Here's some questions followed by my answers

1. Which is the easiest to program in your experience?

2. Which sounds best to your ears, more importantly, why?

3. Which VSTi modular synth has the best sound? NOTE: if you only have one, state that. If you are stuck in one style of music or hate certain styles common to synths state that too.

4. What do you prefer, small synths that get a specific job done well or huge synths that do many jobs well?

5. Is the all-in-one synth available, modular, semi-modular or a mix? Do you think that should be the goal? To create a more flexible Vapor (sample playback, Kompakt engine).

I'd like to see a discussion that has some sense to it instead of someone justifying a purchase or pushing what they like for a singular style of music. These people should have to qualify their responses.

1. Easiest to program - Vaz Modular 3, without a doubt and to my surprise vastly more capable than I thought it originally to be.

2. I think for analog style music Vaz has the best sounds. Even the best Synth Edit creations with custom modules aren't quite as 'real' sounding. By that, I'm talking natural and good in a mix like many of the older analogs were. Not something that is clinically better as it's possible I've missed something that is. But for hybrid to digital I don't think anything yet touches Reaktor which is important considering it's huge learning curve and price, although Vaz is by no means inexpensive.

3. Value for dollar Reaktor wins in my book as there are thousands of ensembles and building blocks available. If you don't want to program there's Reaktor Sessions which is a nice peice of kit and inexpensive comparitively. Vaz and Reaktor tie, I like that organic sound of Vaz while I like the overall sound of Reaktor. Unless you design your own filters and oscillators from ground up, and this takes a serious level of smarts. I work from the macro and instrument level on up and still get lost sometimes in Reaktor, those are the highest level components, similar to all of Vaz's modules. So for sheer flexibility Reaktor wins while Vaz tugs on my heart strings as a great sounding, hard to sound terrible synth. It's scope is less intense in sounds it can do but it is still quite large with sampling, FM (simply called sine osc, but it's the real thing, not some sine wave getting messed up). Reaktor still edges it out for the ability to sound different, still I actually make synths that have the "Reaktor Sound" as part of the end result. I like that sound and like to use it. Try auReality's z-plane emulation if you think all filters there have to sound alike. Try the old Dash products and see if you can spot the filter or oscillator. And SE is starting to creep up with it's extended compiler for programmers, listen to Motion by UGO or M42 Nebula. Again, there are tons of great SE based synths despite some zealots that can't accept a freeware program or even $45 program kicks the snot out of their $300 synth.

4. In part out of ignorance, in part because I wish the whole industry would change and get more specialized and not put out so many $150 - $300 superstar synths capable of everything including flushing your toilet. They're all at least good to excellent but I like simple synths. I'll have some designs for Vaz soon. They will not require scrolling the screen and will be capable of very large ranges of sound while staying simple in concept. People love 303's, Juno 60s and the Juno had one oscillator and an LFO. Some people say, big deal they make meat and potato sounds. Guess what, and designers should start remembering this, meat and potatos is why people buy a synth.

Last bit. After spending quality time with East West's Vapor I'm convinced the non-sample based community needs to develop a simple all in one electronic music workstation type synth. I think sample playback for some sounds is a must but for the others simple subtractive and FM should do the job, but I'd also include spectral and a small form of additive.

Synths that are real close right now:
VirSyn TERA 2, with some sampled instruments and the ability to manipulate granularly it's nearly 100%. With CUBE added it's at 100% - for electronic music.

big tick Rhino, has the goods although it leans a bit to the digital side. That said, it does have some filters that do a great job of reducing digital to very smooth analog sounding styles. It's about $75% there and with sample loading will be around 85%.

Sytrus can develop into a bit more than it's current, "It's analog, no, it's FM" style and intergrate a bit more as Rhino has done. It's a top flight synth that is about 70% close and holding.

I love Pentagon and Albino 2 (growning on me every day) but I'm not familiar with anything close to Vapor other than the synths mentioned. I'm also aware it is a contradiction of my preferences but I think the fight is going to be who builds the best all-in-one VSTi for electronic. Then it's up to romplers to fill in the "real instruments"

I guess I should add Cameleon 5000 as it is capable of sme very good digital to actual morphs of instruments real or synthesized. But I think at some point granulation is going to be necessary to remove noise and expand sample data without ugly background noise keeping the library small. I do it in Kontakt all the time so it can be done.

And I guess I should add Kompakt as it is a great synth with really good filters, excellent choices of envelopes and an unbeatable semi-modular design. Throw some really boring samples in there and when I'm done they'll have movement and depth....and I don't enjoy sampling!

I dont own any modulars as a purchase in its own right...
1. CONSOLE and Energy XT are my kind of Modular synths... CONSOLE is brainless.
2. Depends on the Vst/DXi you load/link together to build your super synth.
3. As above.
4. I prefer a synth that has the sound I want to hear... small or large synths is not an issue of preference for me.
5. Is the all-in-one synth available?... To me I have it now.

Sorry to disagree but you are talking about using others synths, not that I don't too, but under the premise it's not relevent.

If you build synths there are so many thing you can do. Condisder a favorite synth of yours, we'll call it synth a. Synth a has a good sound but the filters are kind of scratchy and lose lots of information in the high frequencies while sounding poorly due to the scratchy type sound. In any of the modulars you can design different filters, make an array of filters, even eq if you must. You can do thing your way nearly exactly, or to the programs limits and I'm not sure the programmers know the limits all the time.

I appreciate you like how you work but it is not really part of the same discussion. No offense, but it sounds a bit like a justification. Saying, I have no desire to use a modular and work this way would make more sense and seem more realistic within the context of this thread - which currently is not long for the board in terms of replies.

your vaz/reaktor comparrison is dead-on- Vaz is the best sounding analog anything and does a good amout of digital wavetable/granular stuff as well but it brings these digitsl sounds into a VERY analog processing/control oriented environment which gives complex digital sounds a smooth/rich analog-ized sound- VERY nice-

while Reaktor is very much the master-of-all-trades and excels at innovative digital sounddesign- name any FM/wavetable/granular/ or additive synth and there are 10 reaktor ensembles that will eclipse it- and SO many useful devices at your finger tips!

another peerless and unique modular synth/vst-host is Abox 2 which allows for metacomplex research into things like deep mathematical models- data manipulation networks- cybernetic circuits and neural-networks-etc- it goes way beyond software like Max/MSP and because it was coded in assembler [!!] it can run thousands even MILLIONS of operatores/ processes/ equations simultaneously in realtime-

OK Bruce,I'll bite.
1)For me,it's Reaktor without a doubt.This is probably only due to the fact that I'm really at home with it,though.
2)Tough question.From the playing around I've done with the VAZ demo,I'll have to say it sounds really nice.Some of Tassman's synths are spectacular sounding(such as Peter's Neptune)-here I'm speaking of 3;I haven't tried the demo for 4.Reaktor at normal sampling rates can sound one dimensional and sterile,but at 88k it's a whole different world.
The human ear can distinguish pitch only up to 20k or so,but I think there's a lot of information in the frequencies above that which is more psychoacoustical in nature than anything else.One of the reasons the old Moog modulars sound so great is that the oscillators are going out beyond 30k with the harmonics.The trend of bandlimiting oscillators to reduce or eliminate aliasing(like Reaktor 4 does) takes its toll here.
3)See above
4)I'm partial to the big monsters myself,but then there's things like the PPG or microTERA that do only one thing,but do them extremely well.
5)I'll agree with you on the TERA/CUBE combo-there isn't much of an electronic nature that can't get done with that.Or,something like TERA/Doppelmangler for the really outre electropunks among us.The new Rhino sounds like a killer,but I wouldn't expect anything else from Tick
ew

ew wrote:

4.Reaktor at normal sampling rates can sound one dimensional and sterile,but at 88k it's a whole different world. The human ear can distinguish pitch only up to 20k or so,but I think there's a lot of information in the frequencies above that which is more psychoacoustical in nature than anything else.One of the reasons the old Moog modulars sound so great is that the oscillators are going out beyond 30k with the harmonics.The trend of bandlimiting oscillators to reduce or eliminate aliasing(like Reaktor 4 does) takes its toll here.

I'm very skeptical of this. I don't hear or feel anything different in Reaktor at 44k vs 88k and I think it's pretty unlikely that there are *any* perceptible effects of frequences above 30k. If that were true then why would 44k recordings of a real moog capture that analog-quality and reveal the relative thinness of most digital synths?

I think it's much more likely that the distinctive sound of the Moog has to do with its harmonic richness below 22k. The subtle deviations in frequency in analog gear create a richer harmonic spectrum than a typical digital signal is going to create and give rise to that analog "fullness".

I have several modular softsynths, although not all, so I'll bite:

x_bruce wrote:

1. Which is the easiest to program in your experience?

I find Vaz Modular the easiest to program, but I've been using it for many years now. I think when I first started with it, I didn't really understand the concepts of CV and analogue modelling, and so had to figure out a bit of stuff before I got going. But once I was there, I was flying. I was just giving the phasemod sine osc and multistage env a try out, and within 2 minutes had a fairly complex FM synth going. It really is a beautiful app, I hope more people look into it. They really won't need another synth for years.

Quote:

2. Which sounds best to your ears, more importantly, why?

VAZ again. God, it can sound good. Big, heavy, scary, but light and versatile when you need it. Great for electronic drums, great as a sampler, great wavetable facilities, and of course analog up the wazoo. Taste probably plays a big factor here. I've never loved Reaktor. I don't hate it, but the sounds off the bat were never enough to draw me in.

You mentioned value for money, I think Synthedit can't be beat. It's maybe rough around the edges, certainly can't entirely compete with the big players yet, but if you want to work with a good modular environment on a budget, I mean come on, twenty bucks. It also is very useful for knocking up quick utilities to use in other hosts. I think everyone interested in synths on a PC should have it, it is that useful.

Quote:

4. What do you prefer, small synths that get a specific job done well or huge synths that do many jobs well?

I prefer big synths that I can be using for years. Must stem from the frugal sense I inherited from my mother. If I'm going to fork over money, I want my money's worth. Been using Vaz for 4 or 5 years, been using Audiomulch (I think it counts as a synth) for 6 or 7 years, Synthedit so far only 1 year, but I'll use for many years more. I expect to be using Rhino 5 years from now (a semi, but still big, full-purposed).

For programming, I like big synths because they push you. A well-planned complex environment will really open itself up to you and inspire unique sounds. Having several big monsters I think really helps here. Each will take you down different paths.

VAZMod can be used in any context, make any sound for any purpose if you push yourself as a synth programmer. I would think Reaktor, Tassman, and others would do the same. It sometimes just takes effort and learning.

I think if anyone really wants to get deep into synthesis, modulars are the way to go. I can't wait to try out Zebra once it hits the PC. I think it'll have a lot to offer too.

Cheers,
Steve

kuniklo wrote:

I'm very skeptical of this. I don't hear or feel anything different in Reaktor at 44k vs 88k and I think it's pretty unlikely that there are *any* perceptible effects of frequences above 30k. If that were true then why would 44k recordings of a real moog capture that analog-quality and reveal the relative thinness of most digital synths?

While it's true that 44k recordings capture SOME of the Moog's qualities,it doesn't capture them all.If you have access to an old Moog or E-mu modular,here's a simple test-take any of the hardware VAs or any of your hardware ROMplers,and get as close to the same patch as you can on the modular and on the other hardware.The newer stuff will sound muffled on the high end in comparison-like someone threw a blanket over the speaker.Your modern VAs like the Waldorf and Access VAs run at 48k internally,and they'll sound muffled in comparison-and they're reproducing out to 24k.
ew

ew wrote:

kuniklo wrote: I'm very skeptical of this. I don't hear or feel anything different in Reaktor at 44k vs 88k and I think it's pretty unlikely that there are *any* perceptible effects of frequences above 30k. If that were true then why would 44k recordings of a real moog capture that analog-quality and reveal the relative thinness of most digital synths? While it's true that 44k recordings capture SOME of the Moog's qualities,it doesn't capture them all.If you have access to an old Moog or E-mu modular,here's a simple test-take any of the hardware VAs or any of your hardware ROMplers,and get as close to the same patch as you can on the modular and on the other hardware.The newer stuff will sound muffled on the high end in comparison-like someone threw a blanket over the speaker.Your modern VAs like the Waldorf and Access VAs run at 48k internally,and they'll sound muffled in comparison-and they're reproducing out to 24k. ew

I wish I had an old Moog to try this out .

I don't doubt that a real Moog sounds better than any existing emulations but I'm still much more inclined to believe it's due to differences in the audible frequency range.

Just for clarification. When I discuss small vs large synths I am discussing synths created in the modular synthesizers.

@kuniklo

Quote:

I'm very skeptical of this. I don't hear or feel anything

OK - it's a big discussion:

Dogs CAN hear above 20.000 hz.
Some medicals use SUBLIMINALS in therapy as
your subliminal can FEEL the waves although
you don't hear ONE CLEAR SINUS above 20.000.

BUT:
This one sinus HAS waves above 20.000.

AND:
Music and sounds consist of MANY SINUSES.

AND:
MANY "nonhearable" 20000+sounds are ADDED to ONE hearable/feelable sound.

On the other hand: I don't think it is nessecary
to copy old gear of the 70/80/90 as we live in the virtual nonmaterial third millenium.

It's not so easy to fit old analogue sound into a
nowadays digital mix - the music of the future is digital.

So we need a fusion of ORION and REAKTOR for
full working power !

:wink