Physical Modeling synths. More than just emulation?

[ThomasHelzle]

Personally I hope not like Ultra Analog - the new interface is dreadful.

My personal favourite GUI from AAS is Chromaphone - so modern and light and compact. While it's missing more in-depth modulation options, otherwise I really like it. Clever stuff.
The other, more skeuomorphic GUIs could be fun too in theory but with the very small size, they feel limiting to me and the somehow ugly browser on the side kills the whole look, even if it works well and doesn't get in the way.

I guess they go through their whole range piece by piece ATM? Hopefully the next is StringStudio - it could use a refresh, Chromaphone sounds a bit warmer/rounder to me, StringStudio is a bit more on the digital/hard/sharp side in comparison IMO. And many of the factory presets turned me away rather than attracted me at first...

Well, we will see I guess

Cheers,

Tom

[BBFG#]

Personally I hope not like Ultra Analog - the new interface is dreadful.

My personal favourite GUI from AAS is Chromaphone - so modern and light and compact. While it's missing more in-depth modulation options, otherwise I really like it. Clever stuff.
The other, more skeuomorphic GUIs could be fun too in theory but with the very small size, they feel limiting to me and the somehow ugly browser on the side kills the whole look, even if it works well and doesn't get in the way.
I guess they go through their whole range piece by piece ATM? Hopefully the next is StringStudio - it could use a refresh, Chromaphone sounds a bit warmer/rounder to me, StringStudio is a bit more on the digital/hard/sharp side in comparison IMO. And many of the factory presets turned me away rather than attracted me at first...
Well, we will see I guess
Cheers,
Tom

Supposedly, String Studio is in the process of being revamped next.
It would be nice to have the resonators of Chromaphone in Strin Studio.
Sometimes don't like the overlap in sound between the two.
Still think if they put the two together and added single/double reed models to it, it would synergystically reign above all the others.

[BasariStudios]

When someone says Physical Modeled Synth, I expect a synth that can emulate the characteristics of acoustic instruments. String, Wind, Reed and Percussion instruments.

Besides the pedantic discourse, isn't that what most users expect when hearing the term?

EXACTLY THAT!!! I don't call it PM so i can Modulate Drones on it, for that i have quazillion other synths. That's why i said there is no real PM except VL and MOSS, the exactly did that. I challenge someone to prove me wrong with another VST into the Acoustic realm, i have references and proofs, which i programmed my self.

[fmr]

Still think if they put the two together and added single/double reed models to it, it would synergystically reign above all the others.

That could be something nice, indeed

[ThomasHelzle]

Would be fascinating to design such an instrument. I imagine it would be a very complex process to make it easy to use, sound good in a broad range and at the same time as flexible as we all imagine it to be...
PM (sorry ) is so much harder to tame than a subtractive synth...

Cheers,

Tom

[pdxindy]

Diva is not a physical modeled synth...

Why not? I guess Urs could make some light on this, but if he is emulating specific circuits using mathematical models, as I think he did, that may be considered like "Physical Modeling", IMO.

What would you classify it?

Go to the product pages for Diva, Synth Squad, PolyKB, Synthix and Monark and not one of them uses the term physical modeling to describe the synth...

I am pointing out that the common use of the term by both developers and musicians does not generally include circuit modeled emulations. You are free to argue that the common use is 'wrong' or should be changed or whatever.

I don't care specifically what wording is used, but I would like to continue to have a term (currently physical modeling) that describes/differentiates a synth a like String Studio. I am glad that there is the term so that when Madrona Labs announces Kaivo as a physical modeled synth, I immediately have some sense of what the synth is about and that it will interest me.

[BBFG#]

When someone says Physical Modeled Synth, I expect a synth that can emulate the characteristics of acoustic instruments. String, Wind, Reed and Percussion instruments.

Besides the pedantic discourse, isn't that what most users expect when hearing the term?

EXACTLY THAT!!! I don't call it PM so i can Modulate Drones on it, for that i have quazillion other synths. That's why i said there is no real PM except VL and MOSS, the exactly did that. I challenge someone to prove me wrong with another VST into the Acoustic realm, i have references and proofs, which i programmed my self.

Clarify MOSS.
I was assuming you meant the Korg HW that utilizes it until you said VST.
My V-SynthGT is the one I use for it's PM/APS/EA parameters, but it's HW too.

[whyterabbyt]

Diva is not a physical modeled synth...

Why not? I guess Urs could make some light on this, but if he is emulating specific circuits using mathematical models, as I think he did, that may be considered like "Physical Modeling", IMO.

What would you classify it?

Go to the product pages for Diva, Synth Squad, PolyKB, Synthix and Monark and not one of them uses the term physical modeling to describe the synth...

I am pointing out that the common use of the term by both developers and musicians does not generally include circuit modeled emulations. You are free to argue that the common use is 'wrong' or should be changed or whatever.

I don't care specifically what wording is used, but I would like to continue to have a term (currently physical modeling) that describes/differentiates a synth a like String Studio. I am glad that there is the term so that when Madrona Labs announces Kaivo as a physical modeled synth, I immediately have some sense of what the synth is about and that it will interest me.

And yet kaivo is a hybrid of granular synthesis, subtractive synthesis, and 1- and 2-d resonators.
Nice to know something as abstract as granular synthesis is allowed in a'physical modelled synth' when modelling the physics of something electronic isn't.

[whyterabbyt]

I am pointing out that the common use of the term by both developers and musicians does not generally include circuit modeled emulations. You are free to argue that the common use is 'wrong' or should be changed or whatever.

I am pointing out that the common use of the term by the scientists and engineers who researched and developed physical models in the first place did not generally exclude one specific domain of model, ie the electronic, and that even in common use, such as your own, synths with electronic or electromagnetic modelling routinely get described as physically modelled. You seem to feel free arguing that my use is wrong, though.

[BasariStudios]

Clarify MOSS.

Multi Oscillator Synthezis System, Korg Z1, Korg Prophecy, they all rely on the same System.

As for PM on VSTs, someone mentioned Diva and some other, NO, none of them is Physical Modeling. The closest to PM would be Zebras Comb Filter and nothing else.

[ThomasHelzle]

I propose we simply re-name the field we are talking about to "Frumpiwultar" and get on with our lifes

Cheers,

Tom

[pdxindy]

Clarify MOSS.

Multi Oscillator Synthezis System, Korg Z1, Korg Prophecy, they all rely on the same System.

As for PM on VSTs, someone mentioned Diva and some other, NO, none of them is Physical Modeling. The closest to PM would be Zebras Comb Filter and nothing else.

I still have 2 Oasys PCI cards (not currently used). I also have a Z1 and I so wish that the Z1 had the glottal model from the Oasys PCI. Nothing in a plugin that I have tried is quite like it.

[pdxindy]

I propose we simply re-name the field we are talking about to "Frumpiwultar" and get on with our lifes

Cheers,

Tom

Yes, but is Diva a Frumpiwultar synth or not?

[BasariStudios]

No, its Loppy Fruit. And please don't sell the Z1, if so i will open a thread where everyone will be cursing you.

[fmr]

Go to the product pages for Diva, Synth Squad, PolyKB, Synthix and Monark and not one of them uses the term physical modeling to describe the synth...

From the product description of DIVA: "The oscillators, filters and envelopes closely model components found in some of the great monophonic and polyphonic synthesizers of yesteryear."

Now, you will probably argue that it's "Circuit Modeling", and I will agree, and will add that Circuit Modeling is as much PM as membrane modeling, string modeling or pipe modeling.

Do we use DIVA as an analogue synth? Of course we do - it's what it is modeling.

Do we use a string modeling synth as a string instrument? Most probably, too.

Do we have to use each one just like that? NO. They are all "synths"... We can (and probably should) use them as SYNTHS. You will NEVER have a real acoustic instrument, no matter how perfect the model is - just a "synth". You will have to learn to play it as what it is, the same way a flutist or a trumpeteer learn to play their instruments as what they are.

So, if you think a PM synth will ever replace ANY acoustic instrument you are as wrong as people who said that about analogue synths, digital synths, samplers, etc. Doen't matter what the synth resides on to make the sound. You'll have to learn each synth for what it is, and learn to use it as what it is.