What makes analog so analog?

[nuffink]

Just What Is It That Makes Today's Synths So Different, So Appealing?

[griels]

Just What Is It That Makes Today's Synths So Different, So Appealing?

Nice rackmount

TBH the best VAs sound great to me. Maybe there are some weird noises real analogues can make that elude the digital realm, but I'm more concerned with the way these synths are used than their circuitry. A rich complex digital synth patch (Rhino 2 perhaps) can produce great sounds no analogue synth could produce. But a competently programmed analogue synth can sound spades better than a badly programmed digital emulation.

Anyway, that's me outta here

[seamoss]

Thanks McLilith for posted those 44.1/96 files. Unfortunately, I am at work with just some crappy headphones, so it is a bit hard to tell.

There is no doubt that you can hear the difference in it being an analog synth, though. Anybody that has played with enough analog hardware synths almost would have to agree that there cleary is a difference between soft and hard synths.

It doesn't matter because vst synths are great and getting better and better everyday.


…..and it's the same argument about guitar amp sims. I love them but they still don't sound like my twin.

[Lawnmower Of The Damned]

Great, I go to bed and not only have the flaming trolls shown up, but the majority of my discussion has turned from a hybrid digital/analog VSTi interface to trying to figure out what would happen to your feces if you suffered an anal blockage of some sort.

Can I please ask you guys to get on topic? I think this is an interesting topic, and deserves more attention than it has recieved thus far.

Concerning sypathetic feedback:

It is possible to simulate this in digital. Remember, we are talking about a specialized sound card with the possibility of specialized drivers. Here's what you do. Make a command to send the finished audio off into a buffer, and once the feedback is ready, take the finished bit out of the buffer and mix the two sounds. It would be kind of like the plugin delay correction we've been hearing so much about lately. Solid state hardware has been doing sympathetic feedback for a while now, so let's not get all hung up on this stuff and declare it impossible when it's already been done.

Concerning point to point wiring:

There's something you forgot. Wires impart an impedience upon the signal that passes through them. It's not very difficult to simulate that. The editor could easily have a "wire" module with selectable impedance.

Concerning analog filters:

A long while back WhiteNoise said that he would like to see an analog filter more than an analog oscillator. So, I've thought about it, and I've redesigned my idea a bit. Here's the step by step setup of the signal flow:

1) Midi data from the keyboard enters the soundcard. It can be manipulated here to have envelopes, arpegiators, glide, or any number of other effects that you could create with midi data.
2) That data is converted to voltage and passed out of the soundcard and into an analog oscillator.
3) The sound from the oscillator is taken back into the sound card and run through high quality A/D-D/A converters. All of the analog sound will be kept intact.
4) The editor will have a comman that allows sympathetic feedback. If activated, the audio from the oscillator will be held back momentarily until the feedback data is ready (much like plugin delay compensation, which is easy to implement) and mixed together when finished. At this stage the user can do any signal processing that they please, including phasing effects, delays. etc.
5) When the command is given the audio will be sent to an analog filter. This filter will need to be a completely assignable multi-filter. Running the data through USB or FireWire would probably be best. By setting it up with high-pass, low-pass, band-pass, notch, etc. it would still not be able to cover everything necessary. This is why it should have the ability to take in spline data over the fast connection. Now the user can make any kind of filter they desire.
6) The audio is run back into the soundcard, where it is given another opportunity to be affected in any way the user desires.

Now we have a modular setup, which has sympathetic feedback, analog oscillators, a completely assignable analog filter, virtual wires with impedance...

Will someone hear admit that my idea is likely sounding a little more analog yet!?

[tony tony chopper]

There is no doubt that you can hear the difference in it being an analog synth, though

really? why? what in that wave file couldn't be done using a soft synth?

[Lawnmower Of The Damned]

So, in effect we have digital envelopes, but those are being converted to voltage data and being run through an analog oscillator. Pure analog sound at this point.

Then we run it through digital effects, but most analog synths don't have effects anyway, so the effects were applied after anyway. So there should be no digital sound there.

The signal is run through a completely assignable analog multi filter. All analog sound here.

The audio is taken back in and post processed. The effects here should be the same as plugging an analog synth into your soundcard and running some VST effects over them. And why wouldn't it be? You have a basic analog synth here, supplimented with a great deal of very flexable digital effects. Think of it as the world's most affordable, easy to set up, analog sounding modular synth, with tons of effects.

I don't see how this can go wrong. But you tell me, do you still think this is going to sound the same as a VSTi, or are we finally getting some analog sound?

[McLilith]

really? why? what in that wave file couldn't be done using a soft synth?

I'm not saying it couldn't be done digitally, but since you brought it up, perhaps someone could try to replicate that short clip with a VSTi and prove it to him and everyone else that a VSTi can indeed replicate that clip.


take care,
McLilith

[Lawnmower Of The Damned]

Gol, go listen to some sound samples of a poly-evolver, or any of the stuff at http://www.analoguesolutions.com and you'll see what we're talking about. It's undeniable, there is just something creamier about them. Now please stop trying to hijack this thread. I've got it on topic for the first time in 7 pages, and that's where it's staying.

Feel free to create another topic if you want to discuss ANOTHER TOPIC.

[kuniklo]

really? why? what in that wave file couldn't be done using a soft synth?

I'm not saying it couldn't be done digitally, but since you brought it up, perhaps someone could try to replicate that short clip with a VSTi and prove it to him and everyone else that a VSTi can indeed replicate that clip.

I think it's easy when you spend most of your time (like most of us here) playing and programming synths to forget that a lot of the fine details in a synth's sound get lost in a busy mix with other instruments. If you're doing minimalist stuff or ambient stuff then it's possible that these very subtle details will come out in a way that the average listener. For the typical listener, listening on poor equipment or more likely a low-quality lossy format, all these minuate are lost. Even I have a hard time telling Pro53 from impOSCar in a complex track with four or more things going on at once.

I briefly owned an Alesis Andromeda which is generally considered one of the better analog synths available today. After playing it side by side with impOSCar and a few other synths I concluded that at the end of the day very, very few listeners would notice the difference and the expense and hassle of running a full h/w analog synth wasn't worth it.

Personally, these days I'm more interested in synths that make it easy for me to get the sounds I want out of them than I am in something that sounds exactly "analog".

[tony tony chopper]

I'm not saying it couldn't be done digitally, but since you brought it up, perhaps someone could try to replicate that short clip with a VSTi and prove it to him and everyone else that a VSTi can indeed replicate that clip

I'll give a try, unfortunately it's very hard to replicate a preset from another synth, wether it's digital or analog

Now please stop trying to hijack this thread

hijack?
you're asking 'what makes analog better than digital', and me claiming that the difference is just in your mind, is off-topic?

this was my answer: what makes the difference? nothing, it's the same.

[seamoss]

There is no doubt that you can hear the difference in it being an analog synth, though

really? why? what in that wave file couldn't be done using a soft synth?

maybe nothing?

it just had an analog sound to me, that's all.

[nuffink]

So, in effect we have digital envelopes, but those are being converted to voltage data and being run through an analog oscillator. Pure analog sound at this point.

Then we run it through digital effects, but most analog synths don't have effects anyway, so the effects were applied after anyway. So there should be no digital sound there.

The signal is run through a completely assignable analog multi filter. All analog sound here.

The audio is taken back in and post processed. The effects here should be the same as plugging an analog synth into your soundcard and running some VST effects over them. And why wouldn't it be? You have a basic analog synth here, supplimented with a great deal of very flexable digital effects. Think of it as the world's most affordable, easy to set up, analog sounding modular synth, with tons of effects.

I don't see how this can go wrong. But you tell me, do you still think this is going to sound the same as a VSTi, or are we finally getting some analog sound?

Can I make a couple of points in your thread?

First. It isn't your thread. You just started it.

Second. There are any number of hardware synths that can be completely integrated into your sequencer.
Logic users have been doing this for years with sounddiver, and the new version of SX promises something similar.

Instead of all these pipedreams about dedicated filter boxes and oscillators you might want to see and hear what a decent patch editor and (e.g.) an oberheim matrix 1000 can do.

[tony tony chopper]

it just had an analog sound to me, that's all.

but can you define it?

I'm trying to replicate it, of course it's as hard as replicating any preset. But I don't know what you like in those 3 clips, I mean they sound lame to me, what do you like? Is it in the freq domain? Is it the vibrations?

[McLilith]

But I don't know what you like in those 3 clips, I mean they sound lame to me, what do you like?

If you are referring to the Polaris clips, those are just meant to be a very quick and dirty comparison of two different sampling rates. They aren't meant to sound impressive on their own. It appears that I at least succeeded in that regard.

[seamoss]

it just had an analog sound to me, that's all.

but can you define it?

I'm trying to replicate it, of course it's as hard as replicating any preset. But I don't know what you like in those 3 clips, I mean they sound lame to me, what do you like? Is it in the freq domain? Is it the vibrations?

I am not sure if it freq domain or inconsistency....or maybe some type of harmonics. i am not a sound technician so there is no elaborate answer that i can give.

those clips may have sounded lame to you but I don't think that he was trying to have some "kewl" clips. he was just making 44.1/96 comparisons.

take a listen to pink floyd's "machine" track and see if you think those analog synths can be created digitally. maybe they can? I would love to hear it, if they could.

i am not knocking vsti synths because...honestly...i love them. i wouldn't be here if i didn't