I want to share with you guys, two opinions, seemingly dissagreeing.
Ofcourse, one could argue that in fact, he's comparing apples and oranges, and saying oranges taste sweeter.
I dont want to question his dislike for pc and favour for mac. Ive used the two of them, they both have their faults.
I am however curious about the question of midi timing.
Now I really dont want to get into a mac vs pc thing, and its not about hardware versus software either.
But there are still some myths surrounding digital music making that pop up now and then.
Keeping the channel faders up to 0dB (analog throwback), pci cards that are supposedly more prone to EM interference (soundblaster throwback) and then there's this midi timing thing.
Debunk please?
When have you run into sloppy midi timing; did it give a pleasent looseness to the music, or did you hear a digital mess?
One hexfix of the outfit Velvet Acid Christ, was interviewed for the Matrixsynth blog, and said: "
and it was the follwing that caught my attention:
link
"i spent years on the pc pulling my hair out, ever since cubase with audio in it, midi has sucked on the pc. cubase 2.8 was the last tight midi i ever got on a pc. i tried everything. and always got jitter of about 13 ms with even steinberg’s midi interface on external midi synths and drum machines.
It was an evil battle. i spent years trying to figure it out. no go. I came from the Atari st with notator and cubase. this was super tight and ultra responsive. nothing on the pc came close for midi. let’s not even get me started on how bad cubase sums and mixes digital signals. sonar 6 and saw studio kick the crap out of cubase for audio summing.
finally got a mac with an amt8 midi. running logic express.
WOW 3ms of jitter, just like cubase on the atari. it records me perfectly, something the pc could never do, especially when i was playing fast..
Logic is not much better at summing, but it records better, and i mix outboard now anyhow so. still saw and sonar 6 are king for digital summing and mixing.
But for midi, its logic all the way. it’s tight. cubase is not.
these are just my opinions. all based on the last 20 years of working on gear. It's all opinions. don't hate if you don't agree. it's like arguing that you like apples better than oranges. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to work or what to buy. I'm just talking about my own personal tastes and likes and dislikes."
and it was the follwing that caught my attention:
link
"i spent years on the pc pulling my hair out, ever since cubase with audio in it, midi has sucked on the pc. cubase 2.8 was the last tight midi i ever got on a pc. i tried everything. and always got jitter of about 13 ms with even steinberg’s midi interface on external midi synths and drum machines.
It was an evil battle. i spent years trying to figure it out. no go. I came from the Atari st with notator and cubase. this was super tight and ultra responsive. nothing on the pc came close for midi. let’s not even get me started on how bad cubase sums and mixes digital signals. sonar 6 and saw studio kick the crap out of cubase for audio summing.
finally got a mac with an amt8 midi. running logic express.
WOW 3ms of jitter, just like cubase on the atari. it records me perfectly, something the pc could never do, especially when i was playing fast..
Logic is not much better at summing, but it records better, and i mix outboard now anyhow so. still saw and sonar 6 are king for digital summing and mixing.
But for midi, its logic all the way. it’s tight. cubase is not.
these are just my opinions. all based on the last 20 years of working on gear. It's all opinions. don't hate if you don't agree. it's like arguing that you like apples better than oranges. I'm not trying to tell anyone how to work or what to buy. I'm just talking about my own personal tastes and likes and dislikes."
Ofcourse, one could argue that in fact, he's comparing apples and oranges, and saying oranges taste sweeter.
I dont want to question his dislike for pc and favour for mac. Ive used the two of them, they both have their faults.
I am however curious about the question of midi timing.
A gentleman called kiwiburger, on the gearslutz site, said: "
"I was a loyal Ensonic sampler user for many years, and owned most models at some time. IMO, the D/A converters and/or analog stages were absolute shyte, and couldn't handle low bass. This was very evident on some samples that always clicked and farted on the low end. So there is plenty of distortion and noise going on to thicken up the sound. Not to mention the reverb that always defaulted to ON when you took a sample.
I use various software samplers, and have zero regrets. I've tried converting the old Ensonic samples, but basically my tastes have changed and I don't like them at all - not even for nostalgia.
There definately are some differences, when playing exactly the same sample - with no effects or filtering or anything.
Here is what is missing:
Noise - don't underestimate the effect that low level white noise has. I hate noise, but then again - sometimes when it's gone, I miss it. Analog dithering perhaps. (…) There is a an acoustic analogy - sound lacking bass can effectively have the low end restored if you have some low end noise to interact with the sound. Don't underestimate noise, whether in hardware samplers or analog summing or mag tape, etc.
Distortion - I have no doubt the cheap analog circuits added harmonics that thickened the low end.
Sample rate - (…)
Erratic Midi timing - the timing slop on midi hardware is shocking. I used to tear my hair out. Now I have perfect, sample-accurate timing - and it's too good. There is something about a little randomisation that our ears love. Whether is subtle wobbly tape, or erratic midi timing - a very, subtle, small amount of randomisation can be a very good thing."
"I was a loyal Ensonic sampler user for many years, and owned most models at some time. IMO, the D/A converters and/or analog stages were absolute shyte, and couldn't handle low bass. This was very evident on some samples that always clicked and farted on the low end. So there is plenty of distortion and noise going on to thicken up the sound. Not to mention the reverb that always defaulted to ON when you took a sample.
I use various software samplers, and have zero regrets. I've tried converting the old Ensonic samples, but basically my tastes have changed and I don't like them at all - not even for nostalgia.
There definately are some differences, when playing exactly the same sample - with no effects or filtering or anything.
Here is what is missing:
Noise - don't underestimate the effect that low level white noise has. I hate noise, but then again - sometimes when it's gone, I miss it. Analog dithering perhaps. (…) There is a an acoustic analogy - sound lacking bass can effectively have the low end restored if you have some low end noise to interact with the sound. Don't underestimate noise, whether in hardware samplers or analog summing or mag tape, etc.
Distortion - I have no doubt the cheap analog circuits added harmonics that thickened the low end.
Sample rate - (…)
Erratic Midi timing - the timing slop on midi hardware is shocking. I used to tear my hair out. Now I have perfect, sample-accurate timing - and it's too good. There is something about a little randomisation that our ears love. Whether is subtle wobbly tape, or erratic midi timing - a very, subtle, small amount of randomisation can be a very good thing."
Now I really dont want to get into a mac vs pc thing, and its not about hardware versus software either.
But there are still some myths surrounding digital music making that pop up now and then.
Keeping the channel faders up to 0dB (analog throwback), pci cards that are supposedly more prone to EM interference (soundblaster throwback) and then there's this midi timing thing.
Debunk please?
When have you run into sloppy midi timing; did it give a pleasent looseness to the music, or did you hear a digital mess?
Recent Blog: generative creativeness ... for kids
