sw threatening hw value?

[CS_TBL]

I was just snooping around a bit in the synth explorer at VSE, the Yamaha corner. It was quite amusing to read all these remarks from desperate geeks defending the (in this case) TX802 against FM7 and software in general - but mostly just against FM7. I almost decided to put this essay right there, but this 600 character limit is far from comfy, and splitting up a post isn't my style. Also, you'll see the same hatred in the comments of about any DX/TX model, so I guess something more generic could better be placed right here.

Here's a hypothesis I'll put on the table: sw-haters/hw-protectors are merely protecting the eBay value of their synths. A secondary hypothesis is that their hw features some kinda emotional connection (looks cool, has twinkly lights 'n displays, has buttons/knobs/sliders, smells good, has a positive reputation because artist x used it, etc.) that software may lack, as such it's not related to sound.

It's somewhat unfortunate that things get compared to FM7, even though by now FM7 is many years old, and has been replaced by FM8 years ago. I've never really messed around with FM7, it looked too much like a virtual DX7; FM8 looks like FM8. So, I'll cheat a bit by comparing to FM8 instead whereas all the haters compare things to FM7. But as FM7 is discontinued anyway I'd say it's legit to use FM8. In a way, I wonder why these old reviews still refer to FM7 anyway - must be their age I guess..

First two general remarks from my side:

• I don't hate hw. This is not a hs vs sw debate. I'm merely making this tl;dr as a reaction to people who seem to hate sw for reasons that would be on par with the humour level of the Muppet Show.
• I'm a programmer/sound designer, and you know it. Stone age DX/TX libraries? You can keep 'em. People keep stressing that their old libs don't sound 1:1 like they should in FM7/FM8. I wouldn't know. Even though I have all the relevant hw FM synths myself (DX7, SY77, FS1r), I just couldn't care about importing those sounds. It'll cost me more time to sort out the sysex dump stuff and importing issues than when I'd remake the sound from scratch in FM8. "But it took me a day to create a good sound on my DX7, sure can't just let that sound get lost in time, like tears in rain!?" - "yes you can, it will take you 1/10 of the time to recreate it from scratch using the vastly improved sw interface!"

Some of the arguments given in the comments are - for me - an indication that the relevant user isn't a sound designer and relies on presets and perhaps minor/global parameter tweaks. A true sound designer keeps tweaking until it sounds perfect, and if you know the possibilities are there then the intended sound is there too - it just takes a bit more efforts. Every time I see people complain about sw being plastic, thin, cold, missing subsonic frequencies, missing dimensions, missing that D/A converter using 30 year old technology, whatever, then I think: ok, so, why don't I have these issues? It's hard to really make a point of of this, as there's no way for any neutral third party to verify these issues. So, my standpoint in this is: "learn to design sounds". And yes, it's arbitrary.

Next I see arguments related to multitimbrality and separate outputs. Fine. Do these people realize that multiple instances of a plug in cater for this? (and each instance with its own effects and a max polyphony of 64) -- myth busted

Stability and latency. Why things seem to crash on systems of all these persons is beyond me. If anyone has a messy system it's me. It's not uncommon for me to be working on an FM8 project with 32+ instances while I have 3 virus scanners in the background, mIRC with a log of a month, Photoshop which I simply forgot to close, FireFox with 12 tabs, a HD that hasn't been defragmented for about a year or so, and some other stuff too - like leeching the latest pr0n. Never got any crash. Latency? I dunno what.. whenever I hit a key, I get a sound. I don't even know whether I'm using Asio4all or some other asio driver, and I don't care; I hit a key, I immediately get a sound. My PC is not junkyard material but it's not extremely high end either. An avid gamer has far more juice than I have - I may win with my RAID0 drives though. I noticed a mentioned bug in FM8 about rotating menus upon creating a new sound. Perhaps those people should find a better crack.. - heard some rumour about an intended bug like that. You know, it's fun when people mail/call NI to complain about such a bug. I once worked at a company that put a bug one of their products that would show when someone used a crack. Heck, the coder (sitting opposite of me) just mailed those fools back that they should find a better crack. -- myth busted

VSE acquired by NI?? You silly you! Although I agree that the star system and the tone of voice in some of the reviews at VSE is quite arbitrary. Some FM synths get all the stars and a review as if it's some kinda celebrity, while an almost identical FM synth gets half the stars and gets a slap in the back for being 'thin'. Anyway, it's not really part of my hypothesis, but if VSE mods are reading this: perhaps soup-up all these old reviews in a consistent way, some day?

Splitting up VSE into a vintage section and a software section? In 2000 a DX7 was some 16 years old or something like that, and the Supernovas (Novation) were rather new. Today, the Supernovas are roughly as old as the DX7 was in 2000. Bottom line: it's not easy, nor practical, to draw the line between vintage and non-vintage. After x years, anything that used to be new is vintage. Or should the line be between hardware and software? How about the PPG Realizer messing up that option then? Why would VSE be split in the first place? One theory I can come up with is one that matches my hypothesis; hw owners would hate to see sw alternatives being mentioned, and as such see the eBay value of their hw drop a few floors. Considering the birth date of VSE I can imagine that the admin would've chosen 'vintage' because there was no software back then like there is today. Personally, these days, I think VSE could do without the V and simply have hw and sw in one database.

The next one is the cherry on the cake, really. Some daniel (TX802) wrote: "FM7?!? Save yourself the trouble and buy dedicated digital gear or even better start collecting modular synths, and really educate yourself on sound engineering and what it takes to get quality! If you don't care buy an iPad and sample your sounds into it's Garageband. LOL. Where is the industry headed?!" If I read this generalisation correctly, it takes hardware to become a sound engineering maestro while the rest of the world should stick to their software toys. Statler and Waldorf would laugh their old asses off! -- myth busted

The most recent one in that same list o' comments (17 jan) states that there're so many parameters that sw couldn't provide all that. This is simply not true. Do I really need to explain why? -- myth busted

Elsewhere there're people with a TX816 who are even worse, comparing a fully loaded TX816 (same sound on each module, slightly detuned) with one (1) instance of fm7 or fm8. Again, like I mentioned above, not seeming to realize that multiple instances do just that, all for the price of one, instead of eight! It's what I did with these strings..


Ok. So was all this the essay of a hw hater? Nope. As I've mentioned, I don't hate hw - I wouldn't ever sell my hw even though I never use it anymore - this text isn't about hw vs sw in any way. If you own/use any of those old synths, good for you, have fun with it. This text is about the questionable arguments hw people appear to be using against sw. Some arguments are so silly and easy to bust. It got me thinking.. why? That's where my hypothesises come in..

To recap:

• Is it all nothing more than desperately trying to protect the eBay value of said hardware? After all, potential buyers may visit this place to check reviews, and if they see there's a software alternative they may choose the software option instead.
• Is it simply a matter of DX/TX/SY/FS1r models being physical, things with fancy lights, displays and such? If so, attacking assumed worse sound quality, assumed crashes and assumed latency is utterly pointless. Let's then be frank about it, say you want something physical, fine! But use that argument then.
• Or is it the hw users merely being preset users (with minor tweaks), who don't know how to get great quality from sw? Naturally, assuming that the sw version of old sysex dumps actually sounds less, which I can't check, and which I couldn't care less about because I don't need another 43 EPianos, 13 Marimbas, 18 Bells and a whole lot o' cheap brass, strings and flutes. Such sounds were were probably revolutionary in the 80's though...

Or is it something else, and did I completely miss something obvious?

With that, I've listened to Debussy's La Mer enough by now (some five complete reruns), time for a [Submit].

[th0mas]

With all due respect, and I'm not saying you don't have a point (but I'm not going to check)

This forum should have a "SW vs HW debate" forum where things like this can reside.

[edfunction]

from skimming through, i half see your point.

for some of us who perform without computers issues of multitimbrality, multiple outs etc are important. so a cheapo dx or tx or sy can be pretty useful for live use.
i'd say the various arguments about hardware fm synths sounding better than software are probably pretty bogus, and definitely the interface on most fm synths sucks.

what i am confused about is why you bother to write these things on a vintage synth site. we get it. fm8 rules. you don't need to bang us over the head with it....

[CS_TBL]

what i am confused about is why you bother to write these things on a vintage synth site. we get it. fm8 rules. you don't need to bang us over the head with it....

For sake of discussion, that's what you do on a forum, and because I'm interested in the reason why all these ridiculous comments are what they are. The post wasn't about FM8 btw.

[nogginj]

Im glad you do bring up fm8 because you are obviously a power user and I like to hear those opinions much more than casual preset-jocks who don't invest time or motivation into it. Sure it can seem like a broken record but you are always very polite about it and usually have a really good point. Props...keep showing how far FM8 can actually go.

I don't think these comments are so much 'defending a price point' as much as they are justifying why they may have spent what they did on it, coupled with elitism / I-am-a-beautiful-snowflake syndrome ... it's easy to feel 'special' if you go against the trend. Not to mention collectors aren't always players and so it actually fills the need more to talk about than to actually prove a point (by playing with and giving software a shot).

Finally, instant gratification goes a long way -
flip a switch, plug in headphones, hit key, get sound; it feels good
vs
sit down, flip a switch, move mouse, click an icon, wait, move mouse, click more, wait, plug in something else, move mouse, click some more, hit key, get sound...(not to mention your muscle memory might think you are just writing an email ;]).

It's a really complex psychological phenomenon, that's for sure, sweeping generalistations like that are rarely rooted in practice/fact.

[b3groover]

Digital is digital. People can argue all they want but them's the brakes. I love my old FM synths, partly due to nostalgia. But my favorite digital synth these days is Alchemy.

[edfunction]

For sake of discussion, that's what you do on a forum, and because I'm interested in the reason why all these ridiculous comments are what they are. The post wasn't about FM8 btw.

fair enough. in general i agree. i certainly don't understand fm synths as collector items, except a few of the more special ones (dx100, sy-tg,dx200).

on a side-note can fm7 or 8 reproduce sy sounds? would definitely make me get rid of my tg77 although i might miss the classic converters

[CS_TBL]

Somewhat, but not entirely (talking FM8 now). It's been years since I've touched my SY77, but this is what I remember from it:
- operator waveforms could be phase shifted, in FM8 it's reset or free-running. It may sound like something futile, but with phase shifting you could use two operators to phase out aspects of a waveform.
- there may be unique operator waveforms in the SY, not sure about that though.

But other than that:
- in FM8 you can modulate samples and let samples modulate FM8, using FM8fx (VSTi effect). Naturally you need a sample player for that, as FM8 itself doesn't play samples. Personally I've barely ever used this sample modulating, as it usually ended up as sophisticated noise.
- you have a free FM matrix in FM8, so all the possible routings are possible.

In general, the effects section in the SY is different than the effects section of FM8, and you probably won't find the exact sample ROM in software either, so you won't be able to exactly 1:1 clone SY sounds. Question is how important that is. It may be refreshing to think of what you can do with FM8 rather than how it differs from other machines.

I wouldn't sell the SY, I'm not sure what they make on the second hand market, but it'd probably be cooler to just keep 'm.

[tekkentool]

This forum should have a "SW vs HW debate" forum where things like this can reside.

Oh h**l naw.

As to the topic (I was just using fm8 but an hour ago!), pricks with mindsets like that aren't smart. They're probably crappy musicians because they let superficial things like what box the digital components are located in become focal points in their music production. If things like the outputs were important they would simply make note of that. People who are s**t at things are usually the most vocal about the correct ways to do it.

Some people are just going to hate on what's unfamiliar.

I say don't worry about them, pricks are pricks. I once had somebody who was not a musician argue with me for a long time that electronic music was easy to create because his mate was a DJ. Pricks are pricks.

[edfunction]

@cs_tbl

yes i think part of the magic of the sy is in the roms. i like having it around because it has a sound that has some nostalgic appeal for me. i don't really go hard core into the synthesis on it. for that i have other things that i work more fluidly on and get better results with.

programming fm synths with software editors works pretty well for me except some can be buggy and difficult to use.

[GuyaGuy]

I was just snooping around a bit in the synth explorer at VSE, the Yamaha corner. It was quite amusing to read all these remarks from desperate geeks defending the (in this case) TX802 against FM7 and software in general - but mostly just against FM7. I almost decided to put this essay right there, but this 600 character limit is far from comfy, and splitting up a post isn't my style. Also, you'll see the same hatred in the comments of about any DX/TX model, so I guess something more generic could better be placed right here.

Here's a hypothesis I'll put on the table: sw-haters/hw-protectors are merely protecting the eBay value of their synths. A secondary hypothesis is that their hw features some kinda emotional connection (looks cool, has twinkly lights 'n displays, has buttons/knobs/sliders, smells good, has a positive reputation because artist x used it, etc.) that software may lack, as such it's not related to sound.

It's somewhat unfortunate that things get compared to FM7, even though by now FM7 is many years old, and has been replaced by FM8 years ago. I've never really messed around with FM7, it looked too much like a virtual DX7; FM8 looks like FM8. So, I'll cheat a bit by comparing to FM8 instead whereas all the haters compare things to FM7. But as FM7 is discontinued anyway I'd say it's legit to use FM8. In a way, I wonder why these old reviews still refer to FM7 anyway - must be their age I guess..

First two general remarks from my side:

• I don't hate hw. This is not a hs vs sw debate. I'm merely making this tl;dr as a reaction to people who seem to hate sw for reasons that would be on par with the humour level of the Muppet Show.
• I'm a programmer/sound designer, and you know it. Stone age DX/TX libraries? You can keep 'em. People keep stressing that their old libs don't sound 1:1 like they should in FM7/FM8. I wouldn't know. Even though I have all the relevant hw FM synths myself (DX7, SY77, FS1r), I just couldn't care about importing those sounds. It'll cost me more time to sort out the sysex dump stuff and importing issues than when I'd remake the sound from scratch in FM8. "But it took me a day to create a good sound on my DX7, sure can't just let that sound get lost in time, like tears in rain!?" - "yes you can, it will take you 1/10 of the time to recreate it from scratch using the vastly improved sw interface!"

Some of the arguments given in the comments are - for me - an indication that the relevant user isn't a sound designer and relies on presets and perhaps minor/global parameter tweaks. A true sound designer keeps tweaking until it sounds perfect, and if you know the possibilities are there then the intended sound is there too - it just takes a bit more efforts. Every time I see people complain about sw being plastic, thin, cold, missing subsonic frequencies, missing dimensions, missing that D/A converter using 30 year old technology, whatever, then I think: ok, so, why don't I have these issues? It's hard to really make a point of of this, as there's no way for any neutral third party to verify these issues. So, my standpoint in this is: "learn to design sounds". And yes, it's arbitrary.

Next I see arguments related to multitimbrality and separate outputs. Fine. Do these people realize that multiple instances of a plug in cater for this? (and each instance with its own effects and a max polyphony of 64) -- myth busted

Stability and latency. Why things seem to crash on systems of all these persons is beyond me. If anyone has a messy system it's me. It's not uncommon for me to be working on an FM8 project with 32+ instances while I have 3 virus scanners in the background, mIRC with a log of a month, Photoshop which I simply forgot to close, FireFox with 12 tabs, a HD that hasn't been defragmented for about a year or so, and some other stuff too - like leeching the latest pr0n. Never got any crash. Latency? I dunno what.. whenever I hit a key, I get a sound. I don't even know whether I'm using Asio4all or some other asio driver, and I don't care; I hit a key, I immediately get a sound. My PC is not junkyard material but it's not extremely high end either. An avid gamer has far more juice than I have - I may win with my RAID0 drives though. I noticed a mentioned bug in FM8 about rotating menus upon creating a new sound. Perhaps those people should find a better crack.. - heard some rumour about an intended bug like that. You know, it's fun when people mail/call NI to complain about such a bug. I once worked at a company that put a bug one of their products that would show when someone used a crack. Heck, the coder (sitting opposite of me) just mailed those fools back that they should find a better crack. -- myth busted

VSE acquired by NI?? You silly you! Although I agree that the star system and the tone of voice in some of the reviews at VSE is quite arbitrary. Some FM synths get all the stars and a review as if it's some kinda celebrity, while an almost identical FM synth gets half the stars and gets a slap in the back for being 'thin'. Anyway, it's not really part of my hypothesis, but if VSE mods are reading this: perhaps soup-up all these old reviews in a consistent way, some day?

Splitting up VSE into a vintage section and a software section? In 2000 a DX7 was some 16 years old or something like that, and the Supernovas (Novation) were rather new. Today, the Supernovas are roughly as old as the DX7 was in 2000. Bottom line: it's not easy, nor practical, to draw the line between vintage and non-vintage. After x years, anything that used to be new is vintage. Or should the line be between hardware and software? How about the PPG Realizer messing up that option then? Why would VSE be split in the first place? One theory I can come up with is one that matches my hypothesis; hw owners would hate to see sw alternatives being mentioned, and as such see the eBay value of their hw drop a few floors. Considering the birth date of VSE I can imagine that the admin would've chosen 'vintage' because there was no software back then like there is today. Personally, these days, I think VSE could do without the V and simply have hw and sw in one database.

The next one is the cherry on the cake, really. Some daniel (TX802) wrote: "FM7?!? Save yourself the trouble and buy dedicated digital gear or even better start collecting modular synths, and really educate yourself on sound engineering and what it takes to get quality! If you don't care buy an iPad and sample your sounds into it's Garageband. LOL. Where is the industry headed?!" If I read this generalisation correctly, it takes hardware to become a sound engineering maestro while the rest of the world should stick to their software toys. Statler and Waldorf would laugh their old asses off! -- myth busted

The most recent one in that same list o' comments (17 jan) states that there're so many parameters that sw couldn't provide all that. This is simply not true. Do I really need to explain why? -- myth busted

Elsewhere there're people with a TX816 who are even worse, comparing a fully loaded TX816 (same sound on each module, slightly detuned) with one (1) instance of fm7 or fm8. Again, like I mentioned above, not seeming to realize that multiple instances do just that, all for the price of one, instead of eight! It's what I did with these strings..


Ok. So was all this the essay of a hw hater? Nope. As I've mentioned, I don't hate hw - I wouldn't ever sell my hw even though I never use it anymore - this text isn't about hw vs sw in any way. If you own/use any of those old synths, good for you, have fun with it. This text is about the questionable arguments hw people appear to be using against sw. Some arguments are so silly and easy to bust. It got me thinking.. why? That's where my hypothesises come in..

To recap:

• Is it all nothing more than desperately trying to protect the eBay value of said hardware? After all, potential buyers may visit this place to check reviews, and if they see there's a software alternative they may choose the software option instead.
• Is it simply a matter of DX/TX/SY/FS1r models being physical, things with fancy lights, displays and such? If so, attacking assumed worse sound quality, assumed crashes and assumed latency is utterly pointless. Let's then be frank about it, say you want something physical, fine! But use that argument then.
• Or is it the hw users merely being preset users (with minor tweaks), who don't know how to get great quality from sw? Naturally, assuming that the sw version of old sysex dumps actually sounds less, which I can't check, and which I couldn't care less about because I don't need another 43 EPianos, 13 Marimbas, 18 Bells and a whole lot o' cheap brass, strings and flutes. Such sounds were were probably revolutionary in the 80's though...

Or is it something else, and did I completely miss something obvious?

With that, I've listened to Debussy's La Mer enough by now (some five complete reruns), time for a [Submit].

I dunno. I just like pushing buttons that make things go boop boop beep boop.

[silikon]

Here's a hypothesis I'll put on the table: sw-haters/hw-protectors are merely protecting the eBay value of their synths. A secondary hypothesis is that their hw features some kinda emotional connection (looks cool, has twinkly lights 'n displays, has buttons/knobs/sliders, smells good, has a positive reputation because artist x used it, etc.) that software may lack, as such it's not related to sound.

I don't think alot of folks consider their actions far enough out that said actions could be construed as protecting value (but I do see your argument well). I do also take a bit of exception to the second hypothesis that all software haters just want the blinkenlights and whatnot. I would ask the second hypothesis be reworded to sound more like:

...features some kind of emotional response because of the tactile immediacy and physical stature of having living, breathing hardware, coupled with the inherent imperfections in analog gear, as some find those imperfections pleasing to the ear...

I think there are a large amount of folks in the "software haters" camp that simply can't be bothered to learn how to use a computer, and perhaps think of them as less than musical instruments because they are simply, a computer.
(not a defense, an explanation)

Alot of the myths you busted are really truly that; myths. People can't be bothered to (or don't have the capacity to) learn a new interface and a different way of doing things, so they poo-poo things that are either too complex for them, or somehow inferior because of reasons I can't seem to come up with right how.

VSE acquired by NI??

That would be a new one to me. Every time I've had to speak to NI's support staff in the recent past, I have had less than stellar support. All the mods and admin here are outstanding. As you say, myth busted.

The next one is the cherry on the cake, really. Some daniel (TX802) wrote: "FM7?!? Save yourself the trouble and buy dedicated digital gear or even better start collecting modular synths, and really educate yourself on sound engineering and what it takes to get quality! If you don't care buy an iPad and sample your sounds into it's Garageband. LOL. Where is the industry headed?!" If I read this generalisation correctly, it takes hardware to become a sound engineering maestro while the rest of the world should stick to their software toys. Statler and Waldorf would laugh their old asses off! -- myth busted

This is simple ignorance and should be ignored.

The most recent one in that same list o' comments (17 jan) states that there're so many parameters that sw couldn't provide all that. This is simply not true. Do I really need to explain why? -- myth busted

The same reason you don't see additive synths all over the place with "one knob per parameter". Additive (and FM) lends rather well to a computer screen because of the sheer amount of parameters at your disposal.

[silikon]

Digital is digital. People can argue all they want but them's the brakes. I love my old FM synths, partly due to nostalgia. But my favorite digital synth these days is Alchemy.

Sorry for the second post, but I just read this, and felt it necessary to reflect upon.

Allow me to introduce myself as Advocate for Satan, Inc., A wholly owned subsidiary of h**l Heavy Industries.

Digital has varying degrees of "digital-ness" -- 4 bit, 8 bit, 12 bit, 16 bit, 24 bit, 32 bit... and more. An unnnamed drum machine that samples at 12bit/27.5khz AD/DA's, and yet another drum machine (whether software or hardware) that can sample into 24bit/96k.

There's a bit of a difference.

[Stab Frenzy]

VSE acquired by NI?? You silly you! Although I agree that the star system and the tone of voice in some of the reviews at VSE is quite arbitrary. Some FM synths get all the stars and a review as if it's some kinda celebrity, while an almost identical FM synth gets half the stars and gets a slap in the back for being 'thin'. Anyway, it's not really part of my hypothesis, but if VSE mods are reading this: perhaps soup-up all these old reviews in a consistent way, some day?

Mods have nothing to do with the reviews on the main site. Most of the reviews were either taken straight from press releases (for newer stuff) or written in the late 90s (older stuff). You may have noticed I pointed out in a thread recently that the Roland EG-101 gets four stars while the Juno 6 only gets three.

There are a huge amount of omissions and it's all subjective anyway so I say let it be what it is, it's helpful for people who know nothing and people who know better than it don't need to use it. Updating everything would be a huge amount of work and would end up going out of date just as quickly.

[b3groover]

Digital has varying degrees of "digital-ness" -- 4 bit, 8 bit, 12 bit, 16 bit, 24 bit, 32 bit... and more. An unnnamed drum machine that samples at 12bit/27.5khz AD/DA's, and yet another drum machine (whether software or hardware) that can sample into 24bit/96k.

There's a bit of a difference.

Yes, but the difference is on the analog side, as you said, the AD and DA. 4bit/8bit/16bit... that's all just a matter of digital algorithms which can be transferred / replicated ad nauseum. It's just code. If Yamaha pulled a Korg and ported the SY77/99 synthesis engine to the plug-in format, complete with the original ROM samples and effects code, it would sound 99% the same as a real hardware SY77, the difference being the output stage, aka the digital to analog conversion. Much like the Wavestation Legacy, which sounds cleaner and more focused due to modern conversion. And I would buy it in a heartbeat and probably never turn on my SY77 again assuming it was as easy to edit and create sounds as most synth plug-ins are when compared to their digital hardware counterparts (especially FM). I would never sell my SY77 however just because it has a lot of nostalgia and sentimental value to me. But if something came along that was backwards compatible, sounded the same and/or better, and was easier to program and more flexable, and ran in multiple instances via VST right in my computer? f**k yes, sign me up.

Data is data. It isn't like two Minimoogs sounding different because the discrete, imperfect analog components age differently due to use, weather, manufacturing tolerances, etc. Data is data. Digital is digital.

Likewise, it's silly to ask if FM8 can sound like an SY77. I'm sure there are similarities, but FM8 is not presented as a DX/SY clone. It is it's own synth. Each synth has it's own plusses and minuses that must be weighed when determining which to use.