Diva vs Analogue - a real world test

[pdxindy]

A is more upfront / sits more naturally in a mix. Also thicker low frequencies and rounder high frequencies, the usual stuff.

It is a commercial, not a real test.
For obvious reasons A was MADE to sound better while still close to B (possibly unconsciously, but probably not). If we wanted a real test, we would need a tester who would be completely unbiased, this is impossible if money is involved.

If analogue has some fundamental superiority over digital, it would not matter if the person was highly motivated to make Diva sound as good or better. That essential superiority would be there regardless.

Once we have reached the point where the argument is over the motivations of the tester, that itself shows that the two are on relatively equal footing.

[Gamma-UT]

Are you claiming this is a 100% valid scientific grade test and that the OP is not biased at all by his goal of selling as many of his sound sets as possible ?

Are you claiming that a double blind test design is useless and doesn't provide better data, because we have to assume that if we can't prove that the researcher is biased, then he must be not biased ?

And stop clinging to your "proving" thing, it was proven millions of times that a double blind test is better, because it eliminates bias, thats why i said i don't need to prove anything.

Um, no. Double blind does not eliminate bias. It removes some possible sources of bias but you still have the design of the experiment itself to contend with. Which is one major reason this A/B cannot be a valid scientific test of much at all – I haven't been paying that much attention but I believe IncarnateX dealt with that, at length, nine million pages up in the thread.

[IncarnateX]

Even if double tests eliminated bias entirely it does not prove this silly claim right:

For obvious reasons A was MADE to sound better while still close to B (possibly unconsciously, but probably not)

The bias in this test was that you could not tell the difference, that was given when the OP contained the word "guess". Later it was changed to "tell". Besides, if analogue know a secret formula to make differences so small as the ones in question sound "better", he is a friggin hero and should sell it to the world.

As far as Mutant goes, he has given us an example of not only one the most fallacious way of thinking but also one of the most cheap and lousy way to reject the outcome of a test (that is not even meant to be taken as seriously as he does). First he makes claim of cheat on basis of very thin evidence and when this is evidently rejected he comes back with another claim that is not even testable and stick to it as the truth. As with the former claim, the principle is "guilty until proven otherwise". That is as pathetic as it can be.

[Mutant]

If analogue has some fundamental superiority over digital, it would not matter if the person was highly motivated to make Diva sound as good or better. That essential superiority would be there regardless.

It doesn't have that.
One is better at one thing, the other is better at other thing.
Having both at hand, i can see the possibility and ways to make software sound better.

Once we have reached the point where the argument is over the motivations of the tester, that itself shows that the two are on relatively equal footing.

Except that i think the majority of people here stated that it is very close, but A sounds better.
And in their minds better = analog.

I am too lazy to do the sweep and quote 50+ posts where people tried to guess before the correct answer was given out, but if i am wrong above, do it and prove me wrong...

[pdxindy]

Dwl.. clearly.. I see Mutant is still at it, some, is it two weeks later?
rsp

"It" ?
The saw shape thing was solved a week ago.

Am i not allowed to post kinda on topic here ?
The topic is Diva vs some other synth and a (flawed) test to see if we can tell which is which.
Am i not allowed to state the truth that a for a real test, the one that makes the test should not be biased, because even unconsciously he will design it in a way that will get him a result that will prove something he believes ?

When digital cameras first came out, the results were quite flawed compared to film. Moire, jaggy lines, hard gradations and the falloff to burned out highlights was atrocious.

It did not matter the bias of the photographer, or whether the test was conducted 'properly', you could not hide the flaws. Those flaws were distinct and meaningful.

If there were intrinsic and distinct flaws in the digital representation of analogue, most people would hear them and it would be obvious.

You are correct that this is not a proper scientific test... but the very fact of 'needing' such a test shows that for these particular sorts of sounds, it is no longer about some intrinsic flaws in the medium, but personal preference... and there is no scientific test for that.

[trimph1]

But someone will swear by those tests ...

[Mutant]

Even if double tests eliminated bias entirely it does not prove this silly claim right:

For obvious reasons A was MADE to sound better while still close to B (possibly unconsciously, but probably not)

OK, so it looks like we will continue to think that each other is not capable of logical thinking.
If you can't see that my statement is proven by scientific community and doesn't have to be proven by me, then no matter how many links to articles about default human nature i will provide, you will not see it.
And sir... you have no balls.
No direct, straight answer to the 2 questions.

First he makes claim of cheat on basis of very thin evidence and when this is evidently rejected he comes back with another claim that is not even testable and stick to it as the truth.

Yes, posting a screenshot of Diva's 2 saws (which everyone can confirm), is a very thin evidence...
Please continue entertaining me with your idiotic statements.
I am dying of laughter here.

he comes back with another claim that is not even testable and stick to it as the truth. As with the former claim, the principle is "guilty until proven otherwise". That is as pathetic as it can be.

Who is guilty of what ?
OP of being homo sapiens and not being 1 single exception to the rule discovered by scientific community many years ago ?
You keep ignoring the fact that i am not accusing him of some grave crime, just stating the obvious: that the test is biased by design, i don't know if intentionally or subconsciously.

Please continue entertaining me.

[wagtunes]

"That is as pathetic as it can be.

This whole thread is pathetic if you ask me.

[pdxindy]

If analogue has some fundamental superiority over digital, it would not matter if the person was highly motivated to make Diva sound as good or better. That essential superiority would be there regardless.

It doesn't have that.
One is better at one thing, the other is better at other thing.
Having both at hand, i can see the possibility and ways to make software sound better.

If there is no specific characteristic of analogue that digital cannot match, then we are dealing with personal preference... your argument over the validity of the test is meaningless because there is no test that can account for personal preference.

and of course if the software CAN be made to sound better (via bias or any other means), that is mainly what people are interested in.

[Live Transmission]

People speak of 'better' because the OP started to make a provocative comparison in costs between the synths as well.. that point of this 'test' is completely summing up its bias. A point of costs comparison which is ALL about money, obviously and unmistakenly. If the OP would have wanted any credibility regarded to this 'test' they should've left this useless money related info out of it. Because it's not relevant for the 'test' but only relevant for SALES. Exactly the point where this 'test' went exactly dubious. Call it want you want. The costs picture didn't made this 'test' better anyway. That's fer sure. My 2c.
Hope this helps

[wagtunes]

I don't care about motives. They're meaningless to my ears. That's all that matters. And my ears heard very little difference between the two synths even though I did pick out the OB. But the cost, space requirements and inevitable hardware repairs make owning hardware a non issue for me. I will choose a VST every time, especially now that my ears can hardly hear the difference.

Motives, biases, whatever. Who cares?

My ears sure as hell don't.

[IncarnateX]

If you can't see that my statement is proven by scientific community and doesn't have to be proven by me, then no matter how many links to articles about default human nature i will provide, you will not see it..

Great! So if the scientific community already has proven that analogue in this specific case has cheated by making A sound better than B (which is a retarded statement in itself) why did we need to inspect the waveforms then? Why didn't you just say from the start instead of taking the long road around it?

You are so surrealistically stupid that I lack words for it. You have just impressed an Associate Professor in Psychology. Congratulations, THAT is after all something. But then Again, I seldomly discuss these things with high school drop-outs on marihunanna, so I forget how insane common thinking can be. Mea Culpa.

I'll leave the rest of your nonsense for the KVR community to judge, if anyone cares, which I doubt.

But thanks for providing me a case for future reference.

[Live Transmission]

'You have just impressed an Associate Professor in Psychology.'
@IncarnateX
Probably why you love to hear yourself talking while no one is really interested in what you write as it comes to audio production. Aren't there sites dedicated to lonely assistants? Maybe you should try your 'luck' there. Who knows.

[IncarnateX]

'You have just impressed an Associate Professor in Psychology.'
@IncarnateX
Probably why you love to hear yourself talking while no one is really interested in what you write as it comes to audio production. Aren't there sites dedicated to lonely assistants? Maybe you should try your 'luck' there. Who knows.

Hi "No one". Sorry to hear you are not interested in sound arguments when it comes to pseudo scientifics statements about audio production and tests. Ovbiously you share this disinterest with quite a few here. But careful with overgeneralizations, you might dissolve the borders of your self into pathological identification with the universe.

BTW: I thought KVR was just the place for lonely assistants. Where did I go wrong?

[Live Transmission]

@IncarnateX
Your quite compulsive, aren't you?