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
Analogue vs Digital - Diva and OB8 test Keyboard Synthesizers
View Poll Results: Which synth is First in the 8 bar cycle?
Diva
92 Votes - 51.11%
OB8
88 Votes - 48.89%
Voters: 180. You may not vote on this poll

Old 23rd July 2014
  #481
Quote:
Originally Posted by living sounds View Post
So did you make the recording for this thread with the recapped unit?
naturally yes
Old 23rd July 2014
  #482
Lives for gear
 

A good litmus test would be three different contests, three different examples of ob8 and diva, them you could get a more accurate picture of who can hear the difference.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #483
Lives for gear
 

Furthermore, vsts will never have an opportunity to gain in value. They will, however, become useless. Can't say that for analogs. While their values may fluctuate, they will never reach zero. Vsts, are disposable.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #484
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyklane View Post
I'd love to have that technical discussion with you...I'd be very interested in your perspective. In terms of education and vocation I'm an electrical engineer and you seem to be stating that there is math to prove this assertion. From a DSP point of view, we are in agreement...the processing power to run the audio equivalent of SPICE in real-time is simply not available to the individual consumer yet....however if we're talking analog (you mentioned the Prophet '08 earlier) I think you'll find that you're mixing mathematical proof of significant differences with empirical observation....i.e. Modern operational amplifiers tend to run clean with very high slew rates right up to the rails where they fall apart gracelessly...There are all sorts of pitfalls in just that single issue alone! I am not being sarcastic here: I would actually welcome the discussion.
No, those are indeed two seperate issues. It's all in the details, with synthesis as with any analog processing to change the signal in a "colourfull" way. My educated guess is that certain pitfalls (and often corners cut for one reason or another) make a modern analog hardware synth sound like plastic. And small changes add up. Even more, parts may vary a lot. I've got 5532 from almost a dozen manufacturing dates/manufacturers - and they also give demonstrably different responses. Differences that for example can make an EQ sound either harsh, hazy and muffled or clear, punchy and full. And in this day and age audio quality is not what parts are generally designed for, so it's certainly not easier for a manufacturer to get things right. Especially since they cannot ask 1970s/80s prices...
Old 23rd July 2014
  #485
Lives for gear
 
D_Davis's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
Furthermore, vsts will never have an opportunity to gain in value. They will, however, become useless. Can't say that for analogs. While their values may fluctuate, they will never reach zero. Vsts, are disposable.
For me, the only value any instrument/gear has is how it impacts my ability to make the best music that I can make.

I put no value in scarcity, or rarity, or vintage anything.

It's all about how the tool can be used, so in that case any VST has the potential to be just as valuable as any piece of hardware.

I'm a musician, not a music instrument reseller.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #486
Lives for gear
 
grumphh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
So, instead of saying everyone just guessed, why don't you acknowledge that there are some astute people who actually got it?
Because the numbers don't lie.

Chance is all this experiment demonstrates.
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #487
Urs
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyklane View Post
the processing power to run the audio equivalent of SPICE in real-time is simply not available to the individual consumer yet....
Well, if we're talking simple circuits such as state variable filters built with two or three OTAs, two capacitors and a bunch of resistors then MNA (Modified Nodal Analysis) can be boiled down to a set of non-linear equations that can indeed be solved in realtime. That's what we do.

Naturally that's not a general approach, but the maths used for MNA is equivalent to the maths we use in our optimised scenario. Just, instead of a matrix we use the equations directly to reduce the number of dependencies that need to be solved iteratively. It's a hell of a lot of work, it still smokes CPUs, but it's worth doing.
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #488
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Davis View Post
For me, the only value any instrument/gear has is how it impacts my ability to make the best music that I can make.

I put no value in scarcity, or rarity, or vintage anything.

It's all about how the tool can be used, so in that case any VST has the potential to be just as valuable as any piece of hardware.

I'm a musician, not a music instrument reseller.
Well, one day, you may want to sell a soft synth.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #489
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Because the numbers don't lie.

Chance is all this experiment demonstrates.
So, you're essentially saying no one on gearslutz knows what they are talking about? Or we are all tone deaf? Wow, what a crazy assumption. Not one person?
3
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #490
Lives for gear
 

I met this lovely lady the other night!!!!Only to find out she was a damn replicant!!!!! needless to say i did not take her home : [
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #491
Urs
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
Furthermore, vsts will never have an opportunity to gain in value. They will, however, become useless. Can't say that for analogs. While their values may fluctuate, they will never reach zero. Vsts, are disposable.
Only, each year you need to pay 200 bucks to keep a random vintage synth alive.

One day all CA3080s, all CEM chips and all original Roland filter chips will be gone. Then suddenly a highly sought after vintage synth becomes nothing but a memory, or a source of remaining parts to keep another alive.

A properly backed up VST otoh will always run. If not on a 256 bit computer in the year 2137, then on a the x86 emulator that ships with it. In the same year, only 7 people on earth will have functioning vintage synths. Roughly estimated.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #492
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
Yes, in any one on one comparison we did here, Diva sounded better than its analogue counterparts. Subjectively evaluated by the peeps that were around at the time, during a period of one year or so of tweaking.
Interesting. Thanks for the clarification.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #493
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
Well, if we're talking simple circuits such as state variable filters....
I just wanted to take a moment to thank Urs for participating in this thread. We live in an awesome world today, where the designer of a synthesizer can participate in a global discussion about technology and music.

Very cool!
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #494
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
So, you're essentially saying no one on gearslutz knows what they are talking about? Or we are all tone deaf? Wow, what a crazy assumption. Not one person?
That conclusion could only be drawn if the experiment only had people who have experience with both synths had taken part.

I've done experiments in the past with people who've bitched about the "loudness war" and managed to show that they couldn't actually hear brick wall limiting when I was automating it to turn it and off every 4 bars (I made sure the output was relative to the amount of gain added by the limiter). It was quite alarming actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
Only, each year you need to pay 200 bucks to keep a random vintage synth alive.
Never had to do that.

But there is a place in the world for both. But obsolescence with software/computing hardware is worth being concerned by.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #495
VST
Lives for gear
 
VST's Avatar
Quantum computing could be quite the boon for real-time circuit emulation as each individual vst would be just as individual and esoteric as a hardware equivalent, even mimic component degradation if desired(which could easily be reset to new tolerances at any time). Now that is when we may be able to put our old boards to pasture. No doubt exciting times for digital instruments on the horizon.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #496
Urs
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by keybdwizrd View Post
I just wanted to take a moment to thank Urs for participating in this thread. We live in an awesome world today, where the designer of a synthesizer can participate in a global discussion about technology and music.

Very cool!
hehe, how could I not? My point of view may be slightly biased though...

It's also a good excuse to postpone some things till tomorrow. 31° Celsius in the office, the whole team is melting here. If we did a synth comparison today I'm sure the humidity would induce some extra voice drift.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #497
Lives for gear
 
Eigenwert's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Solaris View Post
Come on, spill the beans!!

Which software and which hardware.
The software was a synthesizer called "Synchrotron". One preset sequence was used as main theme in Black Hawk Down (which even won an Oscar for sound). The corresponding track on the audio cd is called "Synchrotone".

I bought a Nord Modular at the time (which is HW, but digital as well).
Old 23rd July 2014
  #498
Lives for gear
 
Synth Buddha's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenwert View Post
The software was a synthesizer called "Synchrotron". One preset sequence was used as main theme in Black Hawk Down (which even won an Oscar for sound). The corresponding track on the audio cd is called "Synchrotone".

I bought a Nord Modular at the time (which is HW, but digital as well).
Oh. That's nice. Pretty damn cool.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #499
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
But you can't ever do it right with testing.
I'm afraid you're right, Yoozer. No one will ever be satisfied.

You know, I've never been one of those "I can smell a VST types" and have humbly subjected myself to A/B testing time and time again. Sometimes I'm wrong. Most times I right.

But it's never good enough.

If people (like grumphh heh) want to believe that everyone has an equal ability (or inability) to hear or feel (yes, feel) the nuances of sound then so be it.

Have fun, folks! I'm checkin' out for awhile! The sun's shining (a rare event in Germany) and I intend to enjoy it by taking a nice stroll through the park. After that, I'll fire up my obsolete synths and compose a joyful tune in celebration of obsolescence. For the lead part, I think I'll use my Macbeth Micromac-D...

...a fitting synth for an old fool who still believes genuine analog sounds are best created using genuine analog instruments.
3
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #500
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by digital 1010 View Post
I wish someone could just plonk these soft synths in a hardware unit with lots of knobs and stuff. Don't care if its VA,real analogy,digital,etc etc just be great to have them not taking down my MAc pro and logic x and also have some proper hands on dedicated fiddling stuff. I know you can you use midi controllers to map it, and i do, but its not quite the same as a dedicated synth.

Diva in its own device doing all processing would be ace as would Omnispshere. Id love a hardware version of Omnisphere as an alternative to a mix of a roland module and virus marriage.

Great stuff Swan. I got em back to front only because the first synths sounded a touch louder and had more presence/sounded better, which blindly and stupidly led me to believe, after frequenting GS for so long, that it was the hardware.

Ben
Well, while not being exactly "these soft synths" (I'm not even sure what ones you're talking about beyond Diva and Omnisphere) there are some decent choices out there for hardware synths and it gets better all the time. The closest to Diva, IMO, is probably the KingKORG. Of course there is also the Virus, Nords, Waldorfs, etc. You want Omnisphere in a box? I bet the Roland Integra 7 will get you most of the way there.

If you're hanker'n for "the real thing" you've got lots of choices. You could go vintage and pick up a Juno or Matrix, maybe one of the Korgs (I'm thinking polyphonics) but, of course, there are tons of new monophonic analogs on the market that are super fun. You want knobs and real analog, pick up a Sub Phatty or a Sub37.

So... there doesn't seem to be a shortage of hardware synths to me.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #501
Lives for gear
 
Eigenwert's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDGEK8D View Post
IF YOU COULD TELL, if just 15 of you could tell, and the other 85 are idiots.....then the rest would be guessing, or 50%. This means the results would have been 57/43, or 58/42....but they were not, were they? It was absolutely, positively, statistically insignifigant that anyone could differentiate the two.
You are mixing up things. What if the so called "non-experts" just prefered DIVA, outweighing those with the correct choice?

If you re-read this thread, especially the part before the reveal, you might find that your statement dismisses the fact that it was possible to be sure which was which and that there also has been an explanation, why.

And it's pretty bold to name the "non-experts" "idiots". I am pretty sure that nearly everyone, even some of the top producers on GS would be an "idiot" next to a graduate of the McGill University then, because almost no other person will be able to hear the slight EQ curve changes they teach you to hear over there.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #502
Lives for gear
 
login's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by haze015 View Post
Never had to do that.

But there is a place in the world for both. But obsolescence with software/computing hardware is worth being concerned by.
This very relative, computers from 20 years ago keep turning on and the software keeps working on them.

it's the user that move on and stop using old technology, also many software can be run thorugh emulations.

Most Software obsolescence is quite intresting because it only happens when the user decides it is obsolet. There is people outthere using old computers and old software to make music, not bothered to use the last and greatest.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #503
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
Only, each year you need to pay 200 bucks to keep a random vintage synth alive.

One day all CA3080s, all CEM chips and all original Roland filter chips will be gone. Then suddenly a highly sought after vintage synth becomes nothing but a memory, or a source of remaining parts to keep another alive.

A properly backed up VST otoh will always run. If not on a 256 bit computer in the year 2137, then on a the x86 emulator that ships with it. In the same year, only 7 people on earth will have functioning vintage synths. Roughly estimated.
How much would a functioning synth be worth if only 7were?
Old 23rd July 2014
  #504
Lives for gear
 
Eigenwert's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
There is people outthere using old computers and old software to make music, not bothered to use the last and greatest.
I even got the last version of OS X which had no Facebook-functionality build into the kernel to allow the computer to wake up when someone left a message on your profile

Vintage software all the way
Old 23rd July 2014
  #505
Lives for gear
 

Or, I know it's a novel idea, but what if people could actually hear the difference? I heard a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haze015 View Post
That conclusion could only be drawn if the experiment only had people who have experience with both synths had taken part.

I've done experiments in the past with people who've bitched about the "loudness war" and managed to show that they couldn't actually hear brick wall limiting when I was automating it to turn it and off every 4 bars (I made sure the output was relative to the amount of gain added by the limiter). It was quite alarming actually.



Never had to do that.

But there is a place in the world for both. But obsolescence with software/computing hardware is worth being concerned by.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #506
Gear Guru
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
Well, the cost of keeping the hardware alive will outdo the cost of buying whatever succeeds Diva (should that ever happen, hrhrhr). You can buy a new software annually and a new computer every 3 years for the cost of keeping three or four decent vintage analogues alive.

I know what I'm talking about. Whenever we pick one of our 30 analogues up from service, we bring another in need of a tune up.
1. I use analog or "vintage" because I'm poor. Also helps that I don't really fancy the big huge polysynths (except the OB-8) or modulars.

2. If you used your analog synths more for making music they probably wouldn't be needing repair all the time.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #507
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
Or, I know it's a novel idea, but what if people could actually hear the difference? I heard a difference.
I heard a difference in this test, just got it wrong.

But that was a test where people who claimed to hear a difference in the quality of music which has had brick wall limiting used on it couldn't hear a difference. It was the same approach with this one, A/Bing between both and not a single person got it right. I could hear a difference, but got to wonder how much of it was psychological from knowing what I'd done.

Hoping to expand on that experiment, even I did not expect that result.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #508
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
This very relative, computers from 20 years ago keep turning on and the software keeps working on them.

it's the user that move on and stop using old technology, also many software can be run thorugh emulations.

Most Software obsolescence is quite intresting because it only happens when the user decides it is obsolet. There is people outthere using old computers and old software to make music, not bothered to use the last and greatest.
The user or Apple. Usually Apple.

But wanting to have the latest and greatest should not necessarily mean having to discard old stuff.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #509
227861
Guest
Keeping up with a computer is as much of a pain in the ass sometimes or more than a vintage synth. Especially when updates come so often, developers leave, new computers are needed because of an upgrade, other software, ect. So the argument of maintenance is off.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #510
Lives for gear
 
Eigenwert's Avatar
I recently even bought an analogue EQ and compressor, mainly to be sure they'll survive my current computer (and because they sound excellent). Some software licenses might even not survive a HD crash. With software I clearly prefer stuff which utilizes no dongle, no internet connections on production machines and which allow for installation on multiple devices (while the vendor can do nothing but pray that the customer will not give a copy to someone else). If they offer you "lifetime support" (e.g. new keys for challenge-response as needed) I am confident with a company. But a lot of quality software nowadays utilizes 3rd party copytheft-protection technology which surely will become insecure in just a few years (as always with security-relevant technology). I doubt that one can be sure that all that stuff will survive long time without being paid for again.
2
Share
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump