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
Analog vs Digital...the last word Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 16th September 2011
  #121
Lives for gear
 

I've heard that the digital section of that same synth chants "om mani padme hum" in binary, whenever it is sitting idle...
Old 16th September 2011
  #122
Lives for gear
 
lysander's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3phase View Post
When you cut a groove with the aid of energy and create a 3 dimensional footprint of the waveform this way.. and than applying an energy to that footprint to moove it along a needle.. with the result of a modulated energy that is the waveform again...

i see that you cant see a direct thermodynamic transformation of energy here... but ..

how would you describe that footprint of the waveform.. just information ??

and i am wrong even when the process of the cutting appears as such an archaic mountain moving brute act?
...
QFT.
I realise arguing with you is pointless.
But man I need to get some of that stuff you're smoking.
I think you need to engage into critical thinking a bit more.
All this nonsense you're writing is of no use to anyone and could actually mislead people starting out.
Until you can substantiate any of your claims ( good luck ) you're just increasing the noise to signal ratio of this board which is already pretty bad.
Old 16th September 2011
  #123
Gear Maniac
 
thehadgi's Avatar
Do we even need a last word?
Old 16th September 2011
  #124
Lives for gear
 
shaft9000's Avatar
 

the whole 'debate' is nothing but a silly joke on the mind.

digital is just a construct made out of the same stuff - only to serve specific purposes when a discrete signal/pulse is required for achieving logic, memory and other neat tricks. nothing more.

there is no 'Versus' as they are complimentary applications of the same thing...ever notice that the company Analog Devices makes DSP chips? there's your first clue.
Old 16th September 2011
  #125
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lysander View Post
QFT.
I realise arguing with you is pointless.
But man I need to get some of that stuff you're smoking.
I think you need to engage into critical thinking a bit more.
All this nonsense you're writing is of no use to anyone and could actually mislead people starting out.
Until you can substantiate any of your claims ( good luck ) you're just increasing the noise to signal ratio of this board which is already pretty bad.
Hmm ... somehow I agree

But never mind

But on the other hand: we need a final word on analog vs digital before the final judgement day.

But on the other hand: why I am always able to distinguish any analog synth immediately in a mix?
Old 16th September 2011
  #126
Lives for gear
 
sftd's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
Hmm ... somehow I agree

But never mind

But on the other hand: we need a final word on analog vs digital before the final judgement day.

But on the other hand: why I am always able to distinguish any analog synth immediately in a mix?


Two melodic lines in this track come from a Voyager, the rest are digital. (NL2/software)

Can you detect the beginning time marks of each Voyager part?

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 16th September 2011
  #127
Gear Guru
 
Yoozer's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
But on the other hand: we need a final word on analog vs digital before the final judgement day.
The final word is that any time spent on it is time not spent on making music.

Quote:
But on the other hand: why I am always able to distinguish any analog synth immediately in a mix?
Do the people who make it go out of their way to make the analog modeling plugins or synths sound analog-ish?
Old 16th September 2011
  #128
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
The final word is that any time spent on it is time not spent on making music.
Bwaa ha ha. Truth.
Old 16th September 2011
  #129
Lives for gear
 

Real vs contrived????hmmm,ill have to think about that one............................................not: ]
Old 16th September 2011
  #130
Lives for gear
 
lysander's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sftd View Post


Two melodic lines in this track come from a Voyager, the rest are digital. (NL2/software)

Can you detect the beginning time marks of each Voyager part?
I've got no idea and don't care in the slightest, but the track is great !
Old 16th September 2011
  #131
Lives for gear
 
erikdrink's Avatar
Loving the analog vs digital threads!
Old 16th September 2011
  #132
Gear Head
 

IMO This forum needs an auto-block on any subject line that has 'analogue vs digital'

They're 2 different things, simply by their nature. Look at the science behind it folks. And get over it.

Analogue equipment is fantastic. Digital equipment and software is amazing and fantastic too, in its own way. They are not the same thing, they never will be.

They're just tools. Instead of sitting around debating what is better, rather use what works for you the best and pour your soul out in to the music you make with them.

/Opinion. My 2 cents, etc... Gotta go now...
Old 16th September 2011
  #133
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sftd View Post


Two melodic lines in this track come from a Voyager, the rest are digital. (NL2/software)

Can you detect the beginning time marks of each Voyager part?

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
well nice tune, but I cannot. Some people say that the Voyager sounds more like a plugin. Might be. I mean, take a Juno 60 or Polysix, Oberheim, CS80, they have much more of a characterstic sound, don't they? You can make an analog synth sounds digital. Here in this mix, every synth sounds more or less digital to me, not in a bad sense, just very clean and doesn't have much of that analog mystification effect. This sounds analogish to me, has lots of depth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAd81chckhk

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaD1T5EugaI

one could argue ... BUT ... it's not only about reverbs or noise or being almost mono ...
Old 16th September 2011
  #134
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by lysander View Post
QFT.
I realise arguing with you is pointless.
But man I need to get some of that stuff you're smoking.
I think you need to engage into critical thinking a bit more.
All this nonsense you're writing is of no use to anyone and could actually mislead people starting out.
Until you can substantiate any of your claims ( good luck ) you're just increasing the noise to signal ratio of this board which is already pretty bad.
that is what you think. compared to your input its actualy valuable content .
Have you said anything regarding the topic or just throwing some dirt?
thats actually noise !!
I am just r provokating a more philosophical look on the item which is actually as valid as all this technocratic mambo jambo about that cant be what cant be. Just.. there is a lot in music production that cant be explained by numbers or letters..at least not yet.. Bob moog knew that.. but i guess you call his statements missleading noise too.

Actually nothing i tell can misslead people more than all these pro digital myth that dominates the world since 3 decades.
Old 16th September 2011
  #135
Lives for gear
 
sftd's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
well nice tune, but I cannot. Some people say that the Voyager sounds more like a plugin. Might be. I mean, take a Juno 60 or Polysix, Oberheim, CS80, they have much more of a characterstic sound, don't they? You can make an analog synth sounds digital. Here in this mix, every synth sounds more or less digital to me, not in a bad sense, just very clean and doesn't have much of that analog mystification effect. This sounds analogish to me, has lots of depth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAd81chckhk

and this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaD1T5EugaI

one could argue ... BUT ... it's not only about reverbs or noise or being almost mono ...
First thanks for the compliment! (@lysander thank you as well!)

I didn't want to make it seem like a challange on my part or anything and I don't think you took it that way so that's good! However I do at this point feel I have a fair amount of songwriting experience using any tool I see fit to use regardless of its type or origin, and in the end can, in my own work, never identify one type of tool as screaming its excluaive identity.

I don't believe there needs to be a debate. Why eat yourself up about something being recognized in a particular manner when you can just grab the nearest most effecient tool and make some music!

If you can only enjoy making music using instruments that contain a "pure analog circuit path" then by all means use them! If you can only enjoy making music using digital instruments then by all means use them! I enjoy making music using anything, so thats what I use!

I don't ever strive for analog sound.

I don't ever strive for digital sound.

I constantly strive for sound I am happy with!

Anyway, my point was that sometimes we faulty little beautiful creatures known as humans can be very sure of something, but we might not always know exactly what we're sure of.

You seemed very sure of the instant notification analog sound afforded you, and you may have full well been very sure of it! But depending on the situation and the light in which life allows us to view it, those certainties can sometimes be more confusing than something you're unsure of!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 16th September 2011
  #136
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sftd View Post
If you can only enjoy making music using instruments that contain a "pure analog circuit path" then by all means use them! If you can only enjoy making music using digital instruments then by all means use them! I enjoy making music using anything, so thats what I use!
No, of course I enjoy even the music of plugins. I have no problem with that at all. For myself, I currently use only softsynths because I am out of town for a while. And I am happy with it, a synth like Synthix and a few others are "fat enough". It's just a matter of detail ... a real tb303 is a real tb 303.
Old 16th September 2011
  #137
Lives for gear
 

Maybe in future ALL MUSIC MUST BE MADE ON IPADx, there is no AU and MIDI support anymore and all plugins must be purchased over appstore. Let's see ...
Old 16th September 2011
  #138
Lives for gear
 
sftd's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
No, of course I enjoy even the music of plugins. I have no problem with that at all. For myself, I currently use only softsynths because I am out of town for a while. And I am happy with it, a synth like Synthix and a few others are "fat enough". It's just a matter of detail ... a real tb303 is a real tb 303.
Very true!

I think ANYTHING can sound fat, I can get all the fatness -I- need out of any sound I need to get it on via processing, "fatness" is actually the very last attribute on my importance list.

You're also right in that some things just can't quite be nailed, and the example of a 303 is one of the few I agree with.

I heard a melody line in a Kettel track that I LOVED the tone of, usually I'm much more apt to jump on composition than tone, but this little guy was beautiful.

So I tried to make it. A lot. I finally.figured it out, but couldn't -nail- it. This is when I realized that as many analog fanatics bring up often, sometimes there are unique little idiosyncrasies that create a special distinction. In this case it was a 303 creating the tone, and though I "knew how" to achieve elsewhere I couldn't quite get the "magic" or little slice of special I heard in the original.

Strange timing on all this 303 talk. That episode I described above was a few months ago and just last night I got a boredom induced hair up my butt to grab a modern 303 hardware emulation.

Now just trying to make my mind up on which one!

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 16th September 2011
  #139
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3phase View Post
that is what you think. compared to your input its actualy valuable content .
Have you said anything regarding the topic or just throwing some dirt?
thats actually noise !!
I am just r provokating a more philosophical look on the item which is actually as valid as all this technocratic mambo jambo about that cant be what cant be. Just.. there is a lot in music production that cant be explained by numbers or letters..at least not yet.. Bob moog knew that.. but i guess you call his statements missleading noise too.

Actually nothing i tell can misslead people more than all these pro digital myth that dominates the world since 3 decades.
Vaulable content - something your posts seem to be devoid of too. Just lots of psuedo philosophical BS, you plainly know little of science of engineering. I really couldn't be bothered to point out the numerous flaws in your comments.
Old 17th September 2011
  #140
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveman View Post
Vaulable content - something your posts seem to be devoid of too. Just lots of psuedo philosophical BS, you plainly know little of science of engineering. I really couldn't be bothered to point out the numerous flaws in your comments.
when it makes you feel better you are welcome, but as long you dont come up with arguments that is just noise.

But please spare me with things that theese thermodynamic laws are not made with electronic and elektro mechanical processes in mind and thats forbidden to try to apply them in areas wher they are not supposed to be applied... Call it pseudo science or pseudo philosophy if you want.. I dont need to follow modern academic rules to have own thought about the world..
To take it all from books is actually even more pseudo philosophy. OWn thoughts are mandatory..and wrong or right? does that really matter so much? dont take analog /digital discussion so serious

Anyway.. i know that the physics is slightly abused.. but

Part of the first law of thermo dynamic is something that seems to have a more universal meaning..

Quote:
The principle of conservation of energy may be stated in several ways:
Energy can be neither created nor destroyed.
It can only change forms.
In any process in an isolated system, the total energy remains the same.
and soundwaves in the media air ...is that not a thermodynamik process?
and a needle scrapping thru laquer.. is that not a thermodynamic process?


and what are soundwaves ? pressure waves.. they do contain energy.

right? and i know that the idea that the universe is build on sound is romantic hippy mambo jambo .. i just like the idea.. on the other hand..

Black Hole Sound Waves - NASA Science

Its interesting what kind of soundsources the universe provides.. they at least seem to shape the universe.. at least when there was something like a "big bang".
Old 17th September 2011
  #141
Lives for gear
 
shadowfac's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3phase View Post
I dont need to follow modern academic rules to have own thought about the world..
Of course not. You are free to think whatever you want, even if it's wrong and makes no sense at all, just don't expect other people to agree with you if you are unable to provide any reasonable argument.

The problem here, it seems, is that you want to approach a technical issue (sound generation and storage) from a philosophical point of view, but armed with no technical knowledge at all. It is you who's incorrectly applying one way of thought to a matter that requires another one, but you think that since you have an "artistic" point of view, logic does not apply to your arguments. You don't care about actually understanding the world (or the issue at hand); instead, you expect the world to adjust to your thinking, and that will never happen, so you will twist and misinterpret facts and other people's claims to support that vision. That is not freedom of thought, because you are prisoner of your own thoughts. True freedom of thought comes from the realization that one does not know everything about a subject, and must therefore be willing to learn and study all points of view, so one can eventually form his own.
Old 17th September 2011
  #142
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfac View Post
Of course not. You are free to think whatever you want, even if it's wrong and makes no sense at all, just don't expect other people to agree with you if you are unable to provide any reasonable argument.

The problem here, it seems, is that you want to approach a technical issue (sound generation and storage) from a philosophical point of view, but armed with no technical knowledge at all. It is you who's incorrectly applying one way of thought to a matter that requires another one, but you think that since you have an "artistic" point of view, logic does not apply to your arguments. You don't care about actually understanding the world (or the issue at hand); instead, you expect the world to adjust to your thinking, and that will never happen, so you will twist and misinterpret facts and other people's claims to support that vision. That is not freedom of thought, because you are prisoner of your own thoughts. True freedom of thought comes from the realization that one does not know everything about a subject, and must therefore be willing to learn and study all points of view, so one can eventually form his own.

Sure..i ve no technical knowledge ..i just have spend my whole live with sound engineering and studio design and DIY electronic projects and electronic music aso.. And a bit hobby philosophy and soziology. Not too serious, Brian Adams, Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull are the leading philosophers of our time for me..
And in school i had all this technical classes like math, physics and a bit informatics. But never studied that, so i dont know much in this areas.. The typical highschool stuff..some years for a global overview... nothing special ..enough to stay interested.. not more..

Quote:
True freedom of thought comes from the realization that one does not know everything about a subject
Sure i agree. i just dont believe that there is a single person on the planet that knows all about audio. And especially the type that claims audio perfection in the digital domain makes me slightly suspicious. Because thats exactly the type that seems to believe to know it all, because their believe is based on official science.
I ve no problem with that when it wouldnt clash with practical experiance sometimes. So things seem to be just not that simple.

And i even more dont belive that there is a single person on the planet that knows all about the universe we live in.. Most certainly not me...

And i am biased.
I ve heard so strange things from the old audio engineers that did all the audio stuff in the 1930´s. Some had a philosophic mindset regarding the new technology like golden means in the freq response of speaker design and stuff like that. and a technical scientific one too of cause. Just not many rules to follow back than, many inventions based on experimentation.. the formulas came later.

I had the chance to interview some of the first generation telefunken and neuman engineers before they died because i had to design a replica of hydraulic moved patchpannels they had build in the 50´s to 60´s for german tv stations... And as usual when sound engineers start talking the techtalk went over hours... >50 years age difference wasnt really a problem. Especially when you are fascinated about vintage studio electronics and dont start a digital versus analoge debate with the grand daddys of studio technology.
I dont even know whether they was pro or contra digital sound technology.
I only learned that they was rather pissed and concerned about the bad quality of the copies of the old 3rd reich propaganda movies that float around in tv documentarys. " we had a brilliant sound..."
But ensured me that they just was audio engineers and not involved in the politics whatsoever.. Only interested and fascinated in sound and building sound distributing devices.
Easy to believe when people in their late 80´s or even 90´s ? are still so enthusiastic about audio technology.

Anyway i asked a few questions in my previous mail..

Could you please answer the 3-4 questions in the text with yes or no...that might help me to fill the gaps in my limited physical knowledge.
Old 17th September 2011
  #143
Lives for gear
 

3phase needs to get laid. Too uptight and argumentative for an issue to which there is no resolve.
Old 17th September 2011
  #144
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid360 View Post
3phase needs to get laid. Too uptight and argumentative for an issue to which there is no resolve.
i need to go to a party..right now..

But especially issues with no resolve are interesting.. It´s just a bit hard when everybody tells you that you are a total moron when your way thru audio technology, and everybody into this matter has a different one, leads to non mainstream ideas and conclusions. However i think its ok to document that there are non mainstream ideas about audio in the world.
True or not is another question. But as you say..that remains unresolved for now.

We have something like 130 years of audio technology by now .. main body of work actually done up to the end of the 1940´s incl. Wavefield synthesis and the theoretical body for the later digital audio technology. That is really only around since maybe 30 years by now.. Home computer based since 15 years..
So a rather young phenomenon..

enough reason to stay uptight argumentative for a little while longer.
Old 17th September 2011
  #145
Gear Maniac
 

digital can from to 0 to 1 instantly. analog can't.

so when a speaker is reproducing a digital signal there is wasted energy.
Old 17th September 2011
  #146
Lives for gear
 
shaft9000's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid360 View Post
an issue to which there is no resolve.
because the "issue" isn't an issue at all

the issue is: some of our brains' cognitive dissonance and assumptions of exclusion result in this false concept of 'versus'

these design approaches are complimentary and if we only had one and NEVER the other we'd be the lesser for it. you can't have digital without analog, anyways. the entire notion of 'digital' is a mental construct and not a physical reality.

remember this - our fingers are every bit as digital as our shiny new computers and VAs.

fingers were the first things to be called digits, after all.

see how silly this 'debate' looks now?
Old 17th September 2011
  #147
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
false concept of 'versus'
Yes.
Old 17th September 2011
  #148
Lives for gear
 
sftd's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shaft9000 View Post
because the "issue" isn't an issue at all

the issue is: some of our brains' cognitive dissonance and assumptions of exclusion result in this false concept of 'versus'

these design approaches are complimentary and if we only had one and NEVER the other we'd be the lesser for it. you can't have digital without analog, anyways. the entire notion of 'digital' is a mental construct and not a physical reality.

remember this - our fingers are every bit as digital as our shiny new computers and VAs.

fingers were the first things to be called digits, after all.

see how silly this 'debate' looks now?
Our friend there Mister Phase is unfortunately about to set you straight.

Sent from my PC36100 using Gearslutz.com App
Old 17th September 2011
  #149
Gear Addict
 

this broken-down-crack-house of a thread is still going?
Old 17th September 2011
  #150
Lives for gear
 
shaft9000's Avatar
 

this is nothing - if human nature is anything to go by this will be another 20 pager
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