this post was submitted on 10 May 2026
254 points (98.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39494 readers
1797 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the Lord of the Rings fandom there's a persistent debate whether balrogs, or Durin's Bane specifically, have wings. The text in Fellowship is ambiguous whether what it is describing are literal wings or something else wing-like.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Synthesizers: digital vs analog.

Common opinion holds that analog (specifically oscillators, but also filters and even VCAs [voltage controlled amplifiers]) are warmer and more natural sounding while digital are cold and harsh.

The thing is, digital emulation of analog hardware has become virtually indistinguishable from the real thing, but there is a certain segment that refuses to believe their $5000 Minimoog can be so easily replicated by software (realistically I doubt Bob Moog could tell the difference anymore).

Of course some also choose to argue which is better, which is just ridiculous because they both have their uses depending on what kinds of music you're composing or just what sounds you're trying to make.

[–] JackiesFridge@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah by the time you add effects, throw that synth into a full mix with other instruments, THEIR effects, and all the compression and EQing in a finished track, the only thing that matters is whether that single instrument adds what it needs to add to the whole.

Objectively, digital oscillators are better - they don’t drift unless you want them to, they stay in tune, and they can always be run through analogue filters to add imperfections (sorry, “warmth”).

But it still boils down to my first point: it’s a single part of a multi-part song. As long as it gets the job done, who cares whether it’s fluctuating voltage or zeroes & ones. It’ll be analogue on its way into the listener’s ear canal either way.

Absolutely. So much nuance is lost in a mix. Not that it's a bad thing, it's just dumb to think a $3000 synthesizer is going to sound better than a $10 plugin when you've got it buried amongst guitar, bass, drums, and vocals.

[–] nightlily@leminal.space 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You can extend that further to the cranks in the DAW community who swear that their rebranded standard compressor algorithm is somehow different and worth spending hundreds of dollars on. Generally you‘re paying for a different UI and maybe a hardcoded EQ.

[–] Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ugh, compression is a nightmare in general. One person will tell you unless you're using some fancy multi-band compressor on every single track, you're doing it wrong, and another will tell you you should do your best to not use any at all. Add to that many, many people don't even know what it does, and more can't even hear what it does.

[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 5 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Send them this guide

And here's a secret they don't tell you - at the end of the day it's art. There's a bazillion "right" ways to do the same thing and if the result is enjoyed be someone, mission accomplished.

[–] Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago

Haha! I want to criticize this picture so much.

[–] MonkeMischief@lemmy.today 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 23 hours ago

Well yeah, they can't afford to buy music. They spent all their money on the high density crystal core gold connector 1 meter headphone cable.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Of course some also choose to argue which is better, which is just ridiculous because they both have their uses depending on what kinds of music you're composing or just what sounds you're trying to make.

See, the point you're missing is that my kind of music is just better. If you prefer , it's just because your taste sucks. Try making good music, like . Then you'll see that is clearly superior.

(I have no idea about synthesisers, but I heard similar discussions among e-guitar / amp enthusiasts. I'm just guessing the above parody fits your case too.)

[–] Underwaterbob@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

It fits quite well.