Author |
Message |
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
tim wrote: |
I just reread that thread of mine.
Just for the record here-I bought two G2Xs two months after posting that. |
Well, and I have to admit that these days I use the Demo to prototype little inventions that then get ported to other systems and probably a little analogue cerquit soon....
Quote: |
However -to be honest, I still have my doubts about the G2. Well, no. The G2 is as good as it gets! I love it for what it is. To be more precise: I have my doubts about digital modular synthesis, as a whole.
Current sampling rates are more than sufficient for audio recording, at least in my opinion. But audio processing is a totally different ballgame.
I've had hour-long conversations about this with a good friend of mine who is a audio software programmer. All good audio software utilises copious upsampling, especially on aliasing-critical processes. On a fixed sample rate digital modular platform, this isn't possible (yet). Furthermore, distinguishing between "audio" and "modulation" rates (modular heresy in my book, btw.!) and clocking the latter even lower doesn't make things better. (For the record: It's not only the G2 that does this. NI Reaktor does this too, for example.)
And even with all processes clocking at audio rate, the problem isn't solved. Almost every process in the modular domain adds some aliasing, and it all adds up in the end.
|
Yes, this is all true but they need not nesicarily be properties of digital synthesis. The MusicN series of synths introduced digital modular synthesis and they too introduced the controll rate. These days many people define their Csound orchestras with a controll rate that's identical to the audio rate. My own little darling at the moment; ChucK goes a step further and has variable controll rates that can even be higher then the audio rate if need be. Some systems like Tassman try to keep all individual modules anti-aliassed. The price of all that is cpu time though (and in the case of Tassman some stuff simply doesn't get implemented because it's hard to keep aliassing away, I think that's a comendable additude even if it must hurt here & there at times).
In many cases I think this is a perfectly fine trade-off; many people either don't hear it or aren't bothered by it and in that case they are perfectly right to take the extra cpu time. I could imagine a future plugin standard where everything has two modes. You compose in realtime, cd quality, and record all parameter tweaks, then switch and render it all in 64bit float with anti-aliassing per component and check back on the project after a night's sleep.
Quote: |
Not bashing the G2, though. It's a great achievement and I love it dearly for what it is!
|
Absolutely, it's by far the most technically impressive digital hardware synth around.
Quote: |
All I can say concerning these synth A (G2) versus synth B(z3ta or what it's called) discussions: No synth can really replace another synth! So, if synth B floats your boat, well great, then use synth B. And if you are not satisfied with the sound of synh A, well then too bad, it is not for you. Don't use it. Sell it or return it (like Kassen returned the G2).
|
Yeah. One thing that was a large factor in that was that I could buy a engine, I could get a realy nice price on one but that's not the only cost. There is a additional cost of making a instrument your own, learning all the ins and outs, exploiting the strengths and covering up the weaknesses. For the G2 that would take a huge amount of time so I considered what that would bring to me over the NM which I know quite well. I decided that this didn't add up and that I'd be better off focussing on something different that would broaden my pallete more for the same investment in time.
I still ended up learning a bit about the G2's landscape because as a standard when talking about modular synthesis with Rob and some of the people here it works qutie well. A SDK would be great but in a way it's even better if everybody has the same system. For most theoretical discussion about synthesis it doesn't realy matter what modular you have. Signals will still be signals, they don't magically start acting in some weird way. Ok, at times they do, but then they are wrong and that's for bug retports, not theoretcal discussion.
I think Adim needs to think long and hard about what exactly it is that he needs and wants and make a choice. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ian-s
Joined: Apr 01, 2004 Posts: 2669 Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 626
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dasz
Joined: Oct 16, 2004 Posts: 1644 Location: victoria, canada
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 56
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
thanks, elektro80!
/Dasz |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ddc0oi
Joined: Jan 02, 2006 Posts: 1 Location: Montréal
G2 patch files: 1
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Tim Kleinert
Joined: Mar 12, 2004 Posts: 1148 Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Audio files: 7
G2 patch files: 236
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen wrote: |
Some systems like Tassman try to keep all individual modules anti-aliassed. The price of all that is cpu time though (and in the case of Tassman some stuff simply doesn't get implemented because it's hard to keep aliassing away, I think that's a comendable additude even if it must hurt here & there at times). |
I tried Tassman, but I didn't like the workflow at all. I think, besides the tribulations of digital sound synthesis, it's the actual physical interface I crave. Real knobs and real cables. Because, to be honest, I hate computers actually. I hate working with them. They rob me of an inner connection which I need for making music. It's strange. And off-topic, so I'll shut up. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
elektro80
Site Admin
Joined: Mar 25, 2003 Posts: 21959 Location: Norway
Audio files: 14
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:00 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
dasz wrote: | thanks, elektro80!
/Dasz |
Well, good timing! That mp3 of yours proves that the G2 is as pro as they come. Nice work too.
I don´t want to offend Mr. Adim, but his inital claim re the G2 is a bit on the trolling side. Truth be told, to me it seems like he is better served by an instrument with a trillion of smurfy presets. If he finds the G2 dull, he will most certainly loathe any Buchla, EMS, Moog or Doepfer out there. I don´t think this is a bad thing. Not everyone is cut out to be a patcher. That is just the way it is. _________________ A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"
MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:27 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
tim wrote: | Kassen wrote: |
Some systems like Tassman try to keep all individual modules anti-aliassed. The price of all that is cpu time though (and in the case of Tassman some stuff simply doesn't get implemented because it's hard to keep aliassing away, I think that's a comendable additude even if it must hurt here & there at times). |
I tried Tassman, but I didn't like the workflow at all. I think, besides the tribulations of digital sound synthesis, it's the actual physical interface I crave. Real knobs and real cables. Because, to be honest, I hate computers actually. I hate working with them. They rob me of an inner connection which I need for making music. It's strange. And off-topic, so I'll shut up. |
Yeah, i can understand that. Tassman has a very speciffic workflow that encourages building a instrument once, following a prepared plan, then using it for a while like that. That's a workflow I had to get used to too but for somethings I found it actually helped my process-flow for some things.
I do think many parts of the way it connects to midi are quite good and well designed but I fully see what you mean with connecting; you don't need to get it, It's just a nice example of a different aproach to digital modular synthesis. It's not even competition as i see things.
Perhaps you would be more happy with soem DIY analogue modular? After all; the G2 does have knobs but the cables are still very imaginary. If that's not it then if I were you I'd just order one of Rob's little inventions, patch the G2 through it and call it done; to me those little boxes solve most of my issues with the sound most of the time. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:41 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
elektro80 wrote: |
I don´t want to offend Mr. Adim, but his inital claim re the G2 is a bit on the trolling side. Truth be told, to me it seems like he is better served by an instrument with a trillion of smurfy presets. If he finds the G2 dull, he will most certainly loathe any Buchla, EMS, Moog or Doepfer out there. I don´t think this is a bad thing. Not everyone is cut out to be a patcher. That is just the way it is. |
There's some core of truth there; EMS and Buchla (from what I gather) and Serge as well do take considerable skill to get to sound warm and pleasant.
You are totally right about not everybody having the temprament for patching. I don't think there's any shame in that for one thing you are probably much better off with pre-build synths then with bad patches. I don't think a Modular (either version) makes any sense at all if you don't patch it. If I didn't enjoy that so much I would've traded it for a Virus ages ago! If you don't have that temprament and aren't happy with off the shelf synths either you have a problem. The MAX/MSP world has shown those people exist and that there's a market there. Perhaps we could have a market;
"I need a decent electric piano sound that automatically fades 6 dB out of the midrange once my girlfriend starts singing and with a footswitch controller to turn a lessley effect on and off for my solo and offer two bottles of good wine for it, three if you can have it done before next weekend's gig".
Sounds good to me. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
ian-s
Joined: Apr 01, 2004 Posts: 2669 Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 626
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 8:03 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
tim wrote: | Current sampling rates are more than sufficient for audio recording, at least in my opinion. But audio processing is a totally different ballgame.
|
I expect that someone will start doing VA with video speed processors and DACs soon. Simple naive oscillator/filter/amp algorythmns running in the MHz range. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
cebec
Joined: Apr 19, 2004 Posts: 1098 Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31
|
Posted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 9:47 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen wrote: | just order one of Rob's little inventions |
sign me up, please! |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dasz
Joined: Oct 16, 2004 Posts: 1644 Location: victoria, canada
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 56
|
Posted: Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:28 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
g2ian, i just hit the red store button on your performance ("S3ta.prf2"). i like it.
/Dasz |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
hellleutel
Joined: Dec 23, 2005 Posts: 13 Location: Gemany
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:15 am Post subject:
|
|
|
hi there
I don't think the basic sound quality of NM is better or worse than a professional softsynth like reaktor or zebra2 or such... IN fact it *is* a softsynth. Now a week ago, santa brought me a G2 engine and a Poly Evolver rack at the same time... THAT's a difference, guess which one absolutely blows you away when you simply play some notes. Nevertheless I love the crystal clear concept of the NM and the many many special sounds that are possible there. I get my results much faster than in Reaktor, too.
happy:
u |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dasz
Joined: Oct 16, 2004 Posts: 1644 Location: victoria, canada
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 56
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
dasz
Joined: Oct 16, 2004 Posts: 1644 Location: victoria, canada
Audio files: 29
G2 patch files: 56
|
Posted: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:10 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
warning. intense stuff. does it still sound like g2? probably ...
/Dasz |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 2:56 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Not nesicarily like the G2 but definately like a synth from that generation.
That being said, I quite like what you did here combining elements from rave with messed up sound effects; this is good fun. I sugest you emulate a 909 too, then treat it in the same way. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Rob
Joined: Mar 29, 2004 Posts: 580 Location: The Hague/Netherlands/EC
G2 patch files: 109
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 5:46 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Kassen wrote: | If that's not it then if I were you I'd just order one of Rob's little inventions, patch the G2 through it and call it done; to me those little boxes solve most of my issues with the sound most of the time. |
The analog version of the tiltfilter is on its way. I produced a couple of 'preproduction' filters that were field-tested by people like Kassen, Cristian Vogel and some others, in studio and on stage. All works just like it should and right now I'm working on the final printed circuit board, graphic layout, etc. All components will be top grade, mounted in a plain black metal box. The control is a Bourns sealed conductive plastic type, meaning it should last your lifetime. It works great on the G2, but even better on laptop audio interfaces.
It will probably take some ten more weeks before production will be on its feet. And as production runs will be small the box will cost some, but it will be a fair price. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
monokit
Joined: Apr 14, 2004 Posts: 102 Location: Netherlands
G2 patch files: 8
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 7:21 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Rob wrote: |
The analog version of the tiltfilter is on its way. I produced a couple of 'preproduction' filters that were field-tested by people like Kassen, Cristian Vogel and some others, in studio and on stage. All works just like it should and right now I'm working on the final printed circuit board, graphic layout, etc. All components will be top grade, mounted in a plain black metal box. The control is a Bourns sealed conductive plastic type, meaning it should last your lifetime. It works great on the G2, but even better on laptop audio interfaces.
|
Wow, I'm looking forward to this one! If the price is right I can see a couple of these used in my little studio here.
Rob, will this analog version of the tilt filter sound better than the G2 version? And if so, by how much?
Your G2 version has a Tone knob that allows us to tweak the filter just right for the patch involved, and this setting is part of the patch of course. When using the hardware version, I don't think I will tweak the hw Tone pot for every patch, except maybe when I'm tracking the synth. Anyway, curious!
And here's a suggestion for another little box: the Classifier. This is a box that transforms it's audio input to the Classic NordMod (G1) sound. Maybe using a really good AD followed by the (sorta crappy) DA that is used by the G1. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
cebec
Joined: Apr 19, 2004 Posts: 1098 Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 8:30 am Post subject:
|
|
|
robert wrote: | Rob wrote: |
The analog version of the tiltfilter is on its way. I produced a couple of 'preproduction' filters that were field-tested by people like Kassen, Cristian Vogel and some others, in studio and on stage. All works just like it should and right now I'm working on the final printed circuit board, graphic layout, etc. All components will be top grade, mounted in a plain black metal box. The control is a Bourns sealed conductive plastic type, meaning it should last your lifetime. It works great on the G2, but even better on laptop audio interfaces.
|
Rob, will this analog version of the tilt filter sound better than the G2 version? And if so, by how much?
...
And here's a suggestion for another little box: the Classifier. This is a box that transforms it's audio input to the Classic NordMod (G1) sound. Maybe using a really good AD followed by the (sorta crappy) DA that is used by the G1. |
How many I/O, Rob? 2, 4?
Looking forward to this, too!
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Rob
Joined: Mar 29, 2004 Posts: 580 Location: The Hague/Netherlands/EC
G2 patch files: 109
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 10:45 am Post subject:
|
|
|
cebec wrote: | robert wrote: | Rob wrote: |
The analog version of the tiltfilter is on its way. <snip> |
Rob, will this analog version of the tilt filter sound better than the G2 version? And if so, by how much?
...
And here's a suggestion for another little box: the Classifier. This is a box that transforms it's audio input to the Classic NordMod (G1) sound. Maybe using a really good AD followed by the (sorta crappy) DA that is used by the G1. |
How many I/O, Rob? 2, 4?
Looking forward to this, too!
|
The box is stereo, two ultra-matched channels at high end studio quality. To accomplish this all 'time-constant' defining components are handpicked to zero tolerance. Inputs to outputs are DC coupled at exactly unity gain. Inputs accept line level, but can safely be driven quite hot if needed. When the power supply fails (e.g. when by accident the plug is pulled) a relay will instantly connect the inputs to the outputs, so no nasty silences when using the box on stage.
In a couple of weeks a dedicated website will be launched with all the specs and a detailed 'psycho-acoustic' explanation on how it works and why it works.
An eight channel 19 inch studio version with balanced XLR inputs and outputs might of course be a future option. In fact several people who tried the box have said they would like a control like this on every channel strip of their mixing desk.
The reason why I developed an analog version is because it also fights any remaining aliasing residue coming from DA converters. A DSP version with AD/DA would not do that. And from my research I have to conclude that a lot of nastiness is going on in DA converters, especially on laptop audio boxes. This way an 'all analog' version is imho definitely superior to a digital version. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
cebec
Joined: Apr 19, 2004 Posts: 1098 Location: Virginia
Audio files: 3
G2 patch files: 31
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 10:55 am Post subject:
|
|
|
Rob wrote: | And from my research I have to conclude that a lot of nastiness is going on in DA converters, especially on laptop audio boxes. This way an 'all analog' version is imho definitely superior to a digital version. |
you mean stock laptop audio converters?
also, what kind of nastiness have you found in DACs? HF noise from noise-shaping, HF aliasing artifacts, that sort of thing? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Rob
Joined: Mar 29, 2004 Posts: 580 Location: The Hague/Netherlands/EC
G2 patch files: 109
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 3:21 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
cebec wrote: | Rob wrote: | And from my research I have to conclude that a lot of nastiness is going on in DA converters, especially on laptop audio boxes. This way an 'all analog' version is imho definitely superior to a digital version. |
you mean stock laptop audio converters?
also, what kind of nastiness have you found in DACs? HF noise from noise-shaping, HF aliasing artifacts, that sort of thing? |
Yep, that kind of thing. And lots of stuff that comes from within laptops. The real pro stuff seems to be pretty much ok, though. |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004 Posts: 7678 Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
Posted: Thu Jan 05, 2006 9:12 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Rob wrote: | cebec wrote: |
you mean stock laptop audio converters?
also, what kind of nastiness have you found in DACs? HF noise from noise-shaping, HF aliasing artifacts, that sort of thing? |
Yep, that kind of thing. And lots of stuff that comes from within laptops. The real pro stuff seems to be pretty much ok, though. |
I'm not sure this box will be able to fix realy bad laptop cards. In my experience the single largest issue in laptop cards is a improper ballancing of the laptop's internal powerstructure that leads to various non-sound-related functions leaking into the audio. I'm talikng about HD accesses, changes in the schreen brightness and so on here. Nothing will filter that stuff out, ever. Those cards are made for system error beeps and "you have mail" bloops as well as the occsional mp3 or dvd movie. Of cource it can't compete with the real pro stuff, wouldn't make sense to outfit each and every laptop with a 500 bucks soundcard either.
Still; for even mid to high end gear I found this box to be very usefull, not only to mask errors in digital processes (and there WILL be rounding errors) but also from a purely aesthetic point of view. I've used it on analogue gear and also on profesionally mastered vinyl records in large club situations and there's a lot that can be done, both for a subjectively more pleasant listening experience (especially at prolonged listening) and to compensate for room acoustics or even improperly ballanced sound systems.
Generally I think it's worthwhile to get this out of the confines of a digital system because that way it can compensate for anything that goes around in the DAC process or that is a inherent property of the algorithems involved but also because I don't nesicarily feel this setting should be used relative to the patch; I think that often it's worthwhile to considder it relative to the overall soundstage and mix. I think it can often be considered perpendicular to the "pan" parameter as a measure of the relative closeness of a soundsource. This ofcource relates directly to the level of reverb used (if any) and the large advantage of this aproach is that a larger experienced "distance" can be atained at a lower reverb level. This makes for clearer mixes and a better definition of the soundstage. _________________ Kassen |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Axiom
Joined: Feb 19, 2005 Posts: 288 Location: Italy
Audio files: 4
G2 patch files: 28
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 3:39 am Post subject:
|
|
|
This is awesome, Rob. I hope you plan a future version for modular synthesizers such as Doepfer.
Cheers,
Luca _________________ |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Acidfever
Joined: Aug 25, 2004 Posts: 49
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:50 am Post subject:
|
|
|
IMHO the topicstarter should really consider moving away from modular synthesis. It's hard to accept but it's simply not something for everyone.
I must say Z3Ta is a Vsti that does fit in "that" particular category i call the "cliche sounds". It fit's in the same ile as the Access Virus, filling the need for powerfull and heavy sounds much used in music types like hard house and trance.
I think this result can be achieved with the G2, just not as an out of the box experience like a Virus or Z3ta (or a dozen of other hard and software synths for that matter).
There's a synth for everyone.....doesn't have to be the G2 for everyone does it? |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
s. t. Demas
Joined: Jun 21, 2005 Posts: 17 Location: Holland
|
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:53 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
Acidfever wrote: |
There's a synth for everyone.....doesn't have to be the G2 for everyone does it? |
absolut richt acid |
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|