Bazille - most misunderstood synth?

[ghettosynth]

Basically, Bazille is for high brow cognac drinking cigar smoking synthesizer connoisseurs, while other synthesizers are for the low brow peasants. Everyone understands now.

That's right, as it's always been. Was that so hard?

Sorry, FM isn't easy to program. Bazille makes it about as easy as it can be.

So many of you take this shit personally. I really don't get it. I don't go around trying to talk about my ability to play basketball. I will rightly tell you that I suck at it. Either you're good with synths or you're not. Either you understand FM or you don't. Put your ego away, if you don't understand how FM and PD impact the spectrum then you're going to get pretty boring stuff out of Bazille and it's very likely that's why some of you are disappointed with it.

Frankly, it almost goes without saying. Because, really, there's no other synth on the market like Bazille. The only thing that's starting to come close is some of the west coast style modules in Blocks, and that's all monophonic.

[exmatproton]

Frankly, it almost goes without saying. Because, really, there's no other synth on the market like Bazille. The only thing that's starting to come close is some of the west coast style modules in Blocks, and that's all monophonic.

indeed

[chk071]

To get back to the original question: No, i don't think Bazille is the most misunderstood synth at all. It's just that it's not for everyone. I think Urs and his team were fully aware of that though, when they developed it. At least i would be surprised if that was not the case.

[ghettosynth]

Then if that's the case, you might as well all the non subtractive synths into the same "hard to program" category, which would include way too many synths to even start naming.

Try not to take this personally bro, but logic is not your best subject. Try reading what I write more carefully. I try to be careful with my words, I'm not always successful. Most other non-subtractive synths have an obvious mapping between user action and the resulting spectrum. Additive synths make it explicit, you precisely define the spectrum as the sum of harmonics. Additive mixing is natural to most musicians, we do it all the time. Wavetable synths are also somewhat trivial, you start with two waveforms and you morph between them.

I don't know why so many of you are so interested in disagreeing. I'm amazed that this isn't obvious to you. You should have come up with this yourself.

If you treat Bazille like any other modular, they you're going to frustrated and disappointed. It's not as easy to get nice crisp harmonically rich standard waveforms out of Bazille as it is, say ACE. When you try to get great sounds it's very easy to end up with noise. Seriously, if this isn't obvious to you, then you've simply not programmed FM synths very much.

[.jon]

Things that are difficult and complex to you might not be that to normal people, ok?

Bazille isn't just an FM synth, by the way.

[.jon]

Basically, Bazille is for high brow cognac drinking cigar smoking synthesizer connoisseurs, while other synthesizers are for the low brow peasants. Everyone understands now.

That's right, as it's always been. Was that so hard?

Sorry, FM isn't easy to program. Bazille makes it about as easy as it can be.

So many of you take this shit personally. I really don't get it. I don't go around trying to talk about my ability to play basketball. I will rightly tell you that I suck at it. Either you're good with synths or you're not. Either you understand FM or you don't. Put your ego away, if you don't understand how FM and PD impact the spectrum then you're going to get pretty boring stuff out of Bazille and it's very likely that's why some of you are disappointed with it.

Frankly, it almost goes without saying. Because, really, there's no other synth on the market like Bazille. The only thing that's starting to come close is some of the west coast style modules in Blocks, and that's all monophonic.

I'm just quoting this before you can delete it

Tell us again how difficult FM is, but how well you understand it! It must feel awesome to be the only one who really truly understands such a mesmerising and intricate subject.

[wagtunes]

Then if that's the case, you might as well all the non subtractive synths into the same "hard to program" category, which would include way too many synths to even start naming.

Try not to take this personally bro, but logic is not your best subject. Try reading what I write more carefully. I try to be careful with my words, I'm not always successful. Most other non-subtractive synths have an obvious mapping between user action and the resulting spectrum. Additive synths make it explicit, you precisely define the spectrum as the sum of harmonics. Additive mixing is natural to most musicians, we do it all the time. Wavetable synths are also somewhat trivial, you start with two waveforms and you morph between them.

I don't know why so many of you are so interested in disagreeing. I'm amazed that this isn't obvious to you. You should have come up with this yourself.

If you treat Bazille like any other modular, they you're going to frustrated and disappointed. It's not as easy to get nice crisp harmonically rich standard waveforms out of Bazille as it is, say ACE. When you try to get great sounds it's very easy to end up with noise. Seriously, if this isn't obvious to you, then you've simply not programmed FM synths very much.

No, it's not that I haven't programmed FM synths much. It's that I grew up with them. I owned a DX7 for close to 30 years before I sold it. I don't see FM as being difficult just as somebody who grew up in a home that speaks Spanish finds that hard. But I know maybe 3 words in Spanish. The language itself isn't any harder or easier. It's just harder for somebody who isn't used to it.

So yes, maybe I can't relate to somebody who doesn't understand FM synthesis because for me it was just another thing to do back in the 80s. In fact, I could probably teach FM synthesis just as well as I could teach subtractive synthesis, but so what? Who cares? I sure don't. When I taught computer programming in school to kids who actually paid money to be there, they didn't care. My wife would equally understand FM and subtractive synthesis. Why? Because they're both Greek to her.

Now, if you want to claim that subtractive synthesis is more "common" when buying a synth than FM synthesis and therefor people tend to be more exposed to the one than the other and therefor take to the one easier than the other, fine. I'll accept that. But that doesn't mean I accept that subtractive synthesis in and of itself is easier than FM synthesis because it's not. Not when you say to somebody "give me this such a sound" and they have no idea where to begin because they don't know what waveforms need to be combined and in what amounts in order to create said sound. That's why a lot of people don't even bother programming synths at all and just buy libraries. Programming synths in general is witchcraft to them and they want no part of it.

Subtractive, FM, WT, additive, doesn't matter.

If you don't have an affinity for it, doesn't matter what it is.

[Bodhisan]

That's why a lot of people don't even bother programming synths at all and just buy libraries. Programming synths in general is witchcraft to them and they want no part of it.

Subtractive, FM, WT, additive, doesn't matter.

If you don't have an affinity for it, doesn't matter what it is.

And I do think this bring us back full circle, though I do believe my word "misunderstood" should have been chosen better. If this sounds like a broken record, sorry, but I do think that if people understood how to make Bazille work - they wouldn't sell it...unless of course they needed the money...

[chk071]

I never sold a synth because i didn't understand how to make it work... if then, it simply didn't work for me, for whatever reason. Either didn't sound as good to me as other stuff, or i didn't like the synth's architecture, and it was too tedious to use for me. I wouldn't buy something that i don't "understand" in the first place. And Beatzille (which is the only version of Bazille i own) is 90 % clear to me. For the other 10 % i might have to RTFM.

[liv]

I can't say that I understand Bazille but to me it's one of the most appealing synths to work with.

[Bodhisan]

I never sold a synth because i didn't understand how to make it work... if then, it simply didn't work for me, for whatever reason. Either didn't sound as good to me as other stuff, or i didn't like the synth's architecture, and it was too tedious to use for me. I wouldn't buy something that i don't "understand" in the first place. And Beatzille (which is the only version of Bazille i own) is 90 % clear to me. For the other 10 % i might have to RTFM.

Hats off to you for not buying a synth you don't understand...but it's too bad you can't say the same about realizing the sound or architecture before you purchase.

[ghettosynth]

Tell us again how difficult FM is, but how well you understand it! It must feel awesome to be the only one who really truly understands such a mesmerising and intricate subject.

I thought that you weren't interested in this discussion?

[glokraw]

I don't crave more patches in particular (more is always nice though )

I've got 30K factory and freebie presets
in my linux U-he folders.
Supposing 5 genres are represented in typical
preset collections, that's 6000 for each genre, and supposing one
sorts out 90% for lack of suitability, or virtual duplication,
that leaves 600 for each genre, not counting overlap.
If you produce for two genres, thats 1200 sounds,
If you make 10 CD's with ten songs each, thats 12 unique sounds
per song. Throw in some percussion and general sample libraries,
and sounds bundled with a daw, and you've got a pretty nice spread.

But I still look forward to new sounds, hoping for
sonic jewels in the 10% even though I'm so well supplied.

Since DX7 get's some mention here, BlackWinny's master
no-dupes cartridge has over 4000 DX sysex files, so 400 of those
are probably wonderful, likely a few hundred really nice
Synth1 sounds, yada yada yada on and on...
More is always nice.
Cheers

[zenophilix]

I don't crave more patches in particular (more is always nice though )

I've got 30K factory and freebie presets
in my linux U-he folders.
Supposing 5 genres are represented in typical
preset collections, that's 6000 for each genre, and supposing one
sorts out 90% for lack of suitability, or virtual duplication,
that leaves 600 for each genre, not counting overlap.
If you produce for two genres, thats 1200 sounds,
If you make 10 CD's with ten songs each, thats 12 unique sounds
per song. Throw in some percussion and general sample libraries,
and sounds bundled with a daw, and you've got a pretty nice spread.

But I still look forward to new sounds, hoping for
sonic jewels in the 10% even though I'm so well supplied.

Since DX7 get's some mention here, BlackWinny's master
no-dupes cartridge has over 4000 DX sysex files, so 400 of those
are probably wonderful, likely a few hundred really nice
Synth1 sounds, yada yada yada on and on...
More is always nice.
Cheers

Shit, wish I could get that many presets for Synthmaster.

[glokraw]

That total 30K is from 15 plugins, so not an apples to apples ratio
with one Synthmaster. I don't own Synthmaster, but the player presets
seem to include a higher-than-average percentage of interesting/useful
musical sounds. I'll probably buy it in 2018 or so.

If brevity is the essence of wit, there is something to be said for
quality over quantity. I'm not a sound designer, just minor
modifications, and it does take time sorting out the best ones.
Cheers