One-Synth-Challenge: General discussion thread

[Gamma-UT]

Preset : I think anyone should be given the right to make his own presets. I see this competition as showing what people can do with "a synth", and what it is capable of. Not restricted to " what it is capable of" with stock presets. YMMV.

I may have missed something but has anyone said that shouldn't done? If it is, I've been doing it wrong as I generally use mixture of tweaked-factory, straight-factory and custom patches (at least when I've had time to enter).

Now when you visit a VST instrument manufacturer's website and you're browsing through the audio demos, what are usually the descriptions of the tracks: stock presets, mild compression, moderated reverb - right? That's pretty much OSC regulations.

I think a problem at the moment lies in the interpretation of how effects are used. There is a case in point in the current Podolski competition. I can get a snare out of it but the sound relies on the compression, EQ & reverb that follows the synth more than the synth itself, which is simply providing a short 'blip' sound. Is this in the spirit of the rules? Should it be?

Similarly with distortion, which can range from subtle saturation (probably OK) all the way to bitcrushing (not so OK?).

On the other hand, phasers are not allowed but it's possible to simulate chorus and phasing-like effects using a bit of MIDI-level manipulation, which is within the scope of the rules. I've done this before but understand that this might be outside the spirit of the rules.

I'd be happy if the interpretation of rules were to be stricter (eg, bussed reverb only, max three-band EQ per channel, one compressor per channel). However, an alternative might be to say additional effects can be used but the entrant has to be clear where and how they were used. An entry with minimal effects, would just have the number of instances and that's it while people using extensive effects racks would have to describe what they did for each of the affected channels (perhaps even a before and after clip for each). That would be onerous but also instructive for other people as there are neat sound-design tricks to be learned from these techniques.

[bjporter]

Most songs seem to be made with external fx... Either hardware, software, or a nice sound space....

That is the problem: you listen to all these cool songs, and when you finally manage to get the synth and start working with it you realise there's a difference between what you've heard before and the actual presets and/or the instrument's stock capabilities. That's not right.

To me the cool thing about OSC is seeing (hearing) how ppl manage to use the same ingredients in very different ways and manage to come up with completely different stuff by using the same tool. That's why the presets should be easily recognisable and no additional tweaking/effects/etc should be applied. But that's just me.

I see your point now. Would take me a while to get into it... I am such a layer+fx freak.

[pocvecem]

And i always thought that it's only in Germany that everything and all must be regulated and administered to the max.

Hm... where to stop?

You can use a delay with very short times and then it sounds like a tuned comb filter.

You can drive a compressor so loud that it creates distortion.

Many times i simply automated eq frequencies that it sounded like a hipass/lopass/bandpass filter. Should this be not allowed?

You can use an eq as send fx. Then modulate some mid frequencies and it sounds similar to a phaser.

Layering? Double or triple layering with a 1-osc-synth like Podolski to get a fatter sound. Should this be not allowed?

If delay effects are banned then i can simply produce echoes by copying and panning tracks plus the desired track delay.

When we are getting so minimalistic, is it allowed to automate parameters in a synth that can't be modulated within the synth itself?

And so on ....

Built in daw fx. Well, for sure there are e.g. compressors that sound as good or even better than Cubase stock dynamics (Bootsie stuff, Tokyo Dawn Labs ...). I don't see a big advantage of daw fx and eqs. They just sometimes make workflow easier.

I think that we all should use those essentials like eqs, filters, delays, reverbs in a creative way.

I want to paint a sky today. Oh, stop. I'm not allowed to use blue paint. I can only use red and green. Great for surrealism but not for impressionists.


In my opinion the OSC is not for making naked demo tracks for a synth. It should be about what you can squeeze out of a single synth with some additional tools.

And never ever judge a synth by its demo tracks! I wouldn't have bought some of the big synths if i judged them by their demos. (no, i won't name them here or i get hurt)
I remember when i got my first (hardware) workstation. It was a Roland D20 and the built in demo songs by Eric Persing blew me away. Then i compared them to my efforts in making my first multitrack recordings.... doh!

Just one last thing:

Make more music and be creative!

Cheers,
Gerald

[idfpower]

And i always thought that it's only in Germany that everything and all must be regulated and administered to the max.

Hm... where to stop?

Well I do live in EU so...


"Where to stop?" - well that's actually a very good question IMO as long as using free 3rd party effects is allowed OSC is currently not about the actual synth and what you can do with it, but more about how to make it sound great. Which is cool if that's the actual purpose.

I stick to my opinion: anything that is not already implemented in the synth itself should not be allowed. Is it restrictive? Yes, but so is creating a song using only 1 VST instrument (especially when that instrument doesn't have plenty of presets and options). But again, that's just me

We'll see if the rules will be changed or not and there's always the option of not participating if you don't agree with the contest rules/theme/etc. For ex I decided to pass on a few OSCs because I didn't like the synths I was supposed to work with and since I do music just for fun, there was no point to force myself

[Mike777]

I prefer allowing external free fx because if a synth doesn't have reverb or delay, I have no desire to make music with it. I'll skip. So I'm in the camp of OSC is about making the synth sound great. However, using only the synth and nothing else is extra hard and maybe deserves extra points?

Also, I'd support allowing the use of external drums, if there is a free drum kit there, and make it a rule only that one could be used. The making of drum sounds is very creative but I spend more time making drum sounds then actual music. And I do not consider at all that if a synth doesn't have drum sounds, it's inferior.

As for secret voting, I would like the advantages but I think it will suppress comments. Comments I think need to be more encouraged, not less. I would even support requiring comments when voting- maybe a one sentence review at minimum.

[Mushy Mushy]

Keep it exactly as it is.

[pocvecem]

Keep it exactly as it is.

Yo, it's just perfect as it is.

[idfpower]

Also, I'd support allowing the use of external drums, if there is a free drum kit there, and make it a rule only that one could be used. The making of drum sounds is very creative but I spend more time making drum sounds then actual music. And I do not consider at all that if a synth doesn't have drum sounds, it's inferior.

This is a tricky one...drums can really make or break a song so being allowed to use drum loops or even just a drum kit would have a critical impact on the final result. Maybe if we'd be allowed to use a very specific default drum kit chosen by the organizers (so basically everyone using the same sounds as starting point) would work. Otherwise it would be too difficult to track them down since there are miriads of drum kits available on the Internet so it's nearly impossible to tell what's coming from a free or commercial pack.

[pocvecem]

Or just make an ambient track.

I think there's no synth that can't produce some kind of percussion sound. And sometimes you have to forget all the listening habits.
It's as simple as that: almost any kind of percussive sound can play e.g. the role of a snare drum. It's more important how you make use of your sounds.

Be curious and try it.

We make sounds with synths. It's not about the perfect realistic drumkit. Sometimes i have the feeling that those "synth magicians" in the 1970s had more spirit of research then we today with our unlimited possibilities.

[IrionDaRonin]

We make sounds with synths. It's not about the perfect realistic drumkit. Sometimes i have the feeling that those "synth magicians" in the 1970s had more spirit of research then we today with our unlimited possibilities.

Indeed, mate.

Noone has to find the perfect drum kits made out of a synth. I remember good "snare-hammer" sound which were far away from a real snare sound.

For example, the hammered ice block sound from Pocvecem, in this OSC 29. Winner by the way.
Oh, i love that song yet... No snare per se involved in that track.

Have a nice day

[pocvecem]

For example, the hammered ice block sound from Pocvecem, in this OSC 29. Winner by the way.
Oh, i love that song yet...

[shameless sef-promotion mode on]
That's exactly what i meant!
[shameless sef-promotion mode off]



Thanks mate!

[Mushy Mushy]

Re Drum Kits: don't you find that perversely liberating?
Yes they suck but that's as good as it gets so move on.
With an endless pallet of sounds I take 6mths to choose a kick.
With the recent OSC it's 15mins.

[satYatunes]

I don't like Soundcloud. I agree it's a very good platform for showcasing your tracks, create a set of sounds may be for your album or demo tracks for a synth but it's clearly not for any type of competition where contestants vote on each others track. I think it will be fair if we go for anonymous submission with secret voting. Like it or not, we all get biased towards something or other.

Secondly, the comments on the soundcloud track can "BIAS" your decision. Few examples,

1. You start reading the comments while listening then suddenly you read a comment and you are like "oh, I never thought of that". That's it, it may change your decision right then and there.

2. If you see a lot of comments on a track already, then in the back of your mind you must be thinking "so many comments? this must be good".

Personally I don't find Soundcloud comments very useful. Yes, it makes me feel good to see high number of counts but that's it. OTOH I find comments made by co-contestants in music cafe contest quite good. Some even write entire paragraphs dissecting your entire track thoroughly. Writing more than a line on SC is difficult, may be it's only made for "Nice / Amazing / Excellent / Good job" type of comments.

If we are using SC just for the comments then why don't we make it mandatory for everyone to write review/feedback on other tracks even if it's just a few words.

FX:
---
There are certain effects not allowed cause it can change the sound drastically into something else. Correct but at the same time, I have heard some excellent sounds in many OSC tracks which did not entirely come out of the synth only especially when the synth didn't have any onboard effects. I am 100% sure a lot of effects were used afterwards to produce those sounds. Some even explained how they achieved it by using so and so effect. So does it not fall under "sound changed drastically" category? I mean the synth produced a blip and you made it into a snare.

If we are allowing freeware effects then why not commercial effects? It won't change the result too much, would it? I mean, if I don't know how to use an EQ, then it doesn't matter if I use Fabfilter Pro-Q or Easy-Q, the result will be same. Same goes for compressor, limiters, reverbs.

[JoeCat]

Haven't done an OSC in ages, but two cents anyway (and since it's been a while, lots of opining!):

Even for synth purists, certain basic effects like EQ, compression, reverb and limiting are almost essential. Most instruments were not designed to be used completely dry, and if these are not included on-board it's hard not to create a somewhat cold and lifeless track, especially for some of the more specialized synths. It's fun to work with limited resources, but if you cannot create a decent sounding track there's little joy. One could argue that it's a creative challenge, but I see nothing creative, for example, to not being allowed to roll-off the sub-bass that's eating my dynamic range, using EQ to tame an odd resonance, limiting some drum-hit transient, or applying some gentle compression to control dynamics. These are not really effects, they are a producer's life-blood tools.

I love the idea of a two-month window, and here's why: the only disadvantage for may be for people who want to compete every month and feel at a disadvantage to those who may compete bi-monthly. That's a choice, however (enter more, or spend more time on one?).
But it actually opens up the OSC for more people. One month is plenty of time if you have that entire month available, but for those of us with stricter time commitments (I travel, for example), we often don't have one contiguous month available. I can easily find 4 weeks to work on an OSC, but not in the same month! It also opens up more possibilities for the Mac guys - if this month's OSC is Windows-only, we may have something else to work on. It even gives one more time to concentrate on voting. It may have the effect of allowing more competitors - I know 'cause I'm one!

Lastly,
I have the nerve to propose simple re-sampling (not just track-freezing), especially for drum hits. This takes care all the phase problems with creating drums from analog emulations, etc. I don't think it breaks the spirit of the OSC - many users of the synths will record and re-sample these hits. If you are working with a modular and love the randomness, power to you, but if you are trying to make an EDM track with random transients all over your kick, sampling is more "pure" than getting crazy with effects, etc. And for CPU-intensive synths, sampling loops of synth parts, cutting/splicing (as long as you are not using loop-effects, etc.), is (to me) still in the spirit of using the instrument, but allows for a production technique that can be a lot of fun (and less exasperating). I'm not suggesting allowing use of sampler plugs, re-pitching, filtering, but simply allowing for tracking directly with audio samples of the instrument.

Trying too hard to level the playing field keeps people from working in the way that's best for them. 2 months to work with, use of decent bread-butter tools, sample my CPU-eaters and tame my drum hits, and actually have fun - I'd be back in a heartbeat

But just IMHO

[SuperNoise]

One more point of view for pending discussion.
If we are considering new rules here, don't hesitate to look for your future.

I think, I'm still messing around OSC because I can learn a lot here.

First of all, I can learn nice, sometimes free, VST instruments and I know that if any instrument is here on the table it's worth of minimum 5 minutes to give it a try.

Second reason is, I can be updated with new and nice VST effects, if I have some issues with my track, in 5 minutes somebody can give me an advice how to fix my problem, often with external VST effect.

Third reason is, I'm allowed to compose with my favorite DAW, without any big restrictions now, I can improve my DAW skills without spending hours to emulate delay or reverb with MIDI commands or DAW automation what is totally unpractical and uneffective.

Forth reason is, I like to hear tracks here which are on really high level of music art. Damn, who wouldn't like to hear some superb track here? Who wouldn't like to add new traks from OSC to his favotite playlist?

Right now, participating in OSC you may improve your skilld in wide area of sound design without any big restricions. You may develop yourselve in different directions and aspects of Sound Design with wide support of many friends here. This is very importand and I think, it's the big heart of the OSC community.

In the end, everybody wants to increase his music skills and OSC will be as good as many possibilities will give us to develop oursevle.
Just think, that any steps to denny some existing possibilities will cuse that the comminity will be decreased.

Best regars,
SNoise