electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » NM Classic (NM1 or G1)
Tips for nailing the Mini Ladder Filter?
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 1 of 2 [39 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 1:17 pm    Post subject: Tips for nailing the Mini Ladder Filter?
Subject description: Care to share?
Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I've read the archives and searched for tips on creating the mini ladder filter on the Nord Modular. I've seen some interesting discussions, but they are pretty general (try rolling your own, try some parallel paths to create more phase shifts, insert some noise, etc.)

Has anybody had reasonable success in creating a mini style filter?

I'd be really grateful for a discussion of the specific problems inherent in creating this kind of filter response. Just to start us off ... my current state of the art is:

- insert microsopic amounts of white noise
- do two classic LPF's in parallel with slightly different cutoffs, and
- increase the resonance with key note (lower pitches => lower resonance)

However, it is a lot more sharp and defined than I "hear" the mini filter. I don't have a mini, but whenever I hear a mini filter sweep, I sense a kind of "wow" that I am unable to create. (I am not very good at creating the Tom Sawyer 12DB/Octave OBX sweep either.) Am I going at this the wrong way?

Thanks,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gothboy



Joined: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 369
Location: Santa Monica, Ca.
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I don't know much about Mini ladder filters....I don't own one either...I thought I'd respond to your post since it seems so dead here on this forum. I guess summertime gets everyone out to do fishing and enjoying the great outdoors instead of programming in their dark basement studios! Can't blame 'em I guess.....the good weather usually has me working on writing and arranging songs and playing guitar instead of programming my synths and samplers. I had to literally tear myself away from the Micromodular to do some writing on a new song.....THAT thing is addicting!
So is this ladder filter do-able on the Micro? I'd like to know more about the "Ladder" part of the general concept. Are we talking about long "Wows" or short ones. I guess what you're refering to are filtersweeps......when an LFO sweeps the cutoff of the filter, thereby creating a Wah effect similar to the Tom Sawyer sound. That one sounds like a held note while the LFO sweeps the filter. But there are short Wows that I'm interested in creating like in this song, check out the little "Wows" at the beginning and ending of the song under all the ring mod sounds and tell me if that's similar to what you mean:
http://archives.depechemode.com/video/music_videos/49.html

_________________
Apple Mac Pro 3.1 2.88 GHz. Intel Xeon Quad
16 GB Ram
10.8.5/El Capitan
Novation SL49/Remote Zero
Mophox4, Nord Lead 2, Roland System 1, Novation Nova, Nord Micro modular, Korg Radias, Roland d-05, Yamaha A3000 sampler, Novation SL MK2 and Remote Zero controllers, Arturia Beatstep and SparkLE


"We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams"

Dymaxion Vehicle Music at www.dymaxionvehicle.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

The ladder filter is the classic 24db filter found on the minimoog. It yields blippy basses, and when running sounds through it, provide some degree of warm color. It's also the basis for the moogerfooger pedal:

http://www.moogmusic.com/detail.php?main_product_id=5

There are some audio sample on this page.

Regards,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I'm not hearing a filter sweep on the depeche mode video, although I am hearing the fm/ring modulated sounds you are referring to. You can sweep a filter tieh an envelope (like Tom Sawyer) or with an LFO. But the character of the filter will determine how interesting the output is. The character of the mini filter seems very interesting to me.

Keyboards.de had a comparison between some clones and the actual synths. Some of the examples feature some filter sweeping:

http://www1.keyboards.de/magazine/m0404/404022wp.html

Best,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gothboy



Joined: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 369
Location: Santa Monica, Ca.
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

No, there's no filter sweeps in the song......I was refering to the warm sounding "wows" underneath the ring mod sounds at the beginning and the end, the end you can hear them better. Listen to it a few times to get the gist of it. I don't know what synth was used for this particular sound.......I think they had something like 30 hardware synths in the studio when making the album.
Anyway, if it's a sweep you're after then that's a different thing. I hear the moogerfooger sound examples......I see what you mean. It's a classic Moog filter sound. What filter module/s have you tried to do this? I guess the FilterE module with the 24db selected would give you the most sound shaping possibilities. Whether or not you'll be able to completely replicate that moog sound EXACTLY is another matter....it's real wiring with real hardware as opposed to DSPs that make that sound.

_________________
Apple Mac Pro 3.1 2.88 GHz. Intel Xeon Quad
16 GB Ram
10.8.5/El Capitan
Novation SL49/Remote Zero
Mophox4, Nord Lead 2, Roland System 1, Novation Nova, Nord Micro modular, Korg Radias, Roland d-05, Yamaha A3000 sampler, Novation SL MK2 and Remote Zero controllers, Arturia Beatstep and SparkLE


"We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams"

Dymaxion Vehicle Music at www.dymaxionvehicle.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Yup, I hear it. Kinda brassy Jupiter 8ish sound.

The classic filter is supposed modelled after a Roland modular filter. It's warmer than the regular filter, but doesn't create those textures you get in a real analog sweep. Not that it matters for producers .. with multi-tracking and effects you don't really need that depth in any one sound. However when playing live, you are often playing with instruments that have a lot of sonic variety and it helps to have filters with those "layers" of sound. IMO.

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 18197
Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Don't forget, every Moog sounds different (at least the analog ones made by Moog). Even Moog said that. It's part of their charm.

I have a real Moog Modular and when I got my NM 1 I went on a big project to compare the filters. It's a bit of a job. First you have to get the inputs to be exactly the same. The saws on a Moog are not "perfect" being an analog oscillator - all of the waveforms are approximate to the ideal. I've often thought that much of the Moog sound was the oscillators as the filters. But who has defined the Moog sound?

Back to the filters. What does one compare? The filters without resonance turned up? Resonance at the just before oscillation? Resonance after oscillation? Do you use weak signals, medium, strong or overloading signals? What waveforms do you use for the input?

I found after a lot of work, that it was a lot of work to make these comparisons and in the end it was pointless. (I don't like work, BTW). Well, pointless to come up with a bunch of demo files, not pointless from the perspective of learning something. I found that given a particular Moog filter setting, I could figure out a way to get the NM to sound very close; maybe not with a stock NM filter module, but with the additon of some controlled feedback and some eq. I've had many arguments with people about this. Some people simply believe the Moog filter sound can't be equaled. I've learned not to argue with people about religion, although sometimes I can't resist and I always regret it.

So, if you don't already know exactly the Moog sound you want to emulate - take my advice and don't bother. Just make filters you like. If you want more low end oomph, mix some in from a parallel LP filter. If you want a more agressive resonance, the mix in some feedback. You can be your own filter designer.

_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Yes, I agree. To me a better way of aproaching this is saying that in the NM the relationship between the filter's in and output for high resonance settings is often not very satisfing while in the Moog it often is, then seeing what we can learn.

To me that's more interesting then making a perfect imitation of simply buying one of Moog's pedals.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 18197
Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 212
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Fri Jun 16, 2006 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

At high resonance you can get the Moog to break up which I like too. I could be wrong, but this isn't what most people are thinking of when they talk about Moog sound. Kas, maybe this is not the characteristic you are thinking of either. BTW, the Moog Voyager doesn't have the same sound as the Moog Modular filters when they are breaking up, as least from what I've heard. In fact, some of the newer Moog Modular filters (the ones made sometime after 1972) came adjusted in such a way as to not break up. But we were talking about the miniMoog filters - yet again, something a little different.

Talking about this is like talking about the shapes of clouds.

_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Repeatpeak



Joined: Dec 25, 2003
Posts: 46
Location: Boston, MA, USA

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

mosc wrote:
Don't forget, every Moog sounds different (at least the analog ones made by Moog). Even Moog said that. It's part of their charm.

I have a real Moog Modular and when I got my NM 1 I went on a big project to compare the filters. It's a bit of a job. First you have to get the inputs to be exactly the same. The saws on a Moog are not "perfect" being an analog oscillator - all of the waveforms are approximate to the ideal. I've often thought that much of the Moog sound was the oscillators as the filters. But who has defined the Moog sound?

Back to the filters. What does one compare? The filters without resonance turned up? Resonance at the just before oscillation? Resonance after oscillation? Do you use weak signals, medium, strong or overloading signals? What waveforms do you use for the input?

I found after a lot of work, that it was a lot of work to make these comparisons and in the end it was pointless. (I don't like work, BTW). Well, pointless to come up with a bunch of demo files, not pointless from the perspective of learning something. I found that given a particular Moog filter setting, I could figure out a way to get the NM to sound very close; maybe not with a stock NM filter module, but with the additon of some controlled feedback and some eq. I've had many arguments with people about this. Some people simply believe the Moog filter sound can't be equaled. I've learned not to argue with people about religion, although sometimes I can't resist and I always regret it.

So, if you don't already know exactly the Moog sound you want to emulate - take my advice and don't bother. Just make filters you like. If you want more low end oomph, mix some in from a parallel LP filter. If you want a more agressive resonance, the mix in some feedback. You can be your own filter designer.


Great post! Thanks
Philip
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Your posts have been super helpful. Thank you.

Ok, I'll try to build what I think I am hearing. The quality I am mostly trying to get, is when I sweep the filter slowly at medium-high resonance while passing white noise through it. I do get the feeling that there are layers that reveal themselves as the filter closes. Kinda like an aged wine that super-imposes other flavors after the initial burst of flavor.

When doing the same with saw waves, the resonant filter appears to linger over the harmonics in a musical way. It's not abrupt at all.

It's like describing clouds. <grin>

So I guess for me, I'd like to introduce noise, and I would like to emulate (using parallel circuits for depth perception) the same cutoff slope. Does that sound right. That's what I have been doing, but I haven't made that aged wine yet. Speaking of which, is the 24db slope of that filter linear? If I didn't know better, I would imagine it to be concave, with an additional peak near the cutoff.

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
deknow



Joined: Sep 15, 2004
Posts: 1307
Location: Leominster, MA (USA)
G2 patch files: 15

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

jerry,
this is somewhat ot for your exact purpose, but it might be helpful.

at electro-music 06, terry furber was talking about the differance between the minimoog/moogmodular (yes, i know they are not the same), and the voyager.

his observation (which makes sense to me, but i don't have the means to test it) was that with the analog beasts, the envelope generators start to build up in fast passages....the peak value (or the sustain value) rises a little because it doesn't have a chance to discharge completely between notes. this means that the filter opens up a little more durring the fast passages, giving a slightly brigher sound (adding to the "excitement"?).

i don't know if this effect is in the eg itself, or in the vc in of the filter...either way, it should be fairly easy to patch this with the nord...this might be part of the filter character that you like....this apparantly does not happen with the voyager.

deknow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
slave to this



Joined: Oct 23, 2005
Posts: 93
Location: nyc
G2 patch files: 7

PostPosted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

deknow wrote:


his observation (which makes sense to me, but i don't have the means to test it) was that with the analog beasts, the envelope generators start to build up in fast passages....the peak value (or the sustain value) rises a little because it doesn't have a chance to discharge completely between notes. this means that the filter opens up a little more durring the fast passages, giving a slightly brigher sound (adding to the "excitement"?).

deknow


i think this was one of the specific filter characteristics that also gave the tb303 a unique character.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 6:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

deknow wrote:
jerry,
this is somewhat ot for your exact purpose, but it might be helpful.

at electro-music 06, terry furber was talking about the differance between the minimoog/moogmodular (yes, i know they are not the same), and the voyager.

his observation (which makes sense to me, but i don't have the means to test it) was that with the analog beasts, the envelope generators start to build up in fast passages....the peak value (or the sustain value) rises a little because it doesn't have a chance to discharge completely between notes. this means that the filter opens up a little more durring the fast passages, giving a slightly brigher sound (adding to the "excitement"?).


Thank you. That would be interesting to patch. I think that every observation is helpful. The more we know about other instruments and the way our ears interpret them the better programmers we will be.

- A related minimoog phenomenon, that I have found helps me is to increase the resonance slightly near the top end of the sonic range and reduce it at lower ranges (filter resonance inversely modulated by Midi note #).

- Also (OT) I find that detuning oscillators more in the lower pitch ranges (and having them come together in the higher pitch ranges), allow for more of that musical analog quality. I haven't studied the pitch tuning and power supplies to know if this is a function of the actual tuning of the mini or whether people playing it in lower ranges simply detuned it more.

Best,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ian-s



Joined: Apr 01, 2004
Posts: 2669
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 626

PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Tusker wrote:

I find that detuning oscillators more in the lower pitch ranges (and having them come together in the higher pitch ranges), allow for more of that musical analog quality. I haven't studied the pitch tuning and power supplies to know if this is a function of the actual tuning of the mini or whether people playing it in lower ranges simply detuned it more.


The oscillators just don't track. Because it is easier to accurately unison tune higher frequencies (and more important to have the high notes tighter), it is usually done at the top of the keyboard. So when you go down, it spreads apart.

Just add a very small amount of the Key cv through an attenuator to one oscillator and tune together (almost) on a high note.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
davep



Joined: Jul 05, 2004
Posts: 467
Location: Oakland, CA
Audio files: 10
G2 patch files: 73

PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Take a look in the 'Building Blocks' section and you'll find quite a few filter emulations and variations. They are all for the G2, but you may still get some ideas from the discussion and from studying the patches to help you build some new NM filter schemes. And you can download the G2 DEMO from the Clavia site so you can actually load and audition these G2 building blocks and use them as a reference while working on NM equivalents.
_________________
Dave Peck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Tusker wrote:

- Also (OT) I find that detuning oscillators more in the lower pitch ranges (and having them come together in the higher pitch ranges), allow for more of that musical analog quality. I haven't studied the pitch tuning and power supplies to know if this is a function of the actual tuning of the mini or whether people playing it in lower ranges simply detuned it more.


Makes perfect sense. The human ear isn't all that sensitive to exact pitches in the lower regions. It's still more sensitive then the designersofsub-woofers seem to believe though.....

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
monobass



Joined: Nov 30, 2004
Posts: 275
Location: UK
G2 patch files: 12

PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

When I was patching a Waldorf Pulse emulation on my G2 I came up against similar issues..

Side by side the filter on the Waldorf sounded so damn 'silky'.. but I think my emulation was pretty good.. and when listening to the G2 on it's own I was perfectly happy with it. The compromise of the G2's slight lack in this area is worth it I think.

_________________
Steve
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

davep wrote:
Take a look in the 'Building Blocks' section and you'll find quite a few filter emulations and variations. They are all for the G2, but you may still get some ideas from the discussion and from studying the patches to help you build some new NM filter schemes. And you can download the G2 DEMO from the Clavia site so you can actually load and audition these G2 building blocks and use them as a reference while working on NM equivalents.


Yup, I'll try some more of that. I've got this PT Mbox I'm using as an audio interface. I dunno if it will play nice with the demo G2. But certainly I am learning a little about the G2 by opening patches in the editor. There are some modules I'm just guessing at though. Thanks Dave.

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

The oscillators just don't track. Because it is easier to accurately unison tune higher frequencies (and more important to have the high notes tighter), it is usually done at the top of the keyboard. So when you go down, it spreads apart.

Thanks for explaining why it happens. I feel pretty good about my ears now. It really makes a difference to the musicality of the patch across the keyrange. Thats goes to the issue of why I am finding it hard I suppose. I can get a decent Mini-esque sounds for focused applications. Getting a filter arrangement that works across the many applications ... more tricky. I'm sure it will come with time.

Cheers,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

_ Steve _ wrote:
The compromise of the G2's slight lack in this area is worth it I think.


I do agree. The unbridled flexibility is very powerful in it's own way. Also, some of the signature (big, fat, round) sounds that analog purists go for are somewhat relative to the behavior of the environment. The art of placing a sound in an appropriate auditory context appears to be as important as the art of designing it.

Cheers,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gothboy



Joined: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 369
Location: Santa Monica, Ca.
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Now yer gettin' it! Very Happy
_________________
Apple Mac Pro 3.1 2.88 GHz. Intel Xeon Quad
16 GB Ram
10.8.5/El Capitan
Novation SL49/Remote Zero
Mophox4, Nord Lead 2, Roland System 1, Novation Nova, Nord Micro modular, Korg Radias, Roland d-05, Yamaha A3000 sampler, Novation SL MK2 and Remote Zero controllers, Arturia Beatstep and SparkLE


"We are the music makers and we are the dreamers of dreams"

Dymaxion Vehicle Music at www.dymaxionvehicle.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tusker



Joined: Feb 03, 2005
Posts: 110
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Still working on it, Gothboy. Smile

DaveP, I forgot to mention that your thread on the minimoogy filter was an early inspiration to me.

http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-8545.html

My current version uses a signal shaper in lieu of the overdrive. On the G1, I feel I get more hi-fi results out of the signal shaper, particularly in the higher frequencies. I add a little white noise tuned through BPF to about 2khz.

Thanks,

Jerry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
davep



Joined: Jul 05, 2004
Posts: 467
Location: Oakland, CA
Audio files: 10
G2 patch files: 73

PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Tusker wrote:
Still working on it, Gothboy. Smile

DaveP, I forgot to mention that your thread on the minimoogy filter was an early inspiration to me.

http://electro-music.com/forum/topic-8545.html

My current version uses a signal shaper in lieu of the overdrive. On the G1, I feel I get more hi-fi results out of the signal shaper, particularly in the higher frequencies. I add a little white noise tuned through BPF to about 2khz.

Thanks,

Jerry


Thanks! Yes, the G1 Shaper can give some really nice 'heat' to the signal. Here's a couple more tricks I've used that involve the G1 shaper:

1. Run the signal through the shaper, and connect both the 'shaped' and 'unshaped' versions of the signal to a crossfader to manually dial in small amounts of heat.

2. Similar patching to above, but connect the unshaped signal to the crossfader's MOD input as well, and set both crossfader controls straight up. This causes the audio signal itself to control the output of the crossfader at an audio rate, which makes only the top half (or bottom half) of the wave distorted - the wave goes positive & the 'shaped' signal passes to the crossfader's output, the wave goes negative and the clean signal passes to the output. You can use the crossfader's controls to dial in the effect. The point is it sounds different if the distortion is asymetrical (different on the top & bottom halves of the wave).

DP

_________________
Dave Peck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tim Kleinert



Joined: Mar 12, 2004
Posts: 1148
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Audio files: 7
G2 patch files: 236

PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

This is the most thorough scientific treatise of the moog filter:

http://dafx04.na.infn.it/WebProc/Proc/P_061.pdf

It summarises thus:
"[...] and the result is shown to be an equivalent of first order IIR sections with embedded non-linearities."

So, maybe, cascading 6dB filter modules with shapers inbetween might be something to try out.

(OT: Nevertheless- I, too, am a "religious believer" in the sonic superiority of analog music technology -for analog type sounds. IMO, it's logical and obvious if you think of it: Analog is best at doing analog. Because it is analog. Why should it be otherwise? I also love digital -for stuff only digital can do. However, "virtual analog" ultimately doesn't make sense to me. It's a cheap compromise. It seems to me as if digital is trying to copy and usurp analog because it has difficulty finding an identity of its own. Hence the plethora of "classic emulations", with all the accompanying hype. It's just making everything cheaper, not better. Even if one eventually manages to perfectly nail the analog sound digitally, it's still a copy and not the original. For me, it's ultimately a moral choice. Do we accept the copy as equal to the original? Sure, one can argue that "it's only a tool" and hence it doesn't matter. But where do you draw the line? If someone manages to pefectly replicate a Stradivari violin, is it as good as the real one? Think about it. --Sorry for the OT, I got carried away, but I think about this kind of thing very often.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Nord Modular Editors
Page 1 of 2 [39 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Clavia Nord Modular » NM Classic (NM1 or G1)
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use