The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Does analog gear really sound "better", or is it just a learned response?
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4681
Lives for gear
 
Space1999's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
I think what a lot of digital cheerleaders on this thread seem to either completely ignore or at least fail to mention is that recorded digital audio by itself may out spec recording to tape in a lab. In practical application, ie a recording studio, we're often having to add processing and plugins which then adds the time element into the mix (bad pun). IMHO it's latency that creates the biggest challenge to getting the best result with digital recordings not digital recording itself. Converters, plug-ins all add latency which creates a time smear that analog (tape or outboard gear) doesn't have to contend with.

The more intensive the processing power required by a plugin, the more it drags the signal back in time. Add five or six plugins per track over 24 or 30 tracks and it really adds up. Summed, it makes a large audible difference.
You don’t think that going through varying lengths of cables and analog circuitry adds delay?

Yes it most certainly does.

And having worked in big analog studios before I can tell you from experience that right off the bat you are sending that snare you record into your tape machine through your console from 100s of feet of tie lines, patch bays, and analog circuitry both in the console and in the analog pre, EQ and compressor.

And lets not forget there is a reason that you have a playback head, a synch head and a record head on your tape machine.

Phase correlation meters are on consoles not just for mic placement. Every single track in an analog mix has gone through different lengths of the above mentioned components.

And its not just differing lengths of copper line, its capacitors storing and releasing charge and resistors changing electrical energy into heat energy, complex op amp circuitry, Resistive and Capacitive parallel circuits and on and on.

And sound all by its lonesome, is made up of frequencies that arrive at different times to the capsule in your microphone.

So when you discover perfect smear free audio, please come back and let us know.

Pat
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4682
Lives for gear
 
Space1999's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
I think what a lot of digital cheerleaders on this thread seem to either completely ignore or at least fail to mention is that recorded digital audio by itself may out spec recording to tape in a lab. In practical application, ie a recording studio, we're often having to add processing and plugins which then adds the time element into the mix (bad pun). IMHO it's latency that creates the biggest challenge to getting the best result with digital recordings not digital recording itself. Converters, plug-ins all add latency which creates a time smear that analog (tape or outboard gear) doesn't have to contend with.

The more intensive the processing power required by a plugin, the more it drags the signal back in time. Add five or six plugins per track over 24 or 30 tracks and it really adds up. Summed, it makes a large audible difference.
I would rather have the option of choosing what kind of noise or distortion that gets added to my track, rather than it being arbitrarily assigned to me.

Pat
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4683
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
You don’t think that going through varying lengths of cables and analog circuitry adds delay?

Yes it most certainly does.
Actually it doesn't - seeing as electricity travels at the same speed of light (300,000 km / second). You are right to question him but not for this reason.
3
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4684
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
I would rather have the option of choosing what kind of noise or distortion that gets added to my track, rather than it being arbitrarily assigned to me.

Pat
But using analog gear is a choice....
This isn't football teams people. This isn't masks. Why does the human species insist on polarising every god damn thing in this world ??? Use both !!! And if you cant afford analog gear - no worries - you don't need it - all you need is imagination and hard work. Now Ive just got my hands on a lovely tape Korg stage echo analog box - do I need it? NO!!! but does it sound awesome yes !!!!! DO I have to have this **** to make good music ? No!!!! But does it sound different to my bionic delay vst plugin? Hell yes and it's physical. It's a tool that I cannot replicate with a vst. Interacting with a physical object is a different creative process to using a mouse - but then is there an analogue device that will let me time stretch like an amazing granular synth plugin? No. No, there ****ing isn't. Analogue and digital can be good for different things. No-ones better. Now the lot of you stop arguing and go to your studios. Bad gearslutz!!!! Bad.
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4685
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
You've got a trifecta of logical fallacy going:

I've given you the best arguments your "false premise" deserves, and now you're backed into a corner and insulting me (ad hominem), because no one's agreeing with your "begging the question"...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

begging the question is an informal fallacy that occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it. It is a type of circular reasoning: an argument that requires that the desired conclusion be true.
Boy, your comments get strange when you have no valid argument on the actual topic.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4686
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by art felton View Post
As much care needs to be exerted in applying each step of DSP as is put into applying each step of analog processing if you are to achieve optimum performance. Whether it is designers of gear or users of gear it comes down to care. I shift tracks around on a daily basis to make up for latency issues. Each DAW or plugin may behave differently.
Agreed. It's certainly a good practice, but the fact I've attempted to point out is that in the computer world, calculations take time and bigger calculations take more time. Maybe in the next 20 years quantum computing might become a reality and this will be a mute point. Look how far DAWs have come in the last 20 years.
3
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4687
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
Boy, your comments get strange when you have no valid argument on the actual topic.
Yes, injecting logic into arguments on GS does appear “strange” to some posters.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4688
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
But using analog gear is a choice....
This isn't football teams people. This isn't masks. Why does the human species insist on polarising every god damn thing in this world ??? Use both !!! And if you cant afford analog gear - no worries - you don't need it - all you need is imagination and hard work. Now Ive just got my hands on a lovely tape Korg stage echo analog box - do I need it? NO!!! but does it sound awesome yes !!!!! DO I have to have this **** to make good music ? No!!!! But does it sound different to my bionic delay vst plugin? Hell yes and it's physical. It's a tool that I cannot replicate with a vst. Interacting with a physical object is a different creative process to using a mouse - but then is there an analogue device that will let me time stretch like an amazing granular synth plugin? No. No, there ****ing isn't. Analogue and digital can be good for different things. No-ones better. Now the lot of you stop arguing and go to your studios. Bad gearslutz!!!! Bad.
Well, after 20 years I’ve mostly retired my Avalon VTp 747 - it was a fine tube mastering optical compressor, eq, spectral compressor and widener in its day, but I’ve gone back and forth with it and Ozone 9 over the past few months and I have to say Ozone gets the nod. There isn’t a difference in the sound and ozone offers so much more it’s hard to know where to begin - from its tool kit of analysis plugins to vintage and modern eq to its spectral compression and widening - then there’s the ability to output in different formats. It sounds just as great and offers more, and despite your claim about latency, the hardware Avalon accrues quite a bit.

That’s a real world assessment from a guy who does this every day and can “afford” what he feels is necessary to get the best results.

My closet is full of hardware, but I do take stuff out at least a couple of times a year just to keep the gear alive (I’m not good at selling things). I do use guitar pedals and hardware synths - it’s a throwback to what I’m used to after 40 plus years in the business.

Anyway, my subjective two cents
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4689
Gear Head
 
art felton's Avatar
 

In 2010 I listened to a CD and as much as I could relate to the album I did not care for the sound. I sent it through a Variable Mu and there it was, I liked it. But the band did not look for this kind of sound, after all they named it ‘O.K. Computer’.
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4690
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
Well, after 20 years I’ve mostly retired my Avalon VTp 747 - it was a fine tube mastering optical compressor, eq, spectral compressor and widener in its day, but I’ve gone back and forth with it and Ozone 9 over the past few months and I have to say Ozone gets the nod. There isn’t a difference in the sound and ozone offers so much more it’s hard to know where to begin - from its tool kit of analysis plugins to vintage and modern eq to its spectral compression and widening - then there’s the ability to output in different formats. It sounds just as great and offers more, and despite your claim about latency, the hardware Avalon accrues quite a bit.

That’s a real world assessment from a guy who does this every day and can “afford” what he feels is necessary to get the best results.

My closet is full of hardware, but I do take stuff out at least a couple of times a year just to keep the gear alive (I’m not good at selling things). I do use guitar pedals and hardware synths - it’s a throwback to what I’m used to after 40 plus years in the business.

Anyway, my subjective two cents
Yes I make my living from audio too. Ozone is an amazing tool there's no doubt about it and I use it all the time myself. I dont know anything about the compressor you talk of but perhaps it can impart flavor sometimes. I guess it depends on the type of music you are making .There was ana academic blind test that people preferred rock music recorded and summed analogue and classical and some electronic stuff people preferred digital. I cant find it. As for the latency thing - well its not really a claim its just science - unless that unit is doing something weird. There was quite a good thread about it here :

At what length does analog start to have latency ?

So you sound the opposite from me - an analog guy whos gone digital - I'm the opposite I was a big fan of digital whos gone more analog - my sound engineering course was the least year where we had to cut an splcie tape back in 1999! I recorded my edit into a DAW , edited it, recorded it back onto the tape and then cut the tape so it looked like Id cut and spliced it. Sneaky Id say that both analog and digital have their uses and you may even find a combination of your physical compressor and ozone might do something interesting. I now work in interactive spatial audio - there's no way you can do that in the analog domain. Id hang on to your gear - but if you want to get rid of it send it to me!!
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4691
Lives for gear
 
Sharp11's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
Yes I make my living from audio too. Ozone is an amazing tool there's no doubt about it and I use it all the time myself. I dont know anything about the compressor you talk of but perhaps it can impart flavor sometimes. I guess it depends on the type of music you are making .There was ana academic blind test that people preferred rock music recorded and summed analogue and classical and some electronic stuff people preferred digital. I cant find it. As for the latency thing - well its not really a claim its just science - unless that unit is doing something weird. There was quite a good thread about it here :

At what length does analog start to have latency ?

So you sound the opposite from me - an analog guy whos gone digital - I'm the opposite I was a big fan of digital whos gone more analog - my sound engineering course was the least year where we had to cut an splcie tape back in 1999! I recorded my edit into a DAW , edited it, recorded it back onto the tape and then cut the tape so it looked like Id cut and spliced it. Sneaky Id say that both analog and digital have their uses and you may even find a combination of your physical compressor and ozone might do something interesting. I now work in interactive spatial audio - there's no way you can do that in the analog domain. Id hang on to your gear - but if you want to get rid of it send it to me!!
If you’re talking about pairing analog gear with your daw, the hybrid approach, you’re going to have to compensate for latency. You may even have move a track a bit after it’s printed through analog hardware - however, I re-amp through my daw a lot and have no problems with latency (my Mac is able to handle low buffers)

If your daw allows for low latency monitoring, use that. Or, just do all your live to daw monitoring through a small mixer.

The false premise voodoo was engaging in was that (I assume this is what he was saying) in a mix, plug-ins cause audible comb filtering (he called it smearing). This isn’t the case as delay compensation adjusts for that. Any one can try it, just insert a plug-in ( or several)and sweep the wet dry mix and see if you hear it. Or better, use the stereo correlation meter to check.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4692
Gear Head
 
art felton's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
Well, after 20 years I’ve mostly retired my Avalon VTp 747 - it was a fine tube mastering optical compressor, eq, spectral compressor and widener in its day, but I’ve gone back and forth with it and Ozone 9 over the past few months and I have to say Ozone gets the nod. There isn’t a difference in the sound and ozone offers so much more it’s hard to know where to begin - from its tool kit of analysis plugins to vintage and modern eq to its spectral compression and widening - then there’s the ability to output in different formats. It sounds just as great and offers more, and despite your claim about latency, the hardware Avalon accrues quite a bit.

That’s a real world assessment from a guy who does this every day and can “afford” what he feels is necessary to get the best results.

My closet is full of hardware, but I do take stuff out at least a couple of times a year just to keep the gear alive (I’m not good at selling things). I do use guitar pedals and hardware synths - it’s a throwback to what I’m used to after 40 plus years in the business.

Anyway, my subjective two cents
Now that you name it I do agree. Ozone Advanced is great, but analog can add something that Ozone cannot.

The charm as well as the problem is that each analog device behaves slightly differently. It isn't math. It somehow reacts to the signal. It resonates with it. Especially to vocals it adds mystique. At least that is what I perceive.
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4693
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
Y

Phase correlation meters are on consoles not just for mic placement. Every single track in an analog mix has gone through different lengths of the above mentioned components.


Pat
IME small phase/time differences are generally caused by series capacitance and inductive components rather than wire.

This does illustrate, however that is is unwise to assume that the output of an analog device has an identical time/phase to the input. Hence my comment that it is not the best practice to combine an a original track with the "dry" signal of the processor it is feeding.

Either set the processor to 100% wet (like a reverb) and mix it with the dry track, or put the whole track into the processor and take the dry signal out of the mix.

Heck, once upon a time I had a reverb unit which has an output that was inverted compared to its input. Talk about phase problems.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4694
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
The false premise voodoo was engaging in was that (I assume this is what he was saying) in a mix, plug-ins cause audible comb filtering (he called it smearing). This isn’t the case as delay compensation adjusts for that. Any one can try it, just insert a plug-in ( or several)and sweep the wet dry mix and see if you hear it. Or better, use the stereo correlation meter to check.
First of all, it's not a false premise, it's a proven and verifiable fact (which you confirm in your second last sentence). Both analog and digital recording gear have their own strengths and weaknesses. And as a number of people on this thread have also mentioned, I also believe that a hybrid approach works best for my workflow.

That aside, digital audio has a flaw and it's in the time domain. Just like analog's biggest flaw (among a number of others) is signal to noise. Yes, we can compensate for latency with delay compensation. I see this as analogous to noise reduction in the analog world (too much hiss on your recording? Did you engage the Dolby?). Both are compensating for inherent flaws in their architecture. To brush it off (latency) and say "oh, it's nothing because we can compensate for it" is ignoring an elephant in the room.

Last edited by voodoo4u; 3rd July 2020 at 06:57 PM.. Reason: typo
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4695
Gear Maniac
 
SongJohn's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 10089a2 View Post
I think the true disadvantage of digital is "it's too damn clean" !! Its too perfect. I started off mixing in the early 90s. Back then the enemies of sonic clarity were signal to noise ratio, tape hiss etc etc. As a progressive creative technologist digital seemed like a dream to me, it got rid of all those problems.

I have the same story. I used four track cassette in 1998/1999...then it became apparent at some point I might be able to record to my PC. Pretty mind blowing to get that clean sound at home...

Getting back to the original post it's apparent that the OP acknowledges these differences that exist between analog and digital, but I guess he wants (or wanted) to know if people have a preference for analog sound/video because of its long documented history in our lives. I don't think so. There's always been an analog/digital debate but it seems like for every 10 people who choose to stay mostly analog (tape, hardware) there are 100 who prefer mostly digital techniques (DAWs, plugins). Things really haven't changed much in that department in the last 20 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 10089a2 View Post
For years I used to snarl at people like yourself as over romanticising the past and was a big fan of digital sound. But as analog devices have slowly become less common I noticed the sound changing.
I think that was the attitude Walter Becker and Donald ***en took when Steely Dan made an album or two in the 2000-2003 range. Which is why I was surprised when a few years later they went back to analog tape. I hope I'm remembering this right. I believe they claimed they switched back to analog because it was easier for them to mix.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gears View Post
is there something intrinsically pleasing about the "analog sound" that will always be appealing to people as a whole?
However different the analog era was from our current predicament the one thing they share in common is people's willingness to move on and abandon the old technologies in favor of whatever's new. Nostalgia might be a strong drug but it's not enough to overcome the future.
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4696
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp11 View Post
If you’re talking about pairing analog gear with your daw, the hybrid approach, you’re going to have to compensate for latency. You may even have move a track a bit after it’s printed through analog hardware - however, I re-amp through my daw a lot and have no problems with latency (my Mac is able to handle low buffers)

If your daw allows for low latency monitoring, use that. Or, just do all your live to daw monitoring through a small mixer.

The false premise voodoo was engaging in was that (I assume this is what he was saying) in a mix, plug-ins cause audible comb filtering (he called it smearing). This isn’t the case as delay compensation adjusts for that. Any one can try it, just insert a plug-in ( or several)and sweep the wet dry mix and see if you hear it. Or better, use the stereo correlation meter to check.
Ive been doing it for years without any problems thanks - even plugging a microphone into a Daw is a hybrid analog digital system - and I can assure you my analog mixing desk and some of my analog effects introduce no latency whatsoever, especially compared to digital devices, its the converters that introduce the latency not the analog gear, they also introduce hardly any latency these days, but still nowhere near as fast as analog - this is basic science - analog doesnt need to convert things to and from 0s and 1s. - analogue is simply f, basically, instant, seeing as electricity travels at 300, 000 km per second, and don't forget most audio interfaces, digital microphones, converters etc still have some analog circuitry in them. If you read that other thread you would have read that most humans cannot perceive less than 20 ms of latency, lets say 10 for argument's sake. For analog circuitry to introduce that much latency it would have cables to be approximately 4000 miles long. Yes i know that capicitors store energy for releasing later - but that is not necessarily something that introduces latency. Please read :

At what length does analog start to have latency ?

If your compressor is all analog and is introducing latency there must be something wrong with it. Yes as I say - I have been working with digital audio for nigh on 25 years now, and actually writ emy own music software, so I know how to change my buffer settings and set up low latency monitoring - remember I started my career with your CURRENT point of view - I have come round to somewhere in the middle ground. The long and short of it is - digital is just TOO damn clean - and sometime sI want a bit of irregularity in my sound.
I agree with you about the delay compensation stopping smearing though - however ensuring that all plugins are in time with each other - ie that the slowest one is in time with the fastest one (by slowest I mean the one that has to do the most processing) will add some overall latency to the whole track - however, this is becoming less of an issue - again if it's less than 20ms your probably fine unless you have a really annoying musician with micro hearing. Hybrid rules - and I sit dangerously on the fence in this intense debate that I have so foolishly waded into the middle of.

Last edited by Deleted 10089a2; 3rd July 2020 at 08:12 PM..
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4697
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolk martin View Post
Whatever is causing the cancellation you were getting, it does not appear to be a inherent or insoluble feature of digital audio .
exactly

In 2020, PDC exists and is transparent on any well-set-up rig. I would say that even if your rig was broken. Or even if a particular plug-in exceeded your settings, you could manually fix it because the delays will always be in whole samples
3
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4698
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by SongJohn View Post
I have the same story. I used four track cassette in 1998/1999...then it became apparent at some point I might be able to record to my PC. Pretty mind blowing to get that clean sound at home...

Getting back to the original post it's apparent that the OP acknowledges these differences that exist between analog and digital, but I guess he wants (or wanted) to know if people have a preference for analog sound/video because of its long documented history in our lives. I don't think so. There's always been an analog/digital debate but it seems like for every 10 people who choose to stay mostly analog (tape, hardware) there are 100 who prefer mostly digital techniques (DAWs, plugins). Things really haven't changed much in that department in the last 20 years.



I think that was the attitude Walter Becker and Donald ***en took when Steely Dan made an album or two in the 2000-2003 range. Which is why I was surprised when a few years later they went back to analog tape. I hope I'm remembering this right. I believe they claimed they switched back to analog because it was easier for them to mix.



However different the analog era was from our current predicament the one thing they share in common is people's willingness to move on and abandon the old technologies in favor of whatever's new. Nostalgia might be a strong drug but it's not enough to overcome the future.
There is actually an academic paper in which people were given a blind ABX test and it turned out people preferred analog summing for rock music and digital for genres like classical. I can't actually believe Im having this debate seeing as Ive been slagging analog romanticists for the least 20 years! However, as with many things the truth is often found in the middle ground. There's some cool stuff in analog and plenty in digital too that cannot be replaced. I work on the very cutting edge of audio - creating immersive and often interactive 3D soundscapes for different applications and there is simply no way to do this stuff with analog gear. So I am all about the future - but that doesn't mean everything from the past is replaceable and inferior. Something have their charm and reflect the ethos and culture of an era - add character and are cool never to be repeated. Like guitar for example ! or my super duper korg stage tape echo. Noone can take that away from me . Noone goddammit!!! and should I use the latest spatial granular synthesis engine in max map tomorrow so be it - different colored paint on artist palette is all.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4699
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deleted 10089a2 View Post
Everything started to sound too "synthetic" and as a I am a fan of techno and drum and bass that might seem like an unusual thing to say - but you have to remember even early techno etc used a lot of analog components sin their midi gear
But they are still "synthetic". No one has ever heard a synth that did not come out of a speaker. I would venture that fully half of the people in this thread tossing around terms like "real" and "reality" are referencing some earlier recording that they listened to as a "real recording". It's all just music coming out of a speaker.

To say that this artificially generated waveform coming out of a speaker is more "real" than that artificially generated waveform coming out of a speaker would seem to me to be almost a joke, if there were not so many people actually talking that way.

Many of them have spent minimal amounts of time (if any!) in a well-designed space listening to unamplified acoustic instruments. Which some of us would use as the benchmark of what is "real". To me, that is kind of sad.

Not that I begrudge you your taste in music. Just sad that the English language has been deprived of a term that actually used to mean something: "real".

Quote:
is there something intrinsically pleasing about the "analog sound" that will always be appealing to people as a whole



This "genetic" argument just kills me. It's so obvious that people are extrapolating from their own, and maybe their friend's taste.

So we should take a vote on it?

If we do, we need to include the entire human race. Not just us Rock recording engineers on Gearslutz! Include also also all the teenagers with their car systems and their Beats and their earbuds. All the Classical music fans. And those who listen to the pure ethnic styles, Irish, Indian, Balkan, Middle Eastern, African. And also uncontacted tribes in the Amazon Jungle and the Bay of Bengal. Residents of the Canary Islands, Bedouins in the desert and people in North Korea and Siberia. Everybody.

I would say that if the "losing" technology still earns at least 5% or 10% of the votes that kind of kills your argument for "people as a whole" having an intrinsic anything. 5% or 10% "don't care" or "can't tell" also kills it.

Only 10% of the population is left-handed, but I would like to see what would happen to someone if they talked about left-handedness the way they talk about people who like the technology they don't prefer.
3
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4700
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
But they are still "synthetic". No one has ever heard a synth that did not come out of a speaker. I would venture that fully half of the people in this thread tossing around terms like "real" and "reality" are referencing some earlier recording that they listened to as a "real recording". It's all just music coming out of a speaker.

To say that this artificially generated waveform coming out of a speaker is more "real" than that artificially generated waveform coming out of a speaker would seem to me to be almost a joke, if there were not so many people actually talking that way.

Many of them have spent minimal amounts of time (if any!) in a well-designed space listening to unamplified acoustic instruments. Which some of us would use as the benchmark of what is "real". To me, that is kind of sad.

Not that I begrudge you your taste in music. Just sad that the English language has been deprived of a term that actually used to mean something: "real".


[/B]
Ey 'up! here comes the Taliban.... Joking aside, I do not believe I made use of the word real sir! As for your comments on synthetic sound - yes indeed they are all synthetic but all acoustic instruments are "acoustic" doesn't mean they all sound the same, as wind and string instruments use fundamentally different techniques to generate sound as do synthetic instruments. It is my strongly held belief that sounds generated by analog synthesisers often contain more irregularities than those generated by digital synthesisers - they have different flavors as it were, there are different qualities to the sound - I make no comment on one been "better" than the other. They are to me just different colours in my artist's palette as are acoustic instruments. For me purely digitally generated sounds ar often simply too clean and perfect, nor would I wish to return to the days of tape hiss from which I originated.
Now - as for your comments on actual acoustic instruments- I wholly agree there is something nice about that - I live in Ireland and a lot of trad nights around - and I used to live in the Amazon - no electricity in some places there - the jungle has excellent acoustics btw - and I suspect when civilisation ends - acoustic instruments will make a big comeback when electricity is gone. This is why I am frantically learning the guitar - and working out how to make an entirely acoustic echo device (I'm not but I will should the time come). I jest my good sir. However, I like to look at the history of music technology as an evolution of things. From the first bone flutes 40,000 years ago, through to neolithic instruments and buildings designed to resonate at certain frequencies, to medieval Mayan temples that used clever architectural design that create echoes that sound like raindrops in the temple of the rain god , on to lutes, guitars, harpsichord, pianos, analog synthesisers , softsynths over speakers to granular synthesis and immersive spoatial sound that creates impossible soundscapes - all have their strengths and weaknesses and the new should not necessarily replace the old. They are all real, or none of them are real. They are all tools that homo sapiens uses to make sound, and they all have different qualities of sound, to be a fully rounded sound person one should have an appreciation of all of them. Yes, I like drum and bass - but I am also learning Irish trad and have joined a brass band where I play trumpet (or would be if it wasn't for you know what) - one should not limit oneself I feel.

ANYWAY ARGUING ABOUT THIS STUPID POINTLESS **** THAT NOONE EXCEPT A HANDFUL OF AUDIO PEOPLE GIVE A **** ABOUT - SURE BEATS READING THE NEWS ABOUT CORNOVIRUS !! CAN WE DRINK A BEER TO THAT AT LEAST TOGETHER!!!

Take care brothers and sisters and whatever gear or instruments you've got - use it to make the best music and noise you can. Asta luego amigos.

Last edited by Deleted 10089a2; 3rd July 2020 at 09:23 PM..
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4701
Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
Here's the issue and likely why some can replicate it and some can't (at least not as much). Some plugins are processor intensive and some are not as much. I just bought Lexicon Native a couple of weeks ago and it is extreme in its need for processing power, hence the latency. But if we're at the mercy of how much code is required to run a plugin, we're also gonna get get various amounts of smearing in our signal path. It's just the nature of working with digital audio on computers. We can compensate, we can get a faster processor, we can get faster converters, but we're all gonna have to face this issue to a small or large degree depending on our workstation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolk martin View Post
Yea, I am running a fairly heavy machine here.

Its a Gigabyte Mobo with a liquid cooled I7 5960X at 3.5 Ghz, eight cores each with two threads. Gforce 900 graphics and 64 Mb of Ram.

I've no idea what would happen with a slower machine because I never tired the test before
And, in my retirement, I'm running a cheap econobox, a $500 Dell desktop with a 3 gHz, i5-3330, with a measly four cores.

But I nonetheless was able to use (modern) plugins on the buss with no discernible latency. (Even as the older convo reverb evidenced an uncorrected latency, as described in my earlier post.)

While there may well be more to explore here, it's my thinking that much depends on the plugin, and, perhaps, the host software.

Latency issues, overdub/tracking misalignment, these were/are real problems that can arise in complex digital production platforms -- I know because I pushed my own DAW's developers to rethink their tracking alignment options (they finally included a manual, sample-wise tracking alignment adjustment after I called out the issue in a tech forum the former lead dev was hosting on a once-popular recording forum).

Such issues can be hard to pin down, particularly if one blithely assumes everything is OK. I tipped to the problem with my DAW and rig (circa 2002) when I overdubbed a bongo part and it ALL sounded off -- until I did a loopback test, realized new tracks were being placed on the timeline a little under 8 ms late, and started using various methods to overcome the misalignment (until the DAW maker added the manual adjustment option).

So, even if I don't currently seem to have a problem with (modern) plugins not getting properly compensated, I'm actually kind of glad to be reminded to check things out, to make sure things are still (mostly) up to speed. (So to speak.)
2
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4702
Lives for gear
 
Space1999's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolk martin View Post
IME small phase/time differences are generally caused by series capacitance and inductive components rather than wire.

This does illustrate, however that is is unwise to assume that the output of an analog device has an identical time/phase to the input. Hence my comment that it is not the best practice to combine an a original track with the "dry" signal of the processor it is feeding.

Either set the processor to 100% wet (like a reverb) and mix it with the dry track, or put the whole track into the processor and take the dry signal out of the mix.

Heck, once upon a time I had a reverb unit which has an output that was inverted compared to its input. Talk about phase problems.
Yes you are correct. I was hesitant to jump back into the fray but the following rules apply...

In an Inductive circuit, the current lags behind the voltage
In a Capacitive circuit the voltage lags the current.

Analog by definition causes delays, comb filtering and smear.

It’s what gives analog its character.

Yes, electricity travels at the speed of light, but once it flows through copper wiring and circuits with components it has to experience resistance. It is the nature of manipulating electricity in analog circuits.

Otherwise you would not have to have formulas for phase angles of sine waves.

Without this phenomenon, analog could not sound thicker or sonically different from input to output.

Pat
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4703
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
Yes you are correct. I was hesitant to jump back into the fray but the following rules apply...

In an Inductive circuit, the current lags behind the voltage
In a Capacitive circuit the voltage lags the current.

Analog by definition causes delays, comb filtering and smear.

It’s what gives analog its character.

Yes, electricity travels at the speed of light, but once it flows through copper wiring and circuits with components it has to experience resistance. It is the nature of manipulating electricity in analog circuits.

Otherwise you would not have to have formulas for phase angles of sine waves.

Without this phenomenon, analog could not sound thicker or sonically different from input to output.

Pat
yea, that was my impression. As result, when I her folks praising elaborate parallel processing setups. I wonder how much of the sound they like is caused by simple comb filtering when re-combining the outputs rather than the effect they are trying to apply.
1
Share
Old 3rd July 2020
  #4704
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gusss View Post
E

ANYWAY ARGUING ABOUT THIS STUPID POINTLESS **** THAT NOONE EXCEPT A HANDFUL OF AUDIO PEOPLE GIVE A **** ABOUT - SURE BEATS READING THE NEWS ABOUT CORNOVIRUS !! CAN WE DRINK A BEER TO THAT AT LEAST TOGETHER!!!

s.
It's 5:30 here, and you have inspired me. I'm heading for the fridge ..... Coop F5 IPA. Cheers.
2
Share
Old 4th July 2020
  #4705
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
Yes you are correct. I was hesitant to jump back into the fray but the following rules apply...

Yes, electricity travels at the speed of light, but once it flows through copper wiring and circuits with components it has to experience resistance. It is the nature of manipulating electricity in analog circuits.
Not sure what you mean by this. Yes, electricity will encounter resistance in copper, but even if we suppose the resistance is high, it does mean that the electricity will be delayed, it just means that less of it gets to the other end. It still travels at the speed it does. There will be no latency.
2
Share
Old 4th July 2020
  #4706
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by norfolk martin View Post
It's 5:30 here, and you have inspired me. I'm heading for the fridge ..... Coop F5 IPA. Cheers.
Yes, some Guinness here cheers !!! It makes me feel almost normal to have a good old analog-digital; debate as civilisation crumbles around us You know let's make this debate more interesting. So at the end of our utterly futile point about the analog/digital debate, we have to nominate the style of the next futile post. So for example - something like "Scottish accent" or "bored New York secretary" "Australian sheep farmer panicking in a space craft" then the next person has to make their post in the style of that. So my turn. The next person has to make their post in the style of a Traffic Warden.
1
Share
Old 4th July 2020
  #4707
Lives for gear
 
Space1999's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by shobud View Post
Not sure what you mean by this. Yes, electricity will encounter resistance in copper, but even if we suppose the resistance is high, it does mean that the electricity will be delayed, it just means that less of it gets to the other end. It still travels at the speed it does. There will be no latency.
A compressor is not made of a single piece of copper wire from input to output. There are components, there will be latency. You can look up information about calculating the time constant for the 5 time periods to charge or discharge a capacitor for instance.

A compressor can’t run on AC current. It must be converted to DC. You are going to need capacitors to do that. That is about as basic of an explanation as I can give you here as to why circuit design necessitates delaying signal. But it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Pat
Old 4th July 2020
  #4708
Deleted 10089a2
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space1999 View Post
A compressor is not made of a single piece of copper wire from input to output. There are components, there will be latency. You can look up information about calculating the time constant for the 5 time periods to charge or discharge a capacitor for instance.

A compressor can’t run on AC current. It must be converted to DC. You are going to need capacitors to do that. That is about as basic of an explanation as I can give you here as to why circuit design necessitates delaying signal. But it is just the tip of the iceberg.

Pat
Now say that as if you were a traffic warden writing a ticket. Go on it will be fun.

eg : " A compressor cant run AC current sir, Im afraid Im going to have to write you a ticket"
Old 4th July 2020
  #4709
Lives for gear
 
vernier's Avatar
For latency ...send signal through Cooper Time Cube.
1
Share
Old 4th July 2020
  #4710
Lives for gear
 
norfolk martin's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
Are you using a delay on your snare? Because I'm hearing a distinct tight delay on it, although I can't say where it's coming from. If I were to guess, I would say that it's the latency we've been talking about, but even later than my sample so that it sounds more like a delay rather than comb filtering. Try muting the reverb channel as you play the file again and see if you can detect it and where it's coming from.
I repeated the test with other possible variables removed


I put the snare on track 1 of a new project.

I then cloned it to track 2

I put the Arturia 140 plate as a channel effect on track 2 set to 100% dry.

When I inverted one channel , they almost nulled to zero, but not quite.

To see if the pl;ugin was changing the character or the timing of the signal. I then panned them panned them hard left and hard right, and mixed dowm

The attached is the waveform as displayed on audition.

Although the waves are not quite identical, they are complexity time aligned.

This proves only one thing - that it is possible to do latency compensation effectively.

Any echo sound is on the original track
Attached Thumbnails
Does analog gear really sound "better", or is it just a learned response?-snare-wave.jpg  
1
Share
Closed

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 52 views: 13984
Avatar for BenJah
BenJah 25th September 2008
replies: 1296 views: 150871
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
replies: 4766 views: 278764
Avatar for Matt Dairy
Matt Dairy 4 minutes ago
Topic:
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump