Is an oscilloscope a necessary tool for serious sound design?
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 149 posts since 11 Jan, 2013
The lack of VST scopes and/or resources outside of showing fun wave pattern shapes tells me that it's not...
- KVRAF
- 40245 posts since 11 Aug, 2008 from clown world
I would say no. Your golden ears are necessary. If however you don't have ears, then an oscilloscope could be just what the Doctor ordered.
Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
- KVRAF
- 15273 posts since 8 Mar, 2005 from Utrecht, Holland
Other than fulfilling your curiosity (what do the waveforms actually look like) I don't really see the need. Because you don't "hear" with your eyes but with your ears. I even find the plots that some EQs show distracting.
We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.
My MusicCalc is served over https!!
My MusicCalc is served over https!!
- KVRAF
- 4818 posts since 25 Jan, 2014 from The End of The World as We Knowit
Sometimes I do, when I need to filter a waveform so it has fewer harmonics or noise (or the opposite) or if I am blending waveforms, or reinforcing a sample with a waveform: a scope can help show me what to listen for. But my ears and eyes are wired together and YMMV!
s a v e
y o u r
f l o w
y o u r
f l o w
-
- KVRAF
- 5627 posts since 23 Mar, 2006 from pendeLondonmonium
An oscilloscope? Can't remember using it lately. A spectrum analyser? Yes, mostly where my ears can not help (ie: checking infrasonic regions for issues in samples).
-
- KVRAF
- 5627 posts since 23 Mar, 2006 from pendeLondonmonium
Absolutely. And if you insert your ear buds into your nose, you can smell the divine fragrances of the full frequency spectrum.Aloysius wrote:If you sit on your speaker, you can check out all the infrasonics you want.
-
- KVRist
- 406 posts since 21 Mar, 2015
this is an important point, I always think that what really matters in any case is what's coming out of the speakers. Nothing more than that.BertKoor wrote:Because you don't "hear" with your eyes but with your ears.
- KVRAF
- 40245 posts since 11 Aug, 2008 from clown world
himalaya wrote:Absolutely. And if you insert your ear buds into your nose, you can smell the divine fragrances of the full frequency spectrum.Aloysius wrote:If you sit on your speaker, you can check out all the infrasonics you want.
Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
-
- KVRAF
- 5716 posts since 8 Jun, 2009
If you're trying to reverse-engineer a sound, it can be handy to see what's going on.BertKoor wrote:Other than fulfilling your curiosity (what do the waveforms actually look like) I don't really see the need. Because you don't "hear" with your eyes but with your ears. I even find the plots that some EQs show distracting.
I don't see what the OP's issue with existing plugins is though, other than perhaps only a few of them have a useful way of setting a timebase. There's very little you are going to see in an external instrument that doesn't appear in the software/computer domain.
-
- KVRAF
- 5627 posts since 23 Mar, 2006 from pendeLondonmonium
Generally it's true but there are many reasons for using a spectrum analyser (more than an oscilloscope). You simply won't be able to solve any issues below and above the average human hearing, stuff which we don't hear but is still there, captured somehow during a recording (samples for example), and whereas we may not be able to hear at such extremes, it's a good professional habit to inspect samples and eliminate any issues. This is where such utilities are a must.phace wrote:this is an important point, I always think that what really matters in any case is what's coming out of the speakers. Nothing more than that.BertKoor wrote:Because you don't "hear" with your eyes but with your ears.
-
- KVRist
- 406 posts since 21 Mar, 2015
yes I agree, but in the creative process I don't bother much, when finalizing sounds I get more serious and start analyzing mud/resonance areas.himalaya wrote:Generally it's true but there are many reasons for using a spectrum analyser (more than an oscilloscope). You simply won't be able to solve any issues below and above the average human hearing, stuff which we don't hear but is still there, captured somehow during a recording (samples for example), and whereas we may not be able to hear at such extremes, it's a good professional habit to inspect samples and eliminate any issues. This is where such utilities are a must.phace wrote:this is an important point, I always think that what really matters in any case is what's coming out of the speakers. Nothing more than that.BertKoor wrote:Because you don't "hear" with your eyes but with your ears.
-
- KVRAF
- 3477 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England
Only to check for DC offset. I do a lot of processing which involves deliberately adding DC offset, processing as required, then removing it. I always check the result through an oscilloscope to see if I can get away without high-passing as a final step.
Other than that, I don't think it's particularly useful as a sound design tool. Not in the same way a frequency analyser can be. Artists like Cyclo and Jerobeam Fenderson have done some awesome stuff with oscilloscopes - well, lissajous phasescopes really - but other than such highly specialised creative use cases I'd say it's more of a technical tool.
Coincidentally, last month's One Synth Challenge used Spiral Generator which is designed to create patterns in a phasescope. Not sure how many entrants made a visual component though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XziuEdpVUe0
Other than that, I don't think it's particularly useful as a sound design tool. Not in the same way a frequency analyser can be. Artists like Cyclo and Jerobeam Fenderson have done some awesome stuff with oscilloscopes - well, lissajous phasescopes really - but other than such highly specialised creative use cases I'd say it's more of a technical tool.
Coincidentally, last month's One Synth Challenge used Spiral Generator which is designed to create patterns in a phasescope. Not sure how many entrants made a visual component though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XziuEdpVUe0