Ableton Forum

beats me wrote:So there are a bunch of brain washed dumb dumbs forking out $2,000 to $3,000 on a mono synth with built-in "dirty" when they could spend a lot less and throw on a handful of effects and get the same sound?

like you only fork out to buy dirt?

you're buying an musical instrument, not a shovel..

i.m.o. its such a stupid myth that dirt instantly gets connected to analog..
anything digital can be as dirty.. the same way my Moog can sound fecking clean as well..

lets define 'dirt' anyway?
deep dirt.. pink dirt.. warm dirt.. aliased dirt.. expensive dirt.. cheap dirt.. dirty dirt..
dirt as a defintion of quality is such a overated cliche..

the only time I really thought 'dirt' (read; grit) really added to the overall character of a synth is when I sold my Nord G2 and went back to NM1..
the NM1 has a tad more lofi DAC's that sound just a bit more grittier than the DAC's on the G2..
could I achieve this grit by adding FX to the chain with the G2?.. probably..
but I still value a synth by its features, expression and usability, not the amount of dirt it can puke per minute..

^ here we go...holy war time...

beats me wrote:
But let's face, we're mostly a bunch of lazy sods that would gladly fork out more money if it meant less effort.

convenience is a black plague and creative juice killer in general.. < for me personally..

beats me wrote:I read some reviews on synths and there are complaints (sometimes complements) when the synth sounds too clean, clear, or "nice". Is it really that hard to throw some effects in the chain to dirty them up and are these people just whining because it doesn't have everything they want in the box?

Zebra is a fairly clean synth. Using the built-in waveshapers, I get some nice 'dirt', but I still like to add Live's Dynamic Tube or Saturator (with subtle settings) which adds just that extra bit that takes it into sounding organic and makes people not immediately sure how the sound is created.

Poster wrote:anything digital can be as dirty..

BLASPHEMER!

nebulae wrote:^ here we go...holy war time...

oops.







...

For the sake of making this convo more productive, let's discuss "dirt" :

I define good dirt as harmonics-rich; I define bad dirt as low-res or bit-reduction. Different recordings and moods have a need for both kinds of dirt, and both have their place.

Sounds, regardiless of their sources, can impart all sorts of dirt. Even clean sounds can have grit. A classic example is an undistorted guitar sound...many would argue there is no such thing. That by the very nature of ampling a guitar signal you add dirt, which is what causes pleasing responses to your ear.

A lot of people say the same thing about say a Virus C. The analog to digital converters add a bit of grit on the output that some say sounds better to them than the VSTi output from the Virus TI.

Discuss dirt...

landrvr1 wrote:

Poster wrote:anything digital can be as dirty..

BLASPHEMER!

to which Prophet?










'08?

beats me wrote:So there are a bunch of brain washed dumb dumbs forking out $2,000 to $3,000 on a mono synth with built-in "dirty" when they could spend a lot less and throw on a handful of effects and get the same sound? I'm really curious because some of these people talk about it like they don't own any other piece of gear and it's like a big insult that they should own something else or throw something in the chain.

what happens when your hobby is dickwaving?

nebulae wrote:
Discuss dirt...

Diana.. gritty, warm, by far, the queen, of dirt..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hg-IRZk4D0

nebulae wrote:
Discuss dirt...

a big factor for me, is how it integrates into the original sound. If it sounds tacked on, then it does not work so well. If it sounds like it was part of the original sound from the start, then it works better. Then there is the time domain. The way dirt works on the attack and body can have an 'organic' quality that I find pleasing.

You mentioned grit, and then there is noise. is noise dirt too? I like added noise, a bit of hiss, crackle, static at the right time...

^ yeah, all good points about dirt, grit and hiss. Nice.

drums are another great example of uses for good dirt and bad dirt. Some purists have to have a 909, but for me, a sample or a 909 emu will do just fine. add in some distortion and you have all sorts of wonderful harmonics and crunch...

Poster wrote:

landrvr1 wrote:

Poster wrote:anything digital can be as dirty..

BLASPHEMER!

to which Prophet?










'08?

You've totally pwned me.



...

I just used dirty because most comparisons are made between dirty and clean, and just saying sounds "better" would lead to a 50 page post arguing over the definition of sounds better. Dirty should cap it off at about 25 pages of the definition.....and why it's better.

nebulae wrote:

3dot... wrote:...I don't remember where I was going with this...

something about using your ears

oh yeah,,use your ears...
use your fingers as well...

3dot... wrote:

nebulae wrote:

3dot... wrote:...I don't remember where I was going with this...

something about using your ears

oh yeah,,use your ears...
use your fingers as well...

geez, no need to get kinky...