I don't see why it's unreasonable to be concerned with technical aspects of a musical instrument when they do have tangible effects on the sound (however much you personally might not care.) Nobody thinks it's odd for guitarists to care what their strings are made of.silikon wrote:When it all comes down to it, you're making music. If you're that caught up in how the music is generated, I'd say you're likely concerned with the wrong things. It's a shame that people can't get past some supposed inferiority of a digital machine; I often struggle to see how being an analogue purist would enhance ones output.
I say instead we see what fleshes out with this new offering and judge it on reasonable metrics like "does it produce interesting sounds?" and "is the interface such that it inspires?", versus "aw, it's digital, therefore it must be shite".
But eh. I don't think analog-versus-digital has to be an all-or-nothing argument. Both, in my view, constitute different parts of a balanced sonic breakfast. The issue I have with VA is that, in my experience, it tends toward the worst of both worlds - VAs rarely have the warmth and character of real analogue gear, and they don't tend to make anything like the most of the possibilities digital synthesis offers, and they don't have any kind of unique territory in which to judge them on their own merits like hybrids do, because they're trying so hard to "be" analog, against which they just don't hold up to scrutiny.
There's plenty of digital stuff I love (you'd have to pry my DX7 from my cold, dead fingers, and I just spent over an hour having to talk myself down from paying an unreasonable amount of money for a pawn-shop D-50,) but it's all stuff that's very open about being digital and isn't trying to be a poor imitation of an analog synth. Likewise, while I love my JX-10, Roland really sold it short by making so many of the presets attempt to copy typical DX7 timbres. Let east be east and west be west, Roland (and the rest of the industry,) and quit trying to meet in the middle and tell me that's The Future.
Thing is that there's not much left to go for "REALLY low." The MicroBrute is $300, and the Volcas are a jaw-dropping $150 apiece, and they're real analog (or, in the case of the Volca Beats, a mix-and-match structure comparable to the 909.) Are Roland's offerings really gonna undercut that?Kidney05 wrote:But if the costs are REALLY low-- under 300 or so?-- and they sound good, they could be really cool. Pretend you don't know the difference of analog and digital-- if this thing fit your budget and sounded good and had a great interface, it just doesn't matter what it's "supposed to be" or taking place of.
But I'm skeptical if they can deliver such value cheap enough. If they can't, it'll look bad next to the Volcas.