Korg wavestate hardware vs wavestate native vst: sound comparison
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- Korg wavestate hardware vs wavestate native vst: sound comparison
Let's compare the sound of the korg wavestate native VST plugin with the hardware wavestate.
I will play the same factory presets back to back on both instruments. Also i play sounds from my own "Solar Eclipse" sound set back to back on both instruments. You can import the wavestate hardware sound sets in the wavestate native VST, so in this video you can hear if they are sounding different.
If ever there was conclusive evidence that digital hardware synths/romplers/VA's etc (not real analog of course, that's different), are nothing other than software code inside a physical shell, and can be 100% replicated in a plugin in every single way, then this is it. I hope the person that was arguing with me that a Roland integra can beat any plugin watches this and finally understands.
The VST is cool, but the physical knobs and sonic explorations able to be achieved on the hardware synth seem better. Also.. more money!
Dont have the hardware version and tried the vst and i found it not that inspiring. Perhaps good for playing and tweaking presets.
I have a feeling that the software Wavestate sounds somehow better in everything than the Wavestate synthesizer itself. How could this be?
@@AlekseiDroganov I don’t think the VST is better than the hardware, if you use the hardware in conjunction with the editing software. And the sound difference might be because you are listening to digital audio from the software vs. analog audio through an interface from the hardware. It all depends on the signal path then.
@@AlekseiDroganov Тоже так показалось.
@@AlekseiDroganov the beauty of the hardware Wavestate is live performance based using two hands at the same time which is almost impossible on a VST.
HW sounds better, warm and deeply - copared to VST. Lucky to have HW version and honestly, better to support you as preset genius then sending money do Korg for VST I would expect to be free for HW owners.
There isn't that much of a difference at all - "hardware sounds better" has been debunked a handful of times by audio specialists and is just a thing mid-levels musicians say for some reason.
@@MeteoXavierPlease do you have any links? I'd love to see this and use as a response for every Follower of Saint HW.
I’m not too keen on VSTs in general but personally I found the hardware sound more fuller and “3D” in a way.
LOL
Its digital, the soud are the same calitie!
Nerds arguing on how a sample based digital synth sounds better running in a raspberry pi cpu rather than an intel or amd cpu just shows how insane this community has become
People that claim HW sounds “better” have just no idea to R&D…
They’re clearly wrong if they think Korg spend money to recode everything from scratch, instead of just porting the existing code to VST/AU format.
I agree due to the advances in technology. We must be reminded that we are hearing these comparisons on youtube too. My Wavestate sounds much better than what I hear here, for instance.
I was actually thinking the other way around - have Korg shot themselves in the foot by releasing the identical VST software versions of the hardware they spent all the money on (opsix, wavestate and i hope modwave). I am not complaining - the prospect of owning software versions of all three for less than any single hardware is a definitely positive one for me.
@@mack_solo I don't think so. It's easy to say that they're getting less money, because the VST is cheaper than the hardware - but SO MANY of those customers simply wouldn't be buying one if it were hardware-only. Add on to that the fact there's suddenly no per-unit cost, and it becomes clear they'd be self-sabotaging NOT selling the software version - after a strategic delay to get some hardware sales out of the people who can.
Hélo! je n'arrive pas à sélectionné un items dans All Data, Programs, Wave Seqs, WSeq Lanes????. Je peut sélectionné uniquement une Performances, comment cela est ce possible?
A3 is slightly flat on the vst. It's not as warm, and just doesn't have the same richness.
I hear a very clear difference. The hardware seems to have better stereo separation. Sounds much wider imo. Hardware also seems to have more mid. Not saying the plug is bad. But sonically I deo prefer the hardware.
only difference is that the hardware runs on Rpi and vst on windows or osx
No difference at all and it can't be. If you know anything about coding and hardware it is obvious. I'm owner of hardware Wavestation and of course won't sell it, because the beauty of this synth is in real knobs, it's a real adventure and meditation for me.
But couldn't you get a MIDI keyboard and program the knobs?
@@Rightly_Divided every user interface is unique, you cannot easily replicate this experience without dedicated hardware. And Wavestate price is really low for this quality. Plug in and serious midi controller will cost more or about this price.
@@astrarivm Yeah that makes sense. I have the hardware and love it. Being able to set my DAW to send MIDI to play notes while I record in audio as playback is great when you can just focus on knob work. Good point.
How would I obtain those customs sounds QR Angels Choir and QR Emotional Pad - they sound amazing!
if you contact me on facebook, korgforums or gearspace, then I will sent you the details how to get them
Is it me or does the hardware ws sound a bit more clearer? Less muddy than the vst? What for audio interface are you using?
i'm using a motu 828 mk3, but i tried to keep it transparant as possible and spent a lot of time to gain match the two
You are right I have this software and it sounds very flat. I had to add a little bit of effects here and there to bring it up to scratch
Its the same sound.
I'm hearing it thru cheap speakers and and in the first two presets especially, I can hear huge difference in the depth and dimension of the sound. I prefer the hardware on this case
I tried my hardest to tell the difference and even watched the spectrum analyzers. I couldn't really tell but if anything it sounded like a tone knob was turned a little bit to the left on the VST making the hardware version a little more dynamic and bright. So slight though.
Good morning,
Really very interested in purchasing your Solar Eclipse sound bank, but not found online.
It’s a pure marvel, truly magical.
Can you tell me how to buy it?
Can I directly install this sound bank in the native vst without having to buy the hardware?
Thank you in advance for your answer.
sound exactly the same
Of course it is. It doesn't matter if the code is processed on an Intel CPU or a Raspberry Pi (aka Korg hardware)
I found it very difficult to compare because the sounds are always evolving, it's impossible to click on the same sections accurately. I recorded Doodles into audacity and had to raise the VST version by 1dB to match levels. The lower frequencies didn't seem to evolve exactly in the same way. At first listening they do sound exactly the same, but I wonder if the outputs on the hardware are doing some thickening or something.
The hardware definitely sounds better !! Much fuller sounding and the sound of the Wavestate hardware has more detail,depth and also better panning of sounds. All in all the hardware synth has a more emotionally impact sound ! Sometimes the spectrum analyzers on it's own can not "show" the real differences between the hard and software .However it's convenient to have the software version too, for faster working in a daw or to be on the road!
Even when compressed and stored on UA-cam, and then decompressed and played through YOUR hardware and YOUR SPEAKERS?
@@NFawc I listen here on UA-cam το this hardware vs software comparison...BUT once upon a time i had the older Wavestation EX (hardware) AND the software Wavestation and definitively they sound very simalar but not the same!! I made A/B tests with the same sounds, console ,same volume and speakers in the same control room etc. Panning of Hardware were better and wider and the sounded a bit fuller ! Alltough the FX section of the software were clearer (and sounded different in some patches) because of the newer soundcard D/A (WS EX hardware was1990 and D/A converters 20bits (or 19bits i don't remember exactly) , soundcard of 2005 had D/A converters 24 bits etc...
@@emulatorx2 Yeh makes sense the hardware (audio) end of things can easily differ...
lmao you guys are so full of it
If we only could hear the audio and wasn't told which was the hardware v native, I'd put money on the majority of people not having a clue which was being played . I use a set of ROKIT 8's with 10s and trust me , they both sound more or less identical
Excellent comparison, sound almost the same. Question: is it possible to load Ensoniq Wavetables/Transwave to Wavestate? Thank you!
There is almost no difference between the two, layered with any drums or other synths and no one on the planet could tell in a taste test. I think its great that they made it accessible to more people. Prefer the hardware for hands on control obviously and would really prefer the pro keyboard version to come out. Since the hardware is a vst in a box, I think any differences heard are largely imaginary
Yeah I did blind listens and guessed, and half the time I was right and half the time I was wrong. My ears personally don't hear much of a difference at all
There should be zero differences as both are sample based.
The only issue that could arise is if you have a poor DAC which taints your computer's sound to begin with.
Was about to pull the trigger on a Wavestate but now I’m thinking about this option. Thanks a lot! 😂
Bit annoyed that we've bought this in a box and now Korg want us to pay for it again. I much prefer my hardware although of course the sounds are identical.
A proper comparison should also test the filter behavior, that’s where hardware usually beats the software. Basses as well. But I wouldn’t be surprised if this sounds the same as well as Wavestate sounds very VST-ish. I like both versions anyway.
there is a .25 - .75 DB RMS difference between the hardware and software versions mostly in the low-mid range (100 - 350 Hz). hardware has slightly higher RMS amplitude. this can easily be compensated for with proper multiband compression.
I am surprised I find it so audibly obvious, considering the comment feed. I can only imagine most people here are old or tone deaf.
Sound is only one of a few reasons someone buys a synth. In the same ways a engine in a car. Dodge challenger vs dodge charger. They can have the same engine but a different diving experience. Might not be the best Analogy but you get my point. The reason why you buy hardware is far more then sound
I love my wavestate it's an ambient producers dream machine.
Thank you so much for your Wavestate tutorial videos BTW. You've helped me out so much learning this beautiful peice of kit. Will be buying your soundset also, Thank you!
HW is just Raspberry Pi inside case. I laugh at all comments saying how HW is warmer, better, etc. This is not analog where HW circuits can make some difference. It's literally just software one running on RaspPI and the other one on x86 CPU (or Apple Mx, whatever). Seriously, think before you write something. But it's great example of predjudiceses towards VST instruments. It may sound literally the same many will still claim HW is better. It's same with Arturia Vintage Collection.
no, don't think, just listen and i hear differences, you laugh or not don't matter. Maybe it is the preamp used, the dac in th hw etc.. just listen don't judge the others, superman.
Maybe you should test your audition, HW sounds definately warmer.
Thank you for this comparison - well done!
Thank you for such good contributions to the community. A doubt I have. The sound packs that are bought online are used for both the physical and the VST?
yes, the hardware and the vst are using the same sound set, you can load sound sets in the hardware and vst, that makes no difference.
Sounds silly to saw, but hardware has crisper attack, more defined highs. It's just cleaner imho. Maybe, I am hearing things. Lol.
Just an information: Wavestate Native can work as a stand alone software without DAW? As soon as I will get one I want your Solar Eclipse library 😂
very useful. link is not available. I have the two, plug in/ native and hard/editor; after well choosing the cables i made the sounds really identical on my system. I find the ui of editor is more practical and clear than the native.
HW sounds slightly better. It is warmer, and slightly better in respects of detail.
SW version is still good for the money, but colder sounding. Still, in a full mix you won’t really notice.
Same, but hardware plus software is a homerun! V2 hardware and massive discount on vst... easy choice
You don't hear a lot of things on UA-cam.
VST is sometimes interesting, but you always suffer more from noise. In case of bad luck, you have a lot of noise.
Great video. What Analyzer Plugin are you using? Thx
I own a Wavestate and I intend to buy the VST version soon, just for the convenience of having it in my DAW. The price for owners is significantly less for the retail version too.
I've recently made a couple of songs using just the Wavestate on my channel (Psygnus Prime and Proxima Synthauri, if you're interested). No additional editing, added EFX, or other instruments were used.
The vector joystick plays a great part in the songs, so the VST might have a steep learning curve to use the mouse to manipulate it efficiently. For some, $200 is expensive for the software but considering what you're getting and being able to play it on a midi keyboard with more octaves is a huge plus!
Hardware dynamics and high frequencys definitely better.
thanx - finally one with not destroyed ears 🙂
Think my soul left my body 3:20
Your sound library sounds amazing, these pads are so lush!
2:49. 4:47
same sound
Question is... does the VST have all the presets from the hardware version?
absolutely!
clearly more brilliance, clarity, dynamic and punch on the hardware (listened to on Adam A7X). but also the plugin is a little less loud here.
its the same code! Doesn´t matter if the plugin runs on a PC and not on a raspberry like in the physical box. So the difference is just the D/A hardware.
Qui, could you do a tutorial on how to import .wavs into Wavestate Native. (If it's possible!) Sample Builder only seems to let you create multisample which can't be used in the wave sequencer and I can't see how to import them anyway. There's a setting to set the user bank but that doesn't seem to accept banks created in Sample Builder. None of this is covered in the instructions... If it is possible, any advice from you would be appreciated :)
You can't import waves despite the fact the VST is called "Wavestate." Using Sample Builder, you create a wavestate file format with your waves, then you save this to your computer which you can then import into Wavestate in the settings tab. To access your new user file, you have to click a box in the sample lane, scroll down to User, and you'll find your files (which is not accessible from the User tab in Performance or Program area. Your imported file is accessible when you change Mode from Wave Sequence to Single Multisample but you can't manipulate it in the wave sequencer. You could add effects and other things, though.
@@robinicus1133 thank you 🙏
Hi Qui, I purchased sound patches from you a while back. Can they be imported into Wavestate Native rather than just being on the actual wavestate?
Yes, just import the wsbundle in the wavestate native and the set will be added to the wavestate native
@@quirobinez Do you still sell patches if so where?
Hardware sounds slightly better, probably from the analog stage. Barely though, they're almost the same and in a mix it wouldn't matter.
What analog stage? It's a digital synth. They are exactly the same. The one small difference is the hardware runs through converters.
@@WildAnalog The analog stage is the part where it becomes analog, not digital.
There is a difference between them. Even I who dont do anything with music and have cheap Koss Porta Pro headphones can hear a difference and that is also through UA-cam compression. It is not easy to notice in beginning but when you hear it, it is obviously a difference. To put it extreme, it is as comparing mono to stereo. The difference isnt that big but it is in that area. Hardware is more alive and software more flat.
What AD was used for recording hardware wavestate?
Maybe this is the kind of difference it is between old 1970 synth and new production ones? Have heard that new models that says they are identical in sound as the original but there is a difference. A difference that looks that some people here cant hear the difference. If identical then why add vintage knob to make a synthetic version of the old sound on new production? Why not build identical as the old models but expand the features, add MIDI 2.0 because MIDI 1 has limitations that create problems with the sound. Only 127 steps and latency issues and more...
Comedy gold.
Thank you for the comparison. There are obvious differences between both versions. Hardware has a wider stereo field, sounds more crisp and the voices are seperated better. Strongly audible in the low end, hardware has more punch. Software is more one dimensional, depths and definition isn't on par with the hardware.
I didn't expect that as people say this Korg series has crappy converters build in the hardware.
Do you know if this is true for the Modwave hardware vs Native too? I read a few times, VST would sound better. I can't believe that.
I’m gonna need this asap! Please send me a torrent link 👍🏻
Great job, thanks