The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
anyone else underwhelmed with modern poly synths? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 21st December 2016
  #211
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
All this carrying on about being attacked for liking modern synths, and having to respond defensively, is just a load of BS, stop being such drama queens, LOL!
I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. Can you quote some things I've said to maybe jog my memory?

Last edited by golden beers; 21st December 2016 at 10:45 AM..
Old 21st December 2016
  #212
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
I'm kind of treating you like a crazy person because of all this hyperbole. I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about. Can you quote some things I've said to maybe jog my memory?
No, couldn't be bothered.

Click on your username, choose 'show only posts by Bach666 in this thread', read them yourself, your BS is all there.
Old 21st December 2016
  #213
Gear Guru
 
fiddlestickz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
Why does it matter what it is called?

Isn't he allowed to be personally 'underwhelmed with modern poly synths', and to have a thread title asking if anyone else is as well, and for that to be discussed?

Really not sure why anyone would take that as a personal attack, as it really isn't, LOL!

<<snip>>

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
Someone's opinion that a vintage synth sounds better than modern options is a fallacy, that deserves ridicule?

Yep, you are the sort of idiot I am talking about, you are what turns these threads to crap, not the person voicing their own personal opinion about a synth.

Last edited by golden beers; 21st December 2016 at 10:47 AM..
Old 21st December 2016
  #214
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddlestickz View Post
<<snip>>
<<snip>>

The OP was not personally attacking anyone on their views for or against vintage synths.

I called him an idiot for ridiculing the OPs opinion, not because he prefers modern synths over vintage.

Last edited by golden beers; 21st December 2016 at 10:48 AM..
Old 21st December 2016
  #215
Lives for gear
 
Paega's Avatar
Hell no! The Elektron Analog 4 is amazing. I use it it for so much. Overbridge is a game changer. A great bread and butter analog you can treat with all the ITB processing you need!
Old 21st December 2016
  #216
373097
Guest
This thread certainly shows that people are still very passionate about poly synths!

I love my Virus TI, but have no idea if it is modern or vintage. My Prophet 12 is also lovely. Korg Radias is very cool. Blofeld is very nice. Matrix 6 too. DeepMind 12 looks to be a real great synth, but don't have one yet. Not sure which of these are considered modern, but I am not underwhelmed at all.
Old 21st December 2016
  #217
Lives for gear
 
Rufuss Sewell's Avatar
I want to jump in on the idea that "vintage components sound better because they're old and messed up."

I appreciate my JP8 because it's super pristene, sparkly, shiny, glossy etc. To me this is what vintage analog represents. A HiFi quality almost like an acoustic guitar.

It sounds just like all of the Duran Duran, Human League and Howard Jones albums that were made when it was new.

With the JP8 in particular it has nothing to do with distortion or "loose" electronics.
Old 21st December 2016
  #218
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bach666 View Post
I seriously don't even know what we're talking about.
...
Old 21st December 2016
  #219
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sayersweb View Post
This thread certainly shows that people are still very passionate about poly synths!
Not really. It just shows how frail egos need to go into attck and lecture mode when someone says they like the sound of the old polys. Like SimonInAustralia pretty eqloquently pointed at, but no one with a flailing ego issue over whether their modern synths are 'worthy' or not wants to hear. Pathetic.

These threads are never a dick measuring competition until someone takes the simple fact of someone else liking old synths as some sort of personal slight. And then it's over, down the plughole, and the whole bullsh*t onslaught comes out of 'but you can make great music with a VA or a plugin' (no ****? lol), you can't hear the difference in a mix' , etc. Pathetic.
Old 21st December 2016
  #220
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufuss Sewell View Post
I want to jump in on the idea that "vintage components sound better because they're old and messed up."

I appreciate my JP8 because it's super pristene, sparkly, shiny, glossy etc. To me this is what vintage analog represents. A HiFi quality almost like an acoustic guitar.

It sounds just like all of the Duran Duran, Human League and Howard Jones albums that were made when it was new.

With the JP8 in particular it has nothing to do with distortion or "loose" electronics.
It's a bullsh*t theory, because I don't remember thse synths sounding any different when in music shops in the 80's, brand new. Only people who were not there back then think this.

Also, Human League is JP4, not 8. Howard Jones is 8.
Old 21st December 2016
  #221
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
It's a bullsh*t theory, because I don't remember thse synths sounding any different when in music shops in the 80's, brand new. Only people who were not there back then think this.
Heh... So you remember sounds you heard 30-40 years ago...
Which invalidates the scientificaly proven fact that electronic parts properties and performance change over time.

Yeeep.
Old 21st December 2016
  #222
Lives for gear
 

How about we make this thread more constructive ?
If you have a vintage synth and a modern synth and can't make the modern one sound like the vintage one.
Post the target vintage sound and your best effort on the modern synth.
This way we can at least try to come up with ideas on how to solve the problem.
Old 21st December 2016
  #223
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
Heh... So you remember sounds you heard 30-40 years ago...
Which invalidates the scientificaly proven fact that electronic parts properties and performance change over time.

Yeeep.
They had the same emotional impact. Which is the part people are trying to ascribe to ageing parts. But wtf am I doing going back in here?? Goodbye. Unsubscribed.
Old 21st December 2016
  #224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
Heh... So you remember sounds you heard 30-40 years ago...
Which invalidates the scientificaly proven fact that electronic parts properties and performance change over time.

Yeeep.
the 'aged components' idea has been twisted into something it's not by people trying to quantify what it is about older synths that make them sound good.

If someone says a synth sounds good because of old components, this can be true.

If someone says a synth sounds good because the components have aged, this is untrue.


generally, what happens is an old component may fail. say for example a regulator may have been over heating for years and one day is cooked and just doesn't work. In this case it doesn't affect the sound at all until it fails, at which point the synth makes no sound at all.

It's true that capacitors become less efficient over time, but this is something that shouldn't affect the audio other than the capacitors in the powersupply, which can increase the background noise by a few percent. That's about the only thing in a synth that will age and change the audio output.

It makes a tad more noise. It doesn't affect the tone of the synth at all.


There might be some calibrations going out of whack a little as components degrade/fail, but this doesn't make the synth sound better than when it was new, quite the opposite.

If you have a failing component, it doesnt make your synth sound 'vintage'. it makes your synth sound like crap, or nothing at all.

the reason a minimoog D sounds awesome is not the 'aged' components. it's the fact that it's a minimoog D.
Old 21st December 2016
  #225
Lives for gear
 
TheBrightSide's Avatar
I'll admit that the only reason I chimed in here was beacause I was a little taken back by the thread title.
Nothing really to do with vintage vs modern synths though.
Mainly because, since joining here, I have read countless posts of people wishing for more new poly synths.
There's been petitions, pleading and demanding.
Then within a short space of time, there is plenty to choose from.
So to read that they don't sound good enough is pretty perplexing.
Nothing against the OP, I also fully understand the value many people place on tone, like most guitarists.
But if I was a synth manufacturer, there is no way I'd read Gearslutz. It would be way too frustrating.
Old 21st December 2016
  #226
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBrightSide View Post
I'll admit that the only reason I chimed in here was beacause I was a little taken back by the thread title.
Nothing really to do with vintage vs modern synths though.
Mainly because, since joining here, I have read countless posts of people wishing for more new poly synths.
There's been petitions, pleading and demanding.
Then within a short space of time, there is plenty to choose from.
So to read that they don't sound good enough is pretty perplexing.
Nothing against the OP, I also fully understand the value many people place on tone, like most guitarists.
But if I was a synth manufacturer, there is no way I'd read Gearslutz. It would be way too frustrating.
From what I heard of the deepmind; it sounded up there with the vintage synths.

and does duophonic count? because the new OB Twovoice is a face-melter
Old 21st December 2016
  #227
Lives for gear
 
TheBrightSide's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by golden beers View Post
From what I heard of the deepmind; it sounded up there with the vintage synths.

and does duophonic count? because the new OB Twovoice is a face-melter
I got to play the Twovoice a few months ago, stunning!
Old 21st December 2016
  #228
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by golden beers View Post
If you have a failing component, it doesnt make your synth sound 'vintage'. it makes your synth sound like crap, or nothing at all.
I am not talking about failing components.
I am talking about things like envelope attacks become different between voice cards because of 30 years of different temperatures in different areas of the synth.
Which will make a synth go closer to the wild behavior of for example OB-X.
It is not just the tuning, all parts of the signal path are important.
Old 21st December 2016
  #229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutantt View Post
I am not talking about failing components.
I am talking about things like envelope attacks become different between voice cards because of 30 years of different temperatures in different areas of the synth.
Which will make a synth go closer to the wild behavior of for example OB-X.
It is not just the tuning, all parts of the signal path are important.
I addressed this point here

Quote:
There might be some calibrations going out of whack a little as components degrade/fail, but this doesn't make the synth sound better than when it was new, quite the opposite.
My Pro5 rev2 has unmatched envelopes, which change as the thing heats up.

guess what? it always did.



edit, PS>
Quote:
It is not just the tuning, all parts of the signal path are important.
when did I mention tuning?
Old 21st December 2016
  #230
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

Is the Juno 106 a vintage poly synth?
Is the OB-6 or Studio Electronics Omega 8 underwhelming when compared to this vintage poly synth?

Do I love vintage poly synths?
Yes.

Do I love modern poly synths?
Yes.
Old 21st December 2016
  #231
Lives for gear
 
patrickdafunk's Avatar
 

What about The Schmid?
Old 21st December 2016
  #232
Lives for gear
 
Bach666's Avatar
 

I keep imagining a mob of people in this thread chanting, "Make synths great again."
Old 21st December 2016
  #233
Lives for gear
 

Lol.

I will continue to hold out for the perspective that older synths sound different, but not "better" except in terms of familiarity with certain types of synth sounds.

They do tend to "sound better" because, simply, they have less going on than most modern synths, which since the advent of digital require far more user understanding of the principles of synthesis, along with a musical ear, than most older synths did, to make interesting sounds with.

This led to a period where people tended to rely more on presets than rolling their own.

But that's long past; the accessibility of and range of complexity of modern synths is extensive enough now that you can enjoy the nature of older synths if you want, or can go for all the in-depth sound designing and even synth designing (Reaktor) you want, with no-one stopping you either way.

And you don't have to spend a lot, or break your back moving around heavy furniture, one of the biggest revolutions in synth design we should all be applauding.

The lock expensive studios had on "the best" equipment is broken. The availability of synthesis has been democratized. Of necessity, since we live in a time of No Money for the vast majority of people on this planet.

I see this as all good. The few for whom spending $8-$60k on one instrument seems legitimate can continue to do so, and the rest of us can have just as much fun, for far less money, too. What's to complain?
Old 21st December 2016
  #234
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Lol.

I will continue to hold out for the perspective that older synths sound different, but not "better" except in terms of familiarity with certain types of synth sounds.

They do tend to "sound better" because, simply, they have less going on than most modern synths, which since the advent of digital require far more user understanding of the principles of synthesis, along with a musical ear, than most older synths did, to make interesting sounds with.

T
In regards to less going on: old synth vs software, maybe in a way. not at all in another way, but this is kind of apple vs orange

hardware old vs new; not really.


I remember not so long ago an A6 user challenged Jp8 users to synthesise something that can't be replicated on the A6. He couldn't do it and conceded that the JP8 was more powerful than he had thought.

Last edited by golden beers; 21st December 2016 at 04:32 PM..
Old 21st December 2016
  #235
Lives for gear
 
enossified's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonInAustralia View Post
I don't really understand why people get so worked up at the thought of someone preferring an old synth and discussing it here.
Because those vintage lovers then broadbrush all new stuff as total crap?

Why is progress always seen as bad by these people?
Old 21st December 2016
  #236
Lives for gear
 

Modern polys don't offer anything that hasn't already been done in spades. unless bad digital on board FX and a fake tube overdrive are really features.

Especially when hard to implement features of the past are a smart code change away today ( Jupiter Europa, Tauntek mods, KIWI mods, JX10 OS mods ). Even my JP8 has encore midi and that was implemented many years ago ( rudimentary but it does work ).

The routing on an OB-Xpander rivals anything today and it's a very stable well built instrument with an 8 channel midi / CV gate interface to boot!

When a manufacturer finally steps up and makes a Discrete poly synth with modern digital implementation my ears will perk up. no toys with cheap knobs or SMD BS. real circuits!!!

nick z
Old 21st December 2016
  #237
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewAllianceEast! View Post
The routing on an OB-Xpander rivals anything today and it's a very stable well built instrument with an 8 channel midi / CV gate interface to boot!

nick z
The OB-Xpander?

Jk I know which one you meant.
Attached Thumbnails
anyone else underwhelmed with modern poly synths?-ob-xpander-vintage-synth-book.jpg  
Old 21st December 2016
  #238
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by golden beers View Post
In regards to less going on: old synth vs software, maybe in a way. not at all in another way, but this is kind of apple vs orange

hardware old vs new; not really.


I remember not so long ago an A6 user challenged Jp8 users to synthesise something that can't be replicated on the A6. He couldn't do it and conceded that the JP8 was more powerful than he had thought.
Yes, I'm sure neither "power" nor "less [or more] going on" are the most precise ways to put it (what's going on, what is sonic power, where does it all go, what does it all mean?! etc. <G>).

Agree more that it's an apples vs. oranges thing.

We can go back to the possibly useful discussion of randomness and microarticulations, if that will help. Because more modern synths are more precise, made with closer-tolerance components (less noisy, stay in spec, are more stable, last longer, etc.), there's a lot less noise aka randomness present in the overall system. You introduce what randomness you want, rather than working with its presence in the older, looser-tolerance instrument.

Useful debate is whether that looser tolerance/increased noise, as someone stated here recently, all resulted in anything more significant than the two phenomena of hiss (white noise/pink noise) and out-of-tuneness. If only those, both of those can be reintroduced on a modern synth in a variety of ways.

If the argument is then that such vintage hiss/tune issues vary in subtle ways over the course of holding a note, and that what is being used to reintroduce that randomness, because computers, is not absolutely random (no digital randomness is), then that can be a relevant distinction to hold onto.

I think fans of vintage, analogue, more-random/out-of-tune synths appropriately emphasize this as a category of exclusive capability; if you take the idea that nature's randomness cannot be completely simulated in a digital medium (which is so far scientifically true), then any modern, non-analogue synth will never be as "natural" as an analogue synth. And older vintage synths, with their older component spec tolerances, will be more "natural" in this sense than more modern synths.

How discernible this is to the ear is the real question, and highly dependent on individuals, performance situations, awareness of/interest in such subtleties, etc.

It's like the old audiophile debate about more or less natural sound; it mattered most in that medium listening to things like solo guitar or piano performances recorded with very excellent (not-bog-standard) microphone and acoustic engineering technique. It mattered less in large orchestral, or pop music, given that the ability for the ear to detect the relatively minute differences is quickly masked by more complex sound.

This is as true in current electronic synthesis as it is anywhere else. The microarticulations that occur during the attack phase of any note are key to its sonic quality, and that attack phase is more or less detectable in simpler or more complex sonic environments (hence all the debate about TB-303 original vs. emulations).

Those microarticulations on a vintage synth (the old, hit the same note repeatedly, get different results each note) -- their variation, in particular, out of the control of the performer -- are the key area where the distinct nature of vintage synthesis becomes most apparent.

That's my take on it, at least. Plus you detune two oscs than what.....

Oh and as to A6 vs. JP8 -- I wouldn't even begin to try to compare, or emulate. I come from the school of Nothing Sounds Exactly Like Anything Else, so Why Bother, on that front. It matters more if you're trying to recapture in absolute, inarguable simulation some original sound (including all its engineering and treatment on the original recording, something everyone forgets) and don't have the original instrument available to do so.

But here again, most movie scores that "sound orchestral" these days are entirely software, and the people paying hundreds of millions of dollars to see said movies neither notice nor care about that.

All depends on what you're after.
Old 21st December 2016
  #239
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by enossified View Post
Because those vintage lovers then broadbrush all new stuff as total crap?

Why is progress always seen as bad by these people?
Why does someone else's opinion of a synth affect them, why do they take it personally, I don't understand.

The OP says he prefers the sound of the OB8 to the new mainstream polys on offer, why is he not allowed to have that opinion and voice it, without it being seen as a personal attack on others that needs defending, it is bizarre.

Do people really identify so strongly with the modern equipment they are addicted to, that a negative opinion towards that equipment is taken as a personal attack on the person who owns it?

And progress is not seen as bad by 'these people', they just want progress in terms of sound quality, or at least not going backwards in sound quality, while providing all these additional features that might not improve the basic sound quality, the tone, of the synth.

'These people' often own a lot of modern gear, along with their vintage gear, I don't think there are many who exclusively use only vintage gear. So I don't think there is the us vs them scenario that you seem to be making up in your head.
Old 21st December 2016
  #240
Lives for gear
 
synthguy's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewAllianceEast! View Post
Modern polys don't offer anything that hasn't already been done in spades. unless bad digital on board FX and a fake tube overdrive are really features.
I would respectfully submit that this is incorrect with two synths in particular: the Behringer Deepmind-12 and Roland JD-XA.

Anyone who isn't just a little bit amazed at what the DM12 can do is either fibbing to themselves, or doesn't like anything but blirpy noises. I've listened to demos and have been utterly floored, thinking that Uri's team somehow snuck a Solaris in there. The sounds that it's capable of with a fairly traditional synth architecture are simply amazing.

The JD-XA cheats by also being a digital SN synth, but I don't care. The melding of four mere analog voices on top of a very capable sixty-four voice SN section with some pretty darn good effects is amazing. The patches it shippped with are mostly garbage, but hint at an extremely potent synthesizer. The Axial patch libraries help it a lot. But the real magic comes when you roll your own patches on one. It's one of those black hole synths, like a JD-990 on steroids.

And if you include solid VAs, I have to mention the Arturia Origin, simply an amazing synth built with the oscillators, filters, amps and EGs of their software emulations, and the pieces bundled in a modular synth form contained in a handsome and knob endowed module. It sounds pretty darn analog.

I hurt to own them all.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump