> It's possible to make a digital track sound convincingly analog in any > decent software package. Soft saturation on the EQ, tape compression, add > a little hiss ... nobody will know the difference.
nobody? it's all futile attempt - analog devices lacked stability,that meant milions un-copyable micro-details per minute.. you cant name them ,point at one - but the general image is much much different from the digital "emulation" imho. ___________________ Record an analog track > to a computer at a sufficient bitrate and it still sounds analog. ^ true, much more "analog" than the software emulation of tape saturation and all that ... > Techno's godfathers were *proud* of the synthetic nature of their > instruments. They didn't try to make their strings and basslines sound > real. > ^ their "synthetic" was somehow half-organic/half-synthetic when i look at it now.. the word "synthetic" in 2006 means something completely differnt.. it reached the ridiculous extreme, biting its own tale.. ___________________________ someone mentioned jelinek,ok he can sound really sweet sometimes, but it's samples.. a slightly different story.. show me someone who sounds like that relying of software synthesis ONLY. /12
