The Logic Off Topic list

--- In logic-ot@y..., Kool Musick <koolmusick@y...> wrote:
> Yoonchi wrote:
> >I don't seem to understand it, :-).
> (A) I think you do understand it, actually. (B) Understanding is not 
really 
> what it's about anyway. 'Underhearing' is. (I mean that every which 
way).
>

Affermative. It's a snob thing, :-). Just like the transistor vs. 
tubes league. Now THERE I hear the difference.
 
> >I've listened to a Roland Juno 60, a Roland Jx8-p, a Roland Jupiter 
8 and 
> >a Korg Poly Six. These are synths of the early 80's. I also know 
the sound 
> >of that Matrix 1000. The only thing I can say of the sound of these 
synths 
> >is: they have a certain 'oohmp'.
> Then ... you understand exactly. Only question remaining is how 
important 
> it is to you.

You are right. It may not be that important to me. I squash the sound 
with guitars, bass and other pedals.

> >Agreed, you can also get that 'warm' sound on these synths,
> >but you can also get this sound on digital synths, to my knowledge.
> Some would rabidly disagree with you. Lots of them on Analogue 
Heaven. Put 
> on your best armour-plating, go there, post the above remark, and 
see what 
> happens to you!!!

So, where can I go to be 'the knight of digital synth'?  :-).

> >The thing that bugs me is that people who complain about digital 
synths 
> >are just people who only play presets on synths and don't know 
their synths.
> Now THERE (IMO) you have a very valid point. Not all. But a goodly 
number. 
> However, there's still a fair few people who do really know their 
synths 
> who still insist that analogue synths have that extra something.

And here I may not even disagree with you. It's just that IMO you can 
also get the sound that you like, not necesarrily that 'anologue' 
sound, by using compression, saturation( through amps or stompboxes) 
or other effects.
 

Thanks for the explanation,
Yoonchi.