Music Player Network
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: GEARLAB REQUESTS: Please post them here!
Dave Bryce #3050693 06/24/20 04:01 AM
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 2,589
Likes: 193
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 2,589
Likes: 193
As a thought, maybe you get the kind of requests that fit in with what has already been tested?

Diversifying might invite more inquiries beyond plugins and keyboards, expanding the usefullness of the forum.


There is never enough time to be in a hurry...
GearLab Island
Re: GEARLAB REQUESTS: Please post them here!
Dr Mike Metlay #3051002 06/25/20 09:12 PM
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,203
Likes: 121
MPN Advisory Board
MP Hall of Fame Member
Offline
MPN Advisory Board
MP Hall of Fame Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,203
Likes: 121
Originally Posted by Dr Mike Metlay
Originally Posted by Markyboard
Would love to see Dr. Mike dissect a Quantum/Iridium.
The Iridium is something I could do, for sure. I can promise nothing at this time, but in response to your request I have made inquiries of someone who might be able to make it happen. We shall see.

Thank you Mike!

Originally Posted by Dr Mike Metlay
Quote
I think I’d perk up reading that any of these modern digital synths is on a whole other level sound-wise from VSTs. Don’t know if it’s even possible these days. I’ll also throw out that IMO 8/16 voice poly on high priced (say > 2k) digital synths in 2020 is more than disappointing. I understand the reasons (ie tradeoffs) but still.

I see where you're coming from here, but the whole "better sound" thing is, in my not so humble opinion, a bit of a blind alley. They all use code on silicon. It's what the silicon is connected to that matters. A really good plug-in that is well coded to run at high sample rates, run through a really good DAC, will sound really good; a keyboard synth that is meh coded to run at a lower sample rate, run through meh-quality output circuitry, will sound meh. On the other hand, the reverse can be true! There are a whole lot of butchered-quality plug-ins being played through $30 interfaces out there...

No doubt and I should have specified the best vs. the best. Of course it's subjective but I'm really wondering if there's anything better achievable in the digital synthesizer domain - either hardware or software. Now analog emulations I can see getting much much better. Just think of a real B3 through a Leslie or acoustic piano.

Originally Posted by Dr Mike Metlay
I think the real key is immediacy. I have been writing about the man/machine interface since the mid-1980s; it was the topic of an article I wrote for the Computer Music Journal at MIT, the one that got me on the path to get out of science and into music/writing as a full-time gig. The single most critical part of any keyboard is the point where the human's hands and eyes touch and see the machine. The one advantage of a well made digital synth is that the keys feel good and well-integrated with the sound engine, which itself is laid out in an intuitive way. The Hydrasynth is a great example. We have plenty of examples of this being done poorly; does anyone out there genuinely LOVE programming a Korg Poly-800 or Yamaha DXanynumberatall? If the synth is fun to work with and expressive to play, it will subjectively sound better to the player.

First let's make sure we're talking studio use here as I get not wanting to gig with a pc. In discussions comparing hardware and software I always start with "aside from the interface and immediacy" knowing this to be the hardware advantage. I still challenge these hardware interfaces because while I know they're better than mousing around some of them are still not great. I mean if they were so great wouldn't everyone be programming their own sounds? hand

Regarding the HS at a really incredible price how many folk just want presets (nothing new here)? And of course Poly AT as opposed to messing with the oscillators parameters, and all those modulation possibilities? I still think you can't dismiss maybe the only interface advantage computer software offers- the big screen. Not saying this makes the overall experience better than hardware (it doesn't) but it helps. Btw I'm looking forward to a Wavestate review with this in mind.

Now assuming the sound quality is equal between a really good VST and a digital hardware synth then the cost of that keyboard interface/immediacy may be several thousand dollars. Plus hardware takes up real estate. This is why all my digital is in the PC (except for my PC3x controller) and I spend much effort on making the VST experience as pleasant as possible. I do realize PCs/interfaces cost money but assuming you already have them..


Slight tangent here but imagine a generic physical controller slab where through motorized positioning of real knobs, slider and buttons you could duplicate the visual interface of any VST. And store that configuration for recall. I use my controllers (combination of PC3x and Akai MPD232) to handle a lot of the VST interface. But this doesn't match up visually with whats on the screen and so while better than just mousing it doesn't eliminate the mouse all together .


Originally Posted by Dr Mike Metlay
As for massive polyphony, I respectfully disagree. If you're doing entire arrangements on one machine with multitimbral usage over many MIDI channels, yes, I can see the advantages. But if you're talking about a single timbre that you're playing in real time, most synths turn to muck if you play a lot of two-fisted lines and chords on them. This isn't a piano, where note ringouts and sympathetic vibrations are critical to its sound, or an organ, where tone wheel interactions are critical when playing smears and the like; this is a synthesizer, where sounds are often so complex that playing more than 16 of them at a time is actually counterproductive (ask any Polymoog player how often they play this way, even though they could). E-mu made a lot of synths and modules with up to 128-voice polyphony; I personally know exactly zero people who used them monotimbrally just to have all those voices under their hands.

Andromeda - 16 voice. Note I almost never use it in Mix (combination) mode. I sometimes create single patches that "play" but don't sound like a piano or organ and I even use a sustain pedal with them. This is where I often wish for more voices. Since they're my own patches you'll have to take my word that playing all those voices doesn't muddy things up. And this is real analog.

I have no doubt that muddiness can be a valid concern with polyphony in the hands of the wrong person. But tbh I think using this rationale spawned out of manufacturer's marketing excuses from 30+ years ago. Right up there with why we don't need a color monitor for a DAW and why mixing board jacks should be in the back facepalm. More voices makes the design more complicated; thermal, overdriving op-amps, testing, ASIC/FPGA and/or pwb real estate etc. In other words more expensive - that's the bottom line.

Sorry - I know I'm preaching to someone with much more expertise than me and who I greatly respect. Hope I didn't get too carried away.

Re: GEARLAB REQUESTS: Please post them here!
Dave Bryce #3051107 06/26/20 12:12 PM
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 66
Likes: 15
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2020
Posts: 66
Likes: 15
I see it was already mentioned here once, but I'd love to see a thorough, unbiased review of the Osmose when it's finally available. Is it really going to be all that and a bag of chips? I dunno. Haven't been too impressed by the demos of it so far, but I'm not unimpressed either. Kinda on the fence. I mean, it's intriguing, even if it is one of the ugliest synths I've laid eyes upon (my subjective opinion, naturally). Really don't like the look of it, but others do like it. And I definitely don't like that you need a computer to do any editing on it. Anyway, if it's possible to snag one of those temporarily, that would be very, very cool. And if not... no big deal. smile I'm happy with my Hydrasynth's poly AT.

Re: GEARLAB REQUESTS: Please post them here!
Dave Bryce #3051215 06/26/20 11:55 PM
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 20
Platinum Member
Offline
Platinum Member
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 20
I faux-rescind my other votes & say go for the Kurzweil PC4. Ks were always above my league, immediate interests & needs, but I also know that being near-modulars inside, they were used in Pink Floyd & David Rosenthal rigs for good reasons. I haven't laid hands to one since my first music store job had a K250 on the floor. Then I bought a Mirage (killer 8-bit PNO!) and saw Patrick Moraz wring out a 250 in a duet concert with Bill Bruford. Man, I'm so old, I'm peeing dust. Anyway, yeah, I'm curious about the fringe lands of a K in particular.


Synth-love is a phase-locked loop of OCDs.

https://soundcloud.com/david-emm-1
1 member likes this: Dave Bryce
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4