MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

softtube modular vs vcv rack
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Author softtube modular vs vcv rack
mateo
I've been eyeing Softtube modular for a while now, and it's currently on sale, but I'm wondering if it's really worth it given that vcv rack is free... any thoughts?
The Space Disco
Since softtube uses iLok I think I would pass. Such a crap can slow your system down, right?

VCV is just beautiful. And nerdy. And FREE!!!! !!!!

Save your cash... if you gonna buy vst screw the sales and save up for U HE junk like Diva and such. Arturia and Korg stuff you can learn to patch in any DAW using built in synth and effects. Sorry I’m going off topic...

VCV it is.
deb76
I have both and VCV is a great product but I prefer Softube (the module of Buchla 259e is a real plus) is it is VST (i) and I can work with my other synths, hardware or virtual, create sound alloys. I do not regret this purchase at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME1dMArVoXk&t=53s
Nelson Baboon
i haven't used the vcv, but the logic here seems pretty simple.

there is a pretty good demo of the softube stuff - something like 3 weeks with no restrictions on use, as I recall. And the vcv stuff is free.

I mean, why don't you just try them out for free and form your own opinion, rather than ask others?
deb76
The Space Disco wrote:
Since softtube uses iLok I think I would pass. Such a crap can slow your system down, right?

Sorry, no, it does not slow down my system.
Quote:

VCV is just beautiful. And nerdy. And FREE!!!! !!!!
Save your cash... if you gonna buy vst screw the sales and save up for U HE junk like Diva and such. Arturia and Korg stuff you can learn to patch in any DAW using built in synth and effects. Sorry I’m going off topic...
VCV it is.

Modular Softube is also an excellent product. And personally I prefer it to VCV rack especially because I can use it as a VST in my Daw.
You are contradictory, you boast the fact that VCV is free - but unusable in a DAW - and you say "take DIVA" or the Korg or Arturia vst to learn how to patch.
Already, apart from the excellent Modular of Arturia, the others that you quote do not allow to learn to patch. And in terms of possibilities, creation of instruments, sounds, with different patches and modules - including the Buchla 259e - we learn with a real modular.
Finally, the Modular Softube is cheaper than a Diva or other Vst (i) of Korg or Arturia. And he has more possibilities in terms of diversity for musical creation.
mateo
Nelson Baboon wrote:
i haven't used the vcv, but the logic here seems pretty simple.

there is a pretty good demo of the softube stuff - something like 3 weeks with no restrictions on use, as I recall. And the vcv stuff is free.

I mean, why don't you just try them out for free and form your own opinion, rather than ask others?


Because it's on sale NOW so I need to decide quickly and not in 3 weeks. I am trying it out but I am just curious about other people's opinions.
Jamnuska
Don't forget about Reaktor6 which is also on sale.
Gribs
ILock/Pace is not noticible in terms of CPU usage. I am glad I took the plunge into allowing it in my music computers. It opened up UVI, Softube, Eventide, and Soundtoys plug-ins. I originally took the plunge for Falcon and am glad I did that.

I am just getting going with Softube Modular so I am not able to comment yet. I have just played with some presets.
x2mirko
I'd say Softube Modular is hardly ever worth the money when compared to VCVRack.

Soundwise, I have not noticed significant differences. It's obviously hard to tell, since there's no direct overlap in "emulated" modules and even two basic oscillators can sound different from one another, but there's at least no immediately apparent quality difference where one just clearly sounds great and the other doesn't.

Looking at functionality, I can't imagine how Softube are going to compete with VCVRack in the long run, as development on their side has been rather slow. The most important utility modules are there, but if you're looking for inspiring modules, look elsewhere. If you take third party plugins into account on VCVRack, you're already getting WAY more functionality than with Softube (and even if you only stick with the "stock" modules, Softube is already a little outmatched, really). Development is rapid and there is a quickly growing scene of module builders (many of which seem to actually know their stuff - there's a lot that sounds really great - for example check out VULT).

Usability: It's not even close in my opinion. The way you interact with VCVRack is just smarter and faster. Adding modules and moving them around makes a lot more sense in VCVRack to me (these Add/Edit-Menus in Softube are a pain in my opinion). You can freely zoom in and out and everything just feels more fine-tuned. It's not that Softube Modular is particularly bad in that regard, but VCVRack crushes it.

The one thing where Softube has a significant advantage is the VST integration. VCVRack are working on a VST bridge, but that isn't done yet and from what I can tell the idea is basically to transmit signals to and from your DAW, not to offer such functions as preset recall with projects etc. So if you need DAW integration, Softube may be better. I don't care much about that, as I work with it as I work with my hardware modular, i.e. I assume that once I turn it off, the patch is gone and record it accordingly.

Another advantage Softube has to some extend are direct licensed ports of modules. You'll probably not see a licensed copy of a buchla module on VCVRack. But then again, VCVRack already does have a lot of module emulations (Mutable, Befaco, etc.) and who knows what's in the future there. If VCVRack takes off as strongly as I think it will, I highly doubt that Softube Modular will be very interesting for manufacturers to partner with in a year or two from now.

Overall, VCVRack is the first software modular that really feels right to me (I own pretty much all that there are I think). It's a joy to work with. The fact that apparently a one person operation can build a more usable product in a shorter timeframe and offer it for free blows my mind a little bit, but there we are. I'd honestly be surprised if the "software modular" userbase wouldn't completely shift to VCVRack in the next two years or so.
deb76
Quote:
x2mirko => I'd say Softube Modular is hardly ever worth the money when compared to VCVRack.

This is your opinion but I do not share it. I have both but I prefer the Softube modular of which I prefer the sounds, the combinations of the modules. And especially I see that it goes very well with my VSTi like the Falcon, the Moog Modular Arturia, banks like IRCAM Solo Instruments, and its management of lunch for programming upstream is excellent, especially for microtonality, which allows the frequency frictions Hz. It is a great tool for contemporary music.
And then and most importantly, as I worked for 7 years with a Buchla 200 e 18 elements, I find with pleasure a modeling module Buchla 259th which was my favorite module. This modeling is really excellent.
Finally, concerning the price, currently, with the additional modules we remain at the level of an investment of the order of Vst d'Arturia or U-he. Compared to the hardware price of modular modules, frankly invest in the Softube is little compared to the purchase of my Buchla 200e.
Finally, besides the fact that it is directly compatible in a DAW as VST3 - I hate to go through the bridge - I note that it is optimized for Ableton Live with which I have no problem CPU. Which is not the case with the VCV rack.
Josef_K
I love Softube Modular and have bought it already. It doesn't quite have "that" sound for certain lead sounds compared to the Arturia Modular but for experimenting it feels better imo, which is why I want modular to begin with. I tried VCV rack today and was surprised there's no multiple, considering it lacks the feature in Softube where you can mult any output directly from the jack. I downloaded the Mutable and Befaco add-ons and used Links, so no harm done, but strange.

Only tried it for a short while but I like the Doepfer VCO:s in Softube more, crosspatching them gave me cool sounds instantly, the VCV ones sounded a bit sterile. Lower CPU usage might open up for some more complex patching though, and I might like the Even VCO more, so I'll keep at it smile
BrokenBo
i somehow doubt that in terms of sound the vcv rack is coming close to softube. softube is very cpu hungy, that is for sure, but the sound is top notch. as i stated in the sotftube modular thread, i tried many options and modular was by far the best sounding.

but it´s nice that it is free and open source. very good future potential. i guess in some time you can also use it as a vst, then i will try it out for sure. fun times ahead.

btw: somehow kind of irritating for me how a software of under 100 $ is called super expensive on a forum where almost all users have modular systems for 5-10k+. software needs developing and work also, but people seem to only want to pay for the hardware manufacturing (paying only what they can touch) i think this is kind of a wrong thinking because it undervalues the work behind software development.

for example. the erbeverb´s greatness lies in the dsp dwork of tom erbe and not only in the manufacturing of the hardware. but i highly doubt people would have paid significant dollars if it was a dsp plugin. the hardware just adds a tactile dimension, but in software you can use unlimited instances of a module, so everything has pros and cons and has their value.

for vcv rack which is a great tool, you should also highly consider donating some money. there is a shitload of work going into such a product and work still has to be paid imo.

sry for little bit of ranting applause
Unifono0815
Josef_K wrote:
I tried VCV rack today and was surprised there's no multiple, considering it lacks the feature in Softube where you can mult any output directly from the jack.


Stackable outputs are available in VCV Rack.

In my opinion VCV Rack has the best workflow of all the software modulars.
Adding modules by right clicking an choosing from a list is much faster than the way it's implemented in softube. Also I'm not a fan of how the cables appear and disappear in softube.
CPU wise my macbook pro has most problems with VCV. Softube and Reaktor Blocks run fine, but my fans start blowing like crazy when running VCV. Hopefully this will be addressed in future, it's annoying.
Soundwise I guess Softube nails the analog emulation the best. But as in real Eurorack many users might prefer digital sounding modules like the mutable stuff, it has a reason why it's so popular. And I guess they sound identical to the hardware versions. I didn't try the Buchla Osc in Softube so far.
VCV is a really impressive project and it's crazy that you get something like this for free. However, my personal favourite until now is still Reaktor Blocks. I get that the behind the panel patching is very different from Eurorack, but it also can help have a clean view when playing with the modules and to prevent a mess. And for me it's the most complete regarding the modules available (the user library is just awesome). And it sounds amazing, the anaqlog modelling as well.
Josef_K
Unifono0815 wrote:
Josef_K wrote:
I tried VCV rack today and was surprised there's no multiple, considering it lacks the feature in Softube where you can mult any output directly from the jack.


Stackable outputs are available in VCV Rack.

In my opinion VCV Rack has the best workflow of all the software modulars.
Adding modules by right clicking an choosing from a list is much faster than the way it's implemented in softube. Also I'm not a fan of how the cables appear and disappear in softube.
CPU wise my macbook pro has most problems with VCV. Softube and Reaktor Blocks run fine, but my fans start blowing like crazy when running VCV. Hopefully this will be addressed in future, it's annoying.
Soundwise I guess Softube nails the analog emulation the best. But as in real Eurorack many users might prefer digital sounding modules like the mutable stuff, it has a reason why it's so popular. And I guess they sound identical to the hardware versions. I didn't try the Buchla Osc in Softube so far.
VCV is a really impressive project and it's crazy that you get something like this for free. However, my personal favourite until now is still Reaktor Blocks. I get that the behind the panel patching is very different from Eurorack, but it also can help have a clean view when playing with the modules and to prevent a mess. And for me it's the most complete regarding the modules available (the user library is just awesome). And it sounds amazing, the anaqlog modelling as well.


Stackable outputs are available? Gotta read up on how to get that working then. Though using actual mults is a good way of keeping track of what I'm doing so it wouldn't be that bad, if only I had an alternative with more mults per slot (Links only has one 1:3 mult).

I tried messing around with two Befaco VCO:s, a rampage and the Befaco reverb and liked that a lot more than the standard VCV modules. Then I went back into Softube Modular and well, I simply like it more. I'll probably still use VCV rack for when I want something different, but Softube will be my main software for sure. I don't have any issues with the workflow stuff you mention, some are even the opposite for me, so that's a factor as well of course.
mateo
BrokenBo wrote:
btw: somehow kind of irritating for me how a software of under 100 $ is called super expensive on a forum where almost all users have modular systems for 5-10k+.


I've never seen anybody complain that $100 is super expensive. What seems to bug people is the cost of the additional modules, one of which is more than the software itself: it starts adding up, and doesn't feel like the greatest value compared to Reaktor, for example. If they had a bundle of everything for, say $300, I wouldn't hesitate. But at the moment, even on sale, I'm not convinced.
deb76
mateo wrote:
BrokenBo wrote:
btw: somehow kind of irritating for me how a software of under 100 $ is called super expensive on a forum where almost all users have modular systems for 5-10k+.

I've never seen anybody complain that $100 is super expensive. What seems to bug people is the cost of the additional modules, one of which is more than the software itself: it starts adding up, and doesn't feel like the greatest value compared to Reaktor, for example. If they had a bundle of everything for, say $300, I wouldn't hesitate. But at the moment, even on sale, I'm not convinced.

I agree with Joseph_k, I tested VCV rack that I like but I prefer the sound and modules of Softube. I started with the purchase of Softube Modular software ($ 69) and the Buchla 259e module ($ 79) : in total $ 148. The Buchla 259e was mandatory for me since I owned a Buchla 200e 18 elements for 7 years. And I do not regret because I find what makes the originality of this module Buchla. But even without the Buchla 259e module you can do a lot of things already.
Then, I have just taken advantage of recent promotions with the 4ms Spectral Multiband Resonator ($ 39), the intellijel uFold II ($ 19), the Intellijel Korgamastron ($ 36) and the Intellijel Rubicon ($ 36) in total $ 130. So for the moment this virtual modular comes back to me at $ 278. I had purchases that cost me much more. And with this configuration I can create music by creating new sound alloys with my Vst (i) of Arturia (Modular, Arp 2600, Synclavier, Mini V, Prophet V, Sem V), the Diva and Zebra2 of U -He, the Xils4, the Tassman 4 not to mention Reakor or my bank IRCAM Solo Instruments because the Softube Modular has the advantage of being a VST3 and is played with others in a DAW. ..
For my part, I do not oppose Softube's Modular to other virtual synthesizers from Arturia, U-He or AAC, nor to Reaktor. All are different and what can be obtained from Modular Softube, I do not get it from Reaktor and vice versa. And so much the better. On the other hand, in a musical creation, it complements very well in sound alloys.

PS : In the Reaktor user library there is a modeling of several modules of the Buchla 200e. The Cloudlab 200t complements very well with the Softube Buchla 259e module. However, I prefer the latter because richer in sound possibilities, from musical to total trash :
https://www.native-instruments.com/en/reaktor-community/reaktor-user-l ibrary/entry/show/11077/
feedbackl00p
Softube is way overpriced for what it is.

You can actually DIY build some of the physical modules for cheaper than the software version in Modular.
BrokenBo
feedbackl00p wrote:
Softube is way overpriced for what it is.

You can actually DIY build some of the physical modules for cheaper than the software version in Modular.


whut? thats a bold statement. what about all the utilty modules. what about the time you have to invest. what about the fact that you can use multiple modules at once in softube.

how do you build the intellijel and 4ms stuff (the buchla osc as well) for under 60 bucks.

it is true though what mateo said. people are most annoyed that they have to pay money for additional modules, which i understand. but i think music software is underpriced in general (no i am not a software developer grin). that is also why some people have tons of plugins on their disk and use like 1% of what they have.
BrokenBo
i think the open source concept of vcv is very nice though. this also worked very well for reaktor blocks, which has a huge user library.
deb76
feedbackl00p wrote:
Softube is way overpriced for what it is.

This statement is ridiculous and totally bad faith. The Modular is worth $ 69 and we can do on this basis music. And its quality in audio output is excellent.
Quote:

You can actually DIY build some of the physical modules for cheaper than the software version in Modular.

Frankly, I have something else to do than build a DY with which I could not make music. And the digital suits me perfectly for its possibilities.
phase ghost
Jamnuska wrote:
Don't forget about Reaktor6 which is also on sale.


Totally this. I've been very impressed with Blocks. There's a large (and growing) selection of user submitted modules too.
tassie tiger
The largely 'free' nature of VCV means that the user base will grow rapidly, and this will encourage rapid development (official and third-party plugins).
The user interface and the range of modules is already pretty good in such a short space of time. Just imagine what can be achieved in, say, another 6 months!
Optimisation of the processing
Something better than VST/AU bridge
etc...

I've never really bothered with software emulations of modular synths, but I think VCV is onto something.
tassie tiger
Unifono0815 wrote:

... my personal favourite until now is still Reaktor Blocks. I get that the behind the panel patching is very different from Eurorack, but it also can help have a clean view when playing with the modules and to prevent a mess ...


You can always set the VCV cable opacity to 0% after you've done your patching!
Unifono0815
tassie tiger wrote:
Unifono0815 wrote:

... my personal favourite until now is still Reaktor Blocks. I get that the behind the panel patching is very different from Eurorack, but it also can help have a clean view when playing with the modules and to prevent a mess ...


You can always set the VCV cable opacity to 0% after you've done your patching!


ah nice, didn't know that.
BlackSheep0507
Surely for a decent Softube modular setup you can get an actual modular synth?

Defo not feeling to pay silly money when Aalto/Kaivo/VCV in the right hands is more than capable of producing quality music.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software Goto page 1, 2  Next [all]
Page 1 of 2
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group