How come "Hardware" VA's 16 years ago sounded so good like the AN1x and now....
-
- Banned
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
-
- KVRAF
- 15135 posts since 7 Sep, 2008
No sure I understand your LOGIC or REASONing 
"I was wondering if you'd like to try Magic Mushrooms"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
"Oooh I dont know. Sounds a bit scary"
"It's not scary. You just lose a sense of who you are and all that sh!t"
-
Bronto Scorpio Bronto Scorpio https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=98170 - KVRAF
- 5546 posts since 13 Feb, 2006 from Wiesmoor, Germany
They were entirely digital and ran on very, very primitive processors. You probably wouldn't even notice the amount of CPU a Virus, a AN1x, a JP-80x0 etc would take on a modern CPU.
The problem is that the analog emulation mania has gone nuts. I really had high hopes that it would end one day but it get's worse and worse instead.
The Nord Lead is still one of the best soundding VAs imo for example.
Sadly everything now needs 0df stuff and so on. That's cool and maybe even necessary if the synth has to sound as close to analog synths as possible but it's NOT (!!!!!!) necessary for a GOOD sound!
I already gave up ranting about this a long time ago though
The majority of people still want emulations and no new stuff, so I guess it will stay like that for a while.
Stuff like Zebra, Synthmaster and Diversion are the way to go imo.
The best example is Sean from ValhallaDSP. He knows a lot of stuff about the great stuff from the past but he only uses this knowledge to learn from it and to come up with unique concepts instead of completely emulating something.
Cheers
Dennis
The problem is that the analog emulation mania has gone nuts. I really had high hopes that it would end one day but it get's worse and worse instead.
The Nord Lead is still one of the best soundding VAs imo for example.
Sadly everything now needs 0df stuff and so on. That's cool and maybe even necessary if the synth has to sound as close to analog synths as possible but it's NOT (!!!!!!) necessary for a GOOD sound!
I already gave up ranting about this a long time ago though
The majority of people still want emulations and no new stuff, so I guess it will stay like that for a while.
Stuff like Zebra, Synthmaster and Diversion are the way to go imo.
The best example is Sean from ValhallaDSP. He knows a lot of stuff about the great stuff from the past but he only uses this knowledge to learn from it and to come up with unique concepts instead of completely emulating something.
Cheers
Dennis
-
- KVRAF
- 43937 posts since 11 Aug, 2008 from clown world
Programmers were much better in the old days.
Music was better in the old days.
Musicians were better in the old days.
Oh wait ...
maybe I'm just getting old.
Music was better in the old days.
Musicians were better in the old days.
Oh wait ...
maybe I'm just getting old.
Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
-
- KVRAF
- 24411 posts since 7 Jan, 2009 from Croatia
I f**king love my AN1x. Nothing in the VST world sounds quite like it.
-
- KVRAF
- 9590 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
They had way less power. They were just really good at making something useful with that puny amount of cycles. Technically synths today are way superior. Less aliasing, per sample processing,less noise and whathaveyou.
I suspect one reason is cultural. They became the benchmark by being used on pretty much everything for a while.
The Roland JP 8000 supersaw for example is a complete joke (though really clever) by today's standards but due to it being used in all the classics people really enjoy that sound.
I suspect one reason is cultural. They became the benchmark by being used on pretty much everything for a while.
The Roland JP 8000 supersaw for example is a complete joke (though really clever) by today's standards but due to it being used in all the classics people really enjoy that sound.
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 8237 posts since 22 Sep, 2008 from Windsor. UK
Convertors.
Actual electricity running through actual metal.
For the same reason, my JV1080 sounds better than my Omnisphere despite 20 years of progress and being programmed by the same dude.
Actual electricity running through actual metal.
For the same reason, my JV1080 sounds better than my Omnisphere despite 20 years of progress and being programmed by the same dude.
Soundcloud | Facebook |
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 9590 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
I suspect pure nostalgia is also a reason. If you try one today you might just balk at the amount of aliasing and other shortcuts they were forced to make.
Weren't we all much more productive 10-20 years ago ?
Weren't we all much more productive 10-20 years ago ?
-
- KVRAF
- 9590 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
I doubt that is the reason. I had a contemporary Roland sampler (S750) and to me the ADA conversion was fairly neutral. What went in sounded pretty much the same coming out again.tehlord wrote:Convertors.
Actual electricity running through actual metal.
For the same reason, my JV1080 sounds better than my Omnisphere despite 20 years of progress and being programmed by the same dude.
It would be an interesting test to make,don't know if Roland made any modules with digital outputs around that era. The 2080 doesn't have it (i believe) but the 5080 did,no ?
-
- KVRian
- 1488 posts since 7 Jan, 2004
I'll add one more reason.
Hardware VA's usually run largely on dedicated Digital Signal Processors (DSP chips). These are far less flexible than the General CPU's we have in our PC's but they are also much more efficient. You can compare it with the graphical power of a video card versus that of the CPU itself.
Of course that's only a small part of the explanation. Modern day CPU's easily crunch those old and not so old DSP's.
Hardware VA's usually run largely on dedicated Digital Signal Processors (DSP chips). These are far less flexible than the General CPU's we have in our PC's but they are also much more efficient. You can compare it with the graphical power of a video card versus that of the CPU itself.
Of course that's only a small part of the explanation. Modern day CPU's easily crunch those old and not so old DSP's.
The more I hang around at KVR the less music I make.
-
- KVRAF
- 9590 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
The JV 1080 is quite a good example of why some people prefer older tech. Take the string ensemble for example. They won't fool anyone believing you had a real orchestra at your disposal. Technically it's a pretty awful sound but it just sounds awesome!
Don't know what to call it but therein lies the explanation i believe.
Don't know what to call it but therein lies the explanation i believe.
-
- KVRAF
- 8237 posts since 22 Sep, 2008 from Windsor. UK
jupiter8 wrote:I doubt that is the reason. I had a contemporary Roland sampler (S750) and to me the ADA conversion was fairly neutral. What went in sounded pretty much the same coming out again.tehlord wrote:Convertors.
Actual electricity running through actual metal.
For the same reason, my JV1080 sounds better than my Omnisphere despite 20 years of progress and being programmed by the same dude.
It would be an interesting test to make,don't know if Roland made any modules with digital outputs around that era. The 2080 doesn't have it (i believe) but the 5080 did,no ?
There was a similar discussion over at teh slutz (surprise surprise)
Taking into account that the 1080 and Omnisphere have very similar sounds in them programmed by the same dude, I can't think of any other reason.
It's not the timbre's themselves, more the character of the sound.
Similarly, when I had a Virus Ti, the analogue outs sounded different (and to my ears nicer) than the USB audio.
I'm not an analogue/hardware purist by any stretch of the imagination, but there's clearly a difference.
Soundcloud | Facebook |
-
Bronto Scorpio Bronto Scorpio https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=98170
- KVRAF
- 5546 posts since 13 Feb, 2006 from Wiesmoor, Germany
+1jupiter8 wrote:The JV 1080 is quite a good example of why some people prefer older tech. Take the string ensemble for example. They won't fool anyone believing you had a real orchestra at your disposal. Technically it's a pretty awful sound but it just sounds awesome!
Don't know what to call it but therein lies the explanation i believe.
As I said, sometimes (always?) it's totally worth it to sacrifice realisim for awesomeness
Cheers
Dennis