Using samples makes me feel like I didn't really write the track

[eilios]

You know all sound in the world is sine waves, right?

True in additive synthesis, not so much in others.

As for the whole "synths aren't beautiful" thing, to each their own. I'm not going to get into the whole "what's real music" debate because to be honest nobody wants this here, but evolving synth pads are absolutely gorgeous to listen to for me.

[SonicThHedgog]

Electronic music is about sound design more so than any other kind of music. Not making your own synth patches means you're missing out on a whole creative field. Start doing it. It's not just useful, it's also fun.

You do know _most_ piano VSTs use samples, right?

And the synth vst's that I some times use are sampled too, does that mean i dont own my synths ;(

[Tensei]

If Vst arps are just pitch shifted, how come the arps don't lose tempo? Also, the backing synth has to be stretched out, or the duration would be off.

Would it blow your mind if I told you that it's possible to pitchshift samples without changing their duration?

[Rozovian]

What happened to this thread?

All sound can be quite accurately represented as sine waves. Squares are odd harmonics of the fundamental, loud; triangles are a softening series of odd harmonics. With both odd and even harmonics, you get saws. Even with frequency-mangling synths like FM you can still recreate the sounds as distinct sine waves, it's just not practical to create those sounds using additive synthesis.

I really hate synths. Even after all those decades of development they're still sine/square/triangle/noise being inserted into effects and layered upon one another to generate a sound. I'm talking about realism here, if anyone bothered to read that. Synths can be amazing at what they do, but it's hard to come by a synth that's "beautiful" in the way you'd call a harp, a sitar or a very-well crafted acoustic guitar beautiful. Native-Instruments is making great progress with their traktor and reaktor range, though..

Dude, you really need to get out more. Not only are you generalizing all synths under your impression of basic subtractive synths, but you're assuming subtactive synths themselves can't be beautiful. This is a simple all-synth track I made the other day. It sounds like crap, doesn't it?

[redtails]

Dude, you really need to get out more. Not only are you generalizing all synths under your impression of basic subtractive synths, but you're assuming subtactive synths themselves can't be beautiful. This is a simple all-synth track I made the other day. It sounds like crap, doesn't it?

This thread was originally about using samples.

To answer your question, yes I do believe your arranged song would sound a lot better being played on an actual piano (or sample) and an actual violin (or sample). I'll greatly admit it's a very advanced piano VST you have there, though if you please, do compare to a sampled piano. The striking difference is the perfection of a VST (which can be a good thing at times) and the lack of artefacts (which can also be a good thing). With VSTs you can also go beyond reality and creativity is supposedly less bottle-necked. Sometimes it's said that limitations boost creativity

This is all leading to the fact that it's a matter of taste. It was also my opinion to say a synth can't be as beautiful as a recording. And you synth-lovers are certainly better presented at this forum than the haters

[Rozovian]

This thread was originally about using samples.

To answer your question, yes I do believe your arranged song would sound a lot better being played on an actual piano (or sample) and an actual violin (or sample). I'll greatly admit it's a very advanced piano VST you have there, though if you please, do compare to a sampled piano. The striking difference is the perfection of a VST (which can be a good thing at times) and the lack of artefacts (which can also be a good thing). With VSTs you can also go beyond reality and creativity is supposedly less bottle-necked. Sometimes it's said that limitations boost creativity

Nah, the thread was about using specific kinds of samples, like sampled phrases, parts, and loops rather than sampled instruments. At least, that's what the OP was about.

First of all, stop using VST as if VST=synth. I used _no_ VSTs in that song.

Second, 85 keys * 127 velocities + round robins + resonance + pedals... way too much trouble to avoid "perfection" and "lack of artefacts"... which you could change anyway. You don't think you could detune the a string or add pedal or hammer noise to your liking? Or are you talking about qualities inherent in the sampling itself rather than in the physical instrument?

Third, where are you getting " an actual violin" from? If I wanted a violin-sounding instrument, don't you think I could have picked one more violin-like? Maybe I wanted oscillating glasses, or

Fourth, my example would sound a lot better if I could actually play piano.

[Arcana]

I dunno, I think you should use whatever you want. For a long time, I avoided samples and loops, even ones that I thought were really cool, because I wanted to be "a real composer".

That's a load of bull, you can take existing stuff, slice it up, process it, crunch it up, filter it away, whatever. If it gets you one step closer to where you want to go with your song, then go ahead and use it even if it's not your own personally handcrafted loop with personally-handcrafted synths.

When I started music I read a lot of OCR and there was a huge anti-loop bias around here. I think that was a problem for me (I had no music training) because it denied me an easy way to simply get started. It's like trying to learn how to color things by being given a brush and oils, rather than being given crayons and a coloring book. You can make something good, given enough years of practice with oils, but sometimes you just want to get something done now and have it look reasonably good.

So yeah, I love presets and loops and stuff, but I also do this kind of thing for fun and not as a secret dream to become a super-elite musician or something.

[Nabeel Ansari]

This thread was originally about using samples.

To answer your question, yes I do believe your arranged song would sound a lot better being played on an actual piano (or sample) and an actual violin (or sample). I'll greatly admit it's a very advanced piano VST you have there, though if you please, do compare to a sampled piano. The striking difference is the perfection of a VST (which can be a good thing at times) and the lack of artefacts (which can also be a good thing). With VSTs you can also go beyond reality and creativity is supposedly less bottle-necked. Sometimes it's said that limitations boost creativity

This is all leading to the fact that it's a matter of taste. It was also my opinion to say a synth can't be as beautiful as a recording. And you synth-lovers are certainly better presented at this forum than the haters

Stop being an acoustic instrument elitist and stop posting offtopic babble in this thread.

[SonicThHedgog]

Because of this thread im going to buy a violin, timpany,drums, a $20,000 steinway, a MXL-Genesis II mic, and handmake my guitar when i already bought one to get a "beautiful' realistic sound ;P

prey for me somebody.

[Tensei]

This thread was originally about using samples.

To answer your question, yes I do believe your arranged song would sound a lot better being played on an actual piano (or sample) and an actual violin (or sample). I'll greatly admit it's a very advanced piano VST you have there, though if you please, do compare to a sampled piano. The striking difference is the perfection of a VST (which can be a good thing at times) and the lack of artefacts (which can also be a good thing). With VSTs you can also go beyond reality and creativity is supposedly less bottle-necked. Sometimes it's said that limitations boost creativity

This is all leading to the fact that it's a matter of taste. It was also my opinion to say a synth can't be as beautiful as a recording. And you synth-lovers are certainly better presented at this forum than the haters

It's not even a 'synth-lover' thing. I don't make synthesizer based music at all but even I can acknowledge that they can be just as expressive as acoustic or sampled instruments. How does saying that synthesizers as an instrument can sound as beautiful as acoustic instruments make me a 'synth-lover' in any way?

Your limitations= creativity argument (which I think is an incredibly stupid point anyway, but that aside) is generally applied to composition, NOT sound design.

I also believe it's important to draw a line between physical modelling and run of the mill subtractive synthesis. While physically modelled instruments generally won't be as convincing as high-quality sample libraries, they can definitely hold their own against cheaper sample libraries.

As for other types of sound design; does your assertion that synths are inherently inferior to acoustic instruments mean that you consider electronic music to generally be inferior to other types of music as well?

I can think of plenty synthesizer-centric songs that I would consider 'beautiful'.

[redtails]

@Rozovian

To answer your questions; a very advanced piano synth might account for stuff like resonance, damper pedal, sustain pedal, hammer noise, key noise, differences in velocity etc. Yet up until now I have not yet seen such an advanced synth, they're all sampled (Synthogy Ivory, Alicia's Keys). So in a way, a sampled piano will generally be more realistic than a synthesizer piano not using samples. I mentioned violin because I thought it'd sound good being played by a violin , piano + violin is a very good combination

@neblix

I am sorry to hear that, I was merely answering questions that arose

@Tensei

Okay you're right about my prejudice about synth-lovers, it's not really related. May I ask where you got the info from that limitations only boost creativity during composition and not during sound design? I don't think I said synths are inferior to non-synths, lack of beauty is not equivalent to inferiority

[Tensei]

@Tensei

Okay you're right about my prejudice about synth-lovers, it's not really related. May I ask where you got the info from that limitations only boost creativity during composition and not during sound design?

I think this point is flawed thinking in the first place, no matter whether it's applied to composition or sound design.

In terms of composition, it only applies if you don't even have a basic idea of what you want to write, so you spend more time experimenting with different sample banks than actually putting down music. In this case, sure, maybe it would be beneficial to be limited to only one instrument sound, but I don't think this is the right mindset to be writing music anyway.

If you have a clear idea of what you're going to write, but you find that your samples aren't adequate to play what you envision, wouldn't you say that this limitation actually hampers your creativity?

I know that I definitely get bummed out if something like this happens to me, and in this case I definitely wish for fewer 'limitations' (i.e. access to better samples).

This applies similarly to sound design. If you don't know what sound you want, you'll just spend time messing around with the various settings on the synth, and nothing might come of it.

If, on the other hand you have a clear goal of the sound you're aiming for, this, again, can get hampered by the fact that the synth isn't versatile enough, or that the oscillators are of insufficient quality.

I don't think I said synths are inferior to non-synths, lack of beauty is not equivalent to inferiority

When you say that synthesizers aren't capable of generating 'beautiful' sounds, that implies an inherent inferiority when compared to other instruments that are capable of it.

[Nabeel Ansari]

@Rozovian

To answer your questions; a very advanced piano synth might account for stuff like resonance, damper pedal, sustain pedal, hammer noise, key noise, differences in velocity etc. Yet up until now I have not yet seen such an advanced synth, they're all sampled (Synthogy Ivory, Alicia's Keys). So in a way, a sampled piano will generally be more realistic than a synthesizer piano not using samples. I mentioned violin because I thought it'd sound good being played by a violin , piano + violin is a very good combination

You're missing the point, Redtails. You're treating the word "VST" as if it equals a synthesizer. No one uses synthesizers to replicate real instruments. There are very few people who try. You're stating the obvious to people who have been doing this for a long time.

A VST is a plug in. It can either be a sampler or a synth. Alicia's Keys is a sample library for Kontakt. KONTAKT IS A VST.

[Rozovian]

No one uses synthesizers to replicate real instruments.

*ahem*

But yes, A VST is a plugin, which can be a sampler, a synth, and effect, or possibly something else. Logic uses Mac OS X's own plugin format, AU. If you mean to say virtual instrument, say that instead.

btw, didn't we have a discussion about using loops fairly recently? Could be worth linking to.

[Nabeel Ansari]

*ahem*

But yes, A VST is a plugin, which can be a sampler, a synth, and effect, or possibly something else. Logic uses Mac OS X's own plugin format, AU. If you mean to say virtual instrument, say that instead.

btw, didn't we have a discussion about using loops fairly recently? Could be worth linking to.

I meant no one prefers it over samplers. It hasn't gotten to that point yet.

And it's off topic anyway. This discussion is about recorded excerpts and loops, not sample libraries for samplers. We've already cleared this up back in the first page.

[redtails]

@Tensei

you've now stated several points that are all true. Without vision, there will be no product, without means there will be no perfection. The thing I was thinking of was that there's no real difference between choosing from a near infinite amount of possibilities (very few limitations) and not being able to pick a favourite at all (a lot of limitations). Yet in the case of limited choices, a choice will be made timely. Henceforth, limited possibilities forces the artist to focus more on making the best of his means

And that's not what inferior means here. A bike is inferior to a car on the motorway, but superior in the city. Likewise, synthesizers are superior to symphonic instruments when it comes to versatility. Does that automatically mean electronic music is superior to symphonic music? of course not

[prophetik music]

No one uses synthesizers to replicate real instruments

whoops, might not want to generalize that much, considering there's so many VSTs where the only thing they do is simulate real instruments.

[Nabeel Ansari]

whoops, might not want to generalize that much, considering there's so many VSTs where the only thing they do is simulate real instruments.

I meant usage, not development. Synths don't measure up to samples.