Oh aye -- Only You, Don't Go, Love to Hate You, and A Little Respect were complete howlers right enough.pflosi wrote:it didnt matter on that s**t music he made

Oh aye -- Only You, Don't Go, Love to Hate You, and A Little Respect were complete howlers right enough.pflosi wrote:it didnt matter on that s**t music he made
I don't doubt Clarke's credentials as a synh geek/guru. But as a pop star he has been responsible for some of the most offensive s**t outside of the Stock, Aiken & Waterman camp! Erasure made the sort of music that made me wish Human's had evolved without ears. Eeeek! makes my skin crawl thinking about itclubbedtodeath wrote:Oh aye -- Only You, Don't Go, Love to Hate You, and A Little Respect were complete howlers right enough.pflosi wrote:it didnt matter on that s**t music he made
Then you just aren't good enough to pick it out. He already owes me 40 bucks.nvbrkr wrote:That's hardly what anyone would call a blindfold test.redchapterjubilee wrote:madtheory wrote:I bet in a blind A/B test very few of us could hear a difference between a good VA and a real analogue.I'd be willing to give someone $20 if they can successfully parse out what's VCO analog, what's DCO analog, what's ROMpler and what's VA/softsynth on one of my tracks.nvbrkr wrote:I bet many can.
But that's precisely the point. What you hear as music is most of the time presented in just such a melting pot of sources.nvbrkr wrote:That's hardly what anyone would call a blindfold test.redchapterjubilee wrote:madtheory wrote:I bet in a blind A/B test very few of us could hear a difference between a good VA and a real analogue.I'd be willing to give someone $20 if they can successfully parse out what's VCO analog, what's DCO analog, what's ROMpler and what's VA/softsynth on one of my tracks.nvbrkr wrote:I bet many can.
Ahem, well, let's not talk about that, shall we? I do have a wife and childrentallowwaters wrote:Then you just aren't good enough to pick it out. He already owes me 40 bucks.
I think this is pretty much spot on. What's more I think these sort of discussions are only of interest to extreme synth geeks. As far as A/B comparisons go there is no level the synth geek will not go to in order to weigh up the merits of one against another. Case in point - Just seen a guy selling a vintage SEM on e-bay. Here's what he had to say about it in comparison to the new SEM, which Tom Oberheim claims is identical to the original in all but a few details;TrondC wrote:for what it's worth in this way overdone and beat to death topic, I'd probably miss 95% of the time in a blind test. I can't even tell a minimoog from software. I also represent the very small percentage of people who even cares about what makes each sound in a record (most people won't care if it's a $500000 buchla or a toy ukulele as long as it fits the song), which means that, my poor analog/va distinguishing-skills aside, 99.99% of people won't ever hear the difference unless you actually A/B an analog synth versus a poor va.
That is only because most people don't realize or care what needs to happen for the benefits of analog synthesizers to be evident in their recordings.redchapterjubilee wrote:But that's precisely the point. What you hear as music is most of the time presented in just such a melting pot of sources.
Ummm, oboes are analogue already. Unless you have some kind of digital oboe I've never heard of before...madtheory wrote:Ah, now I get it. Now I'm going to record an oboe and make it sound analogue. Using Pro Tools. Because I can.
That's nadafarms from this forum, he's well known for getting really excited about a synth when he buys it and then selling it a week or so later when something else catches his eye. I believe that he's just talking it up so that he makes money from the ebay sale.Dogboy73 wrote:As far as A/B comparisons go there is no level the synth geek will not go to in order to weigh up the merits of one against another. Case in point - Just seen a guy selling a vintage SEM on e-bay. Here's what he had to say about it in comparison to the new SEM, which Tom Oberheim claims is identical to the original in all but a few details;
"This is one of the best analog synths ever made, it DOES sound better than the new SEM. I've owned the new SEM and greatly prefer the old one over the new (Why are you selling the old one then?!) (the new is still really good though) but nothing quite like the original. The original sounds more liquidy and warm, it has a buzzier bubblier sounding filter and the oscillators drift more."
http://cgi.ebay.com/Oberheim-SEM-Analog ... 3698074272
Well they might have a point I suppose. But we're talking VCO v's VCO here. Not only that we're talking about 2 practically identical synths seperated only by time & a few pots that Tom couldn't get hold of or didn't want for the new SEM unless I'm missing something here. Is it just a vintage thing?!
Not necessarily. It's the money....and it doesn't weigh in favor of VAs. All of my real analog is worth around 50% more than what I paid for it, whereas any VA bought around the same time would now be worth at least 50% less...projectwoofer wrote:...and in the end it's music that counts, no?
I would definitely fall in the latter category. I'm too busy making music and recording it to be bothered with whether my analog synthesizers sound analog enough, or whether my digital synths are digital enough. I'm more worried about whether the song sounds right or whether the overall mood I was going for was achieved.Automatic Gainsay wrote:That is only because most people don't realize or care what needs to happen for the benefits of analog synthesizers to be evident in their recordings.