Future of Synthesizers

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

e-crooner wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:25 pm What is innovated at those institutes will hardly make it into the mainstream.
Yeah ... that loud electric guitar music will never catch on either.

Post

vurt wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:03 pm
Jace-BeOS wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:02 pm
Forgotten wrote: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:24 pm Synthesizers that only work with the application of bodily fluids
https://www.engadget.com/2020/01/17/Rai ... itar-namm/
still only a pedal.

read on... :hihi:
Oops, I see SHall1000 got to it before I did.

Actually, I’ve been thinking that this might be evidence that most of what can BE discovered has BEEN discovered and that we are now settling into the era where there’s a need for gimmicks to make something seem new when it’s just a different interaction but not a new concept overall.

Science and technology can only go where physics goes, and we have made probably most of the discoveries that can be made with the resources and the ability to manipulate matter that we have (which is considerable, unless you want techno-fantasy like Star Trek, and then the reality is that it’s effectively impossible because we cannot manipulate matter that precisely, never will, and cannot attain the necessary amounts of energy expenditure to even test many of the hypotheses left).

People who lived through many dramatic technological changes tend to think that this is a perpetual process and that, another lifetime later, things will be just as different again. Progress with physics and technology doesn’t seem to hold this as true, though, when you really look into it. Almost all of the *physically possible* things are being done and anything else isn’t physically possible (like the techno-fantasy of holographs that dance freely in front of people as interfaces and displays in TV shows and movies: not based on anything in the physical world, and impossible).

AI and ML are buzzwords for things that aren’t really what those terms claim. I have zero expectations of either being anything like the actual meaning of the terms in my lifetime. Without understanding how natural intelligence works, I don’t think we as a species will generate artificial intelligence. What we have now is not intelligence. Nothing thinks and nothing learns. At best, we might accidentally stumble onto it when we put an unmanageable number of unpredictably interacting systems together ... like our actual brains... but I don’t think it’ll be a tool, per se.

So maybe synthesis is in the same place. Not just with technology: Our hearing system only has so many things it responds to. Our ability to get enjoyment from sound has limits (that vary from person to person, but there is a generally accepted set of parameters). We can make all kinds of crazy sounds today with what we have, but only certain sounds (a wide spectrum, granted) lead us to “feel musical” about them.

Many synthetic sounds are just “noise” to people, and most people hate “noise”. I can appreciate why. When I am not in control of what I have to hear, I hate noise! It took me a while in my youth (ugh) to develop an appreciation for noise in music, and I still need it to be “musical”. Being deeply embedded in music as a hobbyist and lover of sound is what got me to accept and appreciate many things that the majority of people don’t appreciate, and we cannot expect everyone to have the same interest and to develop the same appreciation.

I’m not closing the door on things happening that I can’t anticipate, but I am suggesting that there’s probably a drop off on the curve of “developments possible” and we’ve already seen the drop off in terms of *new and unique* tool availability.

I haven’t heard a truly new sound in well over a decade. Just sounds I’ve already heard, in the real world or in synthesis, through effects... etc., used in somewhat different contexts and slightly different structures. I am actually a bit ... jaded and uninspired by sound compared to when I was new at all of this.

If we, as a society, want some new revolution in music... we might have to actually go back to ... musicianship!

Give it a few more decades. Let’s see if the majority gets tired and bored of the sounds they’ve been fed by the recording industry. It’ll take some chance exposure and meme-like spreading of something to catch the attention...

I’m personally not expecting any major discovery. I just think there will be yet another swing in taste and fashion that makes people reject “the old” and embrace something old that they think is new. Those of us older than 40 have lived through it already, probably several times. As posted above, some fringe culture or interest will swing around to the mainstream... but it won’t be new to the people who were already in it and it will only last until the same thing happens again...

Humans are very attached to that which is familiar. Novelty seeking is definitely another human trait, but the actual existence of truly novel things seems to have already been on a long decline. It’s really just going to be a repeat exchange between the mainstream and the fringe, back and forth.

This is all my own opinion as an armchair psychologist and armchair scientist, but I’m not pulling it out of my ass; I’ve spent quite some time reading up on what is and is not physically possible, as well as watching my fellow primates do the things they do... ;-)
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud

Post

thecontrolcentre wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:32 pm
e-crooner wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 5:25 pm What is innovated at those institutes will hardly make it into the mainstream.
Yeah ... that loud electric guitar music will never catch on either.
The cool stuff has all long been invented.
When was the last time something important was developed in synthesis?
Granular for instance was invented in the 70's I think.
FM at least as far back as the 80's.
Yet, subtractive continues to be many musicians' go-to synthesis.
Why? Because it is intuitive and easy to understand. After all, most musicians want to make music, not spend their time programming.

Post

More beeping and stuff I think.

Post

So progress ended in the 70s? Just look at the musical changes in the 20th century ... there is no reason to believe the 21st century wont be just as inventive. Early days yet ...

Post

donkey tugger wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:12 pm More beeping and stuff I think.
youre not wrong, i heard a bloody track the other day, just repeated this for 2 mins...

beep beep beep beep
this vehicle is reversing
beep beep beep beep
this vehicle is reversing

followed by a cacophonous rumble and the sound of breaking glass.

rubbish! :x

Post

donkey tugger wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:12 pm More beeping and stuff I think.
Hoping it will be a single beep and then loads'o stuffin'.

Post

thecontrolcentre wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:15 pm So progress ended in the 70s? Just look at the musical changes in the 20th century ... there is no reason to believe the 21st century wont be just as inventive. Early days yet ...
Many of those changes were due to the electrification of acoustic instruments. That kind of innovation is probably over and done with.

Post

e-crooner wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:47 pm
thecontrolcentre wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 6:15 pm So progress ended in the 70s? Just look at the musical changes in the 20th century ... there is no reason to believe the 21st century wont be just as inventive. Early days yet ...
Many of those changes were due to the electrification of acoustic instruments. That kind of innovation is probably over and done with.
im sure plenty of guitarists would argue against the idea that electrifying the instrument was the end of innovation.
tom morello is quite mainstream and did new things (ok90s) since then matt bellamy and ed obrian spring to mind as pushing guitar boundaries in more recent years.
then a current fave noveller.

thats just off the top of my head choosing names you probably know.

Post

I don't know any of them, but according to Wiki they use effects pedals a lot, and one of them also controls synthesizers with the guitar. Nothing really new, was already done by Pat Metheny in the 80's.

Not sure, but I think the last synthesis innovation of importance (although I personally hate it) was the supersaw 8)

Post

its not so much what they use, but what they do with it, techniques and such.
if you dont know who they are though, very little point trying to explain. as id need to reference their work, which you dont know.

Post

"Alexa, load a warm fizzy modulated retro noisy layered wavetable and granular pad with prominent odd harmonics, slow attack and mildly detuned stacked voices."

Post

vurt wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 7:17 pm its not so much what they use, but what they do with it, techniques and such.
if you dont know who they are though, very little point trying to explain. as id need to reference their work, which you dont know.
Sure, but if playing style is the innovation, that has little to do with this topic, which I think refers to technical synthesis innovation.

Post

Echoes in the Attic wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 7:19 pm "Alexa, load a warm fizzy modulated retro noisy layered wavetable and granular pad with prominent odd harmonics, slow attack and mildly detuned stacked voices."
playing "rick astley never gonna give you up"

Post

Echoes in the Attic wrote: Sun Jan 26, 2020 7:19 pm "Alexa, load a warm fizzy modulated retro noisy layered wavetable and granular pad with prominent odd harmonics, slow attack and mildly detuned stacked voices."
Since Alexa would have to be taught before what those subjective attributes (fizzy, warm, retro etc.) stand for, the results would depend a lot on who taught Alexa.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”