[javajosh]

As much as I love the analog sound of early electric guitars and keyboards, I'm okay with simulations. After all, at the end of the day any possible sound is the output of a one dimensional function that takes the time and returns a value. You call this function 40k times a second (at most), wiggle a voltage in proportion to the return value, feed the output stream into a digital-to analog-converter of some sort, and bam! you can generate any sound possible, modulo the capability of your speaker to articulate different frequencies.

The only other boundary condition on the function is that we want to parameterize it in a way that is comprehensible and pleasant for humans to manipulate. I would suggest that a simulation of this synth would be superior to the synth itself in every way. If you were clever enough (or masochistic enough) you could even build in "flakiness" and "parts wear" and "thermal variation".

If you really want an analog sound, then get an orchestral instrument, or an electric guitar! I don't understand this half-measure of "use-machines-to-synthesize-sounds-but-not-THAT-way".

[eternityforest]

I like them as alternate history retro computing art pieces. They look cool and do in fact make actual music.

I just don't like them enough that I'd ever want to actually own one...

[soundarana]

> wiggle a voltage in proportion to the return value, feed the output stream into a digital-to analog-converter

The first part of this sentence, the wiggle, is already a DAC.

[javajosh]

You're right, I misspoke. The DAC turns data into a voltage wiggle which moves the magnet which moves the membrane of the speaker. But my point stands, I think.