Operator Vs Analog

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
BoddAH
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:13 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by BoddAH » Wed Oct 08, 2014 12:21 pm

Quinnx wrote:
" If I use sampler do i need analog "
If you have a multisample you will get away with sampler/simpler
but if you have only a single sample your limited to how far you can go on the keyboard
before it starts to break down especially at higher pitch.
This is where normal analogue/Fm synthesis excels because your generating the wave across all pitch which means the sound is pure and hi resolution across the entire scale.
That’s another question. How do pretty large and recent sample libraries for Sampler like Retro Synths fare compared to true VA synths like Analog? Which generally sounds better and more like an actual analogue synth?

Stromkraft
Posts: 7033
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by Stromkraft » Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:47 pm

outsidesys wrote:Let's not forget that Operator can be a 4 oscillator subtractive synth.
Exactly.
Make some music!

Quinnx
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:09 am

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by Quinnx » Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:25 am

How do pretty large and recent sample libraries for Sampler like Retro Synths fare
Can not comment since i have not got this however..
my experience with samples has show me that you can reproduce any analogue synth sound
as long as your source sample is pure and it is a multi sample.
after this the rest relies on the sound path and filters etc..
This method does require large amounts of space from both RAM and HDD to function
where as the likes of analogue modeling and FM require only a fraction of this to achieve the same result.

ian_halsall
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 8:52 am
Location: South London
Contact:

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by ian_halsall » Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:30 am

I never use Analog because Operator can do pretty much the same thing as Analog when you switch it into non-fm mode anyway.

You can put all 4 operators or waves in parallel (no fm) and then put the filter on.

I think you can have a separate filter for each oscillator in Analog but I don't need to use that so...

BoddAH
Posts: 638
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 7:13 pm
Location: Brussels, Belgium

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by BoddAH » Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:35 am

Quinnx wrote:
This method does require large amounts of space from both RAM and HDD to function
where as the likes of analogue modeling and FM require only a fraction of this to achieve the same result.
Interesting. But let’s say HDD space and computing power is not an issue. Is the realism and “behavior” really the same? To cite an extreme example. Is it possible to get a large and intricate enough Sampler preset to sound as good as, let’s say, U-He’s Diva?

At what point do sample libraries get diminishing returns compared to their size and, in the same way, at what point do soft synths get the same diminishing returns regarding the computing power required.

More importantly, comparing two state of the art flagship examples (multi-gigabyte sample library VS flagship CPU-intensive soft-synth) which on is better? What are the differences in sound quality and behaviour?

ian_halsall
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 8:52 am
Location: South London
Contact:

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by ian_halsall » Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:09 am

BoddAH wrote:
Quinnx wrote:
This method does require large amounts of space from both RAM and HDD to function
where as the likes of analogue modeling and FM require only a fraction of this to achieve the same result.
Interesting. But let’s say HDD space and computing power is not an issue. Is the realism and “behavior” really the same? To cite an extreme example. Is it possible to get a large and intricate enough Sampler preset to sound as good as, let’s say, U-He’s Diva?

At what point do sample libraries get diminishing returns compared to their size and, in the same way, at what point do soft synths get the same diminishing returns regarding the computing power required.

More importantly, comparing two state of the art flagship examples (multi-gigabyte sample library VS flagship CPU-intensive soft-synth) which on is better? What are the differences in sound quality and behaviour?
The problem with this approach is you need samples to start with.

one of each of the waveforms that goes into Analog or Operator - and they don't sound right across the keyboard when pitched up/down a lot.

So you might need a lot and it's a pain to make multisamples using either of the Ableton samplers (Simpler and Sampler).

Synth sounds are not great from samplers in my experience unless you are using construction kits and just accepting the key, tempo etc. - this approach is generally shunned on this forum though!!!

TomViolenz
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by TomViolenz » Mon Oct 13, 2014 11:32 am

But if you load single cycle waveforms into Sampler, then it becomes the same thing as a two oscillator FM or AM synth (counting Samplers oscillator section).
(once you go single cycle, pitching up or down shouldn't matter)
Free single cycle waveforms are available everywhere, or you can go all out and purchase the 25 000 Galbanum Architecture waveforms. (like I did)

I arranged them into 128s in Sampler, so that each Sampler becomes an FM or AM synth with 128x21 possible wave combinations.
This makes Sampler into my prefered synth.
(3 LFOs, Aux envelope, 10 stage envelopes for everything, good filters (SVF was already mentioned, but add the filter morphing too!)
Very low on CPU!

(I don't know how analog like the sounds are, I don't concern myself with these kinds of questions. If it sounds good, it sounds good!)

yur2die4
Posts: 6623
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 3:02 am
Location: Menasha, Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by yur2die4 » Mon Oct 13, 2014 12:55 pm

There has been absolutely no mention of multiple filters (both as in more-than-one at a time And having formant) unison detuning, or OSC sync :P

Still. It'd be nice if they had a New analog, this one is pretty dated. I enjoy using it, but it is dated. The layout has some quirks to it also.

ian_halsall
Posts: 1711
Joined: Fri May 27, 2011 8:52 am
Location: South London
Contact:

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by ian_halsall » Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:17 pm

TomViolenz wrote:But if you load single cycle waveforms into Sampler, then it becomes the same thing as a two oscillator FM or AM synth (counting Samplers oscillator section).
(once you go single cycle, pitching up or down shouldn't matter)
Free single cycle waveforms are available everywhere, or you can go all out and purchase the 25 000 Galbanum Architecture waveforms. (like I did)

I arranged them into 128s in Sampler, so that each Sampler becomes an FM or AM synth with 128x21 possible wave combinations.
This makes Sampler into my prefered synth.
(3 LFOs, Aux envelope, 10 stage envelopes for everything, good filters (SVF was already mentioned, but add the filter morphing too!)
Very low on CPU!

(I don't know how analog like the sounds are, I don't concern myself with these kinds of questions. If it sounds good, it sounds good!)
sounds like a lot of work - I'd rather use operator or one of the other synths that can make decent sounds without so much painstaking editing - and make music - just my preference of course.

jlgrimes
Posts: 1533
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:55 am
Location: Atlanta, Ga

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by jlgrimes » Mon Oct 13, 2014 4:56 pm

Jopke wrote:Are there situations where it might be good to use Analog over Operator? As far as I can tell Operator is just more powerful with more capabilities.

I would think things typically as PWM (maybe Operator can do this), and thick Unison leads (Operator probably could do this but it would most likely be easier in Analog).

Also if you are following examples of how to program things, Analog might be more better since it correlates better to a typical analog synth, where in Operator you would have to learn a whole new workflow.


That said Operator is the more powerful of the two and therefore more harder to master, but Analog would be more easier to master.

TomViolenz
Posts: 6854
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:19 pm

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by TomViolenz » Mon Oct 13, 2014 7:01 pm

ian_halsall wrote:
TomViolenz wrote:But if you load single cycle waveforms into Sampler, then it becomes the same thing as a two oscillator FM or AM synth (counting Samplers oscillator section).
(once you go single cycle, pitching up or down shouldn't matter)
Free single cycle waveforms are available everywhere, or you can go all out and purchase the 25 000 Galbanum Architecture waveforms. (like I did)

I arranged them into 128s in Sampler, so that each Sampler becomes an FM or AM synth with 128x21 possible wave combinations.
This makes Sampler into my prefered synth.
(3 LFOs, Aux envelope, 10 stage envelopes for everything, good filters (SVF was already mentioned, but add the filter morphing too!)
Very low on CPU!

(I don't know how analog like the sounds are, I don't concern myself with these kinds of questions. If it sounds good, it sounds good!)
sounds like a lot of work - I'd rather use operator or one of the other synths that can make decent sounds without so much painstaking editing - and make music - just my preference of course.
Whatever suites you ;-)

ansolas
Posts: 379
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:01 pm
Location: Earth ~ Europe ~ Germany ~ Cuxheaven

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by ansolas » Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:19 pm

Analog has no OSC phase lock

Stromkraft
Posts: 7033
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by Stromkraft » Mon Oct 13, 2014 10:31 pm

BoddAH wrote:How do pretty large and recent sample libraries for Sampler like Retro Synths fare compared to true VA synths like Analog? Which generally sounds better and more like an actual analogue synth?
That really depends on the patch, doesn't it? I have always used Samplers as Sampling Synthesizers, meaning the main interest to me with sampling classic synths is to get the main basic waveform, much as TomViolenz describes, and recreate envelopes, filters and so on in the Sampler itself.

This basic waveform sampling, one cycle or not, makes the requirements on the features in the Sampler more specific and its character or its ability to give character with its routings, filter and envelopes and so on.
It might be an interesting sound as the basic waveform may be imperfect and therefore interesting musically, but the final sound might not be that close to the original as filters and envelopes of the original synth aren't captured.

This is the path I prefer personally. To use samples as a way to get interesting basic waveforms that would take a lot of work or be impossible to recreate in a synth like Analog, Operator or similar.

Some analog synth libraries sample the full sound of a synth patch, or partials of it, as this captures the original great sound of the sampled synth very well, but if that is the case this also means you're stuck with the specific dynamic aspect that was sampled at the time, which of course limits you a bit (which might be a good thing, you know). There could be very attractive qualities in those samples though, so this path also has value.

I'm not sure how "Retro Synths" has been structured as I haven't found the time to get into it.
Make some music!

Quinnx
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:09 am

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by Quinnx » Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:55 am

once you go single cycle, pitching up or down shouldn't matter
for General synthesis your probably right unless your trying to actually emulate say a Moog.
just doing synthesis and creating sound you will get away with single cycle.
If your trying to reproduce tone from another platform or media you would still need multisamples to keep tonal quality
from that system.

On the other hand..

Operator gives you all the single cycle waveforms you want
In its basic form it will give you analogue style subtractive synthesis with the added bonus of
adding FM modulation should you want to dabble or need it.
And for those that want to push further you can obviously sample/mulitsample from operator to simpler/Sampler
for further manipulation and get the best of both worlds.

Quinnx
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 1:09 am

Re: Operator Vs Analog

Post by Quinnx » Sat Oct 18, 2014 5:58 pm

Just doing a side by side comparison of single cycle waveforms:
I used operator to produce a waveform
exported it and imported to sampler and did a side by side comparison.

Going up the scale there was no noticeable difference
but going down scale to bass frequency the sample started to break down by comparison to what was playing in operator.
So it looks like with single cycle waveforms your going to loose on lower freq unless of course
the wave starts as a low Freq wave then it may work out better that way.

Post Reply