Modern soft synths

[jancivil]

I've made I think 2 Reaktor Ensembles in... 9 yrs? I really am not too swift here.
That said, Blocks makes something that's really pretty easy one level easier.


As to 'modern' soft synths, as it happens, Reaktor houses the ones I find innovative. It's all about feedback loops in Stephan Schmitt's creations. Skanner, Kontour, Reaktor Spark. Particularly Skanner can't have been done much earlier in history than it was. Kontour patches can be so complex that, as rendered from teh DAW one print can turn out so differently than the last I had to test each one. I had the same experience with Molekular, which isn't exactly an instrument, but it's Reaktor some more again.

[ghettosynth]

Just curious - do you guys have any time to actually compose music? It has been a very long time since have heard an interesting new tune. Perhaps that shouldn't be very surprizing if everyone is lost in blocks and filters.

This is a common rejoinder, but yes. I release new stuff every month, and it's just a hobby. I use Reaktor regularly as a part of my compositional process, hence, creating music is part and parcel with exploring Reaktor.

[pdxindy]

I simply don't buy into purist approaches. You can make no claims about what is "needed", only about what you find valuable. It's like saying guitar players don't need distortion.

It may be just the right sound to have a physical modeled guitar tone against a granular pad both filtered per voice by a high quality ZDF filter.

You know, you shift the ground around a lot. You focus on the importance of filters in defining whether a synth is cutting edge or modern etc, so I mention various techniques and synths that do not directly rely on filters for the character of their sound. I say filters are not always essential and next you are off in another direction calling me some sort of anti-filter purist.

I didn't say I am against filters and you know very well that I love me some filters and am not a purist in that sense. However, if you create a physical modeled synth and need a filter to say emulate a physical instrument, then the physical modeling failed. Physical modeling by its very definition would not depend on a classic subtractive type filter but would instead 'filter' frequencies based on modeling the physical properties of various materials... say wood vs metal and so on.

[ghettosynth]

I simply don't buy into purist approaches. You can make no claims about what is "needed", only about what you find valuable. It's like saying guitar players don't need distortion.

It may be just the right sound to have a physical modeled guitar tone against a granular pad both filtered per voice by a high quality ZDF filter.

You know, you shift the ground around a lot. You focus on the importance of filters in defining whether a synth is cutting edge or modern etc, so I mention various techniques and synths that do not directly rely on filters for the character of their sound. I say filters are not always essential and next you are off in another direction calling me some sort of anti-filter purist.

No, that's not how we got here. We were discussing the pros and cons of fixed vs flexible systems and I made a half/joking comment about switching to physical modeling instead of FM to highlight how flexible Reaktor is.

Instead, I ended up working on some physical modeling stuff. You should eventually be able to do that with something from Urs, maybe.

I have stuff from AAS and Sculpture in Logic and Zebra is very capable of modeling many sounds with impressive realism.

We only got back onto filters when I pointed out that AAS filters aren't very good and that limits what YOU can do with your chosen tools. This had absolutely nothing to do with the prior conversation. You can't assert that I'm shifting ground when I'm just responding directly to the words that you write.

However, if you create a physical modeled synth and need a filter to say emulate a physical instrument,

Now you're shifting ground. I never once mentioned any goal with respect to any technique. I said I used physical modeling, and, in fact, I far more use it to simulate instruments of fiction than of reality.

That said, you are still sidestepping the point and that is the same can be said about sampling, and yet filters are often used there.

I never said that filters were the end all and be all to being modern, in fact, I don't even respect this idea that a modern synth is really anything that it's often labled as. Some of you read into what I wrote in an attempt to dismiss my perspective. I said that filters were probably the most important thing in improving the perception of quality of Reaktor instruments. That, my friend, is a true statement. It was yours and someone else's own misreading of my words that drove the filter argument.

I also said that filters matter to me in terms of buying fixed architecture synths and, clearly, they matter to Urs as well else Bazille wouldn't have any. Moreover, he doesn't have anything that is a physical modeling synth on the level of anything by AAS or anything in Reaktor, which is what drove my reference to reminding you that his synths, like almost every other synth, is limited in that way.

In fact, the only cogent argument in this entire thread for modern, which to me, subtractive, as an architecture is certainly not, is that put forth by jancivil. The Reaktor work of Steven Schmidt is almost certainly "modern."

[pdxindy]

I have stuff from AAS and Sculpture in Logic and Zebra is very capable of modeling many sounds with impressive realism.

We only got back onto filters when I pointed out that AAS filters aren't very good and that limits what YOU can do with your chosen tools. This had absolutely nothing to do with the prior conversation. You can't assert that I'm shifting ground when I'm just responding directly to the words that you write.

Okay... you're right... I was misremembering the thread...

Well.. since you just defined modern as subtractive... then I actually agree with you that filters have been until recently one of the primary places of weakness and thus a good way to judge.

However, I consider modern as much more than subtractive and so my general comments have a different perspective than yours. For various synthesis methods, filters are not nearly as significant as with subtractive.

I really care very little about the quality of the filter in String Studio... it is not central to the synth.

[ghettosynth]

Okay... you're right... I was misremembering the thread...

No worries, we all do that.

Well.. since you just defined modern as subtractive... then I actually agree with you that filters have been until recently one of the primary places of weakness and thus a good way to judge.

Nope, I did not define modern as subtractive. Jancivil was referring to synths like Prism and Scanner which are not subtractive. In fact, that was kind of my point, I don't think that Zebra is "modern" really, nor any of the other megasynths with a few per/voice effects. That's just an update of the K2000 which is some 20 years old and just a slight evolution of the romplers and synthesizers that preceded it.

But, certainly, in Reaktor they have been a point of weakness. I'm not a fan of the primary filters at all. They really should have stopped using them. Even Stephen Schmidt still uses them.

Prism is a modern synth. But, what I think is modern and what people mean are two different things. After all, Prism doesn't have "four oscillators" and whatever else initiated this multi-page "debate."

However, I consider modern as much more than subtractive and so my general comments have a different perspective than yours. For various synthesis methods, filters are not nearly as significant as with subtractive.

I don't disagree with that. However, that doesn't mean that they aren't useful musically. We may think of physical modeling as a way to synthesize a particular sound, but, filtering it might be the way it fits into our music.

Case in point, a guitar solo played through a wah wah pedal can be modeled with a physically modeled guitar and a resonant quasi-bandpass filter (I believe that it's typically a shelf, but it is resonant).

Now, typically a wah way is an effect applied after the poly stage, but, in a physical modeling instrument there's no reason that it couldn't be applied per voice. In that case the wah wah is just as much a part of the instrument as the physical model.

As I said, you can't dismiss this without sounding like grandparents in the 60s trying to argue that nobody needed distortion. It may not be interesting to you, but, that doesn't mean that it has no musical value.

I really care very little about the quality of the filter in String Studio... it is not central to the synth.

That's fine and it suits your perspective. But it wouldn't suit mine. I do care about being able to borrow from multiple models to achieve a musical goal.

[wagtunes]

To me, a modern synth (and one that will probably never come out) is Flexion.

[ghettosynth]

To me, a modern synth (and one that will probably never come out) is Flexion.

Didn't know about that one, yes, I agree. Looks interesting, signed up for the newsletter.

[pdxindy]

That said, you are still sidestepping the point and that is the same can be said about sampling, and yet filters are often used there.

and if you needed a filter for the sample to sound like the instrument that was recorded, then your sampling would suck same as a physical model sucks if it needs a filter to sound like what it is emulating. Saying that is not in any way a comment on whether there is value in having means to further manipulate the sound. (please stop putting words in my mouth)

Anyway, this is my last post in this thread. You are being rude and too consistently misrepresenting what I say for that not to be purposeful.

[ghettosynth]

That said, you are still sidestepping the point and that is the same can be said about sampling, and yet filters are often used there.

and if you needed a filter for the sample to sound like the instrument that was recorded then your sampling would suck same as a physical model sucks if it needs a filter to sound like what it is emulating.

No, not at all, this view is far too narrow. That isn't necessarily the reason that filters are used and is absolutely not a claim that I have ever made. They can be used creatively in the same way that they are used with other sound sources. Moreover, this is your assertion, not mine. There is absolutely no reason why the thing that you sample or model must be the final element of interest.

I have several Kontakt libraries that use samples of interesting processes as "oscillators." Rhythmic Robot's Platter, for example, uses waveforms recorded to vinyl and then played back on old record players. They are EXCELLENT samples. They don't suck because there are filters, there are filters because they are an integral part of the product. They are, in essence, sound sources where a subtractive filter still plays a key role in the resulting synthesizer.

In fact, even though the samples are excellent, it wouldn't be a product at all without the subtractive synthesis being added to the sampling.

This very same idea could easy be applied to physical modeling. You might want to create a subtractive synth based on sawtooth oscillators that are physical models of strings, for example.

Saying that is not in any way a comment on whether there is value in having means to further manipulate the sound. (please stop putting words in my mouth)

I'm not putting "words in your mouth", you are simply misreading. I am making a claim that there is value in being able to combine post sound source filters with physical models and that having good filters with all forms of synthesis has value.

In order to include them at the voice level they must be a part of your synthesis engine, not simply an effect.

I gave you an excellent example of this, e.g., the polyphonic pmed wah guitar.

Anyway, this is my last post in this thread. You are being rude and too consistently misrepresenting what I say for that not to be purposeful.

I disagree, I'm just being clear and I think that your assertions about physical modeling are simply too narrow. You're trying to argue that filters have no place in models with physical modeling synthesis. I disagree.

You yourself use filters with FM, which is another synth method that is supposed to not need post voice filters.

Finally, the entire argument is faulty because physical modeling often uses filters at its core and so having a wide variety of filters to use, or abuse, in that context can have value. I'll give you a perfect example of this. There is a simple model of the Moog resonator in the library, that is a crude physical model. The sound is definitely improved by using better filters.

[Cinebient]

I hope the OP lock this thread....it lost the entertainment

[spunkmuffin]

I hope the OP lock this thread....it lost the entertainment

KVR is serious, if you want entertainment go to Trumps twitter.

[Cinebient]

I hope the OP lock this thread....it lost the entertainment

KVR is serious, if you want entertainment go to Trumps twitter.

NOoooooooo!

[ghettosynth]

Here is a quick example of what I think is a simple and interesting instrument.

It's built from some blocks and Chet Singer's excellent Serenade violin synthesizer.

I've modified Serenade slightly to allow for automatic bowing from the two synced LFOs that are summed with the mixer. This allows automatic tempo synced bowing, the manual bow is simply added to the tempo synced bow. Pressure is mapped to the shape of the LFOs so applying pressure changes the bowing in real time.

The second LFO and the Envelope above map to the filter and are also triggered by gate input.

This yields an expressive instrument that has is interesting above and beyond the capability of the physical model. It is, in fact, a synthesizer. Slow attack and decay times yield tones not possible with any real violin, but, the physical modeled violin yields tones that are just not easily accomplished with typical subtractive techniques. Even though this is a monosynth it's not possible to do this without an environment that lets you combine the elements at a voice level.

For those interested in building their reaktor skills, note how this seamlessly combines non-blocks instruments with blocks instruments. You are not limited to just using blocks by themselves.

Schematic is provided on the right, go build it yourself if you're interested. If anyone wants, I can post a clip of the modifications they're fairly simple, but I won't bother if nobody is interested.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

I've made I think 2 Reaktor Ensembles in... 9 yrs? I really am not too swift here.
That said, Blocks makes something that's really pretty easy one level easier.


As to 'modern' soft synths, as it happens, Reaktor houses the ones I find innovative. It's all about feedback loops in Stephan Schmitt's creations. Skanner, Kontour, Reaktor Spark. Particularly Skanner can't have been done much earlier in history than it was. Kontour patches can be so complex that, as rendered from teh DAW one print can turn out so differently than the last I had to test each one. I had the same experience with Molekular, which isn't exactly an instrument, but it's Reaktor some more again.

Well two in nine years is more than I can lay claim to, However I've not had the full version of Reaktor for very long. I kind of got talking to a few enthusiast's recently here after a really long sabbatical, I'd only vague prior demo experience plus some of the Reaktor player stuff (which is vastly different since the full version of course allows one to go in under the hood of anything and tinker away). It really is quite remarkable and a lot of fun, If not frustrating sometimes for me in the exact same manner which you describe, I've literally spent hours just sperging out with Molekular with a guitar DI'd into with a few pedals before hand along with exploring some of the synthesis stuff and grooveboxes, It is a really fun environment which I didn't know I was missing out on so much for all these years despite hints from trusted friends/peoples opinion's I trust, I never got the "just get it, you won't be disappointed" push which is eventually what I did (Well almost, I was looking for something new/fresh which made an easier decision). I'm not a synth wizard but have hours of pure, selfish fun. It is really helping me in that department though which is quite something, Blocks are very intuitive which for a knucklehead, missing link like me is a real gift

All the best Jan and to all as always, It has been a while and always great to see regular, familiar names, Cheers

Dean