Analog and Virtual analag hardware synths

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:09 am

xh9o wrote:personal rules: if i hate music, i´ll tell you hoping you kick your own ass and develop.

new philosophy for you, encourage your brother.

I'm done with you though. goodbye.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:10 am

Ok, so here's what I did. I pulled up the Dennis DeSantis demo track that came with Live 6 (or perhaps earlier). I EQed and Compressed the tracks the way I liked and added a Sylenth to it to get 5 tracks of audio over about a minute of music. Plenty of dynamic and swells.

I then mixed down each track through my tubes to 5 24-bit stereo tracks. Granted, each track will have slight variations as I messed with the preamp knobs to get some saturation and avoid distortion.

The difference is subtle but audible. If I did this over a 50-track song, the aggregate would be more noticeable. The trick then would be to make sure the noise was kept to a minimum. Anyways, let me know what you think:

http://www.nebulae.com/collect/desantis.wav
http://www.nebulae.com/collect/desantis-tube.wav

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:11 am

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.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Johnisfaster · Post by **Johnisfaster** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:13 am

nebulae wrote:Anyways, let me know what you think:

http://www.nebulae.com/collect/desantis.wav
http://www.nebulae.com/collect/desantis-tube.wav

I'll check it out tomorrow in the studio. tonight is 'laptop/ableton forum/adult swim' night.

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:13 am

Johnisfaster wrote:new philosophy for you, encourage your brother.

i don´t consider you as my brothers.

and encouragement is something you must deserve, it needs a base.

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:21 am

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.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

simple again: since you aren´t what you wanna bes wanna be, if no one gives you clarity about that fact you will never have the chance to maybe become it. though it might be true that it doesn´t change at all eveb if i or another would tell you that truth a thousand times everyday. as there is not enough talent, passion (not "ambition" or "wish") and personal profile (a developed result of excessive self criticism) existing that might be required.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:29 am

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.

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.

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:29 am

Tone Deft wrote:we can be twats just like you, but we're better at it, MUCH better at it, try us.

sorry haven´t read it before. but hell yeah you guys are the best in whatever you cool superguys do. and your neb etc., why should i care about his fans or whatever. if these paople have no taste or anything i could have interest for, so what should make me care about it? hell i just give information and you can´t prove me wrong so far, and the less you can proove me wrong the more you whiners try to shout me wrong. now in the chorus since one on one seems lvery ost for you. cheap little motherfuckers, you have no concept, no ideas, and though trying to produce 10 times longer than me not even usable knowledge. you should be thankful for the time an informations i contribute instead of crying your loss of imaginative authority on this board here.

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:44 am

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.

yes, its too much effort for not enough result. sending out sending in, even latency might become an annoying issue here.

but thats nebulas general problem. much work, no glory (honkboard glory does not count). but not only his, its the problem of the whole generation of irrelevant wanna be artists spreading their crap all over the internet. i´m not just pissing, i really wish you would be exciting. i´m bored of todays music.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:47 am

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.

Fail!

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".

D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me! D is for digital, that's good enough for me!

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:50 am

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".

sorry, but you´re wrong again. dco only means digitally controlled osc, its full analog osc but they are controlled digitally due to a more solid and stable tuning. if you doubt it despite all reason, just listen to that little dream of a beast.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:54 am

I'm so glad b0unce is back. I missed you, buddy. *hugs*

xh9o · Post by **xh9o** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:00 am

aisling · Post by **aisling** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:45 am

Machinesworking wrote:
aisling wrote: being a virgo and my own worst critic, there are days that I feel that way!

nebulae wrote:I'm August 31st. I feel your pain.
August 26th. Don't put much stock into it, but I have to admit the over analytical part kinda fits.

I knew I liked you

Chang · Post by **Chang** » Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:08 am

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.

No ones crying here, just disagreeing with you.

I own a ton of analog synths. Tons. And analog outboard gear, but mix down itb. There is no way in hell if you took a decent VI like Sylenth 1 and ran a moog bass sound emulation out into a proper front end and recorded it back and compared it to a real moog you'd be able to tell the difference between the VI and the real thing if you a/b. Not a chance. I've done this with many hard core analog die hard engineer friends and never had anyone be able to tell difference when your front end is dialed in properly. If I take Sylenth right now and simply send it into a moog filter then into a Portico 5042 or a Fatso it would be impossible for you to tell me which was true analog and which was vsti recorded.

But.

Lets say you;d still be able to hear the digital and your absolutely right about everything (which imo you are not) what difference would it make anyway to the consumer listener? None. Its about the finished song, not whether or not digital or analog was used.

PS - You know the term "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing?" I just read this entire thread & you sound like that terms poster child.

And you said nebulae "wasn't a good liar?" I think you should look in mirror. I find it hard to believe that you owned any analog Neve eq worth thousands of dollars and wouldn't specify which model. Of course you'll go google one and say this was the one, save it. Don't waste your time. I just read this entire thread and your are crazy wrong about so many things so I wouldn't care anyway. And you rag on nebulaes music like an ass to top everything else off.

Just do us all a favor. Go to your local hardware store, buy a rope, drive home, make a noose and put your head in it.