Fatboy Slim thoughts about software synths

[mcnoone]

It's a waste of my time. I already posted a clip where someone a/b'd Diva and the Phatty and the Phatty sounds clearly better. Did you listen to it?

No, it's not a waste of time.
The "someone" who posted it, simply wasn't able to make it sound better than the Phatty, but I'd like to have a go at it, if I can find a decent mp3 sample of what bite and overdrive sound is like on the Phatty.
I guess I just need a challenge, and I don't believe that synths are limited by their architecture and code alone. Some extra effort in the sound making process may be all that's needed to make it better or equal to that Phatty sound.
If you know where that post is, then just post link, as I didn't see it.

[Ingonator]

It's a waste of my time. I already posted a clip where someone a/b'd Diva and the Phatty and the Phatty sounds clearly better. Did you listen to it?

No, it's not a waste of time.
The "someone" who posted it, simply wasn't able to make it sound better than the Phatty, but I'd like to have a go at it, if I can find a decent mp3 sample of what bite and overdrive sound is like on the Phatty.
I guess I just need a challenge, and I don't believe that synths are limited by their architecture and code alone. Some extra effort in the sound making process may be all that's needed to make it better or equal to that Phatty sound.
If you know where that post is, then just post link, as I didn't see it.

Hi,

it was me who posted that example at the very beginning of the Diva public beta.

Anyway after the latest updates my opinion is still that no softsynth including Diva could really 100% match the sound of a real analog synth like e.g. the Phatty (which is the only one i got for direct comparison at this moment).
Like i already mentioned at the public beta a part of the "magic" of the Phatty comes from using the filter overload feature. at the same time i also asked Urs if he could implement a proper filter drive or overload like this. AFAIK this could be part of a future update.
BTW the Waldorf Blofeld got an excellent filter Drive too (with switchable Drive curves) which in most cases makes the sound of the Blofeld many times better than without.

A direct comparison of the Phatty and Diva would lead to small (or bigger) differences at any time as Diva was modeled on a Minimoog model D. Such comparison like mine could only show if a plugin sounds "analog" or not but not as a 1:1 comparison. My demo which was posted above is already more than 6 months old but so far there seem to be very few (i guess i remember only one besides my own) direct comparisons of Diva with an analog synth. I am still waiting for a direct comparison with a real Minimoog model D. If someone got it he could please post a link here.

I agree that in a mix and/or with the use of FXs and processing the differences get much smaller. In that case it is difficult to say if a sound was done on a real analog, or softsynths like e.g. Diva, Synthix or Saurus.
If we talk about synths used in some famous songs people sometimes forget that usually some heavy processing was involved with those tracks. This is why a direct comparison of a "dry" audio demo of a certain softsynth to a certain track could be "unfair" like i mentioned in an earlier discussion at another thread.


Ingo

[Urs]

It's a waste of my time. I already posted a clip where someone a/b'd Diva and the Phatty and the Phatty sounds clearly better. Did you listen to it?

It always depends on who makes them, and why. We'd have zero problems doing comparisons in which Diva sounds "better" than any synth featuring the circuits she's been modeled on

[Ingonator]

It's a waste of my time. I already posted a clip where someone a/b'd Diva and the Phatty and the Phatty sounds clearly better. Did you listen to it?

It always depends on who makes them, and why. We'd have zero problems doing comparisons in which Diva sounds "better" than any synth featuring the circuits she's been modeled on

Hi Urs,

the demo was mine which i published at the first days of the public beta. You could read my explanation in my post above. I was surprised myself about the demo being mentioned here after that long time.
Anyway this also shows that there are very few examples (public ones...) with comparisons of Diva and a real analog synth.

I'm a bit confued how an emulation could sound "better" than the analog circuits it's modeled on. If "better" means different than it would mean it is not an exact model...


Ingo

[Urs]

It's a waste of my time. I already posted a clip where someone a/b'd Diva and the Phatty and the Phatty sounds clearly better. Did you listen to it?

It always depends on who makes them, and why. We'd have zero problems doing comparisons in which Diva sounds "better" than any synth featuring the circuits she's been modeled on

Hi Urs,

the demo was mine which i published at the first days of the public beta. You could read my explanation in my post above. I was surprised myself about the demo being mentioned here after that long time.

Yeah, that's weird, specifically as we changed Diva's sound twice (beta->1.0, 1.0.1->1.1). Especially "repairing" the Feedback sound of the ladder filter should lead to more oomph.

Anyway this also shows that there are very few examples (public ones...) with comparisons of Diva and a real analog synth.

There are many, many more. There were some on Amazona recently, there's some on Moogulator's page, there's way more on Gearslutz than on KVR.

We don't promote them because they're mostly pointless (see below).

I'm a bit confued how an emulation could sound "better" than the analog circuits it's modeled on. If "better" means different than it would mean it is not an exact model...

We never said they sound exactly the same as certain synths. We modeled certain circuits and their behaviour. Only because those circuits are also found in prominent synth doesn't mean that we stopped at doing a carbon copy.

In the end we tweaked by ear until we reached a state that we (Clemens, Howie, Hans and myself) liked *better* than the analogue counterparts. This was discussed in depth as the "muffle" problem, Diva simply sounds less muffled than her references. Some say this is "less 3D" and "lacking depth", we say it's "less boxy" and "more open". The technical difference is a few simple lowpass elements that are uswed to reduce noise in analogue synths. Diva doesn't need those because we didn't model all that noise - we just modeled certain effects of noise and heat.

It's been commonly noted in various a/b comparisons that the analogues had "more bass and roundness" and Diva had "more treble". However, if you eq some upper end spikes out and adjust volume, then Diva has plenty of bass.

[kilon]

I happen to own the most powerful Analogue (non modular) synth out there. Alesis Andromeda A6 . The irony is that Andromeda has loads of software inside it, since it has some insane modulation abilities even compared to soft synths.

I did not buy Andromeda because its analogue I bought it because of its 72 knobs. That migh sound stupid to some people but I am a hands on guy, really this is what make me hava tons of fun with Andy, and its no crappy crammed midi controller, its a brilliant designed interface.

The more I use it the more however I start to appreciate what's all the fush about analogue sound. Its not so much that analogue sound cannot be achieved with software. I have done analogue sound with waldorf blofeld and Alchemy resynthesizes with ease most of my Andromeda sounds. Its just analogue sound on an analogue synth is just unescapable. Its there right besides you , ready for you to use and abuse it. You dont need to search for it.

I recently made a track , that what makes it special is that most of the sounds are made from scratch with my Andromeda. The brass sounds is just phenomenal (your taste may vary) , they sound exactly like CS-80 brasses. I Know i am a good sound designer but I also know that I am no pro sound designer. I know that is Andromeda that make those sounds sound so good, not just me. Most of those sounds took me 10 , to 20 minutes to make each and yes it was easy though I started from absolute zero.

Here is the track.

http://soundcloud.com/kilon/temple-of-dawn

so yes I dont think that soft synths are quite there yet. At least its not as easy to do analogish sounds with them. But if you willing to put the time and dont mind working inside the box soft synths is the way to go.

[Ingonator]

It's been commonly noted in various a/b comparisons that the analogues had "more bass and roundness" and Diva had "more treble". However, if you eq some upper end spikes out and adjust volume, then Diva has plenty of bass.

I totally agree to that, both for Diva and also other synths.

Like i mentioned more than one time and have tried to show in my demos also the low end of Saurus is much improved by adding an EQ in the Low Shelf. I mentioned this to Bastiaan and maybe there will be a kind of additional EQ (in addition to the current "Boost" which is based on psychoacoutic modeling) included in a future update.


Ingo

[Woody Aki]

In all honesty, I've given up going through 14 pages of this debate, and I will not exalt the virtues of neither hardware nor software...I'm also assuming that a fair number of you have only gathered soundbites from the actual interview, which makes your opinions irrelevant in light of what I read between the lines of that interview.

Norman Cook has admitted that he's been off the piss/pills and out of his own scene for a while - that for me says a lot...not in a condescending, troll-like manner, but rather in the sense of, here's someone who's dealing with his five senses coming back, so he tends to be sensitive to everything around him until he settles down, finds a working method that embraces new tech into the equation (should that be of any benefit to him) and enjoys his new-found sobriety.


Has anyone mentioned that?

[_leras]

they were outdated when I used to sell synths in the late 80's and are simply obsolete now. Time to move on people........

No thanks. I like what my "outdated" analogs produce. YMMV but why the f**k would I care?

No more than I care that you are stuck in the past with obsolete gear......

Yes, people have been making ITB digital only music for 10+ years now with excellent results.

but, Analog is still great and is unmatched sonically for some types of sounds. JMJs music still sounds great, some beautiful pure tones.

Its not at all necessary... but outdated/obsolete... why on earth would that be the case?


.

[mcnoone]

I'm a bit confued how an emulation could sound "better" than the analog circuits it's modeled on. If "better" means different than it would mean it is not an exact model...
Ingo

Yea I heard that comparison demo before, that you did, but I'm finding other audio examples around as well.
I don't really mean "better", but I wanna try and match this overdrive, biting, type of tone using Diva, and compare it to the Phatty which has it, and see if I can dig it out of Diva. I have a couple of patches here from Diva, that shocked me somewhat. I was simply blown away, and haven't heard anything like these tones coming from it before. Very over-driven, and biting, is how I'd describe them. More like the feedback-overdrive thing. I'll try to post some audio examples soon.

[ghettosynth]

In all honesty, I've given up going through 14 pages of this debate, and I will not exalt the virtues of neither hardware nor software...I'm also assuming that a fair number of you have only gathered soundbites from the actual interview, which makes your opinions irrelevant in light of what I read between the lines of that interview.

Norman Cook has admitted that he's been off the piss/pills and out of his own scene for a while - that for me says a lot...not in a condescending, troll-like manner, but rather in the sense of, here's someone who's dealing with his five senses coming back, so he tends to be sensitive to everything around him until he settles down, finds a working method that embraces new tech into the equation (should that be of any benefit to him) and enjoys his new-found sobriety.


Has anyone mentioned that?

No, but I think you might be reading more between the lines than is there. I did read the entire thing FWIW.

[Loki Fuego]

In all honesty, I've given up going through 14 pages of this debate, and I will not exalt the virtues of neither hardware nor software...I'm also assuming that a fair number of you have only gathered soundbites from the actual interview, which makes your opinions irrelevant in light of what I read between the lines of that interview.

Norman Cook has admitted that he's been off the piss/pills and out of his own scene for a while - that for me says a lot...not in a condescending, troll-like manner, but rather in the sense of, here's someone who's dealing with his five senses coming back, so he tends to be sensitive to everything around him until he settles down, finds a working method that embraces new tech into the equation (should that be of any benefit to him) and enjoys his new-found sobriety.


Has anyone mentioned that?

No, but I think you might be reading more between the lines than is there. I did read the entire thing FWIW.

My summary of the interview: He isn't inspired with softsynths. He is a sample guy (so it's hard to expect him being inspired with soft synths). And he is going to switch to Ableton Live sooner or later, because he already did several bits in it. For him it's just a work flow issue, rather than that he thinks that working in the box is uninspiring.

[Richard_Synapse]

Yes, people have been making ITB digital only music for 10+ years now with excellent results.

but, Analog is still great and is unmatched sonically for some types of sounds. JMJs music still sounds great, some beautiful pure tones.

I think his stuff was recorded on 8-track or something? And probably mixed on some analog console, furthermore routed through analog FX (phaser comes to mind).

Overall that means a whole lot of analog post-processing which is all gonna shape the sound to some extent.

Richard

[Mutant]

When comparing hardware with software we have to keep in mind that what we can hear on all the most famous old recordings like for example Vangelis' CS80 on Blade Runner soundtrack or Jarres Minimoog and Eminent 310U on his first few albums is NOT how these synths would really sound when connected directly to our modern high quality digital audio interfaces.

The sound we can hear is the sound of the whole analog signal chain.

So for example if we want to fairly compare old recordings with CS80 to the most faithful emulation of CS80 that is ME80 (IMHO), we should use:

1. Some tube preamp emulating plugin with a very subtle barely hearable setting.
2. A good tape saturation plugin.
3. Sometimes even a speaker and a microphone impulse or a real speaker and microphone to capture the real vibrations of the air in the room.

These 3 would "warmify" the often so called "cold" sound of any VSTi.

Then with added EQ, reverb and delay, the difference would get a LOT smaller.

[Mutant]

Yes, people have been making ITB digital only music for 10+ years now with excellent results.

but, Analog is still great and is unmatched sonically for some types of sounds. JMJs music still sounds great, some beautiful pure tones.

I think his stuff was recorded on 8-track or something? And probably mixed on some analog console, furthermore routed through analog FX (phaser comes to mind).

Overall that means a whole lot of analog post-processing which is all gonna shape the sound to some extent.

Richard

Heh your post appeared when i was writing mine

So +1 to what you said.