I know the differences between them, but does using a hardware synth have advantages over a VST? I was just wondering if I should buy a hardware synth or if I should stick with VSTs.
It really depends on what you want to use it for. If you want to be playing live, a hardware synth would be better as they are much more stable - no chance of anything crashing, running out of battery or otherwise loosing the will to live (unless it's analog...) The big disadvantages are space and cost - unless it's a rack unit, it'll probably be fairly hefty. As for synthesizing ability, I can't really say much as I haven't had much opportunity to compare them, but I doubt my laptop could handle a soft equivalent of my XV5080. I personally like having dedicated units for everything and being able to physically move sliders around on the fly easily is a big selling point, particularly when playing live. That being said, I've met a large number of people who absolutely swear by softsynths. It all depends on what you personally want.
As you probably realise, it all depends on what you requirements are. I think it's generally agreed that VSTi's are superior for actual 'sound quality' - but really that's only important if you are interested in doing 'studio-quality' recordings at home, for example. If you are an active musician, going out-&-about to rehearsals/gigs etc, then I would go for the 'hardware' option. The other thing I might add is this... some people seem to think that 'sound quality' is the be-all & end-all for some reason. - but how many great/classic songs do you know that were recorded 20, 30, 40 or more years ago that didn't have the technology available today? Furthermore - how many folks listen to music through top-quality speakers all the time??? For most people, it's iPods, car radios, TV, or a bog-standard home hi-fi.
More money than sense - at that quality it'd probably sound no different to playing it through a car hifi...
