Best VST instrument for relaxation, Ambient, sounds

[kobal]

Mpowersynth is really good for making soundscape and evolving athmoshpere and the sound quality is good ( saturation,fm doesen t sound digital cause of artifacts for example , these are some of the best sounding in synth plugins if you take modern high quality analog as a benchmark maybe cause the synth can be oversampled way more than most out there and also cause it s well balanced, not muffled, not dark , not big low mids muddy sound ect.. )

[egbert101]

<delete>

[ghettosynth]

double dip - too many people coming and going!!!

Yes, yes, Merry Christmas (or whatever you do this time of year!)

I usually look at the wall alone contemplating the meaninglessness of life at this time of year.

That's the best time to write an empty ambient track that has few notes. I like to use dark and bleak synth tones with just a little distortion. iZotope trash 2 is perfect. Bring that distortion in and out gently, it should really be the only thing that's changing much, and it's not changing very much.

[Nielzie]

how does it compare to valhalla shimmer or eventide's blackhole ? more or less generates the same sounds, no ?

112db Mikroncascade + ValhallaDSP Shimmer = ambient heaven, I guess.

[aMUSEd]

OK this

http://www.soniccouture.com/en/products ... ed-spaces/

[exmatproton]

OK this

http://www.soniccouture.com/en/products ... ed-spaces/

[martinjuenke]

Here's a nice modular session with a simple setup. Front and center is the Belgrad analog state variable filter. There is also an analog phaser module in there with the resonance quite high. For these kinds of sounds, and many others, if you're trying to do this ITB, then DSP algorithm quality matters quite a bit.

Commentary of my wife:
This guy should have a better manicure, but the sound is okay...

[4damind]

Btw.. it's very easy and doesn't need a long time to make some ambient stuff with help of Absynth. This short idea I made in the last 10 minutes. The deep drone pad is from Dune and there is a small "fill" with Repro-5 and later there is a lead from the Nord.. all the "mystic" sounds are from Absynth.

I had forget to write something about the FXs. It's only Eventide Blackhole, NI Replika Delay and the AAR Bigrock phaser. Yes, not so much stuff but it's not mixed yet (only the AirEQ is added on the master within the VMR)
As I wrote before: IMO a synth with support of sampled content (like Absynth) works the best. It's also not "the best" instrument/synth/FX, it's more the kind of mood which should be achieved.

https://soundcloud.com/52degree/the-ambient/s-53i60

ambient-1200x900.jpg

[glokraw]

Reaktor is like buying an old house, and finding a secret passage
to a room with stacks of riches, glowing objects and
pulsating orbs casting light on piles of jewels, with
inviting aromas wafting on breezes as warm or cool
as the moment calls for.

To round out the ambient toolbox, some 16 part multi-timbral
sample based instruments for the layering capabilities, are great.
I'd suggest getting IK Sampletank 3 while it's $99, and add their
free Syntronik, whose soundset can be loaded into Sampletank.

Hive and Zebra also make for a great team, that are
as easy to buy and install, as they are great in creative use,
and have about 12,000 presets between them, when you
download the free extras available.

The new Aparillo has some great capabilities, and an hour
of videos to help turn cacaphony into dreamcapes.
Cheers

[.jon]

Nobody said that you should "squeeze whatever random noodlings." You are projecting what you want to read. I also didn't hear of anyone using a "mile long FX chain."

Further, the OP didn't ask about music that has "long term value." That's your choice of label that is by no means a constraint that anyone else has necessarily imposed.

I'm referring to these comments from this thread for example:

"OP, you may very well have all the synths that you need for this, but what you may want to start experimenting with is suitable chains of effects, which can really transform any source material into totally new, deep, soundscapes."

for ambient, choosing effects is far more important than choosing synths

Any synth + a lot of reverb.

Ambiverb: anything in>ambient out.

So yes, obviously not verbatim "mile long fx chains", but the general idea in these and from countless of similar threads I've read along the years (now this is an actual projection) is that ambient is something you get simply by drowning sounds in reverb or mangling in complex fx chains. Paulstretching is another commonly suggested "instant ambient" tip. Sure, you get strange sounds and swishy, distant swooshes with 0 effort, and it's even fun, I'm suggesting that it may not be as interesting to the listener. Or stand out from the endless stream of pieces created with equally low amount of effort.

Do you actually think trying to create music with long term value is a "constraint", or is that snot hanging from your nose?

So? Many synths do, and, more to the point, so do many effects. It's a reflection of the state of the art in the synth which absolutely reflects the synth quality and that has nothing to do with what you choose to use or like.

No, it does not absolutely reflect the synth quality. It may reflect that in your head to yourself, but rest assured, that has nothing to do with objective quality or what others prefer. It's just one part or module of an instrument, and no matter how hard you try to impose your own opinion of filters on others, they simply don't make or break a synth for other musicians. There's dozens of synths with modern ZDF filters which suck as synths, and on some even the filters sound like shit.

Really, this drama is just about Omnisphere users being offended that not everyone respects their overpriced bombastic toy as being superior. I made a comment with respect to the technology in the synth in support of another reader's perspective that the quality isn't necessarily there and that's my opinion.

Good that you acknowledge that it's nothing more than your opinion, what you don't seem to realize that your opinions aren't nearly as important as you believe. Because in the very next sentence, your opinion turns into a statement of fact:

Like it or not, that's just a statement of fact and there's no reason to be offended by it. If you like old synths, good for you, but some of us value whether a musical tool is on the cutting edge. Feel free to talk about old synths, but I'm going to feel free to point out that they're old.

Anything that brings you happiness, mate. Could you give us all a date of expiration, so we can start unliking old synths? What is the ghettosynth limit for acceptable synth age? Just kidding, we don't actually give a f**k about that.

[Michael L]

Ambiverb: anything in>ambient out.

That was my joke-- there is no Ambiverb. My serious answer on page 2 is that ambient is a genre and thus not based on an instrument or fx.

[.jon]

Ok, I didn't get that one I would have easily believed there's an Ambiverb VST out there.

[Michael L]

Ok, I didn't get that one I would have easily believed there's an Ambiverb VST out there.

I thought my slogan was an exaggeration (anything in>ambient out!) but you have shown there is a real market for a new "instant-ambient" plugin (or zynaptiq could just rename Adaptiverb).

[ghettosynth]

Nobody said that you should "squeeze whatever random noodlings." You are projecting what you want to read. I also didn't hear of anyone using a "mile long FX chain."

Further, the OP didn't ask about music that has "long term value." That's your choice of label that is by no means a constraint that anyone else has necessarily imposed.

I'm referring to these comments from this thread for example:

"OP, you may very well have all the synths that you need for this, but what you may want to start experimenting with is suitable chains of effects, which can really transform any source material into totally new, deep, soundscapes."

for ambient, choosing effects is far more important than choosing synths

Any synth + a lot of reverb.

Ambiverb: anything in>ambient out.

So yes, obviously not verbatim "mile long fx chains", but the general idea in these and from countless of similar threads I've read along the years (now this is an actual projection) is that ambient is something you get simply by drowning sounds in reverb or mangling in complex fx chains. Paulstretching is another commonly suggested "instant ambient" tip.

Point taken. However, there is some truth to those processes yielding
an ambient piece, whether you respect it or not. Erik Satie is little more than piano and (obviously natural) reverb. There is no implication in the statement that no effort with respect to composition is intrinsically a part of the formula, that's your projection. Of course anything in -> reverb -> ambient out is an overstatement, but so is your unnecessary aggression and projection.

Sure, you get strange sounds and swishy, distant swooshes with 0 effort, and it's even fun, I'm suggesting that it may not be as interesting to the listener. Or stand out from the endless stream of pieces created with equally low amount of effort.

Again, the need to stand out is your chosen constraint. The song "every breath you take" by sting was written in a half hour or so IIRC, effort does not necessarily equate to quality or interest. Again, that is your bias and projection. Effort does not necessarily make something stand out.

Personally I don't like the overly simple paulstretch tracks, it's why I got bored with the Drone Zone for a long time. That doesn't completely invalidate the process however.

I could say a lot more about this but this thread and this post isn't really the place for it.

Do you actually think trying to create music with long term value is a "constraint", or is that snot hanging from your nose?

It is definitionally a constraint, one that you added to the conversation in an effort to bolster your point. You are still doing it, including attempting to mock me rather than see your own invalid arguments.

So? Many synths do, and, more to the point, so do many effects. It's a reflection of the state of the art in the synth which absolutely reflects the synth quality and that has nothing to do with what you choose to use or like.

No, it does not absolutely reflect the synth quality. It may reflect that in your head to yourself, but rest assured, that has nothing to do with objective quality or what others prefer. It's just one part or module of an instrument, and no matter how hard you try to impose your own opinion of filters on others, they simply don't make or break a synth for other musicians.

I didn't say that it "makes or breaks" a synth. I did say that it is a factor in synth quality, and it is. No amount of being offended is going to change that.

There's dozens of synths with modern ZDF filters which suck as synths, and on some even the filters sound like shit.

Moreover, this fascination with ZDF, per se, is only a part of the equation. However, like it or not, the accuracy of the emulation does affect the quality of an instrument. That is almost definitional when an instrument purports to be a model of something else, as all synths with any hint of being a VA do. There's more to a good filter emulation than "ZDF", but trying to deny that it doesn't yield a more accurate filter when implemented properly is simply false. Get over it.

Really, this drama is just about Omnisphere users being offended that not everyone respects their overpriced bombastic toy as being superior. I made a comment with respect to the technology in the synth in support of another reader's perspective that the quality isn't necessarily there and that's my opinion.

Good that you acknowledge that it's nothing more than your opinion, what you don't seem to realize that your opinions aren't nearly as important as you believe.

Then feel free to ignore them, i.e., not what you're doing now.

Because in the very next sentence, your opinion turns into a statement of fact:

Nonsense, you're demonstrating your own lack of objectivity right here.

Like it or not, that's just a statement of fact and there's no reason to be offended by it. If you like old synths, good for you, but some of us value whether a musical tool is on the cutting edge. Feel free to talk about old synths, but I'm going to feel free to point out that they're old.

Anything that brings you happiness, mate. Could you give us all a date of expiration, so we can start unliking old synths? What is the ghettosynth limit for acceptable synth age? Just kidding, we don't actually give a f**k about that.

Which is ample evidence to convey that this question is outside of your skill set. If you understood the field more, then you wouldn't be asking the question, sincerely or not.

As others are here, you are overreacting to my statements. If you ever thought that old VA synths sounded like accurate models in the first place then you have conveyed your inexperience with what good synths sound like.

VA synth models were shite for years. That has never made them useless, but it absolutely says something about their quality as an instrument. That is, they would be a higher quality instrument given better models.

[ghettosynth]

So, taking this thread in a different direction, I think that method matters a lot in terms of what tools to recommend. Again, of course, it comes down to what kind of music that you want to create, but tools that work well for some methods work less well for others.

For example, SoundMorph's Dust is great, but this doesn't fit into everyone's workflow.



Is your approach more traditional from a compositional POV, or are you into generative processes? Do you want to rely on presets for textures or do you think that creating those textures are an important part of the compositional process?

I use quite a few effects that allow me to tame and constrain more abstract and random processes. These wouldn't work for everyone and, frankly, most of them aren't available anyway as they are collections and/or modifications of Reaktor ensembles or built up from commercial effects in other modular environments. But, I definitely think that in a style where composition is often minimal, that sound design is an integral part of the composition process. Although I'm not a purist about much of anything, I don't find it satisfying in the least to dial up some cinematic texture and play some bells or didge over the top.

That's just my approach though, I'm not trying to project that as anything universal. I am saying that expressing your approach is helpful for others trying to help you find tools.