What synth VST is good for...

[Markku]

Newb warning!

I have quite many synth VSTs, some I find more useful than others. Then there are these humongous sonic monsters, which apparently can do much more than I can even imagine.

However, when I learn more, I always find out that there are some "rules" or "categories" which are not apparent for beginner. I understand that there are different technologies in use, additive, substractive, FM etc., but often that doesn't describe what kind of sound you can or can't do.

There are special cases, drum synths or such which are easy; on the other hand sample based synths can sound like whatever the samples are...

But for these more or less general purpose synths, what music style *or* what specific sounds you use them for? For example, what are strengths for Zebra, Diva, Massive, Razor, FM8, Absynth, Spire, Nemesis, BlueII, Predator, Z3ta or Sonic Academy ANA? (Add your own favorites!)

Also, if one synth VST is better than others to in specific area or if some (otherwise good) synth VST is especially weak in some area, that would clarify some conversations here a lot...

My motive is to more or less to see if there are good candidates for some stuff I want to make. I was considering Nemesis and Predator, but because I have so many synth VSTs already, I'm probably just overstocking my synth armoury...

[rod_zero]

Synths are not that commonly categorized by type of sound because most of them can make a great variety.

Some can be very specialize, but the majority is good in a range as "analog type sounds" but other are so capable that they can do anything (Zebra, Alchemy, Omnisphere).

Also it's a lot about taste, some one may like some kind fo leads or pads from one synth, and some else only bass from that one.

[Markku]

rod_zero, if that's true, it seems very odd that we have hundreds of commercial VSTs if there are couple of good ones which could make all others unnecessary? Or will the one with good feature set and best preset collection be the "king of the hill synth VST"?

I'm a bit provocative, yes, but as an amateur, I would like to know more...

Btw, I agree that Zebra is very good synth, even if I'm constantly confused with it.

Let's say I want to make epic orchestral film type music, heavy metal or trance. Or maybe music for toddlers. What I so far have found out is that orchestral needs several VSTs with different specialist areas (violins, brass, etc.). Heavy metal needs guitar and amp sims. Trance (and its many, many relatives) need very specialised bass simulations and very weird or at least untraditional soundscapes.

I'm a little skeptical can they all be done with one VST? (OK, maybe sampler can do this, but that's kind of cheating, if the sounds come from other sources...)

[chk071]

If i may give you and advice, forget about the one plugin for everything thing... some VSTi's are good for bass, but suck at pads, some are good at pads, but suck at basses, and so on. There is no such thing as the "one synth for everything". At least that's my experience. Horses for courses, IMO.

[Tricky-Loops]

My motive is to more or less to see if there are good candidates for some stuff I want to make. I was considering Nemesis and Predator, but because I have so many synth VSTs already, I'm probably just overstocking my synth armoury...

If you tell us which stuff you want to make, people might give you some recommendations...

[fluffy_little_something]

You probably already have more plugins than you need to cover every sound you need. Take some time to find out which synth excels at which sounds, which interface you like the most, which has the best sound quality, which is the most reliable, which doesn't drain your resources, etc.

Make a short, diverse list of specific sounds you like from songs and try to recreate them on your synths.

Unlike others, I would be happy to have just one single synth covering all sounds. I have demoed most synths, but not found any such synth, yet, not even among the more expensive ones (Diva etc.). There is always something else I don't like. Maybe Dune 2 will be it...
I have about a dozen cheap synths in my folder, but at the end of the day I only use 2 or 3. I guess if I had not bought the others, I would already have deleted them.

[SODDI]

Newb warning!

I have quite many synth VSTs, some I find more useful than others. Then there are these humongous sonic monsters, which apparently can do much more than I can even imagine.

However, when I learn more, I always find out that there are some "rules" or "categories" which are not apparent for beginner. I understand that there are different technologies in use, additive, substractive, FM etc., but often that doesn't describe what kind of sound you can or can't do.

There are special cases, drum synths or such which are easy; on the other hand sample based synths can sound like whatever the samples are...

But for these more or less general purpose synths, what music style *or* what specific sounds you use them for? For example, what are strengths for Zebra, Diva, Massive, Razor, FM8, Absynth, Spire, Nemesis, BlueII, Predator, Z3ta or Sonic Academy ANA? (Add your own favorites!)

Also, if one synth VST is better than others to in specific area or if some (otherwise good) synth VST is especially weak in some area, that would clarify some conversations here a lot...

My motive is to more or less to see if there are good candidates for some stuff I want to make. I was considering Nemesis and Predator, but because I have so many synth VSTs already, I'm probably just overstocking my synth armoury...

It really depends on what you are comfortable learning. A true fact is that all well-made synths have their strengths and their weaknesses; and only you putting your own hands on them and learning that specific synth to death will tell you what they are.

I could tell you that Absynth is great for pads and it's good for "ambient" music. But that's not all it does, and learning how to program it is a bitch, but it's a rewarding bitch.

I could tell you that Razor is more of an incredible specialty synth than a great all-around synth - but every time I put my hands on it I discover deeper and broader ranges of programming.

You just got to bite the bullet, consider all the options intelligently, get a synth and make it yours.

[aciddose]

I categorize synthesizers this way:

Categories 'A', "Architecture"

• Subtractive - Start with high harmonic content, use filters to select that content
• Additive - Build up harmonic content from individual parts
• Sample-based (PCM) - Play back full sampled timbres
• Modulation (FM, ...) - Modify harmonic content by modulation of individual parts
• Hybrid

Categories 'B', "Complexity"

• Preset - Sounds are selectable and can be modified, but not fully
• Simple - Sounds can be modified, not every option is exposed
• Standard - Most commonly used options are available
• Advanced - Every option is available except for those rarely used
• Semi-modular (mod-matrix + limited configuration) - Things can be routed as desired, but with a static configuration of modules or limited number of "slots" or "algorithms", for example 4 source slots, 4 filter slots, 4 modulation slots, 4 post-process slots
• Modular - Everything can be configured any way you like, for example 16 slots which can accept any type of module

Categories 'C', "Quality"

• Poor - The basic "functional" implementation and nothing more
• Low - Some limits with regard to quality, the minimum "acceptable" implementation
• Standard - Typical quality
• High - All obvious issues are dealt with, no aliasing, full bandwidth, ...
• Refined - Quality is maximized without regard for cost. Non-perceptible issues are eliminated.

These all interact to a degree, and in many cases you'll need to apply different levels to different parts of a particular synthesizer.

For example you might classify a synthesizer like this:

Hybrid (subtractive, sample-based, modulation), semi-modular (no audio feedbacks, isolated audio/modulation signals), core (oscillators, filters) high-quality, other modules standard.

This sort of thing will allow you to get an idea very quickly what you can do with a particular synthesizer. For example a "refined" quality simple subtractive will probably produce great simple leads and basses. Don't try to create huge atmospheres or sound-scapes though.

[ghettosynth]

rod_zero, if that's true, it seems very odd that we have hundreds of commercial VSTs if there are couple of good ones which could make all others unnecessary? Or will the one with good feature set and best preset collection be the "king of the hill synth VST"?

To some extent, this is true. We don't have hundreds of synths because we NEED hundreds of fine distinctions, we have hundreds of synths because devs want to convince us that there synth meets a particular distinction that matters to us. Whether that's true or not, isn't really the point.

acid_dose has given you a good categorization. Within a particular category there are tradeoffs. For example, to my ears, Diva and Monark set the standard with what can be done with virtual modeling. If CPU or specific features were never a concern, there's not a lot of justification to own any other analog modeling synths. They are the king of the hill and if accuracy in modeled sound is what you want, then just get one of those two.

But that's almost never true, and moreover, for certain sounds you won't hear any real difference between those synths and other lesser synths but you still pay with the CPU hit. In other cases, less accurate modeling actually sounds better. It's often referred to as a "modern sound", which I find humorous as the vernacular is most likely a consequence of having sounds built from less accurate models for a number of years, both in terms of soft synths and in terms of digital hardware, e.g. romplers. There's a lot of competition here because modeling isn't at the forefront so many developers have the skills to add features that might appeal to a subset of the market. One example of this kind of synth is NI's massive. It's filters sound good, but they're not in the same class as Monark. It has other features that make it a good choice for a "modern" sound. There are many many others in this category so please don't take this as a recommendation, it isn't. You should consider whether its specific features have value for you.

So, both functional features and ergonomic/presentation issues matter a lot. Maybe you want a full modular, or maybe you prefer interacting with the user interface in a particular way. I don't like the Ableton instruments much at all, but, I still use them because I like how they fit into the Ableton workflow.

Breaking synths down into category and understanding how particular features matter in your genre will help you focus on choices that will get the job done. Probably the best advice I can give you is to ignore any advice from someone not able to articulate exactly why a synth is a good choice for what you're interested in doing. Any advice worth listening to should cover specific technology features, usability features, and playability features of the recommended synth with respect to your application.

YMMV,
gs

[Markku]

Incredible! You really thought this through, thank you, people!

I just wonder, how much it's just subjective. For example, sometimes I find a free/cheap and unknown synth with some awesome sounds (even if there are just a few of good ones). I often think why this $200 synth is considered so powerful when this little one gives better (to my ear) sound? For example I was trying to get certain sound from Massive and then tried Straightliner. Some curve modifications and there it was! Of course Massive is a lot more powerful in most cases.

Also, it might come as great relief to synth sellers, but I believe that nearly every one of them has something valuable. Music is an art form, so whatever inspires is valuable. For example, while UI style has no effect to sound quality, if UI attracts musicians to play with, it probably will tempt them to use the synth more... Same works other way, if some part of UI is difficult to use or plain ugly, it *can* kill the inspiration.

Also, I'm quite sure that many beginners like me are very confused with huge array of synth VSTs available. I guess most of the beginners just listen demo songs and try out presets. However, if the synth maker has not produced best possible demoware? Or if maker of the synth is not as good as a musician as coder? If the coder is not even aware of what his/her creation can do? There are so much possibilities.

But, if the classifications you mentioned are as broad as I thought them to be, there are no simple guidelines. I understand the difference between, say, Monark and Razor, but I guess the difference between Zebra and BlueII is more debatable or depends on users skill level. Also, the non-musical issues (like CPU usage or UI) may contribute a lot to usability. I think this is the answer I gather from this.

[aciddose]

A huge part of it is subjective, but so are the sounds/music you're going to be making. Unfortunately (or not, depending on your preference for things) this isn't a scientific process to exacting specifications. We're not operating a particle accelerator here, we're making a series of beeps at arbitrary frequencies chosen by us in a generally subjective manner.

There is a significant portion that is objective. Many of the categorizations are not flexible at all, you have to mix them because they have very narrow strict definitions.

Of course "complexity" and "quality" can be made subjective, but they can also be made objective by measurement. Then it is not the result that is subjective, but the choice of method for measurement, like "IQ". They become statistical results in that case.

Still though they will be useful once you learn to identify when you are making a subjective judgement and likewise when someone else has made one. You will need to recognize those cases and interpret to the best of your ability taking into account the apparent difference of opinion.

You'll find if you pay much attention to this that 99% of the content of reviews and commentary on just about everything is subjective. The process of locating real valuable factual information becomes a long and difficult one, but still worth the effort.