why do people say "fuck plugins"?

people always say fuck plugs blah blah blah but i dont understand what they mean. what do they use instead of plugs? do they use the default host instruments/effects 'cause those are pretty much just pre-installed plugs no? maybe they mean only use hardware...i dont know. anyone know why someone would be against plugins? i can see how someone might hate using vsts, as most of them, are shit sounding/looking/intuitively retarded and just feel awkward and broken. but companies sell expensive ones that people buy and so are these anti plugin people against these too or do they just hate free vsts?

:undecided:

I think they mean "fuck soft-synths"

i don't think people do say fuck plugins.....some people prefer hardware synthesizers and drum machines etc to software versions, but that's just a personal preference.

Its how u use the shit u have that matters intit. Anything can make the worlds most amazing tracks it really doesnt matter. Obviously some things work better than others dont they.I mostly use hardware but do use some plugins. But i use hardware because i find it easier 2 record stuff that way and automate live where possible, than to make something with software,automate, bounce bring it back in etc. But also its what ur used to, i use a certain sequencer, but i hate the others because i dont know them or are used to them.

I quess people dont like free vst cos there are alot of bugs in them. But there are some wicked free ones, the ones i swear by were free. Maybe its a brand thing. People dont like certain brands of hardware maybe its the same with plugins.

I find most of the people who say fuck soft synths simply like to have something physical to manipulate, and don't feel as comfortable transferring over their emotions and thoughts through a screen instead of with a dial of knobs.

It's similiar to how some writers will only write with a pen and paper, whereas some like to write on their laptop.

i just hate those plugins that "emulate" vintage synths (arturia, gmedia, etc..)

  mrx said:

i just hate those plugins that "emulate" vintage synths (arturia, gmedia, etc..)

It is annoying that they use terms like that, but the architecture of some of those synths is nice.

Actually, the one thing that is bothersome with most soft synths is that they have little to no documentation of the actual architecture, so it's not as easy to make a patch as with a Korg MS2000B, or something where you can see where the audio is routed.

yeah i think most in the "fuck plug ins" camp are basically against virtual "Analogue" VSTs. and i totally agree, except that i do use them .

i have some real analogue synthesisers, FUCKING CLASSIC ONES too, but i cant sequence them with my computer, so unfortunately if i want them to do things that i cant physically play, then i have to resort to vsts. and i do fart out a lot of little sketches where writing some virtual parts is a lot less hassle than firing up the beasts

also, i do like the Arturia Moog Modular and ABL pro

also, lots of people can't tell the difference anyway so i dont give too much of a fuck

in conclusion Analogue Hardware is much much better than Virtual Analogue plug-ins & Virtual Analogue plug ins are much more convenient than unsequencable Hardware Analogue synths

i need to sort out connecting the mono/poly to the pc via the bass synth CV in/out etc.

and i keep meaning to hook up the juno arpegiator to the rimshot output from the 626

and i read somewhere that korg and roland gear has some kind of opposite incompatible polarity or something (but i dont even know what that means)

and i seem to remember hearing that i can get around that with the novation bass station

i need to buy some more cables

/ramble

in summary: see first sentence

also: i rate the free synth1.vst which i used on "wasp tinkle" by the tuss. you would (not) be surprised at the amount of gushing twatmail i have received from idiots telling me how WARM and LUSH my ANALOGUE synths are

lol idiots

lol yeah that's what I love about the fake tuss tracks, all of them make fun of those analog purists. =D

If it's a good sound you're going after, it'd probably be more worth it to take a $1000 audio engineering course over buying a $1000 analog synth.

it's an old habit from years ago, 2001

the sheep fashion was to sell your synths and buy softsynths 'cos they are the same. bullshit they are. you have this nice synth and it is worth a stack of money, and some clever marketing gets you to sell that valuable real life piece of studio machine and buy some pretty much imaginary software that is worthless after a year or two. a lot of those softsynth cost hundreds of pounds back then too.

edit: you mean you'd sell a real piece of machine that sounds lovely to buy a bunch of numbers stored on a computer? totally beyond common sense i reckon.

i got into computer music cos aphex twin's stuff like windowlicker and come to daddy sounded completely out of this world. i didn't get into computers to make glitchy clicky crap that was coming onto mp3.com from joyrex.com's ancient version of EKT. basically all the stuff labelled "I.DM" was glitchy clicky software crap years ago. im stuck in the past. i hate I.D.M because i saw what happened for myself and i hate softsynths for various reasons that come from the past.

things have changed quite a lot since then.

if you're making your own music it's your own music and nobody has a right to make you do anything you don't want to do. you do whatever you feel is right, and forget about pleasing others so much. if you want to use softsynths it's just up to you.

personally for me? i've used softsynths over the years and never really liked them much. pc's are better these days though. amen warrior uses softsynths i think, but he really changed my mind on what can be done on them. i like ludd's stuff too. there's a bunch of other guys doing top stuff as well like softcell and a thousand other names

id say a softsynth, along with digital effects except delay are probably some of the worst things you can do with a computer music in my opinion. i dont really like the sound that much usually. digital is good though. i like digital AND analogue, because they're both a part of ELECTRONIC music. none of that online geek i.d.m. bullshit thinking.

i dont like softsynths, but theres music made using softsynths that i like

i dont see it as either real synths or softsynths, i just see real synths and that's it.

i was big on midi before and this year ive started to get into voltage control and voltage/hz and sequencing on board real gear instead of from an atari st. it's a lot harder and you have to think a lot more musically but it's taken a year but i'm really getting into it now, it's loads of fun. there's a lot of stock criticisms of doing hardware synth kind of stuff, but for me that's the only way forward and i dont care what anyone says. follow your own path and see what happens.

the most important thing is do what's right for you, following what somebody else says would be a total disaster

endrant. safe.

safebra

I find complex digital synths that would normally require a software editor anyway are best in the VST realm.

Although you can get away with some sounds using analogue VST's it's the natural harmonic richnes enduced by unstable organic cuircuits that is missing from the sound and as a result all analogue VST's (or VA's synths) start to sound a little cartoon or artificial in the higher fequencies and reveal that they are at the end of the day a convinient comprimse to the real thing.

Hi frequency filter modulation, filter self oscillation, VCO drift and filter saturation still don't sound right digitally.

On the other hand ther's the user interface debate which is why I'm sticking with hardware from now on.

Interface has an influence, but more so the range of parameters available. Whatever machine or software we use provides a space to work in; it has a feel that's its own, more so with hardware. Different kinds of instruments and sequencers will encourage you to work in a different way. If you for example use a tracker as a sequencer your tracks might reflect that in un-obvious ways. A Roland MC202 is mental really, that sequencer still spins me out. Same with the Roland R8, doing melodies with an R8 is ace. I like the way different people respond to machines, I like witnessing that dialogue between a person and a machine or a range of possibilities. There's something naturally interesting about it.

Sean Booth interview for Elektron

i started writing music on the computer because i couldn't even fucking bang a tambourine on time.

as i got over issues like that, physical instruments got more interesting.

Plugins are like those "how to draw anime" books and shit. You can use them as a base and do interesting stuff with them, but unless you invest some serious time and talent you end up with a Deviant Art/Myspace page filled with generic shit.

That being said, I use WASP all the time because it fucking rocks.

You can do about the same with software as with hardware, the most important thing is how you treat the sound.

why do people say 'fuck plugins'?

because they are fucking idiots.

use all the tools available to you to make your musik.

from minimoog emus to pots and pans - whatever gets the job done that you are happy with.

  mosca said:

from minimoog emus to pots and pans - whatever gets the job done that you are happy with.

correct.

I think when people say that they are mostly refering to those vst-clones of vintage analog synths.

you just have to listen to what you're doing, and if it sounds good, then it doesn't matter how you made it.

  mrx said:

i just hate those plugins that "emulate" vintage synths (arturia, gmedia, etc..)

  vasio said:

I think when people say that they are mostly refering to those vst-clones of vintage analog synths.

they do? these are some of the best sounding synth plugins out there, still not great compared to the real gear but you can get some damned good sounds out of the better arturia/NI/etc. plugins - the jupiter 8, cs80, minimoog, arp2600, prophet 5 & imposcar plugins are all excellent compared to the rest of the field.

yeah, the vst analogue synth clones are usually really good! arturia mini moog is especially good.

Here a good read http://www.gearslutz.com/board/electronic-...i-over-kvr.html

It's the joy factor for me. VST plugins = no joy, messing about on synths = lots of joy. Joy is the right word. Or glee. Or fun.

It's just way more fun. It's no fun making music on a machine that you can also use to organise your accounts in spreadsheet, or write an essay about gender and sexuality in chinese cinema.

That said, i do fucking love ableton live, and i fucking love Operator. I'm going to get an FM synth, but i bet it won't be as easy to use as Operator...i'll probably get more joy out of it though...what am i talking about.. :sick:

I get lots of joy from reading chunky's posts

im in the, if the end result is good, the methods are meaningless cru.

I'm in the "the more fun you have making music, the more joy it will give you and other listeners" massif.