On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 23:04 +0100, David Olofson wrote: > On Saturday 01 December 2007, bradley newton haug wrote: > > like most 'gut feelings' related to anything audio the only real > > answer lies in a pair of heaphones,a blondfold and an A/B box. > > Solves all problems of perception. > > ...but that would require playing the *exact* same sounds on both > systems, which is pretty much where the very problem is here: The > hardware synths tend to use secret, proprietary algorithms. "Algorithm" implies it's a software synth anyway. A softsynth running in an FPGA or DSP is not a hardware synth. Well, not in my book anyway. > From a theoretical standpoint, there's no need for an A/B test at all. > The hardware synths most people are talking about here *are* > computers running software synths. Same algorithm ==> same result. > (Assuming "algorithm" includes using or emulating the exact same data > types, obviously.) Exactly. > And, if you find a softsynth inferior to some hardware synth due to > resolution issues, recompiling it with 'double' sample and control > values would allow it to beat most hardware synths flat to the ground > in that department, I'd think. Or why not 'long double' while you're > at it. ;-) It depends on the software involved. Great though Novation stuff is, it aliases terribly (for instance). Nice filters though. Gordon _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
