If you could have only one synth, what would you choose?

[fmr]

Actually, I was rather looking for a replacement for Sylenth1.

Are sampled instruments a replacement for you, when you can just use the real deal?

Yes, in what concerns synthesizers, a modern sampler like one of the "big three" can be a good replacement.

Also, if you can use the "real deal" why are you looking for a replacement in the first place?

[gaggle of hermits]

the debate may well have been though the title of the entire thread suggests otherwise.

sorry, insufficent precision when phrasinge: the debate about kontakt, and that very specific moving of goalposts I mentioned.

i only came in at the end of this whole shebang – i don't think i've moved any goalposts at all, just responded to a list of things that didn't make a whole lot of sense to me. if i were to pick kontakt libraries that came at least close to the spirit of sylenth, they'd be things like wave alchemy's bassynth or the cl-projects virology.

maybe whoever posed the question did and if so, i dare say it was a deliberately chosen example given that i'm not sure if anyone would consider sylenth a desert-island synth given its many limitations but does one thing that kontakt happens not to support directly.

[chk071]

Actually, I was rather looking for a replacement for Sylenth1.

Are sampled instruments a replacement for you, when you can just use the real deal?

Yes, in what concerns synthesizers, a modern sampler like one of the "big three" can be a good replacement.

Also, if you can use the "real deal" why are you looking for a replacement in the first place?

Because I want to point out that samplers aren't synths.

Obvious, I know. Obviously not.

[chk071]

Is Kontakt a piano because there piano libraries?

Is Kontakt a trumpet? Or an oboe?

[whyterabbyt]

i don't think i've moved any goalposts at all

agreed.

[vurt]

Actually, I was rather looking for a replacement for Sylenth1.

Are sampled instruments a replacement for you, when you can just use the real deal?

Yes, in what concerns synthesizers, a modern sampler like one of the "big three" can be a good replacement.

Also, if you can use the "real deal" why are you looking for a replacement in the first place?

Because I want to point out that samplers aren't synths.

Obvious, I know. Obviously not.

just an fyi, the "book of sampling and synthesis" disagrees with you.

based on what synthesis actually means, they do fit the bill.

ill dig it out later and get the exact quotes

[gaggle of hermits]

Because I want to point out that samplers aren't synths.

roland made a very successful business out of selling synths with sampling engines as their basis for getting on for 40 years.

does this exclusion extend to wavetable synths? if not, why not? a wavetable is simply a stored array of samples. ppg might want a word.

[whyterabbyt]

just an fyi, the "book of sampling and synthesis" disagrees with you.

based on what synthesis actually means, they do fit the bill.

ill dig it out later and get the exact quotes

Expert opinion doesnt count.

Though seemingly, false dichotomies do.

[whyterabbyt]

I supposed 'Kontakt isnt a synth because its a sampler' makes a change from 'Kontakt isnt a sampler because it doesnt sample.'

(just as ignorant, though)

[HAL76]

What a dumb discussion again.

Define the term "synthesizer". You´ll quickly see that it´s not about the method of sound generation.

Samplers are -=superiour=-. Godlike beings in a world full of dreadful creatures, conflicts and racism.

[chk071]

Define the term "synthesizer". You´ll quickly see that it´s not about the method of sound generation.

Sure, but, we have to make distinctions, even when there isn't a 100% clear definition, and a lot of overlap.

There are cars which resemble SUV's, but you wouldn't call them SUV's either.

Even though I would argue that a sampler is further away from a synth than a SUV like car from a SUV. It's simple another use case. More like comparing a truck to a passenger car.

[chk071]

Anyway, if someone here would ask which synth he should pick as his first synth, and I'd answer Kontakt, I'd get a slap in the face for sure.

[HAL76]

Define the term "synthesizer". You´ll quickly see that it´s not about the method of sound generation.

Sure, but, we have to make distinctions, even when there isn't a 100% clear definition, and a lot of overlap.

There are cars which resemble SUV's, but you wouldn't call them SUV's either.

Even though I would argue that a sampler is further away from a synth than a SUV like car from a SUV.

If you want to male a distinction you either have to find a new term or convince the public to rethink their understanding.

"Synthesizer" basicly refers on "sound generation" and that may as well be an E-mu. I´d say sound generation and modification. Not more, not less.

But really - I wouldn´t even think about such questions anymore. Especially when we think of modern Hybrids like Falcon, MSF and SM like granularSynthesis it should get clear, that there are no diffferences anymore. Boders exist only in our heads. Or not.

[whyterabbyt]

"But SUVs are cars"

"Nope. Its either an SUV or its a car, it cant be both. You've gotta make a distinction, mate, but just the one, and its got to be an either/or choice... "

[Dencheg]

Because I want to point out that samplers aren't synths.

roland made a very successful business out of selling synths with sampling engines as their basis for getting on for 40 years.

does this exclusion extend to wavetable synths? if not, why not? a wavetable is simply a stored array of samples. ppg might want a word.

A waveform is not a sample.
A waveform is basically vector information, while sample is raster.

Samplers play recorded sounds, synths make new sounds from simple(ish) waveforms.

Samplers aren't synth, regardless of the amount of books stating otherwise