Page 5 of 6

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:35 pm
by matia
Raiven wrote:Some people here are unbelievable as usual. I've got 4 industry profession audio engineers that can't discern a difference. Have fun with you antiques.

Get new speakers and headphones fellers.
i've heard both when i worked for this place in mix a and can tell you there is a difference:



-matia

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:51 pm
by tekkentool
I like D16 stuff. just people are entitled to their own opinions about sound without being "ignorant"

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:53 am
by JayEm
matia wrote:And you can't take the trigger out from the software 909 and drive a step sequencer on the software 101 ...
Actually I think you can... at least I'm sure the 606 emu has the ability. It permanently outputs MIDI.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:15 am
by ford442
i own Drumazon and it can output MIDI - D16 are quality plugs..

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 1:01 pm
by polar69
+1 for D16, the demos are pretty much crippled but I've seen the full versions and the are pretty amazing. If SH101TOR is any bit as good as Drumazon et al then it will be one of the best vst's for a while.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 3:47 pm
by CS_TBL
You know what's lovely about all this? :lol:

If there's some high end sample-based synth/workstation on the market, like a V-Synth or an Oasys, there's never someone to compare the piano to a Steinway, never someone to compare the strings to real strings, never someone to compare the brass to real brass, never someone to compare the guitars to real guitars.. and keep in mind these sample ROMs are usually miles away from what they could or should be. Until these ROMs get into the hundreds o' gigabytes, I'll hone 'm a bit.. :P

But when some clever software engineer comes up with a simulation that's about 99% faithful, then there's a whole horde rushing in to complain about that 1% difference which makes no point in the mix in the first place. A difference, in addition, not even within the complex realm of acoustic instruments, but in the realm of sawtooths, blocks/pulses and filters.

But.. in this happy new year I'll continue using a certain practical and vast softsynth while I return to threads like these to read the occasional rant. ^_^

2010 8-)


PS. do the older members here remember the 80's organs and consumer keyboards that had a "piano"-preset which was in reality a filtered narrow pulse? Weren't we all like 'whoa, nice piano!' ? :P

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 pm
by Christopher Winkels
CS_TBL wrote:
PS. do the older members here remember the 80's organs and consumer keyboards that had a "piano"-preset which was in reality a filtered narrow pulse? Weren't we all like 'whoa, nice piano!' ? :P
In a word, no. They were c**p even in the '70s and '80s.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Fri Jan 01, 2010 10:01 pm
by edfunction
I think that 99% accuracy is a bit of an exaggeration, in time I don't see why not.

Maybe people don't complain that a synthesizer or rompler recreation of an acoustic instrument is not perfect because the interface (keyboard) is so different that the performance is also radically different, effecting the sound and so on. I think also our expectations of simulations of acoustic instruments compared to electronic instruments is a little lower for the obvious reason that it is a much harder job with many, many more variables.

A big thing that many emulations of synths and drum machines forget is that the interface is a major factor in the way these instruments are used and a big part of what is so inspiring about them.
I like the sound of the D16 stuff, it is quite close to my ears, but I wouldn't write beats in the same way as I would with an 808 or a 909 in front of me. This is not a qualitative assessment just an observation. I think it's good that we have the option to have affordable access to these simulations, but some prefer the real thing plus many don't want to use computers on stage (i prefer not to).

I look forward to doing an A-B with my 101 (software can be convenient and fun too) I just hope they don't forget the great sequencer!

++ Maybe a site dedicated to vintage synthesizers is probably not the best place to suggest everyone throw away their "obsolete toys". ++

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:35 am
by Raiven
edfunction wrote:
++ Maybe a site dedicated to vintage synthesizers is probably not the best place to suggest everyone throw away their "obsolete toys". ++
May I remind you that THIS board IS "Software Synthesizers." This website went beyond just vintage synths long ago.

(Obsolete - no longer produced or used; out of date )

They are obsolete.

(Toy - an object, esp. a gadget or machine, regarded as providing amusement for an adult.)

If your not making money in the use of your instruments, then they are toys.

People will by all means enjoy their old synths, but they are obsolete and just toys if your not making money in their use. I was speaking in reference to the dictionary meanings above.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 4:41 am
by pricklyrobot
I can't understand why people persist in drinking Coca-Cola, when I have several chemist friends who are willing to certify that Pepsi is equally—if not more—sugary and delicious.

Philistines!

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 5:13 am
by skweeegor
Raiven wrote: (Obsolete - no longer produced or used; out of date )
Reading comprehension is your friend.
Raiven wrote: (Toy - an object, esp. a gadget or machine, regarded as providing amusement for an adult.)

If your not making money in the use of your instruments, then they are toys.
I didn't realize people no longer made money using a 303, 101, or any other vintage synth that now has a vst emulation. Can you forward me the survey where you asked every musician in the world whether or not they still use vintage synths?

For the record, I'm a big fan of the D16 plugs, and I love vst's. I just don't see why you need to be such a smarmy douche about it when others indicate a preference for the real thing. It's still an EMULATION after all.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:22 am
by matia
That's exactly the point. It's the method by which you create and not just the sound. I also fancy the idea of taking a cable from the trigger out of an 808/909 and driving the sequencer of a 101 with a single cable rather than having to route midi notes and so forth. This is how I make music and what generates the results I want and, to a larger extent, if some company is to claim they have a clone, then it needs to have the same interface and capabilities. Sorry, but clicking on virtual step buttons is not like pressing real buttons on a grid sequencer. Sure there are alternatives/controllers ... but it's not the same experience as working with the real deal. I swear, people on the lower economic front tend to have just as much snobbery and elitism as much as those in the affluent sector.

I will say again though, to my ears, the D16 stuff sounds good but a perfect clone it is not, both tonally and conceptually.

-matia
edfunction wrote:I think that 99% accuracy is a bit of an exaggeration, in time I don't see why not.

Maybe people don't complain that a synthesizer or rompler recreation of an acoustic instrument is not perfect because the interface (keyboard) is so different that the performance is also radically different, effecting the sound and so on. I think also our expectations of simulations of acoustic instruments compared to electronic instruments is a little lower for the obvious reason that it is a much harder job with many, many more variables.

A big thing that many emulations of synths and drum machines forget is that the interface is a major factor in the way these instruments are used and a big part of what is so inspiring about them.
I like the sound of the D16 stuff, it is quite close to my ears, but I wouldn't write beats in the same way as I would with an 808 or a 909 in front of me. This is not a qualitative assessment just an observation. I think it's good that we have the option to have affordable access to these simulations, but some prefer the real thing plus many don't want to use computers on stage (i prefer not to).

I look forward to doing an A-B with my 101 (software can be convenient and fun too) I just hope they don't forget the great sequencer!

++ Maybe a site dedicated to vintage synthesizers is probably not the best place to suggest everyone throw away their "obsolete toys". ++

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 6:37 am
by Raiven
skweeegor wrote:
I didn't realize people no longer made money using a 303, 101, or any other vintage synth that now has a vst emulation. Can you forward me the survey where you asked every musician in the world whether or not they still use vintage synths?

For the record, I'm a big fan of the D16 plugs, and I love vst's. I just don't see why you need to be such a smarmy douche about it when others indicate a preference for the real thing. It's still an EMULATION after all.
Your the douche.

If your not making money with it than it's a toy to you, or anyone else, period. No surveys are needed and there's no need to show how much your feelings are hurt about it. Work on your own reading comprehension. That statement is in general and applies to any music instrument.

"I didn't realize people no longer made money using a 303, 101, or any other vintage synth that now has a vst emulation. Can you forward me the survey where you asked every musician in the world whether or not they still use vintage synths?"

Did you actually think about this after you typed it? :?:

Use what you like but old synths ARE obsolete. One may find them nice and enjoyable, including myself, but they are what they are.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 7:19 am
by skweeegor
Your definition made the distinction that something that was obsolete was out of production OR used. Notice the "or". Tons of professional musicians are still using vintage synths,(along with their vst's I'm sure) so they're not obsolete by your definition. Even if it's a matter of function and not sound (as others have stated) the fact that they are still useful means they are still relevant today.

Re: SHIOITOR

Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:17 am
by Raiven
skweeegor wrote:Your definition made the distinction that something that was obsolete was out of production OR used. Notice the "or". Tons of professional musicians are still using vintage synths,(along with their vst's I'm sure) so they're not obsolete by your definition. Even if it's a matter of function and not sound (as others have stated) the fact that they are still useful means they are still relevant today.
OR as in"this or that" makes the definition relevant. It didn't say AND. Something out of production is obsolete. It has been replaced or discontinued because of a lack for consumer demand or technical cost effectiveness due to advancing technology.

Korg Trinity's are obsolete.
Prophet 5's are obsolete.

The Apple Logic 8 and Ableton Live 6 software I continue to use are obsolete. Still get the job done and enjoy using them though. I prefer the compressor plugs in Live 6. ;-)