Are there any "new" sounds? [long]
2000-03-23 by Paul Schreiber
<<taking a break at the 1/2-way point of MOTM-440 kitting>> I always like to delve into this area myself. Just a couple of ramblings: a) everyone should *immediately* buy Wendy Carlos' CD "Secrets of Synthesis". I think EastSide Digital has them (also check The Artist's Shop). This is a CD that is in the form of a college lecture. She explains how both the Moog and the DKI Synergy (see www.synthtech.com/synergy) are used in her work, and how a certain "feature" is used/needed to produce a desired result. b) In subtractive-based synths (ie MOTM) 85% of the "sound" is in the filters. The other 15% we'll talk about later. But for now, getting certain desired sounds will eventually center on which filter you are using, and how it is driven (CV-wise). Some filter stuff is basic: like a '440 (24dB/oct) filters out 75% of the treble the '420 passes. Then, there are the subtle stuff: like the '420 has a certain "crispness" because of the LM13600 OTA. A Moog ladder "sounds like a Moog" because of how the harmonics are filtered as the center frequency is swept (actually, it has more to do about the *phase-shift* through the filter). That is why we plan 7 different MOTM filters. Each will "sound different". Personal preference will then divide them into "I like these" versus "I don't like those". They will sound different because of filter topology, the parts used, and so on. c) If you want to hear "new sounds", the best thing I've personally heard in the last 10 years is the (now being blown out) Yamaha FS1R FM-based module. Like presets? How does 1536 sound??!? It combines the "breathyness" of the Roland D-50 with "bells" of the DX-7. Going throught the presets, you think it has to be a sampler: no synthesis engine could possibly crank out this diverse number of sounds. But it does! The downside: Yamaha ain't *telling how they did it*! The manual doesn't even *hint* at how the thing is programmed. Weird! But it does demonstrate that there are still new "ways" to make sound. Now, would I prefer it over a MOTM? No, because it may be a tour-de-force in DSP, it gets ZERO for user interaction. I guess that explains 1536 presets! There is a lure of a modular, and the lure is: the sound you need is inside, you just have to find it! What is interesting about the Carlos CD is she basically says the instability of the Moog drove her to the Synergy. Also, (as Ken), she was getting into microtunings (try to hunt down her "Beauty In The Beast" LP) and the Synergy has a RAM-based tuning table. Download any old tuning you want! The only other microtunable synths I know of are the Yamaha TX-802 and I think the DX-1 can do this as well. Of course, any analog VCO can be "scaled" for microtuning. It's just 1000 times easier with digital. d) Lastly, I think analog synths went the "wrong direction" when they tried to become fancy, expensive combo organs (CS-80, OB-8, MemoryMoog, M12, blah blah blah). Why? because of restraints (money, space) these poly-hogs didn't offer 5% of the possibilities a small modular had in terms of control/modulation/patching. The synth companies went into a spiral of trying to increase market share by positioning themselves as a super-duper Hammond B3. So, instead of "staying" in the universities with the modulars, they created $6,000 monsters that had 10-20 good sounds and 400 bad ones! I tell people modulars are like a piano. The really good piano players can get a vast array of tones out of a piano. You have to work at it. Same with modulars. You have to think about what you are doing. But it's also fun to patch and tweak "open loop". Growing up, I lusted after owning a Minimoog. About 2 years ago I got one pretty cheap ($650). Sure enough, sounded just like a Minimoog (Wakeman, Chick Corea, etc). But after 6 months, it dawned on me that a Mini "sounds like a Mini" and *that's all*! The fixed patching (the thing has basically zero options in terms of modulation) with small keyboard/octave switching means an extremely limited "sonic palette". Now, don't get me wrong. I grew up on Mini solos (my favorite is Head East's "Going Down for the Last Time") but I eventually sold it. I love that *one sound* but that's boring! (maybe if I could *play* like Chick Corea...) I classify the Mini along with the Rhodes and the Wurli 200. They make 1 sound fantastically. Eventually, any "synthesis engine" (additive, subtractive, FM, etc) will get you stuck in a sonic rut. The one advantage MOTM has is that (hopefully!) that point will occur *a very long time* from now! Paul S. sigh....off to bag up