Open source modular synth software lets you create 70s & 80s electronic music
openculture.com
openculture.com
Hardware is much more hands on, with real dials, switches, and other means of physical interaction which screens and mice don't come close to matching. Hardware does exist through which musicians can interact with computers, but it's usually MIDI, which has its own limitations compared to fully analog gear.
With hardware you generally don't have to worry about software or OS updates, and the hardware generally continues to "just work" for a long time.
A lot of uncommon analog hardware is very unlikely to ever be modeled in software, so the way it reacts when manipulated may never actually be matched in software (even when the potential to do so is in principle there if anyone ever bothered to create a high quality model of it in software). This extends to how it sounds as well, for the same reason.
That said, modular synth software like this is still great, and may be the next best thing to using the real thing. It's also a great way to learn and get a taste for what's possible before committing money to buying any hardware.
A truly amazing bit of software, and it has also been a very rewarding experience to be an early adopter of this suite, because the progress made so far by the developers is nothing short of astonishing - not to mention the uptake and adoption by a lot of the more cocktail/unique modular designers out there ... many of whom, seem to have taken VCV Rack as their new standard test-bench for working out ideas before hardware prototyping - meaning we have a huge plethora of modules to play with!
Anyone interested in synthesisers NEEDS to put a weekend or two worth of effort into learning VCV Rack and creating their own stacks. Its really a very, very valuable bit of software - and its free! And its open source! So, you interested-in-programming-synthesizer-algorithm folks can get started with very, very little fuss, already ..
This is the same for electronic test equipment as well. There are so many features crammed in new devices, even if you manage to get enough controls for the basic cases on the front panel, a lot is still hidden in nested menus galore and they aren't necessarily sensible or discoverable or even work properly. This results in semi-religious fighting over which update is the least shit and people refusing to accept updates because they fear them.
The outcome, at least with electronics, is that you'll find a lot of 30-40 year old equipment nestling next to the state of the art with a sticker on it "for indication only". This equipment does a lot of the real work while the new stuff is used for validation and traceable measurements only. Due to rapid progress in technology, people cling to the last thing they felt any physical connection with.
This will pass in time as the status quo is accepted for younger generations. Fly by wire it is.
(I am incidentally a rather large fan of analogue and modular synthesizers and half built one in the late 1990s with 1970's electronic equipment, some of which I still own!)
I'm currently building digital instruments for android phones and I refuse to add any UI elements until I figure out something that makes sense. Until then the interpreted Lua code is the user interface. I would be very interested in some new UI patterns for touchscreen that take good advantage of interaction between user actions and visual feedback.
There is a good option - but the current, dumb UX fad, rejects it whoreheartedly. That option is keyboard. Give everything a keyboard shortcut and let the user learn them (if at least by providing a visual overlay listing shortcuts straight on the interface).
If something is a tool - not a shiny cloud SaaS toy intent on getting audience to drive the hockey-stick graph straight into acquihire - users will learn keyboard shortcuts.
My knobs look like software, I refuse to do screw heads, metal finishes, etc.
I haven't done much touch screen software, so no comments there.
Audiomulch has a graphical interface. Signals are processed by constructing a graph where each line represents an audio channel that can be routed between blocks that perform specific functions.
Supercollider is more like a programming language, you can think of it as a DSL for audio generation.
Both of them can interface with hardware, of course.
I think there will always be a strong demand for tactile hardware interfaces, regardless of what people come up with on a laptop application. The kinaesthetics of making sound by manipulating something physical is so satisfying and intimate.
I don't think there's anything wrong with displays. They offer immediate and quick insight into internal state and operation. The issues appear when you introduce modal workflow, with some features only available in some modes.
Worst offenders in category of hardware equipment are probably guitar multi-effects and synthesizer workstations. They cram so much functionality with so little thought given to flow and usability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CdMvkBOUgs
I believe quite strongly that for most people, utilizing hardware of some kind (pad controllers, keyboards, etc.) is essential for making music. Music is generally made by playing instruments. It is the small errors, the groove, the emphasis, the spirit/heart/soul of playing an instrument, that makes music feel alive and interesting and vital. If you're just clicking around with a mouse, you're programming it, and programmed music sounds programmed. Overly precise, inhuman, etc.
In Glenn Gould's debut on US television, conductor Leonard Bernstein talks about - and then demonstrates - the difference between rote, mechanical playing of a score (i.e. "programmed music") vs. a performer's interpretation of it (i.e. the heart & soul that I'm talking about). The discussion starts around here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Nx09pigZRI&feature=youtu.be...
For those that can't justify spending about $1k for one, their Pocket Operator series is pretty fantastic.
I also recently bought myself a Novation Circuit, which honestly has the feeling of Teenage Engineering's interface design (minus a lot of the whimsy). For about $300, it's a fantastic little groovebox that I'll be getting a LOT of mileage out of.
Edit: formatting.
I would also feel compelled to still buy an OP-1, though, since they obviously put a lot of effort into R&D.
I do wish for a cheap knobby controller like the maudio axiom or novation SL mk2 that has reliable faders, pots and encoders. Those are the one instrument product i would say you should buy new and get the extended warranty from Sam ash or Guitar center. When the pots start shooting out lots of spurious midi CC's, deoxit's not going to save you. Deoxit's great for making door hinges stop squeaking tho
Every couple of years I get this fancy idea of "I'd really like to create some sounds/music", which usually ends up with me aimlessly manipulating digital knobs and switches on some massive UI, creating weird sounds with no real structure and changing all the default settings. The other option being something like FruityLoops, but doing anything in there kinda feels like making "Lego music" due to just slapping together samples.
The closest I ever got to creating something like "music" was actually through a game, FRACT OSC, which I think is still really cool. But I guess for most professionals the toolset in there is just very basic and it also suffers from the same "Lego music" feel of just slapping together samples.
Then there's stuff like SoundStage VR, which looks quite amazing to tinker around in, but due to a lack of VR setup, it's not something I had a chance to play around with yet. But the basic idea of making music in VR really appeals to me, it's just so cyberpunk and feels like it could be way more approachable, at least compared to something like software synths with their intimidating UI.
Here's a rough crash course from someone who also struggled to get started:
1: You start out with a wave (sine, saw, pulse, etc). No synth starts out with a pure form of these waves. They all add a little color. Most synths have 2-5 oscillators (they produce the waves), often with each having different controls.
2: The filter constrains the sound. So, for example, if you wanted to make a bassy instrument, you'd filter out most of the high frequencies. The Attack, Sustain, Delay, and Release settings affect length and volume over time. This is what you use to turn waves into plucks, kicks, claps, strings, and anything else you can think of.
3: Most synths have at least 2 LFOs, or low frequency oscillators. You can connect these to different controls across the synth and change the timbre in weird, sometimes unpredictable and amazing ways. With Helm in particular, you click the little helmet by the LFO and drag the little bars on the different controls to change how much the LFO affects it. You'll see a little green bar pop out and move with the LFO. Serum has a separate tab with LFOs and routing to synth controls.
Starting with a relatively simple subtractive software synth that uses primitive "analog" waveforms -- like, say, Tal-Uno-62 (https://tal-software.com/products/tal-u-no-62) -- is probably the best way to play around with learning synthesis. It's a lot harder to create a "bad" sound in a simple subtractive synth, and in something like Tal-Uno-62, there aren't a whole lot of possibly confusing menu options and buttons.
Samples and wavetable synthesis are also relatively easy to get a "good" sound of quickly. Most are structured, architecture wise like a subtractive synthesizer, you just replace the primitive waveform with either a sample, or a bank of digital waveforms.
FM and additive (and spectral and granular) are neat techniques, but IMHO way more finicky to program. (They are also techniques where the software interface is quite welcome! Programming a DX sound in the (free and open source) Dexed VST is quite a bit easier to do than it is on a Yamaha DX7's two-line LCD screen and buttons.)
For the parent poster: I understand that quite a few professionals, particularly in loop / beat oriented music genres (such as hip hop / trap, EDM, and reggaeton) use FL Studio quite a bit! The nice thing about FL Studio is that it has a nice intuitive layout for beat-making. It's what I'd personally recommend for someone just wanting to mess with synthesizer beats. (My personal favorite is Reaper but I don't tend to write beat oriented stuff. :) )
Interesting, for me additive is the most intuitive. I find it easier to visualize sums of sine waves than subtracting harmonics from a more complex waveform (such as a sawtooth), particularly when considering the use of notch or bandpass filters. But that may have a lot to do with my education, which featured a heavy dose of Fourier Transforms and associated techniques.
On the other hand, "simple" additive with relatively few partials is actually pretty easy too. (The Hammond B3 and other tonewheel organs are essentially additive synthesizers.) A lot of software (your Alchemys and Razors) is built on a simplified version of additive too, or uses additive techniques to perform "resynthesis", or has other tools that "simplify" some of the additive editing.
The version history on KVR is interesting: https://www.kvraudio.com/product/circle-by-future-audio-work...
Helm's first release was August 3, 2015: https://github.com/mtytel/helm/releases
Circle's first release was also August 3, 2015. Maybe they're developed by the same person.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atvtBE6t48M
Also, go ahead and try Propellerhead Reason (free to play with, you can save, but can't open saved files). It's the best one on the UX side. However I have to admit I'm using it for 10+ years now.
Check out this Minilogue review playlist by Marc Doty of Automatic Gainsay. You can see what's happening on the oscilloscope while he's explaining things.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAGrtvdn2CyYwV6gxgiXv...
FruityLoops is a great start to learn the basics of audio sequencing such as: tracks, beats, bars, measures, tempo, basic mixing and effects.
Once you've mastered FruityLoops, I'd recommend switching to Cubase or Ableton Live. There are a lot of VST ( Virtual Instruments ) synths available for free which can offer a lot of unique tones ( not pre-sampled audio ).
There are a lot of YouTube tutorials available now for all these tools, which can really help. Reddit also has a few good sized subreddits for digital music production and is a good place to get help or advice.
The software itself is a bit pricey and only runs on Mac or Windows but I've found it very helpful for getting an intuitive sense of what the different synth options actually change.
If you want to create music without fiddling with UI you could also look into -- Sonic Pi[http://sonic-pi.net/] or Overtone[http://overtone.github.io/]
I plan on purchasing it but I'm waiting for the "hey you haven't signed up yet so here's a discount" email to come because their marketing strategy is very familiar.
For learning sound design, first pick a type of synthesis (as others have talked about). Most people start with subtractive synthesis and it is by far the most popular. So much so that bits of it overlap into other tools that focus on different forms of synthesis (e.g. lowpass filters as part of a wavetable synth). As for plugins, you can't go wrong with synth1. It's free, does more than what you'll need to start (you can just ignore knobs until you understand them), and has clear labels. Start with an initial patch (should be a basic sine wave IIRC) and build up from there.
Learn what the different components actually do to the waveform. You can't think of it like "this makes the sound more like this" since how it changes the sound depends on the rest of the parameters. This is probably why you end up "aimlessly manipulating ... knobs and switches".
For actually writing music (not just tweaking your bloop sounds), Ableton has a fantastic interactive guide [0] that takes you through everything you really need to make music. Everything else builds on top of that and is arguably unnecessary. It also includes great examples. There is also practically infinite information out there around writing music. Go get some.
While focusing on writing actual music: don't be afraid of presets. There's nothing wrong with using them, especially if you are just learning. Nothing in music is 100% original. At the end of the day, all that matters is that it sounds good (and you're not blatantly copying others' work). You can start to use your own sounds once you learn more about actual synthesis. As you start to learn more synthesis, try finding a preset that is close to the sound you want and then tweak it to your liking.
As far as DAWs, don't assume there is "one perfect DAW" for you. FL Studio might just not suit you. While all major DAWs should be able to achieve the same things, they often go about it differently. Depending heavily on how you want to work, some will be harder for you. You'll likely end up learning more than one eventually, so try out a few. Once you find one that starts to click, STOP SWITCHING. Stick to that one as long as you possibly can.
REAPER [2] is a great option for beginners since it has very generous pricing and trial. However, it's not just a "beginner DAW" -- it is fully capable professional software.
The key to making any progress learning is focus.
[1]: https://learningmusic.ableton.com/ [2]: https://www.reaper.fm/
Addendum: I mentioned learning what knobs do to the waveform, but I never explained how. There are plenty of options, but the most basic way that you can set that up right now for free is to grab REAPER, synth1, and some free oscilloscope plugin. This very basic setup will take you extremely far in learning synthesis.
That's a distinction I've totally missed until now, as you pointed out, I've mostly thought about synths like they are traditional music instruments, which ain't really the case and as such added a lot to my confusion about "How to make something other than noise with this?".
Thank you for, yet another, very helpful comment! I'm literally blown away by the sheer number, and quality, of useful resources and information being shared here. Kudos to the HN community!
For instance, the Roland Gaia is a good example... almost all its controls are knobs or sliders and there isn't a whole lot hidden in it. But there are similar software versions. And a synth like that is just a bunch of modules more or less hard-wired together.
If you reset it and turn as much off as you can, it is much easier to get some insight into how these things work.
When I was learning how to program a synth, I did a little of research on how to create a snare drum sound with a subtractive synth, and when I had that, I worked on creating a tom-tom, a bass drum, etc. Then I tried the same with a "horn" sound or a "string sound".
That won't get you very far, but it's a lot more solid of an approach than just noodling. I like to mess around with stuff too, but it's easier to learn when I'm trying to do something intentional.
Open your mouth in a 'neutral' position and make a sound. That's an oscillator. Tensing your throat will change the waveform (on a synth that would be square, pulse, sawtooth).
Purse and widen your lips, make a 'wow' sound: that's a low-pass filter (which cuts off higher sound frequencies).
Make a 'shhh' sound: white noise. Purse your lips, make it sound like wind blowing: band-pass filter (which only lets certain frequencies through).
Turn that wind noise into a whistle: now you're adding filter resonance. As that noise becomes a pure tone, the filter becomes self-oscillating.
Add some vibrato to your sound (like an opera singer), or change the pitch (like a siren), and you're adding modulation.
Doing this in a room, or large hall: now you're changing the reverb (reverberation). In a canyon with echoes: delay.
Often, this is also a useful method to work out how to program a subtle or complicated patch (a sound preset on a synth, so named because early modular synths used telephone patch cables to make the necessary connections).
Aside: I've often wondered what a human choir, making 'synthy' sounds, would be able to do with something like Jarre's classic Oxygène IV...
But how to end up with actual music/a melody doing this? Do you manipulate the sound live? Do you record different samples, made that way, and stick them together with a sequencer? Or do you switch between different, predefined, patches on the fly to kinda "play" it like an instrument?
Sorry if these questions are basic, but this has always fascinated me with synth music: Creating beautiful melodies out of something that starts out pretty much just as "noise", it's kinda like magic.
Been using VCV rack for a bit and its fairly awesome (Usually over MIDI sequenced via BitWig).
(If you've been active in digital music for a while it's easy to forget how little the general public knows about stuff like this, and a title that goes "did you know you can do X with Y?" is better than a dry factual title)
You can check them out here: https://github.com/Miserlou/RJModules
There were no digital modulars in the 70s and 80s, and certainly nothing like the granular synthesis or physical modelling available today. A more meaningful comparison in that context would've been against something like a Roland System 100M or Moog Modular: instruments with real analog electronics.
It's the same code. The Mutable Instruments modules are all open source.
Sigh.
I do both - I have all the sources for all the public modules I can find (and there are usually about two more added, on average, every day by the community... WOW!) and I build VCV Rack from sources every week or so, just to see the development pace (and what a pace it is!), but I also just go through the web page, use an account, install the free plugins through the Plugin Manager feature, and so on.
It helps to compare the two while developing my own plugins.
And I have to say that this app is amazing! I've rekindled my love for modular synthesis (been into synths since the 70's) because of this app, and its all I'm taking to my bands jam sessions these days -replacing a suite of digital/DSP synths that I was previously relying on.
There are at least two fundamentally flawed assumptions behind your post.
1. Electronic music isn't just about endless options and capabilities. Endless options give you endless search space to navigate.
2. The idea that generic computers are always better than dedicated hardware is rather archaic, because with modern technology you can integrate powerful computers into dedicated hardware very cheaply.
There is a huge difference between using a fully integrated, though-out hardware synthesizer versus using a MIDI controller mapped to some plugin in a DAW. There is a reason thousands of musicians still buy analog gear, VA synths and fully digital FX pedals.
https://patchstorage.com/platform/vcv-rack
A couple in there might qualify for your "full stack" requirement - or are at least pretty close.
I'd be happy to hear you found something - for my needs I've got a 'full stack' consisting of a 4-voice poly VCO/VCA/VCF standard, a little sequencer, and a drum synth - but its not really in a condition where I could share it since I built some of the modules with special configuration from sources... however, if I've wanted to sit down and create a stack from the standard modules for a while, so .. lets see who gets there first! :)
Put simply, this is Pure Data on acid.
VCVrack is open source, but as an end user you're not dealing with the low-level stuff out in the open the same way you would in PD. It's a completed object rather than a set of legos.
Having said that, You're right about the GUI. The PD GUI is... primitive, to say the least.
VCV/Eurorack is a simplified rather dated synthesis model for people who don't want to go that low. It's ideal for people who just want to noodle around plugging and unplugging things and turning knobs.
I've been sketching ideas for a next-gen synthesis language which is more powerful than PD/sc, keeps some elements of modular thinking, but adds some useful creative extensions.
If I'm really lucky I'll find the time to do something with the ideas in the new few years.
Reaktor 6 had a similar thing happen, lots of people who hadn't used it before were brought into that ecosystem by their "blocks", which also kinda emulate Eurorack.
When will VST/AU support be added?
VST/AU support will be added with the “VCV Bridge” module in Rack v0.6.0, scheduled for release in late January 2018.
Rack itself won’t be a VST/AU plugin because of the major limitations of these formats, but instead you’ll be able to connect Rack to your main DAW by adding the lightweight VST/AU Bridge plugin to as many DAW channels/tracks as you like, which will each connect an equal number of Bridge modules in Rack. This cross-application method allows you to break the mindset of mixing linearly in your DAW and instead use nonlinear methods like cross-modulation between tracks, enveloping audio to control filters and sidechain compressors, etc. The Bridge protocol will be fault tolerant and will not matter which order you open the DAWs.