Login / Register  0 items | $0.00 New#KVRDeals

The most underestimated synths...

User avatar
Krakatau
KVRAF
 
5362 posts since 24 May, 2002, from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH

Postby Krakatau; Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:13 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

BlackWinny wrote:
Krakatau wrote:mind you : Frogs are notoriously spiteful creatures !

:D :P :clown:

CROACK !

I'm ashamed... I'm French and I don't like eating frogs.
Image
I prefer the cheese.
Image


well...let me then apologise for all these cheezy comments

:oops:
Armagibbon
KVRist
 
464 posts since 20 Apr, 2017

Postby Armagibbon; Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:29 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

sqigls wrote:why? it's 64-bit also

Albino 3 is 64-bit? Since f*cking when?

*checks linplug site*

Oh boy am I late to that party. Thanks for that, but now I have to keep both on...
User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
1823 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:35 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

+1 on ArcSyn. It has a powerful sound and responds quickly to user ideas, because it has a clear GUI with parameters (and values) that make a real difference when tweaked! Not a clue why there's little discussion about it. Patchpool made some wild presets. Perhaps its "too unique"?
"As the artist goes deeper into his own thing, he learns what works and then needs fewer tools."
kx77free
KVRian
 
597 posts since 19 Jul, 2005, from Paris

Postby kx77free; Thu Apr 20, 2017 4:34 pm Re: The most underestimated synths...

What is the matter with the musician heads?
They are too big, you need always the top of the stupidity, 8 go of ram to run VST... 64 bit of stupidity.
Bla blabla, just make music with your preferred synths in x86 or x64.
Consider your computer like a rack of synths.
When I started to work with VA in 2000's years, I used Orion like a rack with a virtual Midi channel.
Learn to work your sound before to claim something about the "new" technology which is not really new.
The majority of DSP code used by the actual VA is more ten years ago created by the universities.

I believe that a good dev doesn't follows the market if he wants to do good and original synths because the end users are very strange, they are like zombies on the forum, they want always more to do nothing more in reality.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z11yMKGpvhU

electronic music in x64
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jr3WD2gR8_c

electronic music in x86
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K37jsT1RH4U
Armagibbon
KVRist
 
464 posts since 20 Apr, 2017

Postby Armagibbon; Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:56 pm Re: The most underestimated synths...

kx77free wrote:What is the matter with the musician heads?
They are too big, you need always the top of the stupidity, 8 go of ram to run VST... 64 bit of stupidity.
Bla blabla, just make music with your preferred synths in x86 or x64.

Jeez dude, chill. This whole deal with bitness is only because some daws don't support 32-bit stuff anymore. Ya know like Cubase 9?

And who's even saying 32-bit sucks for sound quality in here?
User avatar
V0RT3X
KVRAF
 
6691 posts since 3 Jul, 2012, from Canada

Postby V0RT3X; Thu Apr 20, 2017 7:59 pm Re: The most underestimated synths...

32-bit plugins are obsolete.
KVR caused an invalid page fault in module KERNEL32.DLL at 015f:bff7b997.
User avatar
sqigls
KVRAF
 
2496 posts since 24 Dec, 2004, from Melbourne, Australia

Postby sqigls; Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:08 pm Re: The most underestimated synths...

Armagibbon wrote:
kx77free wrote:What is the matter with the musician heads?
They are too big, you need always the top of the stupidity, 8 go of ram to run VST... 64 bit of stupidity.
Bla blabla, just make music with your preferred synths in x86 or x64.

Jeez dude, chill. This whole deal with bitness is only because some daws don't support 32-bit stuff anymore. Ya know like Cubase 9?

And who's even saying 32-bit sucks for sound quality in here?

if kx77free is referring to my post, I was just questioning the use of a bridge in a 64-bit DAW when the plugin has a 64-bit version.
nobody's gonna creep into your house and delete your 32bit plugins, chill chill, it was just a logistical suggestion.
User avatar
sfd
KVRian
 
977 posts since 14 Jul, 2013

Postby sfd; Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:23 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

I agree with KX77FREE.

There are indeed people who appaers to be limited by the possibilites and features of their gear. Those who don't make music based on an idea a feeling or even ak melody. Instead they make musich within a tight frame set by a genre like, say EDM. So really it's not even music making. It's all abotu throwing in sonic effects.

This is not inovaztive music at all. It's limited to what what teh gear can spit out.

And so there's this hunt for new gear because they're in need of a never-before-heard sonic shit to throw into the gaps of their drum patterns.


They always ask: "What can we do with this new synth that we can't on our old?"

I ask: "What song can I compose with this new synth that I can't on my old?"
You can listen to my music HERE.
dark water
KVRian
 
575 posts since 2 Jun, 2016

Postby dark water; Fri Apr 21, 2017 12:34 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

Every synth is the most underestimated synth, man.

*strokes (non-existent) beard*
User avatar
wagtunes
KVRAF
 
9614 posts since 8 Oct, 2014

Postby wagtunes; Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:20 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

sfd wrote:I agree with KX77FREE.


I ask: "What song can I compose with this new synth that I can't on my old?"


But you see, that's a slippery slope too. I always refer to ELP's "Lucky Man" as an example of what I'm trying to get across.

Would that song have had the same effect had Keith Emerson played the ending lead on his B3? Or if Greg Lake played it on his bass?

Sound matters. It's not only just about the song. If that were the case, musicians wouldn't struggle so much with arrangement.

When Popcorn came out in the early 70s, would it have been as big a hit had it been played on a toy piano or traditional guitar or some other "ordinary" instrument?

The only reason we talk about Switched On Bach at all is because it was done with synthesizers.

As a composer for over 40 years now, I constantly struggle with getting across the exact mood I'm trying to reflect with the song.

This piece I just did absolutely HAD to have bagpipes and a mandolin to reflect the mood I was going for. It absolutely had to have the sound of the ocean in the background. I slaved over this arrangement and there is no way it would have had the same effect had I played it on the piano.

https://soundcloud.com/steven-wagenheim ... ead-vocals

Sound matters...Whether we want to admit it or not.
User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
1823 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:32 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

So we can now include our Most underestimated instruments, starting with bagpipes and mandolin!
I will add the flugelhorn, which has been underestimated for 50 years since it opened the Beach Boys' "God Only Knows."
"As the artist goes deeper into his own thing, he learns what works and then needs fewer tools."
User avatar
wagtunes
KVRAF
 
9614 posts since 8 Oct, 2014

Postby wagtunes; Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:53 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

Michael L wrote:So we can now include our Most underestimated instruments, starting with bagpipes and mandolin!
I will add the flugelhorn, which has been underestimated for 50 years since it opened the Beach Boys' "God Only Knows."


The specific instrument is not the point. The point is, sound itself matters. The tone, the quality, everything about it. We don't write in a vacuum. Not every song ever written translates well from one instrument to another. Would you have replaced the violin lead between the verses with a bombastic supersaw? I know I wouldn't. I think it would have been totally out of place and made the song sound stupid.

There is a place for every sound and not every sound fits in every place. If it did, we'd just open up our synths, close our eyes, and pick out a sound at random. But we don't do that.

At least I know I don't.
User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
1823 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:01 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

So, what are some Most Underestimated Synths that produce non-random sounds?
"As the artist goes deeper into his own thing, he learns what works and then needs fewer tools."
User avatar
wagtunes
KVRAF
 
9614 posts since 8 Oct, 2014

Postby wagtunes; Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:02 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

Michael L wrote:So, what are some Most Underestimated Synths that produce non-random sounds?


You know what? When you feel like having a serious discussion, I'll answer your questions.
User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
1823 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:09 am Re: The most underestimated synths...

I'm trying to get back on topic.
Enzyme is a synth that is pretty close to what you describe: close your eyes and pick a sound :o
"As the artist goes deeper into his own thing, he learns what works and then needs fewer tools."
PreviousNext

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to Instruments