Emulations - Architecture vs. real emulation

[blümchen]

If you want to know more about emulating actual circuitry, you might want to check my paper on emulating the Moog filter: http://dafx04.na.infn.it/WebProc/Proc/P_061.pdf

Hi antti,

are you planning on a complete Mini emulation of your own? I really like your ASynth and think a fully blown antti Mini would be worth it. What do you think?


kybernaut

What exactly would it be worth?
I think, that's finally the question. But I could be wrong.

.

[jmh]

Aah. The Phoscyon thingy probably ...

Nope

JMH

[Highvoltage]

I think what is more interesting here, that better digital hardware, like my old roland jd990, or korg prophecy still sounds much better and 'harder' than any software. at least they have a character that instantly differs them from software.

and its quite strange for they use dsp and digital algorythms. any ideas? or its just my ears?

[blümchen]

I think what is more interesting here, that better digital hardware, like my old roland jd990, or korg prophecy still sounds much better and 'harder' than any software. at least they have a character that instantly differs them from software.

and its quite strange for they use dsp and digital algorythms. any ideas? or its just my ears?

That's in fact true. But meight also very much depend from the soundcard you use inside your computer.

Those hardware instruments often use spezialized circuits to transform the internal digital signal into analog signals (if analog outputs are used).

On the other side, there is unique knowledgement and some internal secrets used by those companies to generate the digital sound synthesis. He he.

I mean, that's just a general significant difference to the hobbyist VSTi market, where 80% of the oscillators and filters base on one and the same (SE) algorithm ...

I use an Yamaha AN1x as master keyboard at home, and I have to say, that even that relatively cheep VA hardware synth (I got it for less than 500 Euro some years ago) sounds much more pressurefull than any software synth with approximately the same feature set. (But I also use a middle cheep (Audigy) soundcard with my home computer.)

The "hardware myth"...

.

[tomg]

Sorry, if I completely demotivated you. But that is for me a total disappointment. And it even shows, that I am not that wrong with my thesis above, which is by the way based on analysis of equipment.

But you gave it away for free. That's honorable!
But please don't tell the people, who have never listened to a real analog hardware synthesizer, that you made a simulation of such. Because you didn't.
That's actually the point we discussed here. The nice screen cannot compensate the total lack of sound quality.

Sorry again.

I don't think you have an argument with me. I said if you want a P-600 you have to buy a P-600. Software is not going to get it. The very best emulation you can buy may be close but it is still second rate. Don't expect C++ to sound like transistors and ICs. It won't. That was the point. Ether I explained it badly or you missed it.

If you had a P-600 to AB with you would see that all 100 factory patches are programmed into the emulator and some of them are damned close, even using SE to build it with. (Search around KVR for P-600 owners saying how close it is, you'll find 'em. ) Close enough to call it a working emulator. And that was that point. (2 different points, got it?)

If you can program a factory patch and it works you have an emulator if it doesn't work it's not an emulator it's something else.... Maybe tribute?

Regards

[blümchen]

Well. Right.
I don't own a P600.

But it is a fact, that if the original hardware sounds like your plugin, then it is probably the most worse sounding hardware synthesizer ever.

That is really my impression.
Especially the low key ranges sound terrible week for any "analog" or even "virtual analog".

But I don't believe that for some reasons. (It would be hard to make an analog oscillator sounding that weak) ...

I don't think, that it should be called seriously an "emulation".

Especially, because on that website (where your plugin is hosted) is an entire brunch of such SE "emulations" available (for purchase), which are probably all made with the same set of oscillators and filters.

I think, it is actually a bad game, to make an entire "bussines" out of such primitive SE "mass production" and claiming to produce "emulations of classic analog hardware synthesizers". That has nothing common with serious VST developent and nothing common with serious distribution politics. The reason is very obvious- selling on base of wrong claims.

Hopefully the people will recognice that fake, before they spend allot of money for a wrong "imagination".

I am not gernerally against selling SE plugins. But I am infact against selling plugins which merely have the name of an classic analog synthesizer - only for the reason to sell anything - not even sounding approximately close to that original.

I am even against using the name and appearance of the original in that case if it is freeware. Develop what you want, but please dont't "decorate" you with the honor of others ...

.

[tomg]

Well. Right.
I don't own a P600.

But it is a fact, that if the original hardware sounds like your plugin, then it is probably the most worse sounding hardware synthesizer ever.

I am not gernerally against selling SE plugins. But I am infact against selling plugins which merely have the name of an classic analog synthesizer - only for the reason to sell anything - not even sounding approximately close to that original.

I am even against using the name and appearance of the original in that case if it is freeware. Develop what you want, but please dont't "decorate" you with the honor of others ...

.

That's not what I said... See if you can follow this.

It sounds "close enough" to "sound something like" "the factory patch" when you program "the factory patch" on the synth. It's a "poor second" but a "usable poor second" and worth every bit of the $15 lousy bucks I used to charge for it.

Will it replace a $700 P-600 in a mix? In some cases absolutly, in some other situations absolutly not! Just like all emuations of hardware devices.

If you want the sound of a Mini, Prophet or whatever you still have to get the hardware. Or you can use a resonably close emulator to get resonably close and that's all you get!!

Frankly I don't care what anybody thinks of me selling my SE products but Jeff and he said it was OK years ago. So... I'll do as I damn well please until the commies take over.

Regards

[jens]

korg prophecy still sounds much better and 'harder' than any software.

the Phrophecy is nothing else than software running on a dedicated hardware-box...

[crimsontider]

pustekuchen,
I for one am enjoying your commentary
Could I get your comments on a few emulations?

Korg Legacy's MS-20 and Polysix, Arturia's Moog's and CS-80V, and what company that you consider to do the most accurate emulations.

Wonder if Arturia emulated the transistor ladder circuit
in their MiniMoogV.

I tend to believe that most SE creations are not really complete emulations of the hardware but the sound that the hardware makes. Take Superwave-Performer for instance. Some of the presets do a good job of emulating the sound of some classic analog synths but once your start moving filters and envelopes the emulation is gone. So maybe the emulation definition needs to be more specific to include sound, controls and total emulations?

Worse Analog Keyboard?
http://users.informatik.haw-hamburg.de/ ... el_7A.html

[snooky]

I think Asynth is very close to the analog sound...

[vmartell]

Thnx for the comments.
I did not want to initiate the thread and then dissappear... I guess my original post wanted to ask two questions:

1.- Is the architecture the defining factor in the sound of a synth? If the answer is yes, that could mean that all those SE synths or Reaktor ensembles are closer to the real thing that we would like to admit. However the consensus seems to be that it is not the case... I tend to agree, at least when doing direct AB between the real thing and the Reaktor or SE thing.

2.- However, would it come across in a mix, with drums, lead and backing vocals and probaby guitar, strings, etc? Would anyone know the real when listening on FM radio? What about an MP3 encoded at 128?

3.- Of course I would rather own the real thing... like one of those Korg monsters in the PS series... or maybe a Macbeth M5 - now, there's one to think about: a synth with an ARP-like sound architecture with a Moog-like sound...

V

[shamann]

I think what is more interesting here, that better digital hardware, like my old roland jd990, or korg prophecy still sounds much better and 'harder' than any software.

I have a Prophecy. I like it, but it doesn't sound any better a lot of the software I have. In some cases, some of the software sounds better.

[setAI]

Software is not going to get it. The very best emulation you can buy may be close but it is still second rate. Don't expect C++ to sound like transistors and ICs. It won't. That was the point.

LOL! well then- explain to me just how VAZ Modular- a software synth- stands as the undisputed BEST sounding analog emulation in software OR HARDWARE? and even better than some genuine analogs?

[tomg]

Software is not going to get it. The very best emulation you can buy may be close but it is still second rate. Don't expect C++ to sound like transistors and ICs. It won't. That was the point.

LOL! well then- explain to me just how VAZ Modular- a software synth- stands as the undisputed BEST sounding analog emulation in software OR HARDWARE? and even better than some genuine analogs?

It doesn't. It's "very close" but it's still software with a finite sample rate. To actually recreate the sound of hardware you need an infinate sample rate. We can't do that yet.

Regards

[droolmaster0]

Software is not going to get it. The very best emulation you can buy may be close but it is still second rate. Don't expect C++ to sound like transistors and ICs. It won't. That was the point.

LOL! well then- explain to me just how VAZ Modular- a software synth- stands as the undisputed BEST sounding analog emulation in software OR HARDWARE? and even better than some genuine analogs?

It doesn't. It's "very close" but it's still software with a finite sample rate. To actually recreate the sound of hardware you need an infinate sample rate. We can't do that yet.

Regards

that is pretty much pure nonsense. An "infinite sample rate"? Once you get past the ability of the human ear/brain to discern, it doesn't matter. what exactly that point is, I don't know, but to claim that it is infinite is ridiculous.

Plus, in fact, Vax Modular sounds fantastic. I'm not concerned with whether I or someone else could differentiate it from a real analog. It certainly sounds better than many analogs, despite its 'finite' sample rate.