Sampled synths vs emulations

[jancivil]

And u can do all that with samples too , ie tweak modulate etc

Not at all, as was just pointed out. It's far less dynamically than a synthesizer.
You don't seem to have a lot of experience with real synthesizers, and that word 'real' means 'actual'. Synthesis as a definition doesn't stand on a definition of 'hardware'; a recording of a snapshot of an oscillator or a filter, what-have-you is not that thing.

[jancivil]

What is 'real synths', it means it is delivered in a box which isn't a computer? Pheh. Numerous hardware synths are software in a box.

That's just dogma, and silly dogma.

Sampled synths never had any moment here, to say the least. That is the least attractive kind of instrument in the world to me. It should be self-explanatory, why.

Listen this isnt the question and i dont agree hence why i asked the question even a sample u can tweak the adsr the filter modulate it , change the lfos etc and u can even build one using wavetables from synths , which is what a lot of people do in serum / europa etc

Well, believe whatever you like.
You brought that in and we're free to address it on a forum. You don't really know what you're on about to believe that and you don't seem like you want to hear anything but yourself, so I'm out.

[pdxindy]

And u can do all that with samples too

No you cannot... if the sample has the filter set at a specific value, you cannot change it. It is a static recording of a set of parameter values... you cannot adjust those values.

Thats why u choose ones with the filter set all the way , then u can bring it down , which sample libaries u tried ?

RePro filter sounds like a Prophet 5... it's gorgeous when you use the audio rate modulations!

Kontakt filters sound like crap

[wagtunes]

People who obviously know nothing about synthesis talking about synthesis.

I think I'll go talk about the theory of relativity. I'm sure I can do just as well.

[Cinebient]

Yep, audio rate modulation!!
While i still prefer mostly sampled instruments for acoustic sounds (beside a few very good physical modeling synths) for me sampled synths are a waste of space (of course just my opinion).
A real synth engine can do so much more. And yes, audio rate modulations is one part of the fun.
But there are also hybrid synths where you can combine both worlds....like Omnisphere, Falcon, Alchemy etc.
So if you say sampled synths i think about kind of just play back a multi-sampled library with maybe some FX and envelopes on top.

[ghostboi]

Nnxt

[BBFG#]

People who obviously know nothing about synthesis talking about synthesis.

I think I'll go talk about the theory of relativity. I'm sure I can do just as well.

Generally speaking, there's almost always a gap between quantum and relativity. This was a regular discussion I had with one of my customers that was a professor in it. While he was far more knowledgeable about the science of synthesis, he was also seen as a complete idiot in the real world of it.

Most musicians are relative and poetically speak in metaphors. Which turns out, is often not understood by others that can't think in such abstracts.

[Ou_Tis]

If you don't alter the presets and don't use playing techniques that haven't been sampled (like unusual pitch bending) is there still a clear audible difference? Does it depend on the synth?

[wagtunes]

If you don't alter the preset filters and don't use playing techniques that haven't been sampled (like unusual pitch bending) is there still a clear audible difference? Does it depend on the synth?

Depends on the synth but not the point. You don't buy a full blown synth with ten gazillion modulation parameters that will probably cost you a couple of hundred dollars just to play presets. You can do that for a lot cheaper.

You buy a synth to have a synth. You buy, what is essentially a rompler, to have a rompler.

Now I know I'm going to get hammered by a ton of preset junkies telling me I'm wrong. Well go and take your synth and trade it in for a rompler and see if you can get the same modulations and expressiveness out of the rompler even if you NEVER create one patch on your own.

[Burillo]

for people who don't know and don't want to know how to program a synth beyond basic ADSR/subtractive synthesis, sampled synths are a godsend. believe it or not, some people just don't care for synths that much. when i want a synth, i want "a synth", not "a unique and organic and moving and evolving sound that you haven't heard anywhere else that uses anal phase shift vector hybrid wavetable synthesis", and ROMplers fit the bill nicely without me needing to be a rocket scientist - scroll through presets, pick the one that sounds closest to what you want, and move on. preset packs for synths are usually like 40-50 presets, maybe 100-150 if you're pushing it. ROMplers come with hundreds, even thousands, and most of them are "bread and butter" (meaning - likely what i'm looking for) type sounds. choice is clear.

[BBFG#]

I buy a synth for how it sounds and plays. I use a rompler for it's sounds, and once in awhile, get a nice surprise that it plays almost as good as the synth. But head to head for synth sounds, the real thing is always better, regardless of whether I'm playing my own or someone else's 'presets'.

[jancivil]

Well, what you care about can't be argued, except that's not the same goalpost as <is working with a sampled synthesizer as good as full synthesis>. I'm not a synths-first musician by any stretch but I like - no, I need - having more control.

I use certain things in Kontakt - all of this is SonicCouture - like a synthesizer and deal in detail with the filters, the filter EG, the velocity to filter and except that there is no actual oscillator except for samples and permutations of samples or manipulations etc, it's like working with a synthesizer. The filters are filters, however; ie., they're not a sampled snapshot of a synth set the one or the other way. I find that far too limiting to say the very least.
(I think the filters since K5 are very good, they may not be exactly like other filters one likes but I like them for these purposes.)

[jancivil]

If you don't alter the presets and don't use playing techniques that haven't been sampled (like unusual pitch bending) is there still a clear audible difference? Does it depend on the synth?

The reality here is, if what you have is a snapshot via samples of the sound produced with this, that, and the other setting, you aren't working directly with the synth. If that has no moment for you, you're done.

If the goalpost is can you use the wavetable feature and build an instrument say in Kontakt, that's actually synthesis.
if it's "u can tweak the adsr the filter modulate it"/sic is it tweaking the envelope of the synth itself? Is it a feature of the sampler after the fact. Are you working with the actual filter or are you morphing presets of sampled snapshots. You can make yourself believe anything, one supposes but there is a difference.

If it's you have a sample as the driver in your oscillator, another different goalpost; is it fully integrated with a whole synthesizer architecture? It is or it isn't.

The architecture of the synth is not present in the sampler instrument, or it would *be* that synthesizer. If one wants to believe it's as good, objectively, here are some realities one has to get rid of to arrive at that conclusion. It isn't the same, but you can feel it's better based on whatever strikes your fancy.

[dark water]

15 years ago when I first got into music software, I would definitely have agreed with the OP. Samples at that time to me were a lot more 'real' (even accepting their limitations as noted in posts above) whilst imo software synths sounded 'plasticky thin' attempts at replicating hardware synthesizers. However around 2010 software synth developers such as u-he, NI, XILS Labs, Camel Audio, LennarDigital and others started coding some wonderful, much deeper-sounding (imo) software synths that didn't only start to challenge hardware synths for sound but had the added bonus of being software too. Since the start of this decade, software synth designers have pushed on even further - and not just with hardware emulations but new synthesis ideas too - to the point now where we are spoiled as musicians as to whether we use software or hardware instruments.
Samples can still be useful for me - drum beats, vocals or acoustic foley recordings for example - but I seldom buy synth samples now because they sound inferior and offer less playable options than software synths such as RePro, Diva or Monark et al. Fair play to excellent synth sample companies like Pink Noise - they were excellent for their time and provided options not available at the time with the then-inferior software synths. But synth samples have (of course) not moved on much whilst software synths have come on in leaps and bounds since 2004 when I started this nonsense.
YMMV

[pdxindy]

believe it or not, some people just don't care for synths that much. when i want a synth, i want "a synth", not "a unique and organic and moving and evolving sound that you haven't heard anywhere else that uses anal phase shift vector hybrid wavetable synthesis"

believe it or not, some people like to play a guitar rather than a sample of a guitar... it has nothing to do with some never before heard sound... (your childish sarcasm aside)