Login / Register 0 items | $0.00 New @ KVR
User avatar
fmr
KVRAF
 
7377 posts since 16 Mar, 2003, from Porto - Portugal

Postby fmr; Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:26 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

EvilDragon wrote:
bbtr wrote:
Urs wrote:digital compressors which surpass


Hey, I often wonder - where are those?!


Tokyo Dawn Labs. Klanghelm. Presswerk.

And so on, and so on...
Fernando (FMR)
bbtr
KVRist
 
384 posts since 21 Nov, 2005

Postby bbtr; Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:29 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

@ EvilDragon:
I had in mind Kotelnikov and DC8C when I said - I know two. But that's hardly too much, is it? Presswerk is NOT digital or what?!

@fmr:
And so on - well I didn't mean vanilla style cookbook digital compressors OF COURSE. u-he said 'a lot better' than the analogs. So where are those?
User avatar
Urs
u-he
 
22230 posts since 7 Aug, 2002, from Berlin

Postby Urs; Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:34 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

bbtr wrote:u-he said 'a lot better'

Nope, I said "...it's possible to make digital compressors which surpass any analogue one in sound quality, flexibility, musicality, efficiency, price and what have you."

The context here is not about comparing one to another. The context is about the perception of value, regardless of the actual qualities which could be compared. It's not about "better", it's about "why do we always automatically presume that..."

That is, if we start comparing, we already submit ourselves to the notion that analogue is better. Example: "Let's see if this software lives up to a Fairchild" -> :dog:
bbtr
KVRist
 
384 posts since 21 Nov, 2005

Postby bbtr; Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:37 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

oookay, same thing. Mine is shorter.
User avatar
EvilDragon
KVRAF
 
16603 posts since 6 Jan, 2009, from Croatia

Postby EvilDragon; Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:37 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

bbtr wrote:Presswerk is NOT digital or what?!


Of course it is digital, it's a plugin. :lol:

It can go way beyond what it was made to emulate in the "simple" views.
User avatar
fmr
KVRAF
 
7377 posts since 16 Mar, 2003, from Porto - Portugal

Postby fmr; Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:02 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

bbtr wrote: @fmr:
And so on - well I didn't mean vanilla style cookbook digital compressors OF COURSE. u-he said 'a lot better' than the analogs. So where are those?

Well, I'd add to the list, just like that, FabFilter, Melda, the old FishFillets, Toneboosters, and I'm sure I can find several more...

Don't know if they are "a lot better" (which analogs are we taling, anyway?) but they are certainly more versatile, and we can accomplish more (i'd say A LOT MORE) with them.

It's the same with synths. I see now many people shelling out $500 or more for a limited synth, sometimes monophonic, or with reduced polyphony, which will require maintenance, needs electricity to work, has to be physically connected to a mixer, and all that because "it is analog".

Personally, I am happy with the virtual synths.
Fernando (FMR)
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
11687 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:37 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

Urs wrote:Well, if you want to be strict on the comparison, it's "young fans" who still buy analogue cameras.

Thing is, in the world of photography, digital sensors have made analogue film obsolete, and likewise did digital image development make analogue image development obsolete. Cameras, lenses and light are still physical though.

In the world of audio production, nostalgia prevails. Analogue stuff is the shnitzle, even though its limitations are often dreadful compared to what is possible in software (think compressors, eqs, mixing desks). I.e. it's possible to make digital compressors which surpass any analogue one in sound quality, flexibility, musicality, efficiency, price and what have you. But people still get teary eyes in front of a Fairchild, while a softcomp is always "just a tool" for them. :bang:


It's actually a trend, the word is not "still", but "again" or "increasingly", backed up by Kodak's increasing sales figures for film.
Sure, for most jobs a digital cam will do, it is above all fast and practical. But for special applications such as art analog film is better.


Regarding sound, I think the difference is that with sound more perfect does not mean more enjoyable. Many people simply like the sounds of the past and don't strive for perfection or new sounds. Unlike with photography, where except for artistic shots you try to capture reality as perfectly as possible, with music there is no reality to capture perfectly, it's all art to begin with.
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2291 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Fri Jul 27, 2018 10:57 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

fluffy_little_something wrote:Regarding sound, I think the difference is that with sound more perfect does not mean more enjoyable. Many people simply like the sounds of the past and don't strive for perfection or new sounds. Unlike with photography, where except for artistic shots you try to capture reality as perfectly as possible, with music there is no reality to capture perfectly, it's all art to begin with.

With time so deep even on the human scale, maybe my perception of nostalgia, what people liked in old stuff, is different from some other younger human who nonetheless is not exactly young. :)

I listen to old "good stuff" and the sound might be blamed on people recording ensemble in studios with an engineer and (old definition of) producer sitting in the control room. The studio equipment was IMO substandard in quality compared to modern capabilities, but you had several humans all recording together, a rehearsed and previously arranged tune, none of the musicians worrying about anything except playing their part. The engineer worrying about getting it on tape and the producer worrying about fitting it together.

That antique method of working, I would guess, would sound "even more gooder" with modern studio equipment.

A few days ago was thinking about some musicians whose successful careers spanned several decades of different musical fashion-- For instance Mr Smokey Robinson spanned 1950's doo-wop R&B, Beach Music and Soul R&B, and finally MTV synth-pop-funk.

All was quite good but I'm of the opinion the early stuff recorded with larger groups of musicians and less nonrealtime overdubbing had lots better feel and groove. When he started doing the synth-pop-funk it sounds to me he was still doing it in big studios, or alternately he had the mother of all home studios. But it was mostly machines and vocals. With such a talented guy doing machines + vocals it "almost sounded as real" as the earlier acoustic stuff. But not really.

Dunno if he wanted to do it all mostly by his-self later on for budget reasons, or to better control the product and not have to be frustrated working with other musicians, or what. It is just my ignorant impression of the evolution and maybe completely erroneous. I think the old stuff, had it been recorded the old way but with the better gear of later years, would still have sounded great, even better without all that noise and distortion in the old hits.
low_low
KVRist
 
350 posts since 19 Jul, 2018

Postby low_low; Fri Jul 27, 2018 11:05 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

vortico wrote:Oh, one more thing to add. We're in the DSP board, but there's a lot of innovated needed in the hardware controller market. Still more things to try like haptic interfaces, modular knobs/buttons/cable MIDI controllers, expressive keyboards with MPE, and electro-physical sound making devices.


I've looked at DSP boards, but there doesn't seem to be an industry standard that is used widely enough that VST manufacturers can all use them, am I wrong ? Most of the DSP I've seen is manufacturer specific, and they have their little set of VST's that go with them and that's the end of it.
Terrafractyl
KVRist
 
331 posts since 15 Nov, 2005, from Melbourne Australia

Postby Terrafractyl; Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:08 pm Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

It always struck me that as someone that sits on the slightly more experimental side of music making, that I was constantly chasing the cutting edge of audio DSP. Those software vs hardware threads always drive me insane because 90% is people don't seem to understand that just because they can make a bass patch in Monark that sounds just as good as one on their HW Moog, this makes hardware obsolete.
Try making a patch on 'any' digital modular with extensive feedback, and a bit of heavy audio rate modulation. And then make the same judgement. Doesn't work.
For 'most people' this stuff is highly unmusical and not nessecary but for some, and I think an increasing number, it is a huge realm to explore and actually find new sounds. Doesn't mean thing like Vcv rack aren't absolutely amazing, but Im still not selling my modular. Maybe in 10 years I might re-assess.

Ive always found it interesting over the years how some of these 'crazy sounds' have generally become more and more accepted and kind of trickle down from the more experimental musics down into the commercial over time. Hey I even hear some tricky synth stuff in pop music sometimes, or advertisements on tv and radio often have heaps of wild FM sounds. But I'm talking about synths, I agree completely that the craziness that surrounds some outboard gear like Fairchild is just hypded nostalgia. wowsers

For me in the vat world lately unfiltered audio are doing a lot of amazing work. Seems like everything they put out is a bit 'new' in someway.
Hypnagog (Experimental Electronica) |
Terrafractyl (Psytrance) |Kinematic Records (Label)
User avatar
vortico
KVRist
 
164 posts since 19 Jul, 2008

Postby vortico; Fri Jul 27, 2018 3:51 pm Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

low_low wrote:
vortico wrote:Oh, one more thing to add. We're in the DSP board, but there's a lot of innovated needed in the hardware controller market. Still more things to try like haptic interfaces, modular knobs/buttons/cable MIDI controllers, expressive keyboards with MPE, and electro-physical sound making devices.


I've looked at DSP boards, but there doesn't seem to be an industry standard that is used widely enough that VST manufacturers can all use them, am I wrong ? Most of the DSP I've seen is manufacturer specific, and they have their little set of VST's that go with them and that's the end of it.

Oh, haha, I mean the DSP forum board.
VCV Rack open-source virtual modular synthesizer
DaveGamble
KVRian
 
1000 posts since 12 Jul, 2009, from Brighton

Postby DaveGamble; Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:41 pm Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

Urs wrote:
bbtr wrote:
Urs wrote:digital compressors which surpass


Hey, I often wonder - where are those?! I know of two which are great, but come on, that's nothing compared to the hundreds of 'analog' plug-ins. And they are recommending sonic degradation as a feature, as a selling point! And people like that! ?!?! :dog: :dog: :dog:

So who is going to make THE experimental digital compressor from the future? Any volunteers? :oops:

Let's put it that way: I'm extremely biased. But also hats off to Dave Gamble, if you need any example without my biased opinion. But there's more, certainly, I just don't know them well enough.

<3 <3 <3
[ DMGAudio ] | [ DMGAudio Blog ] | dave AT dmgaudio DOT com
low_low
KVRist
 
350 posts since 19 Jul, 2018

Postby low_low; Fri Jul 27, 2018 6:39 pm Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

vortico wrote:Oh, haha, I mean the DSP forum board.


That was funny! :lol:
User avatar
S0lo
KVRian
 
583 posts since 31 Dec, 2008

Postby S0lo; Sun Jul 29, 2018 1:34 am Re: Plug-In Development Frontiers

Terrafractyl wrote:Try making a patch on 'any' digital modular with extensive feedback, and a bit of heavy audio rate modulation. And then make the same judgement. Doesn't work.


Not sure what you meant by "Doesn't work". Do you reach a point where you don't get any sound at all?
Previous

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to DSP and Plug-in Development