Synapse Audio Minimoog emulation "The Legend" for VST/AU and RE released!

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS
The Legend

Post

The problem is, FLS wants to separate the physical from everything else. He points to a generality that all people's ears and eyes are essentially the same from a general physical perspective. But he refuses to acknowledge that even there we have physical differences and emotional factors that absolutely alter how each person perceives any kind of stimulus.

It's like saying all cars are the same because they all have wheels and an engine.

Like I said, pointless arguing with people like that.

Post

Well I hear colors and see sounds so you're all wacky...... :nutter:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Post

Wikipedia wrote:"A" is likely to be red
But how on Earth do they know??? :o
You may think you can fly ... but you better not try

Post

I hear what everyone else also hears.
It depends on whether you are generalizing or speaking in detail.

Generally - yes, we more or less hear the same thing.

But if you start breaking it down to details - no, we don't hear the same exact thing. Physically impossible.

Whether this is important or not, depends on application. I can guarantee you, if you bring two mixers to do a mix, they won't agree on what the final mix should be. They will have their own opinion based on their auditory perception. It wont' have anything to do with liking or disliking the song from aesthetic point of view.

Color example is right. Many times I've found myself disagreeing with people on exact shades of a certain color.

While we would agree on main colors (generalization), we would disagree on the shades (nuances, details). And again, this had nothing to do with liking or disliking the colors based on a personal bias. It's how we see them and we see them differently.

Now replace colors with sounds and you'll get the same picture.

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:The color example is absolutely correct (and we're not talking about colorblindness here). Certain nations have different outlooks on certain colors. For example, in Japan, for centuries they used exactly the same word for blue and green. It was the same color to them. There are studies about these things, go educate yourself a bit :)
That's a language thing, but the Japanese see exactly the same as Europeans do, the same frequencies etc., because their eyes are build the same way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ao_(color)

Bees however see different things because their eyes are different.
You're right about the bees, but that's about it :hihi: .

To give you another example. An eskimo can differentiate about 70 shades of white, living in the environment that he does. Just like a trained ear will perceive stuff that a non-trained person will not. Here i'm not talking about physiology, but about the cognitive process.

Yet another example of the wonders of perception. There are glasses that invert your vision. So the ceiling becomes the floor and vice versa. At first it drives you crazy. After a few days wearing the glasses, your vision is normal again. Your brain has adapted and interpretes the same signals in a different way resulting in a normal view again. Just to show how flexible and personal perception is.

I have a master (5 year) in theoretical psychology by the way so i know a few things about it.

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:
wagtunes wrote:Wrong because of so many variables from person to person.

Hearing loss, especially in frequency ranges. For example, a harsh cymbal sound won't be interpreted the same by a person who has lost the upper frequencies as I have. That's why I have to consciously put an EQ on the upper frequencies of my cymbals out of habit because I know I'm not hearing that harshness.

Then there is how we emotionally identify with each instrument. You can't remove emotions from the equation of how we "hear" sound. We are not robots. If we were, everybody would love or hate the same songs the same way.

But again, taking emotions away, as even you yourself admitted plays a part in the "hearing" process, all our hearings are not equal. You have absolutely no idea what I hear and I have absolutely no idea what you hear. So to make a blanket statement that everybody hears things the same is just flat out wrong purely from a physiological standpoint.

Your ears and my ears are not the same.
I disagree, our ears and hearing are virtually the same, in all humans, just like our eyes and vision. (Problems such as color blindness, tinnitus etc. excluded, of course). If it were not, humans could not communicate and agree on anything. Actually, we would have died out early during out evolution.

Only the interpretation of what we all hear differs. But even that interpretation is often pretty consistent within a given culture.
To get back to topic, most people seem to agree that Legend sounds powerful. Sure, some will say it sounds thin. But when 9/10 say it sounds powerful, it does sound powerful. You know, when it walks like a duck...
I’m not sure how you can make this statement. It’s well known that our ears and eyes deteriorate throughout our lives. We mostly start off with the famous “20-20K” frequency range, but that’s some platonic ideal. If you’re an adult male, chances are you are not hearing over 15 khz. If you’ve abused your ears, it’s probably worse. Eyes too. I went though my childhood to about 25 with perfect vision, but then I noticed that my right eye was still fine, but my left eye was slightly off. Now on the precipice of 53, both eyes are borked. Not badly, but if you bring me a check in a dim restaurant that’s printed in tiny gray text, I won’t be able to read it with my regular glasses. My daughter, OTOH, can see it all perfectly. My grandmother, nearing 100, can barely see or hear. We do not see and hear the same.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

Something else to blow FLS's "facts" totally out of the water.

Just like every other human being, I have a human being's eyes. However, they are not the same as everybody else's eyes. I only see out of one of them. Thus, I have no depth perception. I can't even imagine what it's like to be able to perceive depth. So I absolutely do not see things as others see them.

I am also color blind. I wish I could see colors as others see them. I cannot.

I can go on and on and on.

Yeah, we all have the same eyes and ears.

But we don't all have the same eyes and ears.

For those who don't understand that, I can't help you.

Post

Stefken wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:The color example is absolutely correct (and we're not talking about colorblindness here). Certain nations have different outlooks on certain colors. For example, in Japan, for centuries they used exactly the same word for blue and green. It was the same color to them. There are studies about these things, go educate yourself a bit :)
That's a language thing, but the Japanese see exactly the same as Europeans do, the same frequencies etc., because their eyes are build the same way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ao_(color)

Bees however see different things because their eyes are different.
You're right about the bees, but that's about it :hihi: .

To give you another example. An eskimo can differentiate about 70 shades of white, living in the environment that he does. Just like a trained ear will perceive stuff that a non-trained person will not. Here i'm not talking about physiology, but about the cognitive process.

Yet another example of the wonders of perception. There are glasses that invert your vision. So the ceiling becomes the floor and vice versa. At first it drives you crazy. After a few days wearing the glasses, your vision is normal again. Your brain has adapted and interpretes the same signals in a different way resulting in a normal view again. Just to show how flexible and personal perception is.

I have a master (5 year) in theoretical psychology by the way so i know a few things about it.
An Eskimo's eyes are no different from ours, they see the same shades of white as we do. But we don't care about all the different shades of white (except for the paint industry etc.), which are not really whites anyway, but extremely light blue, green, black etc. White is white. So yes, the Eskimo brain pays attention to something that is irrelevant to most of us. So their brain changes compared to ours.

Our eyes are like cams, if they are not damaged, they "see" the same thing. Now, what we do with the raw images afterwards in Photoshop is a different story...

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:
Stefken wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:The color example is absolutely correct (and we're not talking about colorblindness here). Certain nations have different outlooks on certain colors. For example, in Japan, for centuries they used exactly the same word for blue and green. It was the same color to them. There are studies about these things, go educate yourself a bit :)
That's a language thing, but the Japanese see exactly the same as Europeans do, the same frequencies etc., because their eyes are build the same way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ao_(color)

Bees however see different things because their eyes are different.
You're right about the bees, but that's about it :hihi: .

To give you another example. An eskimo can differentiate about 70 shades of white, living in the environment that he does. Just like a trained ear will perceive stuff that a non-trained person will not. Here i'm not talking about physiology, but about the cognitive process.

Yet another example of the wonders of perception. There are glasses that invert your vision. So the ceiling becomes the floor and vice versa. At first it drives you crazy. After a few days wearing the glasses, your vision is normal again. Your brain has adapted and interpretes the same signals in a different way resulting in a normal view again. Just to show how flexible and personal perception is.

I have a master (5 year) in theoretical psychology by the way so i know a few things about it.
An Eskimo's eyes are no different from ours, they see the same shades of white as we do. But we don't care about all the different shades of white (except for the paint industry etc.), which are not really whites anyway, but extremely light blue, green, black etc. White is white. So yes, the Eskimo brain pays attention to something that is irrelevant to most of us. So their brain changes compared to ours.

Our eyes are like cams, if they are not damaged, they "see" the same thing. Now, what we do with the raw images afterwards in Photoshop is a different story...
How long are you going to show everybody how ignorant you are?

Post

nichttuntun wrote:I too do not think it is ridiculous. It's a further option to sculpture sound and it can add character to the instrument and it even can be a main character of an instrument.

I think an effect section shouldn't be the main part of the sound design process because the instrument alone should stand out with something special may it be it's own base sounds, filters or so. So I think a built in knob which disables all effects (even when changing presets) is a very useful feature to have to see what the basic instrument sounds like.
I think it really depends on the mindset. There isn’t a “one size fits all” approach to this topic. Behringer is doing well with its Deepmind. Without its effect processor, it’s a pretty mediocre sounding synth. Some people declare the magic of analog, but in its case, the Roland Juno 106 plugin sounded better at all settings to me. Not that the Deepmind is bad, just not that great. (Very flat sounding PWM and shrieky sounding resonance that raises the cutoff frequency in the last 25% of its range) But to dismiss it as a mediocre synth based on those flaws would be silly, because the effects are very good and they are tied to the synth engine like a plugin is, which as far as I know, is a first for a hardware analog synth and not really common in any hardware synths. The end result is a sound that’s very good and hard to get in any other synth, hardware or software. The famous Virus is like this too. When you hear it without any effects, it’s really not a great sounding synth, but those effects bring it to life and have made it a modern classic.
Zerocrossing Media

4th Law of Robotics: When turning evil, display a red indicator light. ~[ ●_● ]~

Post

wagtunes wrote:Something else to blow FLS's "facts" totally out of the water.

Just like every other human being, I have a human being's eyes. However, they are not the same as everybody else's eyes. I only see out of one of them. Thus, I have no depth perception. I can't even imagine what it's like to be able to perceive depth. So I absolutely do not see things as others see them.

I am also color blind. I wish I could see colors as others see them. I cannot.

I can go on and on and on.

Yeah, we all have the same eyes and ears.

But we don't all have the same eyes and ears.

For those who don't understand that, I can't help you.
The majority do not have such health problems. So you are citing exceptions to prove your point.

Post

zerocrossing wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:
wagtunes wrote:Wrong because of so many variables from person to person.

Hearing loss, especially in frequency ranges. For example, a harsh cymbal sound won't be interpreted the same by a person who has lost the upper frequencies as I have. That's why I have to consciously put an EQ on the upper frequencies of my cymbals out of habit because I know I'm not hearing that harshness.

Then there is how we emotionally identify with each instrument. You can't remove emotions from the equation of how we "hear" sound. We are not robots. If we were, everybody would love or hate the same songs the same way.

But again, taking emotions away, as even you yourself admitted plays a part in the "hearing" process, all our hearings are not equal. You have absolutely no idea what I hear and I have absolutely no idea what you hear. So to make a blanket statement that everybody hears things the same is just flat out wrong purely from a physiological standpoint.

Your ears and my ears are not the same.
I disagree, our ears and hearing are virtually the same, in all humans, just like our eyes and vision. (Problems such as color blindness, tinnitus etc. excluded, of course). If it were not, humans could not communicate and agree on anything. Actually, we would have died out early during out evolution.

Only the interpretation of what we all hear differs. But even that interpretation is often pretty consistent within a given culture.
To get back to topic, most people seem to agree that Legend sounds powerful. Sure, some will say it sounds thin. But when 9/10 say it sounds powerful, it does sound powerful. You know, when it walks like a duck...
I’m not sure how you can make this statement. It’s well known that our ears and eyes deteriorate throughout our lives. We mostly start off with the famous “20-20K” frequency range, but that’s some platonic ideal. If you’re an adult male, chances are you are not hearing over 15 khz. If you’ve abused your ears, it’s probably worse. Eyes too. I went though my childhood to about 25 with perfect vision, but then I noticed that my right eye was still fine, but my left eye was slightly off. Now on the precipice of 53, both eyes are borked. Not badly, but if you bring me a check in a dim restaurant that’s printed in tiny gray text, I won’t be able to read it with my regular glasses. My daughter, OTOH, can see it all perfectly. My grandmother, nearing 100, can barely see or hear. We do not see and hear the same.
Of course both hearing and vision deteriorate with age. But that is no longer normal hearing and vision.
Our entire bodies work the same way, which is what makes medicine possible in the first place. Just because some people get cancer does not mean that our bodies work differently. The normal body works how it is described in countless medical books. Only thanks to our knowledge of the normal, healthy human body can we tell when there is an illness, i.e. a departure from the way it should be.

Same with sound. I have heard many people say that the reverb in Sylenth1 sounds metallic, and I agree.
Why is that? There is a double consensus:
- we hear that the sound is not the way it should be
- we agree linguistically on the way it departs, i.e. metallic

Post

fluffy_little_something wrote:
wagtunes wrote:Something else to blow FLS's "facts" totally out of the water.

Just like every other human being, I have a human being's eyes. However, they are not the same as everybody else's eyes. I only see out of one of them. Thus, I have no depth perception. I can't even imagine what it's like to be able to perceive depth. So I absolutely do not see things as others see them.

I am also color blind. I wish I could see colors as others see them. I cannot.

I can go on and on and on.

Yeah, we all have the same eyes and ears.

But we don't all have the same eyes and ears.

For those who don't understand that, I can't help you.
The majority do not have such health problems. So you are citing exceptions to prove your point.
Oh and you're the statistical expert on the percentage of people who have the exact same ears and eyes.

Again, pure ignorance.

Post

wagtunes wrote:
fluffy_little_something wrote:
wagtunes wrote:Something else to blow FLS's "facts" totally out of the water.

Just like every other human being, I have a human being's eyes. However, they are not the same as everybody else's eyes. I only see out of one of them. Thus, I have no depth perception. I can't even imagine what it's like to be able to perceive depth. So I absolutely do not see things as others see them.

I am also color blind. I wish I could see colors as others see them. I cannot.

I can go on and on and on.

Yeah, we all have the same eyes and ears.

But we don't all have the same eyes and ears.

For those who don't understand that, I can't help you.
The majority do not have such health problems. So you are citing exceptions to prove your point.
Oh and you're the statistical expert on the percentage of people who have the exact same ears and eyes.

Again, pure ignorance.
Don't put words into my mouth again, I said:
"I disagree, our ears and hearing are virtually the same, in all humans, just like our eyes and vision."

Not exactly the same.

Post

Stefken wrote:You're right about the bees, but that's about it :hihi: .

To give you another example. An eskimo can differentiate about 70 shades of white, living in the environment that he does. Just like a trained ear will perceive stuff that a non-trained person will not. Here i'm not talking about physiology, but about the cognitive process.

Yet another example of the wonders of perception. There are glasses that invert your vision. So the ceiling becomes the floor and vice versa. At first it drives you crazy. After a few days wearing the glasses, your vision is normal again. Your brain has adapted and interpretes the same signals in a different way resulting in a normal view again. Just to show how flexible and personal perception is.

I have a master (5 year) in theoretical psychology by the way so i know a few things about it.
Perception happens in the brain, which is known to be flexible. But the ears hear the same and the eyes see the same. That data is then processed in the brain. It is the brain that inverts floor and ceiling again in order to correct the first inversion. The eyes don't invert anything. They continue to send the inverted data to the brain.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”