> Well, more energy don't means more bandwith.
Right - not always but it can imply that because, if higher
frequencies aren't there to begin with, then there is no energy
required to produce them. Conversely, if there are higher frequencies
then they will require energy to be produced. (Actually my question
about the 20 -20,000 Hz range was included in anticipation of that
response.)
>Synth designers tends to increase the region slightly below the least
possible frequencies of their engine as a
psycho accoustical trick to mask the lack bandwidth anyway a trained
ear will recognise that. That's why some VAs sound that harsh...
Junos have a built-in sub bass boost. (I think.)
> > What are you saying the bandwidth of
> > typical analog oscillators are - In excess of 20 - 20,000 Hz (?)
>
> Why not? If your speakers can do that, there's no bandwidth or
sampling frequency
I was wondering what the actual frequency range is of analog
oscillators that were used in popular analog synhtesizers - not the
theoretical limit.
> Well.. I guess you rather like synths like Juno, it at least would
fit to the description of sound you like. Anyway, it's rather soft
sounding compared most of the analog synths I know. So I think it's
rather a matter of taste
I do tend to like soft rather than hard sounding synths and that is
indeed why I didn't like the Evolver. For people that like
screaming/ripping leads, the Evolver would be great.
Junos or "The Japanese Sound" in general is usually described as
bright (as analogs go) compared the "The American Sound" that includes
Moogs, SCI and, ironically, The Korg Poly-6.
>than a sign of analog sound...
Well, I guess the question of what other quality/qualities make a
synth sound analog is so wide open to subjectivity that it would be
another long topic or thread : )