sylent1 vs zeta...

[EvilDragon]

Synlenth is definitely not an additive synth.

And z3ta is not a wavetable, it's a waveshaping synth.

[4damind]

Synlenth is definitely not an additive synth.

And z3ta is not a wavetable, it's a waveshaping synth.

Yes and no
The Z3ta oscillators has 32-bit wavetable synthesis with three rendering modes (DRAFT, NQ, HQ) and an independent Waveshaper for each oscillator with 14 wave transformations (description by Cakewalk)

[firepile]

As for sylenth1 i want to believe that he works the memory leak bug...

Slowly...

[EvilDragon]

Synlenth is definitely not an additive synth.

And z3ta is not a wavetable, it's a waveshaping synth.

Yes and no
The Z3ta oscillators has 32-bit wavetable synthesis with three rendering modes (DRAFT, NQ, HQ) and an independent Waveshaper for each oscillator with 14 wave transformations (description by Cakewalk)

It doesn't do wavetable synthesis as it should be done - a la PPG/Waldorf.

[Rellik]

Yes and no
The Z3ta oscillators has 32-bit wavetable synthesis

Wavetable synthesis in the way z3ta+ uses it is just the method the oscillators use to generate basic waveforms - it's not related to real "Wavetable Synthesis" which takes advantage of cool morphing and stuff by using large wavetable buffers full of gradually changing waveforms.

It does have "waveshaping" options for its oscillators, although personally I haven't had all that much use for it. That said, z3ta+ is a great synth with great modulation options

[brok landers]

Synlenth is definitely not an additive synth.

And z3ta is not a wavetable, it's a waveshaping synth.

Yes and no
The Z3ta oscillators has 32-bit wavetable synthesis with three rendering modes (DRAFT, NQ, HQ) and an independent Waveshaper for each oscillator with 14 wave transformations (description by Cakewalk)

It doesn't do wavetable synthesis as it should be done - a la PPG/Waldorf.

zeta is a synth of which's osc's are pureley based on wavetables,none else (as a lot of Vsti's are). technically these are wavetable synths, and so is zeta.
however, the correct term of wavetable synthesis as you mean it (a la ppg) is "wavetable array scanning synthesis", which is commonly but falseley called wavetable synthesis.

[himalaya]

So it is described that Z3ta+ (and Rapture) is a wavetable synth. Perhaps technically it is correct, as the single cycle waveforms are set next to each other to form a 'wavetable' but these single cycle weaveforms can not be scanned through, like the original wavetable synth could do, ie: the PPG.

So a PPG is a wavetable synth and it can scan through the wavetable to produce an animated sound. The Z3ta+ uses wavetable but it can't scan through them (similarly like Rapture). I wonder how many people bought Z3ta+ or Rapture thinking they are getting a PPG-like wavescanning sounds ?

I remember reading a thread where Rene of RGCaudio had tackled this wavetable vs wavescanning subject, but I can't find it...

Nevertheless, it is weird to call a synth a wavetable synth if it does not scan through its wavetable. I mean, some of us grew up with the term 'wavetable' firmly associated with synths like the legendary PPG and other Walfdorf synth, and yet, here are synths that call themselves 'wavetable' but do not utilize the full feature set of the pioneering wavetable synths. ???

[EvilDragon]

Nevertheless, it is weird to call a synth a wavetable synth if it does not scan through its wavetable. I mean, some of us grew up with the term 'wavetable' firmly associated with synths like the legendary PPG and other Walfdorf synth, and yet, here are synths that call themselves 'wavetable' but do not utilize the full feature set of the pioneering wavetable synths. ???

This. Exactly this.

z3ta is not a wavetable synth. It's a waveshaping synth period.

Wavetable array scanning synthesis... too long to pronounce or type so f**k that


Also, in that context table=array, so it's a bit redundant there. Maybe it should've been called wavescanning synthesis then. But, here we are, and wavetable synthesis it is.

[himalaya]

[
however, the correct term of wavetable synthesis as you mean it (a la ppg) is "wavetable array scanning synthesis", which is commonly but falseley called wavetable synthesis.

But is it ? I have never seen this description mentioned in any review of a wavetavble synth that had pioneered this technique (PPG Wave) I would bet that most musicians have never seen this term either. A Google search of this term yields no results either!

Hence, it is misleading to call a synth a wavetable synth if it does not behave like the originator, the PPG. What's the point ? It only confuses people, and I have read comments on various forum referring to Rapture, for example, like it is akin to PPG! It is not! Nor is the Z3ta+ !

[brok landers]

>snip<
z3ta is not a wavetable synth.

yes it is. i've explained it above.

It's a waveshaping synth period.

yes it is.

Wavetable array scanning synthesis... too long to pronounce or type so f**k that

hehe, yeah, i give you that, i wouldn't want to say that 10x after another...

Also, in that context table=array, so it's a bit redundant there.

nope. the table is made of a single cycle waveform (fft > ifft). the array is the tables in a row which the synth scans through.

Maybe it should've been called wavescanning synthesis then. >snip<

it sometimes is, but it's not that widely common ...

[brok landers]

[
however, the correct term of wavetable synthesis as you mean it (a la ppg) is "wavetable array scanning synthesis", which is commonly but falseley called wavetable synthesis.

But is it ? I have never seen this description mentioned in any review of a wavetavble synth that had pioneered this technique (PPG Wave) I would bet that most musicians have never seen this term either. A Google search of this term yields no results either!

Hence, it is misleading to call a synth a wavetable synth if it does not behave like the originator, the PPG. What's the point ? It only confuses people, and I have read comments on various forum referring to Rapture, for example, like it is akin to PPG! It is not! Nor is the Z3ta+ !

to get that staight: i never said that i agree with the misleading in calling a synth a "wavetable synth", if it's not capable of scanning them, as that is what is commonly assumed and expected, when reading "wavetable synth".
all i said was, that it is technically correct if one calles his synth a "wavetable synth" as soon as it's osc's is based on just those.
see, back in the days, when the ppg was out, there simply didn't exist any other synths that had wavetable osc's (whether with the feature of arrays plus the option to scan through it, nor osc's that are made of wavetables but don't feature the array plus scanning), so the term "wavetable synthesis" was correct, as there was only that implementation. however, by the time digital synths came up, creating osc's via implementing a wavetable got more and more usual. and as soon as someone implements a wavetable as osc, basing the whole osc set on just those, he's entiteled to call that synth a wavetable synth. again, misleading, yes, but correct nevertheless ...
and yes, in an older interview wolfgang palm, the inventor of that synthesis once said, that it's misleading to call it wavetable synthesis, and him personally refered to what would be the correct term: wavetable array scanning synthesis ... guess that this just did stick to my head ...


btw, as this is a zeta vs sylenth thread: the osc's in sylenth are wavetables, too ... so technically it is a wavetable synth, too ...
not that i would ever call it that way ...

[himalaya]

and yes, in an older interview wolfgang palm, the inventor of that synthesis once said, that it's misleading to call it wavetable synthesis, and him personally refered to what would be the correct term: wavetable array scanning synthesis ... guess that this just did stick to my head ...

Still, when Woflgang Palm created wavetable syntheis it consisted of a set of features that made up this form of syntheis, one of those was the wave scanning possibility. We grew up with this term to mean that it was possible to play waves in a static way and in a sacanned way. Now, we have the so called wavetable synths (like the Z3ta+) that omit the scanning bit, and create a lot of confusion for people. I'm just saying it is weird. Even musicdsp.org in its wavetable papers talks about wave scanning as part of the wavetable synthesis make up. To quote:

" a mechanism exists for dynamically
changing the waveshape as the musical note evolves...This mechanism can take on a few different forms, probably the simplest being linear
crossfading from one wavetable to the next sequentially. "

http://www.musicdsp.org/files/Wavetable-101.pdf


So wavetables are synonymous with moving from one wave to the next. The Z3ta+ ( or Rapture) can not do it. Hence they are not true wavetable synths, no matter how one looks at it.

Perhaps mr.Palm calls waveteble syntheis as used in the PPG "wavetable array scanning synthesis" now, but it is not called that in any articles on wavetable syntheis, nor any reviews of original wavetable synths, and all old time musos who remember PPGs and older Waldorfs synths will always associate wavetable with that famous motion sound. The problem is, new comers get confused by this, thinking that synths like Z3ta+ or Rapture or other 'fake wavetables' synth will provide PPG-like sounds.

I'm just writing this, not directed at you Brok, as I know you feel the same. I know I'm barking up the wrong tree now, as this conversation took place many years ago when Rene of RGCAudio was still active in his forum...

By the way, the choice of Z3ta+ or Sylenth should be easy. The Z3ta+ contains BigTone's sounds, a whole bank of them excellent sounds. Z3ta+ is a must buy for this reason alone!

[zerocrossing]

...what would be the correct term: wavetable array scanning synthesis ...

Wait, we're missing out on a chance to call something W.A.S.S.?

[generalstargazer]

I prefer the sound of sylenth1 over z3ta+. There's just something much more warm sounding about it

[robindrieghe]

i thank you all.