Overestimated synths?

[Frantz]

Yes, you said that already, what is it? In fact, define "organic sound."

Organic sound is any sound which avoids the use of factory patching, digital additives, and genetically modified oscillators (GMOs). Glad to clear that up for you.

[xoxos]

it's a wonder we haven't seen more biological oscillators, the way they used to test bacilla colonies for computing. also genetically modded oscs would probably be more organic hehe

seriously "what is organic" -

it seemed c. 1992 ? the term "organic" was suddenly everywhere in electronic music media in the u.s.. i guess intended to mean atmospheric and less overtly machine .. eg. meat beat manifesto's new album was "organic electronic music" i guess because it had denser layers of motile synthesis. it may well have been an industry joke in light of the gen x vegan consciousness stuff. but yeah, c. 1992-1993 suddenly "organic".

no meaning really. it's like the term "chaos" - mathematics denser than we care to concern ourselves with, more used for marketing.

[xoxos]

just as an odd thought, doing a bunch of research in synthesis, one often encounters these hideous latex models of vocal tracts used in universities, used for studying trumpet embouchure et c. i'm surprised we haven't seen any marketed mechanical synthesizers like this either. "how did you record the vocals?" "i packed my simulacrum with macaroni"*

*t-shirts and mugs

[egbert101]

Here is an organic Synth:

[Etienne1973]

What we have learned is that when you add filters to FM you get a better instrument. That is a fact that no amount of hagiographic whining will change.

Main weakness especially of the DX7 Mk1 was/is analog synth emulation. So if you're after typical analog subtractive synthesis sounds with FM synths, then yes, filter(s) can help. Hybrid sounds can also be interesting.

[chk071]

Frankly, i gave up on the topic. There'll always be the hoard of people which will tell you that any of their super-antialiased, ZDF synths will be able to blow everything hardware, or older software out of the water. The point they're notoriously missing is that it's not so much about the technicality, but, about character, and, especially, organic sound. Which of course also has a technical background

Really? So what is that technical background?

You are painting a false dichotomy along with a straw man.

Of course "organic" sound has a technical background

Yes, you said that already, what is it? In fact, define "organic sound."

Oscillator drift, saturation... i frankly don't know what other stuff developers do to make their synths sound "alive". But they surely do something others don't, otherwise there wouldn't be synths which simply sound bland and boring, unless you work and work and work to make them sound more unpredictable, and more like a instrument.

Or, if you're asking what defines organic sound, well. Whenever you create a sound with synthesizers, you want it to be as organic, and diverse sounding as possible, so you pretty much try to create an organic sound by default. Any kind of modulation, or saturation will lead to a less static sound, and, for the same reason, some synths simply sound more organic, or alive out of the box, simply because they already model some of the stuff analog synths do by default.

[thecontrolcentre]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/organic

[xoxos]

Here is an organic Synth:

now listen to all of "it takes a nation of millions to hold us back"

i swear they had a box of rats, every two bars

[ghettosynth]

Frankly, i gave up on the topic. There'll always be the hoard of people which will tell you that any of their super-antialiased, ZDF synths will be able to blow everything hardware, or older software out of the water. The point they're notoriously missing is that it's not so much about the technicality, but, about character, and, especially, organic sound. Which of course also has a technical background

Really? So what is that technical background?

You are painting a false dichotomy along with a straw man.

Of course "organic" sound has a technical background

Yes, you said that already, what is it? In fact, define "organic sound."

Oscillator drift, saturation... i frankly don't know what other stuff developers do to make their synths sound "alive". But they surely do something others don't, otherwise there wouldn't be synths which simply sound bland and boring, unless you work and work and work to make them sound more unpredictable, and more like a instrument.

If you can't identify it, then you're simply making up things to satisfy your preferences. You started this by claiming that others miss some point for which, when pressed, you can't identify, but then claim to have some quantification of components that you don't value.

Like what you like, but let's not suggest that others don't understand their own preferences, or what makes for better technology, just because you don't.

[chk071]

Frankly, i gave up on the topic. There'll always be the hoard of people which will tell you that any of their super-antialiased, ZDF synths will be able to blow everything hardware, or older software out of the water. The point they're notoriously missing is that it's not so much about the technicality, but, about character, and, especially, organic sound. Which of course also has a technical background

Really? So what is that technical background?

You are painting a false dichotomy along with a straw man.

Of course "organic" sound has a technical background

Yes, you said that already, what is it? In fact, define "organic sound."

Oscillator drift, saturation... i frankly don't know what other stuff developers do to make their synths sound "alive". But they surely do something others don't, otherwise there wouldn't be synths which simply sound bland and boring, unless you work and work and work to make them sound more unpredictable, and more like a instrument.

If you can't identify it, then you're simply making up things to satisfy your preferences. You started this by claiming that others miss some point for which, when pressed, you can't identify, but then claim to have some quantification of components that you don't value.

Like what you like, but let's not suggest that others don't understand their own preferences, or what makes for better technology, just because you don't.

I don't think you'd have come to any other conclusion, no matter what i say. I think you very well got what i mean, you just want to argue controversially for the arguing's sake, as usual. Apart from that you left out half of what i wrote, because you obviously thought it was too much on point to quote it.

Anyway, now that we got that shit throwing behind us, maybe we could continue discussing like adults? Please? I'm sure you're capable of doing so, when you're not trying to be a smart arse, like you just did.

[jancivil]

"[DX7] overestimated at the time" - because it could not synthesize absolutely anything.
Ok, John Chowning did rather believe that the method could. I rather doubt he claimed that about the DX7, in any form.

The extent of Chowning's work is dramatically deeper than this Yamaha product. This was far from an ultimate presentation. If there's some marketing that seemed excessive, that seems hardly unusual.

That said, I don't find that 'The DX7 was a revolutionary product' (which I have yet to say myself) is a ridiculous notion. I was programming one extensively, for my own interest and for that group. So, in my experience at least there was no product which did anything like time dimension applied to carrier and modulator. The construction of spectra in 6 operators with 6 independent EGs was, and remains significant.

Google 'DX7 revolutionary' and see if there are a few, or many hits in affirmation. I'm not using popular notions as any authority (don't need any) but it's just not at all unusual to see.



Yeah, it seems too arrogant to me to display such a top-down assessment of one's own expertise with such a readiness to dismiss. It's not so surprising here, but it's still quite an irritant to me. Chowning is a genius, the product was developed recognizing the potential use value of that product of genius. Social media dweebism notwithstanding.

[ghettosynth]

Anyway, now that we got that shit throwing behind us, maybe we could continue discussing like adults? Please? I'm sure you're capable of doing so, when you're not trying to be a smart arse, like you just did.

Nobody's throwing shit dude, you are just being called out on your bullshit.

I think that you're still missing it. Notice that only one of us is upset here. You're being emotional about something that is beyond your abilities to articulate. The salient point here is that you are projecting when you make poorly articulated assumptions about what other people think. I don't think that you have any data whatsoever to support your claim about ZDF or oversampling. Nor do I think that you can articulate precisely what matters about drift or saturation or how any of this can be aggregated to any sort of meaningful measure.

The bottom line is, "organic sound" is meaningless bullshit.

[AnX]

Gotta love buzzwords...

[jancivil]

- regarding the structure of the algorithms
FM8's #1:



DX7 Algorithm #1:



So, yeah, I don't know quite what to do with that. I don't really regard myself as smart like that anyway. I never sussed the Rubik Cube, you know.
But to me, that just isn't it.

[chk071]

Anyway, now that we got that shit throwing behind us, maybe we could continue discussing like adults? Please? I'm sure you're capable of doing so, when you're not trying to be a smart arse, like you just did.

Nobody's throwing shit dude, you are just being called out on your bullshit.

I think that you're still missing it. Notice that only one of us is upset here. You're being emotional about something that is beyond your abilities to articulate. The salient point here is that you are projecting when you make poorly articulated assumptions about what other people think. I don't think that you have any data whatsoever to support your claim about ZDF or oversampling. Nor do I think that you can articulate precisely what matters about drift or saturation or how any of this can be aggregated to any sort of meaningful measure.

The bottom line is, "organic sound" is meaningless bullshit.

I tried to explain it. I also stated that i don't know exactly what synth developers do to make synths sound organic and alive. You simply dismiss it as bullshit, because you don't even want to get into understanding what it could mean. If you have any better expression of the terms i was using, then, let me know. And if you have no idea what i mean, then i'm wondering what you did the last 30 years, because you surely didn't mess around with synths, otherwise you'd surely know that some are simply sounding bland, and lifeless, and some sound as if you play on a musical instrument, with all the diversity in sound there could be. Says the guy who's into it for 6 years to the guy who is supposedly into it for much longer, and uses Reaktor, because he thinks it has the best sound quality, and the qualities i was exactly talking about. I still believe you know exactly what i mean, but you simply enjoy picking on what i said, even leaving the important parts out, to make your point look better, when it really isn't good.