TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- When will the obsession with "analog" stop?
Pages (12): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles That is not what this topic is about. At all. I own and use both analog and digital stuff myself. This is about the seeming need for people who make or use VSTs or other digital synths to justify their choice in terms of them "sounding analog" or whatever. Rather than letting the sound stand on its own merits. And also about the tendency of some who use analog stuff to be purist or elitist about their methods. I meant it as a discussion about user attitudes, not another stupid "analog versus digital, which is better, derp?!" |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by david.michael In other words... it's not going away. That's really all it comes down to. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by cryophonik Well, it only took 5 pages, but I think we finally have the answer. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by david.michael This is why you guys keep me around. I like to shed my own inspiring light on the subject. I'm like a tub of information, bubbling over like a jacuzzi. |
Great, now why'd you have to go and bring that whole thing up?!
He didn't bring it up. I brought it up. So get it right tho. 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tehlord Good luck with those monitors you bought /runs |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fledz Next on the agenda: PC vs Mac no. 132435663900020022374288982 |
Has anyone considered that maybe everyone is obsessed with analogue because it's the benchmark? Analogue is how a basic subtractive synth should sound, with no aliasing, no digital artifacts etc. Digital attempts to emulate analogue, which lacks aliasing or any of those other features. That's why everyone's obsessed, not because analogue automatically sounds great, but just because its the standard to which digital is compared.
If you have an mp3, you judge it based on whether it reproduces the original sound well, an analogue sound. If you have a digital synth then similarly, you judge it against how well it reproduces the smoothness and warmth of an analogue machine. To me its just the obvious way to make judgements about the quality of a synth. Of course, it gets a bit amusing when noobs who have never heard an analogue synth start making claims like "ZOMG, NexUS SOunDS So ANALOgueS DuDE!!!?!?!!111??". Basically, it just seems to me like it makes sense for an emulation to be judged against the original. And to me, most digital subtractive synths are emulations.
In my opinion, digital already succeeds a lot of the time, which is why the whole "sounds analogue" thing is now a bit passe. Most people don't even take a product seriously if it says it "sounds analogue" because its just assumed that modern plugins should lack aliasing etc. so it goes without saying hopefully.
Modern VAs are at least 85% of the way there in most cases, you might prefer the analogue workflow, but the sound is almost the same these days, and everyone knows it. But analogue will always be mentioned just because its the benchmark to which digital synths will have to look up to.
Yeah, this analog vs digital debate is an archaic one. It's been proven that you can make music with either one. Digital seems more efficient in someone's work flow though, but classic hardware is classic for a reason (unless they made a vst for it--all my opinion though!). Digital used to be the uncool dweeb, now it's cool as ever. Same thing with fruity loops. no one bashes it anymore.
Because no one uses FL any more... Because its written in delphi and can't be ported to modern multi core architectures... Because its lame...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kitphillips Because no one uses FL any more... Because its written in delphi and can't be ported to modern multi core architectures... Because its lame... |
Deadmau5 "uses" everything, as long as they pay him 
(really saying: I want to be that succesfull and people begging me, to accept their money. And mention I use their product as well )
mine doesn't, as you can see with my new SSL Alpha channel and API-2500
Uploaded with **************
| quote: |
| Originally posted by theterran Not quite true. It still has some of the better manual automation capability to boot...And it does export to lame...it just takes a bit longer than anything else, that's all...:P FL is a great intro to DAWs for nubbins...better to learn on than Reason4 anyway. And Deadmau5 uses FL, therefore it must be cool. |
LOL
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kitphillips Well we all know that export to MP3 is the one essential feature for any DAW right? |
one still can't download a real MOOG 
or DSI Prophet
| quote: |
| Originally posted by theterran Hey, I was merely saying that FL was at least capable of it, that's all. Says more for it than Reason 4, because uh...it can't... And nexus analog is bestest analog. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by kitphillips Well I don't really even consider reason a contender anyway... FL is pretty much the lowest of the low IMO. |
Okay, so we've gone from Analog vs Digital to DAW flaming... hopefully we'll get onto Mac vs PC soon, as someone suggested. After that we'll try to definitively answer, once and for all, which is the best subgenre and who is the best artist in electronic music.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by derail After that we'll try to definitively answer, once and for all, which is the best subgenre and who is the best artist in electronic music. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by theterran oh I c wat u did there mr. derail... In b4 Dirty Dutch House vs. Dubstep for #1 subgenre. Then Tiesto is going to mix both into 1 hit single using only analog synths and FL Studio to claim best artist of the universe and end the debate once and for all. /thread |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Twilothunder23 It makes difference on the final product. The final prodcut sounds better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CCIjz1ZXAs ^ Record a saw off an old korg synthi and listen to how it sounds then do the same thing on the es1. Yeah... no audible difference Nexus ain't ntohing but SAMPLED presets. Straight of the 1080 straight off the jp8000 straight off the virus synth into SAMPLIT. For fucks sake there are even LOOPS OFF OTHER PEOPLES MUSIC. This dude created the ultimate trance rompler by sampling the factory presets of old digital synthesizers. And his product reflects his mentality. The whole shit is illegal why you think you cant buy nexus in guitar center? They will sue his ass in a split second hell they even sued roland in the 90s over those 1080 expansion cards. |
The arguement I never get is when people say "its not about analog or digital being better or worse because they do different things". Its one of the vaguest most general statements a person can make about something.
NO SHIT. Thats the POINT. If we tried to compare things that didn't have differences, there would be nothing to compare in the first place.
All synths are different in one way or another. And I love how people will also try to estimate the % that digital is comparable to analog (like kit saying 85% wtf). Are you sure its not closer to 84% kit?
You always have a knack for bashing newbies while sounding like a total idiotic newbie yourself.
Then we have drunks trying to challenge people who don't even know proper study design. You might be able to pull some type of research off (double blind would be a good starting point), but not by comparing the saw waves of 2 synths. Either way if the study was ran properly I'm sure you'd achieve some signifance in the results.
There are LOTS of things that appear the same to the masses but still have vastly different effects. Regardless of whether they could identify analog, why not run mood test instead in 3 conditions? One control, one all digital, one all analog. Maybe you'll find the group that listened to analog had an increase in positive emotions.
Regardless of a lot of the nonsense in this thread I'll add my own nonsense. Our ears evolved on analog. Defining "better" as more enjoyable to listen to, analog is better imo. Is it cheaper or easier to use? Of course not. Analog corresponds to changes in air pressure. Digital is based on numbers and needs to be converted to analog before it can even be heard. Digital caused a revolution 30 years ago and offered a lot of advantages, but our ears did not evolve on digital. And after how far digital has came and how much commotion it has stired, I still question why it sounds "unhuman" or cold/sterile.
Digital is all about sound for sounds sake, analog just sounds more like something humans made. "Good" digital needs to be manipulated into sounding human or warm, good analog already has those properties.
I hear a lot of digital sounds that impress me, but in the end whether or not I can put my finger on exactly whats wrong, I always just sense something is wrong.
I also expect that the "masses" can just sense this too. So why can't we all just agree that analog is better in terms of ENJOYING the sound? Not in terms of ease or convenience, not in terms of how each can be disguised in a musical piece, in terms of face value. Who can actually tell me digital sounds better?
Rather than discuss why analog is more pleasing to listen to, I'd love to see someone provide justifiable grounds to make that arguement for digital. I'm not talking about price or conveniene, someone tell me why digital is more enjoyable for you to hear. Why it makes your brain feel better after you hear it? Then maybe we'll have an actual debate at hand. Lots of people don't think these threads are valid but I think they're as valid as arguing whether or not imitation cheese is better than real cheese made from real cheese products.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.