MOTM

>How about granular synthesis? Harmonic resynthesis? Morphing? All
>*possible* theoretically in analog (I think) but wonderful in the
?digital realm. Go here: http://www.symbolicsound.com/.
>
>Right tool for the right job, and it ain't always analog.
>
>Mike

Oh, I agree absolutely!  Digital is fantastic for that kind of stuff.
 And mixing analog and digital into hybrids is wonderful too, whether
that's a MiniWave, PPG Wave, Prophet VS or taking the output from a
soft-synth and plugging it into your 440...

My previous post was about the shortcomings of digital emulating
analog, not about digital being inherently evil.

I'd also throw in physical modelling in there, though I tend to prefer
modelling instruments that DON'T exist rather than ones that do.  (If
I want a lead violin part, I'll go find a violinist - they can
articulate that sound far better than I ever will; they've spend 20
years learning how to do it).

And w.r.t 'Zipper noise': that's not a limitation of digital.  It's a
limitation of the implementation.  Future systems will through enough
resolution at it that you won't be able to hear it.  (Most current
systems get this right too now, though not everywhere).

Harry