KVR Audio

Monkeys on the Bed · Post by **Monkeys on the Bed** » Tue May 29, 2018 5:21 pm

I have an anecdote about FM synthesis and how it was the scourge of my existence. Back in the late 80's, I was touring Western Canada in various rock bands. We did cover tunes of a wide variety of bands, with emphasis on being dance-able yet still hard. In smaller towns across the prairies and central BC, that seemed to be the ticket to keeping a bar full of people happy all night.

As the keyboard player, I was using a Roland JX-3P, a Roland Juno 106 and a Kawai K3. The first two were trusty analogue synths with the Kawai being a wavetable synth with analogue style filters. It was my budget response to the Yamaha DX-7 which was still quite new but really taking the industry by storm. Now I had bandmates asking me why we couldn't sound like (insert any 80's title/band here) and I would always tell them the same thing - because I can't afford a $^&%# Yamaha, that's why!

Ironically, now I can run entire stacks of synths in my DAW. Sure it only took 30 years, but I'm a patient guy.

Even Steven 1988.jpg

Nielzie · Post by **Nielzie** » Tue May 29, 2018 5:46 pm

I was born in 1977, when Yamaha licensed the FM technology. If that's not a good reason to win a free license, then I don't know what is

RyFi · Post by **RyFi** » Tue May 29, 2018 9:13 pm

iliasboufidis wrote:second half for fm, but i just find the whole thing precious

That was pretty great. Ah, the 80's...

Monkeys on the Bed wrote:I have an anecdote about FM synthesis and how it was the scourge of my existence. Back in the late 80's, I was touring Western Canada in various rock bands. We did cover tunes of a wide variety of bands, with emphasis on being dance-able yet still hard. In smaller towns across the prairies and central BC, that seemed to be the ticket to keeping a bar full of people happy all night.

As the keyboard player, I was using a Roland JX-3P, a Roland Juno 106 and a Kawai K3. The first two were trusty analogue synths with the Kawai being a wavetable synth with analogue style filters. It was my budget response to the Yamaha DX-7 which was still quite new but really taking the industry by storm. Now I had bandmates asking me why we couldn't sound like (insert any 80's title/band here) and I would always tell them the same thing - because I can't afford a $^&%# Yamaha, that's why!

Ironically, now I can run entire stacks of synths in my DAW. Sure it only took 30 years, but I'm a patient guy.

Thanks for the story. That's too bad that you had to fend off gripes about not owning a DX7, especially since you had that awesome setup. What were the tunes that you guys were covering that had DX parts that you couldn't emulate? I'm surprised that there were any

. I may love FM synthesis, but I'm sure not aware of very many 80's songs that put the DX to good use...

Monkeys on the Bed · Post by **Monkeys on the Bed** » Wed May 30, 2018 12:45 am

We had fun indeed! As I recall, the DX had a distinct "tine" sound that was useful for layering with other sounds to flesh things out. Whitesnake comes to mind, but Def Leppard used them too I think. They gave pads a real sparkle that was completely absent in the analogue synths to date. Of course, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention this one:

rcrath · Post by **rcrath** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 5:33 am

FM gongs I made to sound like fake gamelan music. My attempt to make a pretty link failed, so here is the url. https://www.dropbox.com/s/4m2tzi5vg1xkt ... x.mp3?dl=0

Easier: put it on SoundCloud:
https://soundcloud.com/richrath/fmelan

pentproductions · Post by **pentproductions** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:39 am

I don't know much about FM synths please teach me

RyFi · Post by **RyFi** » Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:13 pm

rcrath wrote:FM gongs I made to sound like fake gamelan music. My attempt to make a pretty link failed, so here is the url. https://www.dropbox.com/s/4m2tzi5vg1xkt ... x.mp3?dl=0

Easier: put it on SoundCloud:
https://soundcloud.com/richrath/fmelan

Very neat!

pentproductions wrote:I don't know much about FM synths please teach me

The "complexity" of FM synthesis is one of the biggest exaggerations that's ever been proliferated. It's super simple! You create complex spectra by modulating the frequency/phase of a carrier sine wave with a modulating sine wave. The frequency ratio between the two determines the harmonics/overtones in the resulting spectrum, and the amplitude of the modulator determines the amount of energy in the overtones, with higher amplitudes adding progressively more energy to the higher frequencies. That's literally it.

There are basic categories of resulting spectra depending on the frequency ratios, and that info's easy to find or simply hear or see on a scope. You create dynamic spectra by modulating the modulator's amplitude with its envelope, so to simulate a filter sweep you make the modulator's amplitude increase or decrease instead. The carrier's envelope controls its loudness as you'd expect. Algorithms determine how the operators are set up, which ones are modulating which and which ones are carriers. You can modulate amplitudes and frequencies and rates just like you can in subtractive synthesis to achieve the same kinds of vibrato, tremolo, detune, dynamic responsiveness, etc.

rcrath · Post by **rcrath** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 5:52 am

Very neat!

Thanks!

RyFi · Post by **RyFi** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 6:29 am

Welp, that was a thoroughly underwhelming thread, I gotta say... But I did see some videos I hadn't seen and heard a couple of pretty great tunes and sketches, so that's not too bad. Thanks to those who contributed.

The dice have been rolled, and the winners are...

baalisoda
Local Man
rcrath

Congrats on winning a copy of Aurora FM!!

Check your PM for instructions on how to redeem.

baalisoda · Post by **baalisoda** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 7:21 am

RyFi wrote:Welp, that was a thoroughly underwhelming thread, I gotta say... But I did see some videos I hadn't seen and heard a couple of pretty great tunes and sketches, so that's not too bad. Thanks to those who contributed.

The dice have been rolled, and the winners are...

baalisoda
Local Man
rcrath

Congrats on winning a copy of Aurora FM!!

Check your PM for instructions on how to redeem.

Thank you so much, Mr.Ryan for this kind gesture

I hope to make full use of this in my future projects

Congrats to Local Man and rcrath as well

Local Man · Post by **Local Man** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 2:28 pm

RyFi wrote:Welp, that was a thoroughly underwhelming thread, I gotta say... But I did see some videos I hadn't seen and heard a couple of pretty great tunes and sketches, so that's not too bad. Thanks to those who contributed.

The dice have been rolled, and the winners are...

baalisoda
Local Man
rcrath

Congrats on winning a copy of Aurora FM!!

Check your PM for instructions on how to redeem.

Very cool! Thanks for this.
After reading more about it, I love the fm purist approach Aurora takes. I think fm synthesis is one the most misunderstood and abused technologies in the music world. I hope to put this to good use.

fmr · Post by **fmr** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 2:50 pm

RyFi wrote: You create complex spectra by modulating the frequency/phase of a carrier sine wave with a modulating sine wave. The frequency ratio between the two determines the harmonics/overtones in the resulting spectrum, and the amplitude of the modulator determines the amount of energy in the overtones, with higher amplitudes adding progressively more energy to the higher frequencies. That's literally it.

I don't think that's entirely correct.

1. "The frequency ratio between the two determines the harmonics/overtones". It determines WHAT KIND of overtones WILL appear WHEN the modulator acts over the carrier. If the amount of modulation is 0, no overtones will appear, no matter what ratio the modulator has and its amplitude. Besides, these will not be necessarily harmonics. Harmonics are partials which are perfect multiples of the fundamental. FM is notorious for the fact that it produces many sidebands that are NOT perfect multiples of the fundamental. The amplitude of the modulator and index (amount) of modulation also act as factors in this equation.

2. "the amplitude of the modulator determines the amount of energy in the overtones, with higher amplitudes adding progressively more energy to the higher frequencies". Again, I don't think this is entirely correct. It's true (we can say that) the amplitude determines the amount of energy in the sidebands (not only overtones but also "undertones" - that's why we usually refer to them as "sidebands", because the partials appear on both sides of the fundamental). This means that, when we raise the amount of modulation, MORE sidebands will appear (because the amount of energy they had was previously ZERO). So, higher amplitudes (and/or higher modulation index - we may just increase the amount of modulation - index of modulation - without touching the amplitude of the modulator, and the result will be similar) not only add more energy to the sidebands but will also increase the number of sidebands that will appear, making the sound spectrum progressively more complex, to the point it may become just noise.

Chapelle · Post by **Chapelle** » Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:10 pm

rcrath · Post by **rcrath** » Sun Jun 03, 2018 5:12 am

Yay to all! I needed a win these days!

rcrath · Post by **rcrath** » Sun Jun 03, 2018 5:12 am

Yay to all! I needed a win these days!

Aurora FM giveaway - Post your FM synthesis content to enter