indistinguishable from hardware ??
-
- KVRian
- 781 posts since 25 May, 2006
...uff, just fixed for newbies 
-
- KVRian
- 781 posts since 25 May, 2006
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
I just noticed I missed 3 from my choices (my 3 and 4 were in fact 4 and 5 respectively)
So my revised guesses: 1B, 2B, 3B, 4A, 5A are the original OBX
EDIT: and for 3 and 4 I prefer the one that I think is the OPX.
So my revised guesses: 1B, 2B, 3B, 4A, 5A are the original OBX
EDIT: and for 3 and 4 I prefer the one that I think is the OPX.
Last edited by hakey on Fri Nov 04, 2011 7:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
when you say "original", what are you referring to? it isn't possible to qualify something based upon an arbitrary standard.
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
-
- KVRian
- 1355 posts since 27 Oct, 2009
Yes, I'm sure you took good care in preparing these samples, which have to prove that your emulation is indistinguishable from the original.Peter999 wrote:Thank you
What about you, izonin, now? At least I posted these because of you...
-
- KVRian
- 781 posts since 25 May, 2006
@ aciddose: Original: OB-X, VSTi: OP-X PRO-II
@ izonin: Of course tried to come close, but they are not 100% identical from the settings
@ izonin: Of course tried to come close, but they are not 100% identical from the settings
-
- KVRAF
- 6323 posts since 30 Dec, 2004 from London uk
its obvious he cant tell and dosnt want to embarras himself by being wronghakey wrote:But, going on your posts in this thread, it really should be obvious to someone such as yourself, no?izonin wrote:I'm not falling for this.
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
I know, after all that hot air and bluster... hilarious!UltraJv wrote:its obvious he cant tell and dosnt want to embarras himself by being wronghakey wrote:But, going on your posts in this thread, it really should be obvious to someone such as yourself, no?izonin wrote:I'm not falling for this.
-
- KVRian
- 781 posts since 25 May, 2006
@ izonin: at least make a trial, then I will forgive you 
Again, I never said that hardware and software are indistinguishable, experts should be able to in these examples; I just said that it's not forcingly the case that one is poor and the other great
Again, I never said that hardware and software are indistinguishable, experts should be able to in these examples; I just said that it's not forcingly the case that one is poor and the other great
-
- KVRAF
- 4585 posts since 2 Nov, 2006
@Peter: it's not impossible to fake a sound. The problem is when you REALLY play an instrument. As soon as you tweak a knob you can hear the difference between a real analog and a soft synth.
I could link a piano sample and ask if it's real or fake... it would sound real to a lot of people, maybe professional pianists too. The problem is if you have to play it live.
I firmly believe that analog and virtual are two different kind of instruments and must be used each for its unique features.
I could link a piano sample and ask if it's real or fake... it would sound real to a lot of people, maybe professional pianists too. The problem is if you have to play it live.
I firmly believe that analog and virtual are two different kind of instruments and must be used each for its unique features.
-
- KVRAF
- 6372 posts since 8 Jun, 2009
What are you not falling for? You've claimed the sound of one of the instruments in the test is 'poor', so this should be easy, no?izonin wrote:Yes, I'm sure you took good care in preparing these samples, which have to prove that your emulation is indistinguishable from the original.Peter999 wrote:Thank you
What about you, izonin, now? At least I posted these because of you...I'm not falling for this.
-
- KVRian
- 781 posts since 25 May, 2006
btw, there's no eq, external processing or any other tricks; it's all pure and dry; OB-X recrded directly to disk over apogee rosetta converters, OP-X PRO-II directly rendered to disk too - so a fair uncoloured comparison
-
- KVRian
- 1355 posts since 27 Oct, 2009
Forgive me? I'll demo your software tomorrow, and I'll post a short review here. How about that?Peter999 wrote:@ izonin: at least make a trial, then I will forgive you
Again, I never said that hardware and software are indistinguishable, experts should be able to in these examples; I just said that it's not forcingly the case that one is poor and the other great
- KVRAF
- 5234 posts since 25 Feb, 2008
Well then, you should have absolutely no trouble in picking out the emulation from the original in examples 1, 2 and 5 which feature slow filter sweeps.izonin wrote:it's the poor filters that cripple the sound of this emulation (OP-X Pro)
