Hey guys.
I hope this question isnt too vague.
Im interested in getting into sound design and synth programming. Ive only ever used virtual synthesizers.
If theres any good sound designers out there reading, Id be interested in hearing your story.
What Im really interested to know is, is it possible to make a name/career for yourself as a sound designer without spending months or years studying music/maths.
Im learning synthesis and its goin pretty well. Ive programmed some very useable patches for Blue, Albino, Zebra, Absynth, and Aplha.
Im currently checking out the Absynth tutorial dvd and learning lots. But recently I was put on to the SOS synth secret series, and there seems to be a lot of emphesis on complicated maths, music, and lifelike emulation.
Is it really that important?
I find the maths part difficult to fathom.
Again, sorry if this question is a bit vague.
Kudos, Respect, and thanks in advance.
Getting into Sound Design / synth programming.
-
- KVRist
- 178 posts since 27 Dec, 2004 from Dublin, Ireland
-
- KVRian
- 1106 posts since 8 Oct, 2003 from Belgium
- Reading books about synthesis : subtractive is the easiest method, start with that. Pick up a book that goes fairly deep into the subject, but not too mathematical either, or you'll lose interest quickly. Learn about the interaction between VCO - VCF - LFO - VCA and how they modify your sound.
- Reading the manual of the synth your programming (a couple of times) : every synth has options that set them apart from other synths, learn about those.
- Get a hardware synth with knobs or a controller for your softsynth, it makes it easier to tweak your sound.
- After all that theory you can begin recreating sounds of other synths or samples. Don't look at values, but use your ears. You'll soon know if you can do it or not.
- Once you can recreate existing sounds pretty fast and you know which knobs to tweak to give you a certain result, you can begin making your own sounds from scratch.
That's very briefly how I began.
Good luck,
Peter.
- Reading the manual of the synth your programming (a couple of times) : every synth has options that set them apart from other synths, learn about those.
- Get a hardware synth with knobs or a controller for your softsynth, it makes it easier to tweak your sound.
- After all that theory you can begin recreating sounds of other synths or samples. Don't look at values, but use your ears. You'll soon know if you can do it or not.
- Once you can recreate existing sounds pretty fast and you know which knobs to tweak to give you a certain result, you can begin making your own sounds from scratch.
That's very briefly how I began.
Good luck,
Peter.
-
- KVRer
- 20 posts since 24 Jul, 2006 from Melbourne, Australia
i want to break into this as well - let me know if you find any useful info 
vst presets - http://secondsight.110mb.com
choons - www.myspace.com/secondsightaustralia
www.myspace.com/liquidearthpsy
choons - www.myspace.com/secondsightaustralia
www.myspace.com/liquidearthpsy
-
- KVRAF
- 3850 posts since 5 Mar, 2004 from Millicent Australia
Do, do and do agian and again
Make banks for synths and get them out there to see how ppl respond. Go for useability and some flash "how did he do that" stuff as spice.
I'm always interested inhaving more banks for SynthStudio Pack synths. I'll even reward outstanding contributions...
Make banks for synths and get them out there to see how ppl respond. Go for useability and some flash "how did he do that" stuff as spice.
I'm always interested inhaving more banks for SynthStudio Pack synths. I'll even reward outstanding contributions...
Benedict Roff-Marsh
http://www.benedictroffmarsh.com
http://www.benedictroffmarsh.com
-
- KVRist
- 157 posts since 31 Jan, 2005
I'm strong on math yet would have to say that I never use it when programming patches. An area where math is an asset but still isn't required would be in synth creation but that's something different. I really wouldn't worry about the math. In my opinion, math-heavy explanations are ofen more academic than practical.
As far as the time commitment is concerned I would concentrate on one synthesis method at a time. Don't stop playing with the others because that's simply no fun but do concentrate on one. Some are more difficult to learn than others but generally speaking you are probably looking at days to weeks to get your "walking legs" with a method and weeks to a few months to become totally proficient in that method. To get a good basic understanding of all the major methods might take six months to a year and it will probably take a few years to reach a mastery level.
It's also important to understand that different methods require different learning approaches. Subtractive(i.e. analog) is the most intuitive and though I don't recommend it it can be learned without so much as reading the manual. Just start fiddling and eventually you figure out what everything does. Now contrast this with FM synthesis. Without reading up on it every sound a person programs from now until the end of time is going to sound either like a flute or a truck of cats running over a cliff.
Like Pschelfh said, I'd start with subtractive. Albino is great for this. Be sure to get a thourough understanding of pulse width and also oscillator syncing. Explanations on syncing are often not very straightforward and it is easy to just say to hell with it and gloss it over but please don't! After subtractive move on to additive and get a harmonic/FFT analyzer plugin such as Fre(a)koscope to see what happens as you add harmonics. After learning subtractive, additive won't take long at all. Also be sure to read up on harmonics at this point. Understand harmonics and how to interpret an analyzer as these will prove to be invaluable to getting anything other than the most basic sounds out of FM programming. After additive I'd move onto FM and phase modulation. FM and PM are related, but PM is a bit easier so you might want to learn it first. PM is easier but FM is a bit more powerful. After all these explore physical modeling if that's something that interests you and then hit granular synthesis. Hit granular last not because it's the most difficult but more because it's used to create ambient effects that while useful and cool are't as broadly applicable. You're using Absynth so you're probably already familiar with most of these.
Some of my own rulse of thumb are:
1. When programing bass patches detune two oscillators by one octave. This will make the patch sound fatter and allow it to be played over a greater range. This can also be done to high-pitched leads to keep them from sounding thin and to also increase their useful range.
2. Use the filter and it's envelope to sculpt a sound before working with the amplitude envelope. Sounds in nature don't simply increase and decrease in amplitude, but at louder amplitudes they contain more high-frequency content.
3. Don't be afraid to use presets, modify presets etc. for use in your music.
4. To get thick pads:
a: use pulse-width modulation and place the modulation amount/depth close to, but not over 50%. Anything over that will produce a noticable amplitude modulation effect.
b. Detune one oscillator up by 5-10 cents and another oscillator down by 5-10 cents. This will help to cover up the amplitude modulation created as a side effect of the pulse-width modulation. Don't detune one oscillator by 10-20 cents and leave the other unchanged! Yes this will cover up the side effect but it will also through your patch out of pitch.
5. Again, know harmonics and harmonic analysis up and down. After all this is what sound is made up of.
These are just some starting points.
There's really no reason you can't produce professional patches almost from the start. You're basically just acquiring more tools along the way.
As far as the time commitment is concerned I would concentrate on one synthesis method at a time. Don't stop playing with the others because that's simply no fun but do concentrate on one. Some are more difficult to learn than others but generally speaking you are probably looking at days to weeks to get your "walking legs" with a method and weeks to a few months to become totally proficient in that method. To get a good basic understanding of all the major methods might take six months to a year and it will probably take a few years to reach a mastery level.
It's also important to understand that different methods require different learning approaches. Subtractive(i.e. analog) is the most intuitive and though I don't recommend it it can be learned without so much as reading the manual. Just start fiddling and eventually you figure out what everything does. Now contrast this with FM synthesis. Without reading up on it every sound a person programs from now until the end of time is going to sound either like a flute or a truck of cats running over a cliff.
Like Pschelfh said, I'd start with subtractive. Albino is great for this. Be sure to get a thourough understanding of pulse width and also oscillator syncing. Explanations on syncing are often not very straightforward and it is easy to just say to hell with it and gloss it over but please don't! After subtractive move on to additive and get a harmonic/FFT analyzer plugin such as Fre(a)koscope to see what happens as you add harmonics. After learning subtractive, additive won't take long at all. Also be sure to read up on harmonics at this point. Understand harmonics and how to interpret an analyzer as these will prove to be invaluable to getting anything other than the most basic sounds out of FM programming. After additive I'd move onto FM and phase modulation. FM and PM are related, but PM is a bit easier so you might want to learn it first. PM is easier but FM is a bit more powerful. After all these explore physical modeling if that's something that interests you and then hit granular synthesis. Hit granular last not because it's the most difficult but more because it's used to create ambient effects that while useful and cool are't as broadly applicable. You're using Absynth so you're probably already familiar with most of these.
Some of my own rulse of thumb are:
1. When programing bass patches detune two oscillators by one octave. This will make the patch sound fatter and allow it to be played over a greater range. This can also be done to high-pitched leads to keep them from sounding thin and to also increase their useful range.
2. Use the filter and it's envelope to sculpt a sound before working with the amplitude envelope. Sounds in nature don't simply increase and decrease in amplitude, but at louder amplitudes they contain more high-frequency content.
3. Don't be afraid to use presets, modify presets etc. for use in your music.
4. To get thick pads:
a: use pulse-width modulation and place the modulation amount/depth close to, but not over 50%. Anything over that will produce a noticable amplitude modulation effect.
b. Detune one oscillator up by 5-10 cents and another oscillator down by 5-10 cents. This will help to cover up the amplitude modulation created as a side effect of the pulse-width modulation. Don't detune one oscillator by 10-20 cents and leave the other unchanged! Yes this will cover up the side effect but it will also through your patch out of pitch.
5. Again, know harmonics and harmonic analysis up and down. After all this is what sound is made up of.
These are just some starting points.
There's really no reason you can't produce professional patches almost from the start. You're basically just acquiring more tools along the way.
-
- KVRian
- 1106 posts since 8 Oct, 2003 from Belgium
I think he means that the basic parameters are almost the same on every subtractive synth, so you don't really need to read the manual to start programming sounds right away.
Just a short answer until fvwelsh elaborates.
Peter.
Just a short answer until fvwelsh elaborates.
Peter.
My band : The Black Tartan Clan (celtic punkrock)
-
- KVRAF
- 9600 posts since 17 Sep, 2002 from Gothenburg Sweden
gsoto wrote:Thanks Peter. I agree, but I should have said that what I found interesting was the "I don't recommend it" part.
In other words:RTFM.and though I don't recommend it it can be learned without so much as reading the manual.
-
- KVRAF
- 4669 posts since 26 Sep, 2005 from U.A.E
jupiter8 wrote:gsoto wrote:Thanks Peter. I agree, but I should have said that what I found interesting was the "I don't recommend it" part.In other words:RTFM.and though I don't recommend it it can be learned without so much as reading the manual.
!!!-
- KVRist
- 295 posts since 19 Mar, 2006
-
- KVRist
- 157 posts since 31 Jan, 2005
I'll give you my own experience as an example. When I started out my first real synth was a second hand Sequential Circuits Six-Trak (analog synth) which didn't have a manual. After a few weeks I was off to a good start. I may not have known the finer details of patch programming but I at least knew if I turned up the thing labeled LFO I could get the amplitude or pitch to warble. I learned that turning down the filter cutoff made the sound duller, sawtooth wave is more 'edgy' than a square, etc. etc.. Contrast this with my early FM experience. I picked up a DX100 (FM synth) that also didn't have a manual. Now try as I sure did I can't say that I ever really got it. I had no clue what the hell one algorithm did versus another algorithm. And every sound I produced was either uber mellow, sine-wave, and flute like or sounded like an over-distorted, synced-oscillator analog patch. It was an absolute nightmare. Since then I've learned that if you read up on FM and use an analyzer to literally see how it behaves it is actually not that difficult.
-
TotcProductions TotcProductions https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=6202 - KVRAF
- 5157 posts since 5 Mar, 2003 from Franklin, NH
IMHO, you don't "break in." Unless network television comes out with a new reality series titled "American Sound Designer" or something to that effect, you're going to have work your ass off. Reading all the documentation and learning all the methods and whatnot is only 25% of the ordeal. Creativity is necessary...obviously. You need to know how to balance what sounds people want to use with what sounds you want to create. Nobody is going to give a shit that's worth anything, no matter how well designed the preset is, if they can't use it in a track. You need to pay attention to playability and control, volumes, consistency, style/genre, organization, originality, blah blah blah, blah blah blah. Basically, experience, and your ability to learn from that experience, is the key. 
Of course, that's only if you're trying to make money off of it. If it's a hobby, do whatever you like, there will always be a few people who enjoy your work.
[edit]Oh yeah, and I highly recommend forking over the money for anything on sound design written by Simon Cann (ie: How to Make a Noise). Simon is an incredibly knowledgeable fellow..but more importantly, he's one of a very rare breed of people who can get that knowledge across is a manner that's easily understood and applied by anyone who can read.
[edit]
Peace
Of course, that's only if you're trying to make money off of it. If it's a hobby, do whatever you like, there will always be a few people who enjoy your work.
[edit]Oh yeah, and I highly recommend forking over the money for anything on sound design written by Simon Cann (ie: How to Make a Noise). Simon is an incredibly knowledgeable fellow..but more importantly, he's one of a very rare breed of people who can get that knowledge across is a manner that's easily understood and applied by anyone who can read.
[edit]Peace