Honestly Im really wondering. Ive never been a fan of 99% of emulations out there and trying to use them to model your specific "emulation". I have no problem with emulations being used as an item in their own... but...
So here's the areas Im interested in responses for.
1. Guitars. You can get a great amp, mic, stuff it in a closet with some pillows and make an awesome guitar sound (check out meryll's tracks!) for easilly the same price as a POD. Toss on some cheap fx pedals and not only are you matched functionality, you now have your own signature tone people will seek out... You know, if people wanted to hear limp bizkits tone, they can buy a cd with it all over......
2. Moog-a-likes. nuff said.
3. "instrument" modelling. you realize you can get a strat for 50-99$ US these days, spend about 50 hours and easily play most things quite well. The same money and time you spend to make a guitar sound via midi/plugin, only to have it NOT sound like a real guitar anyways....
4. analog whatever. If tape machines rock so much for you, why the hell dont you mix to tape? I cant see any reason why someone would invest well into 1000's into a digital platform and spend lots of wasted time trying to sound analog. you can spend the same amount and get a REALLY great sounding analog setup. People tend to forget you can do a lot more with the equivalent analog setup in anything.... not because of some arcana technical superiority, but because you gotta be creative... DOH! answered my own question.
5. autotune. why try to act like you're in tune? Practice.. practice...pratice... , then at parties you can impress people without having to find a cd player first.
end my rant. I wanna know other peoples ideas. Ive spent too much time thinking about this crap in my own head I feel Ive lost perspective... what's really going on out there!
So why do you guys use emulations....
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328 - KVRAF
- 2226 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
-
- KVRist
- 142 posts since 3 Jun, 2003 from Edmonton AB Canada
I think the number one reason is price. A software emulation of a real moog is a fraction of the price. Nobody doubts the real thing is better but emulations are getting really close. Personally I would prefer something tangible but that requires money.
I think convenience is a close second. Software is instantly recallable, no acoustic treatment, patch cords, high-end ADA, $2000 microphone & preamp, excruciating mic placement, etc. and you can still get a relatively decent sound. Plus with plug-ins, you have the added advantage of doing everything in the digital realm. No worry about jitter, DC offset, noise, etc.
Emulations are getting closer all the time. In my opinion, they still have a long way to go. I almost always prefer the real thing but it's not always an option or economical. (I'd like a real full-size pipe organ too.)
I think convenience is a close second. Software is instantly recallable, no acoustic treatment, patch cords, high-end ADA, $2000 microphone & preamp, excruciating mic placement, etc. and you can still get a relatively decent sound. Plus with plug-ins, you have the added advantage of doing everything in the digital realm. No worry about jitter, DC offset, noise, etc.
Emulations are getting closer all the time. In my opinion, they still have a long way to go. I almost always prefer the real thing but it's not always an option or economical. (I'd like a real full-size pipe organ too.)
-
- KVRAF
- 12235 posts since 18 Aug, 2003
Happy to see you posting around here again, Robert.
The best thing about software emulations is a reduction of crap lying around. If I want a simple guitar sound once every two years, it's a lot easier just to find some samples than have a guitar sitting in the closet for those two years.
Other reasons would be ease of use and seemless integration into your working environment. If you're doing everything through software, it can be a big hassle to have to start setting up mics and leads and timing, etc. A plugin integrates into your sequencer, allows otherwise impossible automation, chaining, and so on.
Philosophically, it also makes sense to use known media (real-world instruments/hardware) as a model when designing newer media (software). Go with what you know works and build from there.
That said, I'm with you some of the way. I hate seeing software be exact emulations of real-world counterparts and nothing but. If you're going to make something in software, build on the strengths of software instead. Analog modelling in synths is a good idea, because it makes the sound we want. A good softsynth should take that model as a beginning and make it do what the old hardware could never do.
Moogs are a good example. I'm a bit baffled why I would want a softsynth that can only do what Moog did 30 years ago, when I can get other softsynths that can do that tenfold and sound just as good.
Cheers,
Steve
The best thing about software emulations is a reduction of crap lying around. If I want a simple guitar sound once every two years, it's a lot easier just to find some samples than have a guitar sitting in the closet for those two years.
Other reasons would be ease of use and seemless integration into your working environment. If you're doing everything through software, it can be a big hassle to have to start setting up mics and leads and timing, etc. A plugin integrates into your sequencer, allows otherwise impossible automation, chaining, and so on.
Philosophically, it also makes sense to use known media (real-world instruments/hardware) as a model when designing newer media (software). Go with what you know works and build from there.
That said, I'm with you some of the way. I hate seeing software be exact emulations of real-world counterparts and nothing but. If you're going to make something in software, build on the strengths of software instead. Analog modelling in synths is a good idea, because it makes the sound we want. A good softsynth should take that model as a beginning and make it do what the old hardware could never do.
Moogs are a good example. I'm a bit baffled why I would want a softsynth that can only do what Moog did 30 years ago, when I can get other softsynths that can do that tenfold and sound just as good.
Cheers,
Steve
-
- KVRian
- 1005 posts since 1 Apr, 2002 from Spain
I don´t play the guitar and vst-fx make the amount of noise I want them to, unlike cable-wired hardware, plus there may be 100 % free plugz able to do the job.Robert Randolph wrote:
1. Guitars. You can get a great amp, mic, stuff it in a closet with some pillows and make an awesome guitar sound (check out meryll's tracks!) for easilly the same price as a POD. Toss on some cheap
I don´t have the space and money for a real moog and I have no mixer to plug it into plus it´ll be out of tune and noisey. Maybe those two last things are for some people part of the charm of a moog, but I can add that charm with vstfx if I want to - at least I have a choice.Robert Randolph wrote: 2. Moog-a-likes. nuff said.
Ok, so #1 was about effects only I guess then? Well my answer for #3 is part of the one for #1 then, which also covered using a virtual guitar.Robert Randolph wrote: 3. "instrument" modelling. you realize you can get a strat for 50-99$ US these days, spend about 50 hours and easily play most things quite well. The same money and time you spend to make a guitar sound via midi/plugin, only to have it NOT sound like a real guitar anyways....
Well the 1000´s invested into a digital platform are much better given out because a digital platform can be used for loads of other things than just giving an artificial analogue tape sound.Robert Randolph wrote: 4. analog whatever. If tape machines rock so much for you, why the hell dont you mix to tape? I cant see any reason why someone would invest well into 1000's into a digital platform and spend lots of wasted time trying to sound analog. you can spend the same amount and get a REALLY great sounding analog setup. People tend to forget you can do a lot more with the equivalent analog setup in anything.... not because of some arcana technical superiority, but because you gotta be creative... DOH! answered my own question.
Can you make an artificial digital sound with a tape machine btw?
You´d need a really great tape deck btw, to reach the quality of digital equipment, btw, and still sounding warm of course.
Maybe you don´t have the time(money!) in the studio to make it as good as you want to. Or if you´re recording at home and have a decent singer.. why would you wait 3 years till that singer can do the job perfectly, if you wanna finish some songs right here right now? You could get another singer of course, but the one you have chosen may fit perfectly into the music, except for not singing perfectly in tune. I wouldn´t wait 3 years either till I could play a theme perfectly into my sequencer, I´d rather use quantization.Robert Randolph wrote: 5. autotune. why try to act like you're in tune? Practice.. practice...pratice... , then at parties you can impress people without having to find a cd player first.
It´s pretty simple. Lots of people simply don´t have the budget or space to make music on the equipment of which they can get virtual emulations.Robert Randolph wrote: end my rant. I wanna know other peoples ideas. Ive spent too much time thinking about this crap in my own head I feel Ive lost perspective... what's really going on out there!
And using autotune to correct the pitch, quantization to get things fitting better on the beats etc... that´s all of question of that many composers prefer to spend their time being creative and not playing things over and over again till they are right.
Best Regards
Roman Empire
Roman Empire
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111289 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
my room is 6ft by 4ft i do not have much room really,specially not once the desk is in here 
-
- Banned
- 6127 posts since 1 Apr, 2004 from Et in Arcadia Ego
blow-up dolls are way cheaper than hookers.
-
- DASH Guy
- 8156 posts since 20 Sep, 2001
sometimes emulations (of instruments) are just interesting as they can sound different (worst?)
than the originals
didn't the hammond started as emulation of pipe organ?
than the originals
didn't the hammond started as emulation of pipe organ?
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2226 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
Perhaps the point was missed a bit....
I am wondering why people TRY to emulate something (that is normally very accessable)... rather than use that technology to create something new, inspiring... or just plain good in it's own rite.
The "rant" was just me going on about how its silly to "emulate" when the real thing will always be just that... the real thing.
Why the bloody hell cant people take stuff, and make good sounds without trying to "emulate" or "sound like".... even half the time "influenced by" is incredibly bland.
-R
bert
I am wondering why people TRY to emulate something (that is normally very accessable)... rather than use that technology to create something new, inspiring... or just plain good in it's own rite.
The "rant" was just me going on about how its silly to "emulate" when the real thing will always be just that... the real thing.
Why the bloody hell cant people take stuff, and make good sounds without trying to "emulate" or "sound like".... even half the time "influenced by" is incredibly bland.
-R
bert-
- KVRian
- 725 posts since 30 Mar, 2004 from Melbourne, Australia
Well I am not a guitarist, but I have guitars on nearly all my tracks. Some of them sound almost convincing IMHO. As for spending a hundred bucks on a Strat and investing fifty hours trying to learn a few chords - forget it. Even if I did, then I would need to invest in an amp, mikes, cables, stomp boxes etc - all so I can get a sound that is maybe 10-20% more realistic than I'm getting with VSTi's?
As for sounding more analog when mixing/mastering using a digital setup - why not? Makes sense to me to add warmth to tracks that sound like they were recorded on glass. I mean, a $59 plugin which gives me analog delay with dial-up quality, age, tape emu with stretching etc - versus spending $1000 on the real thing? No contest.
As for Moogs - never used them, never lusted after them, and I have 20GB+ worth of vintage sampled synths across 4-5 romplers which probably include sampled Moogs - to be honest I select a sound on how it appeals to my ears, not the label of the manufacturer on the hard or soft synth.
15 years ago I had a MIDI studio in a spare bedroom stuffed full of synths, cables, fx racks, mixer, amps, speaker etc etc. I could hard move into the room. Today it's all inside my laptop, and the quality of what I am making is ten times better.
Damn good thread though, I look forward to revisiting this thread later for others' opinions.
As for sounding more analog when mixing/mastering using a digital setup - why not? Makes sense to me to add warmth to tracks that sound like they were recorded on glass. I mean, a $59 plugin which gives me analog delay with dial-up quality, age, tape emu with stretching etc - versus spending $1000 on the real thing? No contest.
As for Moogs - never used them, never lusted after them, and I have 20GB+ worth of vintage sampled synths across 4-5 romplers which probably include sampled Moogs - to be honest I select a sound on how it appeals to my ears, not the label of the manufacturer on the hard or soft synth.
15 years ago I had a MIDI studio in a spare bedroom stuffed full of synths, cables, fx racks, mixer, amps, speaker etc etc. I could hard move into the room. Today it's all inside my laptop, and the quality of what I am making is ten times better.
Damn good thread though, I look forward to revisiting this thread later for others' opinions.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111289 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
oh i do that as well but sometimes its a particular sound your after i guess?
-
- KVRian
- 711 posts since 16 Mar, 2002 from Mostly in planes and hotels. Terra Firma: Seattle, WA
Right now, can't really afford a MMV, so forget about my favorite synth of all time .. A moog modular. The sound is timeless and if I can come even half close, I'd be a happy camper. No one complains about the B4 being the emulation of a Hammond, and using a B4 is as legitimate as using a Korg CX3 or other clonewheel, so why not a moog. A good sound is always good. If it is genre/era-specific, it is not timeless.
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2226 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
I guess from the responses Ive lost touch with people who make music for their own enjoyment.....
Seems the responses here so far (and before I start, this is a wonderful thing, not bad at all!) seem to tell me that a lot of people make music for their own enjoyment. That is, you hear XX on the stereo, like it and want to take your ideas and make something similiar because you like it.... In that idea I can see the idea for emulation...
What I am more exposed to, and personally much more interested in is people who are making music to create new music for others... not specificaly to create music to satisfy (even if subconsciously) their own desires....
Learn something new everyday I really forgot some people make music just to enjoy it rather than to acheive some technical merit, create new art, or push a boundary... Its a lost art i guess...
Seems the responses here so far (and before I start, this is a wonderful thing, not bad at all!) seem to tell me that a lot of people make music for their own enjoyment. That is, you hear XX on the stereo, like it and want to take your ideas and make something similiar because you like it.... In that idea I can see the idea for emulation...
What I am more exposed to, and personally much more interested in is people who are making music to create new music for others... not specificaly to create music to satisfy (even if subconsciously) their own desires....
Learn something new everyday
I really forgot some people make music just to enjoy it rather than to acheive some technical merit, create new art, or push a boundary... Its a lost art i guess...-
- Banned
- 6127 posts since 1 Apr, 2004 from Et in Arcadia Ego
Alot of the time, it's probably just a limitation in hardware, as was my case, & still is. Space considerations like vurt mentioned play a role for some. I can do whatever I want emulation-wise programming on a piano-roll, but if I wanna get guitar in there, I have to shell out $$$ for soundcard, instrument, mixer, amp, mics, all that crap (which I'm finally doing, & cussing all the way to the bank..). When I emulate, it's a financial solution/limitation.Robert Randolph wrote:Perhaps the point was missed a bit....
I am wondering why people TRY to emulate something (that is normally very accessable)... rather than use that technology to create something new, inspiring... or just plain good in it's own rite.
I would also imagine that there are those that emulate simply becuase they can, & I think it's good to push the envelope towards perfecting all that, & providing an overlap between how conventional instruments are played.
Consider someone who has a accidental handicap & can no longer play guitar as a loss of a hand; emulation development places a precious method of creative expression back within reach, so I dig it, even if all of it sounds crap (I'm talking guitar here strictly) for the moment..
-
- addled muppet weed
- 111289 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
Robert Randolph wrote:seem to tell me that a lot of people make music for their own enjoyment. ...
there should be no other reason unless you are looking for commercial success really?why create something that you do not like?for the sake of money,nah,i do enough in life i dont enjoy for cash it aint takin my one last haven
-
Robert Randolph Robert Randolph https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7328
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2226 posts since 25 May, 2003 from Saint Petersburg, Florida
hehe...vurt wrote:Robert Randolph wrote:seem to tell me that a lot of people make music for their own enjoyment. ...
there should be no other reason unless you are looking for commercial success really?why create something that you do not like?for the sake of money,nah,i do enough in life i dont enjoy for cash it aint takin my one last haven
A. someone who makes music to model stuff they already listen to. Kid makes trance because he listens to tons of trance and wants to make stuff just like it because it sounds great ! (haha)
B. Someone who takes music they like.... then makes something totally different, they still like it, but it's something new.. new ideas.. new use of old ideas.. new instruments.. new effects.
I totally forgot A. even existed heh.