Hi folks,
what about some audios? Please tell me what FX it is and if it sounds "good" or "bad".
A.wav
B.wav
Best wishes, FRitz
smoothing out digital harshness?
-
- KVRian
- 1442 posts since 30 May, 2005
In the end will be the word.
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
-
- KVRian
- 770 posts since 2 Apr, 2003
You're wrong about the impOSCar.Chase wrote:Many of the "most analogue sounding" synths around just have oscillators that produce very mathematic waveforms and at the end of the signal line go through some kind of "warming" mechanism that produces the audio equivelent of a very nice D/A converter (see: powercore virus, Karnage). Sure, some may have some sort of anti-aliasing mechanism for an accurate sound which is done AFTER the signal has already left the aliasing oscillators (see: vangaurd, Pro-53 and Asynth, If i'm not mistaken) and some simply do both (see: ImpOSCar, MiniMoog).
-
- KVRian
- 1442 posts since 30 May, 2005
Wrong in all cases. Very strange statements.JonHodgson wrote:You're wrong about the impOSCar.Chase wrote:Many of the "most analogue sounding" synths around just have oscillators that produce very mathematic waveforms and at the end of the signal line go through some kind of "warming" mechanism that produces the audio equivelent of a very nice D/A converter (see: powercore virus, Karnage). Sure, some may have some sort of anti-aliasing mechanism for an accurate sound which is done AFTER the signal has already left the aliasing oscillators (see: vangaurd, Pro-53 and Asynth, If i'm not mistaken) and some simply do both (see: ImpOSCar, MiniMoog).
In the end will be the word.
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
-
- KVRAF
- 25037 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
-
- KVRian
- 1442 posts since 30 May, 2005
Hi Jens.
thanx for the answer. It's Voxengo TubeAmp 1.9!
Best wishes, FRitz
In the end will be the word.
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
-
- KVRAF
- 4030 posts since 7 Sep, 2002
jens, that's a wrong test - to adjust Tube parameter. When it is too high, that WILL destroy everything, because this changes transfer function curve to an 'unreal' thing.
-
- KVRAF
- 25037 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
Maybe I should start putting things after synths?
(which I always thought to be utter bollox in 99% of all possible cases)
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
wow, you should read my comments on the subject then.
i'd say almost 100% of synthesizer parts you hear in commercial tracks have a compressor insert, simmilar to the one i made, or various other basic compressors (you dont want a smooth one for this, you need something quick and dirty like a real insert.) the next most common thing is a phaser or chorus with light settings. then of course there is EQ. people often complain "<insert synth here> doesnt have enough low end" or etc. holy shit, do people actually believe the raw sounds from a synthesizer would ever be used in a track?
this is part of the reason i absolutely hate any synthesizer that doesnt produce real raw output. these instruments are obviously made only to apeal to losers who dont know how to do real mixing. having effects applied inside a synthesizer limits the possible things you can do outside one, making such an instrument (with a constant eq or other effect applied) useless in my opinion.
if i hear "digital harshness"... i think; "yeah right, so you dont know how to mix?"
i'd say almost 100% of synthesizer parts you hear in commercial tracks have a compressor insert, simmilar to the one i made, or various other basic compressors (you dont want a smooth one for this, you need something quick and dirty like a real insert.) the next most common thing is a phaser or chorus with light settings. then of course there is EQ. people often complain "<insert synth here> doesnt have enough low end" or etc. holy shit, do people actually believe the raw sounds from a synthesizer would ever be used in a track?
this is part of the reason i absolutely hate any synthesizer that doesnt produce real raw output. these instruments are obviously made only to apeal to losers who dont know how to do real mixing. having effects applied inside a synthesizer limits the possible things you can do outside one, making such an instrument (with a constant eq or other effect applied) useless in my opinion.
if i hear "digital harshness"... i think; "yeah right, so you dont know how to mix?"
-
- KVRAF
- 25037 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
actually if I think the sound of the synth isn't right I try to tweak the synth itself... - careful with your insults there, mister!
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
I love it when people call something wrong and then leave no evidence, oppinion or ANYTHING on why they would claim so.fritzman wrote:Wrong in all cases. Very strange statements.JonHodgson wrote:You're wrong about the impOSCar.Chase wrote:Many of the "most analogue sounding" synths around just have oscillators that produce very mathematic waveforms and at the end of the signal line go through some kind of "warming" mechanism that produces the audio equivelent of a very nice D/A converter (see: powercore virus, Karnage). Sure, some may have some sort of anti-aliasing mechanism for an accurate sound which is done AFTER the signal has already left the aliasing oscillators (see: vangaurd, Pro-53 and Asynth, If i'm not mistaken) and some simply do both (see: ImpOSCar, MiniMoog).
I posted only I've heard straight from developers.
But come to think of it, Imposcar simply uses sampled waveforms and a FAT filter for its great sound, right?
-
- KVRAF
- 6937 posts since 4 Jun, 2004 from Utrecht, Holland
Can't be bothered to wade through five pages...
Did anyone suggest to run projects at 88 or 96kHz instead of 44kHz? This helps in getting rid of most of the harsh aliasing sounds by shifting them up one octave, above 22kHz instead of 11kHz and thus imperceptable.
Did anyone suggest to run projects at 88 or 96kHz instead of 44kHz? This helps in getting rid of most of the harsh aliasing sounds by shifting them up one octave, above 22kHz instead of 11kHz and thus imperceptable.
My MusicCalc is temporary offline.
We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
-
- KVRian
- 1442 posts since 30 May, 2005
Hey Chase,Chase wrote:I love it when people call something wrong and then leave no evidence, oppinion or ANYTHING on why they would claim so.fritzman wrote:Wrong in all cases. Very strange statements.JonHodgson wrote:You're wrong about the impOSCar.Chase wrote:Many of the "most analogue sounding" synths around just have oscillators that produce very mathematic waveforms and at the end of the signal line go through some kind of "warming" mechanism that produces the audio equivelent of a very nice D/A converter (see: powercore virus, Karnage). Sure, some may have some sort of anti-aliasing mechanism for an accurate sound which is done AFTER the signal has already left the aliasing oscillators (see: vangaurd, Pro-53 and Asynth, If i'm not mistaken) and some simply do both (see: ImpOSCar, MiniMoog).
I posted only I've heard straight from developers.
But come to think of it, Imposcar simply uses sampled waveforms and a FAT filter for its great sound, right?
sorry sir. I think what you heard from developers there should have been something else. You seem to have misunderstood something.
Aliasing, when you've got it, you've got it. Afterwards removing it is a complex thing and is very CPU consuming. Therefore developers choose mechanisms which reduce aliasing while generating their waveforms which uses way less CPU then the other way round.
The audio equivalent to a "nice" DA converter is silence. Nothing. What you put in is what you will get out. This is the best DA converter available. So when you're talking about good sounding converters while comparing them with some kinda distortion (warming is adding overtones to the signal and the technical word for that is distortion) then this is wrong.
And what is a FAT filter?
Best wishes, FRitz
P.S. If you've heard other things from some "developers" please tell what they said and who they are. That would be interesting.
In the end will be the word.
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
-
- KVRian
- 1442 posts since 30 May, 2005
Hi Jens,jens wrote:
Maybe I should start putting things after synths?
(which I always thought to be utter bollox in 99% of all possible cases)
Maybe you should, dunno. Try to get this effect with the synth itself. I'm willing to learn that trick.
And there was the same thingy on the drums too which is quite obvious. So at least 50% of all signals could have been valid for you, too.
Best wishes, FRitz
And on the knob range: While it's arguable to have this full knob range available if it's producing garble when fully turned up it can be a nice LoFi FX for some stuff. Not everything that's possible is what I mostly do. On many plugins.
In the end will be the word.
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
Check out some of my music at www.fritzmetal.de
-
- KVRAF
- 10597 posts since 13 Jun, 2004 from Alberto Balsam
Correct me I'f I'm wrong:fritzman wrote:Chase wrote:I love it when people call something wrong and then leave no evidence, oppinion or ANYTHING on why they would claim so.fritzman wrote:Wrong in all cases. Very strange statements.JonHodgson wrote:You're wrong about the impOSCar.Chase wrote:Many of the "most analogue sounding" synths around just have oscillators that produce very mathematic waveforms and at the end of the signal line go through some kind of "warming" mechanism that produces the audio equivelent of a very nice D/A converter (see: powercore virus, Karnage). Sure, some may have some sort of anti-aliasing mechanism for an accurate sound which is done AFTER the signal has already left the aliasing oscillators (see: vangaurd, Pro-53 and Asynth, If i'm not mistaken) and some simply do both (see: ImpOSCar, MiniMoog).
I posted only I've heard straight from developers.
But come to think of it, Imposcar simply uses sampled waveforms and a FAT filter for its great sound, right?
Aliasing, when you've got it, you've got it. Afterwards removing it is a complex thing and is very CPU consuming. Therefore developers choose mechanisms which reduce aliasing while generating their waveforms which uses way less CPU then the other way round.
Most anti-aliasing is done by internally generating the signal that is leaving the oscillator [we'll call this oscillator "oscillator A"] at a very high sample rate with a nyquist frequency well above human hearing with another seperate generator [which we will call "Oscillator AA"], and then taking the real-time inverse of that high-rez "AA" signal and mixing it with the original oscillator's "A" signal (with a sample rate of whatever the host is set to) so all you get is the pure artifacts of aliasing after phase cancellation [which we will call the "PA signal"], and then inversing that new, "PA" signal in order to mix it another seperate, identicle "A" signal, cancelling out the "PA" signal from the "A" signal, giving you an anti-aliased signal, right? If im wrong here then I'm wrong (plus I suck balls at explaining things).
Then you misinterpreted "nice". I mean they go through a stage that mimmicks the after effects of a typical hardware D/A converter - usually some kind of noise and subtle compression.The audio equivalent to a "nice" DA converter is silence. Nothing. What you put in is what you will get out. This is the best DA converter available. So when you're talking about good sounding converters while comparing them with some kinda distortion (warming is adding overtones to the signal and the technical word for that is distortion) then this is wrong.
umm, the opposite of a thin one? Compare the "kjaerhus auto filter" or "frohmage" to THIS or THIS. I really can't explain the physics of what makes them sound better to me as I don't know the technical details.And what is a FAT filter?
when I say 'heard from developers' I mean what I picked up from companies' native forums and the company forums here.P.S. If you've heard other things from some "developers" please tell what they said and who they are. That would be interesting.
-
- KVRist
- 487 posts since 19 Jan, 2003
With regards to the Virus, it's not particularly "analog-sounding" in the first place compared to whats available today especially, the oscs are mediocre at best, the (original) filters are very good in their own right but probably not the best analog emulations, and the "warming" might typically come from the analog boost in FX which is just a bass EQ so far as I know. If you've got one you can easily prove to yourself that there is not some hidden warming mechanism by turning off everything except the oscillators and listening to them in all their thin, artifact-ridden glory.Chase wrote: I love it when people call something wrong and then leave no evidence, oppinion or ANYTHING on why they would claim so.
Of course the Virus is still an excellent synth and a good example of how something with a poor sound source in the oscillators can end up sounding rather nice anyway.
To get this more on topic, the last statement is contradictory to my advice to the OP which would be to forget the fx and do something about the sound sources. I saw the gear list in another thread and it struck me as being rather ill-suited to sounding "analog." Of course it might have other merits but... Not what I would pick if I was trying to get old analog synth sounds, except maybe the MModularV.