Why that wavetable-mania?

[Unaspected]

Omg, i could just aswell finally learn FM

In reality though, my puny brain is probably going to stay subtractive forever

Off topic:

FM can also be useful when applied as a modulation source to different parameters. Though I think that the main strength of FM synthesis is the ability to create interesting variation in sound simply by modulating operator levels. Though, of course it's great for percussive sounds also because of the amount of information you can pack into transients. It can be approached quite simply by building up a sound around a base oscillator/operator and then subtract or modulate oscillators/operators from the sound. As with all audio processes, it's a balancing act: Find a sweet spot; dial back; mix in.

You can approach it in other ways but it doesn't have to be daunting. Start with a single oscillator and just listen as you introduce a second operator. You can easily create some meaty sub transformations that way. Then apply what you know about subtractive synthesis.

[Teksonik]

Ok, but do they - Dune3 and/or Serum - actually use that function and transform / recalculate it real-time further down the chain, or do they calculate it once to quantize the result to fit into the 256 points single-cycle waveform?

I fell a few credits short of my PhD in Quantum Mechanics so I have no idea......

Might be a good answer to ask at the Synapse Forum. Richard, Marcin, or Mark should be able to answer that one.....

I just hand draw my Waveforms/Wavetables.......

[e-crooner]

Wow, so many replies

Do I get that right, a wavetable is basically a set of tiny audio files that are played in sequence?

Since someone said wavetable synths sound digital, is the, say, sawtooth wave from a wavetable somehow inferior to a sawtooth calculated on the fly? If not, where would the digital sound come from as long as one uses a good filter?

[Unaspected]

Wow, so many replies

Do I get that right, a wavetable is basically a set of tiny audio files that are played in sequence?

Since someone said wavetable synths sound digital, is the, say, sawtooth wave from a wavetable somehow inferior to a sawtooth calculated on the fly? If not, where would the digital sound come from as long as one uses a good filter?

A wavetable is an array or table filled with data points which represent a waveform. When it is scanned through with a phase accumulator, the waveform is effectively read. Because the wavetable holds discrete points, interpolation is required to calculate values between samples. This is where noise can occur. You have a trade-off: Increase wavetable size and use more CPU or smaller tables at the cost of quantisation noise.

It is then possible to place arrays in parallel, containing different information, which can be cross-faded between. On a really basic level, this functionality could be used with band-limited waveforms to provide enough data to cover each note on the keyboard - with waveforms between these values requiring interpolation to calculate.

[e-crooner]

A wavetable is an array or table filled with data points which represent a waveform. When it is scanned through with a phase accumulator, the waveform is effectively read. Because the wavetable holds discrete points, interpolation is required to calculate values between samples. This is where noise can occur. You have a trade-off: Increase wavetable size and use more CPU or smaller tables at the cost of quantisation noise.

Isn't that similar to a digital audio file, though?

[Unaspected]

A wavetable is an array or table filled with data points which represent a waveform. When it is scanned through with a phase accumulator, the waveform is effectively read. Because the wavetable holds discrete points, interpolation is required to calculate values between samples. This is where noise can occur. You have a trade-off: Increase wavetable size and use more CPU or smaller tables at the cost of quantisation noise.

Isn't that similar to a digital audio file, though?

Yeah. It's basically the same principal. However, if we're scanning through at different rates, we can then generate frequencies above Nyquist. Depends on how you're working with them.

There are then different methods to cross-fade between wavetables that are in parallel or the option to discretely insert waveforms for highly complex transformations that were generated offline. You might, for example, sample an analogue waveform with its subtle variations and then use this to create a less static sounding waveform when reproduced. Or you could insert two waveforms at either extreme - maybe antic604 meant 256 parallel waveforms as Dune 2 used waveforms that are 2048 samples in size (I don't know about Dune 3 specifically) - and then apply different cross-fades between the two.

[SoundPorn]

WaveTables are the new Soundfonts

[highkoo]

Can someone tell Bones about dubstep so we can end this particular session of infini-troll?

[mdstudio]

Ok, but do they - Dune3 and/or Serum - actually use that function and transform / recalculate it real-time further down the chain, or do they calculate it once to quantize the result to fit into the 256 points single-cycle waveform?

I believe Serum calculates it once. Not sure about Dune. I believe Hive does it in real time.

[dune_rave]

to telecode:
I just adore fm sounds. its my personal taste.

[tony10000]

Huh? I bought this one almost 20 years ago!
https://waldorfmusic.com/en/archive/ppg-wave-2v
https://www.kvraudio.com/product/waldor ... by-waldorf
Also, Massive has been out for more than a decade...

Exactly! And Orion had Wavedream/Wavefusion for 20 years, too. All that says is that a few years ago there were only a handful, one of which was a hardware emulation, today there are dozens with more being added all the time. So if NI, Synapse and Waldorf could manage it 10-20 years ago, why is it only now that everyone else is falling over themselves to catch up? If you can't see the validity in the question, there is something wrong with your mental processes.

The answer is simple: SERUM. Probably the most popular synth of the last decade.

[metaside]

I'll have to give it a try! I was quite impressed with the automatic tables in Europa when I fed it sweeps from my Eurorack, but found that for some complex tones it would create multiple frames within one desired 'cycle'. The resulting table is unusably 'steppy' an unlike the source. Can this issue be avoided in Icarus?

I guess it will depend on source audio and the resynthesis mode selected, but my guess is one of the modes will handle it better. Maybe give the demo a try. Another good synth for resynthesis in my experience is Infinite Pro (only to be recommended for very advanced users though and not sure if there is a demo), but Icarus is my default and fav option for most things resynthesis these days.

[rob_lee]

What is the appeal? To me it is still a bit nerdy, frankly.

It's the new age KVR thing innit

[FapFilter]

If you think about it: most things about music creation could be considered a bit nerdy.
Is the kid with FL Studio and Serum seeking for the latest Skrillex wavetables more nerdy than the analog head with his collection of original synths from the 70's and 80's, every single one of them having extreme historical importance, lusting over each of their delicious filter FM which could never be replicated properly in software?
Even those badass guitarists aren't safe from this with their 30+ guitars, every single one of them more magical than the other and even more pedals
And don't forget about your typical KVRian, with more plugins installed than transistors inside their 12 core CPUs

[rob_lee]

And let's not forget your typical KVRian, with more plugins installed than transistors inside their 12 core CPUs

This!