Maybe i missed something along the way but what ttoz wanted to know if the old VAs was more powerful than a modern computer and they aren't. That is demonstrably false (though i fully admit to being off by a factor of least ten myself). So the reason they sound so good must lie elsewhere. So efficient or not an I7 still has way more grunt than a Motorola 56k.eidenk wrote:
Whatever the Powercore vs I7 situation is, what tenshin111 wrote is the answer to waht ttoz asked IMO, the hardware is tailored to the software being run on and performs at 100% efficiency, look up the concept of netlists and Verilog/VHDL programing languages and you'll discover that it's possible to run a specific task on say a 200Mhz ARM chip based machine faster than the very same task on a 5GHz Intel/AMD computer. The strenght of Intel architecture is that it allows to perform virtually any task but its efficiency is extremely low.
How come "Hardware" VA's 16 years ago sounded so good like the AN1x and now....
-
- KVRAF
- 9590 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 20713 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
The Novation V-Station sounds pretty much identical to the K-Station, the K-Station had much, much better reverb but I didn't hear any differences in the synth engines themselves. Did the K-Station sound as good as the Supernova?ttoz wrote:The AN1x happened to be the one i had, and the novation supernova, and i friggin LOVED my an1x.
I much prefer my 10 year old Scope synths to 99% of the native softsynths available. I'll even take those over Oxium and U-NO-LX.
Here's a conundrum: Korg's OASYS PCI card was their best sounding (IMO) virtual analog for nearly a decade until they finally re-released its full algorithms into the OASYS keyboard and now the Kronos/Krome. Why the world got flooded with awful sounding MS2000's and microKORG's in between then is beyond me.
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 20713 posts since 22 Nov, 2000 from Southern California
I'm using my 10 year old Scope cards on Windows 7.ttoz wrote:i remember xp broke all compatibility, and now xp will be no longer soon. FEEECK!
-
- KVRAF
- 14123 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
Maybe here's a clue from the manual:
128 voices and maximum 10 notes polyphony,
The AN1x has three types of programmable multi-effects plus EQ built into the voice architecture, which lets you customize the effects configuration for each voice. There are 8 Reverb effects, 5 Delay effects, 14 Variation effects (which includes Chorus, Auto Pan, Pitch Change, Compressor, Distortion effects and more), and a stereo 3-band Equalizer. An Effect Bypass function lets you bypass all effects or specific ones at the press of a switch.
The key words: customize for EACH voice.
If you tried to do that on a modern computer it would fry.
128 voices and maximum 10 notes polyphony,
The AN1x has three types of programmable multi-effects plus EQ built into the voice architecture, which lets you customize the effects configuration for each voice. There are 8 Reverb effects, 5 Delay effects, 14 Variation effects (which includes Chorus, Auto Pan, Pitch Change, Compressor, Distortion effects and more), and a stereo 3-band Equalizer. An Effect Bypass function lets you bypass all effects or specific ones at the press of a switch.
The key words: customize for EACH voice.
If you tried to do that on a modern computer it would fry.
-
- KVRAF
- 19801 posts since 16 Sep, 2001 from Las Vegas,USA
From the AN1X Manual:osiris wrote:Maybe here's a clue from the manual:
128 voices and maximum 10 notes polyphony,
The AN1x has three types of programmable multi-effects plus EQ built into the voice architecture, which lets you customize the effects configuration for each voice. There are 8 Reverb effects, 5 Delay effects, 14 Variation effects (which includes Chorus, Auto Pan, Pitch Change, Compressor, Distortion effects and more), and a stereo 3-band Equalizer. An Effect Bypass function lets you bypass all effects or specific ones at the press of a switch.
The key words: customize for EACH voice.
If you tried to do that on a modern computer it would fry.
The AN1x comes with an impressive array of 128 voices preprogrammed and ready to play, each of which
can be edited and overwritten to store your own. Ten notes of polyphony provide for versatile SINGLE,
DUAL and SPLIT play options.
Yamaha is calling Patches Voices here.........so it's 128 patches, 10 Note Poly in Monotimbral mode.Poly goes down as you start using scenes unison etc.....
Page 9 of the Manual:
"Over the years, the meaning of the term "voice", when
applied to synthesizers, has varied depending on
manufacturers and models. In general, it means a sound,
which in some synths is called a "patch", and in others a
"program".
Last edited by Teksonik on Mon Sep 24, 2012 6:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
-
- KVRAF
- 19801 posts since 16 Sep, 2001 from Las Vegas,USA
I started with an Atari 520 ST......the first sequencer I bought for it was limited to 1 track...15,000 notes.......my how things have changed......ttoz wrote: , pentium 133, start, logic 2.5, start, midi, start, make music.. 20 hrs later and i was still in the same seat !
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
-
- KVRAF
- 14123 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
I get it. I was thinking how tedious it would be to edit fx for 128 voices.
-
- KVRAF
- 19801 posts since 16 Sep, 2001 from Las Vegas,USA
And what a jumbled mush of noise it would end up being.........osiris wrote:I get it. I was thinking how tedious it would be to edit fx for 128 voices.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
-
- KVRAF
- 14123 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
It would sound like some Omnisphere/Alchemy presets.
(joke
)
(joke
)-
- KVRian
- 927 posts since 10 Jan, 2010
i think it's obvious that they really mean 'preset' when they are saying 'voice'. everybody has their own terminology, and some are more confusing than others...
i'm not sure why you'd really want to do that, but it's certainly possible on a modern cpu. it would involve a bit of work (with some kind of midi vst that understands spillover), and a bunch of instances of some synth in mono mode, but it's definitely possible.
disclaimer: i work for intel, so possibly i am biased towards general purpose CPUs. i can't say too much, but i will say that people may be importing their view of cpu inefficiency from inefficient programs. cpu cycles have gotten so cheap, and software so complex, that people tend to write simpler and less efficient programs. this is normally a good thing - it's still fast enough, and it's quicker to develop, easier to find and fix bugs, and easier for new people to be able to modify old code without breaking things. the raw power available though is much higher on a modern CPU (anyone's, not just ours), and it amazes me that things like synths written in java (a pretty inefficient software platform) are possible. highly optimized, well designed code running on a fast processor (e.g. diva) can be a frightening thing indeed
i'm not sure why you'd really want to do that, but it's certainly possible on a modern cpu. it would involve a bit of work (with some kind of midi vst that understands spillover), and a bunch of instances of some synth in mono mode, but it's definitely possible.
disclaimer: i work for intel, so possibly i am biased towards general purpose CPUs. i can't say too much, but i will say that people may be importing their view of cpu inefficiency from inefficient programs. cpu cycles have gotten so cheap, and software so complex, that people tend to write simpler and less efficient programs. this is normally a good thing - it's still fast enough, and it's quicker to develop, easier to find and fix bugs, and easier for new people to be able to modify old code without breaking things. the raw power available though is much higher on a modern CPU (anyone's, not just ours), and it amazes me that things like synths written in java (a pretty inefficient software platform) are possible. highly optimized, well designed code running on a fast processor (e.g. diva) can be a frightening thing indeed
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 22457 posts since 5 Sep, 2001
[DELETED]
-
- KVRAF
- 14123 posts since 20 Nov, 2003 from Lost and Spaced
Urs wrote the code for DIVA while extremely high one night. He thought he'd dreamed it. I believe beings from the future - possibly even future Urs - gave it to him. He is still trying to replicate it.
(This is all theory and conjecture and possibly untrue)
(This is all theory and conjecture and possibly untrue)