ilovefuzz.com

Yep, sounds good is good.

I'd love a Re-301 update to the Boss RE-20, but ...I can dream.

I was being a little hyperbolic with sad day.

And i know digital emulations vs. analog hasn't reached the A=B point with everything (looking at you, delays, some synths, other things), but a lot of people have done blind tests between older analog synths and digital/software emulations, to very surprising results. The Tal U-NO 60/U-NO 62/U-NO LX and the Boutique JU-06 have made believers out of a lot analog die-hards. Most ESQ-1/SQ-80 owners agree the SQ-8L sounds phenomenal, myself included.

Then again, there's something to be said for analog instruments sometimes, and even if they're exact 1 to 1s, placebo is a thing too. And as always, i will push that it should not be "Analog vs Digital" it should be "Analog and Digital" but here we are. If the 303 they're teasing is an ACB 303 that looks and sounds "exactly" like the original, and it's around what the Boutique JU-06 cost, it could be worth consideration. Immediately i'd be more excited if it were actually analog, but then i think about like, all my equipment, and how fucking awesome the Acid8 sounds, and i'm just like, ehhh, fuck it.

A Space Echo update could be awesome. I don't know, i'm not holding out for any impossible dreams, just waiting to be possibly pleasantly surprised by something.

Analog/Digital is one of the lamest debates ever, IMO.

I've been using digital stuff since it came out beyond the studio rack gear (which I bought secondhand).

What it works for, it works for.

Same as my destroyer fuzzes work for in analog boxes.

For "normal" delay, honestly I'm happy as hell with the RE-20; the "real" Space Echo is only better for the stuff I've modded and adjusted it for.

I think everyone in here agrees with that?

Def. Both analog & digital abstracts have their virtues and flaws. Sometimes the more flaws, limitations means superior sounding results.
The perfect is the enemy of the good.
I try to remember perception of sound is highly subjective. Each individual has a different hearing response and varied frequency notches depending on genetics, environment, plus no 2 acoustic spaces are identical and so on.
I'm one of the few people who has long preferred the sound of tapes to CD, because I can crank them to levels where the same music on CDs rapidly fatigue my ears due to the brightness of the top end above 18khz which otherwise rolls off on all but the best cassette decks. Yes I can EQ CDs to roll off the top but it's still not the same in how all the other audio information plays back, where levels distort and how pleasant sounding the distortion is.

Emulation is pretty great but still has a ways to go in duping many things like a Hammond B3+Leslie combo. Also passive EQ with discrete circuitry, inductors and transformers. From my understanding it has a lot to do with phasing which may explain why many issues pop up when summing ITB. Another noticeable area of struggle for emulation is tape saturation, treating it as a toggle switch. But what does that mean? Which formula of tape, playing how fast and on which machine?

Similarly, I have yet to hear a plugin that can do the 12bit sampler thing to drums. You'd think digital should be able to easily emulate other digital gear, but sometimes things are greater than the sum of their parts & specs on a page, algorithms etc and the only current way to achieve them is through the clunky, obsolete hardware.

Still, everything is awesome

Funny, I don't get the ear fatigue (and hearing tests as good as it did when I was 20, normal curve to 16k, highest the guy tests for that took my insurance) from CDs - but I can sure hear the hiss and tape degrading even on the best cassette decks.

Reel, that's another story, but...

I like the way tapes sound but I wouldn't say they're my go to for reliable replication of the source material.

D.o.S. wrote:I like the way tapes sound but I wouldn't say they're my go to for reliable replication of the source material.

What's funny is that a lot of analog media I like because of the imperfections. I have a very very slightly warped version of Bedhead's Transaction De Novo that gives it this really cool vibe that I love, almost like if it was remixed for me.

Inconuucl wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:I like the way tapes sound but I wouldn't say they're my go to for reliable replication of the source material.

What's funny is that a lot of analog media I like because of the imperfections. I have a very very slightly warped version of Bedhead's Transaction De Novo that gives it this really cool vibe that I love, almost like if it was remixed for me.

Same x2
Great record

Inconuucl wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:I like the way tapes sound but I wouldn't say they're my go to for reliable replication of the source material.

What's funny is that a lot of analog media I like because of the imperfections. I have a very very slightly warped version of Bedhead's Transaction De Novo that gives it this really cool vibe that I love, almost like if it was remixed for me.

This conversation came up a while ago when folks were talking about tape delay emulations that feature a lot of wow+flutter, which somehow derailed into talking about letterpress prints where the letters are embossed on the page. There were disagreements (of course), and i don't believe this is a subject where one side is right or wrong, but i personally believe that in an era of digital "perfection" that what makes old and analog media interesting, unique, and often worth preserving is its imperfections. After xeroxing and computer printing, letterpress's embossing is interesting and different, even if it is technically incorrect. Regardless of one's thoughts on CDs and mp3s, vinyl records and 1/8" cassette tapes have specific imperfections that sound wonderful and pretty in the contexts of certain music. I like it. I get it.

But at the end of the day, if it sounds good, it sounds good. I'm kind of cautiously optimistic about the [potential] ACB 303 reissue, in light of the price increase on the Acid 8. If it's around $200, it could be pretty nifty.

Effect A:

"Following the “BREAKTHROUGH” philosophy, BOSS continues to leverage its 40 years of knowledge and expertise to develop innovative products that meet the needs of today’s musicians. Stay tuned for an exciting new floor unit that represents the latest evolution of BOSS’s leading effects technology."

(http://tfr.roland.com/us/area/479)

rfurtkamp wrote:Effect A:

"Following the “BREAKTHROUGH” philosophy, BOSS continues to leverage its 40 years of knowledge and expertise to develop innovative products that meet the needs of today’s musicians. Stay tuned for an exciting new floor unit that represents the latest evolution of BOSS’s leading effects technology."

(http://tfr.roland.com/us/area/479)

A new ME maybe?

New GT realistically, the GT-100 is 4 or so years old. Current MEs are descended from it, so it'd be trickledown eventually.

If so, interested considering I have two GT-100/001s here and the new thing is an evolution of that.