Diva vs Analogue - a real world test

[Urs]

I provided a test you could use to determine whether or not a plugin produces the same result an electronic circuit produces.

Well, you provide a single test for a single phenomenon, using an electronic circuit that isn't even the circuit that was modeled and you derive from this that the model as a whole must be wrong. In fact, you imply that all models must be wrong even though you tested just this one. There's a terrific logic in this, I can't even begin to grasp it.

I'll eventually check this one - possibly scandalous! - oversight out with the circuit that was actually modelled - the MS-20 in question resides in a cupboard 6 meters from my desk. If it's a bug, we'll eventually fix it, thanks for the intrigueing bug report. Standing as it is however, Diva being the acknowledged reference for analogue modeling, yada yada, myself being a pretty busy guy, excuse me if I will not grace your findings with utter priority. Maybe next year, when there's time to revise this or that model.

[aciddose]

This isn't specific to a synthesizer, to a plugin or something to be considered "a single phenomenon".

This same test can be applied to any electronic circuit processing audio just as it can be applied to any software processing audio.

People consistently try to distract from the core issue or detract from the fact that this is the most simple test possible to demonstrate that any particular software is or is not a model of any particular electronic circuit.

Personally I really don't care, my issue is with the thread and its misleading title "vs. analogue".

This whole game is intended to demonstrate the difference between a valid test and what we have from the OP.

[trimph1]

I made no claim.

So besides from accepting the fact that tests with two options always end up in equal distributions, that the difference between analog circuits and Diva is so significant for the sound that you cannot hear it and that those you call stupid resort to insults, we now have to disprove claims you never made?

Are you doing this on purpose to confuse people?

I think he is doing this to confuse us...he does have his own "standards" as we can, kind of, see.

[Urs]

This whole game is intended to demonstrate the difference between a valid test and what we have from the OP.

I totally understand. You know something, and you said it.

[Gamma-UT]

"Dear u-he, this 'virtual Moog' you purport to sell is rubbish. I can't stick daggers in it. Yours, Keith Emerson."

[aciddose]

I made no claim.

So besides from accepting the fact that tests with two options always end up in equal distributions, that the difference between analog circuits and Diva is so significant for the sound that you cannot hear it and that those you call stupid resort to insults, we now have to disprove claims you never made?

Are you doing this on purpose to confuse people?

I claimed you'd get results from this "test" equivalent to a coin flip.

No, we don't even need to go there.

I "claimed" this test is a coin flip.

I have no doubt there are differences between the two clips, but once we start to get into discussion of the sources of bias, both bias in the data and bias in the results based upon subjective interpretation we are on a whole other level of psychology, not electronics, audio or anything of the like.

Based upon the results my "claim" matches with the evidence gathered.

Feel free to repeat the test as many times as you like and see if you can find a result that doesn't fit with the very well understood statistics of a coin flip.

If you want to get into the technical of this stuff I'd suggest heading over to a forum on statistics or math. The evidence from this very thread points to that being the best decision to make.

[OutCider]

"Dear u-he, this 'virtual Moog' you purport to sell is rubbish. I can't stick daggers in it. Yours, Keith Emerson."

Conclusive proof that analogue/digital is better/worse than digital/analogue for the same/different reason.

Thanks Keith

[EnGee]

Well, I think it is not the suitable thread for scientific and labs tests.

As I see it, it is like going to the church and saying that "I can prove there is no God".

[Locus M]

I will not grace your findings with utter priority. Maybe next year, when there's time to revise this or that model.

I don't understand why you would bother with such a pile of contradictive rubbish in the first place. This is way below your level and league. You are King Kong while he is Donald Duck.

[aciddose]

As I see it, it is like going to the church and saying that "I can prove there is no God".

Actually walking into any university and making such a claim would cause quite a lot of laughter, wouldn't it?

You can prove there is no evidence of something which is defined as that which has no evidence?

See the "I know you're lying, but continue" image

[Locus M]

If you want to get into the technical of this stuff I'd suggest heading over to a forum on statistics or math.

That projection must have hurt like shit.

[trimph1]

This thread has become an EPIC

[OutCider]

It's why we can't ever have anything nice

[aciddose]

I will not grace your findings with utter priority. Maybe next year, when there's time to revise this or that model.

I don't understand why you would bother with such a pile of contradictive rubbish in the first place. This is way below your level and league. You are King Kong while he is Donald Duck.

I think you misunderstand both our positions.

I'm not sure why people get emotionally riled up about this or that plug-in or whatever else. I've noticed this and I've been trying not to name any particulars for that reason.

First, there is no need for anyone to be on a defensive as there is no threat present.

Second, I suspect although many people may be confused (in fact did you not just question whether I intended this?) that there are those of us present who would question "how is it possible to be confused about something so intuitive and simple?"

I wouldn't recommend anyone, ever attempt to actually do circuit modelling down to the level of this particular effect... although in some cases it does have notable effects and so it may be worthwhile, I've found it quite expensive to get right.

I'm not going to tell Urs or anyone else who knows their stuff what they should do. If he wants to model this that's cool and in fact I suppose it is possible that in some cases this may be the missing factor to get "that sound" too.

Anyway that is technical, "confusing" stuff which is for the purposes of this thread really irrelevant.

I don't want to see "are you intending to confuse everyone?" come up so I'll post something in the dev forum if I want to discuss stuff like this.

The relevant part is that the whole "X vs. analog" concept is fundamentally flawed when this A/B measurement is used. It doesn't actually demonstrate anything related to "X" or "analog" or their relationship, it's a subjective test. We can find some statistical result for "do you prefer X or analog", but anyone conducting such a test should be aware of the limits of the test and the potential biases involved.

A/B tests can be used to demonstrate whether there is a significant difference between two things. For example if you need to identify A vs. B based upon known properties, the test can demonstrate how reliably you can identify these properties.

It's still subjective, but the intent then is to measure you (the subject) and your capability to identify these properties. It proves nothing about A or B, it only demonstrates something about you.

I just find it very offensive to see misleading thread titles like "A vs. B" where the content of the thread has absolutely nothing to do with A or B!

The fact I'm trying to demonstrate the problem with the test and people get emotional and defensive about "A" or "B" is what really gets me.

Is it even worth the effort? Who am I really helping here?

I want to live in a world where people know better. People are smarter than I am and I can look up to others and their accomplishments and learn from them. I am fighting for that.

I suppose I should just give up.

[bftucker]

Listen, and understand! It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.

Is it from the future?

Nah...Canada, I think.