Mac = analog, Windows = digital | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (1)
w M w
...and 270 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613464
Today 2
Topics 127501
  
 
Messageboard index
Mac = analog, Windows = digital
 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-03 04:58 [#02374846]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



 


 

offline oscillik from the fires of orc on 2010-04-03 05:31 [#02374848]
Points: 7746 Status: Regular



Linux = steampunk?


 

offline cwnt on 2010-04-03 08:46 [#02374855]
Points: 951 Status: Regular



both are analogue and digital, electronic in other words
and digital is made from analogue
so digital is analogue, in a certain way :-D

electronic music for the win


 

offline cwnt on 2010-04-03 08:47 [#02374856]
Points: 951 Status: Regular



oh and you could describe the cpu and certain computers as
microelectronic :-D


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 09:10 [#02374861]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



There was time then mainly analog electronics was used.
Analog electronic devices are big, very inefficient. Today
systems is small and efficient.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-03 13:06 [#02374880]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



You can always tell music made on Windows because of the
aliasing and digital harshness. That is a legacy of the DOS
operating system at the heart of every Windows.


 

offline Steinvordhosbn from London (United Kingdom) on 2010-04-03 13:07 [#02374881]
Points: 3185 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Imagine having to nod sagely as you listened to these people
talking at you.


 

offline Steinvordhosbn from London (United Kingdom) on 2010-04-03 13:08 [#02374882]
Points: 3185 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



Apart from fleetmouse who you'd convince to have sex with
you and move away from limited oral congress and onto the
broader dialogue that only bodily contact permits.


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2010-04-03 13:44 [#02374889]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker | Followup to Steinvordhosbn: #02374882



I completely agree and have no clue what you're on about.


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 13:45 [#02374890]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #02374880



Every well known OS gives enough space for aps to store and
process information. There is no known problems with audio
quality except individual software bugs. I deeply suspect
that you don't know what you talking about am I correct?


 

offline Steinvordhosbn from London (United Kingdom) on 2010-04-03 13:46 [#02374891]
Points: 3185 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



I am on my own and I just amused myself chanting "Erection
Inspection". There's nothing to see here.


 

offline dave_g from United Kingdom on 2010-04-03 14:18 [#02374894]
Points: 3372 Status: Lurker



I know a great deal about electronics and a fair amount
about computer architectures and operating systems, so I'm
finding it hard to refrain from feeding the trolls. Anyway
here's an appropriate LAZY_TITLE


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 14:32 [#02374895]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



If we talking about electronics I say analog and digital is
always together never separated.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-03 14:34 [#02374896]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Digital is masculine in character because it's hard and
angular, and analog is feminine because it's curved like a
woman. So men who use windows are gay. They might as well be
fisting a bro.

Men who use Mac to make music are hetero and have art
babies.


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 14:49 [#02374898]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



Sorry except digital displays, keyboard and etc witch uses
pure digital signals. Other IO interfaces/devices is analog
in nature therefore is operating with help of analog el.
currents (mic, acoustic systems, radio frequency modulation,
...voltage modulation systems and so on...) Seems everything
is digital today - digital AND analogous.

To simplify I can say this - I can form perfect sine wave by
using zeros and ones. As I said digital is only technology
to sculpt analogous physical world. There is no difference
between. Quality is not issue in digital, only cost of
technology.


 

offline oscillik from the fires of orc on 2010-04-03 14:51 [#02374900]
Points: 7746 Status: Regular



art babies :D


 

offline retape from http://retape.net (Norway) on 2010-04-03 14:53 [#02374902]
Points: 2355 Status: Lurker



Mac is analog as in doesn't have as many features as the
digital Windows and breaks down by itself from time to
time?

sure, why not.


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 14:58 [#02374905]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



tikital cummputer


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 15:00 [#02374906]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker



:D


 

offline dave_g from United Kingdom on 2010-04-03 17:04 [#02374917]
Points: 3372 Status: Lurker | Followup to nightex: #02374898



I beg to differ (technical pedantry follows - look away
now)

You cannot make a perfect sine wave form zeros and ones
because you will suffer from quantisation errors. Even if
these are imperceivable, they still exist.
A "perfect" sine wave has all spectral energy at a single
frequency, which is impossible with any quantisation
errors.
In the real world this is pretty academic.... hmmm I must
get out more.

Now, please carry on with this most amusing thread.



 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 17:41 [#02374921]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker | Followup to dave_g: #02374917



I meant 'perfect' sine wave. I cant make perfect sine wave.
Human hearing perception is limited, and technology is far
beyond limits of human perception. I assume you know that
there is limit where quantisation errors cant be detected by
human. So further discussion about analog and digital data
streams differences is irrelevant. What matters is result
(what you get from it) not technology which makes certain
product.


 

offline oscillik from the fires of orc on 2010-04-03 18:07 [#02374923]
Points: 7746 Status: Regular | Followup to nightex: #02374921



try using that argument with the photography community


 

offline nightex from Šiauliai (Lithuania) on 2010-04-03 18:57 [#02374927]
Points: 1275 Status: Lurker | Followup to oscillik: #02374923



There is people who are obsessive about quality and
perfection. This fanaticism blinds them to see things in
rational manner.


 

offline lupus yonderboy from 1970. (United Kingdom) on 2010-04-03 21:36 [#02374940]
Points: 1985 Status: Lurker | Followup to nightex: #02374927




i'm having an awful time.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-03 21:52 [#02374947]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to oscillik: #02374923



There is too many pixels in newfangled cameras. When you
take pictures as Bod Bylan says there is light all over
them. It's a picological disgrace.


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2010-04-03 23:31 [#02374967]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker



this thread reads like a conversation between a stoner and
someone who's dead serious.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-04 00:06 [#02374977]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



A stoner, a drunk, an acid head and a fleetmouse came to the
gate of a city before dawn. The gate was locked and the
stoner said "let's just lie down and wait till it opens."

The drunk said "let's smash it down!"

The acid head said "let's take acid and float through the
keyhole."

Meanwhile, the fleetmouse had wandered around the side and
found an open door.


 

offline goDel from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2010-04-04 00:46 [#02374982]
Points: 10225 Status: Lurker



this thread reads like a conversation between a stoner,
someone who's dead serious and a cocky zen-monk on crack.


 

offline pulseclock from Downtown 81 on 2010-04-04 00:58 [#02374983]
Points: 6015 Status: Lurker



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline roygbivcore from Joyrex.com, of course! on 2010-04-04 02:05 [#02374988]
Points: 22557 Status: Lurker



when i play shows i make sure that everyone else uses the
same kind of computer as me or i wont play


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-04 02:09 [#02374990]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



pulseclock wins the internet and nigel wins a smaller but
still respectable internet


 

offline Greg Reason from Brisbane (Australia) on 2010-04-05 10:36 [#02375088]
Points: 182 Status: Lurker



No, this thread wins the internet


 

offline recycle from Where is Phobiazero (Lincoln) (United States) on 2010-04-05 12:01 [#02375098]
Points: 39976 Status: Regular | Followup to Greg Reason: #02375088



STFU Greg, you have 17 points and your in Australia

if you see my cousin Alex, say "hi" to her for me

thanks YO!


 

offline Greg Reason from Brisbane (Australia) on 2010-04-05 13:27 [#02375111]
Points: 182 Status: Lurker | Followup to recycle: #02375098



Yeah there's only five of us over here, I'm sure I'll run
into her at some point :-P


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-04-06 06:36 [#02375229]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to Greg Reason: #02375111



There is more than five people in Australia.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2010-04-06 13:04 [#02375242]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



They only look like people.

they have pouch


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-04-07 08:02 [#02375431]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to dave_g: #02374917



I don't know how much you know about analogue and digital
synthesis. One of the reasons their hasn't been many
analogue FM synthesizers made is because its too hard to
make reliable waveforms with analogue oscillators.


 

offline dave_g from United Kingdom on 2010-04-07 19:50 [#02375509]
Points: 3372 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #02375431



I would imagine that it's more to do with the sheer number
of oscs needed. Something like 7 operator FM needs 8 VCOs
for.... monophony!

Multi-multi VCO lends itself to digital. You can just just
clock through some wavetables doing the sums then blast it
out to a DAC.
I'm sure FM would sound wicked on a bank of VCS3s!
(Infact FM sounds amazing on a Synclavier, but that's
another story)



 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-04-07 20:02 [#02375511]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to dave_g: #02375509



Well, no. The reason they never did much FM with analogue
(until recently) was that it was too hard to make the
analogue oscillators generate reliable waveforms. Number of
oscillators had nothing to do with it.


 

offline dave_g from United Kingdom on 2010-04-07 20:46 [#02375515]
Points: 3372 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #02375511



What do you mean by reliable? I take reliable to mean works
to specification often/always, i.e. not broken.
Do you mean stable? i.e. oscillators were too unstable to
allow reproducible sounds to be created? I think you
probably do.

I would agree, but you can do FM with analogue oscs, just
not get it to sound the same ever again, which is a good/bad
thing (depends what you're up to). It would also sound like
a noisy mess, which again might be just the ticket (or
not)....

However if you wanted to do polyphonic analogue FM synthesis
knowing full well the limitations, you would still baulk at
the number of VCOs needed!

If you were so inclined, you could set up a simple FM synth
using Reaktor or whatever, then add some pseudo-random noise
to the modulating oscillators and play around.

I think FM is cool technology. It's a shame it killed a lot
of analogue synth companies, but hey, water under the bridge
now....

I started to design an analogue polysynth, but feature creep
set in and I wanted a FPGA with wavetables and FM too (and
additive synth engine), so my plans are on hold! (ambition
>> free time)
Hybrid synths are the way to go. I really like "LA
synthesis" too....

Funny thing is I barely use my only synth (Evolver desktop).
Everything is done on my Akai S5000, so even a sampler makes
a wicked synth....

Anyway I thought this was an OS holy war, not a synth one!


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-04-07 22:21 [#02375529]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to dave_g: #02375515



Expensive, but it can be done

Yes, I was referring to the oscillator stability. I thought
reliable would be a better word. Personally I don't care
about whether or not its analogue or digital, as long as it
makes interesting noises, so the while analogue vs digital
debate is kind of stupid. However, you were talking about
perfect sine waves and I was providing a counterpoint; even
though digital suffers from quantization errors and whatnot,
you will never get a perfect sine wave with analogue
electronics, because analogue oscillators are not reliable
enough to make the same shaped waveform on a consistent
basis.

Regarding this thread, I think it was designed to be a war
of both.


 

offline Taxidermist from Black Grass on 2010-04-07 22:22 [#02375531]
Points: 9958 Status: Lurker | Followup to Taxidermist: #02375529



Fuck. No edit button. This message board is stupid.


 


Messageboard index