[rodgersorganusers] Re: Analog
- From: Ian McLean <solo_tibia@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rodgersorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 03:57:31 -0800 (PST)
Well, my original intent was to rip a majority of the guts
out of my latest 340, and replace with digital. But, once
you get one of these working as they should have been,
well, there simply is no peer (well, maybe a Walker which
is always a custom design). A digital Allen 311, GW 319EX
or Rodgers 360 sounds far more 'electronic' than one of
these designed-in-1971 warhorses set up correctly. Mine was
built in 1981
Of course, for the tuned percussions, and effects, digital
has delivered better than analogue ever did. But then,
these are somewhat easier to achieve, and the develoment
costs can be spread across a huge market. These sounds I
will replace with digital samples on my analogue Rodgers.
Quite frankly, I think that this 'electronic' digititus
(others refer to this as unnatural brightness') is a
consequence of most digital instruments' sampling
technology (of any brand) continuing to truncate the upper
harmonic activity of their samples. That, when combined
with all of the considerable processing which occurs in
de-noising, scaling, and God knows what else then
contributes to the digital'electronic' outcomes especially
in the upper harmonics which also seem to gain some element
of digital 'glare'. When these are then combined in some
sort of ensemble the outcome is so often amusical and can
cut through and diminish the positive merits of digital
pipe recreative organs even the largest space.
Just like 'perfect-sound-forever' (ha!) CD, with its
compromised 16/44.1khz standard, only when the 22Khz
brickwall filtering was bypassed, or the new higher
resolution formats came out, did digital music replay
become worthy and musical. I contend that the same thing
still needs to occur with digital organs. When the samples
are long enough, one per note, and of a higher resolution
than currently being deployed, only then will analogue
instruments truly be dead.
Currently a well set up Rodgers analogue has some inherent
life to itself which really can be described as having
merit in, and of itself. If the audio circuits do not
deliberately cut off the top end, then the harmonics
generated reach upwards without compromise. Consequently
they ensemble like they were alive. Nearly all digital
organs do not unless they are multiple computer designs.
When in ensemble most seem to congeal into a oneness.
Rodgers analogue did not.
Of course, the real reason for the existence of digital is
cost. There simply is no way that anyone could afford to
build or purchase an analogue instrument for real world
prices today. Also, my exposure shows that that the
majority of the quality analogue instruments were not
correctly or empathetically installed, or even given their
correct speaker complements. So, digital has fared better,
as they are easier to deliver an acceptable outcome with
significantly less ongoing maintenance than analogue. So,
it is down to available skills and cost at the dealership
level. Much easier with digital to attain an basic level of
acceptable outcome.
Digital: Sit down with a laptop and scale, voice, and
viola! All done! No crawling around on hands an knees,
tweaking this, and tweaking that. Much cheaper on site
labour costs.
LP's always sounded unbelievable on well set up
turntable/arm combinations that cost the earth (still do),
and required a great deal of skill and time (i.e. cost) to
get the CD killing outcome that is inherent within the
grooves. There is a corollary here with analogue and
digital organs. Only the truly passionate and skilled can
get analogue over the line to even a basic level. To get
digital 'over the line' takes far less time, and skill. Of
course, to make both exceptional does require a lot of
skill - but these are the exception. But, even then what is
created at the highest level is in many ways replicable
with a simple file copy.
So what will be SACD and DVD-A of organs? Is the Marshall
Ogletree Trinity Church instrument the first example of the
long sample, high resolution organ? Is this the future?
Rodgers' digital suffers less digititus issues than that of
its major competitor. But even this level is too
distracting to my ear.
Ian McLean
PS: Noel, my Rodgers has a Maas-Rowe set of real struck
chimes. No oscillators involved!
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
____________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or set to vacation,
go to www.frogmusic.com/rodgersmem.html
If you have any difficulty with this or PayPal,
please contact noeljones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx for help!
Shop for Playing Guides to your Rodgers Organ at Frog Music Press
Other related posts:
