Synths do not always sound what the interface claims

[Dúnedain]

And you might get very close despite using clearly different values

Yeah for me it is a challenge to come as close as possible. Of course it helps if the synth behaves like the parameters suggest.

Therefore this thread as this is not always the case.

[fluffy_little_something]

I suppose you are a perfectionist, also judging from your other threads on ideal waveforms etc.

Earlier today I was trying to recreate an old Sylenth1 patch on the Dune 2 demo and it was veeery difficult to get the envelopes right as they are so different. Similar knob settings yield totally different results. So I had to experiment a lot. I suppose that is where experience and the art of sound design comes in: you hear the source sound and you know exactly what you have to change in order to get there with your recreation.

[exmatproton]

And you might get very close despite using clearly different values

Yeah for me it is a challenge to come as close as possible. Of course it helps if the synth behaves like the parameters suggest.

Therefore this thread as this is not always the case.

And then? What do you want to obtain with this thread?
Yes, not all plugins show the exact value you're actually hearing or measuring. So what? We can't do anything about that.

Maybe it is a good idea to make examples and deliver those to the actual dev's of the synth, so they can "fix" that.

[fmr]

Maybe it is a good idea to make examples and deliver those to the actual dev's of the synth, so they can "fix" that.

If I were a user, and a developer would "fix" the behaviour of the envelopes after several months (or years) in the market to more than the minimum, I would be really pissed. That would be enough to destroy all the patches built along that period of time.

People have been recreating sounds since the early days of synths, and the envelopes were far less precise than today. It's matter of learning each synth and know how it behaves. Then... adapt.

[exmatproton]

Maybe it is a good idea to make examples and deliver those to the actual dev's of the synth, so they can "fix" that.

If I were a user, and a developer would "fix" the behaviour of the envelopes after several months (or years) in the market to more than the minimum, I would be really pissed. That would be enough to destroy all the patches built along that period of time.

People have been recreating sounds since the early days of synths, and the envelopes were far less precise than today. It's matter of learning each synth and know how it behaves. Then... adapt.

Yep, i agree completely

I was being sarcastic...i think this is one the most useless threads on KVR...
If he wants "perfection", he should use different stuff. Drawing and generating his own envelopes, waves and then mix that with a res of 192KHz @ 32bit in a wave editor...

[aciddose]

If I were a user, and a developer would "fix" the behaviour of the envelopes after several months (or years) in the market to more than the minimum, I would be really pissed. That would be enough to destroy all the patches built along that period of time.

This is 100% wrong.

The plug-in author can correctly interpret past settings to "import" to new settings flawlessly.

It's a simple matter of coefficients and equations. If the author ("developer") was competent to begin with this is at the level of an equivalent to preschool. Not even at kindergarten level.

Not quite A B C D, E F G ...

More like "remember to wipe the shit from your ass and wash it from your hands."

Customers in the VST/plug-ins field demand the most ridiculous and unrealistic things from authors and yet don't demand foundational or even very basic competency at all. Users need to start demanding basic functionality that works correctly and worry about 3d realistic GUIs and complex preset browsing databases after they have plug-ins that work correctly to start with.

Just look at the number of bugs new software is released with on a regular basis. This is the author saying "f**k the user."

[fmr]

If I were a user, and a developer would "fix" the behaviour of the envelopes after several months (or years) in the market to more than the minimum, I would be really pissed. That would be enough to destroy all the patches built along that period of time.

This is 100% wrong.

The plug-in author can correctly interpret past settings to "import" to new settings flawlessly.

"IF" the author does that, fine. But I've had my dose of "fixes" that damaged considerably the work already done.

[Mutant]

If you do sound design by listening you will not always get the desired result. Sometimes you need to have highly accurate values.

Which times would those be, then?

100% Matching a sound from a different synth for example.

[Dúnedain]

I suppose you are a perfectionist, also judging from your other threads on ideal waveforms etc.

Yes I am

Earlier today I was trying to recreate an old Sylenth1 patch on the Dune 2 demo and it was veeery difficult to get the envelopes right as they are so different. Similar knob settings yield totally different results. So I had to experiment a lot. I suppose that is where experience and the art of sound design comes in: you hear the source sound and you know exactly what you have to change in order to get there with your recreation.

Just bounce them and measure envelope times using a wave editor
Or use a real time wave viewer plugin with freeze function
That is how I would do it
More accurate than experimenting
Saves you the trouble from experimenting as well

[Dúnedain]

I was being sarcastic...i think this is one the most useless threads on KVR...

Fine, then do not reply any more

If he wants "perfection", he should use different stuff. Drawing and generating his own envelopes, waves and then mix that with a res of 192KHz @ 32bit in a wave editor...

Plain silly words

[Dúnedain]

If I were a user, and a developer would "fix" the behaviour of the envelopes after several months (or years) in the market to more than the minimum, I would be really pissed. That would be enough to destroy all the patches built along that period of time.

This is 100% wrong.

The plug-in author can correctly interpret past settings to "import" to new settings flawlessly.

It's a simple matter of coefficients and equations. If the author ("developer") was competent to begin with this is at the level of an equivalent to preschool. Not even at kindergarten level.

Not quite A B C D, E F G ...

More like "remember to wipe the shit from your ass and wash it from your hands."

Customers in the VST/plug-ins field demand the most ridiculous and unrealistic things from authors and yet don't demand foundational or even very basic competency at all. Users need to start demanding basic functionality that works correctly and worry about 3d realistic GUIs and complex preset browsing databases after they have plug-ins that work correctly to start with.

Just look at the number of bugs new software is released with on a regular basis. This is the author saying "f**k the user."

Great words, and these apply to DAW developers as well.

[V0RT3X]

To the OP.

You mean like Arturia's products?

So many of their products look like the real deal, but sound nothing like it.

[Dúnedain]

To the OP.

You mean like Arturia's products?

So many of their products look like the real deal, but sound nothing like it.

No, I was talking about ES2 and old sound cards. But I'll put Arturia on my list

[whyterabbyt]

If you do sound design by listening you will not always get the desired result. Sometimes you need to have highly accurate values.

Which times would those be, then?

100% Matching a sound from a different synth for example.

You're asserting that that's not possible unless you have calibrated parameter values?

[Dúnedain]

To give some extra feedback about perfection. When the patch is just at 95% of what I want then to me it sounds just 95% (or even lower) as good as I want. I want it, just like everybody else of course, as good as possible. If that will require some work then just be it. It will increase my knowledge of synths and sound design anyway which is always good of course.