Is software equal to hardware as far as sound quality is concerned? (poll)

[xamido]

Oh good, another analog vs digital thread.

[fedexnman]

I voted . This debate drives me insane . ..... There are so many factors . Do movies and photos look better shot digitally or using film. Is digital better than tape . Is viynl better than CD . Are amp sims an effects just as good as amps . etc etc etc. Analog synth or VST plugin ....... Etc etc . If its sounds good it sounds good so be it software or hardware . I don't think the average listener or viewer cares . In the end its not the tool ,but the art created with it.

[FarleyCZ]

In the end its not the tool ,but the art created with it.

Yes!

[Touch The Universe]

What about the art that went into making the tool?

[fmr]

In my opinion I believe that we are so far from recreating true analog synthesis in software because in order to do so I think we would have to go beyond the component level and really approach it from a molecular level ...

What's crazy about that? I think in order to do proper simulations you really would have to approach it this way in order to get a super authentic analog experience. Of course maybe it would be overkill, but.. i think the only reason that it has not been done before is because we do not have the computing power available to do a full blown synthesizer using technology like this.

Check this out.
http://www.reprise.com/host/electricity/atoms.asp

What's crazy in your assertion is the "molecular level". What the hell do you mean by that? What are we trying to produce here? Clones? I think you are just mysticizing what is just a machine. And bear in mind that there is no "true analogue synthesis" - there were several machines in the past that used analogue circuitry, and achieved very different results - some I like, some I love, but others not so much.

Besides, I am in the field that thinks WE ARE THERE ALREADY, and that each year, we will be watching more and more instruments that go beyond what was made in hardware (and I am talking HARDWARE, not just ANALOGUE - but even that).

[jacqueslacouth]

And once you record your VERY expensive vintage analog synth into your DAW you pass that pure mystical sound through an AD converter and are left with a series of 1s and 0s to produce a digital facsimile of the original sound….then we apply compression algorithms to the finished sound and listen to it through $20 earbuds from Kmart,

[maschinelf]

Fish, because I think it's an irrelevant question.

Hardware and software both have their uses and benefits, and will continue to be used together. In a way, they have to run together, because technically, software cannot run without hardware, and devices such as audio interfaces etc. are hardware as well after all. Even when it's all software based, the hardware is still important to some, as for example the difference between a motu and rme interface.

Conversely, whether it's an analog or software synth, a high-end preamp or a modelling preamp, a hardware fx unit or it's software clone, it's mostly still gonna end up in the digital domain.

This question doesn't have an answer, because it's not really a question.

[palebluedun]

Well guys,

Voted yes and fish. Then read through this whole thread. Really!

Thanks a lot!

Now I’m going to have that dream again where I’m in a bar having a drink and C-3PO comes up to me and puts his hand on my butt and says, “You know, you haven’t lived until you’ve had a super authentic analog experience…”

And he sounds so sincere!

I’m going to cry.

[ATS]

Software beats hardware a lot of time now.

[V0RT3X]

In my opinion I believe that we are so far from recreating true analog synthesis in software because in order to do so I think we would have to go beyond the component level and really approach it from a molecular level ...

What's crazy about that? I think in order to do proper simulations you really would have to approach it this way in order to get a super authentic analog experience. Of course maybe it would be overkill, but.. i think the only reason that it has not been done before is because we do not have the computing power available to do a full blown synthesizer using technology like this.

Check this out.
http://www.reprise.com/host/electricity/atoms.asp

What's crazy in your assertion is the "molecular level". What the hell do you mean by that? What are we trying to produce here? Clones? I think you are just mysticizing what is just a machine. And bear in mind that there is no "true analogue synthesis" - there were several machines in the past that used analogue circuitry, and achieved very different results - some I like, some I love, but others not so much.

Besides, I am in the field that thinks WE ARE THERE ALREADY, and that each year, we will be watching more and more instruments that go beyond what was made in hardware (and I am talking HARDWARE, not just ANALOGUE - but even that).

Basically all I'm saying is that the component modelling could be taken even further than it already is by simulating the physics behind the electrical interactions. I'm no physics major, but I imagine that the so called magic that people associate with analog hardware has to do with the electrical physics involved, so why not simulate that in real time? Of course the notion of it is absurd right now because we don't have the computing power available.. but that's why I hit no on the poll.

[FarleyCZ]

Basically all I'm saying is that the component modelling could be taken even further than it already is by simulating the physics behind the electrical interactions. I'm no physics major, but I imagine that the so called magic that people associate with analog hardware has to do with the electrical physics involved, so why not simulate that in real time? Of course the notion of it is absurd right now because we don't have the computing power available.. but that's why I hit no on the poll.

...and that's exactly where it gets totally isane. Every little part, every little resistor are made a little bit differently each time. Thy're not clons on atomic level. That means, that every single HW unit has slightly different sound. Unnoticable for normal listener, but you spend years developing atom-based raythraced über emulation of your favorite moog and some people will always claim that their moog has more analogue quality becouse it simply sounds a tiny bit different then the emulation. And becouse they've spent thousands on it, they will say they like the analogue version more. This is just nonsense, gentleman. This whole discussion. You love your HW? Stick with it, but don't b****hit me about any kind of sound quality issue unless you can somehow measurable specify what do you mean by that.