Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: All about the Roland Jupiter-series

previous by date index next by date
previous in topic topic list next in topic

Subject: FW: [AH] Re: was JP-8: now VA vs Analog

From: "Verschut, Ricardo" <ricardo.verschut@...>
Date: 2001-01-31

-----Original Message-----
From: matrix [mailto:matrixsynth@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 5:52 PM
To: analogue@...
Subject: Re: [AH] Re: was JP-8: now VA vs Analog

> Talk about exaggeration. VA is like 98% of the way there. 98% of a great
> thing is still a great thing. Even if it gets to within 99.99% of analog,

It all depends on whether you focus on that 2% or not. That 2% becomes
about 80% if you focus too hard on it. It's the subtle differences that
make all the difference in the world. But... I personally love all forms
of synthesis. It's all about sound creation for me. Different tools for
different tones. I'll take them all. The cool thing about VA is that you
can go places you couldn't with traditional analog. At the price of that
pure analog character you can take digital to an analog level or if you
prefer, analog to a digital level. Think of the Q. Uterly amazing where
you can go with one. I think each has it's place. Also, a good majority of
analogs sound different from eachother as well. There are some analogs out
there, albeit DCO based, that a VA could floor. Think Poly61 compared to a
Virusb. Which one has more "analog" (note quotes) balls so to speak? A
Poly61 or a Virusb?