FM is not impossible

[dover666]

reaper madness is my first attempt at fm... i think it's fm anyway,? it's on my website... meh...

[Equilibrium]

Well, finally it's all paid off, I'm creating some of the most amazing sounds, sounds that I couldn't have created in any other way.

Are you able to say what you're creating before you've done it? Are you able to conceive of the sound you'd like to make and then make it?

No, not yet, although I don't mind that at all because there I sounds that I hadn't really even though of coming out at me. With that said I do obviously aim to a certain extent ie, a bass sound, a pad with two different 'sets' of sounds melding... That sort of thing, but over time I will certainly refine it.

That's for the positive responses, and also thanks to those who have pointed me in the direction of some other powerful synths. For the moment I'm just fine with FM7, I want to see how much I can squeeze out of it for a fair while.

The only hang up I have with it at the moment, is there is a lack of effects to my mind, and also, the delay on the LFO IMO is shockingly bad. It's about as subtle as a large brick.

Not that that really bothers me as getting some modulation going isn't that hard really.

[james0tucson]

Well, finally it's all paid off, I'm creating some of the most amazing sounds, sounds that I couldn't have created in any other way.

Are you able to say what you're creating before you've done it? Are you able to conceive of the sound you'd like to make and then make it?

No, not yet, although I don't mind that at all because there I sounds that I hadn't really even though of coming out at me.

Yeah, I'd like to get my brain around FM, but at the same time, I really want to work in a mode where my creativity drives the way I use my tools, as opposed to my tools driving my creativity. One person in the BBC Radiophonic documentary had a very good way of expressing this idea.

But I do love playing with Sytrus, even though it's just weird to me.

[Equilibrium]

Well, finally it's all paid off, I'm creating some of the most amazing sounds, sounds that I couldn't have created in any other way.

Are you able to say what you're creating before you've done it? Are you able to conceive of the sound you'd like to make and then make it?

No, not yet, although I don't mind that at all because there I sounds that I hadn't really even though of coming out at me.

Yeah, I'd like to get my brain around FM, but at the same time, I really want to work in a mode where my creativity drives the way I use my tools, as opposed to my tools driving my creativity. One person in the BBC Radiophonic documentary had a very good way of expressing this idea.

But I do love playing with Sytrus, even though it's just weird to me.

I can certainly understand that. I suppose the goal to be attained is to be able be making a tune and decide that I'm going to go now program such and such sound that I want to include. I think programming for the occasion can be the most powerful way of programming, and can be deemed as an intimate part of creativity. I always think that it is very similar to a painter mixing their paints. It might not be easy to get what you want, but your work will have so many more tones if you can achieve that difficult goal of 'mastery'.

[Equilibrium]

BTW I took a quick look at Sytrus, and it looks like it uses ADSR envelopes? To be totally frank that would almost put me off in itself. Is it not like trying to drag a car with a horse?

[BONES]

Don't forget the way-cool Panzertank PM4 from Land of Cockaigne. That was the first SE synth that I ever played with but I think it probably stands up OK 3 or 4 years later.

[Jafo]

Another good way to get started with FM is to get a synth construction app, perhaps SynthEdit, and experiment with it. I never even liked FM until I began working with it.

[BONES]

BTW I took a quick look at Sytrus, and it looks like it uses ADSR envelopes? To be totally frank that would almost put me off in itself. Is it not like trying to drag a car with a horse?

ADSR is fine for 99% of things and I don't see the benefit in having to deal with it all the time for its occassional usefulness.

[Equilibrium]

BTW I took a quick look at Sytrus, and it looks like it uses ADSR envelopes? To be totally frank that would almost put me off in itself. Is it not like trying to drag a car with a horse?

ADSR is fine for 99% of things and I don't see the benefit in having to deal with it all the time for its occassional usefulness.

To be honest I've really gone off it, as you can do a lot of subtle things with these more powerful envelope generators. It's just a matter of getting used to them. That's just an opinion of course, and ADSR is no doubt a stroke of genius!

[james0tucson]

BTW I took a quick look at Sytrus, and it looks like it uses ADSR envelopes? To be totally frank that would almost put me off in itself. Is it not like trying to drag a car with a horse?

ADSR is fine for 99% of things and I don't see the benefit in having to deal with it all the time for its occassional usefulness.

Which is it? Occasionally useful, or fine for 99% of things?

[Equilibrium]

I think he means deal with the complex envs for their occassional usefulness. I find it isn't that occassional.

[speccyteccy]

Which particular brand of FM are we talking about? I think the way Toxic does FM is way easier than the way Yamaha did it with the DX-7. With those f**kers, it was very difficult to take a patch and tweak it in a desired direction but with Toxic that is usually both simple and intuitive. Sytrus's multi-page GUI would, I think, make it a much harder row to hoe.

I hear you. I've been looking for a single page synth to move on to from Vanguard (3rd bank nearly finished) but I'd not tried Toxic as it won't run on my non-SSE Athlon. Just tried it on my laptop, and am quite impressed, but I don't think comparisons with Sytrus are fair - sytrus has WAY more functionality, hence its multi-page interface.

I'm very tempted by Toxic though - I'm going to upgrade my DAW soon anyway, and Toxic may just be the next synth for me to put some serious effort into - I'm well aware that to push Sytrus to it's limits would be a big jump from Vanguard / 3xOsc, even though it's a truly beauriful synth.

Are you able to say what you're creating before you've done it? Are you able to conceive of the sound you'd like to make and then make it?

It's one thing for Ty Cobb to have hit a home run, it's another thing for him to point to the seat in the stands before the pitch, and hit the ball to that spot...

I've spent the last year programming nearly 400 patches for Vanguard, and I'm not really sure how much I've learnt beyond the basics. It's easy to start off with the basics for a particular type of patch, but to get a good one, I just experiment and tweak and keep coming back to them until I'm satisfied. If I listen back to them, I can't remember how they were created, and wouldn't be able to recreate them easily.

But does that matter? I've still ended up with a shed load of usable (for me) presets, and I also find creating patches can be really inspirational - you create a new sound which inspires you to play some notes with it etc, etc.

BTW I took a quick look at Sytrus, and it looks like it uses ADSR envelopes? To be totally frank that would almost put me off in itself. Is it not like trying to drag a car with a horse?

Take another look at Sytrus - it's got imo the best multi-point envelopes of any synth - and loads of em too. I counted 62 LFO's the other day, and there are even more envelopes, but I couldn't be bothered to count them all. The ADSR you saw is probably the global one you can use to tweak your patches.

[ross g]

Just a few words of inspiration for anyone who is thinking of attempting to learn FM synthesis, or who is learning it.

It is possible. I have been trying to learn FM Synthesis for a fairly short amount of time and have been told a few times to give up, "it's just too hard". Well, finally it's all paid off....

If you're thinking of trying to learn, do it, and devote hours and hours to it, it will pay off. I believe that the FM7 is just about the most powerful synth you can buy, and what's best of all is that now I know that I can program it with confidence.

Good luck!

did you post on the subject a few weeks ago? i think i told you it wasn't that hard, stick with it, but i may have just been thinking of it and didn't post, don't remember....

i've been messing with Reaktor 5, a simple but powerful 4 operator FM synth they have in the latest version, and it takes my back to my DX100... (is FM7 a NI product?) i actually had an easier time programming with the DX hardware than the Opcode software at the time because i was able to focus on the sound and not the graphics, i guess i learned to listen to whay was going on and i try to bring that experience to programming now...and you don't need to have a physics degree to make music, just a good ear and a few good ideas...


continued good luck,
rg

[ross g]

Well, finally it's all paid off, I'm creating some of the most amazing sounds, sounds that I couldn't have created in any other way.

Are you able to say what you're creating before you've done it? Are you able to conceive of the sound you'd like to make and then make it?

No, not yet, although I don't mind that at all because there I sounds that I hadn't really even though of coming out at me.

Yeah, I'd like to get my brain around FM, but at the same time, I really want to work in a mode where my creativity drives the way I use my tools, as opposed to my tools driving my creativity. One person in the BBC Radiophonic documentary had a very good way of expressing this idea.

But I do love playing with Sytrus, even though it's just weird to me.

james, i caught that same idea from the film and although it really rang true, i get screwed up with that sometimes...for example with FM synthesis, it seems to produce certain idiosyncratic sounds easily, and as long as one becomes familiar with that type of sound, why not just experiment with FM until you get something that clicks? unless you are doing emulations of real instuments (which sound kind of yucky on FM to me anyway), why bother? not to say going at it with a more scholarly approach is necessarily wrong (i've heard academic-type stuff done with DX synths back in the day that were amazing/beuatiful), but if that intimidation stifles you, it seems like "just f**king around" might not be that bad after all if it allows you a useful tool...

[Equilibrium]

did you post on the subject a few weeks ago? i think i told you it wasn't that hard, stick with it, but i may have just been thinking of it and didn't post, don't remember....

Yes I did although I don't remember you posting. My feeling is that as subtractive synthesis was the first really popular form of synthesis that was both available and affordable for the general public, it is come to be seem as the most sensible way to synthesis sounds. FM I think is considered quite esoteric and therefore quite off putting.

I certainly was put off by the whole black art aspect of it.