Fatboy Slim thoughts about software synths

[dalor]

pdxindy, fully agree on all accounts. The point I was making, old doesn't always mean outdated.

[pdxindy]

pdxindy, fully agree on all accounts. The point I was making, old doesn't always mean outdated.

I agree

[_leras]

Don't want to be too negative, but is there any relevance to Fatboy Slim now? He's done some great things in the past, and deserves full credits for that, but now it's 2012 and I haven't seen any bigbeat revival party yet...luckily.
Maybe I'm wrong, but what was the last great record from him? Produced in a time when we all used atari's? Time flies....

Diddums. Are you upset he doesn't make dubstep?



.

[LeVzi]

I bet Norman Cook is using CDJ's when he plays out, or even Scratch or Traktor, I doubt he's demanding 1210's everywhere he goes. Just gotta move with the times.

I'm guessing you missed the part of the interview where he talks about using Serato.

Well no I didn't read it, I just read the bit about him banging on about old v new in terms of synths. Even then I struggled to keep interested.

If he doesn't like modern soft synths, then that's cool, but there are a lot more people who do, who actually make music I like.

It's obvious his career is in the shitter, as Zoe Ball has suddenly made a big comeback and is appearing on TV again.

[vurt]

DIVA raised the bar in the VST world this year (2012!) when the same could have been achieved with hardware since 1966.

In 1966 very few of us could have afforded to cause it was quite expensive.

I never said it was cheap. I just said it was possible. People think that all this new technology is creating a better sound, yet we use Technology to reproduce the sound from yesterday.

you might.

[trimph1]

DIVA raised the bar in the VST world this year (2012!) when the same could have been achieved with hardware since 1966.

In 1966 very few of us could have afforded to cause it was quite expensive.

I never said it was cheap. I just said it was possible. People think that all this new technology is creating a better sound, yet we use Technology to reproduce the sound from yesterday.

you might.

I'm not so sure all of us reproduce sounds from yesterday...nor do all developers as well...

[Cyforce]

The hole "analog vs software" question is for me personally not really important. In my eyes, the first question or better said the real question should be as user or musician - if this tool(doesn't matter if hardware or software) - is this tool useful for me and my production? Gives it me an advance etc...

[dalor]

DIVA raised the bar in the VST world this year (2012!) when the same could have been achieved with hardware since 1966.

In 1966 very few of us could have afforded to cause it was quite expensive.

I never said it was cheap. I just said it was possible. People think that all this new technology is creating a better sound, yet we use Technology to reproduce the sound from yesterday.

you might.

Do you own DIVA?

[vurt]

DIVA raised the bar in the VST world this year (2012!) when the same could have been achieved with hardware since 1966.

In 1966 very few of us could have afforded to cause it was quite expensive.

I never said it was cheap. I just said it was possible. People think that all this new technology is creating a better sound, yet we use Technology to reproduce the sound from yesterday.

you might.

Do you own DIVA?

what does that have to do with the statement "People think that all this new technology is creating a better sound, yet we use Technology to reproduce the sound from yesterday."?

DIVA is but one part of the tehnology available to us, a very small part at that.

[Ross Baron]

.[/quote]

Diddums. Are you upset he doesn't make dubstep?

Lol. Softsynth+2012=dubstep? Couldn't care less, tbh. Still enjoying some of his work, but as I said, time flies and production methods are changing, hardware wise and software wise...

[dalor]

DIVAs only goal is to sound like yesterday's synths.

[LeVzi]

http://www.arturia.com/evolution/en/products#Analog

http://www.adamszabo.com/jp6k/

http://www.gforcesoftware.com/products

http://www.xils-lab.com/pages/PRODUCTS.html

http://www.admiralquality.com/products/Poly-Ana/

http://www.applied-acoustics.com/ultraanalog/overview/

http://kunz.corrupt.ch/products/tal-u-no-62


The soft synth world has the hardware covered. Dunno why you'd want the old hardware now anyway, other than sentimental value.

[jupiter8]

DIVAs only goal is to sound like yesterday's synths.

That's a pretty boring outlook on things,no ?

[vurt]

DIVAs only goal is to sound like yesterday's synths.

DIVA has no goal, DIVA is just code, the users are the ones with goals.
many of yesterdays tools are used to make sounds that are considered up to date, in the past for example those synths where used to make space music, rather than their intended use's of creating for example orchestral sounds. in turn these recordings where often sampled by hip hop artists to create a new sound...
and so on it goes.
the users are the ones in control, DIVAs patches may well emulate the old hardware but that doesnt mean someone wont create their own sounds and move on from its creators intended goal.

we are not bound by the tools unless we give in to them, be creative and who knows what you will find under the hood

[risome]

+1 to that Vurt