Native vs. UAD, comparisions....

[rexxz]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

[susiwong]

Then study harder. Cause right now you're failing 101.

Like what? So far no one has really provided any compelling falsifications to his claims.

the point was that he was comparing processing power between two processors which are not designed to do the same set of tasks. i could be wrong but it seemed that he was in fact comparing apples to oranges to make his point.

That's why gigaflops are such a good comparison though. Had he been comparing partially architectural things like Ghz then it wouldn't be a fair comparison, but FLOP/S is purely a performance spec and therefore a reliable comparison between different types of systems.

If you're into gigaflops and whatever, why not get into gaming, extreme overclocking and stuff ? They got nice fps, too.
Last time I checked it was notes, lyrics and sound that mattered in music.
Oh well,
susiwong

[eduardo_b]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

You're presenting what argument? You have apparently missed the point, which is...no, I won't even bother. Let me ask you this instead: Is it the tools or the user that results in good music?

[rexxz]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

You're presenting what argument? You have apparently missed the point, which is...no, I won't even bother. Let me ask you this instead: Is it the tools or the user that results in good music?

I did not miss the point, it is you that seems to have done so. What I'm telling you is that the tools do matter. There is a quantifiable and observable difference in objective qualities between tools, and to claim otherwise is a folly.

[eduardo_b]

Last time I checked it was notes, lyrics and sound that mattered in music.
Oh well,
susiwong

Apparently it's all floating points, processors and money. Who knew.

Not us.

[eduardo_b]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

You're presenting what argument? You have apparently missed the point, which is...no, I won't even bother. Let me ask you this instead: Is it the tools or the user that results in good music?

I did not miss the point, it is you that seems to have done so. What I'm telling you is that the tools do matter. There is a quantifiable and observable difference in objective qualities between tools, and to claim otherwise is a folly.

Folly is believing that music technology is more important than music. You seem oblivious to this reality. Quantify that.

[rexxz]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

You're presenting what argument? You have apparently missed the point, which is...no, I won't even bother. Let me ask you this instead: Is it the tools or the user that results in good music?

I did not miss the point, it is you that seems to have done so. What I'm telling you is that the tools do matter. There is a quantifiable and observable difference in objective qualities between tools, and to claim otherwise is a folly.

Folly is believing that music technology is more important than music. You seem oblivious to this reality. Quantify that.

Please show me where I stated that I believed that. Go on, I'm curious to see.

[eduardo_b]

The music will still be good regardless of the tool if it is used wisely.

If this is the case, why pay for something that costs a lot more? I'm just taking your statement and presenting an argument based on what you said, not what is really true or not.

You're presenting what argument? You have apparently missed the point, which is...no, I won't even bother. Let me ask you this instead: Is it the tools or the user that results in good music?

I did not miss the point, it is you that seems to have done so. What I'm telling you is that the tools do matter. There is a quantifiable and observable difference in objective qualities between tools, and to claim otherwise is a folly.

Folly is believing that music technology is more important than music. You seem oblivious to this reality. Quantify that.

Please show me where I stated that I believed that. Go on, I'm curious to see.

You're too opinionated to be curious. The tools don't matter anywhere near as much as the person using them. They can't replace talent. Spending more money won't change this. There's nothing to quantify.

[rexxz]

You're too opinionated to be curious. The tools don't matter anywhere near as much as the person using them. They can't replace talent. Spending more money won't change this. There's nothing to quantify.

Once again, missing the point. Also I'd like to know how I'm "too opinionated to be curious". That's blatantly false. There is a very simple truth of reality that tools do indeed matter. Whether you choose to place their level of importance low or high, none can argue that they matter. That is all I was saying.

I presented my first question to you because you said the music will be good regardless of what tool is used. While it may be true on paper, the tools affect how the music sounds, and conversely how we enjoy them. A song recorded with a 10 dollar microphone on a 4 track mixer with an out of tune squier would not sound nearly as good as one recorded with superior tools. Are you going to argue that this is not true? A simple yes or no will suffice.

[dirty oscillators]

however i'd rather hear a good talented musician play a cheap out of tune upright Kimball then a bad untalented musician play a Steinway grand.

[rexxz]

Clearly, that is not my point of contention however. I think anyone with a pair of eyes can realize what I am saying.

[dirty oscillators]

Clearly, that is not my point of contention however. I think anyone with a pair of eyes can realize what I am saying.

you're saying that the tools do matter, to a degree. however, you're not defining the degree and if that's more important than the talent of the user or not.

[rexxz]

I never brought that second part up, so I didn't feel the need to define them. I simply stated that tools matter. I never claimed superiority over anything. One should argue against what is presented, not create strawmen because they feel like I am implying something else. If someone misinterprets my statement, it is their own fault.

[dirty oscillators]

it's quite an obvious blanket statement then.

[rexxz]

Tell that to eduardo_b.