What is analog sound? Examples plz

[FapFilter]

it really depends...
i can't recall hearing/reading too many complaints regarding a Juno 6 not sounding very analog, despite being a DCO synth

[j wazza]

I don't understand the insecurity that drives people to try and defend DCOs as pure analog. It's nuts that anyone can dismiss the contribution of temporal variance when the very manufacturers that have built DCO based synths have tried to convince you that you're getting a "true analog signal path" put extensive effort into trying to simulate that temporal variance digitally.

i dont remember anyone saying dcos are fully analog, maybe someone did but it stands for digitally controlled oscillator, but many synths with dcos eg juno have an analog signal path after the oscillator,
the drift is a big part of the sound though yeah, i guess the true analog drift just means it is actually analog drift, not modelled digitally, but for something like pitch drift it should be possible to emulate it pretty much perfectly

[fmr]

I don't understand the insecurity that drives people to try and defend DCOs as pure analog. It's nuts that anyone can dismiss the contribution of temporal variance when the very manufacturers that have built DCO based synths have tried to convince you that you're getting a "true analog signal path" put extensive effort into trying to simulate that temporal variance digitally.

i dont remember anyone saying dcos are fully analog, maybe someone did but it stands for digitally controlled oscillator, but many synths with dcos eg juno have an analog signal path after the oscillator,
the drift is a big part of the sound though yeah, i guess the true analog drift just means it is actually analog drift, not modelled digitally, but for something like pitch drift it should be possible to emulate it pretty much perfectly

The signal isn't analog just AFTER the oscillator, but also IN the oscillator. The only digital part is the controlling clock. The signal generator IS analog. Drifting was a curse, and far from being desirable (I remember it well). That's why DCOs were created. Yes, it was a BIG PART of the analog signal (unfortunately - glad we got rid of that). My MKS-80 even has a button just to retune the oscillators.

If I want an oscillator to go out of tune, I want to be in control of that.

[BertKoor]

Same wit delays. Bucket brigades sounded lofi. Digital delays were a blessing. And now we crave for the lofi sound again

[ghettosynth]

I don't understand the insecurity that drives people to try and defend DCOs as pure analog. It's nuts that anyone can dismiss the contribution of temporal variance when the very manufacturers that have built DCO based synths have tried to convince you that you're getting a "true analog signal path" put extensive effort into trying to simulate that temporal variance digitally.

i dont remember anyone saying dcos are fully analog, maybe someone did but it stands for digitally controlled oscillator, but many synths with dcos eg juno have an analog signal path after the oscillator,
the drift is a big part of the sound though yeah, i guess the true analog drift just means it is actually analog drift, not modelled digitally, but for something like pitch drift it should be possible to emulate it pretty much perfectly

From the last page.

Exactly. DCOs are also featured in the Juno-60, the JX-3P, the JX-8P and the JX-10, and nobody ever said those are "digital", or "hybrid". DCO means "digitally CONTROLLED" which means they have a more precise oscillation, and don't drift (go out of tune) as the VCOs. But they are still analog.

DCOs are a hybrid digital/analog circuit. VCOs are (typically) a fully analog circuit. Junos do not model "pitch drift" in any form whatsoever, neither does the Matrix 1000, JX-10, JX-8p, MKS-30, or in fact, the vast majority of vintage polysynths, even those with more than one oscillator.

This is exactly what I mean by the insecurity. You can't help yourselves but to defend DCOs like they're your sister's honor. It's a f**king sound generator, it uses a digital clock, regurgitating marketing speak isn't going to change anything about the circuit. You can look at the circuit, you can see that there's only a digital clock followed by a digital programmable divider that drives an integrator. The SUB output is a pure digital circuit, there's not amplitude adjustment nor is there a waveshaper there.

[j wazza]

DCOs are a hybrid digital/analog circuit. VCOs are (typically) a fully analog circuit. Junos do not model "pitch drift" in any form whatsoever, neither does the Matrix 1000, JX-10, JX-8p, MKS-30, or in fact, the vast majority of vintage polysynths, even those with more than one oscillator.

This is exactly what I mean by the insecurity. You can't help yourselves but to defend DCOs like they're your sister's honor. It's a f**king sound generator, it uses a digital clock, regurgitating marketing speak isn't going to change anything about the circuit. You can look at the circuit, you can see that there's only a digital clock followed by a digital programmable divider that drives an integrator. The SUB output is a pure digital circuit, there's not amplitude adjustment nor is there a waveshaper there.

at the bit in bold, i havent seen anyone 'defending' dcos, or even anyone attacking dcos, fmrs last post is saying the same thing as you and im not disagreeing with you either

[ghettosynth]

I don't understand the insecurity that drives people to try and defend DCOs as pure analog. It's nuts that anyone can dismiss the contribution of temporal variance when the very manufacturers that have built DCO based synths have tried to convince you that you're getting a "true analog signal path" put extensive effort into trying to simulate that temporal variance digitally.

i dont remember anyone saying dcos are fully analog, maybe someone did but it stands for digitally controlled oscillator, but many synths with dcos eg juno have an analog signal path after the oscillator,
the drift is a big part of the sound though yeah, i guess the true analog drift just means it is actually analog drift, not modelled digitally, but for something like pitch drift it should be possible to emulate it pretty much perfectly

The signal isn't analog just AFTER the oscillator, but also IN the oscillator. The only digital part is the controlling clock. The signal generator IS analog.

No, this is again not correct. It is more correct to say that the only analog part is the integrator and even that's only partially true. The integrator isn't an oscillator. In fact, even the integrator is a hybrid circuit that doesn't work correctly without a DAC to drive the amplitude adjustment. The vast majority of the circuit is digital. The sub is a pure digital output. The entire audio frequency oscillator is a digital pulse generator. We don't refer to that as the "clock."

Drifting was a curse, and far from being desirable (I remember it well). That's why DCOs were created. Yes, it was a BIG PART of the analog signal (unfortunately - glad we got rid of that). My MKS-80 even has a button just to retune the oscillators.

If I want an oscillator to go out of tune, I want to be in control of that.

You can have whatever opinion you want about which is better but that doesn't make a DCO an analog circuit. So, like it or not, if you want to argue what "sounds analog" then you have to accept that an analog oscillator has pitch variation. You are just saying in any number of ways, that you like the sound of digital because it's stable.

BTW: There's a huge difference between just having some pitch variation and being out of tune. That variation, that movement, is a part of why people who like analog, like VCOs.

[dark water]

DCO or VCO?

bands.jpg

But which is better?



There's only one way to find out... FIGHT!!!






ps, both of these used to be analog sounds before uploading to YT


pps, I'm not here (again, again...)

[j wazza]

actually youre all wrong, dco stands for dc offset which is 100% analog, anyone who disagrees has no self esteem

[vurt]

actually youre all wrong, dco stands for dc offset which is 100% analog, anyone who disagrees has no self esteem

idiot.
its a misspelling of disco.
which is where they use synthesisers.

[ghettosynth]

actually youre all wrong, dco stands for dc offset which is 100% analog, anyone who disagrees has no self esteem

idiot.
its a misspelling of disco.
which is where they use synthesisers.

Ah, this is where the phrase disco sucks comes from then. In the early to mid seventies all analog synths used VCOs and disco was funky. Unfortunately, for synths and disco, by the late 70s early 80s the trend was towards DCOs and disco took a turn for the worse because it lost all of its vibe and mojo. By 83 when Yamaha came out with the fully digital DX7, it was all downhill as digital robbed the soul of all music. Nothing would be right again until grunge in the 90s, which is music made from marihuana. The characteristic gravely sound is a byproduct of sore throats from smoking too much and, of course, the sloppy meandering "music" is also a result of, well, smoking too much.

[vurt]

actually youre all wrong, dco stands for dc offset which is 100% analog, anyone who disagrees has no self esteem

idiot.
its a misspelling of disco.
which is where they use synthesisers.

Ah, this is where the phrase disco sucks comes from then. In the early to mid seventies all analog synths used VCOs and disco was funky. Unfortunately, for synths and disco, by the late 70s early 80s the trend was towards DCOs and disco took a turn for the worse because it lost all of its vibe and mojo. By 83 when Yamaha came out with the fully digital DX7, it was all downhill as digital robbed the soul of all music. Nothing would be right again until grunge in the 90s, which is music made from marihuana. The characteristic gravely sound is a byproduct of sore throats from smoking too much and, of course, the sloppy meandering "music" is also a result of, well, smoking too much.

exactly!
which is why all modern music made with plugins in daws, smells of crotch sweat and roller discos.

[HAL76]

Discussing sound is like talking about mankind and really makes me afraid, especially since the level of generalization is too high to even come close to alternative truths.

I´m out here.

[MadDogE134]

sorry not gonna bother trying to give audio examples but i will try to explain 'analog' sound.

with old gear where every component ran on electricity there were tolerances (+/-) for each component and to pass manufacture specification they had to function within those ranges hence imparting non-linear inconsistencies (slightly random outputs and resistances) across every component and with thousands of components making a circuit there were slight fluctuation of the sound and no two units sounded the same even from the same manufacturer.

also THD came from all these components (Total Harmonic Distortion) which in those days was a bad thing and was constantly fought. most all units stated THD rating as a selling point. the lower the distortion level the 'better' the unit and the higher the asking price. i think we ALL know how too much distortion sounds lol

so back to today ITB is nearly far removed of all that added distortion hence why so many call it sterile, flat or clean. and with the cleanliness of ITB we found an affection to the old hardware. it gave a fatter, thicker sound from the distortion (saturation) so developers have strived to put it back in but controllable down to 2nd and 3rd harmonics etc.

so in the end... developers of today's plugins try their best to put back the imperfections like inconsistencies and harmonic distortions thus advertising 'analog' sound

cheers

[fmr]

The signal isn't analog just AFTER the oscillator, but also IN the oscillator. The only digital part is the controlling clock. The signal generator IS analog.

No, this is again not correct. It is more correct to say that the only analog part is the integrator and even that's only partially true. The integrator isn't an oscillator. In fact, even the integrator is a hybrid circuit that doesn't work correctly without a DAC to drive the amplitude adjustment. The vast majority of the circuit is digital. The sub is a pure digital output. The entire audio frequency oscillator is a digital pulse generator. We don't refer to that as the "clock."

I don't understand what is that "integrator" you are talking? Here is the circuit diagram of the signal generator od the Juno DCO (as published in that article which link you posted):

JunoDCOwaveshaper.png

As we can clearly see, there is a clock input from the microprocessor, AND there is a CV (AFAIK, this stand for Control Voltage) in a component called "Analogue Switch 4052". It's this switch which is going to feed the signal generator, which (again) contains a PWM generator (fed by a PWM CV) and another signal generator (which I presume is the saw generator). Up there it's the sub-oscillator, which also receives from the same CV of the "Analogue Switch 4052". These are then routed to the output, which will feed the filter (again - analog). To me, all this seems analog, contrary to what you are stating. What am I missing?