Anything Virtual vs Anything Analogue...the continuation.

[deastman]

'Virtual vs Analogue' ?

I prefer electroacoustic, you insensitive clod.

I've actually been feeling much the same way lately. I seem to have a lot more fun playing a guitar with a slide and an ebow through a big effect chain, or banging on sheets or metal through my modular... The action has such a tactile and immediate connection to the sound, and I find it very satisfying. The computer once again becomes just a multitrack recorder.

[foosnark]

I grew up on analog hardware in the late 70s/80s and I can't usually tell the difference between the real thing and a decent emulation and, quite frankly, don't really give a damn. ... Whatever, analog purists can have their precious analog synths - I'm happier with the sound and diversity that my VAs give me.

Honestly, I find the fun part of working with hardware isn't the sound, or immediacy, or anything else like that... it's the limitations. If I tell myself "this part is going to be on Meeblip" then I have to be creative about how to work the thing, and I probably pay more attention to making it sound good. But I don't think using it, or other hardware, has really improved my music -- just made it a little more fun for me.

And I drive mine through Tube amps and devi Ever stomps!!!

I have a Devi Ever Rocket, and an equally awesome Red Witch Fuzz God II, among other things. When I mess with them I'm in this state of violent glee, or gleeful violence or something like that. And then I rarely wind up using them in tracks. But that's okay.

If I ask myself whether I'd make tracks or have fun, I'd pick fun every time.

[foosnark]

And I'll add, creative limitations can be good but they can also be that other thing. I would never go back to the days where my FX consisted of a couple of stompboxes, a couple of Radio Shack delays, and a MIDIVerb, and if I wanted two instances of an effect that meant I was going to bounce tracks and add more tape noise.

[ImNotDedYet]

That's fair to a point. What hasn't changed is the fact that a stand alone analog synth is just that. It doesn't have all the goodies built into it that make what I do so easy. And if I'm recording the actual sound out of the box, there is no just tweaking the MIDI file to get it just right. It's get the take right or do it over. Otherwise I'd have to go back to my old analog setup where I ran everything MIDI out and MIDI through from synth to MIDI recorder and then back to the synth in order to direct the output to the multi track recorder. And it's been so long since I've used that setup that I'm not 100% sure that I'd know how to do it again. So why would I torture myself with that much work when I have such an easy and elegant solution in a box?

Point is, there is simply no reason to go back to what I had, which, by the way, was a setup completely void of old analogs because they didn't even have MIDI capability. Those synths I stopped using once I sold my Teac A3440. I mean let's be honest. Old analog stuff was not easy to work with. So why go back to it?

I can see your point, but I have two synths from the 80's that both have MIDI in and out, so I can record the MIDI into my DAW however I want to record it, then fine tune the MIDI, then record the actual audio output. The same could be done w/ MIDI to CV converters or CV sequencers if your synth is CV only. And the final option, and one I use where I don't have MIDI or CV capabilities (recording my Rhodes or Wurlie) is to edit the actual audio if my rhythm or velocity is a bit off.

Multiple paths to the final destination - choose the one your prefer. But saying you can't do it one way vs the other isn't always the full truth.

[wagtunes]

That's fair to a point. What hasn't changed is the fact that a stand alone analog synth is just that. It doesn't have all the goodies built into it that make what I do so easy. And if I'm recording the actual sound out of the box, there is no just tweaking the MIDI file to get it just right. It's get the take right or do it over. Otherwise I'd have to go back to my old analog setup where I ran everything MIDI out and MIDI through from synth to MIDI recorder and then back to the synth in order to direct the output to the multi track recorder. And it's been so long since I've used that setup that I'm not 100% sure that I'd know how to do it again. So why would I torture myself with that much work when I have such an easy and elegant solution in a box?

Point is, there is simply no reason to go back to what I had, which, by the way, was a setup completely void of old analogs because they didn't even have MIDI capability. Those synths I stopped using once I sold my Teac A3440. I mean let's be honest. Old analog stuff was not easy to work with. So why go back to it?

I can see your point, but I have two synths from the 80's that both have MIDI in and out, so I can record the MIDI into my DAW however I want to record it, then fine tune the MIDI, then record the actual audio output. The same could be done w/ MIDI to CV converters or CV sequencers if your synth is CV only. And the final option, and one I use where I don't have MIDI or CV capabilities (recording my Rhodes or Wurlie) is to edit the actual audio if my rhythm or velocity is a bit off.

Multiple paths to the final destination - choose the one your prefer. But saying you can't do it one way vs the other isn't always the full truth.

Almost anything CAN be done, especially today, with few exceptions. The question is, how much torture do you want to put yourself through to make it happen?

I guess I'm just not as patient as I used to be when I was 21 years old.

[trimph1]

I don't know. I seem to get into a much more meditative mood when I work with my stomps and synthesisers. Or guitars getting messed up in my modular synthesiser. Or even Toshinori Kondo's style of playing.

For me the process of making music is more important than ever....

[zerocrossing]

I don't know. I seem to get into a much more meditative mood when I work with my stomps and synthesisers. Or guitars getting messed up in my modular synthesiser. Or even Toshinori Kondo's style of playing.

For me the process of making music is more important than ever....

I wonder if we could get Wagtunes to try green eggs and ham while we're at it.

[trimph1]

I don't know. I seem to get into a much more meditative mood when I work with my stomps and synthesisers. Or guitars getting messed up in my modular synthesiser. Or even Toshinori Kondo's style of playing.

For me the process of making music is more important than ever....

I wonder if we could get Wagtunes to try green eggs and ham while we're at it.

I have every reason to think he will, eventually...

[zerocrossing]

That's fair to a point. What hasn't changed is the fact that a stand alone analog synth is just that. It doesn't have all the goodies built into it that make what I do so easy. And if I'm recording the actual sound out of the box, there is no just tweaking the MIDI file to get it just right. It's get the take right or do it over. Otherwise I'd have to go back to my old analog setup where I ran everything MIDI out and MIDI through from synth to MIDI recorder and then back to the synth in order to direct the output to the multi track recorder. And it's been so long since I've used that setup that I'm not 100% sure that I'd know how to do it again. So why would I torture myself with that much work when I have such an easy and elegant solution in a box?

Point is, there is simply no reason to go back to what I had, which, by the way, was a setup completely void of old analogs because they didn't even have MIDI capability. Those synths I stopped using once I sold my Teac A3440. I mean let's be honest. Old analog stuff was not easy to work with. So why go back to it?

I can see your point, but I have two synths from the 80's that both have MIDI in and out, so I can record the MIDI into my DAW however I want to record it, then fine tune the MIDI, then record the actual audio output. The same could be done w/ MIDI to CV converters or CV sequencers if your synth is CV only. And the final option, and one I use where I don't have MIDI or CV capabilities (recording my Rhodes or Wurlie) is to edit the actual audio if my rhythm or velocity is a bit off.

Multiple paths to the final destination - choose the one your prefer. But saying you can't do it one way vs the other isn't always the full truth.

Almost anything CAN be done, especially today, with few exceptions. The question is, how much torture do you want to put yourself through to make it happen?

I guess I'm just not as patient as I used to be when I was 21 years old.

What are you blathering on about? Is a couple of MIDI cables and an an audio cable tortuous? Hell, I wouldn't even call it enhanced interrogation compared to some installation/authorization dances some software wants you to go through.

You're a professional patch designer, eh? Make me something that sounds like this:

http://youtu.be/gpOu3e35H98

(Listen to the whole track.)

[OutCider]

Sort of like this then?

Yeah, but not as classy

[do_androids_dream]

http://youtu.be/gpOu3e35H98

(Listen to the whole track.)

Beeeeautiful. A wonderful example of what analog synths do. And what software just doesn't do. Make of that second sentence what you will.

I see you and raise you

http://youtu.be/O8Y63APbEtE

[T-CM11]

So why would I torture myself with that much work when I have such an easy and elegant solution in a box?

Torture? Aren't you exaggerating the process of recording an analog synth in a DAW a bit?

Anyway, I'm glad this isn't Gearslutz, where a lot of people live in a binary universe; or you make music like in the good old 70s or you make EDM sludge - ITB in your bedroom in your parent's house. Nothing exists in between!

[trimph1]

I have issues with that phrase?

How can something like what I do be tortuous?

Maybe I must be misreading/miscomprehending something but I thought that professional sound designers would be all over this idea.

[zerocrossing]

http://youtu.be/gpOu3e35H98

(Listen to the whole track.)

Beeeeautiful. A wonderful example of what analog synths do. And what software just doesn't do. Make of that second sentence what you will.

I see you and raise you

http://youtu.be/O8Y63APbEtE

Nice!

I don't know if this was brought up in the Diva vs. OB-8 test thread, but one thing Swan808 probably didn't do is create a patch on the Oberheim that he couldn't get Diva to reproduce well and disregard the difference and put it in anyway. Oddly I looked for a link of his patches and couldn't find one.

Anyway, I've put Diva against my beloved ATC many a time and the ATC, in all it's unsexy interface glory, is still in my studio. If the stars align, it may get a rack buddy in the form of the Neptune 2. I'm tough enough to withstand the horrors of turning those knobs and connecting a few MIDI and audio cables.

I probably should go back and put Diva up against my KingKORG. I did at one point and the KingKORG got the "heave-ho" only to sneakily return to my little world. Something about the sound of the KingKORG just sounds right to me. Like I said in the other thread, it surely isn't it's crap interface or ugly gold tone chassis. (note, the iPad app Patch Morpher turns your KingKORG into one of the coolest evolving pad machines you could ever imagine!)

[Lotuzia]

That's fair to a point. What hasn't changed is the fact that a stand alone analog synth is just that. It doesn't have all the goodies built into it that make what I do so easy. And if I'm recording the actual sound out of the box, there is no just tweaking the MIDI file to get it just right. It's get the take right or do it over. Otherwise I'd have to go back to my old analog setup where I ran everything MIDI out and MIDI through from synth to MIDI recorder and then back to the synth in order to direct the output to the multi track recorder. And it's been so long since I've used that setup that I'm not 100% sure that I'd know how to do it again. So why would I torture myself with that much work when I have such an easy and elegant solution in a box?

Point is, there is simply no reason to go back to what I had, which, by the way, was a setup completely void of old analogs because they didn't even have MIDI capability. Those synths I stopped using once I sold my Teac A3440. I mean let's be honest. Old analog stuff was not easy to work with. So why go back to it?

I can see your point, but I have two synths from the 80's that both have MIDI in and out, so I can record the MIDI into my DAW however I want to record it, then fine tune the MIDI, then record the actual audio output. The same could be done w/ MIDI to CV converters or CV sequencers if your synth is CV only. And the final option, and one I use where I don't have MIDI or CV capabilities (recording my Rhodes or Wurlie) is to edit the actual audio if my rhythm or velocity is a bit off.

Multiple paths to the final destination - choose the one your prefer. But saying you can't do it one way vs the other isn't always the full truth.

Almost anything CAN be done, especially today, with few exceptions. The question is, how much torture do you want to put yourself through to make it happen?

I guess I'm just not as patient as I used to be when I was 21 years old.

That man with an OB8 doesnt seem to be tortured though, and he doesnt use a 1978 4 track cassette deck either. You can mary technologies in an happy way nowadays. ( Add a midi cable for those who want to edit their tracks. Or actually 2midi cables, one for ins and one for outs )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57UgdcrH39I

It's pretty simple, plug the audio, press record, play .... very similar to itb tbh.