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
  #541
Lives for gear
 

You guys are correct. We have no idea what the future holds for these instruments, and their eventual place in history. There is also no indication pointing towards anyone really caring about pure saw waves or whatever, especially, when the kids could give a **** about audio quality in general, as evidenced by downloaded music, much less the album experience that us older folk will remember. So, to that, I say, as everything else, you buy and put a value on what the object you are purchasing means to you to own. In 10 years the general public may only think that whatever vintage gear I own is only worth a fraction of the value I put on it. Honestly, the only people really gassing over this old stuff, ie jp8, whatever, are people around 40's and up. I do think, however, that another musical revolution is on the horizon, and there will be a repeat of the early 90's, when no one cared about synths in music. Then, you will be able to grab all kinds of synths cheap.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #542
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Well, here's one very simple example, with Diva first, then JP8. Completely open filters, with Diva in 'divine' mode:



It's not the JP8 that sounds muffled here..
Diva does sound really good.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #543
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicncars View Post
there will be a repeat of the early 90's, when no one cared about synths in music. Then, you will be able to grab all kinds of synths cheap.
In the early 90's no one cared about quality instruments. But there was a hell of a lot of quality music going around.

It was fantasic
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #544
Lives for gear
 
Eigenwert's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer View Post
What you want to do is rule out luck.

With the example SWAN gave you can do a random guess and still have 50% chance to get it right. The fact that the pattern was repeated doesn't matter much but gives the ears an opportunity to get used to the character, which is good, because it rules out bad initial guesses.

This test is a coin flip; heads or tails. With any additional random switch, the lucky guess is reduced with 50% every time you repeat it.
This would only be true if you assume the same chances on every single example. But one example (which was using PWM) was by far more revealing than other examples. Going this route could work multiple examples of a very similar sound, e.g. to test only a bunch of strong PWM sounds or only a bunch of string sounds at a time - splitting this thing up in multiple, different tests. I would expect a much higher hit rate one one kind of sound than on the other kind of sound (as I was only sure by that specific sound and I assume that I wouldn't have been able to tell from the other sounds).
One main problem with tests is to know what you actually test. Any variables may alter the result. It is a good approach to show broad palette of sounds to make sure people are not focussing on some detail you actually didn't want to test, it keeps the test simple. That is the reason why I would rather go on with the current way of testing. The lucky guess is still reduced by 50% everytime we repeat the test. However, one must make sure that the sound palette either is very broad or very small (testing only for a specific type of sound). Otherwise the result will be altered by the category of sounds used. Not an easy task to achieve.
AFAIK the next test already is on the way. So let's stay tuned. I'll surely participate.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #545
Lives for gear
 
ionian's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urs View Post
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.
Well, at that point I may get stuck using your software. But we're not there yet and my OB8 is still chugging along nicely!
3
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #546
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Well, here's one very simple example, with Diva first, then JP8. Completely open filters, with Diva in 'divine' mode:



It's not the JP8 that sounds muffled here..
Interesting.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #547
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Well, here's one very simple example, with Diva first, then JP8. Completely open filters, with Diva in 'divine' mode:



It's not the JP8 that sounds muffled here..
Try posting the results when you switch from the analog1 to the analog2 waveshape? There. That wasn't so difficult, was it?
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #548
Lives for gear
 
login's Avatar
One day we may be able to print the chips at home maybe not that far away (40 years), and everyone will have analog stuff
Old 23rd July 2014
  #549
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
One day we may be able to print the chips at home maybe not that far away (40 years), and everyone will have analog stuff
Imagine the warez scene.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #550
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Well, here's one very simple example, with Diva first, then JP8. Completely open filters, with Diva in 'divine' mode:



It's not the JP8 that sounds muffled here..
Man, that JP8 sounds great! Exactly the kind of difference I'd expect from all past experience.

That's why the OP's comparison was so perplexing.
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #551
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
One day we may be able to print the chips at home maybe not that far away (40 years), and everyone will have analog stuff
... and nobody will need it, because nobody knows wtf analog is anymore. and then we are in heaven.

imagine all the people ... living for the day ... analog or digital, who cares?

btw: just saw this thread, listend to the examples, and couldnt tell any difference. so, I assume in being right: no analog bs for me. digi and ana sounds the same, and digi I dont have to dust. so ...
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #552
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by living sounds View Post
Man, that JP8 sounds great! Exactly the kind of difference I'd expect from all past experience.

That's why the OP's comparison was so perplexing.
Except I've already pointed out how to easily compensate for this in Diva. All it demonstrates currently is that pendejo didn't make a good job copying the sound.
3
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #553
227861
Guest
I already asked the OP to share patches. That way we can do tests at home if or owns both. Who knows what other methods could have been used for his test.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #554
Lives for gear
 
pulsar modular's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by enecosse View Post
Try posting the results when you switch from the analog1 to the analog2 waveshape? There. That wasn't so difficult, was it?
Dude, I am using the JP8 init patch in Diva. The 'analog2' shape is used for JP6. I'd like to think they know what they're doing with their presets...
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #555
Lives for gear
 
GearAndGuitars's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
This test is an automated A/B switch in a single file between the analogue and softsynth - with closely (slavishly as best I could) matched settings and levels - every 4 bars - its switches. You have to decide what the order is...in the cycle of 8 bars - which is first - OB8 or Diva?
wav:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByO...it?usp=sharing
Love the tune - very DRIVE Soundtrack-ish! Props. As for the A/B, no golden ears for me I suppose - I can't hear a difference that would make me declare one better than the other. Well done!

I think Diva may well be the best virtual analog synth plugin.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #556
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Dude, I am using the JP8 init patch in Diva. The 'analog2' shape is used for JP6. I'd like to think they know what they're doing with their presets...
And you assume every template is exactly calibrated to every model of that synth ever made, do you? Do you always follow what manuals tell you to do too?

How about using your ears and not a template? An extremely simple correction has been pointed out which will make the sounds much closer. Feel free to save it as your very own JP8 template afterwards.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #557
Lives for gear
 
login's Avatar
LOL @pendejo makes me laugh when peoples quotes you
Old 23rd July 2014
  #558
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disease Factory View Post
I think the prophet 12 sound better than diva. Osc Slop is a big must for digital osc. I can get the prophet 12 to sound close to a pro 1 on some patches. The dead sounding osc on diva, and the not quite 3d resonance of the filter in diva makes it fall a little flat on resonant sounds, and swimmy living OSC sounds.

But on static stuff, sounds great...
Diva has slop too. It has separate trimmers for VCO detune, max detune, cutoff slop, envelope slop, PW slop, and glide slop, plus drift and individual voice detuners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenwert View Post
Hey Urs, I'm stressing the PWM because it was the reason how I was able to tell which is the analogue synth and which is DIVA (without ever touching DIVA)

Without that PWM sound I would not have been sure which is which one (as I don't own any of the sound sources - I just have been able to tell which one had been generated digitally by the sound of the PWM)
Diva can do through-zero PWM too. It just wasn't programmed to do so here.
Old 23rd July 2014
  #559
Lives for gear
 
pulsar modular's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by enecosse View Post
And you assume every template is exactly calibrated to every model of that synth ever made, do you? Do you always follow what manuals tell you to do too?

How about using your ears and not a template? An extremely simple correction has been pointed out which will make the sounds much closer. Feel free to save it as your very own JP8 template afterwards.
To my knowledge Diva emulates the JP8 oscillators, filters and envelopes...so that's what I will use in straightforward comparison.

You want to try something else...knock yourself out.
1
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #560
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by maisonvague View Post
You're dodging the issue with games, grumphh.

You know full well there are people who can still tell the difference.

You should also know how easy it is to lie with statistics.
He's not the one dodging the issue. If there are people who can reliably tell the difference, there's no evidence that any of them took this test. Given a choice between (a) people's hearing was no better than guessing randomly and (b) some people could hear better and guessed correctly, while an additional, identical number of people all guessed wrong, Ockham knows which choice makes more sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maisonvague View Post
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.
Straw man. In the case of this test, the results were indistinguishable from statistical noise. Demonstrating that people's hearing is not as good as they would like to think is not the same as saying that everyone's hearing is identical.

Last edited by NewsFromTheSky; 23rd July 2014 at 10:59 PM.. Reason: I accidentally the verb
2
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #561
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenwert View Post
What you're saying opposes the findings of scientific double-blind test. Who should I believe - the majority of scientists or some unknown guy on the internet?

Plus it was fairly easy to tell which is which (if you knew the critical aspects of any digital emulation)

Plus your statement didn't even make sense if it didn't oppose the scientific findings: If the interface influences the sound significantly and if only one source went through the converters it would become easier, not more difficult, to tell which is which.
uhhhhi didn t listen the samples, what you ear in a ob8 recorded into a ff4OO it's what i mean, the way it affect the sound we have no idea , it s something i point out cause some converters are not flattering at all while some can sound more musical and organic.

what scientists have to do with this?
Old 23rd July 2014
  #562
Lives for gear
 
maisonvague's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewsFromTheSky View Post
He's not the one dodging the issue. If there are people who can reliably tell the difference, there's no evidence that any of them took this test. Given a choice between (a) people's hearing was no better than guessing randomly and (b) some people could hear better and guessed correctly, while an additional, identical number of people all guessed wrong, Ockham knows which choice makes more sense.



Straw man. In the case of this test, the results were indistinguishable from statistical noise. Demonstrating that people's hearing is not as good as they would like to think is not the same as saying that everyone's hearing is identical.
Whatever you say, man.

I concede the battle.

I was only guessing.

I couldn't really hear a difference.

It was all luck.

Diva is superior to an OB-8.

Diva is superior to all analogs.

Genuine analog is obsolete.

Ken Macbeth is a swindler.

I am a fool.

You are wiser and more intelligent.

I am sleepy.

Gute Nacht!

5
Share
Old 23rd July 2014
  #563
Gear Guru
 
fiddlestickz's Avatar
lol...still going hard at it lads...!!!
Old 23rd July 2014
  #564
Jose Ramón Alvarado Villa
 
Don Solaris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by login View Post
One day we may be able to print the chips at home maybe not that far away (40 years), and everyone will have analog stuff
We are almost there. Closer than you think:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yuBjalrXPA

I'd give it a 15 years or so for the chip level precision...
Old 23rd July 2014
  #565
Quote:
Originally Posted by pendejo View Post
Well, here's one very simple example, with Diva first, then JP8. Completely open filters, with Diva in 'divine' mode:



It's not the JP8 that sounds muffled here..
Thanks man for doing some audio with your JP8...Mmm on listening - something doesnt sound right about this patch on Diva...it can be much brighter than that I think...
Old 23rd July 2014
  #566
Registered User
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
Thanks man for doing some audio with your JP8...Mmm on listening - something doesnt sound right about this patch on Diva...it can be much brighter than that I think...
I've just found another comparison:

Roland Jupiter 8 vs U-He Diva - Filter wide open: (1. JP-8 --> 2. Diva)

Old 23rd July 2014
  #567
Lives for gear
 
Thunderkyss's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by grumphh View Post
Sorry, the distinction here is between analogue and not-analogue sound.

The claim is that an analogue synth a priori sounds "better" by virtue of its analogue circuitry, that apparently has qualities that cannot be emulated by digital (according to you analogue defenders).

You can't suddenly say that only some analogues can be used for comparisons as long as you claim that analogue is better than digital at being analogue.

That is your copout.
At the same time, guys on the other side of the argument have been saying digital is just as good (or better) for years. Where's last year's champion?

Forgotten by the wayside, because something better came along.

The software manufacturers know it, they're not quite there yet. Next year they'll give us a new champion that succeeds where this year's champion fails.

& you "digital is better" guys will not break stride... as if your argument hasn't changed.

All the while that guy is still jamming on his analog.
2
Share
Old 24th July 2014
  #568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Autumn Leaves View Post
I've just found another comparison:

Roland Jupiter 8 vs U-He Diva - Filter wide open: (1. JP-8 --> 2. Diva)

its a bit tricky on that one because of the SC compression...but the JP8 does still sound a bit brighter...maybe CCoolJ could have used a bit more voice drift tho...thing is with Diva - with correct programming I think you can often get closer...thats my experience anyways...
Old 24th July 2014
  #569
I missed this thread and I am an OB-8 owner. Oh well. I listened to the track once on my iPad speakers and I couldn't hear a difference. How about a unison mode comparison. I think you would see much different results.
Old 24th July 2014
  #570
Quote:
Originally Posted by BM0 View Post
I missed this thread and I am an OB-8 owner. Oh well. I listened to the track once on my iPad speakers and I couldn't hear a difference. How about a unison mode comparison. I think you would see much different results.
yeah I thought unison would draw out some differences - there is a unison bass on this track...but Ill do some open filter and unison sync sounds at some point...
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump