Wave tables aren’t versatile?

VST, AU, AAX, CLAP, etc. Plugin Virtual Instruments Discussion
RELATED
PRODUCTS
Alchemy Falcon Serum 2 Virus TI

Post

Teksonik wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:29 pm
fmr wrote: Tue Jun 09, 2020 8:33 am
Teksonik wrote: Mon Jun 08, 2020 8:37 pm
Tannaliini wrote: Mon Jun 08, 2020 1:11 pm What type of VST synth would be most versatile in sound creation?
One that allows full sample import as opposed to Wavetables made up of short duration waveforms.

Samples open up the entire world of sound...... :wink:
I disagree. I'd say one like Falcon, who allows to use samples (I agree with you on that), but also has other very important synthesis techniques available, like FM, additive, Physical Modeling, etc.

But if I had to choose just ONE synthesis technique, I would choose a sampling synth, for sure.
Of course a Hybrid synth with multiple synthesis techniques that allows full sample import would yield a wide range of sounds but it's the samples that give it the greatest possibilities.

You can have FM, additive, Physical Modeling etc and still hit a wall. With samples literally any sound that can he heard is possible including samples of FM, additive, and Physical Modeling synths. :wink:
The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.

Post

pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
Unless you go granular... Or morph it into a wave table...

Post

All recordings are static, which is the point of recording :)

Post

Tj Shredder wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:19 pm
pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
Unless you go granular... Or morph it into a wave table...
doesn't work in regards to my point

Post

pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:58 pm
Tj Shredder wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:19 pm
pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
Unless you go granular... Or morph it into a wave table...
doesn't work in regards to my point
doesnt sound much like michael jackson either.
:ud:

Post

Remember the time when analog was old hat.

Post

excuse me please wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 3:10 pm Remember the time when analog was old hat.

all my hats are analog.
:ud:

Post


Post

pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm

The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
That is the Problem today. Control over the Frequency Bands is still in the Beginning, but we face a Revolution here.

Post

pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
You're forgetting that Samples can be used a source for Oscillators than can then be sent through filters etc. Not every sound has to start with a generated Saw wave. :wink:

You're also showing a pretty myopic definition of synthesis. Again not every sound has to be a Saw, Square, or Sine wave. FM only goes so far, Additive while theoretically should be able to reproduce any sound falls short.

There are so many sounds that are possible with samples as the basis that have a nuance and beauty that generated waves simply can not reproduce. 8)
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Post

Teksonik wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 4:26 pm
pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:15 pm The problem with samples is that they are static recordings. Synthesis can bend and morph in ways and with a nuance and beauty that samples cannot.
You're forgetting that Samples can be used a source for Oscillators than can then be sent through filters etc. Not every sound has to start with a generated Saw wave. :wink:

You're also showing a pretty myopic definition of synthesis. Again not every sound has to be a Saw, Square, or Sine wave. FM only goes so far, Additive while theoretically should be able to reproduce any sound falls short.

There are so many sounds that are possible with samples as the basis that have a nuance and beauty that generated waves simply can not reproduce. 8)
Good that there are sample based synths for you... and synthesis based synths for me. :wink:

Zebra is one of my favorite synths. I can start with a vast array of waveshapes (your saw wave comment aside). I can craft complex sounds and then that sound can be transformed across velocity, time, keyrange, via aftertouch and pitchbent etc. Because all aspects of the sound are generated, it morphs really well.

Samples you cannot do much with if you are dependent on the character of the sample to create the sound. Filter or some distortion, volume changes. I prefer pure synthesis in its various forms

Post

pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 7:50 pm Samples you cannot do much with if you are dependent on the character of the sample to create the sound. Filter or some distortion, volume changes. I prefer pure synthesis in its various forms
Now try doing a completely realistic Cathedral Choir or Full Orchestra or.....with "pure synthesis". :wink:

There are a whole range of sounds that don't have anything to do single waves or wavetables.

I know this board is not focused on those sounds, like I said myopic and that is a true shame. :(

I enjoy "pure synthesis" as well but I do enjoy the incredible range of sounds that samples bring.
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Post

Teksonik wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 11:37 pm
pdxindy wrote: Sun Jun 14, 2020 7:50 pm Samples you cannot do much with if you are dependent on the character of the sample to create the sound. Filter or some distortion, volume changes. I prefer pure synthesis in its various forms
Now try doing a completely realistic Cathedral Choir or Full Orchestra or.....with "pure synthesis". :wink:

There are a whole range of sounds that don't have anything to do single waves or wavetables.

I know this board is not focused on those sounds, like I said myopic and that is a true shame. :(

I enjoy "pure synthesis" as well but I do enjoy the incredible range of sounds that samples bring.
You're the one myopic and blind, which is such a shame... there, we can both do that.

I enjoy samples, but I even more enjoy the incredible range of synthesis sounds no samples can ever touch... especially when it comes to dynamic playability.

Oh, and for the most part, samples of actual instruments and voices do not sound completely realistic... they sound mechanical and dull in comparison to the real thing. Plus they are stuck as what they were recorded as.

Post

As far as I know wavetable just tells about the oscillator types. Actually I run a wavetable oscillator trough analog eurorack filters, vca and modulated with envelopes, lfos, etc. and it doesn't sound anything like a serum preset.

Post Reply

Return to “Instruments”