Members pighood Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Can a fellow get a "nanny nanny boo boo" up in here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Audacity Works Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 It probably refers to the internal clock before it is downsampled to 16bit.Downsampled to 16-bit? You DO understand the difference between sample rate and bit depth, right? Most engineers know that well-clocked 16-bit converters that normally run at 44.1k will sound better than most consumer 24-bit/96k conversion anyway. And if you think the DA is in the top 20 in a list of most important sonic elements within a professional-level synth, you're sorely mistaken. Ah, never mind. Your post count reeks of troll. Disregard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Retronexus Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Ah, never mind. Your post count reeks of troll. Disregard. Ooooh, have you been drinking Barq's? Because that sentence had BITE... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Audacity Works Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Ooooh, have you been drinking Barq's? Because that sentence had BITE... Sorry, friend. I'll repost just the important bits then:Downsampled to 16-bit? You DO understand the difference between sample rate and bit depth, right?Most engineers know that well-clocked 16-bit converters that normally run at 44.1k will sound better than most consumer 24-bit/96k conversion anyway. And if you think the DA is in the top 20 in a list of most important sonic elements within a professional-level synth, you're sorely mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members realtrance Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Poor zoink. I wish I could take you to lunch just to make up for this huge mess here. My apologies for the majority of the human race, too many of which apparently hang out here (in every sense of that phrase). I'd say I'd like the SH-201 over the R3, mainly because of the knobs, but I haven't heard the R3. I suspect it's lovely-sounding, though, and yes, probably much better as a lap-synth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dejavoodoo Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 I sold my Minimoog because the acoustic guitar emulation sounded like ass. I did teh same thing. Mine would never stay in tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khazul Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Most engineers know that well-clocked 16-bit converters that normally run at 44.1k will sound better than most consumer 24-bit/96k conversion anyway. And if you think the DA is in the top 20 in a list of most important sonic elements within a professional-level synth, you're sorely mistaken.Ah, never mind. Your post count reeks of troll. Disregard. And most converters have a sweet spot - they may be rated at 24bit/192KHz and you think woopie!! - in practice they may actually function most accurately across the audio range at 44.1 as a for eg, so running them at 96K because you can may actually not give you the most accurate analog reproduction of the digital data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Audacity Works Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 And most converters have a sweet spot - they may be rated at 24bit/192KHz and you think woopie!! - in practice they may actually function most accurately across the audio range at 44.1 as a for eg, so running them at 96K because you can may actually not give you the most accurate analog reproduction of the digital data.Yep. It's safe to say that if any synth/sampler manufacturer touts 24-bit/96k, it's primarily for marketing purposes. Retronexus seems to have fallen for empty hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Miket156 Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Its really too bad that a "few" people disrupt what could be a decent musician chat room web site. There are some knowledgeable posters on this site, but the "fraternity" of malcontents spoil any chance of reasonable discussion. They need to stop spoiling HC and get a freakin' life. Manners would help too. Mike T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EJ2 Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 Its really too bad that a "few" people disrupt what could be a decent musician chat room web site. There are some knowledgeable posters on this site, but the "fraternity" of malcontents spoil any chance of reasonable discussion. They need to stop spoiling HC and get a freakin' life. Manners would help too.Mike T. Hi Mike, I have to agree with you. It was just terrible when I first joined. Although, it's seems to be getting better since the moderators have taken better control of the nonsense and banned the {censored} disturbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members skunk3 Posted June 11, 2007 Members Share Posted June 11, 2007 HI KORG FANS I LIKE KORG, DO YOU LIKE KORG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted June 12, 2007 Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tomkeen Posted June 12, 2007 Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 WTF cares, it's a goddamn OASYS! The only people who have them are that no-talent assclown Jordan Rudess and Stephen Kay, a man who has his heart in the right place but is not really all together and couldn't write a synth demo to save his life. Oh no you didn't Saying Jordan Rudess has not talent is just stupid.... I understand people who say that he plays without feeling (just a matter of taste IMO), but no talent? I would like to see you doing the stuff he does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members crufty Posted June 12, 2007 Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 I thought Kay's Oasys demos were pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zoink Posted June 12, 2007 Author Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 Poor zoink. I wish I could take you to lunch just to make up for this huge mess here. My apologies for the majority of the human race, too many of which apparently hang out here (in every sense of that phrase). Thanks. I was beginning to wonder what was so objectionable about, "Wow, the new Korgs sound really good." Never figured them to be fightin' words.You've confirmed that I wasn't missing something. It's just an internet thing I guess -- people write things on message boards that they'd probably never say in person. Today I'm going to try to get back to the music store and play some more on that R3! I suspect more people will rave about it too after they've had a chance to give it a listen -- especially that vocoder! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tdempsey Posted June 12, 2007 Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 the big, lush pads I'm looking for? I haven't had my hands-on yet - so build quality matters - but will the Korg R3 do the rich, lush pads I'm looking for? Or is there something else at this price point? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Khazul Posted June 12, 2007 Members Share Posted June 12, 2007 If the radias if anything to go by - it isnt exactly the first machine I would reach for for "big, lush pads". V-Synth - yes, Virus TI - yes, rompler or radias + random fx chain consiting of a whole heap of multi-fx - yes, radias o it own? generally no. As the R3 is a cut down radias.. then I dont expect it to be any better - matter of taste of course too. Radias is potenially more useful as you can different timbres - dont know what options the R3 has for stacking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Haha! And the hits...they keep comin'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EerieDreamZ Posted June 13, 2007 Members Share Posted June 13, 2007 Oh no you didn't Saying Jordan Rudess has not talent is just stupid.... I understand people who say that he plays without feeling (just a matter of taste IMO), but no talent? I would like to see you doing the stuff he does I was going to say the same thing, though i cant stand his older k2500 tutorial vids. Has he done any updated versions for the later Kurz line? If so were they any better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.