Ableton Forum

Johnisfaster wrote:for what it's worth I think nebulae makes good music.

Thank you, brutha...you know I think your music is fucking fantastic!!

Thanks for the kind words on the little phatty. I build them as my full time job. Once you get to play it first hand, you will feel the difference. Just compare the oscillator sync of the phatty and virus. No comparison!

I will admit that when I first saw the phatty, I almost didn't give it a chance. It certainly looks limited on features and control with only 4 knobs. Now that I have spent hundreds of hours with it, I know it will become another legend. It crushes my old Rogue and is incredibly easy and fast to get around. I am as big a fan of good VA and softsynths as anyone, but I really don't think there is any substitute for a phat analog monosynth.

This synth is quickly becoming ubiquitous. Despite this dismal economic situation, we still have tons of orders to fill. Accept no substitute. Experience it through a proper sound system and you will hear!!

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes, basically...of course, the Virus is legendary in being able to have converters that put out incredible sound...but basically, virtual analog is just software encapsulated in proprietary hardware

either way, I think current softsynths are quite capable of making great phat analogish sounds

navitus wrote:IS the Moog Voyager monophonic aswell ?? u could play chords by pitch shifting the osc's.

yes.monophonic...

...but it has an xy.... ?!@#

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes

for a long time I struggled with this concept, I thought "if it's just a plugin then why would I use it and not just use a plugin?" and finally I came to the conclusion "I could reverse it, why would I use a plugin when I could have a plugin in a physical format?"

Johnisfaster wrote:

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes

for a long time I struggled with this concept, I thought "if it's just a plugin then why would I use it and not just use a plugin?" and finally I came to the conclusion "I could reverse it, why would I use a plugin when I could have a plugin in a physical format?"

nebulae wrote:

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes, basically...of course, the Virus is legendary in being able to have converters that put out incredible sound...but basically, virtual analog is just software encapsulated in proprietary hardware

either way, I think current softsynths are quite capable of making great phat analogish sounds

no.

it has to be 'ported' (rewritten, recompiled, tweaked) to run on a different processor. that's why UAD exists, they make their own shit to run on their own processors. it can be as big as floating point to fixed point processing, big endian vs little endian, all kinds of stuff.

there was one synth whose DSP was also on a popular sound card, so they released the synth for the sound card, in that case the soft synth was literally the same thing as the real synth.


Neb - there's no magic in the output converters, D/A chips are D/A chips, 24 bit audio is 24 bit audio, noise floors are already very low, same with THD. the magic isn't in the output gain stage, it's on the internal processing.

and of course mad props to your music and musical output. x90h twat is lucky I'm in an incredibly relaxed, happy mood today.

Tone Deft wrote:

Johnisfaster wrote:

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes

for a long time I struggled with this concept, I thought "if it's just a plugin then why would I use it and not just use a plugin?" and finally I came to the conclusion "I could reverse it, why would I use a plugin when I could have a plugin in a physical format?"

nebulae wrote:

navitus wrote:Thats what i was thinking, isnt a virtual analog hardware synth basically a plug-in running on its own cpu and convertors ??? Whats the deal ??

yes, basically...of course, the Virus is legendary in being able to have converters that put out incredible sound...but basically, virtual analog is just software encapsulated in proprietary hardware

either way, I think current softsynths are quite capable of making great phat analogish sounds

no.

it has to be 'ported' (rewritten, recompiled, tweaked) to run on a different processor. that's why UAD exists, they make their own shit to run on their own processors. it can be as big as floating point to fixed point processing, big endian vs little endian, all kinds of stuff.

there was one synth whose DSP was also on a popular sound card, so they released the synth for the sound card, in that case the soft synth was literally the same thing as the real synth.


Neb - there's no magic in the output converters, D/A chips are D/A chips, 24 bit audio is 24 bit audio, noise floors are already very low, same with THD. the magic isn't in the output gain stage, it's on the internal processing.

and of course mad props to your music and musical output. x90h twat is lucky I'm in an incredibly relaxed, happy mood today.

Creamware ...?

^ agreed about the internal processing and coding, but I also read that different converters have varying degrees of quality and sound. And the consensus was that Access has some great converters that, coupled with the processing, leads to that famous Virus sound. Am I missing something?

You know about all this DSP stuff, so I'll defer to you.

As for the twat, well, he was fun to play with

nebulae wrote:^ agreed about the internal processing and coding, but I also read that different converters have varying degrees of quality and sound. And the consensus was that Access has some great converters that, coupled with the processing, leads to that famous Virus sound. Am I missing something?

You know about all this DSP stuff, so I'll defer to you.

As for the twat, well, he was fun to play with

at the time... I didn't like the 'Viruses' very much... I was more a Waldorf kinda guy...

but these latest new releases from Access actually got me craving for one...

of course I'm not gonna get one... (many things on the list before...) ....but...
kudos to Access for being innovative...

^ I recently had the chance to buy a TI for cheap. I tested it side by side with my Sylenth1 for a couple of days. My final preference was for Sylenth1. I won't speak for anyone else, just saying, my ears preferred the Sylenth1.

Johnisfaster wrote:for what it's worth I think nebulae makes good music.

+1 I really like neb's stuff as well.

xh9o, gotta say...trashing on anyone's music around here is just not cool. It may not be your cup of tea, but getting just plain mean about it is wrong. Do what you want, but I fail to see how or why you had to go that route.

nebulae wrote:^ I recently had the chance to buy a TI for cheap. I tested it side by side with my Sylenth1 for a couple of days. My final preference was for Sylenth1. I won't speak for anyone else, just saying, my ears preferred the Sylenth1.

thanks for getting me back on track....!

good A/D D/A... and great software are all you need !!!!

(unless it's Analog...)

nebulae wrote:^ agreed about the internal processing and coding, but I also read that different converters have varying degrees of quality and sound.

of course and Live sounds like shit. same marketing.

there are only a few D/A converter companies out there (TI (Burr Brown), Cirrus Logic and AKM.) there might be a few others but those are the big ones. all their D/A converters are pushing ~125dB dynamic range limit with THD (distortion) around the same.

here's Cirrus' lineup, look at the actual dynamic ranges, they're far below what 24 bits of audio can do (and honestly what our ears can detect.)
http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/techs/T2.html

TI
http://focus.ti.com/paramsearch/docs/pa ... STRY_PGE_T

AKM
http://www.akm.com/prod-dac.asp


you can't do a whole lot with DACs to get great performance from them. on the other hand with internal processing you can live up to the 144dB dynamic range and low noise floors etc. DACs just aren't that exciting TBH.

Oh, and a +1 for the Prophet 08. I was a fan of the Vs, and was happy to see the new version. From nice fat bass lines to atmospheric pads, it's got a lot of potential in a very cost effective package.

I really liked the Virus, but at $2800 I just couldn't justify the purchase.

The Prophet, and one soft synth (Alchemy) are all I'm using. Streamlining is a beautiful thing.

Tone Deft wrote:

nebulae wrote:^ agreed about the internal processing and coding, but I also read that different converters have varying degrees of quality and sound.

of course and Live sounds like shit. same marketing.

there are only a few D/A converter companies out there (TI (Burr Brown), Cirrus Logic and AKM.) there might be a few others but those are the big ones. all their D/A converters are pushing ~125dB dynamic range limit with THD (distortion) around the same.

here's Cirrus' lineup, look at the actual dynamic ranges, they're far below what 24 bits of audio can do (and honestly what our ears can detect.)
http://www.cirrus.com/en/products/pro/techs/T2.html

TI
http://focus.ti.com/paramsearch/docs/pa ... STRY_PGE_T

AKM
http://www.akm.com/prod-dac.asp


you can't do a whole lot with DACs to get great performance from them. on the other hand with internal processing you can live up to the 144dB dynamic range and low noise floors etc. DACs just aren't that exciting TBH.

....RME?! Apogee...?! etc...