Original Message                 Date: 28-Feb-02  @  09:02 PM   -   Why is digital less warm than....

Mindspawn

Posts: 659

Link?:  Link
File?:  No file

Hey folks, just some food for thought...

We all hear things like, digital isn't as warm as analog, and while I'm not here to argue that specifically, did you ever think about why that is? Outside of some of the basic physical properties, you'd think the two mediums wouldn't be that divergent.... and in some sense, maybe they're not. Now I'm gonna try a little heresy...

Maybe the reason mixes from analog sounds warmer, more musical, whatever, is: our techniques for recording, mixing, etc., are mostly built and modeled on analog experience. We've learned techniques for, say mic placement, that were establised in the analog realm... maybe we should be evaluating new ways of doing things....?

I mean think about one of the most basic differences between the two mediums, the level meter... Many of us that came from the analog world were sorely surprised to find out we couldn't push the LEDs "past the red" on a digital board... Now once I learned how to use digital LEDs, mt life, and my mixes, sounded better...

I'm not really trying to lay out new "rules" of digital recording/mixing, but just bouncing the idea off you all. If you have any experience with what I'm on about here, by all means share it. If you got a "warm sound" from all digital equipment, what was your methodology? Why do you think it worked that way? If you captured a digital take of a vocalist that just simply shimmers, did you do it the "traditional" (i.e., basically as it's always been done on analog equipment) way, or did you find a technique that is exclusive to digital?

Anyhoos, just some thoughts....

Peace All

[ back to forum ]                           [quote]

Message 141/157                 Date: 19-Apr-02  @  10:15 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

k

Posts: 12353

Link?:  Link

File?:  No file

yes, you cant translate 'stepped' digital data into stepped analog signals - the old 12bit sound from e-mu to me is about the quality of the converters which i'd say are way above anything you'd get now in a workstation, combined with the analog filters of the early e-mu's...

the whole subject is odd tho because in the dig' audio areana it is filled with people extolling the virtues of bigger-rates equaling a 'better' sound.... then as a contradiction we have older lo-res samplers.... they sound 'better' to my ears, so i guess in the end all is subjective?...

I cant see the point in our game of having 100db of dynamic range when we crush it all down and use only about 5-10db of range at all if that (except for ambient styles mebbe & ballad pop productions, but even then the use of dynamic range is very low in most commercial music)

___________________________________

I had an idea for a script once. It's basically Jaws except when the guys in the boat are going after Jaws, they look around and there's an even bigger Jaws. The guys have to team up with Jaws to get Bigger Jaws.... I call it... Big Jaws!!!

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 142/157                 Date: 20-Apr-02  @  07:17 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

pict

Posts: 1005

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

Those sympathetic resonances not being captured are why digital or sampled pianos don't really sound like the real thing.When you press a key on a real piano and then release it the whole piano continues to resonate,when you release a key on a sampled piano the note stops immediately.I wonder,if someone created a plugin that could model the resonances generated by instruments and speakers interacting with each other if that would give the listener the impression that they were listening to a live performance.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 143/157                 Date: 20-Apr-02  @  09:21 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

onemind

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

isnt 100db the point where the noise floor becomes present... inregards to a 100db dynamic range.

if this is the case then using only 10db would result in the noise floor resting at -90db.

I dont know if this is accurate.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 144/157                 Date: 20-Apr-02  @  11:36 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

damballah

Posts: 1675

Link?: Link

File?:  No file

you start at 0 db and work your way down. you don't make the loud parts louder, you make the soft parts softer. which is totally contrary to the overcompressed sound that most people end up with. (these go to 11). Isn't it wonderful -- akai's now got those 24/96 smaplers and you just know someone's gonna be running theirs through a finalizer or sumpin and end up working at like 8 bits by the time it's all squished. woohoo.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 145/157                 Date: 21-Apr-02  @  11:56 AM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

k

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

you can have 10db of dynamic range but that's irrelevent if you dont use it... it doesnt exist, all that exists is the actual dynamic range you actualy use, and most contemporary music doesnt use much more than the top 6db or so - that'd my point.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 146/157                 Date: 23-Apr-02  @  02:31 AM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

Brett

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

it's more about the quality of the adc not just word length, right? The ax44 boxes for my dsp factory are crap. they are the same conversion as my 01v and damn is there a big improvment from recording through my o1v and into the spdif. So the pre-amp /adc is really where your sound quality come's from. I do hear more clarity when I mix down at 24 bit with the level lower than I do at 16bit. But once I go to 16bit I think it sounds worse than just recording at 16 bit. I don't trust the wavelab dither, or any other dither I have used.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 147/157                 Date: 24-Apr-02  @  11:07 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

k`

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

sure but the fact 12 bit sounds so damned good just proves again that in the middle of all this totaly academic based debate in favour of higher bitrates etc, it is all subjective... a 'sound' is a 'sound' is a 'sound' - it's the character of the sound i like!

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 148/157                 Date: 25-Apr-02  @  02:48 AM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

Brett

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

so why hasn't some brilliant programmer figured out how to do 12bit on a pc? why can't a pc record at 12bit with some kind of conversion on playback. Is it because of the smaple rate being only 32khz or what ever. I like the old house records cause they all used those s900's and fm synths. I was listening to a tape from 92 today cause my cd player is f-up. I love the grainy warmth of all those dx-100 pianos and, the 909 and the 12 bit samplers doing the rest. It was definatly a sound. I can here the dx-100 on so many of those old house tunes from 88-94. old fm is great sound. It's warm, and it's digital.

hey K , those emu emaxes really sound as good as the s900/950? I have seen them so cheap, I may get a couple just to run some slice up loops from.

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 149/157                 Date: 25-Apr-02  @  10:03 AM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

milan

Posts: 5701

Link?: Link

File?:  No file

Brett, what are you on about again???

- "so why hasn't some brilliant programmer figured out how to do 12bit on a pc?" well, if you record with yer peaks between -24-18dBfs you will use only 12bits on a 16bit soundcard hence 12 bit recording. but its got fuck all to do with the sound quality of those old samplers. EMAX´s sound comes from its real analog filers, not from 12bit algorithms.

- "those emu emaxes really sound as good as the s900/950?" again, EMAX´s sound comes from its analog filters. S900/950 sound pretty poor compared to modern samplers. i dont think there´s a reason why you´d wanna use them, except if you´re on a low budget of course.

- "old fm is great sound. It's warm, and it's digital" man, if there´s any characteristic to FM is clear digital precision. why do you think it works best for clangy bell-like sounds? if you´re perceiving sounds as warm, try the same sound on a suitable analog and tell me which one is "warmer".

Just go and buy that DM24 for its good connectivity to Pro Tools, willya :P

[ back to forum ]               [quote]

Message 150/157                 Date: 25-Apr-02  @  02:28 PM   -   RE: Why is digital less warm than....

Brett

Posts:

Link?:  No link

File?:  No file

milan, don't mean to be a dick, but do you own any fm synths? "digital precision" that is a laugh. My dx-100 is grainy as . not clear as a bell. maybe the dx-7 did some nice clear bells, but those basses and pianos have a gritty low-fi character. K-back me on this, we have this discusion many times.

as for the analog filters being the sound, off again.They add to the warmth, but run a 16bit sampler through a analog filter and you still don't have that sound 12bit sound. A eIII sounds awsome, but it can't do the gritty break beat drum samples of the emu sp-12 beacause it's 16bit. It's to clean. It's the lower sample rate used, and the compression etc that softens the higher frequencies and attenuates the lows which is why drums sound so good at 12 bit. Just ask every damn producer who has been around since the 80's. Norman Cook, William Orbit, all the hip hop artist. They still pay over a grand for sp-1200's. It's for a reason! The sound...

[ back to forum ]               [quote]