Ableton Forum

I'd like to say that despite the ignorance, differences, sarcasm, and bickering going on in the thread, there are some really intelligent people who have some tremendous experience and skill that leave me quite jealous. I wish I had 1/10 of the knowledge base some of you cats have. Thank each and every one of you for having taught me a few things or two.

nebulae wrote:^ Interesting - I'd agree with those comments. The bass is most noticeable to me because in the first version, it sounds digital. But wit tubes, it feels a lot more "airy".

The drums, especially the hats, in the tube version have more "sizzle". Also, the synths feel like they're pushing air when they do their big swells. All of that adds up to a more pleasant smoothness in the sound.

I'll admit that the non-tube version is cleaner, but I'd argue that the tube version is nicer on your ears.

More thoughts welcome

I haven't heard the comparison yet, have couple hours before I can get to the studio, but yeah, tube saturation done subtly should make the highs and lows sound brighter and less digital.

There was an old project done by the in house band at Sugar Hill Records called Tackhead/Gary S. Clail and various other names. They released a few EPs mixed through an ancient tube mixer, sounded freaking awesome! What's My Mission Now? was one.

bosonHavoc wrote: i prefer organic veggies because they are phatter and have a more real feel to them.
plus they sit in the mix better too.

what you talking about Willis? The virtual analog veggies taste just as good. Are you going to tell me you can tell the difference in a stir fry once it has been drenched with sauce (ginger, garlic, curry, coconut, etc...) get real.

Dude, veggies (even the virtual analog ones) are still too thin and harsh. If you want something that always fills up the mix just right, you have to go real analog carnivore.

Tone Deft wrote: spending your whole life worrying about dying is not way to live. besides, genetics play a HUGE role in it all. there's always the stories of the wine drink cigarette smoking meat eating 100 year old grannie and the health nuts who keel over during their morning jog.

Enjoying eating meat is a viable reason.

Fooling yourself with the exceptions to the rule, IE the few smokers and meat eaters that live to 100, is a logical pile of bullshit. It's basically saying, "Well this one person out of a million made it to 100 living badly, so I'm wiling to take the chance that I'm that lucky!" The newspapers don't publish the 100 year olds that are alive and that way because of healthy living choices, because it doesn't sell papers, it's that simple. You know this, and are basically pulling a republican emotional campaign. Sara Palin would love your logic!

(ducks rib bones hurled in his direction!)

Hitler was a vegetarian.

Chang wrote:
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.

ok. that you and your "hard core analog die hard engineer friends" (very cute btw) don´t hear a difference meaning there is no difference - very convincing. i would say, it depends on how close your ear and mind can dial into sound, how far your understanding and devotion to sound goes. that doesn´t inrease only by buying any standard "die hard" gearslutting gear in the world. of course these tools add something and improve the shape somehow, but there are difficulties especially when the sound is moving/changing. but also when using a realtive static sound, but ok, thats something you don´t hear all the time a difference. wo what? if you don´t hear a diffrence, then have fun and take you vst and run it through 5000€ and believe you did smething real clever. why not? but let me be set free of all the gear that should compensate the lack of sound of digital sources while preferring analog source when it is more than just a gimmick. can you live with that? fine! so go and play on with your did hard superkrass monster maniac engineers. wuff wuff wuff.

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.

its not just the result i work for, not at all. for its fun while work that counts and inspires me. therefore my songs getting better if i´m happy with the results instantly, and not only after mixing and make up with tons of "high end gear" . and doing music with the consumer expectation as highest priority is the lamest crap in the world, that doesn´t do any good to anyone. that just bores endlessly. i´m not a pizza delivery.

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.

the only thing thats really dangerous is when you are in system and you know a little more about the system than the system or its elements itself. then the system defends. you can watch it anywhere, at your home or at the government. because the truth is the enemy of every lie.

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.

what a bullshit. it was an ams neve 8803, i think there is some posting here on this board with my old login "radib" where i did write a little hymn on it. cause that beast really opened my ears for sound.

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.

porr little boy. truth ain´t hard isn´t it? i´m not sure why i take time to answer such silly and hatred non sense. gues its just hard to find in my town or closer environment. its like being tourist in a little madhouse.

i smoke way too much!!! and during a live set ?? a pack and half in 7hrs!

Machinesworking wrote:So let's see? artifacts in the high end? lack of perceived warmth? lack of movement between the individual oscillators? All of the problems with DCOs are the same problems I have with pure digital oscillators.

there is a difference using dco of course, but that difference is much less compared to digital osc. its not as smooth to change the sound, therefore the modulations appear a bit more hacky and well, bits lamer yeah. but loss of warmth? not so much. the bass just loses a bits of dirt and the highs appear more shining and not dumped as they sometimes do with pure analog control. it brightens and cleans the analog signal a little bit up. but without digital artifacts as we know it from dsp based stuff, there is really a big gap between. and cleaning a dirty one up is more natural to me than giving artificial analog dirt to something clean digital. thats way pervert btw. i use dco for the smoother stuff, and complete analog for the quicker, more aggressiv and mad acting elements.

yoshitosser wrote:sorry to be the one who breaks this to you but I think somebody has hacked your website. I downloaded "wedding song" and somebody appears to have linked a sort of wanna be Nick Cave track (eek!!) instead of the cutting edge superbly crafted stuff you uploaded.

thatnks for the description, thats exactly what it wanted to be. all i did record so far is live improvisation, especially that piano ep. i can remember the session quite well, i was fooling around with the keys (can´t play piano anyhow, just was drunk enough to dare this evening) and my girlfriend did like something make her shout "this is our wedding song!!" from the kitchen (you can hear her applause from there, at the end of the first verse... her opinion is all that counts - after mine). so i pressed record and played the tune on, starting to "sing" and "play" it freestyle all the way. great fun. and yeah, for that its even a good song. i know you little assholes would die for sth just in reach of that. even nick cave itself informed me he envies it a littl bit, as his last years weren´t that funny and refreshing like that cabaret tune.

and about "cutting edge superbly crafted stuff"... brrrr, thats really exactly what i want to avoid. music making is not making up the dishes and the place it on the polished table for lunch with your girls parents. for me music making is dirty, excessing than cutting edges. exatcly the opposite of your "approach" TO THE BORING STANDARDS. music is sex, edgy, breathing and sweating and dirty and well, not cutted/censored so much.

xh9o wrote:for me music making is dirty, excessing than cutting edges. exatcly the opposite of your "approach" TO THE BORING STANDARDS.

Here you have perfectly formulated why nobody who loves making music genuinely gives a damn about your (somewhat rudely and arrogantly delivered) opinion on analog, digital, or their relevance in regards to the music they are making. All you're doing is dictating another approach, another standard - your own. By saying, "my understanding of music and tone leads to an analog quality of sound. whats next? forbidding my taste?" you were ever so close, as you are so forcibly forbidding someone else's taste yourself.

Nokatus wrote:why nobody who loves making music genuinely gives a damn about your (somewhat rudely and arrogantly delivered) opinion on analog, digital, or their relevance in regards to the music.

believe me, there is enough people on the same side with me. surely not here on the wanna be producers board. and its less important if you love (yourself while) making music, its more important how much you love music. as a logic of the times where any idiot can do "music" on the pc theoretically, its very common that people not developed an approach by listening to music flood the boards with their irrelevant output because they are not able to listen, they just want to make it theirselves. as an example, no one who posted really interesting stuff in the thread "best album ever" posted sth here. for a very good reason, since the digital/analog is totally irrelevant for writing harmonies and songs. most songs are basically prewritten with really bad equipment etc, sometimes just in the head. this thread is like a trap for all those little smartasses who think they anything about music making, cause they had to read anything as whatever they did, no one cared for their output. so they collected some information trying to hide their lack in interesting songwriting behind some bascial standard sound. becoming a pro by wearing his clothes. but thats rarely alive, original information. its "opinion" and daydream. its not deep, just flat and boring as nebulas no music simply is. ask anyone who has balls. oh i know you don´t know anyone, cause these people would avoid you. or is there anyone here? real "pros"? no one. just some "little bees working on music very hard".

and for me it was great fun to confront all your personal and vain opinions with simple facts, and while that giving the truth the privilege to be my opinion. great fun, thanks for all.

xh9o wrote: believe me, there is enough people on the same side with me. surely not here on the wanna be producers board. and its less important if you love (yourself while) making music, its more important how much you love music. as a logic of the times where any idiot can do "music" on the pc theoretically, its very common that people not developed an approach by listening to music flood the boards with their irrelevant output because they are not able to listen, they just want to make it theirselves. as an example, no one who posted really interesting stuff in the thread "best album ever" posted sth here. for a very good reason, since the digital/analog is totally irrelevant for writing harmonies and songs. most songs are basically prewritten with really bad equipment etc, sometimes just in the head. .

Actually I agree with these sentiments

Nokatus wrote:All you're doing is dictating another approach, another standard - your own.

wouldn´t call it dictating approach, i just explain why i prefer the way i do work against your way to work. the discussion has developed from there. my reasons base on the difference in sound quality between digital and analog sources. i´m aware of it, most here are not. thats a simple gap in knowledge, or call it a difference in having priorities. without these difference no discussion would ever happen in life, therefore no progress. and we would all still sit in holes and peel bananas, like these "die hard hard core 24/7 since 5 years" board kiddies obviously do here.

aisling wrote:I took a listen to your music and did not hear the highbrow essence you profess (i'll not directly insult your music). Having logged many formative years with folk music ala joan baez, bob dylan......while those people recordings are not cutting edge, something magical still shines through that gives it soul.....

em i never stated my music would be the standard for comparison here, when i talk music i mean something else (but definately not that shit produced by the masses of recent home musicians). i would not consider me a musician. maybe things would develop into that direction next years, there is no real ambition regarding this but some interest and fun. further its part of a personal drug (yeah little boys, now come on and have your opinion again) rehab program, i must and want to take that serious.

but wjhatever, i´m surprised of the positive reactions by very respectable people so far, especially the reactions for the main part, the (german) lyrics. and its also a great compliment if yuys like you board honks try to fight me for nearly anything i say.