Does EVERYBODY think every instrument should like a human this or that, or a vintage version of some thing or another?  I realize a lot of money is made on "human" and "vintage", but what about non-human, non-vintage sounds that sound GOOD instead of sounding like something else?
 
Anybody?
 
 

Hi,
 
In the early days of synthesizers, when they first were just sounds, and you turned a knob here and there, it was the fact that its sound was not "recognizable" that made it "spacy" or "alien". And, of course, a lot of work in that area, immediately went to connecting this with space and universe sounds, for the effect, and create an image that is not likely to be there, if we were able to check it.
 
But the image, and the foreign thought of it, was effective in scaring a lot of people to not like the early electronic music, and think of it as "cold", and 50 years later, this is still partially true.
 
Then one day, someone did a funny thing with Bach, and right after that, another turkey used knives and what not on a huge thing on stage and next thing you know ... no one gives a fart about the sounds anymore, since it's all "notes" and what not.
 
I have never thought of "human" this or that, in terms of the sound of something or other. Whether an effect is used or not, and the early progressive music was just full of these things, did not make the music any less real or obtuse, although most listeners can not accept it, because it is not radio sounding, or for this group ... DAW sounding.
 
If ever you want to check something that DAW folks have never been able to do, check CAN, and Holger Czukay in his first 3 solo albums ... the album "Tago Mago" is a bunch of cut and paste, and you do not think of human or alien, despite the incredible array of weirdness and sounds coming and going, and sometimes not making sense, but somehow, it all comes together and sounds fine, and for my ears, and this is the case with "improvisations", this was one of the things that made a lot of music interesting and far out. Compare this to the really long essays that Klaus Schulze has done for 50 years, and I do not find his stuff any less "human", than I do "alien" ... it's simply a "human at work" ... with his equipment and it happens to create something that we call ... MUSIC.
 
I always think of pop music when it's all too recognizable ... which is kinda dumb for me to think so, but it always feels weird and "cold", as opposed to the other pieces that come off more cogent and human, than otherwise. This is one of the issues I have with a lot of music done on DAW's, when it's very clear that its warmth content, is not replacing the machine sounds at all.
 
(Hopefully I am not too far off on this, and I wrote this fine)

I'm not thinking so much about electronic music as say, pattern sequenced drums.  Or guitar sims that don't sound exactly like a vintage whatever ... but sound damn good in their own right.
 
Or maybe I'm not really thinking.
 
I get what you're saying though.

I think you should use what makes the song have the right sound. I use whatever works. I don't have much of my music posted anymore but I tried subbing all kinds of percussion pieces. I had a pan lid that sounded cool if you hit it with a spoon and let it ring. Recorded it with a mic and used a flanger. Very cool 

Bob it is good question and I am with you on this.  I think what is great now is that we have both concepts not just one any more. And one is not better than the other other.
 
Vintage sounding plugins or synthesisers are great and all but not the be and end all. We now have a whole range of synths that sound nothing like vintage instruments and venture into territory that has never been heard before and they are for me just as great as say an analog vintage replica. What is cool now is that we can mix the two and make new textures also never heard.
 
Playing wise it is the same deal. Patterns can be played by a drummer and very human and relaxed and live etc but also at the other extreme is we can have very precise repeatable sounds that are sequenced and quantised as well. One is not better than the other . Think of it as now we have both options and everything in between as well.
 
People who believe that only the older and vintage stuff and that includes mixing on an analog console is the only way are just simply wrong and behind the times. They need to move forward. What is great about mixing today is we can now enjoy the best of both a digital all transparent pure sound and put some of your tracks and buses etc through analog processing or plugins. Something we could never do before.
 
 
Electronic music has never been as interesting and varied as it is right now as well. So much feel and human element can be incorporated into it now. Not like before. We can go either way now with electronic music eg cold and precise or warm and human and emotional. Could not do that 30 years ago though.

I think it is largely a waste of technology to try to make digital sound like analog. We can make thousands of new digital sounds in the time it would take to cobble together a violin, yet we seem to be stuck in the sixteenth century in terms of our esthetics. Given that no one apparently wants to hear anything except traditional instrument sounds, then the use of complex sample libraries to save money by rendering performers redundant seems inevitable. But the charm and power of the traditional instruments is the ability of  a trained musician to subtly modulate his instrument in real time using the kind of largely unconscious neuromuscular control humans have developed through the capacity for language and song to create a truly expressive interpretation. Achieving that level of control by selecting perfect samples with limited control of performance parameters is very rare if not impossible. 
 
Unfortunately the ease of developing unique and interesting digital sound using de novo synthesis has led us to focus on the sound, often to the detriment of the music that we could produce with it. The esthetic weakness of most synthesizer music is that it is not subtly controlled by a performer who has spent thousands of hours mastering his instrument, in no small part due to the fact that he has created hundreds of new instruments in the time he would have spent practicing a single instrument in the past. And many synths lack the ability to produce the subtle modulation available to a traditional instrument performance even in the hands of a dedicated player/programmer. The excitement of a new sound is not a substitute for the coherence of  a musical performance. 

BobF
Does EVERYBODY think every instrument should like a human this or that, or a vintage version of some thing or another?

No.

Tough question. I'm not sure I grasp all the meaning of it but it's Saturday so I'll take a stab. :)
 
I think first is what I'll refer to as the psychological element. I refer to a graphics type example as I think we all have experienced it whereas maybe not so much with music. If you have seen the Tron Legacy movie, there are parts where they did a computer rendering of a young Jeff Bridges. While it was a remarkable achievement and very well done, there was something that did not look right. Perhaps it may be impossible to exactly articulate why it didn't look 'right', there was something in our collective minds eye that told us something was wrong. With that in mind I find that most violin and string samples don't sound right. Having been in the orchestra many years (I still play violin and bass), there has not been a sample I have heard that the same minds eye is not screaming that something is wrong - regardless of how perfectly it was played or sampled. Perhaps that perfection is the issue. <shrugs>
 
There is also a technological element that, I think, gets bent a lot with samples or synthesized sound. To use the drums (ie standard drum kit) as an example, most drummers only have two hands and feet. With the layout of the kit and the person there is a space/time and physical limit to what can be played. When someone uses a daw and samples and doesn't follow those 'laws' it could end up not sounding right. Perhaps a drummer may be the only one to 'know' what is wrong, I think most can tell there is something fishy or we rationalize it as more than 1 person playing drums.
 
Then there is the overuse of effects. Like with a violin sample, again there are physical limitations (chords that cant be played) but also, as I believe slart was referring, is that the skill of the person playing the instrument has an effect on realism. While we can throw effects, like vibrato, at the sample in attempt to warm it up or sound more human, it could be applied incorrectly or very easily get out of control and actually make things worse.
 
I think it also depends on the instrument. Electrical or mechanical instruments can make so many different sounds that it is not unusual to hear a guitar whail and sound alien. An organ with 16000 pipes in a particular setting can sound pretty alien as well. Whereas with acoustical instruments take a violin again, except for electric violins, we all have a preconceived notion of a classic or vintage violin sound.
 
Wow, maybe overkill huh?

The Dr. forgot to start with "Hi," 

Ain't w'all thuh smartz uns? Uzin big werds.