I used to think that, and indeed a computer can run any equations you want. However with analogue you're getting a bunch of interesting-sounding equations without having to think of them and write them down, and that's the "analogue sound." Analogue circuitry isn't a perfect math processor the way digital is, only an approximation, and the deviations from perfection are useful.
Especially if you get into synths. A digital sine wave oscillator is doing sin(time*frequency)*gain. An analogue one is designed to produce a close to perfect sine wave at a certain set point, but you make it able to be varied around that set point by replacing some of the components with adjustable ones in somewhat ad-hoc ways, and see what it sounds like. The frequency may be set by a 3-stage RC circuit, you replace all the Rs with vactrols and see what happens, now the impedance changes as well as the frequency and it might affect other parts of the circuit. You may one-point calibrate it to 1 volt per octave but it won't be linear.
I'm convinced that at least 90% of "analog sound" can be simulated by taking the ideal block diagram and replacing every link with a parametric EQ->waveshaper->parametric EQ chain. Configuring those added components correctly is left as an exercise for the reader.
Jim Lill's video on guitar amp tone is an interesting demonstration. Hear how close he gets to the original with an even simpler combination of EQ and distortion:
Probably. We can calculate or at least measure and reproduce the effect of every analogue component, and simulate exactly what the circuit does. But we don't do that.
Coincidentally my statement comes from the position of someone who has been building and designing analog synths for years and teaching exactly that on the university level.
The analog part of a synth can be meaningful and sometimes it is. But very often it is really not or can be adequately (or more then adequately) emulated digitally.
As a noise musician I am also aware that a lot of the interesting behavior of some circuits only comes to light under extreme conditions. It is a long standing pet peeve of mine that equipment tests always only test the gear in vanilla conditions. But quite frankly vanilla conditions are exactly what 99.9% of the musicians will use the gear with
> But quite frankly vanilla conditions are exactly what 99.9% of the musicians will use the gear with
Any filter resonance or guitar distortion/overdrive is not a "vanilla condition", so you're absolutely wrong.
In fact, the extreme conditions is precisely the reason why normies even listen to music. Nobody would care for electric guitar if it wasn't overdriven.
I also happen to play electrical guitar distorted half my life. Distortion isn't as complicated to emulate as you make it out to be. In fact the hardest part about doing digital distortion is having the analog frontend and the ADC be good enough, since you will add hefty (digital) gains to the signals.
Hoe do I know? I am working on a digital distortion pedal right now. If done right software emulation of guitar amplification chains is pretty good nowadays. Many touring musicians use Neural DSP Quad Cortex and Co nowadays.
I happen to also like the simplicity and robustness of just a stupid analog amp, but those aren't as special as the gearsnobs make them out to be.
Especially if you get into synths. A digital sine wave oscillator is doing sin(time*frequency)*gain. An analogue one is designed to produce a close to perfect sine wave at a certain set point, but you make it able to be varied around that set point by replacing some of the components with adjustable ones in somewhat ad-hoc ways, and see what it sounds like. The frequency may be set by a 3-stage RC circuit, you replace all the Rs with vactrols and see what happens, now the impedance changes as well as the frequency and it might affect other parts of the circuit. You may one-point calibrate it to 1 volt per octave but it won't be linear.