Modular software synthesisers

bladerunner · Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 14 Location: england

hi everyone,

i am currently working on a dissertation for my music technology degree exploring modular software synthesisers/synthesis. My main area of research concerns the differences between modular synths and fixed path synthesisers. I will be looking at the sonic advantages of a modular approach to synthesising sound. i would be very interested to hear the views and opinions of anyone who uses environments such as MAX/MSP, pure data, bidule, analog box etc.

looking forward to your replies Smile

bladerunner · Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 14 Location: england

i see that no one has replied Sad

to be honest it was a bit of a vague subject area and far to wide to research thoroughly. i have slightly changed the area that i will be researching now as what i had in mind when i first had the idea was the ways in which you can control synthesised sound linearly. i have since realised that this is more to do with automating amplitude and filter parameters so my research will head in this direction now...

EdisonRex · Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:40 am Post subject:

it was a bit vague. I still think "automated control" is vague but if you want to discuss it more, maybe someone can say something more useful.

v-un-v · Posted: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:58 pm Post subject:

That's still very vague. Shocked

Perhaps you should give us your opinion first, and then we'll share our views in return, and see if we agree or not.

As you are no doubt aware, music and sound creation are very personal subjects. Very Happy

bladerunner · Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 14 Location: england

can you sense i am struggling a little on this?! Confused

yes you are right, it is vague. basically, i am doing a 3000 word research project that is designed to prepare us for a 10000 word dissertation. although i have been writing music since i was around 12 i have only fairly recently started using synths to make completely original patches for my own music. i have been trying to come up with a good synthesis based research idea that will be both interesting for the reader and serve to bridge a gap in my own knowledge of synthesisers/synthesis. modular synthesisers are definitely something i know little about hence the original idea, but... perhaps i have bitten off more than i can chew. perhaps i should do a more general research project on simply 'modular synthesisers' (probably just trying to be clever with the whole modular vs fixed signal path thing!). the 3000 worder doesn't have to be too specific as such but the 10000 worder will have to be a lot more focused and thesis based. i was hoping that my initial research (the 3000 word one) will reveal some area that i can focus on for the 10000 word one... hope that all makes sense! ...and apologies for the vague thread Embarassed

i will spending the rest of my day reading the synthesis section of curtis roads 'the computer music tutorial'. hopefully this will trigger some more constructive thought...

telstarmagikistferrari · Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:34 am Post subject:

I wouldn't hesitate to take a look at Synfactory (do a google search) as a simple example of modular synthesis on a PC.

jksuperstar · Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:46 am Post subject:

I don't have all my resources, either with me or otherwise Wink

, but I do remember a fair amount of material regarding Moog's approach to subtractive synthesis, as a method of *reproducing* realistic sounds. At least, that was the fundamental reason for choosing the methods he did, in that it emulated what was happening with physically based wind/string/wood type instruments. It is evident in all the presents and programming techniques of the time. Same for the Karplus-Strong algorithms, in emulating a string-resonant body instrument. So maybe you can use that in your own discourse...that fixed path synthesis tends to originate in trying to emulate a specific sound.

Also, you should try "Analog Box", here:
http://www.andyware.com/abox2/index.html

oisin · Joined: Jun 16, 2009 Posts: 35 Location: germany

it could be interesting to not only look at the sonic advantages to modular synthesis, but also the technical (workflow?) advantages; the way creating a new patch from scratch is different from working with hardwired machines..

fac · Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:23 am Post subject:

I'm a modular freak... I have a small analog modular (dotcom) and a Nord G2, but have also played with PureData, Audiomulch, and VAZ Modular.

I would say that modular synths/enviroments themselves are very different from each other. Here are a few examples:

Audiomulch uses higher level modules and is mostly oriented to live performance. It has very little sequencing abilities, but compensates it with some powerful automation and parameter-morphing tricks.

PureData (and probably also Max/MSP) use low-level components and are great for working with samples, complex sequencing, algorithmic/generative music, etc. However, because Pd is so low-level and makes no assumptions about the patch one is constructing, it isn't easy to obtain high-quality sounds out of it. One must be very careful with aliasing, clicks and pops (usually produced by envelopes being too fast), quantization/stepping, etc.

Vaz Modular is great for synthesis and basic sequencing. It has a very powerful sound (much better than Pd or Audiomulch), and an interesting interface that doesn't try to emulate real patch cables. It's more like a hardware modular, but with the power and flexibility of a software enviroment.

What's great is that you can, for example, load VAZ Modular as a VST inside Audiomulch, thus combining the advantages of each. I believe you can also export Max/MSP patches as VST's, and probably load VST's in a Max/MSP patch as well. This kind of interactions results in an experimental framework that could never be achieved with hardware synths.....

On the other hand...

I also love simple hardwire synths for their immediacy. Sometimes, all you want to do is a simple bassline and tweak the cutoff. This is, of course, possible within a modular enviroment, but then you'll start wondering what if you also modulate this with that and control the modulation depth with this knob, and so on.... suddenly, something that should have been so simple becomes a monster with a dozen parameters that affect the sound in ways you hardly remember.

Grizzle · Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:10 pm Post subject:

It'll be difficult to get 3000 never mind 10000 words out of the difference between fixed and modular synths.

The obvious differences are:

A fixed synth quite often has a keyboard attached and reduces what can be done to what is most frequently done. Reducing the control complexity reduces the complexity overall. It is easier to learn, to use, to control. Also though the sounds that can be generated are often less complex. Semi-Modular a mix between fixed and modular path synthesis offers the best of both worlds.

A fixed path synth is usually a performance solution. Often the come with keyboards and just enough controls to make them useful. Have a look at the Moog Lil Phatty which appeals to many musicians who just want a good synth sound. Many traditional musicians are put out by technical synth language and really are more focused or performance rather than sound design.

A modular synth can be as complex or as simple as you like. Modular synths can fill a large room or they can be simple problem solving solutions such as when X happens do Y.

Everytime you unpatch a modular synth you essentially have a brand new synth and have to rewire it to create each new patch. A patch could be an emulation of a particular type of fixed path synthesizer, or a just a simple sound, or an entire piece of music, or even a type of sound processor. It is more difficult to think in these terms in a fixed path synth where most patchs are simple sounds.

A fixed path synthesizer has a fixed function, that being to make musical sounds. As a modular synthesizer offers low level components these components can be easily re-purposed to perform others tasks. A modular synthesizer can be thought of as a kind of computer with comparators, logic gates, filters, timing circuits, gates etc. More powerful software modular synths like Max/Msp can easily be used for education or research purposes. Max offers many of the functions of traditional programming languages eg. the ability to create, manipulate and store lists, the ability to display data graphically, the ability to take in sensory data from the outside world etc...

You would probably have more millage dealing with issues of control. it is a wide area taking in ideas of Pitch control (quantizers and scalers), randomization and probability. You can talk about motion tracking and gestural control, haptic feedback, bio-sensing, augmented reality installations.

anyways just a ramble before bed...

hope it's of some use.

elektro80

elektro80 · Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:38 pm Post subject:

As for the obvious limitations of early fixed path synths, I guess early mass market appeal focused on the Walter Carlos sound. Sure, she used a modular system, but vendors needed to stuff some sort of essence of those sounds into simple machines ( like the Roland SH 1000 class of synths ). As several companies struggled with figuring out how to do this, the musicians of the era tried to make sense of whatever it was they had bought. And when these sounds were featured on popular LPs then this was what the market really wanted.

The standard keyboard rig of the mid 70s would usually be something like

1. organ
2. electric piano
3. string synth
4. synth ( usually a Minimoog/Odyssey/Cat2 class instrument ) or something like the Soloist.

Big acts would always bring upmarket gear.

EdisonRex · Posted: Sun Nov 29, 2009 9:51 am Post subject:

Yeah, Stein has it. Back in the day, a modular cost more than a house. In 1972, an ARP 2500 could set you back 25,000 1970s dollars. A car was only about $3000 then. To have the Minimoog available for less than what a car cost was fairly major; likewise those early japanese and other contemporary performance based instruments available for a fraction of the cost of a modular, priced near enough to other keyboards, was good marketing, if anything.

Al Pearlman used to give his performance synthesizers away to famous artists... why one say a lot of Odysseys around. It did tend to get the sound out too.

bladerunner · Joined: Mar 13, 2009 Posts: 14 Location: england

first of all, apologies for abandoning my own thread! thanks to everyone who replied - it certainly helped me to realise that i didn't have much of an idea for a final paper Embarassed

. i ended up carrying out an assessment of the impact of algorithmic software environments like MAX MSP/PD on contemporary electronic music composition. by my own admission it wasn't very good and i got a 57% for the paper (and i was really suffering from the stress of it all by this point - it was quite evident in my paper!) but... nearly all of my modules were marked at 66 - 91 % and i came out at a safe above 70% average and i got a first overall so all is good! so, thanks again Smile

i intend to hang out here more often now.