Synth General
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
>microKorg
lol get that garbage out of here
>MS2000
Gr8 keyboard m8
>>51052559
>talk shit get hit
>>51052605
I actually really like the microkorg. If you pretend it's a mono synth you can get all these cool sounds.Pretty much Layered+Unison>Unison>Layered>Mono.
I really hope Korg reissues a MKII Odyssey, but with a white face.
>>51053173
oh man that would be great
any new info on the reissue?
>>51053516
No new news other than it's delayed until S/S 2015 at the least.
Need babby's first hardsynth. Want polyphony. Looking towards VA. Under $250 used. Only prev hardware experience is a midi keyboard and a circuit bent sk 5. Micron, MicroKorg, MiniAK, or other?
>>51053173
I don't know shit about synths. I'm starting a dream pop band and want to incorporate ambient textures / soundscapes. Any advice for good synths like this? Again, I literally know next to nothing.
>>51052559
ive never heard anyone say that. people know its the same engine
>>51054513
micron.
>>51052559
elektron monomachine
get on my level plebs
>>51054684
yea elektron stuff is really nice
>>51054467
Save up a bit longer. You can get better stuff in the 500-800 range. It's an investment and could be something worthwhile if you get something that's actually worth the money you're dropping.
>>51054467
Alesis Ion for sure.
>>51054711
wish i had the money for a machinedrum
>>51054818
look out for them on ebay. sometimes even the mk2 ones, sell for less than 500 (not broken), its real weird
>>51052559
i wanna move my setup from hardware sequenced by software to a full hardware setup
i have an AJ2 and an Ultranova and a bunch of effects, thinking about getting a microbrute and an MPC1000.
will that give me the ability to both compose and play live or should i just stick to sequencing with ableton?
>>51055028
i mean sequence with ableton to create a physical release but i would say stick with analog and maybe a pad or 404 for live stuff
>>51054684
Excellent instrument. Mine's not with me right now so this will have to do
>>51055230
god i want a nord so bad
>>51055230
nord sounds fucking epic. lots of fun
>mfw I bought a 4 track record and was ready to make some siqq ambient, but there were bugs in it
Oh well back to saving up for a prophet 08
The only thing I really want to add to my meager keybawd setup is a microkorg. I really like the way it sounds and dat vocoder too. Way more fun/creative than using the one in Reason
>>51055488
EDMfag detected
The synth choices in this thread are abysmal. Pleb as fuck. I mean serious it's 2014, and you're still getting virtual analog synth? Subtractive synthesis is over. It's played out. Get with the times grandpa, get a synth based on more modern techniques like waveshaping.
>>51055554
HA. I've never EDM'd once in my life.
>>51055569
i bet you listened to brostep when it was a thing
Name one advantage a modern hardware synth has over a modern software synth. You can't. Software synths are better in almost every imaginable way, and they're cheaper to boot.
>>51055612
theyre way cooler faggot
>>51055612
f*cking idiot
>>51055600
>brostep
You don't even know what waveshaping is, do you?
>>51055569
Wouldn't you use waveshaping in conjunction with subtractive IE. Use a waveshaper on your osc then run it through a filter.
>>51055612
Hardware is more reliable. Softsynths can't replicate analog filters or VCOs.
>>51055612
software synths dont have a good enough sound, everything you do with them sounds in the box
>>51055612
i would much rather bring my micron to a show than my laptop but yes, for at home i agree. but whatever, people use what they like. let it slide
>>51055600
dubs confirm
>>51055612
they're all the same faggot. hardware is good for people that need physical interaction with the instrument that they're using
>>51055700
dubbe dubbles dubble-confirm
>>51055659
you're implying that old technology shouldn't be used because too many people uses it. get my point?
>>51055700
holy shit
>>51055670
>Softsynths can't replicate analog filters
Bilateral transform.
>VCO
Bandlimited tables + sinc interpolation. If you need hard sync, fuse minBLEP or BLIT.
Alesis micron master race reporting in.
>>51055679
Its the same shit dude. Your modern hardware synth is just an embedded system running synthesis software. Your x86 PC is probably at least 100x more powerful, has way more memory and so can run more advanced and computationally intensive synthesis algorithms. The only other thing would be the DAC, which guess what you can get better quality ones for your PC anyway.
>>51052559
does anyone have a microwave XT? have any tips/tricks?
>>51055810
i'm jelly
>>51055775
Excuse me, I meant the bilinear transform, sorry for the goof.
>>51054684
is this a synthesizer? what makes it special?
>>51055888
What makes it special is he wasted $1300 bux on it.
>>51055888
yeah
>>51055858
It's cool. If you aren't really into synths and willing to invest in learning the novel that is the guide, don't bother.
>>51052780
lol there's nothing wrong with the microkorg, esp when you consider the year it was released
it's a decent VA synth for ~$300, whats the problem with that
Just purchased a Kurzweil k2500s am i master race yet?
I don't need pussy i got ribbon controllers.
>>51055941
Enjoy resampling your cracked sylenth1.
>>51055975
>whats the problem with that
nothing except you can get a micron for like 200 and its better
>>51055857
also thinking about selling my micro. xt on ebay and getting an alesis ion. is this a bad idea?
>>51055975
My point is programming these VA crap in software is so fucking easy it's criminal what these companies are charging for it. Even $300 is way too fucking much.
>>51056031
every hardware synth ever invented is easily replicated with software. you're still missing the point dude, are you autistic?
>>51056064
No one has countered my point, it's all crap like "f*cking idiot" or "theyre way cooler faggot". There is absolutely no reason for any rational thinking person to buy a hardware synth in 2014. Even if you need physical controls it's still cheaper to just buy a dedicated hardware controller instead.
>>51056154
hardware synthesizers especially modular and analog ones, have a sound quality that trumps vsts
>>51056203
making it modular doesnt affect sound quality. also nice high end vsts sounds pretty damn good
microkorg is great. sorry it doesn't automatically churn out studio level presets and you have to actually have talent to make it function properly. plenty of major label artists and professional studio musicians use this instrument, and not because it's cheap, because it's adjustable as fuck and its great for getting those cheesy vintage synth sounds without having to lug around fragile, expensive vintage synthesizers.
>>51056239
lots of modular synths are very high end and have really nice sounds in them though. i would say the highest end vst still cant even compare to the quality of a nord, juno, ms-20, or really nice hardward
>>51056267
It can't compare because the software synths are so much better than hardware ones.
I am thinking of getting a System-1. I have seen countless videos and seems it is the closest to what I need to do at my price range.
The plugout synths sound good to.
I would get a Lead 4 if I had the space amd $$$.
Someday..
>>51055810
how do you like it? thinking about getting one. what is the difference between the ion/micron?
>>51056154
as somebody who is fully updated on modern capabilities of VSTS, I still think the microkorg is a decent buy. It's cheap as fuck and there's something easier and simpler about being able to plug an instrument into mics, pedals, etc without having to cram everything into a computer. You're buying software... in a plastic keyboard shell... at the price of convenience, portability, and simplicity. not everybody makes all their music at their desk, not that theres anything wrong with that, but sometimes people want to take that sound out somewhere else without lugging around computers and a controller on top of it.
>>51056328
So get a laptop.
>>51056367
youve never played a shitty show have you?
>>51056154
the thing about the microkorg is its ease of use, its depth and versatility despite being a lower end, "entry level" synth and its cheap price.
it feels good, it sounds good, its fun to play and I can make great music with it.
I've tried using a midi controller before tho, but I don't really have an inclination to do so
>>51056248
>plenty of major label artists and professional studio musicians use this instrument,
yeah, this. i'm going to take the expertise of Legowelt and The Neptunes more seriously than Some Guy on 4chan
>>51056154
my point is you're still comparing software with hardware. you won't find software that sounds identical to virtual analog/real analog unless it's an emulation in which case it still isn't the "real thing". and it all comes down to preference, in my case i find hardware instruments are much more intuitive and productive than sequencing with software. oh and just because it's "virtual analog" doesn't mean it's not as good or better than "real analog"
>>51056367
literally please try and argue your viewpoint to anybody in the music industry. anybody.
laptop + software + controller is fantastic, that doesn't mean that somebody might not want a simple, single unit synth that they can throw around and plug into any amp without setup.
try getting away from your desk sometime.
>>51056413
meant to say I've never tried
>>51056423
Do you even know what "virtual analog" means? It's software running on the processor inside the synth. You can run the exact same algorithm on your PC, except your PC has a much more powerful CPU and more RAM so it can sound much better.
>>51055569
>get a synth based on more modern techniques like waveshaping.
Distortion synthesis has been around since the 60s.
>>51056413
The wave forms on a VA are so easy to synthesize it's a joke. I've written it before, and it's less than 20 lines of code per waveform. And that's even with proper bandlimited to prevent aliasing. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of dsp could make a VA from scratch in a couple weeks tops.
>shut-in teenagers with no money try and argue with musicians about gear
and yet, if you actually attend shows, you still see microkorgs used by a huge percentage of professional musicians for live music because people don't want to see laptops on fold-out tables with some greasy teenager behind it making dark ambient post experimental noise drone with their le cheaper PC software synths
This argument was exhausted before it started. I play a Hammond - one of the easiest synthesizers to emulate in terms of software. It's like 300lbs and old and requires fucking oiling and maintenance and shit. I know it's more practical to use a Voce or NI B4 or whatever, but I still take care of it because I love the instrument. It feels nice, sounds nice even when idling, and smells nice, and I'm in a completely different headspace when I'm sitting with my hands on 60yr old keys. It makes me play different and I just enjoy it more.
>>51056537
hey hey hey calm down, its okay
what if I don't know how to code at all?
>>51055775
Oh someone thinks he's hot shit with DSP, the "bilateral transform" doesn't account for nonlinearities. It only gives you the simplest digital filters that have been around for decades.
>Bandlimited tables + sinc interpolation. If you need hard sync, fuse minBLEP or BLIT.
Sinc interpolation is computationally expensive. Quasi-bandlimited transitions are good for ideal waveforms, but I don't think they're suitable for actual vintage VCO waveforms.
What now, bitch?
>>51056482
exactly. that's why a lot of hardware synths use virtual analog. you won't have the same results using your PC
>>51056570
don't worry I can vibe with you. it's just the talentless dreamers who hate on people that can appreciate the feel of a tangible instrument for what it is, whether or not its the most cost effective option.
>>51056570
>that rationalization
Do a blind A/B between the Hammond and the NI B4, and see if you can tell the difference. You can't.
>>51056656
that wasn't even what he was saying are you even comprehending?
>>51056642
Yep that's all it is.
>>51056656
Did you read what I typed at all?
>I play a Hammond - one of the easiest synthesizers to emulate in terms of software.
>I'm in a completely different headspace when I'm sitting with my hands on 60yr old keys. It makes me play different and I just enjoy it more.
>>51056537
>Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of dsp could make a VA from scratch in a couple weeks tops.
Only a very basic one that has an unspectacular sound and no interesting features...
>>51056621
I already corrected myself about saying bilateral instead of bilinear, see this post here:
>>51055869
Hardware synths arent pushing the limits on filter technology. They're going to give you the same old tired 2pole (4 if you're lucky) Moog and Arp filters that have been around for decades.
Sinc interpolation used to be too expensive to use, but modern machines can use it on reasonable numbers of tables without glitching.
>>51056656
You're missing the point that the workflow/inspiration is ultimately the most important part. A piece of software being able to generate the same signal as a piece of hardware doesn't mean they're equivalent. And if you think modeling is super easy, I don't think you know anything about modeling. Try modeling a Leslie speaker. You can't.
>>51056737
>unspectacular sound and no interesting features...
Oh you mean like every other VA on the market?
>>51056799
>Try modeling a Leslie speaker. You can't.
https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pasp/Rotating_Horn_Simulation.html
Doppler shift simulation.
>>51056537
now you're just inventing things for the sake of it. jesus chirst
>>51056783
>Hardware synths arent pushing the limits on filter technology.
But still, what you've described isn't remotely sufficient for a good quality emulation. Embedding hyperbolic tangent nonlinearities at various points in the filter is a decent first step, but then you need oversampling, and it still doesn't behave the same. You can iteratively estimate the effect of the feedback path to effectively eliminate the single sample delay (I think it's Diva that does this). Component level modeling is done to a limited extent, but I'm not sure anything yet is really convincing. Stuff like filter FM at high resonance is going to be very difficult to correctly emulate.
>Sinc interpolation used to be too expensive to use, but modern machines can use it on reasonable numbers of tables without glitching.
I think the Korg Kronos does something like that. They patented some novel form of interpolation that's supposed to be super low aliasing, but I haven't read it.
>>51056863
>simulation
yeah. there you have it
>>51056880
It's not that hard, just evalulate the fourier series for all harmonics with frequency less than half the sampling rate. You can put it in a table to save re-computation.
>>51056942
Yeah there you have it, you can model it. What do you think a model is? It is a simulation.
>>51056863
Not nearly enough. You need to model the sound propagating inside and outside the cabinet, the way it's miced and everything. Move the mic 2 inches and the sound changes.
>>51057001
>It's not that hard, just evalulate the fourier series for all harmonics with frequency less than half the sampling rate.
How do you handle audio rate FM, then?
I just wanted to talk about my instrument. W-what are you guys going on about? I feel dumb.
>>51057155
Guy's talking shit about how easy he thinks analog modeling is and I'm baiting him because I know more than he does.
>>51057105
Take a sawtooth wave of frequency f, and a modulator of frequency m
Sum sin(2pi*n*(f+sin(2*pi*m*t)*t)/n for n from 1 to n*f < samplerate/2
>>51057308
Additive synthesis isn't going to accurately model audio rate FM. You're still going to have tons of aliasing, even if you remove harmonics above Fs/2 based on instantaneous frequency. And are you just abruptly including or omitting them on a per-sample basis? Enjoy your discontinuities.
which casiotone is the most liked? i'm looking to buy one cheap
>>51057518
I happen to be a Casio expert, what kind do you prefer?
>>51057380
>aliasing
I already told you everything is properly bandlimited. Check out these spectrums.
I bought a Roland SH-201 from a pawn shop for $185. Pretty much new condition, it's really nice.
>>51057545
i have not a clue, but im willing to read whatever you want to tell me
>>51057564
>>51057564
>he thinks bandlimiting according to instantaneous frequency is enough to prevent aliasing
>laughing_engineers.cpp
Answer me this, then: why do FM synths suffer from aliasing even when the instantaneous frequency of the sine wave carrier doesn't exceed Fs/2?
>>51057618
Sideband frequencies location determined by the Bessel functions. But we aren't talking about FM synths we are talking about VAs.
>>51057581
Uhh, let's see... the early models used "consonant-vowel" synthesis that crossfaded two different low resolution waveforms. The best models that are easy-ish to find are probably the MT-65/68 and HT-700.
Of the monophonic models, the VL-1, PT-30 and PT-50 are best.
There were some additive synthesis ones too, but the sound is kind of boring. The MT-70 isn't too hard to find.
Of the SK series, the SK-1, SK-5 and SK-8 each offer interesting features. I actually think the Yamaha VSS30 is a lot better, though.
Of the PCM keyboards, the MT-750 is most interesting, though it's more practical to settle for the MT-540.
The SA-35 is probably the best for circuit bending.
Does anyone know what's a good real analogue synth to get? All this digital crap sounds too cold, it;s just a bunch of 1s and 0s. Digital's got no soul.
>>51056286
Bump.
Anyone played with a System-1? It can get a SH-101 and SH-2 at the moment. More are coming. Maybe a Jupiter4.
>>51057618
>>51057670
>>51057607
Can you guys fuck off to >>>/sci/ or something. I'm sick of seeing this crap, plus it's not even /mu/ related.
>>51057696
cool bait
>>51057670
>But we aren't talking about FM synths we are talking about VAs.
...but I'm talking about audio rate FM of VA waveforms. Aside from it being phase modulation vs. either exponential or linear FM of a VCO, Why do you think the bandwidth concerns would be dramatically different? It's a perfectly reasonable thing to try to emulate, as you'll find oscillator cross-modulation on a large number of desirable analog synths. But any software implementation will inevitably suffer from horrendous aliasing.
>>51057696
this man needs some tonewheels in his life
>>51057696
>Does anyone know what's a good real analogue synth to get?
EMS Synthi 100
>All this digital crap sounds too cold, it;s just a bunch of 1s and 0s. Digital's got no soul.
kek
>>51057722
>music technology isn't /mu/ related
Well then you should yell at the whole then, since according to you talking about synthesizers isn't /mu/ related either. Moron.
>>51057722
these threads are super slow if there's not some autism going on, it's either this or nothing, and I'm going to sleep soon anyway
>>51057722
Synths are pretty much borderline music/technology. I think it's pretty interesting, but the dude just need to let it go. If digital sounds exactly like analog why do they still make analog.
>>51057787
>tfw no 60,000$ synth
>>51057834
marketing
>>51057764
FM has nothing to do with this, stop bringing it up. Most of the VAs mentioned ITT don't even do any FM, or if they do it's still digital and also suffers aliasing problems.
>>51057834
Because sucker musicians are too dumb to know they are being scammed. They fall for the marketting crap, "It's so much warmer" "so natural" so cool" "digital is lame", so the companies can keep selling their outdated technology at exorbitant prices.
>>51057862
>FM has nothing to do with this, stop bringing it up.
I'm using it to illustrate how your bandlimiting strategy is inadequate.
>Most of the VAs mentioned ITT don't even do any FM, or if they do it's still digital and also suffers aliasing problems.
Because in some domains, there is no adequate way to emulate analog hardware.
>>51057889
Thank you for saving all us "dummies" from the evil music instrument companies! I hope you enjoy spending all your time talking about how much smarter you all than all of us with your nerd shit. Meanwhile I'm rocking out on my microkorg, playing with my bros on stage.
>>51057859
>>51057889
I won't deny marketing is a big part, but I have yet to find a soft synth that sounds exactly like the original. Even digital stuff like FM8 gets really close to a DX7, but it's still not 100%.
>>51057974
>Even digital stuff like FM8 gets really close to a DX7, but it's still not 100%.
I have to interject that FM8 isn't intended to exactly model the DX7, and direct patch comparisons are flawed because FM8's patch translations introduce errors of their own that have nothing to do with the sound engine. NI were trying to make an advanced FM synth that loaded DX7 patches, not a DX7 clone.
>>51057974
DX7 is a digital synth too, you moron.
>hardware
>>51057956
Anti-intellectualism at its finest. Enjoy wasting your money.
>>51057956
>I hope you enjoy spending all your time talking about how much smarter you all than all of us with your nerd shit.
He didn't, though. He knows only the basics and is mostly talking Dunning-Kruger out his ass.
>>51058019
lol'd
>>51058176
If you guys are talking about basic shit, then I am at level negative a million. I don;t even know what Dunning-Kruger is.
>>51058227
The "hurr hardware is useless, softsynths can do everything" guy is just talking shit and acting needlessly smug because he has the Steinberg VST SDK (or just SynthEdit lol) and some copied and pasted code. He thinks everything is easy because he's read 2-3 papers.
>>51058227
its a physiological thing. it has nothing to do with synths. you could look it up also
>>51058359
>The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias manifesting in two principal ways: unskilled individuals tend to suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher
I'm already out of my depth. no idea what this is saying.
Hi nerds
I'm a /v/irgin who's recently played Korg DS10
Which is emulator of a MS series synth with a drum sequencer.
I feel like i've kinda hit a limit with what i can do with that without some kind of instruction booklet (minor music theory knowledge here)
What should my next step be because i really enjoyed playing with that shit
Please & Thanks
>>51058712
You'll probably want to brush up on your DSP. Checkout Oppenheim's Discrete-Time Signal Processing, it's a pretty good intro.
>>51058794
thanks for the tip pal!
Will google it after work
I've bought a microkorg just for playing around, but I have no idea what the hell I'm doing or what half the knobs do.
C-could someone give me a good beginners guide for all things synth?
>>51058794
dude, what the fuck...
>>51058895
Start with the user manual and read some basic stuff on subtractive synthesis. It's not that difficult.
bump for synth
