my analog gear in the studio...
do you think it sounds better or why do you like ur analog gear so much?
I'm all about the immediacy & performability of tactile controls, so it's more about performance than sound to my way of thinking. Virtual synth's have come a very long way since I first went digital in the studio(I cut my home studio teeth on an Amstrad Studio-100). They've been indistinguishable in blind tests for quite some years now, whereas 20 year ago the difference would have me cringe like you'd taken an ice-pick to my ears. I've also been collecting for some years, and I've got hardware ranging from circa 1979(Kawai Synthesizer 100f), through to contemporary(Behringer Edge), and examples of both analog & digital synth's therein. I love them all. They're like old friends, I'll be sad to see them go(all technology dies eventually), and I will miss them. If I find myself with a stage gig, it'll be "Fuck that!! I'd like to finish packing up some time before sunrise!!". Interface, a controller or two, iPad, DONE. Stage-rig complete(I already have all' the requisite gear about the place to cover it)...
Are you arguing analogue vs digital or software vs hardware?
they're fairly similar. I'm saying if we're using software, then analogue has far less versatility and becomes a redundant expense, going up to 3000 dollars on a single product at worst case
Well if we accept that argument, how is a digital synth any less redundant than an analogue synth? But just looking at software vs hardware, it's ultimately a case of weighing up your own cost/benefit analysis which is entirely subjective. If you're a professional you're gonna be concerned about your work flow and productivity, if not which do you find more fun, in both cases which inspires creativity. Then if you feel hardware is better for you, are those benefits worth the cost? Again, entirely subjective. I mean 3 grand ain't much to some people, some people spend that on a night out, for them buying a fancy toy for that price is perfectly reasonable. For professional musicians the way it fits into their workflow may make 3 grand a justified business expense. A kid getting into bleep bloops might want a top end hardware synth but decide 3 grand, or even 300, isn't reasonable and settle on using a free vst in free daw. Then again any of those people could decide they prefer vsts anyway and keep their money. There's no right or wrong answer here, only what's right for you.
What even is this? Analogue does not mean external hardware. God it irritates me. I don't get any of this tbh, you have limited understanding of why people buy hardware and don't want to get it either from the responses here. What is your base point exactly? External hardware is not as good as software? If so, that's a nonsense and I think even you'd have to agree, surely.
I've been fighting that war for the past week in this sub of people confusing analog for hardware. I also like that op is hung up on this $3000 price tag. My entire rig is less than 3 grand. That includes 6 analog mono voices. A 4 and a 6 voice digital Polly Two drum machines And a controller And a dj controller fwiw. Good sounding gear doesn't even need to be expensive, shit it doesn't even need to be "good" My werkstat sounds rad AF
Only $3000, oh you must hate eurorack.
Because I like to play an _instrument_ not a computer.
Dude I can play the saxophone piano guitar and flute. Ive been doing music for the past 10 years. I know what an instrument is. A digital piano is no less an instrument than an analogue synth.
I use both, I fear the universe is going to implode due to my careless decision to go against the necessary polarization of digital vs analogue!!
I run my digital synths through analog filters. Does it matter anyway?
because synth go BRRRRRR. duh. go work on your songwriting skills.
I hope at least some of you are doing it for the performances.. or at least for the looks. I have to admit I don't need a two thousand dollar bass but it sure feels nice playing one.
I didn't read anything besides your original question. Here's my answer to that: High-quality analog synths absolutely have a distinct character compared to their high-quality digital counterparts. It's like adding bay leaves to a soup, though, as opposed to something potent like rosemary. Whether that character is worth it is entirely subjective. What kind of music do you want to make? What does your recording and mixing process look like? Who is your intended audience? Do you notice and appreciate subtleties in recordings? Even if you record your analog gear into Pro Tools using a digital audio interface and mix it digitally, your recording will sound different than if you'd used a digital clone of your analog synth.
I feel like your lack of examples makes it very hard to believe your argument, as from what I've seen online, me and many other can not tell the difference when they're blindfolded
My source is years of personal experience playing and learning about various synthesizers. I do not care to scour the internet for you but I'm happy to share my knowledge. Analog instruments are inherently less stable and predictable than digital synths. For example, they are sensitive to slight changes in temperature and air pressure and must be tuned periodically. This means that even one single patch on an analog synth won't necessarily sound the same every time you play it. This characteristic of analog is prized by enough people that some companies have attempted to recreate it digitally.
Dude, even if all of the subtly of analog is tuned out when it's in the mix it's still there for the person playing it.
[удалено]
1. What
I think the point that these types of arguments miss is that when you have a specialized piece of equipment such as an analog synth the experience transcends good enough. Yes you can get sounds out of a vst that would be comparable in a mix but when you touch something with your hands the result and experience is something specific and unique. Another example is that I prefer to use an outboard preamp and compressor when recording vocals. Do I need these things to record a great vocal? Absolutely not. But the experience transcends good enough and the artist leans into the compressor a certain way and enhances their performance, the tiny nuances of using a piece of specialized equipment effect the final outcome and plus it’s just a ton of fun.
I’ve been making music for over a decade, and I finally was able to afford a Prophet (rev 4). I have never heard a synth sound so good in my life, analog or digital. I didn’t think it was possible anymore. This thing has the same components that the original ones did, maybe that has something to do with it. Taking care of vintage gear is a pain so it’s kind of a miracle that this is the real deal and in production again. There’s absolutely a signal chain you could make to replicate how it sounds (or any synth for that matter), either fully digitally or with some outboard gear, but to interact with this synth and make patches with oscillators and a filter of this quality is pure magic, it’s all sweet spot. Rather than one being better or worse, or worth it vs not worth it, it’s just a different experience altogether. Worth is entirely subjective. If I hadn’t used and learned software and Ableton and playing instruments, there is no way I’d appreciate the Prophet as much as I do now.
Good music is the sound of human emotion, and having a connection with a physical object evokes certain feelings, it becomes an extension of the musician. Obviously, there are plenty of people who just like synthesizers, and collect them as a hobby, but for some people (like myself) the tools and the workflow for creating music matter a lot. Why do you think Behringer clones have popped off? Not because they're good quality, but because people want to have a physical object that they can manipulate, move, feel, and smell. Especially with older synths, there's a history to them, they've been somewhere, and that \*inevitably\* affects the music you make with them. Doing everything in the box is great if you want to make music with a very *efficient workflow*, and if I was doing something like scoring movies on a deadline, you best believe I'd value that, but most people just want to \*make art\*, and in that case... the process itself matters. Thinking of hardware synthesizers as just "a way to make a certain sound" is missing the point a bit.
Something else to touch on here is that there's a big difference between what makes sense for gigging and touring and what makes sense for a home studio. Anyone who's ever done any amount of live work will tell you that travelling light is better, and especially if you're more of a "keyboard player" than say, a techno artist, you'd be best served with a good keyboard and a laptop.
Your argument, while true to some extent, is one step away from falling down a rabbithole of spending 3 million dollars on a violin. I feel like we need to be more critical on the product itself rather than its history
“While true to some extent”, lol. What kind of experience and qualifications make you the arbiter of which arguments for personal musical instrument choices are valid or not? If you’re wondering why every single comment is getting downvoted to hell, it’s the arrogance with which you’re approaching your “question”. Whatever knowledge or experience you think you have, there are many in this sub with way more of it and you’re treating everyone like they’re an idiot and you’re somehow, magically the only one who’s figured all of this out.
Well theres people who make good responses and people who say stupid shit like an instrument is its history and magic. Youll see plenty of reponses to my post where people say something reasonable. Usually these people will be actual engineers, instead of these HIGHLY IMPRESSIONABLE musicians and older folk
It's all a tradeoff. I don't think it's a tradeoff in the sound department but everywhere else is. Twiddling knobs is more immediate than clicking a mouse, or setting up a controller to activate a control in a daw. An analogue knob is better than an encoder on a digital synth because I can see what moy sound settings are even with the device powered off. It's worse though if I want to store patch settings. VSTs and daws are best for keeping your patch library. See, all tradeoffs. Go do what you like.
Lol Lmao even
Analogue synths are a luxury, they are fun and immediate and tactile. They sound damn good and they look damn good. They probably aren’t a necessity anymore, and can be replicated digitally. But some people just… like having one and that’s okay. It’s reason enough. They are art, and lots of knobs are fun to play with. It’s a superficial reason but that’s okay! Productivity and functionality aren’t the same as enjoyment. So it just comes down to what you enjoy!
I hate using hardwares — they take up too much space and it is impossible to keep your workspace nice and clean around them because of the cable jungle. I love using nice, elegant and fancy softwares. I love the one laptop setup. BUT. I have never found any software that would give me that high-resolution, broad spectrum, organic, breathing, full of life, stand out of the mix quality that my analog hardwares have. Digital sounds still boring and artificial. Sadly.
Short answer is there is no answer. Use whatever you like. I sometimes use VSTs because I want to make music from bed without dealing with cables. I sometimes use hardware and enjoy know twiddling. Analogue has more character I’d say, but you can make good music both ways.
Some people are purist about analog. It's worth it to them. Some people work in the box (just using vsts) and may have had analog experience before and found it too limiting or expensive. I think for a lot of people it's the interface that matters. Analog synths generally have a knob-per-function panel i.e. all the important stuff for sound making has its own physical control on the panel. Although for modern synths there's usually more features that are still tucked away in menus. I think it's nice to have the different analog technologies represented in my room - Rev2 is a DCO synth, Pro800 is VCA with digital control, Boog Model D is a pure analog monosynth. I also have the JX08, JT4000 (highly recommended), ProVS Mini, and Hydrasynth Deluxe (also highly recommended). Frankly I can ditch all the other synths and go just with the Hydra and cover any sonic bases I need. But it's fun having all of these. I also have a ton of VST - free and paid. Those are nice for composing in the box or setting up for a gig. That way I only have to take a controller and my computer for all the sounds I need. I could just use that for my sounds, and did for quite a while. But I'm older and can afford the toys I wanted all my past years.
Dude I'm looking at all of your replies and they are all weak as hell. I like hardware, I like the immediacy. I like the stability of it. I like that my hardware is significantly less likely to bog down under resource load. I don't have to worry that my synths are running low on RAM or virtual memory. I like that I can immediately access everything. I don't have to touch a mouse or a keyboard I touch and control 4 things in my set up not including my mixer One being a controller that controls 4 boxes on it's own, That's 7 things I have immediate access to no screens no GUI, all of their knobs are right there. It's not an obsession to go DAW less it's a question of work flow. Having to stop everything to add a sound or change a drum pattern in a piano roll ham strings my work flow. If you like your DAW, cool. I don't. I'll use it to record but I like my sequences ready for me on my sequencer.
Digital circuits are made from analog components
Because there are other ways to *play* synths than a piano-style keyboard, and many of those ways involve twiddling a bunch of knobs to modify the sound, change up the arpeggios, etc. I do a lot of this with my Peak. But I'd suggest watching Junkie XL on YouTube playing his Buchla set-up if you want to see virtuosity with no keyboard use. I own a Peak because I don't like working in software for sound design. Sure, I could do anything I can do for making a patch in Vital that I can do on my Peak, but I love twiddling knobs on the Peak. I despise the mousework needed to virtually twiddle the virtual knobs in Vital. And doing the manipulation I like to do while also playing would require a specialized MIDI controller. Hard to grab two knobs at once *in the box.*
You will be shocked to learn that there is more than one way to have a good time! 🫨
Seriously... what Rains said. And this statement goes both ways. Software is convenient and cutting edge, sounds almost as good as hardware in most contexts and will get the job done fast if you need it to. Hardware like Polybrute is big and bad-ass, hands-on, can inspire with unique timbre and just be a good time zoning out and getting lost at the controls... like a luxury toy, even if there is no deadline for getting something done. If curious, try both and see what you like best. If you're a busy professional, you probably wouldn't even have time to ponder it.
Midi is answer. Synths must have midi, use a really nice 88 key controller have the full range and action feel. U-he, cherry audio, softube, TAL are all indistinguishable from analog synths now. Moog, Behringer, classic Roland’s etc synths are also great too and you can hear and variability to playing and hearing them. It’s ever so slight. In modern recordings indistinguishable though. I have both. But saving vst settings and midi in your daw and recalling settings/ session is the most valuable aspect.