
A Beginner's Guide to the Synth - omnibrain
http://20khz.gizmodo.com/a-beginners-guide-to-the-synth-1736978695
======
chipsy
Inaccuracies and overly-broad statements of this article:

Bob Moog did not invent the idea of a synthesizer. It emerged much earlier in
the 20th century, from a mix of electric-powered organs and various other
early electronics, with many of the inventors working independently. The
boundary between "organ" and "analog synthesizer" has a gray area, and there
were some unique pre-Moog instruments like the Theramin. Moog's contribution
was to make programmable synthesis more affordable and standardized for
professional use - but many of the "synth-like" sounds used in 60's and 70's
records are organs with effects pedals put on them; small electronic organs
had become affordable in the post-war era.

The distinctive-yet-samey sounds of the 1980's aren't entirely attributable to
presets; the presets are a symptom of the underlying appearance of digital
technology in music. Digital simultaneously opened up new realms of
affordability and privilege - at the same time you got cheap tone boxes like
the Casio VL1, you also had monsters like the Synclavier, used on "Thriller"
and in many movie soundtracks, with high-end configurations billed in the
ballpark of $500,000 dollars(1980's money). Digital gear also changed mixing
in favor of extensive production, leading to the heavy reverb washes and gated
snares everywhere. Using a "high end" sound was a status symbol, so it was
flaunted even if that meant you were using the same orchestra hit as everyone
else.

The reappearance of analog is attributable to the same backlash seen in every
media market that has experienced a race-to-the-bottom in price points: Synth
designers have decided to do an end run around the piracy/DRM/price-pressure
issues by going back towards manufacturing. The sounds are "classic" now, and
marketed as such, with a few new tricks added to keep up interest. Musicians
often get into very idiosyncratic workflows and for some of them, working
directly with knobs and patch cables is the right way to go.

~~~
CamperBob2
Arguably the Theremin was the first synthesizer, if you don't count earlier
pneumatically-operated devices.

~~~
abruzzi
The theremin's sound (as well as the ondes martenot) is just the beat
frequency between two supersonic oscillators. While it is the electronic
generation of sound, it doesn't really have the ability to modify the sound.
Wether that a synthesizer or not, is up to your definition.

Bob Moog's modular was also not the first (he and Buchla built their synths at
about the same time). There was computer music being done on the RCA
synthesizer in the 50s. Hugh Le Cain also did a lit of interesting stuff that
predated Moog and Buchla.

------
pierrec
The history section is really cool (edit: OK, maybe not!), but I find the
conclusion horribly opinionated. Alright, making sounds on a computer might
not be as fun as playing with real Legos and getting your hands dirty. So if
what you want is fun, then yes, analog can make a lot of sense. But this
article, reflecting some general opinion, I believe, goes a lot further...

" _Today there are “analog modeling” digital synths that are good enough at
mimicking the character of old-school imperfection the average ear probably
can’t discern the origin of the sound._ "

That should be "the honest ear can't discern". Digital synth programmers have
recently been going to great lengths to emulate the sound of analog (lengths
that I personally find ridiculous, but that's beside the point), to such an
extent that claiming to be able to recognize analog emulation is, in my
opinion, delusional.

I can't blame purists for thinking that way, though. More generally, our brain
modifies the sound that we perceive based on what we know about it, and
understanding this is important to becoming a good sound designer - accepting
that even you can't escape it, no matter how experienced or knowledgeable you
are (quite the contrary). Unfortunately, most people don't accept it, and the
idea that digital synthesis inevitably yields repetitive and boring sounds is
ingrained in people's minds (especially the author's mind, it seems).

And then there's the idea that digital restricts your creativity because of...
presets? In the 80's, maybe. But today? I suppose there are some people who
pick a popular preset and don't even bother tweaking it, but these people
would make shitty music whatsoever. Creative people will create creative
sounds, and they will have a _lot_ more creative freedom and unexplored
territory on digital media. But go ahead and spread the idea that analog
synths make sound with magically better properties - I'll be working on the
actual unexplored territory in the meantime.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
The history section has a lot of errors. The author sort of has the basics
down, but there's a lot of "I didn't research this properly" in the details.

And I completely agree about digital. if you can code, digital is infinitely
open. Analog is sonic Lego with a heavy dose of nostalgia and positional
social signalling.

It's certainly fun to play with, but musically it's a lot more limited.

------
aikah
And get a real synthesizer instead of a VST. Though synthesis will be a bit
more restricted, nothing replaces the pleasure of learning by tweaking real
knobs on a synth.

My first synth was a digital one , a novation nova, a bit cold sounding but it
had nice features though it lacked of FM synthesis ( so no "piano sounds" ).
Back then the Access Virus was the shit .

But today analog synths are really cheap, no need to spend 2000$ on a broken
old Juno or a Moog. People doing electronic music today and wanting to buy
real gear have no idea how lucky they are.

~~~
mettamage
Do you have any recommendations? I happen to know how DAWs work, but have no
clue when it comes to analog synths.

~~~
gtani
(this is from the sidebar in /r/synthesizers, there's lots of other good
sources:)
[http://thesynthesizersympathizer.blogspot.com/2015/03/buying...](http://thesynthesizersympathizer.blogspot.com/2015/03/buying-
your-first-analog-synthesizer.html)

Good knobby starters (analog or virtual analog) Mini/microbrute (except
there's been QC issues), bass station II, MS20 mini, ms2000, Radias, jp8080 or
8000, SH201, ... Roland made a few others 5-12 years back which i can't
remember.

tho for many people, it's easiest to borrow a mac with Logic Pro, which has
some nice synth models (or ableton suite, which has at least a couple
plugins). And borrow a controler with lots of pots, encoders and faders,
Novation SL mk 2 or maudio axiom (i think both come with software premaped to
Logic or ableton analog/operator)

------
cottonseed
I can recommend the documentary, "I Dream of Wires" (on Netflix) about the
history of the analog modular synthesizer.

------
joshontheweb
If you want to play around with some of these concepts I've built a
synthesizer with the web audio api here
[http://robotaudio.com](http://robotaudio.com). I once had ambitions to make a
full featured DAW out of it but I've gotten sidetracked. Still fun to play
with though.

------
abruzzi
The article seems to elide the differences between subtractive synths, and all
the many other forms of synthesis--Frequency Modulation, Additive (Fourier),
Physical Modeling, and others that don't necessarily have all the pieces they
mention like filters and VCAs.

The DX7 has 6 digital oscillators that can only produce sine waves and no
filter. It functions very differently form subtractive synths, but is capable,
with only six sines, of creating sounds that have far more complex harmonics
(and non-harmonic tones) than most subtractive synths.

------
neoCrimeLabs
I'm a little disappointed that there is no mention of Raymond Scott [1], whom
Moog apprenticed for when he was in his teens.

[1] -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Scott#Electronics_and_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Scott#Electronics_and_research)

------
golergka
How can an article on history of synthesizers not mention a single drum
machine?

