you couldn't be further from the truth, but i will forgive your ignorance thanks to your respectful articulationPHeMoX wrote:Honestly, it might be a bit of a hot take, but I'm not so sure the whole audio converter and signature sound argument always holds very true. People underestimate what can (and should) be done through mastering a final mix. And some of the stuff from like the 90s really boils down to knowing how to use compressors or other FX and filters to get the same end result. Maybe some OG samplers make it easier, but maybe it's more about knowing what you're doing.
To be honest, I think I would much rather have the signature sequencer and 'swing' of some of the older samplers (their quantize or time correct feature), versus the literal lower fidelity sound quality (that sounds familiar or easy on the ears, vs super thin and clean like perhaps modern digital sounds).
I'm not at all denying there's a difference when it comes to DSP and analogue audio processing. But at times, it's kind of hard to really tell. Especially within a full mix of something that went through some proper mastering.
the need for professional studios would be defunct if DAW was superior/comparable to hardware
think
and actually most older classic samplers are quantize locked, like an sp1200? you can't go outside of the quantization like you can with a "newer" MPC or Boss/Roland SP