KVR Audio

IncarnateX · Post by **IncarnateX** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:39 am

Architeuthis wrote:Analog synths sound good because they are limited to the physical, natural world, unlike digital synths which can easily be made to do things physically impossible and therefore sound unnatural.

Oh, dear. You are so lost in mythology that I think a rescue mission is too late. Anyway, If you get some time off, try to make some music with whatever you got. If you fail, sell it all and find another hobby.

Architeuthis · Post by **Architeuthis** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:54 am

IncarnateX wrote:
Architeuthis wrote:Analog synths sound good because they are limited to the physical, natural world, unlike digital synths which can easily be made to do things physically impossible and therefore sound unnatural.
Oh, dear. You are so lost in mythology that I think a rescue mission is too late. Anyway, If you get some time off, try to make some music with whatever you got. If you fail, sell it all and find another hobby.

I have the perfect response for this: Yes, I am lost in... mythology? no. Philosophy. Yes, I am lost in that. But it has consistently lead me to great results, so... I can't escape it. And you will be hearing of these results when I finally release some of these products/audio plugins I have in mind.

IncarnateX · Post by **IncarnateX** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:15 am

Architeuthis wrote:I have the perfect response for this: Yes, I am lost in... mythology? no. Philosophy. Yes, I am lost in that. But it has consistently lead me to great results, so... I can't escape it. And you will be hearing of these results when I finally release some of these products/audio plugins I have in mind.

I don't think analog modeling is a discipline within philosophy but God's speed and the best of luck to you.

antto · Post by **antto** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:35 am

i know at least two people who turn to religion to make the ultimate algorithms (dsp and beyond) and it didn't went well so far
you turn to philosophy? well that's kinda odd

you want to make great analog-like products, but you want to cut corners and not learn the details?
you might as well put something together and call it "VA"
but then how will you know the level of "analogue-ness" when you don't understand how to evaluate it?
i know how! you'll use your ears, right?
i showed you two of your creations in my previous post - now you need to find an analog synth or circuit which produces a sawtooth waveform like your algorithms, and you can then call it analog-modelling

IncarnateX · Post by **IncarnateX** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:41 am

Btw: What is it you think is missing in present analog emulations? People fail blind tests between e.g. Diva and a couple pf classic analogs, and Xils Lab seems to make some great emulations too. If people cannot tell one from another already, what would be the gain of further refinement? As stated earlier, we are already in a state of overkill, so what is the point?

Architeuthis · Post by **Architeuthis** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:20 am

Guys, I can't keep this up. I've already answered all the questions and concerns that were just directed at me, but I am also being too vague. Apologies for derailing the topic. I hope to prove all my points with working examples in the future, but for now, I'll have to shut up about my opinions/ideas.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:46 am

Architeuthis wrote:
aciddose wrote:You can start to believe anything if you redefine what words mean and make them meaningless.
Who is redefining the word? It seems like the words in question are vaguely defined in the first place.

Analog = continuous
Digital = discrete (not continuous)

Therefore "virtual analog" is complete nonsense unless you redefine what "analog" means. Does it mean "analogous?" Or does it mean "subtractive?"

What it ultimately means is BULLSHIT.

In the continuous "analog" domain: x^2 = valid result with twice the bandwidth (bandwidth always has its limits but this is what "analog" means; it means there is no aliasing and that any frequency including infinity can be represented at an infinitesimal magnitude.)

In the discontinuous "discrete", "digital" domain: x^2 = never a valid result and merely at best an approximation due to limited bandwidth and quantization. There is no "discrete infinity". The two are contradictory.

This is the proper definition of the word. If people aren't using it correctly that doesn't make it meaningless or subjective: it just makes those people stupid.

So any "analog emulation", "simulation", "approximation" or however you want to define it is a series of trade-offs. This is as simple as the axiomatic assertion: analog != digital.

Architeuthis · Post by **Architeuthis** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:50 am

It seems we can't agree on the goal / reason for having this conversation.

We can't agree on what words to use.

We can't agree on what is "analog sound".

It seems like we can't agree that this conversation is even useful.

We have to come up with a few baseline truths that can be universally agreed upon, otherwise this conversation will be eternally fruitless.

Seems like we have no baseline.

antto · Post by **antto** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 2:59 pm

IMO the discussion in this thread was all fine until a certain person came in and basically said:
"not sure why you guys are talking about such complicated things when i KNOW that the analog sound can be emulated digitally with the simplest algorithms and almost no CPU usage"
and
"i was a user and was not happy with the available VA instruments, and now you tell me that VA means almost nothing, so, as a dev, imma slap the VA label onto all of my stuff too then"

Audiority · Post by **Audiority** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:41 pm

aciddose wrote:This is the proper definition of the word. If people aren't using it correctly that doesn't make it meaningless or subjective: it just makes those people stupid.

Unfortunately we live in a time where science and facts are just opinions and wins who screams louder. :\

Architeuthis · Post by **Architeuthis** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:56 pm

antto wrote:IMO the discussion in this thread was all fine until a certain person came in and basically said:
"not sure why you guys are talking about such complicated things when i KNOW that the analog sound can be emulated digitally with the simplest algorithms and almost no CPU usage"

Sorry. I'm just not ready to be specific or share details. Lesson learned. I will keep quiet unless I have concrete examples, code, evidence, etc. I speak up out of frustration though. Ok. I'm done with that too I guess.

VariKusBrainZ · Post by **VariKusBrainZ** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:25 pm

To me analog means not just the bandwidth but also the non linear nature and how swapping out components can change the character of a circuit

Architeuthis · Post by **Architeuthis** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 7:04 pm

VariKusBrainZ wrote:To me analog means not just the bandwidth but also the non linear nature and how swapping out components can change the character of a circuit

Yes!

Audiority · Post by **Audiority** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:04 pm

VariKusBrainZ wrote:To me analog means not just the bandwidth but also the non linear nature and how swapping out components can change the character of a circuit

word!

Max M. · Post by **Max M.** » Sun Sep 17, 2017 10:18 pm

VariKusBrainZ wrote:To me analog means not just the bandwidth but also the non linear nature and how swapping out components can change the character of a circuit

Yeah, sure... "Digital" is always linear and swapping out components never changes the character/sound of an algorithm. Phew...

---
Just to join sarcastic opinions already expressed above. The subject is just about searching for an euphemism for words like "(all uppercase) the best sound ". Obviously one can't put "the best sound" to cover his thing (that would be too silly) so his looking for some of these crappy-hypo-buzz-words (these days every dumb 2+2 goody has the "analog sound" sticker on, so that stopped to mean anything a while ago).

Analog modelling