Truthemdot_ambient wrote:To really be worthwhile you need to do a double blind, not a single blind test. And you need to have more samples than just one of each...and you need defined test groups plus a control group. Do at least 4 uncompressed samples of at least 4 different analog machines from different eras. Do the same with hardware VA. Do the same with software VA. No compression, EQ or FX, just sounds directly from the gear with pre-described modulation of filters and envelopes, playing high and low, etc. Actually you could come up with MIDI files to use on each of the synths so that you get exactly the same modulation amounts and phrasing.hakey wrote:The comparison between clips that Jupiter 8 gave us was worthwhile because we (most of us) didn't know which was which - it was a blind A/B (and a clear majority worked out which was the analog).
Name the files with random names, keeping a log of which file name is what synth. And put those files in a folder on a web page. Then, someone who doesn't know which file is what posts them for review with one question: Analog or Digital? for each sample.
You then have 3 groups do the test:
1) Believers in analog's special-ness
2) Believers in VA is just as good or better than analog
3) Control group of people who really don't care one way or the other
Obviously the control group has to at least be familiar with what analog and VA synths are.
Only then can you get a statistically valid study.
Any postulation about the results before this kind of study is done is nothing but pure conjecture.
good tunes. You just need to make 'em shake it 
