|
| quote: | Originally posted by Mad for Brad
it was meant to be an analogy but our perception of the world is not analog therefor it must be some quantized approximation. That is something you cannot argue. Well . |
Analogies are useful for explaining concepts, and occasionally for illustrating the problems with a particular line of reasoning, but they can't be used as positive proof for any hypothesis.
To the question of whether or not analog synths either (a) sound better than digital synths or the weaker assertion (b) cannot be accurately modeled by digital synths, the only useful proof is either a [double]-blind test, which disproves (a), or a perfect digital model of an analog instrument, which disproves (b) and therefore (a) as well.
Of course, there are already several analog modeling synths, so the obnoxious analog snobs are going to demand a scientific test anyway to prove that the modeler actually sounds as good as the original. That's been done, too, but good luck trying to make that point amidst a sea of "we don't hear in digital!" nugacity.
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
That was enough dialog about analog to fill a catalog, if you ask me. What's next, a M4B monologue delivered in Tagalog? |
I'm sure that was merely a prologue to a much longer trialogue with an ideologue throwing homologues against a demagogue and a pedagogue. We're nowhere near the epilogue.
___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here
|