Theo Verelst Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 Listening to recent analog synthesizers I feel compelled to make a "airplane design" score for them. Some create a feel with the listener that they could go beyond simulating steam engines and chopper sounds and do deep differential equation connected sound synthesis, without much of the "digital sound", a phenomenon which appears on many people's bug-to-feature list, which I don't maintain however. To me, the examples I've heard from Moog Modulars sound like they have a distinct character, no matter who uses or records them, which I probably deeply appreciate. All others seem second to that, generally speaking. I am aware of non-linearities and probably built in deviations from time-invariant character (when not changing control voltages) as well as mutual influencing between signals, parts and maybe modules, of which some are directly related to sonic character, and others to mix qualities related to these electronic wizardry from the 60s/70s. Some polyphonics were ahead of time to make new sonic standards, but much recently sounds similar probably as a result of standard hardware design practice improvements, with questionable taste in instrument design, and most isn't along the lines I thought would be important: quality circuits and control voltage management. Even interesting synths like the Prophet-12 (which I do respect) have digitally control voltages, and not adjustable analog created curves and signals... Anyhow, recalling some discussion I had as student with airplane engineering students, the answer in general, both for digital solutions or analog behemoths is that seldom there is rocker design in synthesis setups. Some seem to fly more than others through, I say. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iluvchiclets Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 I just have to say - whenever I read your posts I can't understand anything you are saying, but you never fail to blow my mind. Keep up the excellent topics! Electro 5, NI Kontrol S61/49, MX49, PC3, Rev2, Prologue, Pro3, Juno-DS, Mopho Keys, SE02, drums, tons of synth software, guitars, amps, and pedals...help me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretel Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 Theo: You have no clue about analog synthesis and (airplane) wing design. So, for you, the answer is clearly: yes. the one is like the other. Stop smoking weed btw, or at least don't smoke before posting. The mutual information in your posts is way below Shannon, and partial differential equations can't model the amount of nonsense you output as long as they are linear or assume widesense stationarity. 2019 W.Hoffmann T122 upright, Roland FP-50, Roland RD64, Korg Microkorg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurMan Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 I just have to say - whenever I read your posts I can't understand anything you are saying, but you never fail to blow my mind. I have spent most my career explaining difficult technical concepts to others with non-technical backgrounds. For those that might be in awe of TV's posts, let me say that it's easy to craft words that leave others in the dark. What's hard is to make the difficult explainable. Casio PX-5S, Korg Kronos 61, Omnisphere 2, Ableton Live, LaunchKey 25, 2M cables Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MathOfInsects Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 I just have to say - whenever I read your posts I can't understand anything you are saying, but you never fail to blow my mind. I have spent most my career explaining difficult technical concepts to others with non-technical backgrounds. For those that might be in awe of TV's posts, let me say that it's easy to craft words that leave others in the dark. What's hard is to make the difficult explainable. Now out! "Mind the Gap," a 24-song album of new material. www.joshweinstein.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DulceLabs.com Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 What's hard is to make the difficult explainable. It's not hard if you cultivate cooperative systems throughout multiple modalities. When you orchestrate learning-intensive business partnerships to close the achievement gap, you can optimize multidimensional living documents with synergistic effects. Only then you will cultivate student-centered scaffolding using authentic, real-world scenarios. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doerfler Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 Listening to recent analog synthesizers I feel compelled to make a "airplane design" score for them. looking froward to that, T.V.. Put it in the shameless plugs when ready so I can give it a listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjzingo Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 Some synths definitely fly better than others, it's all in the sound and the interaction. WIngs are a whole different subject... /Fred Cantaloop Soulfetch Soulbox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real MC Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 I'm not an aerospace engineer, but I play one on TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xKnuckles Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 Anyhow, recalling some discussion I had as student with airplane engineering students, the answer in general, both for digital solutions or analog behemoths is that seldom there is rocker design in synthesis setups... T. http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ad/fe/41/adfe41a8a99aa4d0e56f702d8caed6f4.jpg "Turn your fingers into a dust rag and keep them keys clean!" Bluzeyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoochie Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 I didn't fall off no turnip truck but good god son, The Queens Engish is spoken here. You want to try that again? I sometimes wonder if this is auto generated so Soviet Sleeper agent Boris and Natasha can decode it on their Secret Squirrel rings. Sorry Theo. That's a little harsh but how am I supposed to understand any of that? And it really does give me a headache trying to grok what your saying. You've said some good things before and I know your smart. I'm smart. Hell we're all smart. We're keyboard players! Translate some of that stuff like your trying to sell to people. Not scientists. Ok. I'm done. Where is my last issue of Mechanics Illustrated anyway? I've got to finish the last nacelle on my flying car. (Side bar. I've actually been in the vicinity during tethered ground testing of the Moller. It's VERY loud. And ya. It's the sexiest damn thing I've ever laid hands on. Paul Moller is a nice guy. And a genius.) Thanks, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WesG Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 It's actually pretty much exactly the same thing. Hammond: L111, M100, M3, BC, CV, Franken CV, A100, D152, C3, B3 Leslie: 710, 760, 51C, 147, 145, 122, 22H, 31H Yamaha: CP4, DGX-620, DX7II-FD-E!, PF85, DX9 Roland: VR-09, RD-800 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CEB Posted August 16, 2016 Share Posted August 16, 2016 [video:youtube] "It doesn't have to be difficult to be cool" - Mitch Towne "A great musician can bring tears to your eyes!!! So can a auto Mechanic." - Stokes Hunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Dan Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Theo, I (even though at times have been critical) have always respected you. We've had PM's and I know you know your shit. You're very intelligent, but what's more important is sometimes you're very forward thinking about things. The problem is that it gets wasted if it's not communicated, and that's always the issue. I feel like you have sort of almost a snobby sense in many of your posts like "I'm going to say it this way, and if you don't get it, you're too stupid" and then you just get a whole bunch of snarky comments on something that could actually be a REALLY interesting discussion that many people could benefit from. I know you can do better - explain yourself, simplify things, use common terms, define things others may not understand. I think you'd get the respect you deserve and much better responses. Dan Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurMan Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ad/fe/41/adfe41a8a99aa4d0e56f702d8caed6f4.jpg Anne! We had no idea that you were an old rocker ... Casio PX-5S, Korg Kronos 61, Omnisphere 2, Ableton Live, LaunchKey 25, 2M cables Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CowboyNQ Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markay Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 That would be something. A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusker Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Is a bad analogy like a turd (waiting for you to poke it with a stick)? You are pretty certain it will smell bad, but you can't resist poking anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonnor Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 The OP needs CEB's sig. Gear: Hardware: Nord Stage4, Korg Kronos 2, Novation Summit Software: Cantabile 3, Halion Sonic 3 and assorted VST plug-ins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theo Verelst Posted August 17, 2016 Author Share Posted August 17, 2016 Not to go into (only) some still illegal in the western world slanderous language, and again not starting up a deep interaction, in defense of the point I'm making: the computer simulation types dealing with certain wing design problems and the contemporary computer simulations for imitating analog synthesis are quite unrelated, which is in error. Also, there's the speaker as the target of certain synthesis efforts that, by the right synth designer, appears to be factored out of the synthesis equation of most people, because of reasons similarly important as wing design. Also, since the longer ago or recent advent of some synth designers/managers to this particular forum, I though I'd test out how their electronics divisions (English) language skill have followed the conventional types of main divisions of the university EE world. No need to deeply look into that if you're only superficially interested. It's like some (certainly not a majority) of the people with "interesting" screen names are like little lap dog or something: only interested in little chunks of dog food, and their master padding them on the head. I'm sorry if talking about years of studying (for most people) undergraduate EE subjects cannot be presented as intellectual dog-food equivalent for self respecting writers. Just skip over the parts that are clearly smelling like "elite only" and continue the "comrade" thinking at will. I suppose. T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoken6 Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 I think the first sentence of TV's latest post translates as "here's a surprise: synth design and aerofoil design are actually related". I didn't get anything else - I understood the words but not the combined sentences. I would always want Theo, or anyone on KC, to feel they can post something of interest - and this is potentially a topic that could be really interesting. But without understanding it, I can't contribute. Cheers, Mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markay Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Glad I took time out from licking my balls to read this thread. A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markyboard Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Agreed Mark. You definitely needed a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synthoid Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Too much information. When an eel hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's a Moray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
area51recording Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Glad I took time out from licking my balls to read this thread. OKAY dammit.......coffee flying out my nostrils does NOT feel good..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretel Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Theo, if you think you have something interesting to say, then say so. But only making nebulous statements won't get you or anyone else anywhere. Actually it looks like you believe there are similarities but are unable to say which. If that is the case, then ask people if your understanding is correct or not, or ask if they can think about similarities. 2019 W.Hoffmann T122 upright, Roland FP-50, Roland RD64, Korg Microkorg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harmonizer Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Theo, if you start a new thread, the assumption is that you would want a reasonably large number of people here to be able to understand what you are talking about - maybe not all people, but enough to make it worthwhile. I don't think you are communicating well enough to make this happen. I am assuming you have studied several years of Electrical Engineering. I don't have that EE background, but I did earn a bachelor's degree in mechanical engineering, and took two EE courses. But I have no idea what point you are trying to make in the second paragraph of your first post. I have read many books on airplane design, including multiple books that discussed the wing designs of several World War II aircraft. I can't design an aircraft wing, but I can understand and enjoy those books. You are not communicating clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnalogGuy1 Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 I'm an EE professor and I'd like to understand you Theo, but although I'm familiar with each of your phrases I'm not sure what your main idea is. Are you saying that the nonlinearities of synth design are like nonlinearities of modeling air flow over a wing (because air isn't an idealized gas, or because of turbulence)? Or are you saying something more metaphorical? Guys/gals: This isn't a problem with technical lingo. This could be a language translation problem. His grammar and sentence length aren't English-friendly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real MC Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 The best analog synthesizers have been those with input from the users. The same isn't true with aerodynamic engineering. Big difference in my book, and I'm an engineer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tusker Posted August 17, 2016 Share Posted August 17, 2016 Actually it looks like you believe there are similarities but are unable to say which. ^^^^ This. A good analogy reveals relational structures in one domain and then maps them to another domain in order to communicate an insight which was previously hidden. http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/1983v07/i02/p0155p0170/MAIN.PDF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.