Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
What I meant is not what the filters do, but the quality of what they do. Just listen to the filter of an MS20 by korg, the one the rereleased with the monotron. It is a regular highpass / lowpass filter, but it can sound so drastically different if you want it to. Sound is hard to describe, let me look for a video... http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=JI9rBVP-nE8&feature=related
Actually that's just a regular generator with cut, resonance and envelope working on a half-saw, half-square sound. But that actually exactly proves my point. With something like this that uses only the most basic components, you can do so much. There is no real need for fancy generators. It's like a tuned car. Do you REALLY need it to drive down the road? No. Will it drive better than a normal car? Probably yes.
Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
show me FL studio pulling of those sounds.
You just showed me a TB-303 style synthesizer. FL's TS-404 is a simulator of that particular synthesizer. In other words, it can pull it off with the basic synthesizers you get with the program.
Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
(Yes, I chose an extreme example, so you have to notice the difference xD) But that may be just my affinity to anologue sounds.
I'm not following. That's a synthesizer that he's using. Synthesizer != analogue. A guitar, that's an analogue instrument. A piano, that's analogue. A synthesizer is not an analogue instrument.
Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
Same goes for synths in general, without having a "fancy" sound generator, there are big differences in quality. There can be good and bad sounding low- and highpass filters just like there can be good and bad sounding FM generators, and their quality is vital to a hifi genre such as yours. As I said, it's difficult to describe without audio examples, but compare this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hu1GU-_m4hk to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASIzx4B7U44 The FL one just is missing something elementary.
A highpass/lowpass filter is nothing more than this:
Every single filter uses that. There is no actual difference in quality. There is only a limit to parametrization. If you use an EQ with 3 parameters, you can't do as much as with an EQ with 7 or 31 parameters. But that doesn't make it have a lower quality. In fact, there are equalizers that can have any number of parameters.
I think you are kind of completely missing the point here. You can't compare digital sound generators and analogue instruments. For one, analogue sound generators always have a noise factor. They create sound by directly creating vibrations in the air. Air is already full with noises. And there's the echoing of the surrounding areas. Walls, the floor, the instrument, you, everything vibrates and creates noise. On the other side digital generators create mathematical "perfectly" calculated sounds. You can't compare a pure digital recording to an analogue recording that has that kind of noise. Secondly, a human playing an instrument (even a digital instrument) is not the same as a predefined sequence of notes that is being played exactly the same velocity and the length every time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mr-rCkRrvg In fact, you can't even compare them and say one is better or has a higher quality. If you do, the digital recording will always have a higher quality because it is precise and has no noise while the analogue recording will sound better because it sounds more natural.
Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
And about FL being able to do everything cubase can.. I'll get back to this when I got access to my own PC again. There are alot of things that it is superior in compared to FL Studio, and the time it needs to get used to it is well worth it. It's the most used audio editing software for windows among professionals for a reason, just like Pro Tools and Logic are for OSX.
I'm not saying Cubase doesn't do some stuff better than FL, because it does. I'm just saying that Cubase and FL have pretty much the same capabilities. Cubase has some more fine-tuned stuff and things that professionals are used to use from analogue instruments, etc. Cubase is supposed to get as close as possible to analogue production while FL isn't. There's the main difference I'd say.
Quote from: Subsonic_Noise on September 17, 2010, 07:00:01 pm
Well, I don't just want to criticise all the time without offering a solution. xD I could, in two weeks or so, upload the korg synth simulators and the Toxic3Orion VST for you if you want. You could try them out and see for yourself if it's worth it. Just tell me. (...I also got a 80mb version of cubase if you want to give it another try )
Meh, it's ok. You don't have to bother. I used the 6 GB version of Cubase, I've seen enough. #_#
As I said, using such heavy software as Cubase makes sense if you are into analogue production or close-to-analogue. I'm not even using FL to its full capabilities. It would be a waste of time to adapt to using Cubase because I won't use everything it can do anyway. In fact, I would still be fine with FL 5 (or FL 7 for that matter, since it was the first one to properly use multi-core CPUs). I do my sample editing and mastering with external software anyway.
EDIT: Oh, BTW. Your Colossus actually kinda inspired me to pull this melody off. xD