Albino vs Gladiator vs Surge vs Zebra

[Urs]

Here's another game:

http://www.u-he.com/music/SomeBass.wav

8 x 4 bars of bassline. Some are Zebra, some are analogue. Can you identify which is which?

Urs

[zerocrossing]

Hm... just for fun (I don't put forth that I can tell the difference between anything, but who knows?) I'll give this a shot. I'm only going to try and pinpoint the "analog" though, just to see. Screw digital v Zebra, that point is moot, isn't it? Zebra is digital. I love it so.

3, 6, 8, 12, 13, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 30 are my guesses for the analog oscs. No? DAMN! I FAILED AGAIN!? DAMN YOU NYC SUBWAY!!!!

I may be wrong, (I never think so though) but this type of shoot-out misses the point. In my humble opinion*, this isn't where the actual difference between analog and digital emulations can easily be found. It's where they break. Like ceramic v plastic. One could make a plastic bowl that looks and behaves like a ceramic one, but though them both at the hearth and that's where you see "what they're made of."

Listening to scantily clad oscillators in a shoot out seems meaningless to me. The fact that they've both been digitized anyway further makes it like looking at my above bowls on a table from across the room.

I do think I know what people are talking about, though. The thing that Zebra lacks. It's hard to put it in words. Not even all analog synths I've played with have it. I call it "woolliness." To me, Zebra sounds like what those old cheap synths (yup, the Juno was an entry level synth) were trying to sound like. What makes them brilliant (The 106 was my first synth) is how gracefully they fail. It's almost like a kind of murky, furry distortion... hard to explain... words fail... There are a few synths that I think get this. Sylenth1 is one of them. Recently, I found AAS's Ultra Analog to be another.

All this about Synth Squad stuff just makes me laugh. I've listened to the demos... they sure sound like a synthesizer. How people are already heralding it as some sort of analog messiah is beyond me. They sound great, and pretty analog/vintagey to me but until they're on my grubby little hard drive, I'll reserve final judgement. If they can get that sound without bringing my CPU to it's knees, I'm on board. If not... I guess I'll need a new computer... er?

* (sorry, I had to write it out! The illiteracy thread got locked before I could chime in!)

About the "instability of analogue oscillators": You must be kidding me. Time for a shoot-out

For each of the following examples you have 3 possibilities - Analogue, Digital, Zebra. Can you find them? Which example is analogue and which one isn't? (As in: Where are the f**king instabilities? Other than tuning, that is...)

Sawtooths:

Oscillator 1
Oscillator 2....

[SWAN808]

Any VA could emulate j-106 because it has basic architecture. It doesn't mean they 'sound like or close to 106'.

My question is, what is the benefit of sounding like or close to the Juno 106? I don't see the logic in judging a synth by comparing it to another synth, especially if you are making that comparison via their ability to sound like yet another synth. I tend to judge a synth by it's own merits. In my opinion these comparisons say more about the sound designer than the synth.

I agree but Howard specifically stated that Zebra can emulate any Juno 106 sound, which is in my opinion complete and utter bull crap, depending of course on what "emulate" means. If "yeah it's playing the same notes" is the only criteria then sure..

Cheers!
bManic

Yes to me I take issue with the idea that hey you can throw away your analogue synths because Zebra can emulate any 'sound' from the analogue synths. Yes I agree you can 'emulate' and make it sound 'like' a Juno - but that is different as bManic says - that character of analogue components is very difficult to emulate purely with 1s and 0s..

None of this means one is better than the other but this thread demonstrates, as always, how differently we perceive differences. One man's "nearly identical" is another man's "huge difference!".

Oh, and the old "well the differences get buried in the mix" does not always apply because if you want that liquid Korg MS-20 bass/buzz/mayhem + kick + hats, aka Mr. Oizo, then you really do need the real thing. It is virtually impossible to get that smoothness, not to mention the crazy audio rate modulations, with the Korg VSTi. Sometimes the last 10% of the sound count a lot and can actually "make" the tune.

Cheers!
bManic

This is a good point IMO - that the difference can be quite small and many are not even interested in the differences - as its just not relevant to them. Real analogue synthesis is just not appropriate in many forms of modern music and sounds dated in the wrong context IMO. I like it for my Nu Disco project but not for Tech House...

Its intersting that I read around here people saying things like 'Zebra sounds analogue' or 'Zebra sounds digital whereas Sylenth sounds analogue'. I wonder whether people who make these statements have ever played an analogue synth? These synths sound like Virtual Analogue synths - they capture the idea of analogue - but as yet have not properly created something that is indistinguishable to the trained ear from real analogue. They make 'analogue-like' sounds. Maybe Creamware Minimax and timewARP are very close...but still retain a digital cleanness...

Like I said - that can be entirely appropriate - I think you would be better off making Electro House with a copy of Synthsquad or Minimax rather than owning a Minimoog, or using Oddity rather than a real (extremely temperamental and dirty sounding) Arp Odyssey...

[SWAN808]

Here's another game:

http://www.u-he.com/music/SomeBass.wav

8 x 4 bars of bassline. Some are Zebra, some are analogue. Can you identify which is which?

Urs

Pretty difficult to tell I admit. Im gonna hazard a guess at Zebra being 3 4 5 7 out of those 8...However there it is one thing submitting a blind test of short pieces of audio in the bass range and another playing and tweaking a synth, playing chords etc - where the little differences start to appear. Again - whether or not these little differences are important is another issue...

Do the Zebra examples have processing such as compression, saturation and EQ applied?

I think Zebra is a fantastic synth - however when I demoed it I did not feel it had the punch, attack and presence I associate with a good analogue synth or a few select VAs such as the Virus, and by the sounds of it - Synthsquad...I personally rate this raw sound and attack - sans processing - as an important component for me. Im not in any way suggesting its important for everybody else.

[Urs]

Zebra being 3 4 5 7 out of those 8...

2 are guessed correctly. I feel honoured though that you mistook the Moog LP for a Zebra.

None of any examples were processed by effects internally or externally. I have normalized the takes though, to bring them on pretty much the same level.

[Echoes in the Attic]

Here's another game:

http://www.u-he.com/music/SomeBass.wav

8 x 4 bars of bassline. Some are Zebra, some are analogue. Can you identify which is which?

Urs

Ooh fun!

Ok, on first listen, I'd strongly believe Zebra to be 4.
I would suspect it NOT to be 5 or 6 and a couple others (can't remember).
1 may be Zebra.
I doubt 2 is zebra (but it's possible).
3 probably not Zebra.
8 could be Zebra.

Not sure about some, but I really think 4 is "that zebra sound". And I really think 5 and 6 are that "Not Zebra sound".

I'd love to be wrong!

edit:Ok, on second listen, IF it's split evenly, I'd guess Zebra = 1,4,7,8. The rest analog. actually, not sure about 7...

[pdxindy]

All this about Synth Squad stuff just makes me laugh. I've listened to the demos... they sure sound like a synthesizer. How people are already heralding it as some sort of analog messiah is beyond me. They sound great, and pretty analog/vintagey to me but until they're on my grubby little hard drive, I'll reserve final judgement. If they can get that sound without bringing my CPU to it's knees, I'm on board. If not... I guess I'll need a new computer... er?

The point of bringing up synth squad is that they are attempting to model analogue behavior. Andrew himself said that they can only approximate it and must make some design choices due to CPU concerns. And that was my point. Any digital synth modeling all the natural chaotic non linear responses in analogue synths is going to use a lot of CPU.

Most digital synths are not trying to do those things. Plenty of devs could get closer to an analogue emulation of we all had more powerful computers.

[Urs]

3, 6, 8, 12, 13, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 30 are my guesses for the analog oscs. No?

Are you serious?

I may be wrong, (I never think so though) but this type of shoot-out misses the point.

It depends. These are 3 highly regarded analogue oscillators (Cwejman VCO-2RM, Analog Systems RS-95E, Moog LP), 2 Zebra oscillator modes with different waveforms (GeoBlend and GeoMorph) and 5 digital oscillators (4 other plugins and Virus TI). The point is that it would be quite easy to tell the digitals from the analogs, even though all digitals go through an analog filter (except No. 14) - if there weren't any Zebras. The Zebras simply do both (I havn't added an example where Zebra sounds like one of those hyper-treble-digitals though).

Another things that goes to show is that people always propell the idea of "imperfections" in analog. That's ridiculous. Some old analog synths may be broken and need repair or constant tuning. But a good, intact analogue oscillator does the same, constant, steady, (boring?) tone that any (aliasing free) digital oscillator does unless you apply modulations. The whole "analogue oscillators are more alive sounding" thing is pretty much rubbish. IMHO the most movement I can hear in oscillators is the aliasing in most digital oscillators, hard- or software.

You want your tracks to sound analogue? The best bet is to add a tiny bit of random PitchBend to each softsynth. That way you can simulate the slightly out-of-tuneishness that you get when you constantly have to tune your analogue gear. There you go, it had to be said

Cheers,

Urs

[Urs]

Here's another game:

http://www.u-he.com/music/SomeBass.wav

8 x 4 bars of bassline. Some are Zebra, some are analogue. Can you identify which is which?

Urs

Ooh fun!

Ok, on first listen, I'd strongly believe Zebra to be 4.
I would suspect it NOT to be 5 or 6 and a couple others (can't remember).
1 may be Zebra.
I doubt 2 is zebra (but it's possible).
3 probably not Zebra.
8 could be Zebra.

Not sure about some, but I really think 4 is "that zebra sound". And I really think 5 and 6 are that "Not Zebra sound".

I'd love to be wrong!

edit:Ok, on second listen, IF it's split evenly, I'd guess Zebra = 1,4,7,8. The rest analog. actually, not sure about 7...

So, yes, it's split evenly. You should reconsider "(not) that Zebra sound" though. I'm using "LP Vintage2" with high oscillator levels in one, while taking XMF with very low oscillator levels and only a tiny bit of drive in another. Makes a totally different character. 2 x 3 Osc, 2 x 2 Osc

The other contestants are:

Cwejman/Analog Systems Oscillators (3 Osc) -> LiveWire FrequenSteiner
Cwejman/Analog Systems Oscillators (3 Osc) -> Cwejman MMF-1
Cwejman/Analog Systems Oscillators (3 Osc) -> Analog Systems RS-110
Moog Lil'Pity (2 Osc) with a tiny bit of Overload (to make it sound more Zebraish)

Urs

[Locus M]

You want your tracks to sound analogue? The best bet is to add a tiny bit of random PitchBend to each softsynth. That way you can simulate the slightly out-of-tuneishness that you get when you constantly have to tune your analogue gear. There you go, it had to be said

I'll add up on that adwise by posting this link:

http://www.kvraudio.com/get/3198.html

Happy analogue emulation


And Urs and Howard: You are simply too saucy and perky! Now emulate this, you hound dogs:


http://www.dsisynth.com/audio/mopho_dem ... o-rock.mp3


Good Luck!

[Urs]

http://www.dsisynth.com/audio/mopho_dem ... o-rock.mp3

Good Luck!

That sounds FUN!

Am I allowed a Runciter or two?

Urs

[SWAN808]

Zebra being 3 4 5 7 out of those 8...

2 are guessed correctly. I feel honoured though that you mistook the Moog LP for a Zebra.

None of any examples were processed by effects internally or externally. I have normalized the takes though, to bring them on pretty much the same level.

In that case my money is on 3 and 7 being Zebra....(fingers crossed)....

1 6 8 Clearly analogue (eek!). I think I can hear the Zebra digital filter saturation in examples 3 and 7. 5 is the Little Phatty. and 2 and 4 are the modulars.

How did I do? Im taking a bit of a punt...as I dont even know how many of each synth are used...

[Nokenoku]

Most digital synths are not trying to do those things. Plenty of devs could get closer to an analogue emulation of we all had more powerful computers.

While this is probably true to a certain degree, I think it has much more to do with "having the right idea".

I might have a further listen to all those files at some time.

[SWAN808]

Id be interested how Zebra got on with emulating these:

http://www.trippler.net/files/p1/MoPhoDrums.mp3

http://www.synthmania.com/Oberheim%20OB ... SEMBLE.mp3

http://www.synthmania.com/Oberheim%20OB ... AMENTO.mp3

[zvenx]

wow.... the OB8 was my favourite analog synth.
When I hear those two patches I wonder why....seriously, to me, vstis circa 2008/2009 sound so much better, I am pretty sure that zebra et al will emulate those and sadly, for my ears, will surely not sound exact but different and I probably would prefer those emulations in 2009.....
things have changed.
rsp