Diva vs Analogue - a real world test

[Nielzie]

I suppose this thread is only so narrow because that person wants to advertise their Diva sound and skin set.
I would find it interesting to evaluate more synths not just Diva. GForce and Xils stuff for instance.

Yes, bring it on!

[Z1202]

a lot of the difference between Monark and Diva Moog emulation is the different era Minimoogs modelled...

As a (hobbyist) musician, I don't care whether Diva (or any other synth) sounds exactly like a Minimoog or not. This is the real "academic" question to me. What I care about is whether I can get certain type of sounds with sufficient quality (this, among other things, includes those analog artifacts, which are musically useful and desired). And so, I believe, do many musicians.

Aside from the recongnizable signature bread-and-butter sounds, can anyone explain the musical importance of being an exact emulation?

Edit: I am also not insisting on using exclusively the Minimoog components of Diva in the suggested comparison. Please use everything which is there, I'm all for it.

[Synthetic Wav]

this don't mean much to start with, there is thousands of different analog sounds, check this for example (based on roland filter cascaded ota design ) https://soundcloud.com/cylob/dr-octatur ... user-demos

[ObsoleteAcc99]

i only read the first post and only listened to the first video. Now this is a great topic. I always used to think I was good enough to tell soft and hardware apart but when the bass and other elements come in it gets really complex to tell. I think only someone with non human ears would be able to tell the difference in a mix. I am *presuming* all the sounds are the same synths right?

i *think* the hardware is A but I am going purely on the bit at the start (the melody on it's own before bass comes in) where I can hear a difference.
That said, in the real world, it's so close either way, shows how brilliant diva is, really.

[Synthetic Wav]

these sound different to me, check on cans, but i don t know which is which , i know just the one i like best , if B is diva i m happy

B have a more "correcte tonal balance" for modern sound and sound better in the mix also more punchy , A is kinda muddy and less alive, these difference could be down to the programing.

A better collapsing /phasing and 3dness make me think it's the hardware but in the mix i like more B cause of the tonal balance.

[SWAN808]

Aside from the recongnizable signature bread-and-butter sounds, can anyone explain the musical importance of being an exact emulation?

the musical importance is that many people find analogue synthesis and processing more musical.

[Gonga]

So the kick and everything changes? HowTF did the poster do this and have it blend together like that? Great job.

This is a good example of the circumstances under which it's most difficult to distinguish - real world circumstances.

The best test of ears is to compare minutia - the attack only for example, or resonant filter sweep. With all the other crap going along with it they are definitely indistinguishable for all practical purposes.

Anyway, I never cared whether an emulation is perfect or not. What I care about is whether a VA can do what I need it to do, and sound as good. In this regard there are many VAs that still fall short, and more and more that sound just as good.

[ObsoleteAcc99]

So the kick and everything changes? HowTF did the poster do this and have it blend together like that? Great job.

This is a good example of the circumstances under which it's most difficult to distinguish - real world circumstances.

The best test of ears is to compare minutia - the attack only for example, or resonant filter sweep. With all the other crap going along with it they are definitely indistinguishable for all practical purposes.

Anyway, I never cared whether an emulation is perfect or not. What I care about is whether a VA can do what I need it to do, and sound as good. In this regard there are many VAs that still fall short, and more and more that sound just as good.

agreed. before i read the whole topic, was it ever answered which was which?

[Gonga]

a lot of the difference between Monark and Diva Moog emulation is the different era Minimoogs modelled...

As a (hobbyist) musician, I don't care whether Diva (or any other synth) sounds exactly like a Minimoog or not. This is the real "academic" question to me. What I care about is whether I can get certain type of sounds with sufficient quality (this, among other things, includes those analog artifacts, which are musically useful and desired). And so, I believe, do many musicians.

Aside from the recongnizable signature bread-and-butter sounds, can anyone explain the musical importance of being an exact emulation?

Edit: I am also not insisting on using exclusively the Minimoog components of Diva in the suggested comparison. Please use everything which is there, I'm all for it.

+1

[Gonga]

So the kick and everything changes? HowTF did the poster do this and have it blend together like that? Great job.

This is a good example of the circumstances under which it's most difficult to distinguish - real world circumstances.

The best test of ears is to compare minutia - the attack only for example, or resonant filter sweep. With all the other crap going along with it they are definitely indistinguishable for all practical purposes.

Anyway, I never cared whether an emulation is perfect or not. What I care about is whether a VA can do what I need it to do, and sound as good. In this regard there are many VAs that still fall short, and more and more that sound just as good.

agreed. before i read the whole topic, was it ever answered which was which?

I don't think so, nor do I care, since they were indistinguishable to me. So...a fun example of how far VAs have come, but not the best test of ears imo.

[IncarnateX]

@Urs: I hope it's okay with you. I'm feeling a little as if I'm trying to bash Diva. Believe me, I am not. My apologies, if this is causing hard feelings, was not intended.

Are you kidding? He is laughing all the way down to the bank thinking about all the money he for the hundred and seventeenth time has saved on advertisement. There are simply no DEV that have ever got so much free attention as him.

God forbid him starting to whine about anything. If he do, I' ll gather the whole friggin North and invade Germany.

[Ogopogo]

I'm also going to guess A as hardware and B as software. It seems extremely close to me though. I would not be surprised at all if I were wrong and you could make great music with both. A just seemed a little more warm and a bit more rich at times.

[chk071]

A just seemed a little more warm and a bit more rich at times.

Yep, just what i thought too. A bit more highs, a bit warmer, and more unpredictable/unstable, and a bit more pleasing bass, the bass of B sounded a tiny bit hollow and odd sometimes. But as you said, the differences are minimal on those sounds.

[Z1202]

Aside from the recongnizable signature bread-and-butter sounds, can anyone explain the musical importance of being an exact emulation?

the musical importance is that many people find analogue synthesis and processing more musical.

So do I. But it's about certain qualities present in the analog sounds, not about sounding "exactly like that". If a softsynth has those qualities, I don't care if it has a hardware analog prototype or not. This is what is musically important. So it's not about analog or not, it's about whether the synth delivers those qualities. In that regard I can repreat my question: is it important to make exact emulations or is it really important just to deliver similar qualities? I fail to see the point in the former other than being just one of the possible ways to the latter.

[Gonga]

Agree. And I would add that neither A nor B is more musical than the other. Both are great.