new philosophy for you, encourage your brother.xh9o wrote:personal rules: if i hate music, i´ll tell you hoping you kick your own ass and develop.
I'm done with you though. goodbye.
I'll check it out tomorrow in the studio. tonight is 'laptop/ableton forum/adult swim' night.
Johnisfaster wrote:xh9o wrote:you´re no musicians, no artists, no producers. you´re just some jealous and annoying internet chatters who play bits around with a well concepted software.
Haven't had a chance to yet, honestly it has a three week demo period, and since it's looking like a souped up version of Symptohm to a degree, I think I'll wait until I know that in those three weeks I can buy it. so Probably later about a month from now.LoopStationZebra wrote:Machinesworking wrote:navitus wrote: me ????
Ok, question : whats the deal with the new Waldorf's ?? Q+ , back in the day the orange one was a huge deal.
Apparently its the same company name but totally different people. True ?
I haven't really gone through this thread, seems there is a DSP war going on....
Same developers / engineers different investors. So essentially the same company. Looking forward to their new soft synth!
Hey MW, did you give the Alchemy demo a go? Just curious as to what you thought. I've been loving it - a lot of possibilities. Haven't been a big fan of soft synths, but Alchemy really fills a lot of niches for me.
Tone Deft wrote:we can be twats just like you, but we're better at it, MUCH better at it, try us.
Chang wrote:nebulae wrote:Totally software, totally in the box. But keep in mind, I send my soft synths out of the box, through an analog tube preamp, and record back in as audio. Then I mix in the box.
Why do that? According to xh9o, its a total waste of time.
Fail!xh9o wrote:absynth sounds great? no. but the rest of your post is agreed, especially about buying virtual analog hardware. thats big waste of money. even those hybrids from the eighties (digital osc with analog filters) sound worse than zebra etc.
Machinesworking wrote: You know that your coveted Matrix 1000 is a digital oscillator synth with analog filters right? DCO's, the D is for digital. It's a "hybrid from the eighties".
I knew I liked youMachinesworking wrote:aisling wrote: being a virgo and my own worst critic, there are days that I feel that way!August 26th. Don't put much stock into it, but I have to admit the over analytical part kinda fits.nebulae wrote:I'm August 31st. I feel your pain.
xh9o wrote:Chang wrote:So if one runs a vsti out into an moog filter then into a good pre and record back into computer your once again saying that it will still sound as cold and digital? That the digital signal will be hiding underneath the analog sound characteristic of the analog outboard? So what? The sound has been changed radically beyond just "gain".
i was talking gain/sound structure. not just gain-amplitude. sure the sound is changed and sometimes even dramatically, but you can´t transform a digitally sources sound into a sound that is sourced analog. you still hear that your source was been digital. very simpel, take analog synth run it through analog filter/preamp and then take digital through the same hardware and what happens? there still is a relative huge different. and tbh if you don´t see that then.... well, i don´t know.
All this analog analog analog you keep talking is crazy anyway as the signal gets recorded to your digital DAW and mastered to a digital CD. So what then? Is the CD going to ruin your sound too?
not nescessarily. but of course there is a difference between recording on tape and pressing on vinyl and convert to a digital master disc and press on vinyl. even with the best converters. but thats not such big deal, important is the sound source and the processing/mixing. if you just convert the mixed result of all these production steps the digital limitations occur the least. but thats very basical knowledge again.
Have you ever even recorded a piece of music?
Do you actually own an analog preamp? I don't think so for some reason. Anyone thats ran a vsti through even a Distressor would not be making the wild unfounded claims you are making.
sure, i had a very nice broadhurst gardens preamp (bult from an classic console decca engineer), a neve eq and a drawmer valve compressor. it all improved the signal, sure, but i accepted that its still different from using analog sources. right now i use low end stuff, cause it feels cooler. a symetrix 528 amp and a soundcraft folio mixer from 1994. that one sounds good if using the line in without the not so good preamps, but the eq is dissapointing. maybe i must buy some old telefunken/neumann broadcast module for that some day.
so... what is your problem with all that? its just simple truth, don´t start to cry all the time. at least not always in my direction.