the analog warmth myth

[Ronny Pries]

Mark77,

couldn't you have joined one of the million existing threads regarding this issue? Is your message really that important to open yet another one dealing with this mumbo?

[apflaum]

i think anything short of 100% computer music is pure stupidity as of now, but i can still hear the difference when i hear a real moog, etc, etc.

your right though, its not worth shit in the end.

[deleted]

DELETED

[OMU]

So, here's my advice... concentrate on making good songs.. that's 99% percent of the work..
and the remaining 1% ... well i guess u could say u might as well do without it coz nobody
will ever notice...

Good advice.
Now take it .... and stop writting such long posts about "analog warmth"

agree

[insaneacyde]

ha,ha,ha and anyone who complains about this thread prolly just spent all there money on another OVERPICED, USELESS doodad and will now spend hours tryin to argue some use for it.
"real tube warmth" from your brain meltdown

[greendoor]

There are too many issues jumbled together here. This my take on things: all VST's are on a level playing field. Unlike hardware, which is immensley variable in quality and prone to power supply and component issues, VSTs are all consistent 32 bit digital effects with no noise or tolerance issues to worry about. A freeware VST - even a Synthedit one - can, and frequently does - outperform a bloated hyped up commercial one. Regardless of how flash the gui is, or what price or protection scam is used - a VST plugin is a VST plugin, and a good algoritmn is a good algorithmn. It's a level playing field - and sometimes simple things are just better. Get over it. As far as "Vintage" and "Analog" go, it's all bollocks. No VST is ever vintage or analog. Forget buzz words and GUI's. There are only so many signal processing methods - just endless combinations of the same building blocks. What I appreciate about some VST designers is there appreciation of some of the characteristics of vintage analog gear, and they way they have given us dsp that get's us closer to that sound. It's not JUST eq. It can be wave shaping or dynamics shaping or phase shifting or time smearing. You would have to be kinda deaf not to hear what - for example - Voxengo AF Tapebus can do to a track. It's not just eq. Personally, I don't care what words or GUI are used - I like stuff that takes the hard edges of clinical digital sound. To use a video equivalent - I sometimes like the artistic effect of 8mm film. There is no way I would ever film with it - but i'm grateful for plugins that can turn pristine video footage into pseudo 8mm - defects and all - when the artistic effect is required.

[abi]

although i think you can´t really create what people call "analog warmth" in a plugin (it´s a simple paradoxon: you can´t create digitally what is in the analog world produced by summing pure voltages i think) I disagree in that point that all these analog type plugins aren´t worth a shit. i don´t know of any freeware plugin which comes close to the quality of psp, voxengo or sonalksis stuff (they all claim to produce analog-sounding plugs). still, an analog compressor would probably sound better than a plugin thats meant to sound analog.
but i agree that it in the end it doesn´t matter if you use a psp compressor or some freeware. the song is of course the most important thing. but i´m sure that any song produced with freeware plugins only would sound much better if the channels were led into an analog mixer (a little mackie?), summed up there and the master track would be led back to the DAW for "mastering". i think mixing digitally produced music on an quality analog mixer would make a GREAT difference.

[Timfonie]

As expected, unfortunately, again only words. No sound examples ...

[John Vulich]

It seems that your focus is more on how analog emulation of FXs are achieved. I think when it comes to the emulation of instruments, there are other factors at work. For instance, the use of free running oscillators. IMO this one element does a lot to alter the character of many synth emulations. I find it be quite noticeable but only while listening to an instrument solo and not in a mix. Once sounds are put into a whole arrangement I think a lot of these sublties are lost.

[jmh]

actually, i think it would be nice if all of these audiophiles would put there money where their mouths are and post up some hiqual mp3 or 16/44 wav examples of before and after sounds...

...

Isn't the burden of proof on the other side in this case?

Not to mention that he has thrown in a lot of separate issues with his 'point' and uses reasoning from one issue as validation for another.

I do 'get' what he's trying to say, but hell, he's saying it in a way that makes no sense. A good way to go with an argument is to think about it first, how it holds up when observed closely, what kind of reasoning there is behind it, etc. yadda yadda.

Then there's the issue about being able to hear any differences. Which is different from what the "end user" - shouldn't that be something akin to "casual listener" or something along those lines? - hears and generally listens to.

And in case nobody noticed... "using 'analogue' emulations / expensive plugins in order to make a BETTER song"... how come this is mentioned so often as a some kind of argument when it's even not an issue - or is there somebody out there with such a twisted logic that reading opinions about reaching subjectively better sounds translates into "my song is better when I use more expensive / analog gear"?-)

This whole "argument" would be easier to approach if the original poster put some effort into what he's saying and formed something logical out of all the issues he's conveniently thrown together thinking they're all about the same thing...

Regards,

"audiophile" JMH

[mark77]

well thanks for all the input guys, i got to see lots of opinions about my post. yes i agree i'm trying to make several points and they are about different things, so the whole thing was more about getting all of these thoughts out of my head. Whats interesting though is that no-one has posted any audio examples. I think what it comes down to is.. minimal details exaggerated beyong belief, and inflated claims about a plugins' powers simply to keep up with competing companies' products. Sound wise.. i think the 'analog sound' or 'digital harshness' debates are about as inane as people arguing whether a 190kbps mp3 file is worse sounding than a 256kbps mp3 file.. when.. in the end, the average listener (and even some with VERY good hearing) would not be able to tell them apart. Oh and before i forget... yes i realise the real purists would be using the real things instead of plugins, but that doesnt stop them from bragging about just how much better their stuff sounds.. and that's what i find the most annoying.. the fact that there is so much arrogance and prejudice built up by the absolute tiniest of things.

[Stupid American Pig]

Ima buy a roland space echo as my next purchase

[wolf_of_badenoch]

actually, i think it would be nice if all of these audiophiles would put there money where their mouths are and post up some hiqual mp3 or 16/44 wav examples of before and after sounds...

...

Isn't the burden of proof on the other side in this case?

<snipped>

"audiophile" JMH

I would have thought there would be little point in the other side "proving" this. After all, it would be easy to do a bad job with the plug-in and therebye "prove" they were no good. If the burden of proof were on those who think analogue warmth does improve the sound there would be more vested interest in proving they do a good job.

I don't care either way really, but it would be interesting to listen to the samples and see if I could hear any benefit one way or another. Do the manufacturer's have any 'before and after' samples on their websites ? If not, I wonder why not - surely it would be a good sales tool.

cheers,

Wolf

[Meffy]

Whats interesting though is that no-one has posted any audio examples.

I suppose most people are bored to death with the entire debate (which has been done over and over and over) and have no interest in wasting time preparing materials for yet another rehash.

I like Vintage Warmer and use it fairly frequently. I don't claim it makes my songs sound any better (nothing could achieve that). But I hear the difference. In hands more skilled than my paws, it can indeed "improve" sound subtly but significantly (assuming you find its sound pleasant; I do).

It's important to understand that small differences CAN be significant. Many small differences together can have a definite cumulative effect. If you'd like to hear audio examples I encourage you to download some demos and make them for yourself, because I have zero stake in this debate and better things to do than try to convince anyone else that my opinion should also be theirs.

That's all I have to say on the matter. :-) Enjoy creating music, whatever you use to make it. 'Bye!

[mauseoleum]

... some like it hot.