Quantcast
HELP! Please help me overcome my GAS for wavetable hardware. Can I achieve similar results with VST? - Page 3 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
HELP! Please help me overcome my GAS for wavetable hardware. Can I achieve similar results with VST?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #61
Lives for gear
 
sakamoto's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
For pads maybe Abyss synth



Old 4 weeks ago
  #62
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
I’m planning on getting an M, but due to tax issues we’re in a bit of a lean period, so it’s not going to happen until probably spring of next year or maybe even the Christmas after next.

In the meantime, here’s what I’m doing.

First off, Wavetables are important. Do a quick search and find the PPG and/or Microwave Wavetables. Import them into your software of choice.

Filters matter! Serum’s main wavetables are very “digital,” but the “French” and “German” ones are quite decent at emulating analog. Vital’s got some decent one’s as well, especially the “Dirty” ones. Dune 3 has a lot of lovely different analog filter emulations.

Bit depth will help you on your way to more vintage sounds. Vital, Dune and Serum all have ways to lower the bit depth of your wavetable. Combined with the right analog filter emulation, you can really get in the ballpark of a vintage hardware wavetable synth.

Don’t overlook vintage emulations. Waldorf’s PPG 3 might not be an exact PPG 2.2/2.3 emulation, but it’s still pretty great. It’s main issue seems to be that the oscillators don’t sound quite as gritty as the original. WaveSim, a free PPG emulation, does get closer, but the filter isn’t as good, and frankly I find it so frustrating to use that I mostly ignore it. Some lovely presets, though.

And of course there are other emulations that can give you equally good vintage vibes. SQ-80 V is really good.

Finally, look to ROMplers. I’ve got WaveRunner for UVI Falcon (also runs on the free player) and Syntronik. Both have very good vintage wavetable presets and offer some degree of tweakability.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #63
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Bit depth will help you on your way to more vintage sounds. Vital, Dune and Serum all have ways to lower the bit depth of your wavetable. Combined with the right analog filter emulation, you can really get in the ballpark of a vintage hardware wavetable synth.
Yes, you can get sorta kinda in the ballpark, but only in a static moment. Playing the M in person is dynamic and just a touch of velocity mod to change the wave envelope depth and different unexpected nuances bubble out. And the way it sounds across the keyboard range is something lovely with unique variation. Some sounds in the deep bass area have so much presence it can be startling!

I guarantee that once you have the M in hand, you will no longer say this.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #64
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
Yes, you can get sorta kinda in the ballpark, but only in a static moment. Playing the M in person is dynamic and just a touch of velocity mod to change the wave envelope depth and different unexpected nuances bubble out. And the way it sounds across the keyboard range is something lovely with unique variation. Some sounds in the deep bass area have so much presence it can be startling!

I guarantee that once you have the M in hand, you will no longer say this.
Demos please.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #65
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
Richest sounding.

It just generally has this warm quality that form me is emotive and it also has this 3D enveloping quality that feels like it's surrounding me, rather than just 2D in front of me.
I guess a lot of that comes from the internal filters and reverb. But whatever is is, it's sounds like the business.

I wouldn't describe it as clean or crystalline - more soft and furry.



I perhaps put too much emphasis on that M9 Clouds patch... It's not necessarily the sound I want, per se. It was just nice sounding and impressive.



Yeah. After this thread, I'm starting to think I can live with software for now!

I am definitely going to grab Vital. I think Hive 2 is seeming a likely purchase at this point.

I have Massive (OG regular), but might consider upgrading my Komplete to the current iteration.

Dune is a definite contender for a purchase.
What one learns with wavetable synthesis, as with other kinds, is that musically speaking, complex isn’t necessarily “better.”

The simpler synth architectures invariably give you sounds which are less busy.

I find I have to focus on sparse playing (staccato not legato, few voices not chords) to really enjoy playing a more complex synth and patch. Sure, you get those amazing, evolving pads you’re enjoying, but those sounds fill the ear quickly, and can grow quite tiresome if there is no space and air.

My synths always sound better to me in the morning, when my ears are well rested and have enjoyed a plenitude of quiet. As the day goes on, and if I’ve been playing a lot, ear fatigue creeps in and flattens everything out.

Psychoacoustics is important; how we judge a sound depends a lot on where it comes from, and where it goes to.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #66
Lives for gear
 
metrosonus's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoozer ➡️
Go for it.
I've got a TR rack here. Its effects are gorgeous. They're also a big part of the sound; switch them off and things get quite a bit less impressive all of a sudden.
I agree with this man 100%. The TR has a separate manual just for the effects section. They are quite in depth and amazing. I have no clue why Korg didn't make an effects box based on these. If they did and I missed it, wow what a maroon I is, as they used to say.

So here's the rub.. if you can narrow down your need / want to something intrinsic, like Yoozer mentioned about the effects, you're going to need the original hardware. This is true about the Virus stuff too.. same reason people constantly pull their hair out over it.

If it's the presets, well, buy one (whatever it is), sample it, sell it on or get better at making your own. There's enough variety and horsepower out there in the VST synth and effects market that it should be easy enough to get rather interesting and satisfying results from your synth and effect chains.

As someone who dabbles quite extensively in ambient, complex, moving pad sounds, you're looking at a 60/40 split between your sound source and "effects". The bias is on the effects, filtering, layering, key splitting, LFOing, step sequencing and a billion other things, rather than the raw sound source.

The sound source can also be anything. I think this type of music is more about personal creativity and what you bring to the table. If you dug through some of the old school presets on synths like the M1, you'd be really impressed with what they came up with, on such a limited synth.

Just to throw in another 2 cents, unless you're wowed by something specific, as I mentioned (effects, filter etc), you're probably geeking out on the programming of the patch and that's something if you put time into, you can learn to do on just about anything. If you think in a modular fashion (since you were asking about VSTs) that opens up a universe of possibilities. It's not at all uncommon for me to take two different VSTs, group them in Live and play them together like they're one instrument.

Last edited by metrosonus; 4 weeks ago at 05:30 PM..
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #67
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
Yes, you can get sorta kinda in the ballpark, but only in a static moment. Playing the M in person is dynamic and just a touch of velocity mod to change the wave envelope depth and different unexpected nuances bubble out. And the way it sounds across the keyboard range is something lovely with unique variation. Some sounds in the deep bass area have so much presence it can be startling!

I guarantee that once you have the M in hand, you will no longer say this.
Maybe, but if you are saying that the M has a capability that I don’t currently have in software, I’m sure that’s wrong. I think what’s more missing is an accurate emulation of how the wavetable oscillators work. Just bit reducing a Waldorf wavetable isn’t quite getting there, though it’s still interesting.

A more interesting question to me is this: why hasn’t there been a modern emulation of the PPG or Microwave 1 that’s at the level of SQ-80 V? Waldorf’s obviously not going to ever update PPG 3, which isn’t bad, but could be better. Maybe Arturia will be encouraged by the success of their Ensoniq emulation and have a crack at it.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #68
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Maybe, but if you are saying that the M has a capability that I don’t currently have in software, I’m sure that’s wrong.
I think a lot of people's jaws will be hitting the floor when reading this.
Have you properly listened to the demos of the M?
I've never heard any sounds as incredible as what this box puts out all day long without breaking a sweat.
Put on some decent headphones and listen to the video in my OP.
If you can get any software to sound anywhere close to that, or if you can point to someone else's software-made audio that does, then I for one would love to hear that.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #69
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
And it's not like you need 'golden ears' to perceive it... We aren't talking about a subtle difference like RePro Vs real analog... It's just an utterly incredible quality of timbre.

I expect that if you listen in headphones, we will be in agreement.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #70
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by metrosonus ➡️
I agree with this man 100%. The TR has a separate manual just for the effects section. They are quite in depth and amazing. I have no clue why Korg didn't make an effects box based on these. If they did and I missed it, wow what a maroon I is, as they used to say.
Well, around the same time they did make the DL8000R and the AM8000R, both of which are both awesome and very hard to find.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #71
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdfgh ➡️
Well, around the same time they did make the DL8000R and the AM8000R, both of which are both awesome and very hard to find.
And more recently there's that mini 'Logue oscillator standalone thingamy-chip. IIRC that has a raft of Korg effects in it, which can be used on external audio.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #72
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
I think a lot of people's jaws will be hitting the floor when reading this.
I should clarify... I do realise my entire thread here is asking the question if any software encroaches into hardware territory... But with that i had in mind the likes of Modwave/Argon8/Hydrasynth... I was not thinking about the M.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #73
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Maybe, but if you are saying that the M has a capability that I don’t currently have in software, I’m sure that’s wrong. I think what’s more missing is an accurate emulation of how the wavetable oscillators work.
Uhh... the second sentence contradicts the first.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #74
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Maybe, but if you are saying that the M has a capability that I don’t currently have in software, I’m sure that’s wrong. I think what’s more missing is an accurate emulation of how the wavetable oscillators work. Just bit reducing a Waldorf wavetable isn’t quite getting there, though it’s still interesting.

A more interesting question to me is this: why hasn’t there been a modern emulation of the PPG or Microwave 1 that’s at the level of SQ-80 V? Waldorf’s obviously not going to ever update PPG 3, which isn’t bad, but could be better. Maybe Arturia will be encouraged by the success of their Ensoniq emulation and have a crack at it.
You know, we have to be careful and thoughtful here.

Much as I think the effort to replicate non-electronic instruments with electronic instruments is good only for the purpose of research into sound…. I think the effort to perfect replication if analogue synthesis in digital is the same.

In both cases, we’re really pretty damned close to “rendering obsolete” real violins, and real violinists, and real analogue synths, along with those who know/prefer/like them.

What are we after here, really, if you think about it? The whole reason for Garritan/Kontakt and now NI’s latest acoustic instrument emulations, complete with bottled expressively, is cheapness. Why hire a real musician and use real instruments? They’re so expensive! Commerce would prefer to have cheap, pre-packaged solutions, because ultimately, they’re supposedly more profitable. This, under the guise of making “access to music” more mass market, so that all it requires is purchase of a cheap toy and no musical skills, training, mastery or understanding to “make music.”

But is it really music? Or just packaged sound with labels to denotate “sad” from “happy” from “expressive” to “angry,” the Four Commercial Emotions everyone can be brainwashed into recognizing as such?

Machinery is great for taking over repetitive tasks that no animal or human or anything with real consciousness should be required to spend their entire lives doing.

But creativity? Daily living? Human interactions? I feel machinery only gets in the way there. Geeks who only know machinery want to replace smart, creative, truly intelligent people instead of working on AI and machinery to automate drudgery because, I think, they’re envious. There’s no point, otherwise. Why even want automation in the musical sphere? It’s purely driven by the desire for profit, with no other values associated.

So in my opinion, emulation is great as a science experiment for the purpose of learning about sound, but stops there. We should preserve, and respect, the real things for what they are. Not try to replace them. Automation and emulation should serve creativity, not seek to replace it.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #75
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️







I'm totally enraptured by the demos I'm hearing from the new hardware wavetable synths.
Specifically, I am primarily interested in rich, complex pads.

If you listen to the above demos *in headphones especially* there is an incredible depth/complexity/richness to the sounds.

I'm absolutely gassing for both a Modwave and a Waldorf M. I cannot easily afford either... But if I have to then I'll sell some bass guitars, synths and kidneys to fund the purchase.

The question is do I have to?

Relevant gear that I have at my disposal:
* Serum
* Largo
* Ableton Suite (with Wavetable and Max4Live)
* NI Massive
* NI Absynth
* NI Reaktor
* [Eurorack] 5x 183-3 amps + 4x A-106-5 SEM multimode filters (12dB) + 1x A-105-4 quad-poly SSI filter (24dB LPF)
* Elektron Digitone (FM)
* Yamaha SY77 (FM)

I want to believe I can get close to the auditory goal with the gear I have.

My suspicion is that software, when pushed to its capacity, might be able to get into the range of the Modwave. Perhaps the Waldorf M is a step beyond what can be done in a DAW.

What I am hoping for from you lovely people is the following:

1) Any tips for using software and making it sound richer.

2) Any demonstration (ie videos, audio clips, links to preset packs' websites) that any software can get anywhere close to the same ball-park as the timbres in the videos at the start of this post. This would convince me that the goal is attainable.
I've been tooling around with my own software + trawling videos on Youtube + searching Google for preset packs... I can't find any examples at all which sound as rich as the aforementioned hardware in the videos I linked.
The closest I've found so far is the intro to this:

I guess it's several layers, multi-tracked... But that still doesn't sound as rich as what the Modwave can do without breaking a sweat.
I had a chance to properly listen to all the demos, and here’s my take. Serum should be able to get you similar sound and character to the Modwave. The Modwave sounds great, but nothing I heard sounded like it couldn’t have come out of Serum.. Of course, the hard thing is matching wavetables. Unless you can get your hands on the exact wavetables that the Modwave is using, you’ll never get exactly the same sound. There’s also Vital, which. Has taken Serum’s place in my studio. It’s a bit more full featured, though Serum has a better wavetable editor.

The M… that I can’t say that I’ve “nailed” in terms of the same sort of character. I wish I could borrow one for a weekend and see how the presets are constructed to see how close I could get with software. Probably the closest things I have would be Waldorf’s PPG. My hunch is, I’ll be getting an M as soon as I can scare up the money for it. That’s just the kind of vibe I love.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #76
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
I had a chance to properly listen to all the demos, and here’s my take. Serum should be able to get you similar sound and character to the Modwave. The Modwave sounds great, but nothing I heard sounded like it couldn’t have come out of Serum.. Of course, the hard thing is matching wavetables. Unless you can get your hands on the exact wavetables that the Modwave is using, you’ll never get exactly the same sound. There’s also Vital, which. Has taken Serum’s place in my studio. It’s a bit more full featured, though Serum has a better wavetable editor.
Great you've now had chance for a proper listen!

Yeah, I'm not trying to recreate any specific patch from Modwave - I'm just trying to attain the same standard of timbral depth and quality.

I'm really not hearing that quality from anything I've heard from Serum - either in using it myself, or the many videos / commercial preset libraries I've checked out. If you can point me to a video which demonstrates otherwise, I'd be very grateful.

I'm using Vital right now and it sounds great. I can see it has potential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
The M… that I can’t say that I’ve “nailed” in terms of the same sort of character. I wish I could borrow one for a weekend and see how the presets are constructed to see how close I could get with software. Probably the closest things I have would be Waldorf’s PPG. My hunch is, I’ll be getting an M as soon as I can scare up the money for it. That’s just the kind of vibe I love.
The M truly is something special!
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #77
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by draig ➡️
Uhh... the second sentence contradicts the first.
Not really. I can say that my Dominion 1 has every feature that the Moog Model D has, and a lot more, while also never really being able to sound like a Model D.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #78
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
We’re back to the features vs. timbral qualities debate. I think/hope we can all agree that beyond a certain point, features cannot replace the uniqueness of a particular instrument’s timbre. This is as true of digital as it is of analogue, though people around here tend to be dismissive of “digital character” since it’s all just ones and zeroes, right?

But here’s precisely where engineering creativity — as powerful and as valuable as any other kind, an art as well as a science — comes into play. Any time spent even playing with synth design, through Reaktor Core, say, makes this amply clear.

To dismiss artistry in the design of digital synthesis, be it pure software or software on top of hardware, is to deny its value, which is the main thing that irritates me, so that when anyone claims “I can make that sound easily in this other synth,” in broad strikes, sure, but in particular, no.

Even the old JP-8000 Supersaw is unique, from its fellow in the JP-8080, as well as from every subsequent effort to recreate it, whether by others or even Roland itself. A close listening will confirm this. And skepticism will deny it, along with denying the impossibility of recreating, say, the sound of the M from any other wavetable-based instrument.

I prefer science over belief, but in art, there are distinctions artists can observe which science has yet to capture and understand.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #79
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance ➡️
You know, we have to be careful and thoughtful here.
Or we could light it all on fire and go by the seat of our pants.

Quote:
Much as I think the effort to replicate non-electronic instruments with electronic instruments is good only for the purpose of research into sound…. I think the effort to perfect replication if analogue synthesis in digital is the same.
Strong disagree. Synthesis emulating synthesis is still keeping everything in an electronic realm. An acoustic instrument is a totally different can of worms… which we’re not really talking about.

Quote:
In both cases, we’re really pretty damned close to “rendering obsolete” real violins, and real violinists, and real analogue synths, along with those who know/prefer/like them.
Also strongly disagree. As long as there are people who “ know/prefer/like them” there will be people who play them. There aren’t jack-booted thugs roaming the streets destroying tubas.

Quote:
What are we after here, really, if you think about it? The whole reason for Garritan/Kontakt and now NI’s latest acoustic instrument emulations, complete with bottled expressively, is cheapness. Why hire a real musician and use real instruments? They’re so expensive! Commerce would prefer to have cheap, pre-packaged solutions, because ultimately, they’re supposedly more profitable. This, under the guise of making “access to music” more mass market, so that all it requires is purchase of a cheap toy and no musical skills, training, mastery or understanding to “make music.”
What are you even talking about? How many of us wake up in the morning and think, “ah, in this part of my music I’d like to hear a tympani drum. Let me pop over to the local orchestral instrument shop, buy one and learn to play it.” It seems like what you are saying is that if you care for the sound of that kind of instrument than you should just wait until you can hire an orchestra to play your score. Good luck with that.

Quote:
But is it really music?
Yes.

Quote:
Or just packaged sound with labels to denotate “sad” from “happy” from “expressive” to “angry,” the Four Commercial Emotions everyone can be brainwashed into recognizing as such?
Quote:
Machinery is great for taking over repetitive tasks that no animal or human or anything with real consciousness should be required to spend their entire lives doing.
Yes. Full agreement.

Quote:
But creativity? Daily living? Human interactions? I feel machinery only gets in the way there. Geeks who only know machinery want to replace smart, creative, truly intelligent people instead of working on AI and machinery to automate drudgery because, I think, they’re envious. There’s no point, otherwise. Why even want automation in the musical sphere? It’s purely driven by the desire for profit, with no other values associated.
I feel like you’re having an argument in your head with someone that seems like a jerk. I’d tell him or her to get the hell out of there.

Quote:
So in my opinion, emulation is great as a science experiment for the purpose of learning about sound, but stops there. We should preserve, and respect, the real things for what they are. Not try to replace them. Automation and emulation should serve creativity, not seek to replace it.
Such a narrow minded opinion of things, IMO. Since we’re throwing analogies out there, let’s talk about what’s happening to meat. Sure, I love meat, but the way most of it is produced is horrible for the world. So we’re working on creating something that approximates it but without the environmental disaster part. So you make something like a Beyond Burger… that once on a bun with all the burger accoutrements, can pass pretty well, and if not perfect, be equally enjoyable. Soon we may have good vat grown cellular meat that is meat for all intents and purposes. But is it? Similarly, I love the sound of a cello, but I can’t play the cello, so my options are to buy and learn how (expensive and time consuming) or use something like my SWAM Cello physical modeling. Now, if cello was something I wanted in every song I play, or even every other song, I’d buy the cello and start learning, but for something I want to access once a month or maybe less, the SWAM software does a really great job. I enjoy it (especially because I’m using a Rise 49 to control it) and it makes me happy. The alternative isn’t really leaning how to play cello or hire a cellist. The alternative is nothing. F nothing. I didn’t live my life waiting for this future to not dig it.

Now with synth on synth crime… that’s even a more murky brew. The oscillators of the Microwave/M are small digital computers, whether you think of them that way or not. In the end, there’s nothing really unknowable about them and certainly they could be reproduced. So why not? What’s it to you whether or not some DSP chip is doing the calculations or an Intel or AMD chip? Of course there’s the analog components, those will need to be emulated and that’s not nothing, but it’s been pretty well established that we have some very good analog filter emulations floating about. I’ve put some up against my hardware and I was surprised at how hard it was to tell them apart in many situations, and even when I could, I wasn’t always sure the hardware was better. There are times I use Legend and Repro when I have a Moog clone and Prophet 6 sitting on the desk. Their tighter and more focused sound is something that I like in certain circumstances. Anyway, I no longer have one, but many people who still do are calling Arturia’s SQ-80 V a triumph of emulation. If they could do it with a SQ-80, why I not a Microwave 1?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #80
Lives for gear
 
draig's Avatar
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Not really. I can say that my Dominion 1 has every feature that the Moog Model D has, and a lot more, while also never really being able to sound like a Model D.
Aha... by capability, you mean feature. In that case yes, the Waldorf M does not have any features that aren't available in software.

You will still not see an audio demo of a wavetable softsynth, done without any FX, that sounds like the M
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #81
Lives for gear
 
realtrance's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing ➡️
Or we could light it all on fire and go by the seat of our pants.



Strong disagree. Synthesis emulating synthesis is still keeping everything in an electronic realm. An acoustic instrument is a totally different can of worms… which we’re not really talking about.



Also strongly disagree. As long as there are people who “ know/prefer/like them” there will be people who play them. There aren’t jack-booted thugs roaming the streets destroying tubas.



What are you even talking about? How many of us wake up in the morning and think, “ah, in this part of my music I’d like to hear a tympani drum. Let me pop over to the local orchestral instrument shop, buy one and learn to play it.” It seems like what you are saying is that if you care for the sound of that kind of instrument than you should just wait until you can hire an orchestra to play your score. Good luck with that.



Yes.





Yes. Full agreement.



I feel like you’re having an argument in your head with someone that seems like a jerk. I’d tell him or her to get the hell out of there.



Such a narrow minded opinion of things, IMO. Since we’re throwing analogies out there, let’s talk about what’s happening to meat. Sure, I love meat, but the way most of it is produced is horrible for the world. So we’re working on creating something that approximates it but without the environmental disaster part. So you make something like a Beyond Burger… that once on a bun with all the burger accoutrements, can pass pretty well, and if not perfect, be equally enjoyable. Soon we may have good vat grown cellular meat that is meat for all intents and purposes. But is it? Similarly, I love the sound of a cello, but I can’t play the cello, so my options are to buy and learn how (expensive and time consuming) or use something like my SWAM Cello physical modeling. Now, if cello was something I wanted in every song I play, or even every other song, I’d buy the cello and start learning, but for something I want to access once a month or maybe less, the SWAM software does a really great job. I enjoy it (especially because I’m using a Rise 49 to control it) and it makes me happy. The alternative isn’t really leaning how to play cello or hire a cellist. The alternative is nothing. F nothing. I didn’t live my life waiting for this future to not dig it.

Now with synth on synth crime… that’s even a more murky brew. The oscillators of the Microwave/M are small digital computers, whether you think of them that way or not. In the end, there’s nothing really unknowable about them and certainly they could be reproduced. So why not? What’s it to you whether or not some DSP chip is doing the calculations or an Intel or AMD chip? Of course there’s the analog components, those will need to be emulated and that’s not nothing, but it’s been pretty well established that we have some very good analog filter emulations floating about. I’ve put some up against my hardware and I was surprised at how hard it was to tell them apart in many situations, and even when I could, I wasn’t always sure the hardware was better. There are times I use Legend and Repro when I have a Moog clone and Prophet 6 sitting on the desk. Their tighter and more focused sound is something that I like in certain circumstances. Anyway, I no longer have one, but many people who still do are calling Arturia’s SQ-80 V a triumph of emulation. If they could do it with a SQ-80, why I not a Microwave 1?
Some day I will have to learn how to inline quote/unquote here.... sorry.

1. Yes, electronic synthesis emulation is all in the electronic realm, as you say, but even the best designers of software and digital synths (we all quote Zavalishin's work here, the guy who did Reaktor Core) will admit that there's a certain, increasingly vanishing point where digital processing cannot (yet) completely capture the full nature of voltage-generated and voltage-controlled signals. Granted, voltage control components have reached a level of tolerance where their similarity to digital synthesis is nearly indistinguishable, but there's still a difference. Similarly, digital synthesis mathematics have reached a point where the available processing power can be put to use to provide ever-improving refinements of the "edge cases" of emulating voltage control (cf. ACB vs. ABM in Roland-Land....), but the emulation is nowhere near 100%. Yet.

2. I am amused enough by your vision of Texas Tuba Vigilantes roaming the streets to destroy tubas to leave this point alone. Although if it's okay for abortion clinics..... why NOT tubas? Hmmmmm????? They're next! I hate tubas.

3. He left long ago, but still haunts me in my nightmares, bringing me back to primal scenes of game development under dire, distressing, inhumane conditions wherein I am being jack-booted to the face for daring to suggest something sensible instead of misery as a solution to a problem. No worries, I've got it under control.

4. I hate the saying that "analogies are always imprecise so useless in argument," -- which I'm sure Ludwig Wittgenstein, author of the Logico Tractatus (or whatever that is called) might agree with.... did you know Ravel's Piano Concerto for the Left Hand was composed for his brother, who lost an arm in WWI.... where was I? Oh yes! Cellos, synths, meat vs. tubas, or something like that. Now I remember.

Sure, one can reproduce sounds in a variety of ways, drag your bum across the strings of a grand piano if that will produce a result (as Jackson Pollock did with painting), but it's not really giving full force to the history of the instrument, the mastery of the techniques and repertoire created around it, to do so.

If you want a sound, sample or produce it any way you like, just don't consider it the performance of a master Tubaist (Tubist? Is that like Cubism with tubes?) or whatever. I made it a small project of mine to create a Cello-like sound on my Nord Modular when I first got it back in '97-'98 (its serial no. suggests it was the last one made before the factory closed for Xmas '97 in Sweden), and impressed with it as I was after reaching a certain point (it's in the Nord Modular library if you want to hunt for it among the 40,000+ patches made for that synth).... I was still no Pablo Casals playing J.S. Bach on cello, for sure. But for a sonic phrase in a pop song, sure, why not?! There's a difference, though, and we shouldn't be either/or about it. Save the cows and all that; find a way to prevent their methane from killing the planet, though. Anyways, Dave Peck came up with a better, more sophisticated and expressive one not long after my submission. So oh well, there.

5. While the M's oscillators are swept wavetables (if that's a computer I have a 1987 HP calculator I'd love to sell to you for $6k!), the particular way they're swept -- the number of samples, the bit depth, the size of the table, the speed/rate at which the table is swept, all that and more, are built specially into the M in ways that are particular to that instrument. No doubt there are even little voltage amps, whether digital or analogue, which are part of the oscillator circuit, and those, along with capacitors, all contribute to the nature of the oscillator's sound in itself. Then you take whatever is generated by that source out into the rest of the synth and, well, it's a wooded path in the rain in the dark in the Schwarzwald in winter to say what happens from there on out. Colorations of all sorts abound in the creation of a circuit, any circuit, as we all learn here, and elsewhere. And we haven't even gotten to the new Curtis filters into which all this circuit goodness is next poured, after the mixer, which is its own thing! Too much to even begin to type here, yes?

6. I also love the SQ-80V for what it is, and like almost all the Arturia emulations, including the Jupiter 8 one you complained about online for over a decade? and which finally got slightly improved, once Arturia had come up to speed on digital filter design a little more when they got to their later Moog emulation, it's well close enough to "the real thing" for me to enjoy it while making music with it. Which is true of everything which makes sound.

As Richard Devine snarkily replied to a question of mine at a music fest once upon a time, "I can make music with anything! Even garbage cans!" [to which I refrained from replying, "so THAT's where you get your musical inspiration, such as it is!]. Which ultimately is true. So your SWAMI CELLO is as good an instrument as anything else. It's just not a cello, and you're not Pablo Casals, nor am I, I'll just end with that.

EDIT: Tractatus Logico Philosophicus, for those keeping score.

Last edited by realtrance; 4 weeks ago at 01:55 AM..
Old 4 weeks ago
  #82
Gear Addict
 
Ed A.'s Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Think of all the edibles you can buy with the money you'll save.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #83
Lives for gear
 
:Metaphor:'s Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
>>>>

3.43:

>>>>


Apparently you and I have very similar taste in pads. I too fell in love with Hive 2 after stumbling on that M9 Clouds patch. After having gone down the rabbit hole of looking at wavetable synths that can do lush pads properly to my taste without sounding too aggressive, fizzy, or without lacking in modulation, heres what I've found to come closest:

Hive 2
Dune 3
Icarus 2
and most recently, Falcon 2. Check out this video, it hints at some of the lushness Falcon is capable of. The video is linked to start at where the patches get good. Some of them have too much going on for my taste, but I think you'll get the vibe from it




Lastly, I'd recommend giving a good listen to the Roland Cloud JV-1080. Sure, some of the sounds are dated, it's not wavetable per se and doesn't have the modulation that some of the modern WT softies do, but it's still one of the absolute kings of great lush, beautiful, complex pads. I find it completely addictive. Well worth investigating.

Best of luck with it.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #84
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance ➡️
…Texas Tuba Vigilantes roaming the streets to destroy tubas…
I’m just going to quote that because we all know it’s a world we’re soon going to be living in.

I guess I look at it like this. We’re apes that have become super good at making tools. These tools range from a stick to hold meat over a fire, to a bit of MRNA that tricks our bodies to thinking we can kill a virus and therefore we do. Somewhere in the middle we have Supersaws and emulations of supersaws. If your egg hatched in front of a JP-8000, then that’s The Supersaw by which you will judge all others, but it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the platonic ideal of a supersaw. An Access fan may argue the Hypersaw is better. It’s really subjective. To me, the Diva Supersaw sounds identical to the JP’s. Why? Because I don’t care. My egg hatched next to a different synth.

Anyway, I’m already sold by the M, but I do believe that it is within the realm of possibility that it could be emulated well. Well enough for me? Maybe, but that doesn’t mean I’d still not want it. Again, I think Repro is really great but I also keep a Prophet 6 handy. The Modwave? Not hearing it. I mean, it sounds great, but nothing about it grabs me and says, “you can’t get that and you neeeeeeeds it… precious….”
Old 4 weeks ago
  #85
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #86
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by :Metaphor: ➡️
Apparently you and I have very similar taste in pads.


THANKS for bringing the thread back to some coherence.

I'm going to check out these synths. I've not looked at Icarus nor Falcon at all yet. Cheers!
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #87
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Next question, and this might be the important one...

What synthesis techniques can be used to make the pads sound 3D (so that (particularly in headphones) they feel like they envelop you, rather than just sit in front of you.)?

If you check the videos in the OP, the M pretty much always sounds like that. The Modwave often has this.

Depth.

For me, this is the really crucial thing. The ultimate goal.

I've heard flashes of this from Hive. Very few other softies.

Can anyone else hear this, or have I just been smoking too much?

Modwave is 100% digital, and I do occasionally hear it from Hive. So it's something that software is surely capable of.

The question is how?

What specifically adds this magic?

Last night I was tooling around with the Sennheiser binaural plug [which employs micro delays and reverb-like-reflections to psychoacoustically trick the brain into perceiving that the sound is coming from a specific point] and double tracked a pad (one instance with the binaural plug).
It sort of worked, a bit [NB I think those plugs work much, much better for tighter, more percussive sounds than for pads], but it wasn't anything like as profound as the effect on the Modwave and the M and I fear it serves to muddy the sound a bit, which is not ideal if you are making silky transparent pads.
Also, I'm certain this sort of binaural processing is not what's happening in the Modwave etc, so it must be something else.

I was PMing about this last night with a different GSer (Hi ) who suggested 'chorus'. It could absolutely be a part of it. It think it is indeed something to do with the stereo data.

Any ideas/suggestions/wild conspiracy theories?
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #88
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
For example:



First sound here.
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #89
Lives for gear
 
sakamoto's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simonator ➡️
Next question, and this might be the important one...

What synthesis techniques can be used to make the pads sound 3D (so that (particularly in headphones) they feel like they envelop you, rather than just sit in front of you.)?

If you check the videos in the OP, the M pretty much always sounds like that. The Modwave often has this.

Depth.

For me, this is the really crucial thing. The ultimate goal.

I've heard flashes of this from Hive. Very few other softies.

Can anyone else hear this, or have I just been smoking too much?

Modwave is 100% digital, and I do occasionally hear it from Hive. So it's something that software is surely capable of.

The question is how?

What specifically adds this magic?

Last night I was tooling around with the Sennheiser binaural plug [which employs micro delays and reverb-like-reflections to psychoacoustically trick the brain into perceiving that the sound is coming from a specific point] and double tracked a pad (one instance with the binaural plug).
It sort of worked, a bit [NB I think those plugs work much, much better for tighter, more percussive sounds than for pads], but it wasn't anything like as profound as the effect on the Modwave and the M and I fear it serves to muddy the sound a bit, which is not ideal if you are making silky transparent pads.
Also, I'm certain this sort of binaural processing is not what's happening in the Modwave etc, so it must be something else.

I was PMing about this last night with a different GSer (Hi ) who suggested 'chorus'. It could absolutely be a part of it. It think it is indeed something to do with the stereo data.

Any ideas/suggestions/wild conspiracy theories?

I don't think it is 100% synthesis techniques make the pads sound 3D especially in Mix. Yes you can get this effect by multi layering sound. Where one of the layers is static or stay in one place in stereo and the rest of the layers are used panning or slow lfo with panning. You can also try to use a different type of reverbs and chorus on these layers. This will give you an impression with the pad is not sitting in front of you but around you.
In mixing you have more options. M/S technique. Using eq on Side or use one of the many plugins such as Leapwing StageOne with great depth function and Mathewlane DrMS plugin.

The example from the video that you posted shows that the first pad (first layer) is in center.Second filtering sound it is on the far right. But still remains in left also. For this effect you can use Bozdigitallabs Pan Knob.

Finally, I think you can get this effect by using these techniques. it takes a bit of fun, but I guess that's what it is all about.


Last edited by sakamoto; 4 weeks ago at 03:14 PM.. Reason: video fix
Old 4 weeks ago | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Thanks a lot for your input! Good post. Useful.

Your video link didn't work. Are you able to fix, or otherwise post the complete URL?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sakamoto ➡️
I don't think it is 100% synthesis techniques make the pads sound 3D especially in Mix.
But I'm hearing that 3D thing on practically all Modwave and M videos. Also a lot of the Hive demos.

While I think your pointers are 100% valid and I'll definitely look to use them, it's hard to imagine that everyone posting Modwave videos all happen to be post processing with M/S techniques etc.
It's this that leads me to think there might be some factors in the synthesis which we might be able to identify and learn the skill.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 220 views: 93206
Avatar for Neptune45
Neptune45 13th February 2021
replies: 14045 views: 1137296
Avatar for Adam Ford
Adam Ford 6 days ago
replies: 1419 views: 127225
Avatar for MPrinsen
MPrinsen 10 hours ago
replies: 123 views: 5646
Avatar for meh
meh 22nd October 2021
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump