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
Why Don't New VCOs Sound as Good as Old VCOs? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 18th April 2018
  #271
PES
Lives for gear
 
PES's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWiggly View Post
Just listened - love to hear more - also love the idea of "from Train, recorded on a moving train". Obscure places to record in can be a whole new thread...
Didn't mean to actually plug, but thank you.

Good idea for a thread indeed. With all the portable solutions these days I'm sure a lot of interesting stuff would turn up. I know I spend the least amount of time making music in the designated music room.
Old 19th April 2018
  #272
Dreadbox

Honestly they make the only VCO's that sound they were pulled out of a time machine.
Old 19th April 2018
  #273
Gear Maniac
 

Garbage in garbage out.

I do not know what is in the black box, my interpretation to make sense of the output is that it must be some diety who has a privilaged access to reality. Now I do not know but I think this diety would not come here, plenty of other priorities I suppose.

I think to be human is to entertain consenual interactions. Now I take repsonsibility for what I say however how any other listens is out of my hands. That is their business. I do not see Neonrider being consensual, perhaps he is not human.

There can be many interpretations to a single utterance. I can not know one way or another so I decide which I is valid. I say that this notion of validity is just something made up by a languaging animal.

Garbage in garbage out.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
Sorry, disagreeing with someone's personal preferences or even just their phrasing doesn't justify spreading objectively false assertions about what they said.

By that argument if someone makes a thread saying "I hate the DX7", and you like the DX7, it's totally valid to make repeated posts claiming that in the OP they confessed to molesting children.

Nope, sorry - that's not valid. Just because you don't like what someone said doesn't mean you get to completely falsify what they said. If you're going to disagree with someone, address the actual content of their post, not your strawman fantasy of their post content.
Old 19th April 2018
  #274
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustAnybody View Post
Garbage in garbage out.

I do not know what is in the black box, my interpretation to make sense of the output is that it must be some diety who has a privilaged access to reality. Now I do not know but I think this diety would not come here, plenty of other priorities I suppose.

I think to be human is to entertain consenual interactions. Now I take repsonsibility for what I say however how any other listens is out of my hands. That is their business. I do not see Neonrider being consensual, perhaps he is not human.

There can be many interpretations to a single utterance. I can not know one way or another so I decide which I is valid. I say that this notion of validity is just something made up by a languaging animal.

Garbage in garbage out.
I'm might use the body of this post as lyrics for a new age track I'm working on. Very gnomic and mystical, verging on the completely nonsensical - should work perfectly!
Old 19th April 2018
  #275
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustAnybody View Post
There can be many interpretations to a single utterance. I can not know one way or another so I decide which I is valid. I say that this notion of validity is just something made up by a languaging animal.
Sorry troll, this is not open to interpretation. When someone directly says in their OP:

Quote:
Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?
...it is clear they are asking whether the difference in the sound of the VCOs is coming from other parts of the signal path. This is not open to interpretation, it's the literal meaning of the passage.

Therefore if people state repeatedly that the OP never considered the rest of the signal path in his question, they are making an objectively false statement.
Old 19th April 2018
  #276
Lives for gear
 
Klonfocius's Avatar
 

[QUOTE=neonrider;13249153]

Quote:
The question is why. Why do old VCOs sound so much better that even to amateurs it's never any contest? Or even old DCOs? The Deepmind has no emotional effect on people whatsoever. The Juno makes them swoon.
Because its amateurs who makes the statment, proos however are no better! Some people wank when they see big boobs, some wank for the prussy, its just that simple. Some dont wank at all, instead they use their ears!

Quote:
I appreciate the analogue renaissance. I love it. But. The only new poly that gets close to the old ones in tone is the Dreadbox Abyss. The Mini or modular reissues nail it, but that is exactly the old design.
Just wait! The market will be flooded in 6 months time, then you can wank to harts delight!

Quote:
Is it even fair to call something that has total locked control of pitch or phase etc a "VCO"?
Yes because that has nothing to do with VCO as such. And VCOs by the way are 99% is not "totaly" phase or/and pitch controlled, you are expressing a sever misconception. however digital phase accumulators are runing from a fixed sample rate and are totally phase pitch controlled.

Quote:
Again, I have no idea. I just know I'd rather have a real autotune I press now and then than...this constant, ever-present DSP control of the oscillator that appears to be basically what these new VCOs do. Do we need a whole new word for them? Oscillator fascism?
Oscillator fascism? Thats kinda new to me. The old school auto tune was press a button and computers then tuned the osc's some cases VCF as well. Background tuning can be implemented in several ways. People should not analyze so damned much all the time, just use you wank gear and wank a bit and be pleased, thats whats all about really.

Look to your left! What do you see? Boris Plank and what does he do? He wank his gear not himself, and out comes aural splendidness no matter new or old VCO, or DCO for that matter!
Old 19th April 2018
  #277
Lives for gear
 
daviddever's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klonfocius View Post
Look to your left! What do you see? Boris Plank and what does he do? He wank his gear not himself, and out comes aural splendidness no matter new or old VCO, or DCO for that matter!
Ehh, that's Boris on the right in your profile photo.
Old 19th April 2018
  #278
Gear Maniac
 

So name calling is your way of being objective. You talk about objectivity as if you see and hear whats really there. I do not subscribe to your objectivity if that is the case. You claim to know that I am a troll. It seems that you are a "Galilean observer" and have direct access to me rather than than through a finite channel. A god's eye view. So you can get around E.F.Moore's Theorm 2. Clever stuff.

I do not think that you calling me a troll is seeking any consensus, more like aggression. This thread is about preferences and I prefer to converse with humans. Thank you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
Sorry troll, this is not open to interpretation. When someone directly says in their OP:



...it is clear they are asking whether the difference in the sound of the VCOs is coming from other parts of the signal path. This is not open to interpretation, it's the literal meaning of the passage.

Therefore if people state repeatedly that the OP never considered the rest of the signal path in his question, they are making an objectively false statement.
Old 19th April 2018
  #279
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustAnybody View Post
So name calling is your way of being objective.
No, my way of being objective is pointing out the FACT that the OP questioned the rest of the signal path, while the detractors I cited are falsely claiming that he did not.

Calling you a troll is my way of acknowledging your desperate attempts to change the subject.
Old 19th April 2018
  #280
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Here's how consumerism works (or worked, btw; it's over if you hadn't noticed):

Advertising (aka "propaganda") brainwashes you into being constantly unhappy with whatever you have, especially if there are more expensive things out there you can be seduced into spending money on.

You -- not just your things, but you yourself -- are told that you are ugly, stinky, crippled and worthless unless you buy Product X. HOWEVER. IF you buy Product X, you will become King of the World! All it takes is money! Look at Trump!

If you don't buy into this, you are constantly bombarded, online, on Facebook, wherever you go, with further propaganda that will eventually sink in.

Then you will impulsively spend money to fix your inadequacy.

Except it never will. Welcome to the world of GAS. of MOAR.

Teens and male nerds are especially susceptible to this propaganda, as they exist in a state of uncertainty about the value of themselves, and so are EXCELLENT propaganda targets.

I'm sorry to say, it sounds like you and your friend are already lost. My condolences!
There is a more precise subset of this phenomenon that applies to musicians/audio engineers ( and in a few other genres ) Normally consumerism encourage the constant purchase of readily-available new things. Musician consumerism encourages the constant purchase of hard-to-find old things.

Prop 1- The fallacy: No new equipment sounds as good as the equivalents made 20-50 years ago.

Prop 2- The immediate result: Therefore, equipment that you can readily buy today at reasonable prices and in reliable working condition is inferior, and you are screwed unless you have the time, skill and money to search out, find, and restore vintage equipment.

Prop 3: The end result:Therefore, most of you are screwed. You will never make good music because modern equipment manufacturers have robbed you of the opportunity. You should give up unless you are willing to spend a lot more on vintage gear .
Old 19th April 2018
  #281
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
Sorry troll, this is not open to interpretation. When someone directly says in their OP:



...it is clear they are asking whether the difference in the sound of the VCOs is coming from other parts of the signal path. This is not open to interpretation, it's the literal meaning of the passage.

Therefore if people state repeatedly that the OP never considered the rest of the signal path in his question, they are making an objectively false statement.
You still don't get it. Read the thread title question again. If it's the Mixer or VCA that affects the VCO then its not the VCO is it? Since he has not tapped out the VCOs directly he can't know if the VCO sounds any different at all.
Old 19th April 2018
  #282
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
You still don't get it. Read the thread title question again.
You're not getting it. A post does not consist of merely the thread title. Read the entire post content again and you will see these words:

"Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?"

Therefore he is IN FACT acknowledging that the rest of the signal chain may be affecting differences in the perceived sound of the VCOs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
If it's the Mixer or VCA that affects the VCO then its not the VCO is it?
But he's not specifically blaming the VCOs, he's blaming the sound. Why else would he cite DCO synths as suffering similar problems?

Ultimately the question is about how the engineering of new analogs results in a different sound than the engineering of old analogs even when they are supposed to be composed of the same or similar components.

VCO-based synths are used as the prime example because they are considered by many to be the "epitome" of vintage analog sound, with the least amount of interference from later digital technology.

Insisting that he MUST be blaming the VCOs when he openly points to DCOs, amps, and other parts of the signal change as potential cultprits to be discussed, is directly tantamount to:
OP: "I noticed the chicken sandwich doesn't taste as good lately. Could it be because of the lettuce, tomato, the bread, or all of the above?"

50% of replies: "Your question is invalid because you blamed the chicken without ever considering what's in the rest of the sandwich."
That kind of answer is just about being willfully ignorant of what was asked all for the blatant sh*tposting.
Old 19th April 2018
  #283
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
You're not getting it. A post does not consist of merely the thread title. Read the entire post content again and you will see these words:

"Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?"

Therefore he is IN FACT acknowledging that the rest of the signal chain may be affecting differences in the perceived sound of the VCOs.


But he's not specifically blaming the VCOs, he's blaming the sound. Why else would he cite DCO synths as suffering similar problems?

Ultimately the question is about how the engineering of new analogs results in a different sound than the engineering of old analogs even when they are supposed to be composed of the same or similar components.

VCO-based synths are used as the prime example because they are considered by many to be the "epitome" of vintage analog sound, with the least amount of interference from later digital technology.

Insisting that he MUST be blaming the VCOs when he openly points to DCOs, amps, and other parts of the signal change as potential cultprits to be discussed, is directly tantamount to:
So he is not talking about oscillator cause he put in amp somewhere in the long post about how old vco sounds much better. And why are you talking for him?
Old 19th April 2018
  #284
Lives for gear
 
Klonfocius's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daviddever View Post
Ehh, that's Boris on the right in your profile photo.
Ehh, the "picture" i'm referring is to the left.
Personal reminder for you, Matrix6 has 3 LCO's used for detuning.

..............For your orientation this is when Boris and Dieter is to the right..------>......
Old 19th April 2018
  #285
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
So he is not talking about oscillator cause he put in amp somewhere in the long post about how old vco sounds much better.
No, he put an entire sentence in the post:

"Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?"

Thus it is objectively false to say that he didn't address or ask about the role of the rest of the signal chain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
why are you talking for him?
Because I'm actually curious about the engineering/design reasons why vintage synths would sound different, yet the thread is cluttered with these completely stupid strawman arguments about how he failed to say something which he actually did explicitly say in the OP.

And here's the thing: these arguments would still be stupid responses even he hadn't addressed the rest of his signal chain in his post.

Imagine if a newbie started a thread saying:
"Hey guys I'm new, and I heard the DX7 was used for the synth part of Jump. I love that song, it's so much better than other 80s rock songs and makes all my friends swoon. Should I buy a Reface or find a vintage DX?"
And then comes 10 different versions of the GS troll response:
"lololol OP's question is invalid because it's based on the false premise of the DX7 being used on jump"
It's a dumbass answer because you can easily move on with the question and discuss the topic regardless of the OP failing to cite the correct synth. Anyone could politely explain to him his mistake and point him towards an entry level poly that will get him close to the sound he wants.

Even with the possibility that the OP is in fact a troll aiming to anger OBXA fans, or fans of other 80s music, what does calling his question "invalid" actually accomplish beyond feeding said troll? Nothing. It just disrupts people who are trying to have honest conversations about Oberheims, Van Halen, Yamahas, or whatever.

And likewise, in this actual situation, it's extremely easy to give intelligent responses citing other parts of the signal chain and how they might affect the sound of the VCOs...as people like pppch, robot gigante, and autoy managed to do. Indeed, whether or not the OP did this himself is entirely irrelevant - the detractors were just using this as a flimsy excuse to try to shut the discussion down.

Thus the only false premise in all of this is the idea that the rest of a forum population somehow can't discuss a particular question if the OP didn't already fully answer every part of the question himself.
Old 19th April 2018
  #286
Lives for gear
 

When I hear old VCOs I wanna fist bump all my bros
Old 19th April 2018
  #287
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
And why are you talking for him?
Probably because he's grown tired of seeing that same method of trying to dumb down the discussion for no obvious reason other than to irritate, and is starting to take offence by it. I know I have.

A point that I think has not been mentioned is that VCO's is often used short for VCO based synths, but I guess there's really no use trying to convince someone that is already hellbent on misinterpreting the OP and any attempt at trying to have an honest discussion.
Old 20th April 2018
  #288
Gear Maniac
 

Do a search of you want to know why vintage synth sound better it's been discussed forever. VCO comparison would have been much more interesting if he had done it right.
Now I'm going to start a topic why software vca sound like crap. Is it the clocking or rest of the signal chain?
Old 20th April 2018
  #289
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
..
Now I'm going to start a topic why software vca sound like crap. Is it the clocking or rest of the signal chain?
Why don't you do that or just stfu?
Old 20th April 2018
  #290
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeHayduke View Post
Why don't you do that or just stfu?
Wow what a tough guy. Guess you never heard a out sarcasm.
Old 20th April 2018
  #291
Gear Head
 

I have quite a few vintage VCO poly synths, including a fair few discrete ones (Trident Mk2, Jup 4 & 8, Ob-X) and just tested a Prophet 6 in person yesterday.

God knows about just the VCOs, but to my ears overall the P6 sounded great and definitely in the same league as the big guns.

I'm also pretty sure the P6 will sound pretty great in the mix straight off the bat. Wish I could say the same about some of the old ones which take up too much space really.
Old 20th April 2018
  #292
Gear Maniac
 
jc2046's Avatar
 

Old farts smell better thatn new farts
Old 20th April 2018
  #293
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
Now I'm going to start a topic why software vca sound like crap. Is it the clocking or rest of the signal chain?
So first you guys were criticizing OP because he didn't question the rest of the signal chain... now that you were proven wrong, you're criticizing OP because he did question the rest of the signal chain?

And he're the funny part:

If your actual problem was that this isn't truly a comparison thread of modular/DIY VCOs (which was obvious at first glance) why did you then decide to spend 10 pages making an easily-disproven false accusation about the precise thing you weren't interested in, instead of taking your own advice and just searching elsewhere for a comparison that discusses what you want?

Now I'm going to go into the AFX Analord thread and spend 10 pages claiming that OP failed to mention Aphex Twin's digital/DAW-based albums, then when someone has finally copy/pasted the paragraph where he did a sufficient number of times, I'll give up and start heckling OP for mentioning Aphex's digital albums in an Analord thread, because discussing everything before Analord has been done to death.
Old 20th April 2018
  #294
Lives for gear
 
Klonfocius's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
No, he put an entire sentence in the post:

"Is it clocking, pitch control, amps, signal chains? All the above?"

Thus it is objectively false to say that he didn't address or ask about the role of the rest of the signal chain.



Because I'm actually curious about the engineering/design reasons why vintage synths would sound different, yet the thread is cluttered with these completely stupid strawman arguments about how he failed to say something which he actually did explicitly say in the OP.

And here's the thing: these arguments would still be stupid responses even he hadn't addressed the rest of his signal chain in his post.

Imagine if a newbie started a thread saying:
"Hey guys I'm new, and I heard the DX7 was used for the synth part of Jump. I love that song, it's so much better than other 80s rock songs and makes all my friends swoon. Should I buy a Reface or find a vintage DX?"
And then comes 10 different versions of the GS troll response:
"lololol OP's question is invalid because it's based on the false premise of the DX7 being used on jump"
It's a dumbass answer because you can easily move on with the question and discuss the topic regardless of the OP failing to cite the correct synth. Anyone could politely explain to him his mistake and point him towards an entry level poly that will get him close to the sound he wants.

Even with the possibility that the OP is in fact a troll aiming to anger OBXA fans, or fans of other 80s music, what does calling his question "invalid" actually accomplish beyond feeding said troll? Nothing. It just disrupts people who are trying to have honest conversations about Oberheims, Van Halen, Yamahas, or whatever.

And likewise, in this actual situation, it's extremely easy to give intelligent responses citing other parts of the signal chain and how they might affect the sound of the VCOs...as people like pppch, robot gigante, and autoy managed to do. Indeed, whether or not the OP did this himself is entirely irrelevant - the detractors were just using this as a flimsy excuse to try to shut the discussion down.

Thus the only false premise in all of this is the idea that the rest of a forum population somehow can't discuss a particular question if the OP didn't already fully answer every part of the question himself.
You just told the truth on GS! This cant end well!

Quote:
Because I'm actually curious about the engineering/design reasons why vintage synths would sound different
So far i cant see that you actually have aske'd an engineer, rather you try to portray your self as sober and
sound by the technique of accusing everybody else including the "engineers" for trolling.
Old 20th April 2018
  #295
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnalvl View Post
So first you guys were criticizing OP because he didn't question the rest of the signal chain... now that you were proven wrong, you're criticizing OP because he did question the rest of the signal chain?

And he're the funny part:

If your actual problem was that this isn't truly a comparison thread of modular/DIY VCOs (which was obvious at first glance) why did you then decide to spend 10 pages making an easily-disproven false accusation about the precise thing you weren't interested in, instead of taking your own advice and just searching elsewhere for a comparison that discusses what you want?
I am proven wrong? You still didnt get it that he/you asked the wrong ****ing question if he wanted to know why vintage synth sound better. Read my sarcasm again maybe even you can understand it. 10 pages? Its you that write long noob posts over and over.
Old 20th April 2018
  #296
Lives for gear
 

O boy
Old 20th April 2018
  #297
Lives for gear
 

Still not enough audio in this thread...
Old 20th April 2018
  #298
Lives for gear
 
Gnalvl's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
I am proven wrong? You still didnt get it that he/you asked the wrong ****ing question if he wanted to know why vintage synth sound better.
But he did ask about the rest of the synth that's an objective fact. So yes, you are proven wrong.

And as I already pointed out, even if he was asking the wrong question, that doesn't actually prevent anyone from addressing the topic, and definitely doesn't justify propping up a flimsy strawman for 10 pages.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klonfocius View Post
you try to portray your self as sober and
sound by the technique of accusing everybody else including the "engineers" for trolling.
I've accused nothing towards the engineers or anyone else actually discussing the topic, my accusations have all been towards a specific group repeating a particular strawman argument.

If anything, you're the one who jumped in the middle of a debate between two engineers to tell them they were contradicting themselves.
Old 20th April 2018
  #299
Lives for gear
 
GeorgeHayduke's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSM2030 View Post
..You still didnt get it that he/you asked the wrong ****ing question if he wanted to know why vintage synth sound better. ...
So what is the answer, do you have something to contribute?

A few posters have mentioned that Dreadbox' synths seem to have the old school flavor. I have never used one, but coincidentally I just read this in the Abyss thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by skawa View Post
..Dreadbox are known for their unstable vco in fact they even say in a interview somewhere that is what makes em sound so good. ...
So that's one qualified opinion.

Last edited by GeorgeHayduke; 20th April 2018 at 04:17 PM.. Reason: Removed flamebait
Old 20th April 2018
  #300
Lives for gear
 
daviddever's Avatar
It seems that this thread is trending perilously close to the Moan Zone, as the meta-discussion regarding other posters is eclipsing the topic discussion.

Back on track: to those who believe that older VCO-based synths sound better, what about vintage-y reissues, such as the MS-20 / Odyssey / SEM / Minimoog? Arguably, these are based on vintage designs, and largely lack microprocessor control, so should they not sound better (to you) than modern (microprocessor-controlled) designs?

And what of vintage microprocessor-based designs which utilize Curtis or SSM VCO ICs? At what point can you identify a difference between the old (preferable to you) and the new? And what about newer designs using reissue ICs? Older designs using reissue ICs (such as CEM3340 Rev G)?

At what point are you willing to bless a newer design as sounding decent? And what are these examples?
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