|
Exploring the fundamentals of synthesis (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Render |
| quote: | Originally posted by PaULiN0
Not to kill this thread from me laughing but this is what i'm pointing out that had a little humor.
This question was little sketchy and mad have agiggle if thats a crime here man wtf. |
lol, understandable. I guess I was wanting to distinguish between whether or not he was an artist who mainly used sample based VSTs or presets as opposed to modulating the controls of a synth for his artistic intentions. |
|
|
| Render |
| quote: | Originally posted by djnitride
Render,
Everyone approaches the creative process differently at technical skill levels.
That said, here is what works for me while I am still largely in the learning phase of how synthesis works and can't yet translate my ideas fully into sounds from scratch.
Just making sounds with a synthesizer and playing around with them gives me ideas for songs that I didn't even know I wanted to make. Since you already start with a sound that you created, you can get that personal connection through your DAW / synths easier and into a song because you have your first starting point into the track. If it doesn't work or you can't do the track justice, just go back to learning your synths and making new sounds and repeat the process. |
Makes sense, and I've definitely had some fun and made progress with this approach. I find that there are two mainly dominant ways in which I approach making a track. One is to discover inspiration through an instrument or sound, like what you were describing, and the other is from a premeditated musical experience, where I've in essence heard the governing concepts of the piece on an in-depth level mentally, and have then made an attempt to share it using the DAW. I really feel that the deeper levels of my expressive potential exists in that second method I described, but it really requires that I have much more dynamic relationship with my tool set than I currently have. I know I'd learn a lot more through further experimentation, but it's really informative to hear all of your thoughts on the matter. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
I started using synths before most of you were born, and I cut my teeth the manly way, with an analog mono synth. :cool: Seriously, though, it was a long, slow process to get from making simple lead sounds and stupid farting, siren, etc. effects to really understanding how to make a sound from scratch, or try to recreate a sound in a song that I like. A large part of that is simply experience.
I think it's a good idea to start with a few basic synths and familiarize yourself with the different types of synthesis (e.g., subtractive, FM, additive, granular) and the general characteristics associated with each one. Most of the sounds you'll make (and most of the synths you probably already own) are subtractive synths, but many of those will have some rudimentary implementation of FM. After that, think about the character of the sound - does it sound like a saw, triangle, square, FM, noise, etc.? This comes down to experience and knowing what each of these sounds like (and don't sound like). Are there complex harmonics/overtones? If so, you could be hearing wavetables, additive, or FM sounds.
Next focus on the envelopes. This area is rather simple - listen to the sound and visualize the shape of the envelope in your head e.g., short plucks with 0 attack, short sustain and release, vs. slow pad with long attack and long release. Also listen to what the filter is doing - is it opening and closing with an envelope as well and, if so, is is fast, slow, etc.? Is it a low-pass, hi-pass, band-pass, etc. How much resonance? Is the resonance also being modulated? Also, is the pitch of the sound being modulated by an envelope? Listen for things that are modulating in a repeating fashion (i.e., LFOs).
These are some of the fundamental things that I listen for and think about for the coarse part of sound design. Of course, it gets much more complex than that very quickly, but I would suggest getting these basics down first. Start with a rather simple subtractive synth to keep things easy.
One book that I would definitely recommend, if you haven't already read it, is the old Simon Cann classic How to Make a Noise. |
|
|
| Render |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
I started using synths before most of you were born, and I cut my teeth the manly way, with an analog mono synth. :cool: Seriously, though, it was a long, slow process to get from making simple lead sounds and stupid farting, siren, etc. effects to really understanding how to make a sound from scratch, or try to recreate a sound in a song that I like. A large part of that is simply experience.
I think it's a good idea to start with a few basic synths and familiarize yourself with the different types of synthesis (e.g., subtractive, FM, additive, granular) and the general characteristics associated with each one. Most of the sounds you'll make (and most of the synths you probably already own) are subtractive synths, but many of those will have some rudimentary implementation of FM. After that, think about the character of the sound - does it sound like a saw, triangle, square, FM, noise, etc.? This comes down to experience and knowing what each of these sounds like (and don't sound like). Are there complex harmonics/overtones? If so, you could be hearing wavetables, additive, or FM sounds.
Next focus on the envelopes. This area is rather simple - listen to the sound and visualize the shape of the envelope in your head e.g., short plucks with 0 attack, short sustain and release, vs. slow pad with long attack and long release. Also listen to what the filter is doing - is it opening and closing with an envelope as well and, if so, is is fast, slow, etc.? Is it a low-pass, hi-pass, band-pass, etc. How much resonance? Is the resonance also being modulated? Also, is the pitch of the sound being modulated by an envelope? Listen for things that are modulating in a repeating fashion (i.e., LFOs).
These are some of the fundamental things that I listen for and think about for the coarse part of sound design. Of course, it gets much more complex than that very quickly, but I would suggest getting these basics down first. Start with a rather simple subtractive synth to keep things easy.
One book that I would definitely recommend, if you haven't already read it, is the old Simon Cann classic How to Make a Noise. |
Thanks a lot. It really helps to hear those words coming from someone of your level of experience. Really reaffirms the idea that in order to achieve complexity by choice, the basics are where to begin. I know that it sounds very obvious, but a very popular culture today seems to be focusing on the idea of knowing how to recreate a sound they've heard in a song by memorizing the arrangement of knobs rather than understanding how the sound is really functioning. I've always wanted to know why and how it worked, so that if I knew how to make one sound with that understanding I'd also have the opportunity to make a whole array of other sounds using the same understanding, rather than being limited to the one that I memorized. I'll definitely look into the book you suggested. Have you uploaded any of your work? I'd be happy to take a listen. |
|
|
| evo8 |
what ive done:
read up on synthesis examples online
asked "how was this sound made" questions
watched various tutorials on synthesis online
read a couple of books on synthesis
its a long road and id probably still describe myself as being at a fairly novice level still |
|
|
| cryophonik |
You mentioned the "mathematics" once or twice, and, I could be wrong, but I get the sense from your writing that you have a left-brain tendency. You might actually find FM synthesis right up your alley. It's very powerful and I think it's well suited for left-brain thinkers because there is a large mathematics component to it. A person doesn't need to know all the math behind it for it to be useful, but I think that it would be more intuitive to a person who excels at math.
| quote: | Originally posted by Render
Have you uploaded any of your work? I'd be happy to take a listen. |
I'm not a commercial sound designer. The only downloadable sounds I have are in a bank created by several of us TAs for the Access Virus a few years ago. If you have a Virus TI/TI2, you can download it from the Access website. I created the first 64 sounds in the bank. Unfortunately, we never created an audio demo for it. |
|
|
| farris |
Cryophonik pretty much summed it up for you in his post.
I have a couple of things to add too.
Choose just ONE synth and stick with it for a long time.
Get to learn your synth inside and out.
That amazing feature on a newly released softsynth sounds cool, but you probably won’t need it (yet).
As cryophonik said, start with a basic synth.
Something like FabFilter One is a great little softsynth to learn the basics of synthesis with (which I did back in 2005).
Sometimes you just need to get back to the basics and relearn everything again.
Sound on Sound’s 'Synth Secrets' is still worth mentioning too:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/allsynthsecrets.htm
I haven’t read or used the following, but you might find them interesting:
- Rob Papen’s book 'The 4 Element Synth', which comes with a couple of DVD's.
- Syntorial
Good luck!
P.S. Read the manual. I'm not saying this in a patronizing way,
but you won't believe how much you can actually learn by taking a couple of hours
to read it. |
|
|
| future_newbie |
| quote: | Originally posted by PaULiN0
Not to kill this thread from me laughing but this is what i'm pointing out that had a little humor.
This question was little sketchy and mad have agiggle if thats a crime here man wtf. |
That's the point. At least specify.
And no, I am not a mod, but you're still annoying and is my right to say it. |
|
|
| PaULiN0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Render
lol, understandable. I guess I was wanting to distinguish between whether or not he was an artist who mainly used sample based VSTs or presets as opposed to modulating the controls of a synth for his artistic intentions. |
Its all good man.
I'm gonna start exploring additive synthesis soon once my kawai gets here. |
|
|
| djnitride |
| quote: | Originally posted by Render
Makes sense, and I've definitely had some fun and made progress with this approach. I find that there are two mainly dominant ways in which I approach making a track. One is to discover inspiration through an instrument or sound, like what you were describing, and the other is from a premeditated musical experience, where I've in essence heard the governing concepts of the piece on an in-depth level mentally, and have then made an attempt to share it using the DAW. I really feel that the deeper levels of my expressive potential exists in that second method I described, but it really requires that I have much more dynamic relationship with my tool set than I currently have. I know I'd learn a lot more through further experimentation, but it's really informative to hear all of your thoughts on the matter. |
Yeah, I plan on attempting the second method when I have enough experience for it to be effective. I have tried it and I just wasn't there yet. Until then, the first method is how I learn.
Also just a random tip, I find tutorials on youtube for synthesis most useful when they are showing how to make a certain classification of sound (ie an evolving pad, stabbing lead, etc) from scratch. They usually explain what each step is for and show their own process which can be very insightful. I think those are generally much better then the ones where they are reproducing some popular sound but not really explaining the reason behind each step. |
|
|
| Teezdalien |
Some good advice from some here. It's a time consuming process to really develop solid synthesis skill, requiring a lot of experimentation, patience and persistence, but it does sound like you're on the right track.
I second Simon Cann's book and the SOS articles, fantastic resources. I'd also add Welshe's Synthesizer Cookbooks as they really shows another approach to subtractive synthesis through harmonic analysis or the overtone series. This method is great for analysing any sound you like, and getting in the ballpark of recreating that sound using some simple subtractive principles.
Another important aspect of sound design I feel is often overlooked is that of recording/sampling, combining and manipulating recorded audio material, a lot of the time it's more straightforward in achieving certain kinds of complex sounds than trying to synthesize everything. |
|
|
| djnitride |
| quote: | Originally posted by Teezdalien
Another important aspect of sound design I feel is often overlooked is that of recording/sampling, combining and manipulating recorded audio material, a lot of the time it's more straightforward in achieving certain kinds of complex sounds than trying to synthesize everything. |
Taking a trip down the "Absynth hole": the endless cycle of making samples to use as input to make samples and use as input :crazy: |
|
|
|
|
