KVR Audio

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:29 am

i've outlined previously in several threads almost all of the reasons it is hard to get exactly the same effects with a digital system. but once we start running at 180000hz these problems will almost all completely go away. try running <insert favorate vst/i here> at a much higher sample rate like 250000hz and then resample the output. if it is designed correctly (xhip works to 10mhz without noticable changes) you will basically be oversampling the process. analog circuits have a limiting effect simmilar to the "sample rate" in digital systems, but there are slight differences. anyway, these differences are not noticable with a high enough sampling rate.

i forgot to mention, obviously bitdepth matters as well, with the analog counterpart being the noise floor of the circuit in question of course. using 24 or 32 bits is very near to higher quality than possible in even the best analog circuits, so once we get those 64bit cpus and start processing everything using such enourmous interger numbers, the problem of accuracy will go away too. float style numbers can also be used if some dither noise is introduced into the system, although the non-linearity of float numbers can still cause problems at 80 or 128 bits of resolution.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:33 am

How true about extremely oversampled processes. Just that we're not there yet. Maybe within the next 5-10 years we'll home in on that. Or maybe someone will eventually figure out a way to cheat this limitation algorithically. Blits and bandlimiting help if done right, but there are other factors as well.

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:33 am

Someone posted demo tracks of a real Prophet 5 and that NI version (which is, admittedly, pretty dated), and the real one, even though obviously captured to digital, sounded so much fatter and more chocolatey

. It just sounded "real", whereas the NI emulation sounded more like a sketch of the sound, which was similar, but not all there.

GMedia are getting pretty close in their emulations, though. I think part of it is that it just takes a hell of a lot of computer to create a virtual reality of anything. Maybe with machines 5 years from now they will ahve enough raw power to get deep enough to fool almost anyone (maybe even live).

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:35 am

aciddose, I posted before I saw your last post. Yours relates to some of the points I made.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:43 am

you mean ni pro51/52 ? hah yeah i know. thier old (1 or 2 years) software is absolutely horrible. the grittyness of everything from the oscillators to the filters makes me almost cry..

about how it was mentioned when opening a filter really high, it gets irky, well i've been working on xhip lately and my server crashed.. but i'll upload an mp3 to geocities here..

http://www.geocities.com/rainbow_stash/mr.banana.mp3

well, as you can see this isnt a perfect example, but i've got the high end sounding pretty damn smooth. it sounds a lot better than my alpha juno 1 atleast. a bit more work and i'll be getting really close..

i think a lot of other coders out there are getting closer too, its just that, most people dont demand such quality, instead they only want so many patches and all the work to be done for them, e-jay style, you know what i mean.

anyway, yeah i'm looking forward to the future very much, i cant wait for the 64 bit cpus when vst becomes obsolite, since it uses the 32 bit float type :)

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:49 am

aciddose, holy f**k! nice sound!

goes straight to the elite of VA. I'd say "nearly there", and that's a complement.

There's still something about the "dog frequencies", which makes it only 95%. But you probably know better what I'm talking about.

Spaceman Sounds · Post by **Spaceman Sounds** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:21 am

Pretty close Acidose, sounds way more analog than say the Timewarp arp. It still has that oh so slight vsti sound... and I mean it as a compliment...but ever so slight digital edge to it.

I think at 44khz it's going to be very hard to get any vsti to sound analog really. But your synth is one of the closest yet

I've started getting air into my vsti recordings as well. It really does help with getting rid of that samey vsti glassy sound. I record my pads through my Mackie HR-824's into a stereo pair of mics. Warms up pads beautiful, and does some weird stuff when you move the mics while playing.

I listend to some old 70's Tangerine Dream yesterday. And it just sounded so warm and nice, then I listend to some of the mid 80's to 90's stuff. It sounded so lifless and old and digital.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:36 am

in the 80s something happened: flat bed consoles with only unbalanced line inputs and built in digital effects, for cheap.

this about summerizes the pc as a mixing desk too.

try an old analog console, you'll be surprised what a bit of noise, uneven panning and other levels, and some quality eq can do for you. it is more about the process i believe, and less about the instruments than most people would have you believe. tangerine i believe was using some roland modular stuff? its pretty generic stuff. i mean you wont be getting any really special sounds out of it compared to say, xhip, or just about any other 'standard' subtractive. so what is left? the method, the process. instruments dont have any magic in them; you do.

these days things are so standardized. i mean listen to a few 70s tracks, every track has its own sound, its own eq, its own special quality. now listen to some 100s of dnb or trance tracks today, all the same. you could swear they were all made by the same guy by many variations on the same software settings!

try being unique, dont stick to exactly the same process all the time, that is where what people call "analog warmth" comes from.

Spaceman Sounds · Post by **Spaceman Sounds** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:43 am

I actually can't use vsti's below 88khz, they all sound terrible at low sample rates.

deleted · Post by **deleted** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:23 am

DELETED

jens · Post by **jens** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:33 am

jens wrote:
bduffy wrote:Tbt's plugins - especially TubeLimit - and the underrated UKM Nonlin are excellent for this.
indeed - indeed - spot on!

but not only TubeLimit but also GreaseTube is magnificent!

(comparing Voxengo's TubeAmp to these plugins is like comparing a bycicle to a Bentley)

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:04 am

(personal grudge detected)

voxengo tube amp is actually on par with what you mentioned. They are all OK-ish emulations of tube-ish behaviour in digital environment. And generally they sound farty.

jens · Post by **jens** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:19 am

Kingston wrote:(personal grudge detected)

not at all - if you'd mention AF TapeBus (which I love) I'd fully agree

voxengo tube amp is actually on par with what you mentioned. They are all OK-ish emulations of tube-ish behaviour in digital environment. And generally they sound farty.

there goes your reputation...

Do I really need to post a mp3 of what TubeAmp does to audio?

(first of all it makes it louder so it might lure you into believing it does something good but to really find out what I does I recommend you to turn tube fully up and drive generously up while turning the output down for compensating the gain-increase (also you may experiment with bias) - but how rusty your ears might be - I bet you'll notice how it totally destroys everything!)

Now try extreme settings with GreaseTube...

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:32 am

jens wrote:I bet you'll notice how it totally destroys everything!)

Now try extreme settings with GreaseTube...

But I think they're both pretty destructive. I thought I was clear on that. (farty is a bad thing in my book) I wouldn't use either of them. Well maybe if I wanted 'digital sounding tube emulation'.

Now tapebus, that thing I really like and use on everything. Especially now that I can turn off the impulse modelling and there's no longer transient smearing.

olafmol · Post by **olafmol** » Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:57 am

the thing is that people were recording from a lot of different sources in the past, and not only digitaly mixing only VST plugins into 1 digital file. If you start playing your VSTi's and/or VA's through a nice (pre)amp and record it using a nice mic, mixing stuff in your recording chain, so not the same amp and mic for every source, your mix will sound a whole lot different. Also current productions have a lot more high frequencies and less dynamics than older stuff. If you mix it less loud with more dynamics, and remove some of the highs the sound will also sound a lot more pleasing.

smoothing out digital harshness?