KVR Audio

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:43 am

re: youtube minimoog comparison.

I've never looked at this sort of thing to be honest, I always expected it would be bad but I can say the envelope and VCA CV response are poorly modeled across the board as well as the pulse waveshaper. The reason is plainly that the authors didn't understand how these circuits work or how to model them well.

Diva's filter is certainly a good approximation as is to be expected due to the methods used, which are the only possible "correct" way to do it and extremely expensive to process.

I'm blown away through - by a nasty disappointing shitwind.

Have we really advanced so little in so many years?

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 11:46 am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQufxG1GcAk

Ingonator · Post by **Ingonator** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:07 pm

I had owned and still own multiple real analog synths and plugins like e.g. The Legend, Diva, Repro-1 (+ the upcoming Repro-5), The Roland plugins and the Xils Lab plugins seem to be VERY close (while is still hesitate to say 100% which will be quite difficult to do anyway) to the sound of real analog synths where so far The Legend might be the best one in terms of emulating the real thing (while it also includes advanced features like e.g. the 2 new Bandpass filter modes based on the Moog ladder filter topology).

The fact that i still have problems replacing my Novation Bass Station 2 and Waldorf Pulse 2 with software is not really due to a lack in sound quality of the plugins mentioned (which is very good for all of them) but due to the specific basic sound and feature sets of those 2 hardware synths. Especially the multimode filter in the Bass Station 2 with it'S 7 modes is outstanding. From the softsynths mentioned above only Diva could get somehow close in terms of filter modes while it misses the Acid filter of the BS 2.

I agree to what was mentioned above about audio rate modulation, especially filter audio rate modulation. Older plugins and/or plugins without modern zero delay feedback filters often fail when doing audio rate modulations. The difference of "standard" filter models and zero delay feedback filters might not always be obvious but the difference could be noticed at extreme applications like e.g. audio rate modulation or high filter resonace amounts up to self-oscillation. The noise found with some software filters at self-oscillation usually is not "analog behavior" which is how some people would call it but just digital artifacts. For example a Minimoog at pure filter self-oscillation (no Oscs used) and without any additional distortion/drive added (which would then add additional harmonics) should produce a more or less pure Sine wave. This works nicely with e.g. The Legend.
For those who still don't get it: At filter self-oscilation the Cutoff corresponds to the pitch, not to the filter frequency. To be really useful filter keytracking should be at 100% and the Cutoff knob is used for tuning the pitch with help of a tuning plugin. At self-oscillation modulation of the Cutoff with a LFO or envelope cotrresponds to vibrato and/or pitch modulation.

yul · Post by **yul** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:41 pm

Great stuff guys! I can see Aciddose chiming in. I know that Xhip isn't focused on analog emulation as such although I must say that your filter FM does sound quite good and can hold up very well into audio range using the LFO. Would you say there was anything specific intended in that case or it's just my mind playing tricks?

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:02 pm

Xhip uses a very simple, low CPU cost filter. This is usually called "state variable" but that's actually a general term that applies to almost every filter type (including the "ladder" which is not a proper name either.) The proper name is "Kerwin-Huelsman-Newcomb" which is far more specific to the exact topology although there are variations possible because the order of stages doesn't matter in a KHN filter.

I went into a bit more detail but I'm leaving all that extra stuff about filters out. The short answer is no, this type of filter (KHN) is just inherently stable and doesn't show the same issues with audio-rate modulation that other filter implementations do.

I wouldn't say it handles audio-rate modulation any better than I would expect any filter to but rather that I'm often amazed at the weird ways in which a lot of plug-ins don't handle anything outside the most basic settings in an elegant way.

yul · Post by **yul** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:45 pm

Great info Aciddose! Thanks!

do_androids_dream · Post by **do_androids_dream** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:48 pm

Is it THAT time again..

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:49 pm

Are we there yet?

Cinebient · Post by **Cinebient** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:55 pm

Yes, there is a gap....software sounds as good but is at the same time a lote more versatile!
Time for analog to catch up

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:21 pm

Dasheesh wrote:It's not about analog vs digital anymore...that was 20 years ago. It's an archaic argument.

+1. We've been at the point where only confirmation bias, comb filtering, what one had for lunch and maybe phase of the Moon will find a difference.

Besides, any physicist well tell you that reality is digital anyway.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:21 pm

Jafo wrote:We've been at the point where only what one had for lunch will find a difference.
Besides, any physicist well tell you that reality is digital anyway.

egbert101 wrote:Starsky Carr's Minimoog shootout should tell you everything you need to know about contemporary analog modelling in VSTs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1h07ws--CM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1h07ws--CM
I'll just leave this here.

Terrafractyl · Post by **Terrafractyl** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:16 pm

Jafo wrote:
Dasheesh wrote:It's not about analog vs digital anymore...that was 20 years ago. It's an archaic argument.
+1. We've been at the point where only confirmation bias, comb filtering, what one had for lunch and maybe phase of the Moon will find a difference.

Besides, any physicist well tell you that reality is digital anyway.

I love how you anti-analog guys always pop up to say this stuff here on KVR. I'm guessing you don't own a decent analog synthesizer!
Also you keep this myth going despite the fact that every Engineer worth his salt will tell you different... hell there is a plugin dev saying so just a few posts up.
There is a reason most plugin companies are still emulating analog stuff!
People that can't afford or justify analog gear will just always try and convince themselves that they don't need it. I know cause I used to be one of them!
As much as Uhe, NI, Synapse and all the rest can do a pretty awesome job at it, my little modular synth still blows them away at certain things.

plexuss · Post by **plexuss** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:24 pm

Q: What's the remaining gap for impeccable analog modelling today?

A: Digital

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 9:29 pm

plexuss wrote:Q: What's the remaining gap for impeccable analog modelling today?

A: Digital

I don't know why you insist on making me feel so stupid but I've had quite enough of your big "smart people" words!

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Thu Oct 19, 2017 10:43 pm

Terrafractyl wrote:
Jafo wrote:
Dasheesh wrote:It's not about analog vs digital anymore...that was 20 years ago. It's an archaic argument.
+1. We've been at the point where only confirmation bias, comb filtering, what one had for lunch and maybe phase of the Moon will find a difference.

Besides, any physicist well tell you that reality is digital anyway.
I love how you anti-analog guys always pop up to say this stuff here on KVR. I'm guessing you don't own a decent analog synthesizer!
Also you keep this myth going despite the fact that every Engineer worth his salt will tell you different... hell there is a plugin dev saying so just a few posts up.
There is a reason most plugin companies are still emulating analog stuff!
People that can't afford or justify analog gear will just always try and convince themselves that they don't need it. I know cause I used to be one of them!
As much as Uhe, NI, Synapse and all the rest can do a pretty awesome job at it, my little modular synth still blows them away at certain things.

Please note that nobody has said anything anti-analog -- just that digital has gotten to the point at which it emulates analog quite well enough, as per the thread title. Well enough that there is no reliable distinction which cannot be adequately explained by confirmation bias or random factors related to the recording or listening environment.

I wish it weren't so. I wish that analog meant something special that digital couldn't reproduce or replicate, but emulations have simply improved to the point that it fools human senses. Maybe if we were Vulcans or something, able to make finer just-noticeable distinctions.

Please point me to a proper double-blind experiment in which people consistently differentiate between an analog synthesizer and a really good emulation. Seriously, I really would love to be wrong about this. I would also love to live in a world in which dolphins had the intelligence of cats and stopped trying to rescue sinking pieces of wood. Or in which top engineers didn't spend thousands of dollars on a couple of pieces of wire in an analog summing box.

Hmm... that may have been a little too sarcastic. I'm sorry; I mean no offense.