In article 464c821f.0310271333.5941f588@posting.google.com, Radium at glucegen@excite.com wrote on 10/27/2003 16:33:> FM synthesis *is* digitalno Rad, it don't have to be. (and there is nothing intrinsically digital about FM.) you show me a good ol' patchboard Moog, and i'll show you analog FM. r b-j> Piergiorgio Sartor <piergiorgio.sartor@nexgo.REMOVE.THIS.de> wrote in message > news:<3f9ce403$0$280$4d4ebb8e@read.news.de.uu.net>... >> The problem with FM music sythesis is that small changes >> can cause big (perceived) effects. >> >> So, for convenience, people tend to use digital techniques.
Sick of sample-based "synthesis"!
Started by ●October 16, 2003
Reply by ●October 27, 20032003-10-27
Reply by ●October 28, 20032003-10-28
Jerry Avins wrote:> But isn't that one of it's main attractions, assuming that things are > stable enough to stay where the composer wants them?Yes, but with control.> I think good analog is harder than good digital; that's why this is fast > becoming a digital world. The first FIR I worked with was pure analog. > I'm glad I didn't need to tinker with the quarter-square multipliers.But an old good analog computer has it's own charme... bye, -- Piergiorgio Sartor
Reply by ●October 28, 20032003-10-28
Radium wrote:> FM synthesis *is* digitalAs I already wrote, FM is FM, it could be analog or digital. FM stands for Frequency Modulation, that's it. You can do it with coupled controleld oscillators or with a DSP, doesn't change the matter. Digital is just good and convenient. bye, -- Piergiorgio Sartor
Reply by ●October 29, 20032003-10-29
robert bristow-johnson wrote:> In article ADZkb.6720$Uz6.297@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net, Randy Yates > at yates@ieee.org wrote on 10/20/2003 18:49:> [...]>>And yes, they were horrid. Especially when you get them up on >>stage in front of hot lights where the temperature was changing. > > but they have a (sorta fat, at least the MiniMoog) sound that is, even > today, hard to emulate.Oh yeah - loved their sound. I was speaking of the technical difficulties (essentially, keeping it in tune).> there is a real market for good ol' analog synths > in good shape as well as old tube preamps or guitar amps.I gave mine away to a school back in the 80's. It was in bad shape back then - the "bus bars" that fed the keys were corroded, so when you played a note it would randomly glissando up the scale.> the good news is that Bob Moog i think finally got his trademark (R A Moog > or Moog) back.Seems like he would deserve it. -- % Randy Yates % "...the answer lies within your soul %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % 'cause no one knows which side %%% 919-577-9882 % the coin will fall." %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % 'Big Wheels', *Out of the Blue*, ELO http://home.earthlink.net/~yatescr
Reply by ●October 29, 20032003-10-29
In rec.audio.tech Andrew Mayo <ajmayo@my-deja.com> wrote:> glucegen@excite.com (Radium) wrote in message news:<464c821f.0310151928.2eb08895@posting.google.com>... > > Sample-based synths are stale and rigid. Any sound effect in action > > will noticeably quantize and alias the music. They are a hell an > > earsore for life-wanting instruments such as synth pads and synth fx. > > The tone of synth pads are generated on FM synths! No wonder pads > > sound so crappy in samplers. > > > > A *real* digital (not analog) FM/modelling synth is a dream! It should > > be hard-coded and able to do its own processing and memory. > > > > > Well, yes, I agree. Your dream machine exists, btw. It's called the > Yamaha FS1R. It has 64 operators, each with its own independent > amplitude envelope. 32 of these operators can do sine, square or > sawtooth waveforms (and formant shape them, either statically or > dynamically). The other 32 can do pitched or unpitched noise (you can > go from a sinewave right out to white noise, depending on bandwidth > settings). (compare with the original DX7, which had only 6 operators > - so this is 10 DX7's in a box!)> It is four-part multi-timbral with three independent effects units and > a comprehensive range of filters. It can do formant synthesis. It > produces utterly beautiful sounds which respond to every nuance of > your playing.What albums by what artists can it be heard on? -- -S.
Reply by ●November 14, 20032003-11-14
This is kinda late, it's been a few days since I posted: In comp.dsp, Jerry Avins <jya@ieee.org> wrote:>Ben Bradley wrote:>> ...>> Timbre is often changed in FM synthesis by changing (using an ADSR >> signa) the amplitude of the modulating signal. You could do this with >> analog oscillators, but it would sound different each time because of >> the phase drift. Actually, depending on what effect you want, this >> could be a good thing... > >Analog oscillators allow one to tune signals 5 KHz apart at 220 MHz with >ease. I had no trouble getting stable voice on SSSC signals in the >6-meter band using the BFO. I think you sell analog stability short.I think we're talking about different types of circuits, and different needs of 'stability'. RF-range communications local oscillators (I presume these are L-C with varactor diodes as part of the C) might well be more stable than what I'm thinking of. The main thing these circuits have in common is the label "electronic oscillator." They're made for very different frequency ranges, and with different types of circuits. Almost no one would try to use one type for the other application. Analog music synths use a wide-range VCO (essentially an integrator-based relaxation oscillator, 20Hz to 20KHz: that's voltage-variable over three orders of magnitude, and they're often used below that, down as low as 1 Hz for vibrato/trememlo and effects). These usually use exponential converters so that the frequency doubles with each 1-volt increase in voltage, and since the converter uses the bipolar transistor's base-emitter voltage-current response, it's VERY temperature sensitive (base-emitter circuits are often used to MEASURE temperature. This sensitivity can be cancelled out in several ways). When an oscillator at 1kHz FM-modulates another at 1kHz, the tone will change significantly with every 5 or so degrees of phase shift. A difference of 1 Hz (which if not temperature-compensated, can be generated by breathing on one of the VCO circuits from a foot away - don't ask how I know) using FM will sound something like a slow Leslie-speaker-type effect cranked up to 11. Even just listening to two same-frequency sawtooth oscillator outputs summed together, you can hear a harmonic 'frequency' (which is over twice the fundamental of the oscillators) whose period is determined by the time between the two vertical parts of the sawtooths, and as they get closer together or farther apart, this 'harmonic' pitch goes up and down. You can hear this slow change even with two 1kHz oscillators that are 1/100th Hz apart. To stop this audible change, the oscillators need to be more than 'stable', they need to be locked together. As already discussed here, you can do that digitally with two phase-accumulator/DDS digital 'oscillators.'>Jerry >-- >Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. >����������������������������������������������������������������������� >
