"Ravi Ivan Sharma" <noision1@...> writes: > VA is virtual analog synthesis, not just something that kind of sounds > pretty close to Analog. Care to define `virtual analog synthesis', or `VA coding'? I can't think of anything except rather trivial things like `doesn't use sampled oscillators' -- and that seems mindlessly pedantic; surely the virus would still be a `VA' if they decided to only use sampled oscillators, but changed nothing else. Indeed I think it's accurate to say that there's precious little qualitative difference between a particularly well-speced rompler and a VA (certainly Roland's recent synths have been playing fast and loose with this confusion). > Finally what's the big push to call the MW something it isn't? It > doesn't change its sound, which is all that matters. Or am I missing > something? There's no push. However, it is a bit annoying to see the term `VA' tossed around like it has some deep meaning. It doesn't, it's a marketing term. -Miles -- Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.
Message
Re: Evolver as an FX Processor // MWXT
2003-02-21 by Miles Bader
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.