Diva Vs. Real Analog

[Shy]

Let's see. Personal attack unrelated to discussion topic, ignoring what I actually meant in that thread ("antialiasing"), and acting like a second grader. That makes you a troll, doesn't it? You can't really expect anyone to take you seriously now, can you?

[hakey]

That makes you a troll, doesn't it?

Funny - it rather seems like you're the troll in this thread.

[trimph1]

Watch it, you two...I may pull one of hibidy's tricks....Cat pix anyone?

Oh, what the hey....




IBTL!!!!

[Shy]

That makes you a troll, doesn't it?

Funny - it rather seems like you're the troll in this thread.

You're hilarious. Disliking your precious synth makes me a troll.

[hakey]

Disliking your precious synth makes me a troll.

As I said, a subjective opinion either way is perfectly understandable. The bile with which you expressed your opinion isn't. To me, that just came across as trolling - and, yes, to some extent my responses were of a similar vein.

Now let that be an end to it.

[Aroused by JarJar]

Nord is what I would consider a prime example of "cold, thin, hard, bright,". So if that's what someone digs, that's groovy, but it seems kind of strange to compare to Diva, which is clearly in the "warm, fat, soft, dark" corner. Apples and oranges. I'm not talking about analog vs. digital with this comparison.

In fact, if I had to point to older synths with a similar general sound character to the U-he synths, I'd point to the early Ensoniqs, also thick and dark, and that kind of thing where you can't quite put your finger on whether it's smooth or gritty. Grooth.

[Shy]

Disliking your precious synth makes me a troll.

As I said, a subjective opinion either way is perfectly understandable. The bile with which you expressed your opinion isn't. To me, that just came across as trolling - and, yes, to some extent my responses were of a similar vein.

Now let that be an end to it.

Don't start making personal attacks and then tell me "let that be an end to it". I stated my opinion, and as far as I'm concerned you can tell me that whatever synth I use is such a piece of shit it nearly gave you a heart attack, I wouldn't call your opinion "a bile". Relax.

Edit: @ your comment below: you're pathetic.

[trimph1]

Nord is what I would consider a prime example of "cold, thin, hard, bright,". So if that's what someone digs, that's groovy, but it seems kind of strange to compare to Diva, which is clearly in the "warm, fat, soft, dark" corner. Apples and oranges. I'm not talking about analog vs. digital with this comparison.

In fact, if I had to point to older synths with a similar general sound character to the U-he synths, I'd point to the early Ensoniqs, also thick and dark, and that kind of thing where you can't quite put your finger on whether it's smooth or gritty. Grooth.

I can see how that would come about with Nord- it does have a hard edge to it, not too sure about the cold part though..

And, weeeeelll, the 'analogue vs. digital' thing would be better understood if we just got rid of the vs. part. I would almost argue that those two labels comprise a false dichotomy...without the one the other cannot exist as such. Maybe we need to rethink the whole vs. part and place the analogue/digital into another category....

[hakey]

Don't start making personal attacks and then tell me "let that be an end to it".

Okay.

Let that be an end to it - you great wazzock.

[Aroused by JarJar]

Nord is what I would consider a prime example of "cold, thin, hard, bright,". So if that's what someone digs, that's groovy, but it seems kind of strange to compare to Diva, which is clearly in the "warm, fat, soft, dark" corner. Apples and oranges. I'm not talking about analog vs. digital with this comparison.

In fact, if I had to point to older synths with a similar general sound character to the U-he synths, I'd point to the early Ensoniqs, also thick and dark, and that kind of thing where you can't quite put your finger on whether it's smooth or gritty. Grooth.

I can see how that would come about with Nord- it does have a hard edge to it, not too sure about the cold part though..

And, weeeeelll, the 'analogue vs. digital' thing would be better understood if we just got rid of the vs. part. I would almost argue that those two labels comprise a false dichotomy...without the one the other cannot exist as such. Maybe we need to rethink the whole vs. part and place the analogue/digital into another category....

Actually my (obviously subjective) impression of Nord sound in general isn't really "cold", but "grey/silver/aluminum". Whereas the U-he synths give me black/gun-metal and other related colors I can "see" but don't know the name of. Similar sensations to old Ensoniqs. It's good when there is an underlining consistency among different synths by the same manufacturer, in my opinion.

Yeah the "vs" isn't really appropriate, especially since no one ever mentions real analog synths- discrete, no MIDI.

[Polybius]

This is exactly why we can't have nice things >:(

Anyway, I've been having fun demoing the Diva the past days, and it runs fine on it's own. The problems start once I start adding effects in the channel, mostly Bootsy's plugins, some Sonitex on the master bus, it's then when it starts crackling and basically my comp breaks down under the strain. So i'm guessing my "old" Phenom X4 isn't up to snuff for this beast. Maybe when multi-core support gets tweaked a bit? Or does it already support multi-cores?

Great sound though, I see myself purchasing this synth within the next 2 years, when I get the funds to upgrade my rig. For the moment, Zebra still gives me plenty of joy, and fills my VA needs for any sound I need.

Overal, i'd say we're looking at the start of the new generation of VA's with Diva. I'm anxious to see what will be possible in the future, as PC's continue getting faster, and talented programmers are making use of all this power.

[Bronto Scorpio]

I love this kind of discussions. We had them sooooooooooo many times. In a few years there will be even better emulations and everyone will be all "Now it really, REALLY sounds like analog!" again.....until the next emulation comes.

It's kind of like with video game graphics. Everytime a new graphic generation comes everyone says "Wow, that REALLY looks like real life!". The first time I said that was when Mario 64 came out (I was a kid back then so please don't laugh)

Don't get me wrong, I love Diva! I have no idea if it sounds like the real things but I couldn't care less. It sounds great and that's all I'm interested in. I want to make music with it! That's all! And I guess we can agree that that's possible (CPU issues aside).

Some years ago I predicted that it wouldn't take long until developers realize that it would be better if they would actually take advantage of digital technology instead of trying to minimize it's disadvatages.
Sadly I was completely wrong. We are still trapped in emulation mania.
So many things could be done. Things like Alchemy, Harmor and Zebra are a step in the right direction.
I guess the (potential) costumers have to realize it first.

Just my 2c

Cheers
Dennis

[trimph1]

That is why I think this whole analogue vs. digital thing is so overblown. Instead of thinking about these two labels as being just different sounds we have these debates as to what sounds better than what....

There is difference, and only difference.

[goldenanalog]

Thank-you a million times for indulging this old fart with a discussion of D vs. A within the context of DIVA-yeah. I know that the ground has been covered many times before, but to my ears, DIVA is the new standard!

Remember how I told you guys that I was an audio guy first?

Tubes versus transistors. CD's versus records. Otari large-format Reel-to reel tape versus Pro Tools. DIVA versus analog! Nord Lead versus DIVA? LOL! Hammond with/without the Lezlie (they had a war over that) Rhodes versus Wurlitzer versus Hohner versus Yamaha CP-80 etc. Etc.

What you wind up with is a myriad of different tools that are ALL GREAT! But DIFFERENT! Melotrons have this amazing distinctive sound that thanks to Dave Spiers are back with us in digital form!

I don't think that digital is going to ever replace analog for reasons that many that you brought up, but there is a trend, and that trend cannot be delegitimized no matter what the reality is-and that's full integration of all your audio tools into one digital environment-that's what's probably going to kill analog-like the rhodes piano-yeah, you can still get it new for 4-5k, or you can be like emost everybody else and do your rhodes in software.

[goldenanalog]

It should also be noted that when each medium peaks is when it presents up with superb tools. Look at cassette tape: it started with tools like the Norelco Carrycorder 150, and wound up living on the Nakamichi 1000zxl.

But digital looks to be boundless, folks. It doesn't look as though there is a ceiling. Ever played with a KORG mr1000? If I understand the technology correctly, it uses one bit to measure the signal differential between 2 points at a rate of 200 nanoseconds per measurement-it doesn't need antialiasing or brick wall, etc. because the sampling rate is so high.

Sounds like fat reel to reel, too. And it's not expensive. Doesn't need it's heads lapped after X hours. Etc.