What synth do you actually USE the most in your own music????

[toine6]

For the last while I've been using Synth 1 a whole lot.

I have a kazillion plugins that I have used in previous projects, but after my last computer upgrade, many years ago, having to reinstall everything was going to be a nightmare, so I got lazy, and haven't installed many of them since

I tryed Synth1 when it first came out but wasn't impressed. It was kind of boring and lacked the wow factor. Even after years of praise from others, I still didn't understand the hype, and it was getting long in the tooth, to boot. But because I wanted to make music and didn't feel like installing stuff, I figured I'd see what I could do with Synth1, as it's a super small file, and all I had to do was drop it into my vst folder. It also had a lot of presets, a clean layout, not too complex or too simple, it covers the basics well. It's cpu friendly and dared me to add more tracks without the worry of bogging down my machine. It actually sounds very good, but it's not the best at "I'm holding 2 notes and sound like bt at the acidhouse" moments. It's kind of the piano of synths, it's a fully capable hammer tool, but you have to build the house yourself, and there's no fancy shortcut kit.

It's a great synth to learn synthesis on, or to learn inside and out and master. It has a really good balance of the things you need, and things you don't. There are lots of great and more instantly appealing synths out there, but Synth1 is a real workhorse. It's the basic ingredients of a chef's kitchen. You want caviar and champagne, look elsewhere.

[Hink]

it just occurred to me...if you used toxic and avenger would you produce bad movies?

[JerGoertz]

it just occurred to me...if you used toxic and avenger would you produce bad movies?

Troma!

[BONES]

Sure, but almost all the music I like is from 35 to 40 years ago, back then they only had analog synths and it was enough, obviously. Why wouldn't it today, provided one doesn't make EDM?

Ask yourself this question - how many of those favourite artists from 35-40 years ago kept using those synths once better ones came along? The answer would be none of them because they weren't using those synth because that's the sound they were after, they used those synths because that's the best they had access too at the time. Once they had access to better equipment, they left all that behind.

You need to look at those artists and their music from a broader perspective. They weren't using analogue gear per-se, they were using what was at the cutting edge at the time. Today those bands are likely to be using the most modern gear they can get their hands on. e.g. Here is Devo in 2012, using a Roland Gaia instead of the MIniMoog they once used to play basslines on stage (see second clip for confirmation). And Mark ignores the two Moogs set up on stage to play the Girl-U-Want solo on a MicroKorg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtqyB2-AO7E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DEGl_5cWTI

So if you want to emulate those artists, you should be using the most cutting edge, out-there stuff you can find, not slavishly cloning sounds that they probably wish they'd been able to do on much better equipment.

A good analog-type synth can also make a wide range of sounds, but it's important one knows it inside out. Just recently I accidentally discovered a nice trick to make authentic string sounds on a subtractive synth.

What? You couldn't just look at any of the hundreds of V/As that do nice strings and work it out? You think there's a trick to it?

I am looking forward to Synapse Audio's upcoming Oberheim emulation, might as well become my new default synth for everything.

While I am looking forward to getting the album we're doing out the door so we can go and play a few shows before we start working on the next one.

Of course it won't do wavetable, granular, FM etc., but I don't need that anyway. I am more interested in the music as such, so the sounds are not that important, in many cases virtually exchangeable. A cool bass line is a cool bass line, any good bass patch will do. Same goes for pads and what not.

That's just wrong. A cool bassline is very often cool because of the sound used to make it. Sculpting the sound to work with the riff is a very important part of making the whole thing sound good. I spend more time and effort getting the bass sounds right than probably any other part of the production process.

[EnGee]

If we look at different synths like spices when you're cooking a meal you can see how they all bring a different "flavor" to the dish or the track.

For example Dune 3 is a little "sweeter" to my palate while Hive 2 brings a bit more bite and so on.

If you're only using Salt and Pepper then all your dishes will start to taste the same after awhile. Maybe that's what some people want but just as with my meals I like variety.....

Amen man!

[e-crooner]

Ask yourself this question - how many of those favourite artists from 35-40 years ago kept using those synths once better ones came along? The answer would be none of them because they weren't using those synth because that's the sound they were after, they used those synths because that's the best they had access too at the time. Once they had access to better equipment, they left all that behind.

You need to look at those artists and their music from a broader perspective. They weren't using analogue gear per-se, they were using what was at the cutting edge at the time. Today those bands are likely to be using the most modern gear they can get their hands on. e.g. Here is Devo in 2012, using a Roland Gaia instead of the MIniMoog they once used to play basslines on stage (see second clip for confirmation). And Mark ignores the two Moogs set up on stage to play the Girl-U-Want solo on a MicroKorg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtqyB2-AO7E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DEGl_5cWTI

So if you want to emulate those artists, you should be using the most cutting edge, out-there stuff you can find, not slavishly cloning sounds that they probably wish they'd been able to do on much better equipment.

What? You couldn't just look at any of the hundreds of V/As that do nice strings and work it out? You think there's a trick to it?

While I am looking forward to getting the album we're doing out the door so we can go and play a few shows before we start working on the next one.

That's just wrong. A cool bassline is very often cool because of the sound used to make it. Sculpting the sound to work with the riff is a very important part of making the whole thing sound good. I spend more time and effort getting the bass sounds right than probably any other part of the production process.

The difference is that back then synths were something new, now they are omnipresent and thus nothing special anymore. Back then they did not have much choice indeed, now we do, which includes opting for synths that don't sound modern. Again, I don't want to appeal to young people today, but people of my generation. And we are perfectly fine with classic sounds.
One of my favorite bands, Maze, still use pretty much the same sounds as decades ago. The same goes for Azymuth. Your assumption that all artists try to be up-to-date and use the latest or best gear is incorrect. EDM people have to, yes, because their music lacks content, so sounds is all they have to impress the audience. But most others don't. The better the music itself, the less the choice of synths, or instruments in general, matters.

With that song you posted there it doesn't matter what synth they use, it is just noise to me.

Sorry, most synth string presets just don't sound like authentic strings to me.

Regarding bass lines, bassically, I distinguish between synth bass and electric bass patches, and between slow and percussive ones. Within those broad categories I can use almost anything for a given bass line, it doesn't really matter.

[digitalboytn]

The better the music itself, the less the choice of synths, or instruments in general, matters.

[toine6]

One spoon only, polyphonic edition.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PboiGI1T2WY

[Ploki]

That's just wrong. A cool bassline is very often cool because of the sound used to make it. Sculpting the sound to work with the riff is a very important part of making the whole thing sound good. I spend more time and effort getting the bass sounds right than probably any other part of the production process.

The difference is that back then synths were something new, now they are omnipresent and thus nothing special anymore. Back then they did not have much choice indeed, now we do, which includes opting for synths that don't sound modern. Again, I don't want to appeal to young people today, but people of my generation. And we are perfectly fine with classic sounds.
One of my favorite bands, Maze, still use pretty much the same sounds as decades ago. The same goes for Azymuth. Your assumption that all artists try to be up-to-date and use the latest or best gear is incorrect. EDM people have to, yes, because their music lacks content, so sounds is all they have to impress the audience. But most others don't. The better the music itself, the less the choice of synths, or instruments in general, matters.

With that song you posted there it doesn't matter what synth they use, it is just noise to me.

Sorry, most synth string presets just don't sound like authentic strings to me.

Regarding bass lines, bassically, I distinguish between synth bass and electric bass patches, and between slow and percussive ones. Within those broad categories I can use almost anything for a given bass line, it doesn't really matter.

Bones is spot on about the bass-line, you're just wrong.
- timbre and tech + development around it has been a corner stone of music development since forever. some famous examples include: Bach fiddling with the tuning to create a tuning which allows better sounding modulations into a much wider range of key signatures and it changed music forever. mozart and fortepiano, having dynamics on an instrument with keys, harpsichord and organ at that time not really having any. You can argue that bach's or mozart's music was shit, because it partly relied on new tech, although i doubt you have knowledge to back it up.

- separating "music" from "sound" is stupid. the musical idea + the sound behind it invoke the desired response, not only the former. The former only works on it's own after its been adopted by the masses with a signature sound tied to it. Be it an instrument, specific voice, specific synth.
There's literally countless examples of the right instrumentation making an iconic musical idea. Tanita Tikaram - Twist in My Sobriety, George Michael - Careless Whisper, Nirvana - Smells Like Teen Spirit (or come as you are, pick one), Metallica - Master of Puppets, Donna Summer - I Feel Love, Michael Jackson - Smooth Criminal, Gorillaz - Feel Good Inc. And so many many more.
All these iconic ideas have a very specific sound and performance associated with them..
(edit: I will just sneak Darude - Sandstorm and Scooter - Hyper Hyper in there)

There's a classical composer Isaac Albeniz who wrote for Piano, but his compositions are more often played on classical guitar, because they work better on guitar and sound better on guitar - he missed the instrumentation, was never popular on the piano and is ironically one of the most popular composers for guitar. (Sometimes music finds a way itself)

- your dumb-ass elitism towards EDM. It's just asinine. The better the music content the better it's instrumentation is crafted. Good EDM producers know how to do that, mediocre don't. Same goes for classical, that's why historically good composers pushed the envelope of an orchestra or expanded, and good composers still do.
Willingly not being knowledgable about a thing doesn't make that thing lacking in content... It's your fault, not EDMs.

- don't kid yourself that music from the lates 80s/early 90s (you said 30 years ago right?) has much more content than music of today. Look at it objectively and you can can find just as much vapid shit in the 90s as you can in the 2010s

[BONES]

The difference is that back then synths were something new, now they are omnipresent and thus nothing special anymore. Back then they did not have much choice indeed, now we do, which includes opting for synths that don't sound modern.

My point flew right over your head, didn't it? The point is they used the best, most modern gear they could find. If you want to be like them, that's what you should do. Those guys could have chosen to use Hammond Organs or electric pianos but they didn't, they chose to push boundaries instead. Perhaps Yachts can explain it better than I can -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlF3Gv437xI

Again, I don't want to appeal to young people today, but people of my generation. And we are perfectly fine with classic sounds.

Maybe the boring ones but at 61 I have less than no interest. I did it all back then, it would be kind of sad to just keep doing the same old krap, year after year. May as well just be in a tribute band (the saddest kind of band).

Your assumption that all artists try to be up-to-date and use the latest or best gear is incorrect.

Oh no, I am aware the world is full of sad losers, this is not news to me. The thing is, if the bands you seek to emulate had your attitude, we'd all still be listening to Mantovani.

The better the music itself, the less the choice of synths, or instruments in general, matters.

Said all the worst bands you ever heard. It ALL matters. If it didn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? Think for a moment about two bands covering the same song. The "music itself" is identical, so other factors, like how much time and effort you put into production, will make all the difference.

With that song you posted there it doesn't matter what synth they use, it is just noise to me.

Close-minded wanker much?

Sorry, most synth string presets just don't sound like authentic strings to me.

They aren't supposed to, they are supposed to sound like synth strings. If you want something that sounds like real strings, there are some very good sample-based instruments that have you covered.

Regarding bass lines, bassically, I distinguish between synth bass and electric bass patches, and between slow and percussive ones. Within those broad categories I can use almost anything for a given bass line, it doesn't really matter.

Seriously? If that's true, then you aren't much of a craftsman, are you? "Slap it on, that'll do."

[dark water]

Diva, Bazille and LUSH are probably my most used software synths in recent months / years (assuming that we're not counting Kontakt and its various libraries).

I'd like to get to grips more with Omnisphere and VCV in the coming months however.
(On the hardware side of things, I still need to push my understanding more with my Cirklon and Minilogue XD).

[CausticPuppy]

Sure, but almost all the music I like is from 35 to 40 years ago, back then they only had analog synths and it was enough, obviously. Why wouldn't it today, provided one doesn't make EDM?

Ask yourself this question - how many of those favourite artists from 35-40 years ago kept using those synths once better ones came along? The answer would be none of them because they weren't using those synth because that's the sound they were after, they used those synths because that's the best they had access too at the time. Once they had access to better equipment, they left all that behind.

You need to look at those artists and their music from a broader perspective. They weren't using analogue gear per-se, they were using what was at the cutting edge at the time. Today those bands are likely to be using the most modern gear they can get their hands on. e.g. Here is Devo in 2012, using a Roland Gaia instead of the MIniMoog they once used to play basslines on stage (see second clip for confirmation). And Mark ignores the two Moogs set up on stage to play the Girl-U-Want solo on a MicroKorg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtqyB2-AO7E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DEGl_5cWTI

So if you want to emulate those artists, you should be using the most cutting edge, out-there stuff you can find, not slavishly cloning sounds that they probably wish they'd been able to do on much better equipment.

A good analog-type synth can also make a wide range of sounds, but it's important one knows it inside out. Just recently I accidentally discovered a nice trick to make authentic string sounds on a subtractive synth.

What? You couldn't just look at any of the hundreds of V/As that do nice strings and work it out? You think there's a trick to it?

I am looking forward to Synapse Audio's upcoming Oberheim emulation, might as well become my new default synth for everything.

While I am looking forward to getting the album we're doing out the door so we can go and play a few shows before we start working on the next one.

Of course it won't do wavetable, granular, FM etc., but I don't need that anyway. I am more interested in the music as such, so the sounds are not that important, in many cases virtually exchangeable. A cool bass line is a cool bass line, any good bass patch will do. Same goes for pads and what not.

That's just wrong. A cool bassline is very often cool because of the sound used to make it. Sculpting the sound to work with the riff is a very important part of making the whole thing sound good. I spend more time and effort getting the bass sounds right than probably any other part of the production process.

This is something I noticed recently while watching Rush videos (RIP Neil Peart). Over the years, Geddy Lee’s keyboard setup seems to have been simplified. In their final tour in 2015, they only used a single synth for the show: a Roland Fantom X7.

All those signature Rush synth sounds (Tom Sawyer, Subdivisions, etc) which previously had been played by Oberheims, Moogs, etc were all replicated on the Roland Fantom for live performance. Modern technology allows for simpler setups; less complexity means less that can go wrong. Now, if you were to isolate the R40 Tom Sawyer opening synth riff with the other instruments removed, and compare to the original Oberheim you’d probably hear a difference, but in the context of the show where it’s all about the music and the performance... who would care?

[fisherKing]

Synthesis was more about making emulations of "real" instruments at the beginning

"When synthesizers emerged in the 1960s, they were viewed as avant-garde, valued by the 1960s psychedelic and counter-cultural scenes for their ability to make new sounds, but with little perceived commercial potential".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthesizer

"Suzanne Ciani (born June 4, 1946) is an American musician, sound designer, composer, and record label executive who found early success in the 1970s with her innovative electronic music and sound effects for films and television commercials.....Her success with electronic music has her dubbed "Diva of the Diode" and "America's first female synth hero".

"She has been nominated for a Grammy Award for Best New Age Album five times".

"The sound of a bottle of Coca-Cola being opened and poured was one of Ciani's most widely recognized works and was used in radio and television commercials in the late 1970s. She is also responsible for "logo" sounds pertaining to Energizer and ABC".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzanne_Ciani



cianikb679.jpg

I still have this issue. She was one of my early influences.

There is so much more to Synthesis than is considered here at KVR.......

i was (briefly) her studio assistant (a looong time ago); amazing stuff, and she owned (in the sense that she knew it) the buchla...

[e-crooner]

Sure, but almost all the music I like is from 35 to 40 years ago, back then they only had analog synths and it was enough, obviously. Why wouldn't it today, provided one doesn't make EDM?

Ask yourself this question - how many of those favourite artists from 35-40 years ago kept using those synths once better ones came along? The answer would be none of them because they weren't using those synth because that's the sound they were after, they used those synths because that's the best they had access too at the time. Once they had access to better equipment, they left all that behind.

You need to look at those artists and their music from a broader perspective. They weren't using analogue gear per-se, they were using what was at the cutting edge at the time. Today those bands are likely to be using the most modern gear they can get their hands on. e.g. Here is Devo in 2012, using a Roland Gaia instead of the MIniMoog they once used to play basslines on stage (see second clip for confirmation). And Mark ignores the two Moogs set up on stage to play the Girl-U-Want solo on a MicroKorg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtqyB2-AO7E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DEGl_5cWTI

So if you want to emulate those artists, you should be using the most cutting edge, out-there stuff you can find, not slavishly cloning sounds that they probably wish they'd been able to do on much better equipment.

A good analog-type synth can also make a wide range of sounds, but it's important one knows it inside out. Just recently I accidentally discovered a nice trick to make authentic string sounds on a subtractive synth.

What? You couldn't just look at any of the hundreds of V/As that do nice strings and work it out? You think there's a trick to it?

I am looking forward to Synapse Audio's upcoming Oberheim emulation, might as well become my new default synth for everything.

While I am looking forward to getting the album we're doing out the door so we can go and play a few shows before we start working on the next one.

Of course it won't do wavetable, granular, FM etc., but I don't need that anyway. I am more interested in the music as such, so the sounds are not that important, in many cases virtually exchangeable. A cool bass line is a cool bass line, any good bass patch will do. Same goes for pads and what not.

That's just wrong. A cool bassline is very often cool because of the sound used to make it. Sculpting the sound to work with the riff is a very important part of making the whole thing sound good. I spend more time and effort getting the bass sounds right than probably any other part of the production process.

This is something I noticed recently while watching Rush videos (RIP Neil Peart). Over the years, Geddy Lee’s keyboard setup seems to have been simplified. In their final tour in 2015, they only used a single synth for the show: a Roland Fantom X7.

All those signature Rush synth sounds (Tom Sawyer, Subdivisions, etc) which previously had been played by Oberheims, Moogs, etc were all replicated on the Roland Fantom for live performance. Modern technology allows for simpler setups; less complexity means less that can go wrong. Now, if you were to isolate the R40 Tom Sawyer opening synth riff with the other instruments removed, and compare to the original Oberheim you’d probably hear a difference, but in the context of the show where it’s all about the music and the performance... who would care?

I don't know that music, but from what you describe it confirms my view that the specific sounds can be replaced by others, from other instruments even. Even good arranger keyboards will do.

[e-crooner]

The difference is that back then synths were something new, now they are omnipresent and thus nothing special anymore. Back then they did not have much choice indeed, now we do, which includes opting for synths that don't sound modern.

My point flew right over your head, didn't it? The point is they used the best, most modern gear they could find. If you want to be like them, that's what you should do. Those guys could have chosen to use Hammond Organs or electric pianos but they didn't, they chose to push boundaries instead. Perhaps Yachts can explain it better than I can -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlF3Gv437xI

Again, I don't want to appeal to young people today, but people of my generation. And we are perfectly fine with classic sounds.

Maybe the boring ones but at 61 I have less than no interest. I did it all back then, it would be kind of sad to just keep doing the same old krap, year after year. May as well just be in a tribute band (the saddest kind of band).

Your assumption that all artists try to be up-to-date and use the latest or best gear is incorrect.

Oh no, I am aware the world is full of sad losers, this is not news to me. The thing is, if the bands you seek to emulate had your attitude, we'd all still be listening to Mantovani.

The better the music itself, the less the choice of synths, or instruments in general, matters.

Said all the worst bands you ever heard. It ALL matters. If it didn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? Think for a moment about two bands covering the same song. The "music itself" is identical, so other factors, like how much time and effort you put into production, will make all the difference.

With that song you posted there it doesn't matter what synth they use, it is just noise to me.

Close-minded wanker much?

Sorry, most synth string presets just don't sound like authentic strings to me.

They aren't supposed to, they are supposed to sound like synth strings. If you want something that sounds like real strings, there are some very good sample-based instruments that have you covered.

Regarding bass lines, bassically, I distinguish between synth bass and electric bass patches, and between slow and percussive ones. Within those broad categories I can use almost anything for a given bass line, it doesn't really matter.

Seriously? If that's true, then you aren't much of a craftsman, are you? "Slap it on, that'll do."

Most musicians just want to get the job done, not innovate. 40 years ago most keyboard players didn't pick their specific synths because they wanted to use the best, most modern gear available, but basically the only gear available. In the 80s many people welcomed the new possibility of storing presets and reliable tuning. But the sound was fine before as well. Meanwhile technical progress has long ceased to be about fixing problems, now it is just a kind of feature arms race.
So, no, using the most modern stuff just for the sake of it, makes no sense to me.

Why do you think so many developers make and customers buy authentic emulations of old hardware? Because they like the sound of it. And even the old synth makers have revived their businesses.

Why would a classic pad sound be crap while other classic sounds are still appreciated and never age? For instance the Jazz Bass sound or the Music Man sound or the Strat sound or the sound of a trumpet or acoustic guitar etc. etc. etc.? Nobody says a Bösendorfer is crap just because it sounds like 100 years ago.

Countless millions of people listen to Classical music. I would much rather listen to Mantovani than to EDM. I am a big fan of Claus Ogerman's sound for instance.

One example of how a good song does not really depend on instrumentation: Mad World. Many people love Gary Jules' version and don't even know the original by Tears for Fears. The two versions sound very different, yet both are very good.

Well, I consider it a challenge to program authentic emulations of real instruments. Sure, some synth strings are ok, but no match for the magical sound of a real strings section.

Craftsman? Well, I do invest a lot of time and effort in trying to emulate real instruments because I don't like samples. But no, I am not fixed on a specific synth bass sound for instance. Often when there is a bass line, I just open one bass patch after another, but can't really decide which one to take as many of them sound good with that bass line. After all, there is no right or wrong patch. As long as it sounds good, it is enough.