Are filters what make the sound of a synth stand out from the crowd?

[chk071]

If all filters in soft synths are just code, i.e. just algorithms. It's just software so there's no intrinsic physical component limiting or shaping the sound of the filter. Change or tweak the algorithm and the dev can change the sound of the filter.
So why do some soft synths have much much better sounding filters than others?

Because some algorithms are better than others?

I guess it's also always a performance/sound consideration. I think Dune 3 just set the threshold for analog modelling in the filters and comparatively low CPU consumption. I really hope that other developers will get to that level of quality in similarly featured synths.

[mjudge55]

All filters in soft synths are just code, i.e. just implementation of algorithms. It's just software so there's no intrinsic physical component limiting or shaping the sound of the filter. Change or tweak the algorithm and the dev can change the sound of the filter.
So why do some soft synths have much much better sounding filters than others?

Better is so subjective here. But I think if the design goals, sound, UI, and marketing are all aligned and targeted at a market where there’s sufficient demand, then the developer will have a successful product and some users will attribute that to the filter where it’s behavior is critical and also aligned.

I imagine developers are ‘tuning’ their filters with this in mind, and while the science is objective the tuning itself will involve subjective decisions.

[Stefken]

All filters in soft synths are just code, i.e. just implementation of algorithms. It's just software so there's no intrinsic physical component limiting or shaping the sound of the filter. Change or tweak the algorithm and the dev can change the sound of the filter.
So why do some soft synths have much much better sounding filters than others?

A painting is just paint on canvas. Why is one painting better than another?

Because it takes competence, dedication, experience and maybe making a great filter is somewhat of an artform?
The guy in the video I referenced does mathematical models as his dayjob; so he does this day in and day out. It's not like : I've got a few hours to spare. I'm gonna make me a filter.

Important part of the problem is getting it detailed AND fast enough. The guy in the video (Leonardo) tailored some of his filters practically as simulators designed to solve a specific problem as fast as possible.

My 2 cents...

[.jon]

Filters are really important on KVR, but the practical situations where the difference between an average filter and a more advanced one has any meaning in a musical sense are pretty rare.

I think they've become so overemphasized is because it's so easy to fiddle with cutoff and filter and procrastinate on the wonderful sweeps and whistles instead of using a synth. One is hearing the sound of the filter in isolation, but I don't think the differences between filters are very obvious in finished pieces of music. A filter is just one component of one sound source.

[flocked]

Regarding software filters: I always wondered why there isn't a eurorack module which has several digitally emulated filters. Basically something like Mutable Instruments Braids or Plaits where you can choose between different oscillator types, but for filters. Braids/Plaits shows that there is a huge market for that.

U-he's awesome filter collection (from Repro, Diva, Hiva, etc.) would be perfect for that and they sound truly analog. Just wonder, if ARM processors are powerful enough for that. Does anyone know?

[Teksonik]

Just to point out the obvious. There are thousands of synth patches that don't use a Filter at all. Filters are just one part of one form of synthesis......

[highkoo]

building the filter around the human hearing system.

I think thats exactly what we should do! Start building all of this stuff for humans, exclusively!
My dog has not come up with a decent patch in weeks!

[mjudge55]

Just to point out the obvious. There are thousands of synth patches that don't use a Filter at all. Filters are just one part of one form of synthesis......

Right and many patches using the filter don’t rely heavily on its specific character. I mean if you’re dead set on an ‘authentic’ acid bass, filter character may be crucial, but for so many other patches you might be using the filter but it’s not like the centerpiece.

[glokraw]

Are filters what make the sound of a synth stand out
from the crowd?
There is a lot of discussion about
filters lately and I wonder... ?

If by 'crowd', you mean those who make money from
created/produced music, horses-before-carts
is the good luck plan . My next-door neighbor
is a professional musician, and while not (yet)
a 'hit maker', is successful in the local market,
nice home, nice rides, nice parties etc.

He insists that success depends mainly on
mastery of instruments followed up with
relentless promotion: the hunt for gigs, good venues
and time slots that paying fans will utilize, coupled with
easily available products. These far transcend
any particulars found in a vst path.
Filters used in unheard music won't matter much
Cheers

[glokraw]

I want to understand how intense a good filter is polishing the sound, really.

If music is well mixed, each part will benefit from
filters, EQ, amplitude etc. Melodies and solos
that are drowned out, stuck in complex sonic mud,
or sharing EQ with the underlying parts, don't help anyone.
Some people can mix 60 tracks,
some best stop at 5 or 6. (Confirmed in a nearby mirror )
Cheers

[twitewhite]

Some of my favourite synths have not really great filters... Virus TI, Parawave Rapid. Can't really call their filter implementation being remotely on the same level as Repro or Diva. But they do great things on the oscillator level so the filters can be used, well .. for filtering - I mean just basic envelope controlled tone shaping with no extra coloration ( I'm not talking about Virus TI filter FX here because it's essentially just FX put before the filters).

On the other hand, Diva and Repro have totally amazing filters, when i think "this sound needs some heavy filter tweaking" these two are usualy my first choices.

I'm still waiting for someone to combine the power of digital oscillators similar to what can be found in Virus TI with state-of-art analogue modelled filters.

Really? I thought Virus and Rapid were known for having good filters.

[Delta Sign]

Really? I thought Virus and Rapid were known for having good filters.

It's entirely subjective. The musical quality of something can't be measured in any meaningful way. Sure, one can objectively quantify certain characteristics of a filter (or any other musical gear) to a certain extend, like how close it resembles an analog counterpart or how much aliasing there is, but that doesn't say anything about how "good" or "bad" it sounds.

Let's take the filter from Podolski/FilterscapeVA, for example. By todays standards, just going by how sophisticated it is and how closely it resembles analog filters, it's probably quite awful, yet I love it for certain tasks like squelchy acid synths.

https://soundcloud.com/deltasign/u-he-p ... d-sequence

To answer the original question, at least from my point of view: No, at least not entirely. The sound of the filter has a big effect on what kinds of sounds I tend to make with a given synth, but there is much more to it. A synth that just allows for the classic saw/pulse through lowpass filter sounds will naturally lead me to very different sounds then a synth with a flexible oscillator section, for example. Synths are more than their filter. Throwing a 303 filter on your synth won't make it sound like a 303, a sound is more than the sum of its parts.

[BONES]

There is a lot of discussion about filters lately and I wonder if high quality filters are the most important component that make the sound of a software or hardware synth so special and popular.

In a word, no. If it was true, then MiniMoog would not be the revered pile of krap that it is because it's filter is terrible. OTOH, it's oscillators sound great, which should give you a clue about what is really the most important single part of a good synth.

Think about it, most of the sounds you make will work equally well with any filter you care to throw at it. It is really only in specific circumstances that having the right filter will actually matter. e.g. When making bass sounds with heavily modulated resonance, what I call "squelchy bass". A lot of filters seem to be OK at low to moderate settings but once you really start to pump it, a lot of them fall over in a screaming heap.

[BONES]

If all filters in soft synths are just code, i.e. just algorithms, then why do some soft synths have much much better sounding filters than others?
It's just software so there's no intrinsic physical component limiting or shaping the sound of the filter.

This is exactly what I wanted to discuss in this thread
Seems to be really a complex topic, at least for people like me with no programming background.
And its great that we have Urs among us

The thing is, different people want different things from a filter so what you think sounds good I might think sounds bad. There will always be different interpretations of good and bad and, therefore, different results when people make a filter. On top of that you will have people deliberately designing bad sounding filters because they are trying to emulate the horrible filter from a classic synth, like the MinMoog I mentioned above or the ARP Odyssey (which is a synth I love, despite it's ordinary filter).

Filters are really important on KVR, but the practical situations where the difference between an average filter and a more advanced one has any meaning in a musical sense are pretty rare.

I think they've become so overemphasized is because it's so easy to fiddle with cutoff and filter and procrastinate on the wonderful sweeps and whistles instead of using a synth. One is hearing the sound of the filter in isolation, but I don't think the differences between filters are very obvious in finished pieces of music. A filter is just one component of one sound source.

I doubt that any truer words will ever be posted to KVR.

[Russell Grand]

What about digital filters better than analogues? Without the 'stuff like that'? Impossible? Nobody has tried yet? Forever stuck in the 70's is the way of the future?

Look man, I know it must be hard for you to see me still post here after you called me a douche and all that, but let me break it to you: That's not what the OP asked about. Here's a small reminder of what the question was:

how complex is the process of creating high quality filters or even precise emulations of analogue ones?

Woah, let's take it down a notch. We don't need to get all personal in a thread about filters. Sheesh...