On 12 Oct 2005 13:38:10 -0700, "S.O.D.D.I." <tactical_neural@yahoo.com> wrote:>> What's upsetting you so much? Ideas don't come out of thin air. >> Chowning and then Yamaha caught the ball and ran with it. To >> considerable effect. > >Discussing... not getting upset. Big diff.If you re-read your posts I think you'll detect an attitude creeping through regarding Chowning/Yamaha. :-) CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect
Re: Questions about FM synthesis and amplitude
Started by ●October 12, 2005
Reply by ●October 12, 20052005-10-12
Laurence Payne wrote:> >Discussing... not getting upset. Big diff. > > If you re-read your posts I think you'll detect an attitude creeping > through regarding Chowning/Yamaha. :-)If Yamaha used its patent to block other non-Chowning FM synth applications, yes. But definitely not towards Chowning. All I averred from the git go was that he did not INVENT FM sound synthesis.
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:25:07 GMT, "Wes" <flattopnospam@suite224.net> wrote:>Are you of the belief that digital is a perfect representation of an event?It can be a pretty near perfect reproduction of an analogue audio signal. What else would you like it (or any other recording method) to be? CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm "Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
in article dg8tk1lae5fb53pl6hf4rm8rh3qd0n6t0j@4ax.com, Laurence Payne at lpayne1NOSPAM@dsl.pipexSPAMTRAP.com wrote on 10/13/2005 14:07:> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:25:07 GMT, "Wes" <flattopnospam@suite224.net> > wrote: > >> Are you of the belief that digital is a perfect representation of an event? > > It can be a pretty near perfect reproduction of an analogue audio > signal. What else would you like it (or any other recording method) > to be?probably for recording, as near as perfect as can be. however the original subject is about analog *synthesis* and those old minimoogs sounded *great* and that sound is maybe only very recently beginning to be faithfully emulated in software. there are tons of posts to the music-dsp mailing list about generating bandlimited sawtooth waveforms (something Moog didn't need to worry about since his sampling frequency was infinite) and emulating the 4-pole Moog voltage-controlled LPF with "regeneration". it's very hard to do this well at 44.1 kHz. -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
Sample-playback synthesis is even worse than analog synthesis. In fact sample-playback synthesis is probably the worst. It is not even a type *synthesis*.
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
robert bristow-johnson wrote:> however the original subject is about analog *synthesis* and those old > minimoogs sounded *great* and that sound is maybe only very recently > beginning to be faithfully emulated in software.Sadly yes. There are idiots who are using emulation. Emulation stinks!> there are tons of posts to > the music-dsp mailing list about generating bandlimited sawtooth waveforms > (something Moog didn't need to worry about since his sampling frequency was > infinite) and emulating the 4-pole Moog voltage-controlled LPF with > "regeneration". it's very hard to do this well at 44.1 kHz.Well, then they should stop emulating. Shouldn't they. LOL
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
Radium wrote:> Sample-playback synthesis is even worse than analog synthesis. > > In fact sample-playback synthesis is probably the worst. It is not even > a type *synthesis*. >There are no moral imperatives in this business. People use whatever tools help them do what they want to do, and tool designers will find out what people want and try to supply that need. Nobody is forcing you to buy/use stuff you don't like! And nobody knows (or can easily find out) with what artistic or technical authority you make these assertions, which make the whole exercise somewhat pointless. Sounds like you really want to join a chat-room. That does not describe comp-dsp, which is a forum for asking and answering ~technical~ questions relating to dsp - maybe even sample-synthesis! And "synthesis" simply means "putting together", and applies to both sample-synthesis and chemistry, among other things. Richard Dobson
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
in article 1129236093.782778.245810@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, Radium at glucegen1@excite.com wrote on 10/13/2005 16:41:> > robert bristow-johnson wrote: > >> however the original subject is about analog *synthesis* and those old >> minimoogs sounded *great* and that sound is maybe only very recently >> beginning to be faithfully emulated in software. > > Sadly yes. There are idiots who are using emulation. Emulation stinks! > >> there are tons of posts to >> the music-dsp mailing list about generating bandlimited sawtooth waveforms >> (something Moog didn't need to worry about since his sampling frequency was >> infinite) and emulating the 4-pole Moog voltage-controlled LPF with >> "regeneration". it's very hard to do this well at 44.1 kHz. > > Well, then they should stop emulating. Shouldn't they. LOLya know, Rad, here is where you get added to the killfile. everything you said above is patently very stupid. most people would be embarrassed, but since you're so clueless, you have no idea how stupid you appear to others. if people like the sounds of a Minimoog (and *many* do, just try to buy one of those synths), they basically have three choices: 1. buy a vintage Minimoog (expensive and rare if you want them in working condition), 2. do without (that's your solution, evidently), 3. get some current product to make the same sound. the last option is what emulation is. if it generates the same waveform (after bandlimiting to the human hearing range) and sounds the same, who cares? shame on those slackers for emulating. and shame on those throwbacks who insist on keeping this vintage gear alive. bye, bye. (time to edit my killfile.) -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Reply by ●October 13, 20052005-10-13
Radium wrote:> Sample-playback synthesis is even worse than analog synthesis. > In fact sample-playback synthesis is probably the worst. It is not even > a type *synthesis*.You should take up the banjo. Synthesizers are obviously causing your lumbago to rumble. I recommend that you reconfigure your patch bay while standing barefooted in a puddle of Pepsi. Home ECT has its pluses. -- HellPope Huey I found some Mexican chocolates shaped like God. They're a way more clever people than you think. We can keep from a child all knowledge of earlier myths, but we cannot take from him the need for mythology. ~ Carl Jung "If you take an Old Testament and flip the pages, you can see Jesus riding a horse." ~ Gilbert Gottfried
Reply by ●October 14, 20052005-10-14
