Tal J-8

[vertibration]

Blowhard? You are the one boasting that you have a $4500 Prophet LMAO

[[nx]]

LMAO says people who dont own expensive hardware.

No way in hell does any software sound as good as hardware. Y'all on some koolaid thinkin like that.

I feel like you must be trolling. You are the one who smugly brought up expensive hardware. Software vs Hardware is the lamest debate ever. You may as well argue that the color blue is 100% objectively better than green. Go make some music.

[vertibration]

Why is it lame? It seems to be lame for those who think software sounds just as good or better than analog hardware. I guess I would think its lame too if I had bad ears. Fortunately I dont. I have good ears, and I have the ability to hear that analog sounds better than software

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

Blowhard? You are the one boasting that you have a $4500 Prophet LMAO

I wasn't boasting. You made the point of calling out "expensive hardware" so I wanted to make sure it met your criteria. Maybe that's peanuts for you and only a vintage Jupiter-8 qualifies or an 8k Moog One. You still haven't said what "expensive hardware" synths you have and personally compared to software instruments, which I asked you about and you ignored.

Because it sounds like you don't know what you're talking about or imaging things. Just sayin'...

[[nx]]

My point is that it's completely subjective. Hardware sounds the best to you and that's great but that doesn't mean that's the case for everyone. Ultimately, It's not about the tools you have, its how you use them. You can use the the most expensive "best" sounding analog synth of all time (whatever that means), that doesn't mean your music is inevitably going to be the best.

[vertibration]

Moogs, Dave Smith synths, Ive previously owned the evolvers, and have other synths now. Lots of eurorack as well (make noise, mutable, industrial E).

It doesnt matter in the slightest what I have, or had.

Its a fact jack. Analog sounds better. You WERE boasting though, and its ok if you wanna boast on KVR. I know its a safe place for people to feel important when they have to validate their opinions by telling everyone they own expensive hardware and have compared it to software

[[nx]]

I know its a safe place for people to feel important when they have to validate their opinions by telling everyone they own expensive hardware and have compared it to software

100% agree

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

You WERE boasting though, and its ok if you wanna boast on KVR. I know its a safe place for people to feel important when they have to validate their opinions by telling everyone they own expensive hardware and have compared it to software

You're the one who brought up "expensive hardware" and I was responding to your post.

LMAO says people who dont own expensive hardware.

No way in hell does any software sound as good as hardware. Y'all on some koolaid thinkin like that.

Or did you already forget that thing you said in writing a few days ago already?

[rezoneight]

Why is it lame? It seems to be lame for those who think software sounds just as good or better than analog hardware. I guess I would think its lame too if I had bad ears. Fortunately I dont. I have good ears, and I have the ability to hear that analog sounds better than software

Hey Timmy can you take your ball and go elsewhere? This thread is about the TAL J-8, not your opinion on hardware vs. software or boasting about how great your ears are (show us the tests to prove it otherwise stfu man).

[rezoneight]

Its a fact jack. Analog sounds better. You WERE boasting though, and its ok if you wanna boast on KVR. I know its a safe place for people to feel important when they have to validate their opinions by telling everyone they own expensive hardware and have compared it to software

The only really relevant item of comparison in this thread is the OG J-8. Do you have one? Did you compare it to TAL J-8? Patrick does and did

[Arashi]

Agreed - I theoretically could build a 4 voice 106 in Modular but let me tell you that is not a pleasant experience and the CPU is through the roof.

I also recently got the Roland Cloud Ultimate with Lifetime Keys. Sound is very good but those UIs - terrible.

The UIs are clunky for sure, and the CPU usage of the poly synth plugins is horrendous. Not only do they use way more CPU than the TAL, Arturia, and Softube plugins (which I think are all comparable to Roland's emulations), but they have unexplained random CPU spikes that practically guarantee occasional dropouts, which is really annoying. My theory is their ACB plugins were all written to run on the custom DSP chips they use in the System-1/8 and boutiques, and when you use them on a computer, they're sitting on top of an emulator. I guess that's the price of being able to run exactly the same emulations on different hardware, but it makes me turn to other emulations when I want to use them as plugins.

I do like Roland Cloud overall, but I mostly stick to the mono synths and digital stuff and use my System-8 for the poly synths.

[Arashi]

Its a fact jack. Analog sounds better.

It's not a fact. It's an outdated myth. Many of us who own analog synths have compared them with recent emulations and found them to be incredibly good…sometimes nearly indistinguishable from the hardware, or at least well past the point where the differences even matter.

Korg's ARP Odyssey plugin (to pick one example) sounds so close to the hardware (I have both) that I forget which is which and have to look at my screen to see which track is selected in my DAW.

Getting back to the topic of this thread, we now have several Jupiter-8 emulations that are not just excellent, but surpass the original with features like velocity response. TAL J-8 also has a stereo spread feature that adds another dimension to the sound.

If you just want a simple maxim like "analog sounds better", by all means, believe whatever you want. But expect people to push back if you try to peddle that as the truth, because it's simply not the case.

[rezoneight]

Its a fact jack. Analog sounds better.

It's not a fact. It's an outdated myth.

But his golden ears man! His golden ears!

[Erik_Lucas]

Statements like "analog sounds better" can't be confirmed. However, statements like "analog signals are continuous" or "digital signals are comprised of discontinuous time variables" are statements that can be confirmed.

The fact is, there ARE differences between digital and analog. I have yet to find a software synthesizer that can do resonance like the analog filter in my ARP 2600M, for example. Another example is FPGA technology in digital hardware synthesizers like the Novation Peak (https://novationmusic.com/en/peak-explained) which ensures less aliasing. You can't find a software synthesizer like that.

The question is whether the difference is worth it. I am of the opinion that even if the listener isn't able to articulate the 'higher functions' of audio (like what aliasing is, what a digital synthesizer is, or what oversampling does to a signal), their ears are still picking up on the differences. This might lead them to perceive the song/sound as 'higher quality', but they won't be able to tell you why.

[ATS]

The idea that software is better than hardware is a tough pill to swallow when you spent thousands on hardware.