then perhaps you should be a professional master audio engineer!
according to tests with people such as audio engineers, classical musicians, conductors, producers- there is a 70% failure above 164kb mp3!!!
you guys have wonderful analog equipment and at the end of the day you upload it to youtube or soundcloud 
!!! haha
audiophiles are funny!
After years of software-only music making I now have an MS20 mini, Nord lead 2x, Volcas, pedals, Ableton/Push. Have a Vermona DRM1 MKIII on the way. I also bought an A4 a while back. Love the sound, although I canāt say it sounds vastly ābetterā than my copies of Diva, TAL Noisemaker, OBXD, etc. Love the crazy options for sound design. Love being able to play with it on the couch away from the computer. I thought it would be a great way to do songs away from the computer.
However, I do not get along very well with the step-sequencer for melodic synth material. I have a very hard time coming up with anything other than neat patterns here and there but canāt seem to make them all gel into anything resembling part of a song. I think itās brilliant that they can squeeze so much functionality into one little box. Blows my mind actually. But in the end, Ableton/Push/keyboard is just so much easier and faster for me.
In my opinion, I think the Elektron step sequencer probably works best and most naturally with drum machines. When I do all drum sound kits on my A4 I find it fast and intuitive to sequence material. I think I would do very well with a MachineDrum or Analog Rytm. But sequencing melodies and chords on the A4 is just not my cup of tea.
Maybe I am getting Sequencing vs. Arranging overlapped. I think if I had to I could stay in the A4 for sequencing melodies and making interesting patterns, sure. Arranging them into complete songs I think is where I would totally fail. That is 1000x easier for me in Live. I can see all the names of the clips, colors, timeline, and instantly know which part is which and what I want to do with it. Contrast that with trying to remember what was on A1, B3, D12, D10, etc. and trying to arrange those into a song. Yikes. Not fun for me.
Iām currently trying to decide if itās worth keeping, because after you take away the sequencer youāre left with a tiny screen, menu diving, and encoders - kind of like Push. Youāve got to love the whole package (sound, sequencer, etc.) to justify the cost of the Analog Four I believe, or play live a lot with the machines, or travel, or whatever.
But speaking as a studio-only musician, I have found integrating the A4 into my workflow very difficult. I will keep trying. Butā¦ I guess my personal preference for workflow is using knob-per-function machines and sequencing them in software. Whatever works.
My 2 cents.
I donāt know, my friendās Massive synth sounds better than my old Electribeā¦
And where do you expect people to upload it to? Overload our Dropbox accounts with Flac files? How will people find them? There is a distribution vs quality issue here.
I personally find that when I sit down at a computer I spend much more time doing sound design then I do making music. With hardware, I find that I make music and then focus on further sound design. I think having a rigidly enforced workflow and the inherent limitations of working with a piece of hardware can be very beneficial creatively.
Much of it is personal preference. You can achieve very good sound in many plug-ins nowadays but if you are using super high quality ones then you will likely find that you run into CPU limits and have to do some bouncing, etc. Plenty of software sounds like crap but so does alot of hardware.
I am really looking forward to Overbridge as the idea of running multichannel audio from a4 and ak into a custom Max patch for effect routing will be a pretty killer combo.
I love my OT but really havenāt got into the a4 as much as I thought either. Iām seriously thinking of swapping it for a rytm as I love the sound and the bass I could get out of it.
The only reason Iām keeping it is because Iām going modular so I want to keep it to sequence that and that overbridge is coming and I think at that point the things that annoy me about it will be moot.
Hw vs sw - Iām still finding a happy ground but what Iāll say about hw is this - I find that I have a āsoundā when I use hw - when I use sw itās sounds homogenous, thereās a lack of something. Other things like sw os updates and stuff that you donāt have to bother with for the most part (except elektron boxesā¦)
well yes its harder to distinguish the modern day SMT hardware sound from software synthsā¦ its all about the interface. if you want to hear the difference, buy an old discrete circuit synth or drum machine.
as for low rate 192 mp3s, and 320kbps that may be because they both sound shiite and is heavily dependant on the reproduction system you listen to. it may be easier to distinguish between an uncompressed audio and compressed. if you canāt hear the differences between them then its better to assume others can and go for the best resolution available, do those who can hear it a favour 
Track to track my ears canāt tell much of a difference. But switching to hardware has improved my effectiveness greatly. With vst I would twiddle with sounds all day and still scrap them cause I wasnāt too satisfied before even making music. With my a4 etc I get something good write music then Tweak to satisfaction which never took too long. ITB I always found myself adding more and more plugins and not achieving much. I feel like the hardware voices find their home in the mix pretty well right out of the machine wherase I was eqing and compressing my vstās often too much just trying to get a fresh sound.
But for me (and I also accepted Iām not gonna āmake itā) it boils down to not wanting to dj my finished tracks. I like the tweak ability of live synthes much more and analog perimeter changes sound better to me than some digital effects over a bounced beat. Iāve also lost my interest in most djs in general- allowing that I do dig really good ones but most even some big guys, armt to my taste anymoreā¦ I just enjoy seeing hearing music that is from the machine making it not from a hard drive/media playing it. But Iām also a minority which is why people play cdās for tens of thousands while another guy plays with his thousands of dollars worth of equipment for 50 peopleā¦ Really it depends what you like and what you do and as Iāve seen - computer based productions has appeared to become industry standard with much of todayās (noise)
Iām with the majority on here. Hardware is simply more fun. I canāt really say if it is more productive for me since I havenāt really committed to much in the past in a DAW and VSTās, but I have tried them out on both my computer and tablet and just really donāt like the lack of tactile feedback. I also love the fact that each hardware synth has its own personality (people would say due to limitations) but really each one encourages you to attack sound generation in a different way.
There is something to be said for live performance if that is something you do or are reaching to do. I just saw VNV Nation with Whiteqube opening for them. Both groups use laptops. However Whiteqube although entertaining with his glowing LED shirt and projected graphics, still wasnāt much to watch from a performance aspect. He pretty much looked like he was DJāing with a mixer on one side, laptop in middle, and APC like MIDI controller on the other side. Then on the other hand there was VNV nation. On the left and right there were MIDI keyboards with Power books next to each of them and a drummer with what looked like some sort of V drums in the middle and of course the lead man doing vocals bouncing around. So needless to say the main show was fantastic. You could actually see the keyboardists playing, the drummer pounding away, and the vocalist jumping around and really trying to pull the audience in and be part of the show.
For me I would find it easier to be more of a performer and give people something to watch with hardware. Clearly with my above example this is not required and you can pull it off just fine using VSTās. But at the end of the dayā¦ donāt be a Whiteqube lol, sorry I just couldnāt get into him, props for the light show however 
and he did get the dance floor moving.
I spend almost 8 hours a day in my day-job staring at a computer screen.
Almost the last thing I want to do in my music-making time (limited as it is) is to spend more time working with a computer screen.
Thatās one of the main reasons Iām now almost entirely hardware based for sound sources.
Iāve gone through an all-hardware live setup in the 1990s, to almost entirely DAW and VST based, back to a studio full of real synths (plus guitars & drums).
I mainly use Cubase (or Ableton) as a multi-track recorder with digital effects and editing facilities. Another advantage is that Iām getting away with a relatively old PC since itās not generating the source sound.
I donāt do much recording though since Iām only really interested in playing live at the minute. Live gigs involve as much hardware as my musical partner and I feel comfortable taking to the gig (we improvise a lot over the top).
Just about the only VST sound source I use these days is Battery 4.
IMHO Hardware is for a performance oriented set up, itās where it shines, for jamming.
For production is good but obviously software is more convenient.
If you are just looking for good sound, fast production workflow and quick results software is better.
But if you intend to have a jam with some pices of gear hardware canāt be beaten.
Same for me ! I spend the whole day on computer screen.
Moreover, I play music as an hobby, a pleasure, so it means I donāt have deadline to push me in productivity aspect of the music. So I donāt need the power of DAWās (full recalling, fast editing, lot of VST, unlimited tracks ā¦ and so on).
To finish, when I composed on computer, I was lost on all differents aspect of music production : compose/sound desing, record, arrange, mixing, mastering ā¦ But I realised I donāt have the time to master all theses aspects. So I decided to dedicate my (short) free time to play music only ! That why I am in hardware today.
to me this is simple:
when i am working on tracks, i use hardware/software equally
i use ableton as a mulitrack recorder and for scultping the sound of my hardware
but for playing live, i canāt use a computer no more.
it doesnāt really make sense to me, cause hardware on stage looks better, feels better and sounds better
and to me it feels like i am really working on stage and not looking into a computer screen all night
me myself hear a big difference between vsts and analog, the sound seems more alive almost like you can touch it , ive never experienced this with software over the many years but i do say i still have achieved some good results, one of my main reasons over the 2 is not having to turn on a pc to be musical, thatās the biggie here
I discover Amiga Computer and their ability to produce music during the early 90ās. Then i came to Cubase and Ableton. My challengers during the same time have hardware. I try to convince them that computer were better. Most of them went to DAW.
Now, since 2005, i play with hardware only, and them with DAW.
I do not have a computer, thatās a problem to finalise and produce my sounds, but i have much more pleasure with hardware, even if itās less powerfull.
But i know that my hability to produce music is better than never, cause hardware is well adapted to my person.
In general, i think that today the discussion mustnāt be relative to witch of DAW or Hard is better sounding, or more creative or else things.
You have to do what you like and do it with what you want, the aim is have fun and reach the objective wanted.
I have been using a lot of different software trying to create interesting instrument sounds, and from time to time, I am able to surprise myself with a sound that actually seems to be alive. However, when sitting down with my analogFOUR, this happens every time. It must be the analogue oscillators, the manual step sequencer and the variations that each step can store. I find the user interface difficult to learn, but as i discover the philosophy behind it, I am falling in love with this machine!
just need to train your ears .
i been recording music since 20 years
im a keyboarder/ synth / piano guy as my profession
i can tell you first hand that a real analogue synth, or a real fender rhodes, or a real piano, sounds, and plays, very different from a plugin
and YES the real thing sounds as much better, as the real BJ you get from a REAL girl, feels from wanking off over cheap american porn.
there is simply no comparison
if you canāt hear it, it says more about you as a musician and your level of listening, than anything else.
you canāt compare real things to fake things point.
Yeah, i have a real rhodes, Yeah , i also bought all Kontant rhodes instruments, like Gospel Musicisians Rhodes, yeah, it comes a little bit close, NO, it doesn come close at all compared to the real thing.
Moog Prodigy sounds so much better than ANY plugin.
no comparision,. you cant fake a real RE201 space echo - i got the real thin with all the hickups and i got the plugin, the plugin sounds digitalm flat an dcheap, the real thing sounds warm , surprising and amazing.
Analog four Elektron: its not the best sounding OSC of all synths, its not a beginners synth, but its an amazing modulation engine -the talent of the A4 is in the LFOs and P-locks, and the FX. Its about changing the sound a lot over time, its about chaning patterns. The A4, as a Synth, is no good. Its the whole sequencing drama that makes it happen. Dont get an A4 for it sounds, even a Juno 1 sounds better. Its the variation and sonical evolve thats nice about it. the sounds needs to change to sound good.
work-flowā¦ that is the deciding factor, especially at the pointy end of the process - later you will probably be mixing on a computer using plug-ins and the like and it is at this point that most often the acoustic differences dissipate or become negligible.
Thanks for all your replies guys. My main issue is that I find the hardware more fun for creating 4 bar loops, but (as someone else mentioned above) I find trying to build a track so difficult, mainly because there is no āsave asā function, as far as I am aware. So if I have pattern A1 and I want the main components of it in the next set of bars, but I want to add an effect or make a small change, I have to go through the whole copy pattern hassle. It would be so much easier to be able to hit SAVE AS A1a A1b etc while you were playing the different variations of the loop you have in front of you, wouldnāt it? So I am finding the whole build a chain/song from the first pattern to be very tedious and much harder than using Ableton, where you can copy and paste a clip, then just change it slightly. How do you guys get around this problem??
my 2 ct - havent read the entire thread
be sexy by turning knobs (and sound cool at the same time)
imho