Cherry Audio Debuts ’80s-Inspired Dreamsynth

Cherry Audio has introduced Dreamsynth, an original software synth design that they describe as “a tribute to the celebrated hybrid analog/digital synthesizers of the mid-to-late 1980s.”

The Dreamsynth design blends flexible dual-wave morphing oscillators, stereo filters, fully polyphonic analog strings, extensive and easy-to-use modulation, studio-quality effects, and MPE support, with a retro-style synth interface.

Here’s what they have to say about Dreamsynth:

“Dreamsynth draws its inspiration from renowned synths including the Ensoniq ESQ-1, the Kawai “K” series, and the Sequential Prophet VS. In the second half of the ’80s, music production was rapidly transitioning from analog to digital. These “hybrid” synthesizers bridged the gap, combining the precision and flexibility of sampled digital oscillators with the warmth of analog filters. The combination of digital and analog sound produced instruments with character and a unique sonic fingerprint that still resonates today.

A Dream Come True

With the magic of these vintage classics in mind, we set out to design Dreamsynth. Dreamsynth is a “What if…?” synthesizer incorporating the distinctive qualities of this remarkable era with the best features of modern software instruments to create a uniquely 21st-century hybrid.”


  • Three dual-waveform oscillators amount to six simultaneous virtual analog or PCM sample-based oscillators with up to 16 voices of polyphony. When modulation is applied, the unique A/B wave mix controls can create a myriad of evolving or rhythmic vector tones.
  • Combines authentic analog waveforms with sampled PCM waveforms. Includes a library of 430 looping, one-shot, and single-cycle PCM waveforms.
  • Dreamsynth also includes a string synthesizer that, unlike traditional paraphonic string synths, is fully polyphonic. It operates independently of the oscillator-based synthesizer, and both can be layered and split across the keyboard, with separate assignments for the arpeggiator and effects.
  • OB-style 12 dB/octave multimode stereo filters.
  • Deep modulation capabilities with 20 mod sources and over 40 destinations. Routings are immediately accessible through our innovative interface with individual pop-up menus and invertible knobs.
  • The effects section includes multiple distortion and sample-crushing options, a 12-stage phaser, chorus, flanger, and rotary speaker effects. Also available are numerous delay (including our acclaimed tape delay) and reverb effects, including our fabulous new “Galactic” algorithm.
  • Supports MIDI Polyphonic Expression (MPE), making Dreamsynth capable of more organic and expressive performances.

Pricing and Availability

Dreamsynth is available now, with an intro price of $39 (normally $59).

21 thoughts on “Cherry Audio Debuts ’80s-Inspired Dreamsynth

  1. More sonic fun from Cherry Audio.
    Been Also layering it with some of my more digital/brighter sounding plug-ins for even more fun.
    Good stuff for $39.

  2. This looks like a lovely synth. I sounds beautiful too. However, I don’t quite get the string synth module, it just seems completely out of place with the rest of the instrument. I would really prefer if they had used that space in the UI to add a second filter, one filter for this powerful a synth just doesn’t seem like enough filters. That aside, I will definitely be picking up a copy soon.

      1. gadi

        We encourage people to share any perspective they have about the gear covered on Synthtopia.

        “Don’t be boring” doesn’t contribute anything meaningful to the discussion on this post and it’s right on the edge of being a personal attack, because you’re not suggesting that a comment is boring, but that a commenter is being boring.

        Contribute constructively and don’t waste the admin’s time.

        1. What about Synthtopia posting gear by companies they know are totally screwing up the market.. what is Synthtopia contributing? Love to hear a constructive reply. (if it doesn’t require too much admin’s time of course).

          1. Champ – Thanks for your comment.

            Synthtopia’s job is not to be a cheerleader for companies that we like or to support the status quo. Our job is to cover news that is of interest and importance to synthesists.

            That includes covering companies that are controversial and disruptive.

            If you look in the right column of every page of this site, you’ll see a section with the heading “What People Are Talking About”. These are the stories from the last 2 weeks that have received the most comments. These stories are often about companies and products that are disruptive and controversial, which is a factor in their newsworthiness.

            If there’s a new piece of gear that you think is newsworthy and we haven’t covered it, we encourage readers to use the ‘Feedback & Site Tips’ link at the top of the site. We review this feedback daily and it’s the source for many stories covered on the site.

            1. I don’t think anyone is saying Synthtopia has to be a cheerleader. Fact does remain Synthtopia is promoting (cheerleading) a shady company and making a profit of that while doing so.

              Of course there’ll be a lot of talk on company B when Synthtopia keeps posting about it. But a very poor excuse to use because of the fact that Synthtopia feeds it.

              Does Synthtopia want others to behave? Why doesn’t Synthtopia hold that mirror for itself? Meaning how can it demand just that when it acts in a way that’s the opposite.

              1. Seems you are new here, familiarize yourself with the community and the opinions of others before you perceive things to be a certain way.

              2. Sorry but your comments make no sense at all.

                It’s not ‘promoting’ or ‘cheerleading’ a company to cover their news. It’s just fucking news.

                Do you think the weatherman is ‘promoting’ rain when he says it’s going to rain?

    1. I think it’s an interesting feature. It’s something you’d expect on a much earlier era polysynth. So combining like the early poly era with the early digital era.. what I like about the first synths in every era is how experimental they are with features. Gives them unique character.

    1. That comment makes no sense because their synths have completely different features and capabilities. Does it make sense to say a modular synth and a polysynth sound the same?

      Do you have no experience with synthesizers or something?

  3. Good sounding stuff for $39. Competitor to Arturia’s Ensoniq replica and Pigments.
    Unable to buy in Moscow, Russia because of MC/Visa locks. Angry of my country government.

    1. I really want to believe that the hate by Russians on Putin is growing by the day, but I feel It’s still too little and too quiet in Russia. All those sanctions will not go away before Putin pays for his war crimes. I know that sucks for Russians but it’s really up to the Russian people to step it up a notch by a lot. Good luck in the meantime and I hope better days will come your way as soon as possible.

  4. Maila Ton Pelaaja said “All cherry audio synths sound the same.”

    I disagree, by virtue of having played most of their source instruments. Their attention to detail is good. Despite some complaints from unhappy posters, I find their effects to be perfectly usable, just like those on synths from other houses. (You can always turn them off and use your uber-verb.)

    I’m not a coder, so I could only guess at it, but everyone puts a certain imprint on their work. Every listener’s ears lean more towards some tonal aspects than others. I find their Jupiter-4 emulation (Mercury-4) to neatly address the lacks of the old hardware I had and I get that round Roland thing I like for just a few bucks.

  5. I’ve played around with most Cherry audio products and ended up buying a couple. I do think they all sound similar, it’s the software equivalent of when hardware synths all use the same chips for DCOs and Filters but with different architecture they have a different feel and flow.

    I suspect the sound generation is almost identical, but having different arquitecture gives each a special something.

    1. “I suspect the sound generation is almost identical, but having different arquitecture gives each a special something.”

      Exactly like vintage gear. Most 80s synths used the same chips but used them differently.

Leave a Reply