KVR Audio

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:24 pm

Re: AKAT-1 differential equation-solving analog computer: Please tell me that's just been photoshopped, that nobody spraypainted the poor thing.

Mutant · Post by **Mutant** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:55 pm

Meffy wrote:Re: AKAT-1 differential equation-solving analog computer: Please tell me that's just been photoshopped, that nobody spraypainted the poor thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacek_Karpi%C5%84ski

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:00 pm

Yes, I know. Just hoping the photo has been altered. It would be a shame for a historic computing device to get (IMO) ruined that way. My suspicion is that it's been 'shopped, or perhaps weirdly lit (though the latter doesn't seem as likely).

ouroboros · Post by **ouroboros** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:04 pm

instagramed?

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:05 pm

Meffy wrote:Yes, I know. Just hoping the photo has been altered. It would be a shame for a historic computing device to get (IMO) ruined that way. My suspicion is that it's been 'shopped, or perhaps weirdly lit (though the latter doesn't seem as likely).

It looks to me like it's just lit strangely.

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:07 pm

Teksonik wrote:
zerocrossing wrote: So, it's not wrong to make music with software, but it is wrong to say it sounds as good as good hardware, because that's just not true.
Bullshit.....and I've owned both....I no longer use dedicated hardware because it's crap.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but a lot of hardware is crap. A lot of it is just software with dedicated hardware, i.e. a plugin in a box.

Mutant · Post by **Mutant** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:28 pm

Meffy wrote:Yes, I know.

Look at the photo at that wiki page.
Same angle, same watermark, different shade.
So surely photoshopped most probably using the "variations" function.

Vectorman · Post by **Vectorman** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:37 pm

I no longer believe that just because a synth is analog that it's automatic magic. I recently bought another Moog LP (to replace one I sold last year) and, using it side by side with DIVA, I just wasn't that impressed with the LP anymore and sent it back. DIVA can do Moogy bass about as well as the Phatty can, IMO - I had them dialed in close enough that when I did two mixes of a new track -one with the LP bass, one with DIVA - they both worked equally well and it just didn't make a damn. It's made me start re-thinking which analog synths are really worth messing with for me in 2012.

Meffy · Post by **Meffy** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 5:39 pm

Ah, didn't notice the watermark. I'm relieved then.

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:21 pm

thecontrolcentre wrote:
zerocrossing wrote:I'd also never buy an MPC or some relic Atari system.
What about one of these?

I hear Fatboy's got one

Oh hell yeah I'd buy that.

I'd wear a vintage suit ala Don Draper and sip martinis next to it until I puked and then restart the entire process. I'd never use it to make music though. That would be silly.

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:22 pm

Vectorman wrote:I no longer believe that just because a synth is analog that it's automatic magic. I recently bought another Moog LP (to replace one I sold last year) and, using it side by side with DIVA, I just wasn't that impressed with the LP anymore and sent it back. DIVA can do Moogy bass about as well as the Phatty can, IMO - I had them dialed in close enough that when I did two mixes of a new track -one with the LP bass, one with DIVA - they both worked equally well and it just didn't make a damn. It's made me start re-thinking which analog synths are really worth messing with for me in 2012.

In general, I agree. I do think that the little phatty can probably go places that Diva can't. But when you're talking about straightforward sounds, it's getting much more difficult to tell the difference.

Teksonik · Post by **Teksonik** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:42 pm

Vectorman wrote:I no longer believe that just because a synth is analog that it's automatic magic.

Bingo and we have a winner.........the Myth that ANALog is the Holy Grail of synthesis is just bullcrap. There is a new Gold Standard and the question should be "can dedicated hardware synths replicate what can be done with computer based synths".....the answer is no they can not.

Vectorman wrote: It's made me start re-thinking which analog synths are really worth messing with for me in 2012.

That would be none....they were outdated when I used to sell synths in the late 80's and are simply obsolete now. Time to move on people........

thecontrolcentre · Post by **thecontrolcentre** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:50 pm

Teksonik wrote:they were outdated when I used to sell synths in the late 80's and are simply obsolete now. Time to move on people........

No thanks. I like what my "outdated" analogs produce. YMMV but why the f**k would I care?

musikmachine · Post by **musikmachine** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:51 pm

Nah, i love my mopho, can't see myself ever selling it.

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:56 pm

Vectorman wrote:I no longer believe that just because a synth is analog that it's automatic magic. I recently bought another Moog LP (to replace one I sold last year) and, using it side by side with DIVA, I just wasn't that impressed with the LP anymore and sent it back. DIVA can do Moogy bass about as well as the Phatty can, IMO - I had them dialed in close enough that when I did two mixes of a new track -one with the LP bass, one with DIVA - they both worked equally well and it just didn't make a damn. It's made me start re-thinking which analog synths are really worth messing with for me in 2012.

I've got a Moog Slim Phatty and IMO they should have named it the Hardy, because it's strong point, for me at least, is it's harsher more biting tones. Over drive that filter and you're going to get a sound that Diva can't do by design. Urs wasn't going for that.

If you think it's close enough, good for you. You saved yourself some space and some money. A little search and I dug up this:

Ingonator wrote:I am only able to compare Diva to my Moog Slim Phatty and if i use no or only a slight amount of filter overload (=saturation/overdrive) in the Slim Phatty they sound very similar, maybe the Sli Phatty is a bit better in the low frequencies. If turn up the filter overload of the Slim Phatty it will blow Diva out of the water...
This could be compensated a bit with an external Drive FX like e.g. Schwa Oligarc Drive.

Here is a comparison i had done at the beginning of the public beta of Diva (zip includes WAV file):
https://rapidshare.com/files/1098043213 ... son_02.zip

At the beginning you hear Diva and a t 1:32 the Moog Slim Phatty starts. The Slim Phatty used 20% of filter overload.
At this comparison you have to remember that Diva recreates a Minimoog and no Slim Phatty so a difference was expected. Anyway you could get an idea how Diva sounds compared to a real analog synth.

I really love Diva but at the moment i don't feel like i really have to sell my Slim Phatty.

Download and listen to his example. To me, even on my $100 V-Moda headphones from the stock headphone out of a HP computer the difference is very clear. I'm sure it would be even more obvious on my home system with my decent audio interface and good monitors. Take some time to click back and forth between the two and you'll hear some weird phasiness or something on Diva. I'm discounting the fact that the Phatty example is a bit louder and seems bassier, You can hear what I'm talking about in the highs and mid tones as well. The high frequency is more muddy. Not as sweet sounding. The richness and solidness of the Moog is really super clear to me. This is what Mr. Slim is talking about. What I'm talking about can't be dialed out or fixed with programming. You may say it's too subtle to care about, but you can't deny it's there. Or I should say, you can deny it's there, but I will then think your hearing is not very good.

Fatboy Slim thoughts about software synths