With analogue vs digital, there's really no actual competition, you just use both together as nature intended. Choose both!

Digital and analog are _different,_ not better or worse. They do some things well and others poorly. I appreciate both for what they're worth.

I'm not sure about the other artists, but Ultravox were using digital synths (like the PPG Wave) as early as 1980/81, so it probably wasn't digital that was the problem 🙂It's funny when I hear people talking about wanting to make music with tape and exclusively hardware synths and outboard. Those of us who went through the transition of analogue to digital have the same bewildered reaction that your mentor did - why on earth would you want to do that? The workflow with tape sucked in so many ways and it was incredibly expensive to do it at any kind of professional level. The gulf between what you could achieve in a home studio vs a pro facility in terms of the gear alone was enormous. The DAW democratised music production in a way that few things have.

they’ll record and mix all on analog and then be like “LISTEN TO IT ON SPOTIFY”

I like the video Starsky Carr did where he put up classic analog and various digital synths against each other. A bunch of people tried to figure out which was which and zero got it right. In the monosynth section I was certain I knew which was the Minimoog, but it turned out that one was the Hydrasynth. Today I have both a Moog and a Hydrasynth on my stand.

I want to see a scientifically valid blind test of whether the human ear can even discern a difference between analog and digital sounds.

What people miss here is that the biggest difference between digital and analog is workflow and mindset. It’s not a “blind A/B” situation anymore because many digital processors have gotten good enough to blur those lines. The issue with digital is its very strengths: infinite reproducibility, infinite options immediately available: option paralysis is real. Nothing feels “special” when it’s no longer of the moment. Backup that synth track and then try every other preset/soft synth. My solution to this is a high commitment approach to recording when I’m writing/producing. I print stuff constantly. I keep backups of the whole project along the way but I almost never open them because it’s prohibitive enough to discourage doing it. I still think a lot of analog saturation effects, particularly the subtle ones, have a kind of magic that digital hasn’t fully hit yet. If you’ve got the money hybrid is probably the best way to go

You went in depth and was really thorough. The way you laid out your life’s narrative was entertaining. The discussion’s subject is relevant and you brought your sensibility to it, not just the usual few talking points. This is a good video made with a lot of effort, I think putting more effort in the thumbnail and the first few seconds would unlock a new level for you on KZfaq. I will dig trough your other videos now.

Really great video, nice to see the topic explored so honestly & comprehensively beyond the meme. Hard subbed and looking forward to more of these

(I'm 1000% done with the Analog vs Digital discussion.) The Platonic Idealism (and Muse) bit was interesting tho! I feel the same when making (good) music. It's as if I'm playing something that is already there and right now wants to be heard. Didn't know that this theory of thought was called 'The Platonic ideal'. Nice.

An important point for me is the physical aspect of interacting with a piece of hardware versus a plug-in, being able to turn a filter knob or change an envelope using sliders allows much more creativity than clicking around a VST interface. But if I was to compare the digitally produced 'virtual analog' sound from say the Yamaha Reface CS with its analog equivalent, I honestly can't tell the difference.

Wow, finding your channel this afternoon was quite a treat! Very nice reflection that I’m sure all of us who make electronic music have had at some point. Took a long break from music and just getting back into it and I’m finding that anything tactile (whether it’s analog or digital) is just infinitely more inspiring and fun than clicking a mouse. I’m in the market for a polysynth and part of me is like “well, I’ve got a DAW and can make/use any digital polysynth I like, so if I’m gonna buy something it should be analog” Still weighing how important that actually is, but definitely cool to find this vid while I’ve been poring over geartube reviews the past week lol.

I've become increasingly interested in going full analog hardware setup, not because I think it sounds better or "warmer" (which I hear a lot from analog fans) but because I genuinely think it will force me to think and compose differently. It's the same argument that I have with people regarding collecting vinyl. I think a lot of the supposed sonic benefits of vinyl are straight snake oil, but to me, it's nice to be forced to sit and enjoy an album differently as part of a ritual that doesn't involve the ADHD-inducing screen. Everything you said in this video resonated with me so much, fantastic video. "Mechanically elaborate but inherently limited" is a brilliant piece of writing, my friend. A pleasure to have found your channel!

I love this type of content do. Freaking awesome man keep it up 🙌🏾🙌🏾

Nice treatuse. Welcome to the 21st C. 👍 😊 I'm with David.

Great break down, ive gone back and forth about Anolog Vrs Digital production, i still prefer the hands on. However I think we are in golden age of Digital / Analog hardware. Just to add, your melodies are great on your bandcamp ! Looking forward to the next album.

I still agree with the analog purists. Yes, analog is still better, for all of the reasons we've heard a thousand times over. But too many people in the analog camp have a dated opinion of digital, which has come a _long_ way in the last 20 years. Obviously, a real Prophet 5 still sounds better than even the best Prophet emulation, but you clearly can't just write off Softube's Model 80 as "cold and lifeless". It's shockingly close. And circuit-level analog modeling is only going to get better. Yes, analog is still better, and I believe that analog will still be around 20 years from now for the same reasons that the Fender Stratocaster is still around. But digital _is_ inevitably going to catch up.

I listened to this at the end of my best day of jamming on my modular ever. I'm only getting started but I feel so much more free than in a daw, paradoxically because of the restrictions. I'm not an audiophile in any way, so the claims of digital sounding worse has always been theoretical to me. It's about workflow, limitations, and expectations. Work with a daw and endless plugins if you know what you want and just need the tools to create that. I'm not that kind of person, I want to play.

The conclusion that I've come to is that it's all about workflow. Analog workflow is different than digital/DAW so the music I make with each sounds different. With analog it's more about seeing what the hardware can do. With digital, it's about what I can do.

When all said is done, there is no such thing as „digital sound“. Digital is an intermin storage medium, or whatever else you want to call it. But by the time it reaches your ears, any sound will be analogue.

New sub. This was entertaining af. Last year, I bought 4 analogue synths and 2 sequencers. In the last couple of years I have bought about 30 guitar pedals, 4 guitars, a groove box, 2 amplifiers and all the other stuff needed to join it all together. I use ableton live, GGDrum, vcv rack, amplitude. I love all of it. I am older so I have no purpose for how I use the gear but I love it. When I am using it I feel inspired and free. Use whatever gear brings joy. Be creative and love the process, whatever it is.

You are a blessing! Go for it! 🎹🔥

Nice another video. Hope this channel grows

Most discussions online speak of analog vs digital. We use a hybrid system. Both analog and digital at tracking, mixing, summing, mastering.

Fantastic take! Recording acoustic instruments is the same way as analog synths - no midi quantization and punch-ins are iffy. Easier just to re-do the take! Nowadays we're spoiled with external instrument tracks where you can record the midi and feed it back to your analog synth while playing with the knobs haha

Very nice sir! Very nice indeed

great video! i especially enjoyed the chapter on platonic idealism and the muse :)

I think in some ways that 80s shift might have had more to do with the move from monosynths to polyphony. Early 80s synth bands had to arpeggiate their chords because of monophony. Then they'd get a polyphonic keyboard and suddenly they could just play the chords. The harmonic effect was the same, but that rhythmic movement and busyness we liked, was now gone.

7:40 - Exactly. Analogue nostalgia is only possible in an oversaturated, wealthy, prosperous environment. It is a luxury commodity that wastes valuable resources such as time. Nice work if you can get it, but don't count on the demand for it being sustainable.

I am with you on most every point you make. While we could argue endlessly about whether one can hear the difference between sounds made by analog vs digital sources, it is self-evident that working with different tools has definitely lead artists to make very different sounding results. I think you’re dead-on with the concept that the restraints and limitations matter. They sure help me. I digitally record, process and mix almost exclusively analog instruments. And it works whenever the song is moving me.

I use both, and what I have found is the instrument I select works through me and changes the result profoundly. My whole mental context changes when I'm working with large heavy knobs on my Moog compared to kit bashing together all kinds of modulators on a digital synth in my DAW. So it isnt so much the sound but the entire headspace and context that changes, and that gets reflected in the end product. Not for better or worse, but you can definitely hear it. Anyway, very enjoyable to hear your thoughts and feelings on the matter. Thanks and have a good day.

The tape hiss in this video is really distracting and irritating, so I guess it kinda fits with content and presentation.

17:03 - great stuff! Love that line...

this is my first time seeing any of your stuff, but I can confidently say there's nothing wrong with your approach to editing/video production! The simplicity is human and refreshing. Great nuanced take on the divide between analog and digital! As someone who can't really afford analog synths I've defaulted to using VSTs. While I have been able to achieve a lot of the sounds reminiscent of the 70s/80s synthpop and post punk records I love, there still seems to be something missing - workflow. The act of using a sequencer or having a filter knob right in front of your face at all times are things that will inevitably lead to different results. Sure I could automate stuff, but there seems to be a difference between thinking "I should draw X Y & Z in" vs just grabbing stuff and tweaking the arrangement in real time. Also the forethought and prep that needs to go into creating a part before recording will play a key role as you mentioned. Anyway, looking to start off with some volcas as a gateway drug and see where things go from there lol

Good for you ❤

POV: How to compress audio that far, that you can hear background noise during the whole video.

A lot of what you say makes sense, but many things said are not factual or misleading. Just because someone created every possible melodic combination using 12 tet does not mean there is a a finite number of combinations. It is very obviously infinite. You are coming from a very western centric point of view and disregarding so much or the worlds music. Also, I find it quite weird that you do not mention MIDI when you are talking about having to "re-record and entire track". MIDI has existed for close to 40 years and is an amazing way to control analog hardware, digitally. Also, You do not go into any specific what so ever. Like the non-linearity of analog feedback networks happening at light speed. That cannot be replicated digitally. At least not for a very very long time. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate your point of view, I just feel like it is kind of off the mark in some spots. It almost feels like you are apologizing to your mentor. I appreciate and agree with your idea that the difference between analog and digital is something to not be overly concerned with as ones focus should be on making music, not necessarily the mode of the tools you choose. The tools that inspire you and the tools that are accessible to you are what matter most. Point being, digital is better at some things and analog at others and there is a ton of crossover. Spending an inordinate amount of time trying to figure out all of those differences is wasteful. Make music, discover the differences as you grow.

Earned my sub, great vid Plugins have come a long way since the early 2000s Recently released vst instrument “Mariana” from Moog music, which isn’t a plugin version of a hardware synth but a unique original instrument really blew my mind It took time for me to become willing and able to use digital tools but now that I do, they’re just too useful, albeit generally less inspiring. So having actual gear is still a necessary part of the process as each piece of gear is it’s own instrument that will drive inspiration in its own specific way. Not gonna get too deep into that but if you want we could do a talk about it

Digital is the way to go, handsfree down, nothing comes even close!🎉🎉🎉

So, I was working in a studio as recording assistant during the nineties, lots of hours with the tape - your mentor, of course, has embraced digital as we all did back then. I think you have put yourself through a tedious process needlessly, that's all I've gotta say - although thanks for sharing. Digital = bad is just not true, and in the end, you were consuming digital copies of all that music. Your perception of what true analogue was formed by listening to the music from digital media (ipod or computer you say - I recon using limewire you were downloading LOSSY mp3s). Just to be clear, I adore analogue synths, tape and processors. my studio is full of outboard gear , some budget, some a bit on a high end. same for synths - Prophet 10, OB6, Jupiter 6, Moogs, etc etc. But I also love Super 6, and 3rd wave, and PPG, and DX7, Wavestation, JV1080 and many other digital synths that are absolutely boss. I get AD wars, but from my perspective, there is no winner.

I enjoy both analog and digital sounds. They complement each other very well. For those who claim that analog sound emulations are almost identical to real machines, they are somewhat correct. However, the significant difference lies in the working ergonomics - it's much more intuitive and faster than working with a mouse and keyboard

I started in 2001 with Reason and VSTs and wanted a BCR2000 to make controls tangible and automate everything. Then computer updates/upgrades started making some VSTs obsolete, then whole projects. I took a break for a couple of years and decided to go the hardware route. I still fire up those tools and get going and can plug them and pair them in an infinite number of ways, then record to a DAW.

I call myself a recovering analog purist. I started making electronic music in the late 1980s and by the mid 1990s was making a living buying, modding, and selling analog synths. In the 90s, some of the early virtual analog stuff was a big turn off and justified my opinions in my mind. I took a long break and came back to electronic music production and was really shocked by the quality of digital emulations of analog synths. I now use a hybrid set up but it’s 80-90% digital, but I have no attachments to any analog stuff and find myself reaching for analog gear less and less and producing more music than ever.

I am not idealogically wedded to one type of synthesis being better than the other. For me it is whatever sounds the most fitting for the track. I wouldn't want to go back to recording my tracks on a four track cassette like I did in the 80s and early 90s, as the hiss becomes very noticeable when bouncing down and used to drive me nuts. I can't say that the limitations of four track are preferable to a digital DAW with its greater possibilities for the home recordist, because for me they are not. I would be interested to hear how a track I have finished on my DAW would sound when bounced to my Akai GX-4000D reel to reel, when I get round to servicing it. The debate for me is vintage analogue vs modern analogue. Personally, I am more inclined to go for modern as vintage requires a long term commitment to maintaining it and associated costs. My first set up was a Casio CZ-1000, SK-1, Roland SH-101, MC-202, TR-606 and Sequential Pro-One, so I've always had a mixture of analogue and digital and it feels perfectly normal to blend the two. Otherwise I'm a bit bored with the analogue vs digital. mac vs PC arguments. I will continue with both working in harmony.

People neglect that we as human beings are tactile creatures, as are most mammals. The concept of, "warmth" and. "feeling" in audio is inherently linked to our seeking contact and connection with things. We are made of, "wires" and the signals that flow through them as we are joined together organically. What we appreciate reflects our organic function. Analog will always be a thing, vinyl and other formats will always be with us because they FEEL better.

Regarding the estimated limit of possibilities it's funny when you consider the beliefs of modular synth geeks: Some of them argue that this is the very reason musicians have to dive into modular in order to find new SOUND instead of melodies. But honestly, I doubt consumers will ever care about to which degree and through what number of modules a saw wave gets folded or what kind of filter is applied to this or that kind of noise.

What I like about the "analog mindset and workflow", is having things to do ONE thing, exactly what you need. (hmmmm, maybe not always, so because of that the digital workflow can be better).

chosing instruments, techniques, methods of any kind is to find what you can afford and inspires you the most. thats it. I find more joy digging into late 80s digital and hybrid synths than in regular analog poly synths. analog is so limited that most of them sound more or less the same to me. so I have only one analogue poly.

One central aspect that might sound philosophical is the reversal of the artist - instrument relationship. If we look at the loudest voices going on and on about the type of gear they use (and/or what everybody else should or must be using): they are essentially defining themselves by the tools they use. This is fundamentally flawed. If we look at the greatest names: Klaus Schulze announced, infamously, the "death of analogue" - then did a 180 degrees turn, admitting that it was misguided as it completely missed the core aspect. Vangelis, famously, did not make any distinction between what kind of instruments he used: acoustic, electronic (and within that, analogue or digital) - he concentrated on the sound, not HOW it was made. Sure, both disliked e.g. programming aspects that broke spontaneity in their famously improvisation-based creative process. For me, personally, after too many years spent in audio processing and synthesis, both commercially in day job and as a hobby supporting my musical activities, the use of antiquated criteria is also a hugely nonsensical aspect. For example, some of the arguments against virtual analogue no longer hold... because processing power, DSP internal numerical representation and maths precision that comes with it, etc. have vastly evolved and even just 10 years ago it was inconceivable to produce such accurate physical modelling-based real time synthesis as we can do now. The entire analogue vs. digital polemic is frankly tiring and, in the 2020s, simply ludicrous on many levels. One can understand the mental (it is largely psychological, therefore irrational) process that makes some still get terribly heated and emanate (logically, technically, philosophically / semantically) deeply flawed 'arguments' that eliminate one or the other technology, but that does not mean that the process is valid. If we look at any and all great names, they have one thing in common: they embrace any and all technology and use the right tools for the right task. Those who are shouting at 120dB volume about 'only digital' or 'only analogue' seem to always have one thing in common: they try to justify their obvious creative shortcomings by vacuous arguments about the tools. Again, totally turning upside down the artists - tool relationship.

I dare to suggest another hypothesis for the change in the early 80s'. Two major sound ways of working were based on 'unnatural' phenomena, namely the gated reverb and FM-synthesis. One group of listeners were impressed by the drums and pleasantly surprised by the novelty and 'clarity' of FM, the other half, I dar to say with a more musical and sensitive ear, was appalled. It does turn that FM is quickly tiring (by its unnatural nature) but 'analog' keeps it appeal. Because digital facilitated these development, it seems its the digital, but its not. The one things come with the other.

I feel like you will understand the rules I set for myself In my current one man band project. I have a rule that loops, tracks or automation is not allowed. That way the performance stays more dynamic, skilled, and engaging. I play keyboard, octave mandolin, drums, and sing all at the same time.

I've been dabbling into photography myself... and there's this analog vs digital thing going on too. And you know? I think it all boils down to the same. A good photo is a good photo no matter the medium. And in the end it all ends up digitized to show it off most of the time. What I get is the idea of "I want to be out of «the box»" and that box is the computer. Most of the people that have day jobs have the screen in front and when you go to do your hobby you want to escape that. I know that's my case too, I spend a LOT of time in front of a screen and a keyboard, and while I enjoy it, and it is super convenient, I want to be able to do things out of «the box». Some other people even loathe «the box». So... if your JOB is photography, like a journalist for example, digital is SO much more convenient most of the time, same as a recording artist or a music producer or a sound engineer that **need to get the job done**. So yeah, when your next plate of food is on the line, you need to make it easier for you. But if photography or music is your hobby, or a side hustle where your means of living aren't on the line, you might want to inconvenience yourself just to boost creativity or because you want to enjoy a process «out of the box» for that and switch context (which is a very psychological thing to do on the other hand). Photographer wanting to slow the process of taking a picture and get distance, think through the next click of the camera... or a musician wanting to restrict what they can do on their setup to be able to create differently.

Inspiring

I think modern albums from Kraftwerk are less interesting than older ones because the same happens with a lot of artists losing a bit of that initial spark through the years, but not because of a tool they used. A synthesizer is just a musical instrument, not some kind of magical thing that suddenly makes you a better musician or worse. There are tons of people with all analog super expensive equipment and their music is terribly boring, something just a loop or something that doesn't go anywhere, and on the other side, you have musicians working only with VST and making amazing enjoyable music. Is true that analog is more easy to experiment with and digital is harder and too big for experiments, but the most important part is what kind of instrument inspires you to do the music that you have on your brain. I'm from a different generation, I'm a generation X and I grew up in the 80s with the transition from the analog world to the digital and I love both worlds. I'm capable of having fun with a hardware sequencer and working with Cubase and I usually use both, and I love working with the Juno 106 as much as with the DX7, but making a nice sound with the DX7 of course takes much longer than with the 106. When I think about writing some music, usually I decide what kind of sound I want and then I decide the instrument I want to play, like when you go for a run or to have a coffee and you have to choose the best clothing for that. In the end, we can't blame the tools because our creativity is not the same as before. Every artist's album is a different story and part of their evolution as artists. About recording and mixing, analog recording is something really painful and I can confirm that dealing with noise and problems like that, was so frustrating, especially if you have a limited budget producing your own music from beginning to end. Today we are so lucky to have so many options available but our poor creativity is not because of the digital synths, but for all the distractions we have in our daily life. Thanks for the video!

As civilization decays, retrofuturism, nostalgia, and hauntology as aesthetic tools are powerful both politically and musically.

Lots of true and good points in this video! I recently saw a short clip of Rick Rubin talking about music as art, and how important it is to create art for yourself the way YOU want it. There is off course no "right" way to make art, or music, and analog vs digital isn't about what's best. I don't consider myself a "real musician" and I don't know how to "properly produce" music. I have a passion for vintage test equipment and I'm an electronics engineer who love strange sounds. I don't make "good" music, perhaps not even music, but I'm having fun, and as a result, some of my stuff is a lot better than some "proper music". Art is about origininality and passion, and I believe a lot in creativity by limitations. When you (Robert O'Blivion) talk about the downsides of analog tape recordings and all the work to keep old analog equipment in good condition, I think about all the creativity that was invented in the studios during the 1960's and 70's. I don't think they always knew exactly what they were doing, but they let the joy of experimenting take over and they were not afraid of doing something "wrong and crazy". I make my music with vacuum tubes in vintage test equipment, but I allow myself to use digital effects like guitar pedals, and I also record digitally and use a PC for "analog" editing via Audacity. I also have a few modern synths, but I don't feel bad about that. I just happen to have found my own way of making music, and I think that not knowing what I'm doing all the time, and not being a properly schooled musician, is what makes my art unique. At least I'm having fun while creating. So, there is no "digital vs analog", it's all about creativity and passion!

Kind of a bummer to think there is a generation that grew up thinking that music via iPod is the way music should sound. I’ve always strongly felt that the iPods itself sounded horrible and everything played back through them was ruined. This isn’t an analog or digital opinion, or a format opinion, I think the specific DA implementation on those devices was awful and ruined a generation of music(along with the 00’s loudness wars mastering). I think vinyl can sound great, but I also think a good digital recording played through a good DAC can sound great. I will also say that 2002 “digital” and 2024 “digital” are wildly different things. A 100% software vst recording sounded vastly inferior to a hardware recording back then, and in the last two decades the gap has closed significantly.

Funnily enough, Dave Oglive, Skinny Puppy's producer got interviewed on exactly this in ca 1988. He got a new digital compressor iirc, and blind tested it with everyone in the studio compared to the analogue tape compressor. Everyone thought the digital one sounded "warmer" For synths, a big Issue i personally have with vsts is that to actually use them properly, you need to buy a midi controller with encoders on top. Its why I usually stick ot hardware synths. All the UI is already right there on purchase and tangible. Tuning encoders with mouse is just no fun. Alot of the hate for va hardware synths comes from the fact they used to be way worse when they first came up in the 80s, synth romplers like the Kawais come to mind. I love my Roland TR-6s, which is vas of al the old kids., They replicated all of the actual circuit behaviour on the 606, 808 and 909. For me digital in general is a blessing, im just a hobby musician, its the only way i can record anything close to professional sounding. DAW liscenses cost way less than a studio. Honestly, in the end it all comes down to preference and what works best for you.

It not always about sound, it about how an instrument responds to touch and the sound which is generated. The differences between a Chinese 100 euro guitar and a say fender is not the sound but the difference in feel.

Does limitation create innovation?

I found the concept of analog methods influencing the workflow interesting and insightful. One of the problems with using digital synthesis is that it opened up just too many possibilities and I suspect your favourite bands just became overwhelmed by these possibilities and lost their "creative path" as a result. What I found most interesting was your classification that digital is "just information". The reality is that analog is "just information" too - It's purely aesthetic - very much akin to the age-old argument that a valve amplifier is "superior" to a transistor based one. It isn't. It's just a preference.

both are good. they are even good together.

I'm thinking about getting a analog tube preamp from the 1950s for my drums and synths for that analog warm sound

I got Volca Sample which let me to discover something called single cycle waveforms / synthesis. Which led me to rabbit hole of experimenting with this technique and actually buying Kawai K1 (an 1989 digital synth based on it). The good thing for me about this analog craze is that those early digital synths (which has a lot of character too) are pretty cheap today. Also there is whole world of some early digital synths which used some analogue components and thus have very characteristic sound with best of both world (various square wave keyboards and early pcm synths form Yamaha). I also wanted to try using actual analog four track recorder which I had chance to do. It was fun but there were some malfuctions and other glitches and digital multitrack recording seems to be much more reliable for me. I am using mostly digital stuff but I like to throw some analog magic here and there.

Nobody was freaking out about Analog vs Digital until it became a thing on the internetz, then getting all the info wrong. People now confuse all hardware as analog. I remember years ago seeing a post where someone wondered how did they get all those crazy sounds in the 90s if it was all analog not realizing a lot of that hardware was digital. In the end, ask yourself what kind of music you want to do and what path you want to take to get there. Some days I start in Reason and might end up in my MPC and that might go into my iPad and back to the MPC. It's all about finding what works for you and brings joy to the process. No tools should be considered off limits. The other side of that is taking time to focus on one piece of gear, learning every aspect of it and squeezing as much out of it as possible.

A talented musician can find something musically useful and appropriate out of any quality of instrument. To say music became "bad" when a certain technology appeared is illogical as music is such a personal subjective experience. Those famous synth artists were experimenting with new synths and I am sure those digital synths sounded good to them!

"I compose almost exclusively inside of a door"

Why is there constant white noise in the background?

Interesting and romantic perspective ...

Interesting and thoughtful video.. 👍😃I think a Cassette Only record label would be great and sold through Online/Mail-Order I'll seek out your music to listen to. I think Instrumental analog electronica should be explored more too.

Apprentce works, Tradesmen works with hands, craftsmen works with hands and head Artisan works with hands, head and heart... (the work is the constant)

Yeah, this is _so_ much faster....

I like both digital and analog synths. I don’t care which it is as long as like the sound and the user interface.

People have been literally saying this on forums for the last 15 years.. So yeah.. good you realized! Ha ha god effort on the video though indeed. I still love an analog comp and eq on the mixbuss.

I think you may be ready for a modular synthesizer...

I find it interesting that people who grew up in the iPod era or streaming discover physical media and somehow like it. I was born in the mid 1970s and therefor grew up with CDs, tapes and vinyl but once I could load all the music to the computer and not having to go through all the time consuming stuff like recording in real time I could never go back again to those. But that does not mean I don’t think about what I am listening too, and I am still an album listener, maybe due to socialization.

analog purism in electronic music does not survive contact with Depeche Mode. that band made me buy a rack sampler 😅

Analog in your story means making more deliberate decisions and choices because they require more work and time, you have to be and are aware of its consequences, the trial and error ia not as cheap, you can't afford to apply every random guess that might be a happy accident (and doesn't most modern music leave the same lasting impression as a Bob Ross painting, fun to make, but will it ever end up in a museum, will million of people recognize it, will it have an iconic status?). Also, making analog music requires many more body parts and by that muscles, not as much as playing an instrument like bass, guitar or a piano, but far more than just your pointer finger, and a tiny wiggle in the wrist (are there activities in live that involve less muscles?). How much of your body is involved? And isn't the body the door to your deeper emotions? Digit means finger. Can we, do we want to live by one finger alone?

this seems like a video that needs a comment letting people who look at the price of a CS80 and get sad know that a hydrasynth deluxe and a deckards dream from black corp are less than a tenth the price and can do much more and if you got an an extra 5k their expander mk2 looks delicious. still aint cheap but, but its not unobtanium either.

I'd like to note about the finite variation of music. It is false. Just choosing different instrumentation to one single piece of music creates in itself almost infinite variation, and playing around with sounds and instrumentation with the same note sequences can make it sound like an entirely different piece of music, even if it technically isn't, just think of every time you heard a cover version that is seemingly different enough to shift you to accept it to be a new piece of work. The very choice of the sound itself is just as much an artform as arranging the notes in a pleasing order, choosing the right accords and so on. So take each of those 68 billion variations of music and add sound variation to it you probably reach infinity.

There are tones that I can not recreate on vsts. It's bs that they sound the same I've tried really hard to make patches on vst to replace analog synths so I can sell them but cut and dry they both sound different and do better at different things. That said some analog synths are awful and don't really show the side of analog that is good

I know a few people in the renfair and historical re-enactment crowd. Some of these folks tend to romanticize the medieval times in exactly the same way you seemed to romanticize the analog music making. Like OMG, clothing so so much better and healthier when you saw it yourself from fabric you weaved yourself on a loom, from threads you spun yourself from flax. Even better if you grew the flax yourself and forged the needle yourself. Except, of course, that this process takes an insane amount of time and effort and the resulting clothing looks and feels like crap because of how coarse and non-uniform the handmade fabric is. It is also dull gray and it takes even more effort to make it white and then more effort to die it some other color. It catches dirt easily and is hard to wash, it wrinkles something terrible and it fades when you wash it. Unlike modern clothing we are so used to wearing that we forget all the innovation and technology that went into it. Forget it so thoroughly, in fact, that we forget that there were good reasons to change.

put a high cut on the sound my dude

Use whatever you want. That's the beauty of today's technology

I've built a few clones of classic synthesizers. The one thing you learn from doing this is how much difference exists from analog synth to analog synth. People paying 3K for a 303 is silly. Most 303s sound "good" and are maybe worth the $1000 in components which comprise it. A few sound "great" and those are maybe worth their price. They might be 1:10 though? Perhaps less. There's not even a really good understand of what makes the secret sauce. There are a few mods out there but they go by the name of "dice-roll" so you can imagine what you're getting.

I believe high quality analog gear still sounds better than plugins, and that's why top professionals still use analog gear. However software plugins are improving and are probably getting close to the analog sound. Maybe mostly for mastering engineers but for example analog summing may still be something the top mixing engineers use. That's different than just putting saturation plugins on the tracks and on the master bus, because then the actual summing is still digital and linear.

I use both

Is an idea that digital can replicate analogue sounds, this is a misnomer given that analogue devices and the sounds they produce are unique and evolve over time. A Moog 37 at a studio will gain a sound according to the conditions it it used within, both with its environment and given HOW it is used by the people in the studio. Through wear it attains its own profile and this character enhances its appreciation amongst those of the genre who use it. Digital can never replicate this.

Not a fan of Yello or Art of Noise then? They did brilliant things with digital in the 80s

The style is quirky with the analog set up...just get some my volts ac to usb and you can power all synths with a battery bank. Maybe consider a roland cube...you have a real forest jam concept video

As a EE I physically winced at "digital hardware synths are just lines of code running on a computer". At the end of the day, every signal is an analog signal. Digital hardware synths, especially early ones, have so much nonlinear analog mojo in the D/A stages, which were thoughtfully designed by great analog engineers. These synths offered new METHODS of synthesis that are simply not feasible with analog - and sound fantastic.

the only analog synths I have are 3 moogs ngl no cap

Digital and VA synths don't necessarily sound bad, but software does... For example: No software can come close to the JP8000 supersaw for example, and I've heard all the "best" emulations... Everything software sounds worse, if you listen to new most new records, they sound like shit. But you can also listen to modern records like Haxprocess Caverns of Duat and Miscreance Convergence which were recorded using analogue equipment, and they sound amazing...

Mini disc was a big deal for me. CDs are still relevant due to their quality and low price imo

we are living in a sad time for making music, I've been doing this for almost 25 years now as a hobby, with some minor success in form of a few releases, but I start being less and less drawn into this. It just doesn't matter anymore, nobody listens to this, unless you are creating some dumb ''content'' around your music and posting every day. There's 100,000 tracks uploaded to spotify every day so its hard to stand out - especially that the labels expect you to make music that is already there and fits the algorithms, to get interest from the listeners. we are just a few years away from having AI generated music.

Please low-pass your field recording of your self, there is way too much high end hiss from raising the noise floor

There is literally nothing more boring thab the analogue v digital debate in music. Yes, digital can sound unnaturally clean, but people qho go on and on about analogue are too often merel obsessed with a fetish. Great business for the music companies tho

There are clips of the documentary “West Coast Theory” on KZfaq that demonstrate an incredible digital vs analog/tape recording. The comparison is done Engineer Richard "Segal" Huredia. He plays a key role in mixing for the Chronic 2001.

The point? 7 minutes in and there is nothing interesting here; just an autobiographical navel-gaze.

Nome of this matters. Do whatever you want to do.