What makes analog so analog?

[Robert Randolph]

just post wavs, they don't need to be that long

2 peopole missed it.. oh well.

And you don't need to post the 48khz version, we can convert it ourselves. Since we're talking about playback and not recording here, if there's a difference in a 48khz recording, then the problem is with the recording device, not playback.

Ah, it certainly makes more sense to test our sample rate conversion than recording devices... afterall, when we record we always use sample rate conversion on everything. (this is sarcasm too)

I think it would be best to include the shortcomings of your devices if they do indeed exist. Id imagine this would be quite similiar to the shortcomings of other devices that other people use, and of great interest to the whole point of this "test".

[Amberience]

The answer lies elsewhere, most likely in the limitations of current technology.

Greg

Can digital equipment emulate the fluctuations in an electrical current? Can software emulate the butterfly effect???

[Robert Randolph]

Digital is what the designer/programmer intended it to be.

You've never worked in synthedit then eh?

Are you disagreeing with me? What do you think gives analog gear its qualities??

Analog gear works on electricity. Control voltages and the like. Vis-a-vis, they aren't perfect. There are blemishes in the sound, and this is why people love it so much. Because it sounds humane.

Its hard to get the same effect out of software that works by algorithm.

You stated digital is what the author intends it to be. Quite often the opposite is true. Given computers can generate random numbers are at least not superficially recognizable as patterns, one could easily make something digital that has no predictability at all... and is indeed nothing like the author intends.

Of course the many times someone sits down to make a great bass synth and ends up making an electric piano instead.... but that's not what you're getting at so

[Robert Randolph]

The answer lies elsewhere, most likely in the limitations of current technology.

Greg

Can digital equipment emulate the fluctuations in an electrical current? Can software emulate the butterfly effect???

If you can observe it, and it can be mathematically stated, then yes.

And since both are true to both examples, the answer is yes.

[Amberience]

one could easily make something digital that has no predictability at all... and is indeed nothing like the author intends.

Of course the many times someone sits down to make a great bass synth and ends up making an electric piano instead.... but that's not what you're getting at so

hehe... ok. If someone sits down and makes something digital that outputs completely random sound ...he intends to sit down and make something that outputs completely random sound

But I imagine designing true analog equipment is a lot like pissing in the wind. I could be wrong of course.

[tony tony chopper]

Can digital equipment emulate the fluctuations in an electrical current? Can software emulate the butterfly effect???

can anyone but a snob care about them


Honnestly, I think that listeners wouldn't recognize analog vs digital, nor care (nor know/care how electronic music is made anyway).

It's like pacman - I don't give a shit about the thousands of pacman clones with ghosts replaced by cops or whatever, but I'd like to have an original, smelly pacman coin-op in my house. But I do understand that kids don't give a shit about pacman, at all. It's only nostalgy. Playing pacman is boring as hell, but the feel of the piece of hardware is nice.

[Sicklecell666]

But I imagine designing true analog equipment is a lot like pissing in the wind. I could be wrong of course.

You are wrong..one example:

what about the Pro-53's 'analog' setting that emulates crappy circuits..Albino has it as well...

[Amberience]

The answer lies elsewhere, most likely in the limitations of current technology.

Greg

Can digital equipment emulate the fluctuations in an electrical current? Can software emulate the butterfly effect???

If you can observe it, and it can be mathematically stated, then yes.

And since both are true to both examples, the answer is yes.

I'll give you the electrical current, because I would imagine its possible to put it into some kind of unreadable equation.

But the butterfly effect... I really doubt that. Its too ambiguous and completely open ended. No-one knows what would happen if you did something different, so software isn't going to be able to do anything like that either.

[Amberience]

But I imagine designing true analog equipment is a lot like pissing in the wind. I could be wrong of course.

You are wrong..one example:

what about the Pro-53's 'analog' setting that emulates crappy circuits..Albino has it as well...

Well I'm no developer, I don't know the technicalities of digital emulation. Just giving an opinion.

[Sicklecell666]

can anyone but a snob care about them

NO. Just someone who gives a shit about authenticity bineg truly represented if it's advertised..

[McLilith]

Okay, I'm going to drag the analog synth into this cramped room and make a few very short recordings at different sample rates. We'll see shortly if my memory was playing tricks on me, or whether a 96 kHz recording really does sound better to me. Of course, since everyone has a different hearing response, different speakers, etc--what might sound obvious to me might not sound obvious to everyone (or even anyone) else. It should still be a fun little exercise.


stay tuned...

McLilith

[Sicklecell666]

Well I'm no developer, I don't know the technicalities of digital emulation. Just giving an opinion.

Don't abandon your opinion..

what happened if you woke up one day & your asshole had dissapeared?

[Amberience]

Wouldn't a 96khz recording hold more information and give the recording more room to capture a truer image???

Don't abandon your opinion..

what happened if you woke up one day & your asshole had dissapeared?

I don't know. I can speculate that I'd be alive for a few hours until I needed a shit, but then I'd die soon after needing a shit because there'd be no way to get it out of my "temple" !!

Or I could speculate that my body could give itself a colostomy.

Is there a mathematical way of working out which is more likely??

[Robert Randolph]

butterfly effect emulation is simple and readily put into a mathematical formula close enough to not make any perceptable difference.

The real question is why the hell would you want this kind of stuff in digital? We have the option to make things better... why are we trying to emulate the mistakes of the past?

I still think it's nothing but nostalgia and training. You want to hear what you've heard... nothing more.

[Lunch Money]

The butterfly effect? Give me a break. Analog synthesizers are sufficiently predictable that it's not really a factor; however, yes, I believe that you could put in even the smallest minutia of random behaviour.

People usually don't understand the butterfly effect anyhow. It's not saying that a butterfly flapping its wings in Canada will make a hurricane in Australia. It's saying, "What if, because of the minute ways in which all things are connected, and because all things are theoretically possible, the flapping of a butterfly's wings... etc...". What most people don't recognize is the minutia involved. In terms of emulating an analog synth, that minutia is small enough so as to be irrelevant to human perception of the sound that it produces.

People on here come up with the strangest arguments.

Greg