What Is The Most Feature Packed Synth?

[goldenanalog]

Really, the lines between DAW and synthesizer have become so blurred... MAX, PLOGUE, USINE, Might throw REASON in there. Nobody is listening to anyone play a keyboard anymore anyway... it's all just programming now. Might want to look into a more advanced DAW you can learn.

The Kronos has a whole lot of other stuff in it besides sounds & synth types, too (mt recording) - it's a great 'all-round' tool that you can easily gig with.

You can always buy Falcon & 'blow it up' - get a slew of available packages for it. You'll then have a synth package for days - one that can thoroughly confuse you with it's 100,000 sound choices. Then buy the latest NI terabyte package to add to that -

IMHO: the op's question should include the purpose of what it's all for - Swiss army knives are great, but I mainly use just the blade - it's nice to have all the other stuff, but kind of pointless.

[AnX]

feature packed usually means bloated, cpu killers like omnibloat.
i prefer several lightweight synths that do one certain synthesis method routed to an effects bus with very good effects.

so basically a crap sounding synth you drown in FX to make it sound half decent

classic

[AnX]

probably

the perfect answer, from a coder

[Dasheesh]

but I mainly use just the blade - it's nice to have all the other stuff, but kind of pointless.

what u did there... i see it.

I'm liking what I'm getting out of softsynths... the point is to be able to play it. that's what's getting lost. i'm more on the experimental side of things though. non standard sounds, played in a musical way. that's what I'm focusing on now. of course nobody will listen to that, but that's what inspires me. i know "musical sounds" without being told they are supposed to be musical. in the past i've own a chit tone of hardware like waldorf, dave smith, vermona, macbeth, and others... but synthesis was always about creating new sounds for me... not imitation, or limitation.

[layzer]

feature packed usually means bloated, cpu killers like omnibloat.
i prefer several lightweight synths that do one certain synthesis method routed to an effects bus with very good effects.

so basically a crap sounding synth you drown in FX to make it sound half decent

classic

yes. got a problem with it, babes?

[AnX]

nope, i dont listen to it sweetheart

[goldenanalog]

but I mainly use just the blade - it's nice to have all the other stuff, but kind of pointless.

what u did there... i see it.

I'm liking what I'm getting out of softsynths... the point is to be able to play it. that's what's getting lost. i'm more on the experimental side of things though. non standard sounds, played in a musical way. that's what I'm focusing on now. of course nobody will listen to that, but that's what inspires me. i know "musical sounds" without being told they are supposed to be musical. in the past i've own a chit tone of hardware like waldorf, dave smith, vermona, macbeth, and others... but synthesis was always about creating new sounds for me... not imitation, or limitation.

It's a cliche that's been beaten to death many times over, but it's true: it's not so much about what you have, but what you do with it. Obviously there are going to be orders of magnitude of more possibilities working with a Kronos verses the venerable M1 - so it's a cliche with caveats -

Q: I want a synth that has the greatest representation of the current fashionable synth methods.

A: No problem! I have many suggestions. Question, op: what are you going to do with it, a tool of the type that you're asking about can require significant immersion to utilize.

OP: I know nothing about synthesis, other then what I've read in EM - but it's very interesting! I took piano lessons for a couple of years in my teens; I'm now 35. I have a little available time when I'm by myself while my gf is still at work - it'd also be nice to get out and play with my muso buddies; maybe in the Church that we go to. Oh: I have a 3 year old Windows 10 laptop; and I'd like to keep the total cost between $500-$1000.

Profiling/qualifying.

So for the above person: maybe something simpler and easier then Falcon might be best to start with. Maybe Prop's Reason, to pick one -

[Musical Gym]

..

[goldenanalog]

of course nobody will listen to that, but that's what inspires me.

https://youtu.be/qPlqPA190b8

Dasheesh: I just caught this commercial - are you sure that nobody will listen to what you like to do?

In my experience: there's an audience for all things performance. The size of the fan base can certainly vary/fluctuate, true. But bottom line: there are *a lot* of tastes.

[xenophobic]

Well i had no idea asking for something i am gonna spend my money on would make some people upset why are you asking me what its for when it doesn't change my criteria so why ask ,if you don't like Swiss army synths that's your problem not mine i do and i have had no problems programming them i don't care how long you have been doing music it's irrelevant to my question if some body asked me a question i respond with answer is that hard for some of you to do if so move along and let people who can answer /rant

[DrSynthLady]

I would also opt for Synthmaster 2.9 when you are looking for the complete pack of synthesis methods. What I particularly like is the feature enabling importing samples and wavetables from other synths. I like my hardware Roland synths a lot but usually I am too lazy to plug them in for recording, so sample import is working just perfect for me.

[goldenanalog]

Well i had no idea asking for something i am gonna spend my money on would make some people upset why are you asking me what its for when it doesn't change my criteria so why ask ,if you don't like Swiss army synths that's your problem not mine i do and i have had no problems programming them i don't care how long you have been doing music it's irrelevant to my question if some body asked me a question i respond with answer is that hard for some of you to do if so move along and let people who can answer /rant

Sorry about angering you, xenophobic, but I suppose that part of the reason for my seeing you as more of a 'newbie' then someone experienced in synthesis is because you left out a foundational method of synthesis on your list that has been part of the collective for decades:

Additive.

Heard of the Hammond organ? It's actually an additive synthesizer - and decades old. Kawai (K5), Kurzweil (1000) - even NED have all used additive synthesis to effect. Also: PD and FM are often confused - they can work & sound pretty close to each other.

Image Line's Harmor is a great example of well-implemented additive synthesis.

I might also suggest looking into 'spectral filtering' synthesis, even though it's not part of your list:

https://www.izotope.com/en/products/cre ... /iris.html

Very unique/different.

[Lotuzia]

"What Is The Most Feature Packed Synth?"

In my experience, a synthesizer which adds sample playback stops to be a synthesizer (which is why Zebra ticks all the boxes except that one).

In my experience this is totally false.

As you like maths, I might try another approach though : So you have a synthesizer, then you simply add 'something', and because of that, pfuiittt it's no more a synthesizer ...

Ok, you got me there. Let me reword:

In my experience, a synthesizer which adds sample playback becomes "a sample playback device with built-in synthesis options - which will probably be neglected in the long run"

This may be true for something that was born as a sample playback device, and add synthesis options later (like Omnisphere), but I doubt somehing like Zebra, that has a long establised user base of die-hard synthesists will ever see that. Just my 2 cents.

Besides, what we have seen with Falcon, for example, (or even HALion) is a lot of the synthesis capabilities being explored, although there are also sampled packs (but those are usually launched as UVI Workstaion packs, that had the bonus of also running inside Falcon).

Everything launched for Falcon has a strong focus on synthesis. Yet, Falcon was born out as a "sample playback device" (it "descends" from Mach Five)

This. And Mach V itself had already several synthesis methods on board. Remebering this because I made some of their factory presets using them

[Lotuzia]

"What Is The Most Feature Packed Synth?"

In my experience, a synthesizer which adds sample playback stops to be a synthesizer (which is why Zebra ticks all the boxes except that one).

In my experience this is totally false.

As you like maths, I might try another approach though : So you have a synthesizer, then you simply add 'something', and because of that, pfuiittt it's no more a synthesizer ...

Ok, you got me there. Let me reword:

In my experience, a synthesizer which adds sample playback becomes "a sample playback device with built-in synthesis options - which will probably be neglected in the long run"

No need to reword, it's more/less what I understood. Well, some other people have mentioned quite a bunch of soft synths that prove otherwise. There are other ones of course. In the hw world vintage Kurzweil k series, or Yamaha units like as old as the SY/TG series, or Motif with the PLG synthesis cards also offer some different experiences than yours.

All in all, a synthesizer with multi synthesis including sample playing is in the end just what one makes with it. I've made tons of sampleless patches on my Kurzweil. Much more than purely samplebased ones. And tons of hybrids as well : See, more is simply more. (Wich is why StiX ticks -nearly- all the boxes, ... including sampling)

Otoh, Kurz and Yams also have strong points and excellence in at least one synthesis field. This is different from multisynthesis units that are -at best- average in everything. (No names here, everybody will have it's own perception about this). So, this could be a real subject of discussion : Major in one/several fields + multisynthesis VS average in all multisynthesis.

Ime, your experience might need to be expanded. (Wich is a good thing : Keeping on learning at every stage of our life)

[Richard_Synapse]

Sorry about angering you, xenophobic, but I suppose that part of the reason for my seeing you as more of a 'newbie' then someone experienced in synthesis is because you left out a foundational method of synthesis on your list that has been part of the collective for decades:

Additive.

If we're picky there's quite a few things left out, say String synthesizers.

But I think the spirit of OP's question is simply "as much as possible".

Richard