[HN Gopher] Ask HN: Introduction to Analog Synthesizers (Simulat...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ask HN: Introduction to Analog Synthesizers (Simulation OK)
        
       I realized I've had a long fascination with analog synthesizers
       going back to the first one I saw in 1977. The band teacher had one
       in his office.  And I was tempted toward random knob twisting today
       when I saw yet another 'analog' synthesizer runnable in the
       browser.  But I'd really like to have some basic idea of how to put
       together rudimentary sounds with intent.  I was wondering about
       book like objects that explain the basics. Maybe a good used book
       to pick up. Thanks.
        
       Author : brudgers
       Score  : 131 points
       Date   : 2021-07-13 15:52 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
       | SN76477 wrote:
       | Step 1 Go through this process
       | 
       | https://learningsynths.ableton.com/
       | 
       | Step 2 Learn what is possible with an easy to follow advanced
       | tutorial
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gipTFNhniMo
       | 
       | Step 3 use the sound on sound inside synthesis as a reference
       | 
       | https://www.soundonsound.com/series/synth-secrets
       | 
       | Step 4 Do it yourself.
       | 
       | vcvrack.com can be a good start once you understand the
       | fundamentals.
        
       | 500ServerError wrote:
       | This is also a good source of enjoyable online synths :
       | https://synth.playtronica.com/
        
       | immmmmm wrote:
       | using some several times a week, used to design some and built
       | many
       | 
       | to be fully pedantic, simulation is often called virtual analog
       | :)
       | 
       | random thoughts:
       | 
       | - ableton had some synthesis lessons with interactive demos.
       | 
       | - modular is great to learn cv/patching basics
       | 
       | - moog werkstat is cheap and patchable
       | 
       | - you can certainly find old second hand doepffer modules for a
       | bargain (modular is very expensive)
       | 
       | - VCV rack will give you the same experience, on your computer,
       | for free
       | 
       | - not exactly the same experience actually, turning a knob and
       | having 1000 dancing and shooting in front of u is always a nice
       | experience, try that sweep with a mouse cursor
       | 
       | - similarly, having a failed cable, among many, in front of same
       | audience is nicely terrifying:)
       | 
       | - if you're ready to spend nights burning yourself with a
       | soldering iron, there's a lot of ressources for "synth diy".
       | 
       | - analog used to sound better due to non-linearities and
       | harmonics, nowadays good (and expensive) plugins achieve
       | impressive results but requires massive cpu
       | 
       | - it's much funnier to travel with suitcases full of very
       | expensive gear rather than just a computer. who doesn't dream of
       | TSA destroying your most valuable belongings:)
        
         | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
         | If you have a 1000 MIDI knobs, you can connect them all to VCV
         | Rack and have the same experience. It works also if you only
         | have 1.
         | 
         | And with Stoermelder's Sail module, the knob can be dynamically
         | assigned to wherever the mouse is, which sometimes feels even
         | easier to use than actual modular.
         | 
         | Remember that you can generally only operate 2 knobs at once
         | with your hands, but can get good at using 8 faders at once.
         | 
         | > analog used to sound better due to non-linearities and
         | harmonics,
         | 
         | It sounds _different_ , not better.
         | 
         | > who doesn't dream of TSA destroying your most valuable
         | belongings
         | 
         | Given what TSA did to Ballake Sissoko's hand-made kora (a west
         | African stringed instrument), I'm not sure that anything is
         | safe.
        
           | immmmmm wrote:
           | being corrected by Paul Davis himself is too much of an
           | honor!
           | 
           | much, much, much respect, Sir!
           | 
           | (sorry writing that too quickly)
           | 
           | never used Sail, but sounds good! thanks reminding me i miss
           | 8 hands and 3 brains when performing live :)
           | 
           | i have a midibox 8 motorized fader project waiting for an
           | enclosure somewhere, but never really thought of it as more
           | simultaneous controls. but indeed. will probably write a m4l
           | patch to handle long sweeps while doing other stuff too.
           | 
           | > it sounds different, not better
           | 
           | agreed, sry
           | 
           | > Given what TSA did to Ballake Sissoko's hand-made kora (a
           | west African stringed instrument), I'm not sure that anything
           | is safe.
           | 
           | i was thinking of a story by Underground Resistance, but the
           | one you mention is even worst.
        
             | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
             | > (sorry writing that too quickly)
             | 
             | well, not really :) There is still a fairly big difference
             | between having all the knobs for module A as part of the
             | faceplate of module A rather than just mapped to some
             | generic MIDI knob surface. Maybe not as much as some people
             | claim, but not zero.
        
         | cronix wrote:
         | I actually think modular is the best way to learn vs an all-in-
         | one synth unit. Instead of "Ignore 99% of what you see in front
         | of you, we are going to isolate an oscillator," you just give
         | them an oscillator. Hook it up, hear it. Now change the tone by
         | altering the cv input. Now add a filter by connecting the
         | output to the filter input.
         | 
         | I just think it's a lot easier to learn what each component
         | does independently (as much as possible...can't have a filter
         | without something to actually filter) and how they interact
         | without adding the complexity of everything at once. Kind of
         | "additive learning" which is easier than "subtractive learning"
         | :)
        
       | fab1an wrote:
       | I'm knee deep into complex modular synthesis patches these days,
       | but started like you a few years ago. I would say: ignore the
       | software stuff and treat yourself to a great analog hardware
       | synth. You will learn a lot more, have a real instrument to play
       | with, listen to its amazing sounds -- and if you don't like it,
       | you will be able to resell it with a tiny loss.
       | 
       | In order to learn things, I would recommend a semi-modular synth
       | like the Moog Grandmother. It's great for learning all the basics
       | and sounds absolutely phenomenal.
        
       | ryanwhitney wrote:
       | If you'd like a no-setup, no-tools, no-cost way to just start
       | messing around, the WebAudio API[0] isn't a bad place to start.
       | 
       | It has its shortcomings, but in many ways mimics the logic of a
       | real synth. They've got a synth[1] tutorial that works and if you
       | search "webaudio synth" a bit, there are other helpful write-ups
       | to start learning or playing with concepts you learn about from
       | other resources.
       | 
       | 0: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-
       | US/docs/Web/API/Web_Audio_A... 1:
       | https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_Audio_A...
        
       | beardyw wrote:
       | I am not sure why they use the word 'analog'. If it is in a
       | browser it definitely isn't, it is digital, though the one you
       | saw in 1970 probably was analog. In operation though the
       | difference is subtle, like a real piano vs a digital one.
       | 
       | There is a lot of science behind audio and if you are that way
       | inclined, learning about it is really worthwhile. All those
       | effects create the sound they do for a reason.
        
         | brudgers wrote:
         | Thanks for the clarification.
         | 
         | I know that there is a semantic difference in technical
         | contexts. It doesn't bother me. It's a true-enough Scotsman.
         | 
         | The distinction for me is with sampling synths (which can also,
         | though rarely be analog)...I mean I have a forty plus year
         | passing interest and the personality to gravitate to HN.
         | 
         | I am more interested in the empirical part. And digital has
         | some practical advantages like using my iPhone.
        
           | beardyw wrote:
           | Analog samplers - ah the Mellotron - Strawberry Fields, King
           | Crimson, Moody Blues - drifts into the past ....
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellotron
        
         | DennisP wrote:
         | Generally it means they're simulating analog synth components
         | in software; i.e. starting with oscillators producing stuff
         | like triangle or sawtooth waveforms, running it through high
         | pass and low pass filters and an amplitude envelope, throwing
         | in some low-frequency oscillators controlling various
         | parameters, adding some effects like reverb at the end.
         | 
         | That way you're doing the same stuff you would in a pure analog
         | synth, and getting similar sounds. In the digital realm there
         | are lots of other ways to make sounds: FM, additive, samples,
         | physical modeling, etc.
         | 
         | Pure analog synth hardware had fallen out of favor by the turn
         | of the century but since then it's made a comeback.
        
       | ChuckMcM wrote:
       | I was the same! I saw synthesizers in the mid-70's and heard some
       | Wendy Carlos tunes and Rich Wakeman and said "Now THAT is a
       | pretty cool instrument!" That lead to me taking an electronic
       | music class in college to get access to a Moog Model 15, and then
       | to buy Hal Chamberin's book Digital Music Synthesis, and
       | eventually to buy a synth from Roger Arrick who runs
       | synthesizers.com and basically hand builds modular analog synths.
       | 
       | Designing those "fat" analog sounds from the 70's requires a
       | subtractive synth which starts with a harmonic rich waveform
       | (like a sawtooth) and then applies filters to it that are
       | modulated by an ADSR envelope.
       | 
       | Dr. Chowning over at Stanford invented (or at least documented)
       | using FM modulation (mixing) of multiple sinusoids to achieve
       | interesting sounds. That was the basis for the Yamaha DX-7 and
       | you can hear it on a lot of 80's and 90's band tracks. His book
       | is somewhat dry but it goes over the theory well and with
       | something like the Yamaha TX81z sound module you can put his
       | ideas into action and hear the results.
       | 
       | Later synthesizers went full on DSP which allows you to
       | effectively emulate that other forms and also to do things that
       | they can not (like phase coherent modulation schemes).
       | 
       | All said, for me at least, playing with the model 15 in college
       | and playing with my Arrick 22-slot modular synth since, has been
       | the only way for me to internalize the connection between the
       | sound I wanted to hear in my head with how to set things up to
       | produce it.
        
       | dimatura wrote:
       | It depends on whether you're more interested in the theory of how
       | things work or how to make nice sounds (two things that are
       | correlated, but not 100% correlated).
       | 
       | It sounds more like the former; in that case Puckette's book is a
       | classic (and free) http://msp.ucsd.edu/techniques/latest/book.pdf
        
         | Cybotron5000 wrote:
         | +1 for Miller Puckette's book (and Pd) - might be a bit
         | hardcore as an intro. for some, but if you're technically
         | inclined it'd be a great overview... If the second option is
         | more important, there's no substitute for messing about
         | starting to get familiar with how different primitive
         | oscillators/filters sound in subtractive synthesis maybe first,
         | then moving on to explore other types from there... (FM for
         | example is less intuitive) ...recreating/ researching your
         | favourite sounds from records, synth internals, or just trying
         | to make whatever you've dreamt of/heard in your head/twiddling
         | 'til you find something you like and then trying to work out
         | what makes it sound cool... ('The Computer Music Tutorial' is a
         | beast of a book, if you wanted an all-in-one reference:
         | https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/computer-music-tutorial )
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | dylanz wrote:
       | I highly recommend Syntorial: https://www.syntorial.com/
        
         | sramsay wrote:
         | A thousand times yes. You can _read_ all the tutorials you
         | want, but the ear training that Syntorial offers is really
         | worth it.
         | 
         | Getting "the sound in your head" coming out of the machine
         | takes lots of practice, but this really, really gives you a
         | running start.
        
         | bwanab wrote:
         | I second the Syntorial recommendation. You can get a number of
         | lessons as a free introduction and it's a very hands on
         | approach that allows you to "get your hands dirty" as others
         | have suggested.
        
       | machinehermiter wrote:
       | I love synths so much I have basically banned myself from them.
       | 
       | I started with Generator in 1999, the precursor to Reaktor. I
       | want to say it was on a 150mhz Pentium.
       | 
       | Reaktor is so much fun but when I think of all the time I spent
       | on it, something more productive would have been better.
       | 
       | If I was going to start right now I would get a Waldorf Blofeld.
       | Just hard to beat that synth for the price, sound and features.
       | 
       | I search for the latest Blofeld videos some times on youtube to
       | get a little synth fix but that is the closest I will let myself
       | get. If I bought a Blofeld I would do nothing all day but make
       | weird sounds for the next 5 years.
        
       | brylie wrote:
       | The basics of modular synthesis with VCV Rack
       | 
       | https://omricohen-music.com/index.php/2019/09/05/new-to-modu...
        
         | tlackemann wrote:
         | This! Omri is amazing. I've been watching his videos since the
         | pandemic started and taught myself modular using VCV from
         | scratch. I even bought a few modules :)
         | 
         | VCV is an amazing tool, seriously amazing. I would have never
         | dove into modular without it as the cost to entry is just too
         | high. VCV also nice because you can play with what you want and
         | just ditch it if you don't like it. Can't say that when you buy
         | a $550 module.
         | 
         | Highly recommend VCV + Omri videos.
        
       | awillimus wrote:
       | Loopop is frequently updating his "In-Complete Book of Electronic
       | Music Ideas, Tips and Tricks", which covers the basics of analog
       | synthesizers and way beyond. https://www.patreon.com/loopop
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | abetusk wrote:
       | Not a book, but I found the Underdog Electronic Music School to
       | be pretty helpful [0] [1], though I have yet to feel comfortable
       | enough to design any sound "with intention".
       | 
       | [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfJ9Dbjz6cs
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNk-lIFq7ms&t=1301s
        
         | woudsma wrote:
         | Underdog really amazed me with their videos over the past few
         | months! Quality tips and tricks.
        
       | Grustaf wrote:
       | A pretty specific and weird, but interesting alternative is
       | PureData, a sort of visual programming language where you can
       | build your own "analog" synths and effects.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7Gv7SR0Nrk
       | 
       | It's very easy to get started, and extremely powerful. Not sure
       | how well it covers your use case, but it's fun.
       | 
       | There's a great introduction to PureData called Designing Sound
       | by Andy Farnell.
        
         | necrotic_comp wrote:
         | fwiw, I've always found the PureData/MaxMSP family of languages
         | really difficult to wrap my head around.
         | 
         | SuperCollider is another alternative, but that's a whole other
         | discussion, really.
        
       | sheinsheish wrote:
       | I don't know if someone already posted this :
       | https://www.soundonsound.com/series/synth-secrets
        
       | sumr wrote:
       | One of my favorite resources I find myself going back to time and
       | again is Synth Secrets a 63 part article series by Gordon Reid:
       | 
       | https://www.soundonsound.com/synthesizers/synth-secrets
        
       | indigochill wrote:
       | I cannot recommend Syntorial enough. It builds up your knowledge
       | of subtractive synthesis knob by knob, starting just with an
       | oscillator and working up to the whole shebang (filters,
       | envelopes, modulation, legato, mono vs polyphonic, etc). For
       | every single step, you're given a typical softsynth interface
       | (with only the settings you've unlocked so far), given a short
       | melody played with the target configuration, and you have to
       | duplicate the configuration by ear from scratch (the intent is
       | that this is the most direct way for you to learn to dial in
       | sounds you hear in your head). You'll also be shown which knobs
       | you got wrong when you make a mistake so you can intuitively see
       | which settings you need to focus on better hearing.
       | 
       | On top of all this, the license includes free add-ons for popular
       | softsynths like Massive and Serum that go into specific detail
       | about applying what you learn to those synths if you're
       | interested in that.
       | 
       | And there's a hands-on demo! https://www.syntorial.com/
       | 
       | It is pretty expensive, but the combination of brilliant hands-on
       | implementation and sheer volume (no pun intended) of learning
       | content warrants it IMO if you're invested in learning the topic.
       | 
       | Also, not directly related to this, but they have a forum as well
       | where people will share sounds they hear in popular songs and ask
       | each other for tips on programming what they're hearing, which
       | can be a neat resource as well, though I've personally not got as
       | involved in that.
        
       | samdafi wrote:
       | I have an old copy of this book, which you can find for about
       | $20, and it's excellent!
       | 
       | https://encyclotronic.com/books/theory/synthesizer-basics-th...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | jeffreyrogers wrote:
       | Syntorial is a little bit expensive, but awesome for showing you
       | how to actually use a synth. It shows you what you need to know
       | as a musician, not as an electrical engineer.
       | 
       | I think it is superior to any book.
        
         | cbzbc wrote:
         | It's regularly sold at a 50% discount, so if you aren't in a
         | hurry you can just wait for a deal to come around (though it's
         | that price at adsr currently).
        
       | smoldesu wrote:
       | Get Vital[0].
       | 
       | It has been exceptionally difficult to teach modern sound design
       | to people without forcing them to buy expensive digital (or
       | physical) synthesizers to learn on. Vital changed that. It
       | democratized nearly every feature you might come across in a
       | modern synth, and it does so better than the industry leaders
       | (Vital kicks Massive's ass, same for Serum). If you only download
       | one synth, make it Vital. If you're downloading two synths, you
       | should also grab Helm[1], the creator's _other_ freeware
       | synthesizer.
       | 
       | [0] https://vital.audio/ [1] https://tytel.org/helm/
        
       | xzel wrote:
       | Some great resources have already been posted that I'd second
       | such as the Ableton website and Syntorial. I'd add the course by
       | Sean Luke out of GMU [0] if you'd like something after and
       | possibly a little more academic. His ebook is free on his site.
       | If you're able to find a copy of The Roland Synthesizer Book [1]
       | I found it incredibly interesting reading. They have pictures of
       | patches for specific sounds. I'm not sure if anyone would be able
       | to find a print version though and I've assumed they're
       | collector's items.
       | 
       | [0]: https://cs.gmu.edu/~sean/book/synthesis/
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.amazon.com/Synthesizer-Four-Volumes-Roland-
       | Corpo...
        
       | brylie wrote:
       | Learning synthesis (from your browser):
       | 
       | https://learningsynths.ableton.com/
        
         | nrjames wrote:
         | This is an excellent resource! I recommend starting here as a
         | beginner.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | It's also a gateway drug to spending a fortune on analog
           | modules.
           | 
           | Let me save you some $:
           | 
           | https://vcvrack.com/
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | tamasnet wrote:
       | I found this series of articles from Sound On Sound to be
       | fantastic, covers a lot of ground at reasonably technical level:
       | https://www.soundonsound.com/series/synth-secrets
        
       | hatsunearu wrote:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYk8r3QlNi8&list=PLOunECWxEL...
       | 
       | THis guy is my favorite professor from my school. He has posted
       | online lectures because of COVID and decided to put it up on his
       | youtube channel so people can watch.
       | 
       | back in the day this course had like 25 official seats but like
       | 40 people would show up every day to "unofficially" audit the
       | course.
        
         | drlobster wrote:
         | I saw some lecture videos this guy put up years ago (nearly a
         | decade now), lost the link and couldn't rememeber his name.
         | 
         | Thanks for this
        
         | cushychicken wrote:
         | YES! Lanterman's courses are excellent.
         | 
         | I particularly loved how he was able to be vulnerable and admit
         | that, even with a PhD in EE/CS, he had no idea what was
         | happening in most circuits when he started.
         | 
         | Mad props to that. I don't know a lot of PhDs who'd cop to not
         | knowing something.
        
         | qwertox wrote:
         | Wow, thank you so much for posting this. I didn't know it
         | exists and watching the introduction made me want to watch the
         | entire course.
        
           | hatsunearu wrote:
           | there's a few other "experimental" courses that he teaches
           | like the guitar amplifier/effects course, it's pretty cool. I
           | was a "beta tester" for that course before it went official,
           | shit was pretty wild and fun.
        
       | munificent wrote:
       | Ableton's guide and Syntorial, both mentioned elsewhere here, are
       | great introductions. Subtractive synthesis (which is the style of
       | synthesizer your probably have in mind implicitly when you say
       | "analog") is fairly straightforward in practice and decomposes
       | into separately understandable components really well. It's a
       | good fit for programmer brains that think in terms of composing
       | smaller units together. It's literally just oscillators,
       | envelopes, filters, and LFOs. Everything else is secondary.
       | 
       | Once you get the basics down, when it comes to real sound design
       | I've found the best tool is to get on YouTube and search for
       | "<name> sound design" where <name> is the kind of sound you want
       | to make: spacey pads, EDM pluck, dub techno stab, 90s synth bass,
       | etc.
       | 
       | Over time, your ear will get better at hearing a sound and
       | understanding how to build it in a synth. You'll learn to hear
       | the difference between a sawtooth and square, what different
       | filters sound like, and how detuning, unison, PWM, etc. all
       | affect a sound. Tutorials are a good way to build up that
       | knowledge.
       | 
       | Also, just like programming, there is absolutely no substitute
       | for just sitting down and noodling with it yourself and trying to
       | make sounds. Like cooking, much of the learning happens in the
       | intuitive non-verbal part of your brain. You don't just need to
       | learn the _words_ for things, you need to develop a deep auditory
       | intuition around sound. You need to feel it. Books will only get
       | you so far with this. Making sounds yourself is key.
       | 
       | You can do this all on a computer using software synths if you
       | want. You can get a free or cheap DAW like Reaper or Ableton Lite
       | and then a free soft synth like Tytel's Helm.
       | 
       | But, personally, I think it's more fun and easier to learn on
       | hardware. That lets you engage your sense of touch and muscle
       | memory, which helps really lock in the learning. The Korg
       | Monologue is a great analog subtractive synth to start with, or a
       | Minilogue if you want to play chords. Hardware holds its value
       | really well, so you can always sell it and recoup most of your
       | investment if you lose interest.
       | 
       | Note that subtractive synthesis is just one way that machines can
       | make sound (but it happens to be one of my favorites). Over time,
       | you'll want to explore FM, wavetable, additive, granular, etc.
       | There's a ton of fun to have.
        
       | PhaseLockk wrote:
       | This may not be the level of detail you are looking for, but I
       | found this short tutorial to be effective at explaining the
       | basics: https://learningsynths.ableton.com/
       | 
       | Ultimately, I think using synthesizers does entail a lot of
       | exploratory knob turning, even if understanding the effect of
       | different components can help guide you to the sound you are
       | looking for.
        
       | 2ndseq wrote:
       | You really should just buy a synth and play with it. The Elektron
       | Analog 4 can be found cheaply and has a huge breadth of
       | parameters.
        
         | dimatura wrote:
         | I know $900-$1500 is "cheap" for most of the HN crowd, but for
         | the rest of us there's hardware synth options that are much
         | cheaper! For example, the Korg Volca Keys [1] is a perfectly
         | suitably synth to learn the basics of analog synthesis and can
         | make some nice sounds to boot. YOu can get it for $150 new or
         | even less used. (And of course, there's plenty of free software
         | synths, as others have linked in other posts here). [1]
         | https://www.korg.com/us/products/dj/volca_keys/
        
         | bartread wrote:
         | ^^^ Underrated comment. There really is no substitute here for
         | hands on experience.
         | 
         | I got back into making music during the pandemic, partly as a
         | deliberate choice where I turned my formerly chaotic and
         | cluttered office/music room into something actually usable, but
         | also through watching a lot of YouTube videos, researching,
         | listening, and looking for a synth to buy.
         | 
         | The key is to get something with all physical controls so you
         | get that immediacy of feedback in terms of the sound changing.
         | You can hear the effect of switching between different wave
         | forms, playing with the pulse width, maybe using an LFO to
         | modulate pulse width, applying a filter and so on. Avoid
         | anything that involves menu diving or relies heavily on a touch
         | screen where you're not getting realtime feedback.
         | 
         | Analogue synthesis is super-popular at the moment so bargains
         | are hard to come by - you are _not_ going to get a used Prophet
         | of _any_ era for a couple of hundred quid, and basically forget
         | _anything_ vintage - but you can get some really good synths
         | for not that much money, particular if you go the monosynth
         | route. The Arturia MicroBrute is great, for example. They 're
         | about PS260 new and I've seen them for PS160 - 200 used on
         | Reverb and eBay. If you're happy to spend a bit more, something
         | like the Behringer Deepmind 6 packs a lot of punch for about
         | PS400, and the Deepmind 12 is available for around PS600.
         | (Behringer had a sketchy reputation for quality but their synth
         | division seems to absolutely nail it - I have a TD-3, which is
         | a clone of the original Roland TB-303, that costs about PS100
         | new as opposed to PS3-4000 for an OG 303 on the used market.
         | Sounds spot on. Couldn't be happier.)
         | 
         | I'd also recommend easing yourself into it. One day I'll get
         | into modular (it's inevitable) but I'm not there yet, and it
         | would have been a mistake to start there as it would have been
         | a bit overwhelming for me. You might be different but I'd say
         | get something that, again, gives you results and immediacy -
         | something that you can tinker around and learn and have fun
         | with, and then take that knowledge and use it with other
         | synths.
         | 
         | Sorry, not really a tutorial, but there are _plenty_ on
         | YouTube, which will help, but what you really needs is hands on
         | time with synths, and lots of it. Try programming patches that
         | you 've heard on different tracks you like from scratch. For
         | example, I really felt like I was getting somewhere when I
         | managed to program a decently credible Tom Sawyer bass patch
         | with a really dirty vintage-ised filter sweep. It's one of the
         | few events during the last lockdown that brought me some proper
         | joy.
         | 
         | And that's really the final piece of advice: have fun and don't
         | be afraid to experiment. You will probably create some really
         | awful sounds, along with some really interesting ones, but just
         | embrace it all as part of the journey.
        
         | brudgers wrote:
         | I appreciate that because it is the kind of thing I might say.
         | 
         | But I am not that committed. At least yet.
         | 
         | I try to avoid starting by shopping when I can. This seems like
         | one of those. A browser is probably enough to gauge the
         | stickiness of my current interests and avoids figuring about
         | where to put "the damn thing."
         | 
         | Or to put it another way, I give this kind of interest time. It
         | might have been awesome to have lived circumstances that
         | encouraged my interest of forty five years ago. But I don't let
         | that put me on a rush.
        
           | bartread wrote:
           | This is an interesting perspective. I would still argue that
           | you need the hands on experience, and I cannot emphasise the
           | immediacy and satisfaction of using physical controls enough.
           | 
           | In my other comment I suggested that you won't find a bargain
           | in vintage gear. That's true. However, if you don't want to
           | be financially committed, you might do well do buy a vintage
           | synth because you should get your money back - or maybe more
           | - if you decide you're not that interested after all and want
           | to sell it. Whereas with a new piece of gear, it will
           | depreciate.
           | 
           | As I say, the market for these things is pretty hot now. I'm
           | weeping that I didn't pick more gear up 10 or 15 years ago
           | before it all became so popular. Of course, I didn't have any
           | spare cash back then so there's that.
        
             | brudgers wrote:
             | I suppose you could argue so. But I am not arguing. I know
             | myself well enough to know what makes sense for me.
             | 
             | It's not the spending money.
             | 
             | It's that spending money can seem like progress. But not
             | really. At least not at first. Doing the thing is progress
             | and I can spend what time I spend that way without product
             | research and bargain hunting and shipping and unboxing and
             | making room for another hobby object.
             | 
             | And accessories.
             | 
             | If I find myself at the point where buying something is
             | progress, then that's the time, but that is statistically
             | less likely.
        
         | tomduncalf wrote:
         | The Analog Four has a huge range but I don't think it's
         | particularly beginner friendly due to the large array of
         | parameters accessed by just 10 knobs. Its flexibility also
         | means it has fewer "sweet spots" than simpler synths - it's not
         | as easy to make something that sounds great by messing with a
         | few knobs compared to e.g. the Roland SH01A.
         | 
         | I think for a beginner it's more helpful to have as many
         | controls as possible accessible hands on, rather than having to
         | go to different pages and have different knobs do different
         | things depending on context.
         | 
         | Analog Four is awesome as you get more experienced though as
         | you can create a whole track on it if you are creative!
         | 
         | I'd personally probably go for a Korg Minilogue as a beginner
         | these days...
        
         | kall wrote:
         | I would second this general idea, but I don't know about the
         | Analog 4 specifically? Out of all the analog synths it is the
         | most like a little computer. It's awesome but doesn't feel like
         | a learning tool. There are a lot of synths that kind of have
         | the signal flow laid out on the front panel, like a Korg
         | Monologue. That seems helpful.
        
       | twis wrote:
       | https://www.youtube.com/c/MoritzKlein0
       | 
       | This guy has a channel where he builds up analog synths from
       | basic components. He does a great job explaining the intuition.
        
         | MrRadar wrote:
         | Seconding this recommendation. As long as you have a basic
         | understanding of electric components he's really easy to follow
         | and does a great job of explaining how the circuits work.
        
       | lintbrush wrote:
       | Nothing beats just getting your hands dirty. This video actually
       | does a great job of covering the basics that are common to 99% of
       | synths, physical or virtual:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfJ9Dbjz6cs
        
       | wheels wrote:
       | There are a bunch of different ways that one could approach this,
       | depending on if you want to learn to play a synth vs. understand
       | synthesis (which obviously have some overlap).
       | 
       | Neither of the books that I'll recommend here are specifically
       | about learning to play analog synths, but they both give a bunch
       | of background to understanding analog and digital synthesis:
       | 
       | I read an earlier edition of this when I was getting into working
       | in electronic music, and found the background very useful and a
       | pleasure to read.
       | 
       | https://www.amazon.com/Electronic-Experimental-Music-Thom-Ho...
       | 
       | This one is specifically _not_ about analog synthesis (but rather
       | digital synthesis and sound processing), but is kind of a classic
       | in the field:
       | 
       | https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/computer-music-tutorial
       | 
       | The most common physical analog synths have two to three
       | oscillators and a resonating filter. The first book would give
       | you enough info to know what that means and begin to explore the
       | space a little more intelligently.
       | 
       | Assuming you're a programmer, you can also do a lot of things by
       | creating synths using either a visual or code-based synths on
       | your own. I'm partial to ChucK, but there's also Supercolider,
       | CSound, Max, Pd, Reaktor, ...
        
       | shams93 wrote:
       | Even though its about webaudio, webaudio uses virtual analog so
       | this book isn't just great for learning webaudio but great for
       | learning the details of analog subtractive synthesis in the
       | browser. https://webaudioapi.com/book/
        
       | cushychicken wrote:
       | This link came up in a synthesizer based topic thread a while ago
       | and was real informative to me:
       | 
       | https://modwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2858814#p285881...
        
       | maxekman wrote:
       | I would recommend VCVRack, a mostly free virtual Eurorack system.
       | 
       | https://vcvrack.com/
        
         | sramsay wrote:
         | I would _not_ recommend that someone just starting out and who
         | doesn 't fully understand subtractive synthesis start with a
         | very sophisticated, open-ended modular system.
         | 
         | oscs, filters, lfos, envelopes, vcos . . . for a beginner, this
         | is all hard enough without adding control signals and fancy
         | routings to the equation.
         | 
         | Rack is amazing; I don't mean to criticize it in any way. But
         | if you're trying to learn to fly, you might want to start with
         | a Cessna instead of trying to jump into the cockpit of a 787.
        
         | biztos wrote:
         | There is something very similar, but not open, available for
         | iPad, called MiRack[0]. It was a _great_ help to me in figuring
         | out basics like VCO /LFO/ASDR/VCA.
         | 
         | Virtual modular isn't going to sound quite like real analog but
         | it's a great way to learn and experiment at very low cost.
         | 
         | I have promised myself to get VCVRack working before I spend
         | any real money on modular gear.
         | 
         | [0]: https://mirack.app
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Hah! you beat me to it by 4 comments. Upvoted.
        
       | singingfish wrote:
       | Hardware-wise the Yamaha Reface CS is a very stripped down
       | beginner friendly but versatile instrument with which to
       | understand subtractive analog synthesis better.
        
       | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
       | One thing not mentioned in the comments here so far is that in
       | general, almost all analog synthesis uses _subtractive_ models.
       | That 's perfectly fine, but you should be aware that there are
       | other synthesis models too. Frequency Modulation (FM) is one,
       | famously used by the Yamaha DX-7. Additive synthesis is another,
       | and rarely if ever found on actual analog synth equipment. There
       | are a few more that were developed in the digital realm and will
       | never (or likely never) appear in analog form.
       | 
       | There's a whole world to explore in subtractive synthesis, but
       | you may find yourself at some point wanting to go outside that
       | paradigm, and if so, it's easier to explore in the digital realm.
        
         | deckard1 wrote:
         | My first PC sound card was an AdLib, which used a Yamaha FM
         | chip. That thing was incredibly cool at the time. It had a
         | jukebox[1], instrument creator[2], and composition software[3].
         | Lots of early Sierra and LucasArts games used it.
         | 
         | Almost all early sound cards had an FM chip, so I forget that
         | people today might not have been exposed to this tech.
         | 
         | Also, there is the interesting area between the AdLib ROL/MIDI
         | synthesis and full blown digitized audio such as wav/mp3... the
         | demoscene was sampling digital audio, chopping it up
         | (MOD/S3M/etc. file format). The result was a wav-like audio
         | file in a tiny file size. Some of the tracker formats, such as
         | Scream Tracker I believe, could do both FM synth and PCM
         | output[4]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USNTZl7DGls
         | 
         | [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2H_g7WQMnFE
         | 
         | [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQa7uSFA0Zg
         | 
         | [4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lFNYJ7B820
        
           | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
           | > Also, there is the interesting area between the AdLib
           | ROL/MIDI synthesis and full blown digitized audio such as
           | wav/mp3... the demoscene was sampling digital audio, chopping
           | it up (MOD/S3M/etc. file format). The result was a wav-like
           | audio file in a tiny file size.
           | 
           | This is typically called wavetable synthesis. You generate
           | the (typically complex) waveform using other means, then load
           | it into the synth and do stuff with it.
        
           | disqard wrote:
           | I haven't heard of Scream Tracker (ST3) since... the late
           | 1990s. That took me back :)
           | 
           | I remember ripping .MOD files from DOS games and marvelling
           | at how well they were composed/crafted. In particular, I
           | still remember some amazing work by Andrew Sega, aka "Necros"
           | [0].
           | 
           | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Sega
        
         | PaulHoule wrote:
         | Didn't the DX-7 use a DSP?
        
           | TomWhitwell wrote:
           | Custom logic chips, not universal DSP - this was the early
           | 80s
        
             | PaulHoule wrote:
             | But still it was working in the digital domain if I
             | remember right.
        
         | nightcracker wrote:
         | A counterpoint to this is that if you wish to recreate many of
         | the classic (and modern) sounds, that often they were created
         | with subtractive synthesis, the easiest path to a close sound
         | is to also use subtractive synthesis.
         | 
         | If you wish to train your ear and learn subtractive synthesis
         | I'd highly recommend https://www.syntorial.com/, which makes
         | you recreate various sounds in a very structured and
         | interactive way, slowly building up complexity.
        
           | eunoia wrote:
           | Upvote for Syntorial. Hands down one of the most effective
           | learning tools I've used in any domain.
        
             | xbar wrote:
             | Precisely this.
             | 
             | Syntorial will get you far down the road of listening to
             | the elements of subtractive synthesis. It's a happy journey
             | and one that gives you subtractive synth skills that can be
             | applied to any of the hardware recommended here.
        
       | stets wrote:
       | Andrew Huang has a really good intro video on modular synthesis:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWslSTTkiFU
       | 
       | Warning that modular synths are typically not cheap. However,
       | most of the physical standalone synths that exist today use the
       | same principles.
       | 
       | Physical hardware can be really fun if you don't end up going
       | with VCV rack or syntorial as mentioned in this thread.
       | 
       | Good pieces of hardware for a n00b:
       | 
       | - arturia microfreak
       | 
       | - korg minilogue
       | 
       | - any of the korg volca lines
        
         | reality_inspctr wrote:
         | The Moog Grandmother is an extremely easy analog synth - my
         | kids know how to use it
        
       | trypwire wrote:
       | Great recommendations in here, and I'm happy to see this thread
       | getting such attention!
       | 
       | This is totally a shameless self-plug, but I think it could be
       | interesting for you:
       | 
       | I'm working on a project called Elementary Audio [1] which is a
       | javascript runtime + framework for writing native audio software.
       | It's like the Web Audio API in that it's javascript+audio, but
       | unlike Web Audio in that it aims to target true native audio
       | apps, like plugins for your DAW or hardware projects.
       | 
       | The API that it offers feels to me very much like thinking and
       | working in analog synths, which is why I think you might find it
       | interesting. You can describe and wire up signals and just see
       | what they sound like without having to worry about what needs to
       | happen under the hood for you to hear it.
       | 
       | I put together a guide for dipping your toes into making sound
       | [2] and you'll find there a bunch of other resources that I
       | recommend for getting into the topic.
       | 
       | I should note too that it's currently in beta and only supports
       | macos and linux (windows coming soon!)
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.elementary.audio/ [2]:
       | https://docs.elementary.audio/guides/making_sound
        
       | brylie wrote:
       | Intro to synthesis parts 1 and 2
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/atvtBE6t48M
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/gJkxGvhOS-M
        
       | djaychela wrote:
       | I teach music technology and have a YouTube channel. I'm doing a
       | series on exactly this subject, so hopefully you'll find it
       | useful. [1] I have a book on music tech which I wrote that covers
       | subtractive synthesis basics as well [2]
       | 
       | [1] https://youtu.be/l1B7ym59VJs [2]
       | https://tinyurl.com/cubase11book
        
       | mortenjorck wrote:
       | This is an odd one and is a bit of an acquired taste, but some
       | sound designers swear by the original 1971 manual for the ARP
       | 2600, of which you can find a PDF here:
       | http://guitarfool.com/ARP2600/Arp%202600%20Owners%20Manual.p...
       | 
       | If you want to follow along with your own synthesizer, there's a
       | breadth of options ranging from software recreations of the 2600
       | to a licensed hardware reissue, but for $25 you can get Cherry
       | Audio's respected CA2600:
       | https://cherryaudio.com/instruments/ca2600
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | I had an Omni 2 that almost set my apartment on fire (the synth
         | itself was lost), it's not such a collectors item today as the
         | 2600 but beware when buying/restoring this old equipment that
         | some of the parts are _well_ over their predicted life span and
         | that can cause trouble. I tracked the start of the fire down to
         | a tantalum cap, and recreating the conditions that it was under
         | fairly reliably caused these to burst into flame.
         | 
         | So if you go the route of buying a broken one and restoring it
         | make sure you refresh all of the caps that are across the
         | voltage rails (of which there are quite a few).
        
       | ace2358 wrote:
       | I can highly recommend Reaktor 6 by native instruments! A full
       | virtual DSP program for creating things at different levels of
       | abstraction. It's the backend they use for a lot of their
       | products and sounds phenomenal. Heaps of tutorials on YouTube and
       | plenty of space to explore and learn.
        
       | awillimus wrote:
       | The Intro to Synthesis video series put out by Reverb's Justin
       | DeLay is really excellent: https://reverb.com/news/intro-to-
       | synthesis-our-6-part-video-...
       | 
       | As mention previously, Reverb.com is an excellent place to find a
       | great deal on a used synth.
        
       | nixpulvis wrote:
       | - Buy a Korg MS-20 (or anything, ideally pure analog)
       | 
       | - Learn some music theory
       | 
       | - Learn some signal / information theory
       | 
       | - Synthesize!
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | I'll have to find the site, but someone posted an _awesome_ site
       | here, some time ago, that taught synthesizers, using a cool
       | JavaScript tool.
       | 
       |  _[UPDATE]_ Here we go: https://learningsynths.ableton.com
        
         | lunatuna wrote:
         | This is lots of fun, thanks for finding it.
        
       | nicetryguy wrote:
       | > But I'd really like to have some basic idea of how to put
       | together rudimentary sounds with intent.
       | 
       | There are really only 4 main waves: Sine, Square, Triangle, and
       | Sawtooth. The "complexity" comes from using these waves to
       | modulate and transform each other. Apply Volume: labeled as
       | Attack, Sustain, Decay, and Release; and you have yourself a
       | patch! Find any synthesizer plugin, load up some of the patches,
       | and start twiddling knobs: Disable things and break each patch
       | down to it's individual components. You can get a feel for how
       | complex sounds are built with "digital VCO's".
       | 
       | Music isn't an exact science: You just have to play with it until
       | it sounds good to you. Have fun =)
        
         | dr_dshiv wrote:
         | Why are there only 4? Are these like Platonic forms?
         | 
         | I see that sine are "no harmonics", sawtooth are "all
         | harmonics", square are "odd harmonics" but a triangle wave is
         | also all odd harmonics. Okay.
         | 
         | Why these 4 forms? There are lots of other forms, like a
         | cycloid.
         | 
         | Last question: is a sawtooth heard as an octave lower than a
         | square wave, because there is only one pulse per cycle, whereas
         | a square has two pulses per cycle?
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | Besides the engineering reasons others have pointed out, some
           | of these waveforms tend to occur in wind instruments. For
           | example a flute produces a waveform close (for some
           | definition of "close") to a sine wave and clarinets produce a
           | waveform closer to a square wave. Thus these waves sound
           | somewhat familiar to most listeners before you start
           | subtracting harmonics. (I don't know that a sawtooth is
           | similar to a natural instrument but it's popular in
           | subtractive synthesis because it's a rich source of
           | harmonics.)
           | 
           | In the early days of synthesizers the goal was to emulate
           | non-electronic instruments, so familiar waveforms were
           | desirable. Then Bob Moog came along and said "Synthesizers
           | are instrumemts in their own right and should not be
           | considered as imitating something else" and then Wendy Carlos
           | released Switched-On Bach and the rest is history.
        
           | nicetryguy wrote:
           | > Why these 4 forms?
           | 
           | It has to do with Voltage Control Oscillators, or VCO's, and
           | actually controlling Voltages with physical components: These
           | are the shapes you can actually make. Modulation is applying
           | a waveform to another, so, if you apply a Triangle wave to a
           | Sine wave you'll get another more complex wave that looks and
           | sounds like neither of the two. You can theoretically make
           | infinite shapes by modulating these forms with each other
           | again and again. This is the bread and butter of analog
           | synthesizers.
           | 
           | I don't think a square, or any wave, is measured in groups of
           | two pulses. "Pitch" is just how many times the pattern
           | repeats per second, the same as how many times a string would
           | vibrate back and forth on a guitar when you pluck it.
           | 
           | Harmonics is a deep rabbit hole that i don't quite understand
           | myself, so, i don't feel comfortable speaking to that.
        
           | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
           | They were easy to make with uncomplicated circuitry. That's
           | it.
           | 
           | The original big modulars included oscillator sync - which
           | locked a bank of oscillators together - and waveform mixing.
           | So you could create more complex shapes. (With some effort
           | and imagination, and not in a particularly intuitive way.)
           | 
           | When digital started to become a thing in the 80s you could
           | start using any shape, including your own hand-drawn
           | waveshapes or a custom mix of overtones.
           | 
           | But that turned out to be less exciting than expected, so
           | most people just switched to samples instead.
           | 
           | A sawtooth is not heard an octave lower. The fundamental is
           | the same for both shapes, because the Fourier decomposition
           | has the same f0.
           | 
           | There are some unexpected psychoacoustic effects which change
           | the perception of fundamental pitch. E.g there's almost no
           | fundamental in the lowest octave of a piano, but our ears
           | fill it in anyway.
           | 
           | But simple repeating shapes tend to do what it says on the
           | label. (And in the textbook.)
        
         | IvyMike wrote:
         | Realizing this was exactly what I learned when playing around
         | with the C64 SID chip in 1983. Neat!
        
         | martyvis wrote:
         | Noise generators tend to be pretty important as they allow you
         | to add complexity to sound synthesis that you can't extract
         | from very determinative wave forms
        
         | elevaet wrote:
         | There's only one wave, sine ;)
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_transform
        
           | nicetryguy wrote:
           | In a sense that reality is "nothing but atoms" you're correct
           | =p
           | 
           | These are the main shapes from a user standpoint =)
        
             | elevaet wrote:
             | Yes, you're right of course. I just felt obliged to do the
             | pedantic HN thing =D
        
       | desine wrote:
       | Everyone else has covered some good places to get started reading
       | and learning, but eventually you'll have to twist some knobs on
       | your own. Assuming you do go down this path, I want to throw out
       | a suggestion.
       | 
       | If you get into synthesizers and music production, I highly
       | recommend picking up a couple of Korg Volcas. They're not fancy,
       | you won't impress any synth musicians with them, but their design
       | is wonderfully fun. They often get overlooked by "serious"
       | bloopmakers; they're a bit limited in capability, inexpensive,
       | and the sound quality (noise floor especially) is not that of a
       | high end synth. But their immediacy, learning curve, and common
       | design makes it very easy and fun to play with. I can get someone
       | who's never played any music in their life to start making beats
       | and dance rhythms with me in under an hour. Elektron has some
       | similar devices in the Models line, but their learning curve (and
       | capabilities) are greater.
       | 
       | If I had $800 to spend on gear, I would much rather have 3 volcas
       | covering rhythm, bass, and lead, and a mixer and recorder, than a
       | single mid-range synth. I'd be able to make more professional
       | sounding tunes with just a license for a major DAW (and maybe one
       | piece of hardware with the leftover cash), but the fun factor and
       | joy of beat crafting would be far greater.
       | 
       | Basically I'm a huge fanboy of Tatsuya Takahashi, a man who went
       | to Korg with a home-built synth from his engineering degree's
       | final year, got a job, and ended up causing a relatively large
       | shift in the industry. There's an interview with him here:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb_-q5GKxK4
        
         | biztos wrote:
         | I second the Volcas -- I bought a Volca Modular[0] this month
         | and am enjoying it greatly, though if "music" is what you're
         | after you probably want the Volca Keys[1] which is cheaper and
         | less weird and has MIDI input.
         | 
         | I also recommend the Keystep 37[2] from Arturia as a MIDI
         | controller -- super interesting sequencer and arpeggiator plus
         | decent quality mini-keyboard and some assignable knobs -- but
         | must point out that it's only "bus powered" on a computer, your
         | iPad or smartphone probably won't power it without an
         | additional power bank.
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.korg.com/products/dj/volca_modular/
         | 
         | [1]: https://www.korg.com/us/products/dj/volca_keys/
         | 
         | [2]: https://www.arturia.com/products/hybrid-
         | synths/keystep-37/ov...
        
         | brudgers wrote:
         | Odds are I won't get terribly into those things. Just a little
         | more into them than I am now. I have other rabbit holes
         | already. I just want to know a little more down the flat early
         | slopes of the curves.
         | 
         | I have "a few YouTube videos" worth of interest. Not ten
         | channels of subscription level.
        
           | dharma1 wrote:
           | I don't think you need any books or hardware at this stage,
           | maybe just someone to explain the basics to you and ask
           | questions from, and a few YouTube videos.
           | 
           | And try installing Audiokit Synth One (it's free) on your
           | iPhone or iPad to mess around with. Best to learn how
           | oscillators, filters, envelopes and LFOs work from just
           | messing around with a synth.
        
           | desine wrote:
           | Fair enough, but:
           | 
           | 1) Hardware is a lot more fun than software. Being able to
           | twist knobs two-handed, live, not using a mouse, is pretty
           | freaking cool, and is a big part of the experience, IMO
           | 
           | 2) If you do spend money, don't write off the volcas. They
           | may offer less sound design, but they're a great capturing of
           | that experience essence. You can syncronize a few, put in a
           | mixer, and jam with a friend or two very easily. It's an
           | expensive hobby if one falls into it's rabbit hole, but this
           | particular model line is both inexpensive and good.
        
         | burnt_toast wrote:
         | I love the volcas. Still just a novice and can't do much but I
         | love their design and all the knobs to play with. I've got the
         | drum, keys, and bass.
         | 
         | It's a personal preference but there's just something about the
         | physical hardware that I like better than software
        
       | zoomablemind wrote:
       | There are many ways to approach the synths. Books and tutorials
       | often do this methodically - waves, harmonics, modulation, etc.
       | This is the way to learn the mechanics of the sound synthesis and
       | ideally should let one figure out how to design 'new' sounds.
       | 
       | However, a lot of musicians prefer the practical way of using
       | synths by getting familiar with the presets which often accompany
       | the synths. Sure, someone had to design those presets somehow.
       | Well, it's also possible to learn that from these presets created
       | by the pros.
       | 
       | Meanwhile for the purposes of music production the presets could
       | be tweaked to better blend with the intended soundscape.
       | 
       | So the question is what's the driving reasons for getting into
       | synths.
       | 
       | As for the resources, there's a nice collection of vintage synths
       | emulators - Bristol https://sourceforge.net/projects/bristol/
       | 
       | Bristol runs on Linux, and supports MIDI. The filters are not
       | very true to original hardware, but good enough for synth
       | explorers.
       | 
       | Also there's a nice set of original manuals that were
       | accompanying the classic ARP synths. They give a theory intro and
       | then detail the presets, mostly how to synthesize acoustic
       | instruments.
       | 
       | There's also a dub of ARP Odyssey original audio tapes by Roger
       | Powell which follow the construction of the described patches
       | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu2JwwG3bjA
        
       | codeulike wrote:
       | The very very basics of classic analog 'subtractive' synths are
       | that you have a wave generator (oscillator), usually these
       | generate Sine, Square, Triangle or Saw waves. You then pass that
       | through a Low Pass Filter. The Low Pass Filter has a cutoff set,
       | frequencies lower than the cutoff pass through unaffected, higher
       | than the cutoff gets attenuated and monkeyed around with. Thats
       | the classic synth sound basically. But there's loads of other
       | stuff on top of that - multiple oscillators slightly detuned from
       | each other, attack/decay/sustain/release of the volume, using an
       | LFO (low frequency osciallator) to modify the cutoff of the low
       | pass filter, etc etc
       | 
       | If you play with a wave generator and a Low Pass Filter and try
       | the different wave types (Sine, Saw, Triangle, Square) you will
       | quickly recognise all kinds of synths sounds that you already
       | know, e.g. you'll recognise the distinctive sound of a square
       | wave bassline. Or the pure sound of a sine wave (think classic
       | Doctor Who theme)
       | 
       | In Propellerheads Reason, there's a device called 'Subtractor'
       | which is basically a classic synth. This page explaining how the
       | use the Subtractor covers a lot of the different things that
       | analog synths do.
       | 
       | https://www.reasonexperts.com/subtractor-basics.html
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-07-13 23:01 UTC)