Diva vs Analogue - a real world test

[rod_zero]

I love DIVA, my favorite synth.

I am happy that it compres and even surpases in sound, IMHO, some of the old dinosaurs.

BUt the more I learn to play instruments the more I wish Diva also existed as hardware. I am considering doing it my self using Surface Pro or a Brix Pro, an steinbberg audio interface and building the caising, similar to what Urs presented some years ago.

There is simply something more practical (for players) and easier to use about hardware instruments.

[fluffy_little_something]

There is someone making a hardware controller for Diva and a few other select synths. Found it:
http://www.matrixsynth.com/2012/08/synt ... dware.html

[IncarnateX]

But if it's about sound and how Diva sounds like a wet rag and the OB 8 sounds like the Gods from Mt Olympus in comparison, sorry, I don't hear it.

Neither do I and wouldn't in a lifetime, even on the best of acid

[bmrzycki]

My vote is Diva is A, OB-8 is B mostly because of the extra high-end of some of the A parts (which I prefer). Honestly though, several of those sounds are so close that if I tried to ABX them I'd likely fail discerning ether source accurately.

Nice work on those sounds BTW.

[LFO8]

Job well done on these sounds I'd say!

[Z1202]

I didn't have the patience to listen to all the examples in the comparison, but what I would expect are basically the extreme setting of anything:
- very low and very high cutoff
- very high resonance across the entire cutoff range
- the same with different amounts of the filter input signal, from zero (selfoscillation) and very low to very high drive leveles
- very low and very high oscillator frequency
- try to exite the resonating filter with transients of a very low frequency (several Hz or even less) oscillator at various drive levels, use different waveforms
- very short filter/osc/pw envelope times, also with various amounts of filter drive
- all possible kinds of audio rate modulations, including noise as the modulation source, linear/exp and thruzero fm
- whatever else is possible
I don't know the architecture of the synths in question, so I don't know which of the above is possible, but you get the idea

Eh....I think it is your own job to test your hypotheses. The burden of evidence is on you here, so can you please demonstrate by virtue of some examples?

Are you trying to imply that, unless I have proved my point myself, it is nonsense "by default"?
This discussion actually kind of motivated me to try to do another comparison of Diva to Monark, this time recording it, and possibly posting the results. Maybe I'll do that later. But I'm quite reluctant to be bothered with borrowing a real modular and testing against it

Edit: BTW there was a nice example in the other Diva vs Analog thread by aciddose. IIRC there was no convincing reproduction by the software, Diva or whatever.

[wagtunes]

As an owner of hardware synths (well, former owner it seems as I can't find anything aside from my TG33) the only thing I prefer hardware over software for, hands down, is playing live.

The last thing I want to do is drag a computer around with me. I'd rather take 2 or 3 keyboards if I have to play out. What happens if your PC crashes in the middle of a performance? Hell, the DAW alone could crash and has happened to me plenty of times with Cubase. Playing out, I have never once had a keyboard go out on me.

That's where I can see hardware over software. But if you're in a home studio, especially with limited space, and you're doing nothing but recording tracks to post on the Internet, I don't see the point in spending ungodly amounts of money and filling your room up with hardware.

[chk071]

I'd say synth A is the Oberheim and synth B is Diva. I agree though that comparison sounds with extreme settings are the better real life comparison, as those are usually the sounds were analog should shine compared to digital. The sounds presented are all pretty simple, and, as already mentioned, are tuned to sound similar. But that's not really the point. The point is, how do the synths compare with equal settings, and no tuning TO sound the same.

[Z1202]

The point is, how do the synths compare with equal settings, and no tuning TO sound the same.

I don't think this point is very practical, except for the purists. A more important point IMHO is the coverage of the entire analog sound palette by the software synths. I don't care if a VA sounds exactly like a Moog or approximately like a Moog, as long as is has the "analog quality and feel".

I might be giving an impression of an "analog freak" here, but in fact, I was already happy with the sound quality of Arturia's Moog Modular V 2 10 years ago for the sounds it could do. Since then I have been more concerned about VA sounds which the softsynths simply cannot do.

[SWAN808]

how do the synths compare with equal settings, and no tuning TO sound the same.

that may be the case if you are comparing the exact analogue synth that was modelled...otherwise IMO it is totally fair to match the software to the analogue...of course that leaves a possibility that there are ranges in the software potentially not covered by the analogue (therefore not sounding 'analogue') and that probably exists a little bit in Diva IMO...

[Chris-S]

My guess: A hardware, B software.

[wagtunes]

Question:

These "extreme" sounds that are being requested. How often do you actually hear them in real world application?

I don't know about everybody else, but back in the day when prog rock ruled and everybody had a Moog or an Oberheim. I don't recall hearing any "extreme" sounds. Most of what I heard was comparable to the videos I just listened to in this thread.

So what exactly is the point of doing these "extreme" sounds?

[chk071]

how do the synths compare with equal settings, and no tuning TO sound the same.

that may be the case if you are comparing the exact analogue synth that was modelled...otherwise IMO it is totally fair to match the software to the analogue...of course that leaves a possibility that there are ranges in the software potentially not covered by the analogue (therefore not sounding 'analogue') and that probably exists a little bit in Diva IMO...

The thing is, it always leave a possibility that the comparison tests have somehow being made so that one synth looks better, just to prove something. E.g. you could just turn the filter cutoff down a bit to make one of the other sound a bit muffled in comparison, change the osc detuning slightly, so that one sounds a bit more odd, or apply a slight LFO to mimic analog oscillator behavior. I don't want to say that you did this, but it's easy to make the one or the other look bad if you want to. Hence i would suggest that they have to sound similar on the same parameter settings. That's nearly impossible, but that should be the way to do it. And if i would create a strict emulation, i would also make sure that the settings sound the same. Diva is another thing though, as you have different modules, and stuff you can put together, so same settings wouldn't work anyway.

Question:

These "extreme" sounds that are being requested. How often do you actually hear them in real world application?

Not the point IMO. These extreme settings, as mentioned, for me represent the field where soft synths are still different from analog synths. A simple saw tooth, or random 80ies sound from song XY from way back then are no measurement for me, as you will be able to replicate those with Synth1 with enough effort.

[fluffy_little_something]

Question:

These "extreme" sounds that are being requested. How often do you actually hear them in real world application?

I don't know about everybody else, but back in the day when prog rock ruled and everybody had a Moog or an Oberheim. I don't recall hearing any "extreme" sounds. Most of what I heard was comparable to the videos I just listened to in this thread.

So what exactly is the point of doing these "extreme" sounds?

Yep, wrote the same thing in the other thread. Extreme sounds are not very musical. To me it is more important a synth can do bread and butter sounds really well and while using little CPU.

[Z1202]

Question:

These "extreme" sounds that are being requested. How often do you actually hear them in real world application?

I don't know about everybody else, but back in the day when prog rock ruled and everybody had a Moog or an Oberheim. I don't recall hearing any "extreme" sounds. Most of what I heard was comparable to the videos I just listened to in this thread.

So what exactly is the point of doing these "extreme" sounds?

Yep, wrote the same thing in the other thread. Extreme sounds are not very musical. To me it is more important a synth can do bread and butter sounds really well and while using little CPU.

The two examples that I posted in this and the other thread are not convincing enough? Listen to the music of JMJ or Chris Worton (Fin), if we are talking about the synths. Also ELP to an extent. I believe King Crimson did a lot of extreme guitar sounds.
Also often you might even not realize that you are listening to "extreme" sounds. They can sound quite similar to the usual sounds and you won't notice, unless facing a direct comparison or simply trying to program a similar sound. It's one of those things which you don't notice unless it's missing.