Sylenth1 teaser on Facebook

[pdxindy]

In addition to an infinite sample rate, analogue (actual existence) is arbitrarily complex. Digital is absurdly simple by comparison. It takes a lot of cpu power to even begin to model that complexity.

The usual online video/audio comparisons are always skewed towards simplicity. Play a simple static note on an analogue and then emulate it with the digital version. For this, digital is pretty damn impressive these days... basically identical.

But when you start tweaking, modulating, and pushing into more complex territory, then there is a clear audible difference.

Then again, doesn't the "infinite sampling rate advantage" disappear as soon as you record and playback an analog synth via some digital device like computer and DAW? Any device which has A/D and/or D/A converters? (Which might also be why some people keep saying music recorded on tape machines sounded better, I suppose.)

No, those are different things... with a digital synth, you are calculating in realtime and bumping up against sample rate boundaries. With recording you are only dealing with a straight signal.

[Teksonik]

Obviously you are unaware of the issues with analog/digital conversion and the meaning of zero delay feedback.

Obviously you are quite mistaken........newbie...........

[Teksonik]

I don't want to spend the time to put together such a comparison. If you are interested, go down to a local shop (if you have one) and do an hour or two of experimenting. The difference is obvious.

I used to work in a music shop during the analog/mid digital era. Of course long before VSTi's. If they existed back then we would have had a hard time selling many hardware synths.......

In addition to an infinite sample rate, analogue (actual existence) is arbitrarily complex. Digital is absurdly simple by comparison. It takes a lot of cpu power to even begin to model that complexity.

Define "complex". It's just another mythical analog Unicorn right along with "warmth". What you have to understand is that not all people consider the analog myth worth even trying to emulate. Softsynths are superior so why dumb them down by trying to emulate the flaws of analog hardware ?

But when you start tweaking, modulating, and pushing into more complex territory, then there is a clear audible difference.

A difference you're not able to prove........that's ok but around here we call that talking smack......

[Teksonik]

You can easily spend that much on a guitar as well... which also has 6 notes of polyphony.

Really ? That's the best you can do ? Apples/Oranges

We can also pay sub $1000 for a guitar and make it sound better.

[Teksonik]

That is not drivel... Lotuzia is right. Analogue is immediate and simultaneous. Digital is not because there are calculations that take time.

Yes it is drivel.......How much time does it take ? Because we all know that electricity travels faster in analog systems.
Once again it's nothing but smoke and mirrors. "Immediate and simultaneous" is just another Unicorn.

Go ahead and pay silly prices for crippled hardware that doesn't sound as good as softsynths if that's what makes you feel good.

I'm just a lot more practical than that............but have fun either way.

[T-CM11]

Go ahead and pay silly prices for crippled hardware that doesn't sound as good as softsynths if that's what makes you feel good.

If you want to make the logical arguments (or break down the opposite), you'd want to omit the terms "good" or "bad" because they have no objective meaning.
Anyway... popcorn time!

[Teksonik]

If you want to make the logical arguments (or break down the opposite), you'd want to omit the terms "good" or "bad" because they have no objective meaning.
Anyway... popcorn time!

Why ? Analog Fanbois are always trumpeting how much better Hardware is than Software but if one makes the opposite argument they are handcuffed by the terms they can use ?

Anyway all kidding aside obviously there are differences between analog and digital circuits it's just my opinion that those differences are a detriment to Analog not a benefit. No one has been able to prove differently and trotting out mythical beasts and obscure concepts of time and space do nothing to reinforce their arguments.

Ok I'm off to work now in the never ending 24/7 circus that is Vegas so I'll just leave it at this........have fun.

[T-CM11]

Why ? Analog Fanbois are always trumpeting how much better Hardware is than Software but if one makes the opposite argument they are handcuffed by the terms they can use ?

There's no logic in Fanbois, whatever side they're on.

[wagtunes]

Why ? Analog Fanbois are always trumpeting how much better Hardware is than Software but if one makes the opposite argument they are handcuffed by the terms they can use ?

There's no logic in Fanbois, whatever side they're on.

Well, having used both hardware and software I'm not a fanboy. I just look at the two sides objectively as far as what each brings to the table pro and con and then make my buying decisions based on what I feel is more important for me.

Hardware - Heavier than software, more expensive than software, space consuming, in general sounds great depending on what hardware you get. Some sound better than others.

Software - Weightless, cheaper than hardware, consumes no space other then the size of your PC, in general sounds great depending on what software you get. Some sound better than others.

For someone like me on a budget, doesn't like to carry things around and has very little space for keyboards and racks, software is the no brainer choice. It's why I sold all my hardware. Imagine trying to duplicate over 100 VSTs in hardware. I'd need a warehouse.

Okay, this is what works for me. Everybody is different and therefore everybody has their own needs. But the overall general traits of each type of synth, as I've outlined them above, cannot be disputed. They are indeed facts. How important those facts are to each individual, that's something entirely different. To me, they are very important and in fact deal breakers because of my current situation.

[Kriminal]

I like the sound of both. I prefer to use a hardware synth, that has tons of knobs/sliders as it's immediate. A mouse doesnt cut it. All the old and new analogues ive used had no issues. They were well looked after.

[wagtunes]

I like the sound of both. I prefer to use a hardware synth, that has tons of knobs/sliders as it's immediate. A mouse doesnt cut it. All the old and new analogues ive used had no issues. They were well looked after.

That was the one thing about hardware that was fun, turning all the knobs and moving all the sliders in real time so even without modulation routings (the real old stuff) you could change your sound on the fly if you were really good at it. And I do miss the feel and look of some of the synths, especially the Oberheim stuff.

What I don't miss is having to lug that stuff around and needing a whole room to store it. I also don't miss the tens of thousands of dollars I spent on virtually a dozen synths, if that. In fact, over the course of 30 plus years before I finally sold everything, I don't even want to know how much money I spent on all the hardware I had. I think I could have easily bought a house instead.

[fluffy_little_something]

No, those are different things... with a digital synth, you are calculating in realtime and bumping up against sample rate boundaries. With recording you are only dealing with a straight signal.

What I mean is, whatever we hear is the final thing, and whatever the origin, if played back through a digital device it has been subjected to sampling and conversion.
I agree that the direct output of an analog synth will sound slightly better than that of a plugin. However, the programmers of good plugins are certainly aware of the ways the individual components of a hardware synth interact with each other, and they will try to emulate that as well. Even in hardware there is a signal flow, it's not that the signal is present everywhere at once in some magical omnipresent way, but it goes from a to b to c etc., which are separate hardware components. And good programmers can recreate electrical interactions and fluctuations as well. It is not magic, but simply old-fashioned physics, that can be described as formulas and thus programmed as well. So they can employ sophisticated algorithms etc, which of course will consume more CPU, but still, it can be done. Maybe it's already possible to recreate real analog feel in software, but its prohibitive CPU usage is in the way.

[pdxindy]

I don't want to spend the time to put together such a comparison. If you are interested, go down to a local shop (if you have one) and do an hour or two of experimenting. The difference is obvious.

I used to work in a music shop during the analog/mid digital era. Of course long before VSTi's. If they existed back then we would have had a hard time selling many hardware synths.......

The advantages of digital outweighed those of analogue for the majority of people... that does not mean there weren't/aren't any.

[bmrzycki]

In addition to an infinite sample rate, analogue (actual existence) is arbitrarily complex.

Then again, doesn't the "infinite sampling rate advantage" disappear as soon as you record and playback an analog synth via some digital device like computer and DAW?

Fluffy, you're quite right. Using the words "sampling rate" for anything that isn't a digital signal is literally meaningless.
If the intention was to say that analog hardware is not band-limited then that's also incorrect too. What we call sound is just energy vibrations within a certain frequency range on the electro magnetic spectrum. Every conceivable sound is a thin sliver in the audio section of the below graph:


And even if we disregard that, our ears are, by definition, a band-limited system. No matter what we hear, what source it comes from (digital, analog, a bird, radio waves from stars, etc) they fall within a band of 20Hz to 20kHz, for most people.

Saying analog synths are better than digital is really no different than saying coke is better than pepsi because it is older, more established, tastes "crisper" and "lighter" and on and on. It's nothing more than a personal preference.

[pdxindy]

But when you start tweaking, modulating, and pushing into more complex territory, then there is a clear audible difference.

A difference you're not able to prove........that's ok but around here we call that talking smack......

The worlds scientific body considers human caused climate change a settled fact... that does not stop lots of right wing freaks from denying it for ideological reasons...

The differences with analogue are also provable... but that doesn't mean you would ever acknowledge it cause you are a zealot with an ideological position.