what is it...

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 1:57 am

that you want in an SFP/XTC synthesizer? what technological features or sounds are missing for the platform that you are desiring?

what would really flip your switch?

i know that i'm setting myself up for a deluge of contradicting ideas, here, so...

please limit your responses to aspects of sound-generation technology or even just "sonic ideas"... but no GUI/control/effects ideas, please. (not right now, anyway)

what is that "sound" that you are craving? be as specific and descriptive as possible, even if you can't talk the tech-jargon.

i feel that it is important for developers to interact with the user-base... this can be a lonely job!

;o)

Post by **garyb** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 2:20 am

great horn sections......strings with body for single note.

Ganool · Post by **Ganool** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:37 am

I would like a synthesizer like the Modular II Morpheus. I don't know what makes me love it, but I think it just sounds fantastic. The presets are also very well done.

If someone would re-pack the Morpheus into a SFP synth with a nice GUI. I'd gladly pay for it.

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:48 am

On 2003-01-30 02:20, garyb wrote:
great horn sections......strings with body for single note.

so, you mean samples?

spacef · Post by **spacef** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 3:55 am

an enveloppe and filter like in NI synths, FM7 and Ab Synth

Too bad reactor doesn't allow to deliver standalones for non reactor users....

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 4:37 am

Even rumours of the greatest VA synth ever hardly attract my interest any more because there's already so many good ones around. Likewise with FM and even granular.

And although I can think of lots of little things I'd like, a grinding X-mod synth etc, what I'd *REALLY* like (and what I think is not even possible on SFP) is something like this:

- sonic qulities are largely irrelevant, let's just say classic VA, but it would also have...
- BPM definable multi-segment envelope snapping to the beat (like Absynth), and the crucial extra being...
- the ability to then export a 16 or 32-step section of this envelope as a wav file, ready to drop into Acid (or similar) and immediately play looped. I don't just mean a wav recorder, I mean a trimmed 32-step wav of a particular tempo, preferable Acidised, and the effects "wrapped" like Fruityloops export.

SFP synths like the Pro-One and Synchrotron come close to this, but lack the crucial last step of actually being able to *easily* take the musical phrase and use it elsewhere. Instead you have to go to audio record a channel in some other app.

And before people start pointing out how easy it is at the moment, remember that not everyone uses SX or Logic. For apps like Orion and Acid, the immediate export of trimmed, loopable wav files would be fantastic. It would also mean that a mere leisurely session spent "tinkering" with the synth could easily result in 20 interesting wav files for use sometime later.

I've got zillions of sounds and forms of synthesis available, so what I really want now out of a synth is a different work flow functionality, something unique, not just a variation of tone or oscillators.

Maybe I'm alone on this, but that's what I'd like.

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 4:50 am

On 2003-01-30 04:37, Spirit wrote:
Even rumours of the greatest VA synth ever hardly attract my interest any more because there's already so many good ones around. Likewise with FM and even granular.

have you checked out Ableton's "Live"? it rocks for this kind of thing. very powerful and intuitive, IMHO. it is certainly not exactly what you describe, but getting close, in some ways.

borg · Post by **borg** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:01 am

must agree with stephen... i'm not a power user yet (still trying to finish my cubase projects), but ableton live has really changed my latest stuff into something adventurous. drop, change, mash,... your loops on the fly, go where you didn't expect to...

if it would only support midi files...

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:32 am

How about an update to your fantastic plastic. I love this synth and I'm going to take every opportunity to keep banging on about an update for it until you do something about it

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:59 am

well, to address my topic a little more, what specifically do you find attractive about a synth like my "plastic"?

what makes it stand out, in your eyes (or ears) and why would it be worth having an updated version?

do you feel that there is still a demand for subtractive-style VA synths, with all that is already available? there is, of course, much that can be done to make one synth have a different sonic character than another with similar feature-sets... but is this enough?

with all the effects and processing devices that are readily available these days are artists really still concerned about relatively subtle differences between synths, like the character of ones filter compared to another?

the computer now allows such sonic diversity that a synth's tone or character can be very extremely modified... gone are the days where an artist recorded a MiniMoog to tape and a learned listener could tell, with all certainty, that the recording was of a Mini.

are useful devices and desirable devices now percieved to be the more radically innovative and unique ones?

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:03 am

I don't want to get this excellent thread OT, but although I like Ableton Live a lot (I've really flogged the demo), I can't justify spenig money on another host

when my brain is screaming "orchestral sample CDs". Added to which (for me) there's not that much it can do that an experienced AcidPro user can't - although Ableton certainly gets there with more speed and ease.

But back OT, assuming option #1 is not viable, then my second choice is for speciality synths.

By that I mean a synth designed to just do one thing really well. And what I'd like most is an ambient / soundscape machine.

There are plenty of bass & all-round synths, but only the Zarg Ambient is a soundscape machine. But even then IMHO it isn't done too well. The Ambient is just BIG rather than evocative. It has lots of choices rather than lots of emotional depth.

The VSTi world has seen quite a bit of action in this area with things like Absynth, Spectrum's Atmosphere, Green Oak Crystal, the Space Synth etc

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:19 am

By that I mean a synth designed to just do one thing really well. And what I'd like most is an ambient / soundscape machine.

my recent thoughts about designing have been in this direction, as well... really focussed devices that offer something very distinctive and specific.

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:24 am

Here's the space synth VSTi. It does the lush-pad thing very well (although I found it had very poor stability). It uses just three things to gets its depth and richness: delays, 16-step VCF sequencing, and deep phasing.

borg · Post by **borg** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:37 am

to be honest, there are already so many synths around: reproductions of analog, fm, whatever,... and some are really great. personally, i have no need for something else in this field.

like gary, i'm more interested in having nice strings, brass and acoustic drums. i must blow the dust of the STS, i guess.

however, maybe a bit OT, but what i really would like to have on a synth, is the possibility to change a lot of parameters with just one knob. i guess it can be done partially in modular, but not at all like i want it. and there's a good chance that it can't be done. consider it as some sort of morphing.
it would be simple, if one could assign the same physical knob to several synth knobs (and specify a range for each knob), but i haven't found a way to do so up to now.
this would allow to make sounds 'break open', or like a flower opening itself in spring to show all its beauty. or like rays of sunlight piercing through the thick, grey clouds, that get drifted away and everything starts to live again.

descriptive enough?
sounds a lot like morphing, not?

Spirit · Post by **Spirit** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:16 am

That's an interesting idea... Perhaps you could group knobs together (using colour?) and then route control to a single slider or LFO ?

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 9:36 am

On 2003-01-30 08:37, borg wrote:
...the possibility to change a lot of parameters with just one knob. i guess it can be done partially in modular,... and there's a good chance that it can't be done.

indeed, it's not the sound generation itself, but the control of what's happening with the sound.
Andy, if you open several instances of the Modular (the overhear of an empty Mod is neglectible) and split your sound generation then you can assign the same controller several times

Spirit's idea works great too, but it's limited to modulation sources, it can't be applied to 'standalone' knobs.

This way I found that some well tuned filter/amp settings could tremendously improve quality of even the most basic (example) setups.
There's still space in VA soundprocessing left with improved control devices.

The Vectron is another good example how control actually influences sound. The Player everyone gets with SFP is a joke compared to the real thing. I have to admit that I missed this completely when trying the demo.
Spirit, I think what you search about ambiency could be achieved by the Vectron. It's easy to derive a whole new list of 128 presets from a single patch by simply controlling it in a different way. The sound changes upto 200%.

My 3rd example for the 'interface approach' is John Bowen's Python. The sound generation was developed by a Modular patch, then the idea behind it got a compact visual representation that makes it controllable (opposed to the original) and useable in a straight way.

Stephen, it's a great idea to put this up and I'm shure you can transform some of the input to new devices.

my 2 cents, Tom

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2003-01-30 09:42 ]

[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2003-01-30 18:00 ]

petal · Post by **petal** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 10:27 am

I think that this just might sneak inside the boundaries of you request.... Though it is more soundcontrol than soundgeneration, but it seems, from the last few replies, that it is the control of the sound that lacks development more than actual synthesis-types.

A few weeks back I requested a "Userdrawable LFO":

http://www.planetz.com/forums/viewtopic ... forum=30&2

The idea I had in mind, was to enable me to form the sounddevelopment of any trickered sound, within userdefinable timelimits. Imagine a pad where the user can draw a curve, and/or manipulate a few userdifinable curves - The information stored inside such a curve, could be used to control any knob on the synth. So it's a kind of sequencer, dedicated to control every single trickered note. The effect could be achieved by automation from a sequencer, but it would require your specific attention to every single note. I'm asking for a more advanced form of step-sequencing, that would enable me to make fx advanced soundmodulation. I'm not sure if this is possible inside the SFP-development kit, but I would really like to be able to sculpture the sound in detail, using the parameters already available in most synths, but controlling their movements from inside the same synth.
If possible, it would be nice if you could control more than just one knob/parameter using the same "usercurve", and it would be nice if several "usercurves" were available, ie. different "usercurves" controlling different parameters in the synth.

I hope this makes sense and that you find it inspirational

Cheers!
Thomas

[ This Message was edited by: Petal on 2003-01-30 10:37 ]

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 3:55 am

there are some interesting control ideas here.

i guess i can ask my question in a different way:

what electronic technology do you value most for music composition? what do you see as the most important electronic musical innovation of all time? why?

obviously advances in electrical engineering and computer technology are the very basis of electronic music (and it wouldn't exist without them), so these are a given... but what specifically?

are the current desires of electronic musicians almost entirely for better ways of interacting with existing technologies to be created?

i am also, primarily, interested in ideas pertaining to "original" sound-generation technologies and not recording/ editing technologies... cuz, otherwise, then everything could be called "electronic music", these days (recording acoustic instruments to a computer, in a way, makes it electronic music, right?) sampling, for instance, could only be a valid "vote", if it included some form of synthesis/ resynthesis, etc... not just the simple looping/ playback of recorded sound.

from a purely artificial-sound-generating perspective, what is the most important instrument around? why?

Post by **garyb** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:09 am

On 2003-01-30 03:48, wavelength wrote:
On 2003-01-30 02:20, garyb wrote:
great horn sections......strings with body for single note.
so, you mean samples?

no, SYNTHETIC.so many sounds are airy or distorted...an original theriman has that kind of solo string sound and an electronic horn that could blat properly would be cool.so would nice analog harpsichord type sounds.(definitely synthetic ones)

thanks for asking,regardless....
reading the other replies i am reminded of my simplicity.i still see instruments and people..

obviously,instruments can be very complex,and i am being naive just asking for sounds.well,the mod can make some great sounds,but we look to developers to simplify things by putting some combinations together ahead of time.

anything that was really innovative and new in synthesis would be highly received,but what that would sound like,only the innovator knows........

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2003-01-31 04:21 ]

wavelength · Post by **wavelength** » Fri Jan 31, 2003 4:21 am

so, electronic facsimiles of acoustic sounds that aspects of could then be manipulated in a very "electronic" way? sounds like a Hartmann Neuron kinda idea.