Your opinion on softsynth workflow

For computer based music makers. Discussions about plug-ins and stand alone computer synth gear.

your prefered softsynth

fully modular
1
10%
*very* flexible, but fixed routing
9
90%
 
Total votes : 10

Your opinion on softsynth workflow

Postby CS_TBL » Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:32 pm

I'm developing some interesting software with a company. Large scale, something that could radically change things. But as it's large scale and development takes a while, don't remind me of it (when is it done? what can it do? etc.). Naturally this SW would feature a built-in softsynth for typical use.

The question I have is: what kinda softsynth do you prefer. Choose fom these answers:

- Fully modular, build up your own models from scratch (or using a few larger constructed components ofcoz)
- Fixed configured synth, tho with *a lot of* extra details everywhere to make detailed sounds, fixed layout etc. The soundsource would feature typical oscillators as well as FM options. So, not your average synth model.

This question is no so much to steer us into a specific direction, as it's most likely we'd feature various fixed models which are a product of a modular system anyway. So, it's more a question of what you would like to work with. Modular or flexible-fixed
"You know I love you, CS, but this is bullshit." (Automatic Gainsay)
s: VSL/FM8/EWQL/LASS h: DX7/FS1r/VL70/SY77/SN2r/JD800/JD990/XV88/Emu6400/Poly61/Amek35:12:2/genelec1030 r: Violin/AltoSax/TinWhistle c: i7-4770/RAM32GB/SSD
FM8 vids
User avatar
CS_TBL
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: NL
Gear: All "In-The-Box"
Mainly FM8

Advertisement:

Re: Your opinion on softsynth workflow

Postby fingerbib2000 » Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:42 pm

CS_TBL wrote:I'm developing some interesting software with a company. Large scale, something that could radically change things. But as it's large scale and development takes a while, don't remind me of it (when is it done? what can it do? etc.). Naturally this SW would feature a built-in softsynth for typical use.

The question I have is: what kinda softsynth do you prefer. Choose fom these answers:

- Fully modular, build up your own models from scratch (or using a few larger constructed components ofcoz)
- Fixed configured synth, tho with *a lot of* extra details everywhere to make detailed sounds, fixed layout etc. The soundsource would feature typical oscillators as well as FM options. So, not your average synth model.

This question is no so much to steer us into a specific direction, as it's most likely we'd feature various fixed models which are a product of a modular system anyway. So, it's more a question of what you would like to work with. Modular or flexible-fixed


well i prefer my modular softsynth for modulations that i think would be great and can't get with a fixed synth (e.g say i want to amplitude modulate the tail of a 808 kick after a half a second with an lfo...yet control the lfo's depth/speed via a midi controller, this is not something that's available on most fixed synths)
but then i will reach for my fixed/flexible when i need a quick bleep or something, but then again, if i can't get that bleep sounding right...so the question isn't really which method i use, it's more a case of which synth will sound best for the job..

sorry, that doesn't answer you question at all, but i guess i like having both options!

maybe create a fully mod synth with 2 different interfaces
so, click one button and you have all the modules there and wires to connect up. once that is done, click the other button and you have a traditional slider layout, which a mod matrix of all the possible connections

check out the prisma synth on the Scope platform to see what i mean by a good easy mod matrix. also, many of the synths that people make for the platform are just patches of the modular synths with a different interface. now, if you could make that interface dynamic, you'd on to something....

thinking about it, it wouldn't really be that difficult once you've made the modules...
Sequential Circuits Pro-8, Rolands TB-303, MKS-80, JX-8P, SH-09. Waldorfs Microwave XT, Pulse. Yamahas RS7000, A4000, DX-200. 2 x Cheetah MS-6. Novations Supernova 1 & 2. Korg ER-1. Creamware Pulsar 2.
User avatar
fingerbib2000
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:08 pm

Postby polardark » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:12 pm

A fixed architecture with some reroutable paths is probably the easiest for a patch programmer's point of view. I'm not a fan of mod matrices. If you've programmed a patch once, mod matrices make the patch hard to read. Same goes for various graphical patch cord-based programming techniques.
User avatar
polardark
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 366
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2004 7:03 pm
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Postby fingerbib2000 » Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:19 pm

polardark wrote:A fixed architecture with some reroutable paths is probably the easiest for a patch programmer's point of view. I'm not a fan of mod matrices. If you've programmed a patch once, mod matrices make the patch hard to read. Same goes for various graphical patch cord-based programming techniques.


i'm talking about a graphical representation of mod matrice in terms of modulation sources destinations on screen..e.g

..............LFO1......LFO2...ENV1.. ENV 2

Cutoff.......o...........o.........o........ o

Pitch........x...........o.........o........ o

Vol..........o...........o.........o........ o

so in this case, the LFO1 is modulating the pitch.

all the actuall patch connections are kept hidden from the user...
Sequential Circuits Pro-8, Rolands TB-303, MKS-80, JX-8P, SH-09. Waldorfs Microwave XT, Pulse. Yamahas RS7000, A4000, DX-200. 2 x Cheetah MS-6. Novations Supernova 1 & 2. Korg ER-1. Creamware Pulsar 2.
User avatar
fingerbib2000
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:08 pm

Postby putzgummycymbal » Fri Dec 08, 2006 7:03 pm

well sir, how about one of each in a duo package. ????????
do you want to kiss me jim? yes I do! Simply tear into the sun.

you got it www.myspace.com/pierceaugust
User avatar
putzgummycymbal
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:14 pm
Location: madison wisconSIN

Postby CS_TBL » Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:54 pm

Sure, it's not a poll to see what should be made, but simply to find out what ppl prefer use. See it like this: lotsa ppl have vintage synths that aren't very modular, and yet ppl use 'em. The advantage of fixed synths is that in the end you'll know 'em like your own pocket. Limitation of features *can* be good. That's why I ask. It's more like a marketing investigation. The difference between a modular synth and a fixed synth is (apart from features) that in the modular case you're mostly building a synth, and in the fixed case you're using a synth. Not everyone likes building a synth. And this isn't strictly limited to synths. What if software would be really modular (modular in its functionality and programflow), would you prefer it over fixed software that follows standard rules? Yet at the moment the whole world uses rather fixed software, and no-one dares to break rules.
Last edited by CS_TBL on Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"You know I love you, CS, but this is bullshit." (Automatic Gainsay)
s: VSL/FM8/EWQL/LASS h: DX7/FS1r/VL70/SY77/SN2r/JD800/JD990/XV88/Emu6400/Poly61/Amek35:12:2/genelec1030 r: Violin/AltoSax/TinWhistle c: i7-4770/RAM32GB/SSD
FM8 vids
User avatar
CS_TBL
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: NL
Gear: All "In-The-Box"
Mainly FM8

Re: Your opinion on softsynth workflow

Postby jonkull » Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:06 pm

CS_TBL wrote:This question is no so much to steer us into a specific direction, as it's most likely we'd feature various fixed models which are a product of a modular system anyway. So, it's more a question of what you would like to work with. Modular or flexible-fixed


That's a hard question to answer as it really depends on the situation. Using my Nord G2 as an example when I write I usually start with a premade patch (which is IMO more or less like using a fixed synth). Once I have a basic song idea going I start altering modules or building from scratch to get the sounds the way I want them. So I'm not really sticking with one or the other but using a combination of both...
User avatar
jonkull
Junior Member
Junior Member
 
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:20 am
Location: Los Angeles
Gear: Andromeda • Serge • Buchla

Postby ford442 » Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:41 pm

fully modular synths are a bit beyond my understanding.. my virus powercore is the most complex synth i can program - it has considerable LFO routing...
User avatar
ford442
Junior Member
Junior Member
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 6:43 am
Location: Nevada City, CA, USA
Real name: Noah
Band: Noah Cohn

Postby MarkM » Sat Dec 09, 2006 2:47 am

I'd rather take the time to play music and not design instruments. For example, I love Reaktor, but I don't want to take the time to learn how to build my own synths. I love the crazy synths that are shipped with it, as well as what others who DO love to build new designs come up with.
User avatar
MarkM
Junior Member
Junior Member
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2005 10:26 pm
Location: Northeast Tennessee

Postby Thefumigator » Sat Dec 09, 2006 3:48 am

If its sounds good, its enough for me. Just bring it here I'm sure somebody will be able to program a set of presets for it.

I will be waiting... for taping it as I did in my video!
Image
watch my first youtube video :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp5Ct-BUrIM
-We're gonna die, you know.
-Maybe. But if we die, we're gonna die walking.
User avatar
Thefumigator
Active Member
Active Member
 
Posts: 322
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 12:37 am
Location: Montevideo, Uruguay
Real name: Amalfi
Band: thefumigator

Postby mwbassguy » Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:35 am

my dream synth would allow every output to be fully patchable to every input, at varying levels, simultaneously.
an avatar and a sig make one's posts more easily recognizable.
User avatar
mwbassguy
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 9:32 am
Location: nyc
Real name: Justin

Postby CS_TBL » Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:38 pm

So, imagine you'd connect whatever outputs to wherever. Would you then use that config to create a big load o' sounds (e.g. use that config for a while), or would you create a new config for each new sound you wish for?
"You know I love you, CS, but this is bullshit." (Automatic Gainsay)
s: VSL/FM8/EWQL/LASS h: DX7/FS1r/VL70/SY77/SN2r/JD800/JD990/XV88/Emu6400/Poly61/Amek35:12:2/genelec1030 r: Violin/AltoSax/TinWhistle c: i7-4770/RAM32GB/SSD
FM8 vids
User avatar
CS_TBL
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:47 pm
Location: NL
Gear: All "In-The-Box"
Mainly FM8

Postby toadmanxtro » Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:12 am

Something that actually sounds good.
toadmanxtro
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:38 am
Location: toronto canada

Postby theholyzero » Sun Dec 10, 2006 6:37 pm

I don't mean to offend people... but I don't like that so many manufacturers of synths (soft or hard) make them 'easier' to use... e.i. modular apparently means more difficult. I prefer a sound source that I can build myself, where the elements are all there at my disposal and I can route a logic module into an oscillator like an LFO or on an envelope trigger. I prefer complexity over simplicity because that is what I want to hear when I play... there is more room to experiment and find weird new sounds. Of course there are those people who want to have the same sounds as the artists that they idolize... a fixed synth, even with a good margin of flexibility, is probably the preference for them. Now, the Clavia Nord Modular synth is sort-of a softsynth with its brain in a hardware unit (much like Receptor and Plugzilla), and it just takes some basic understanding of how they work... and anyways, once you know how it works, you can exploit a 'flexible' fixed system to a larger degree. Of course, I am just biased.
"From the Tongue of the Serpent to the Ear of the Ape"
User avatar
theholyzero
Newbie
Newbie
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 6:47 pm
Location: Seattle, Washington

Postby mwbassguy » Sun Dec 10, 2006 11:01 pm

CS_TBL wrote:So, imagine you'd connect whatever outputs to wherever. Would you then use that config to create a big load o' sounds (e.g. use that config for a while), or would you create a new config for each new sound you wish for?


id like to be able to change the configuration at will, without having to go into an "edit" mode. that was my main complaint with tassman, actually; i couldnt patch/unpatch things live.
an avatar and a sig make one's posts more easily recognizable.
User avatar
mwbassguy
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 9:32 am
Location: nyc
Real name: Justin

Next

Return to Software Synthesizers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests