What layers are made of... And modulation + "FX"

Have an urge to learn, or a calling to teach? Want to share some useful Youtube videos? Do it here!
Post Reply
RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

17 Apr 2018

Two sounds are mixed together (including a modified duplicate). I think the most important parts are crossfading and the basic, static features of a sound that can be changed (now 'truly' including adding delay and filtering next to features discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7506462).

...and that's all there is to layering. Unless I'm missing something? (Oh! Synchronization... sort of...)

Then there's modulation as a quick side topic. Everything mentioned earlier, can be modulated - whether automatically with LFOs, Envelopes, or live, velocity and automation. But that affects the generated sound as a whole, to taste. It's mostly a final step, where the generated sound comes to life.

Still pretty simple.

As for FX () - I could use some help here ~ we got:

- Frequency Modulation FM
- Amplitude Modulation AM
- Ring Modulation RM
- Almost forgot distortion
~ Bit crushing, down sampling (like, duh! xD)

What else? (Ignore things like chorus, phaser, reverb. etc. I only mean FX that change the sound in a raw way like the above few.)

Also, I think FM isn't that easy with a sample modulating another sample, since if I understood correctly, the carrier's pitch is modulated at high frequencies of the modulator (or rather high pitch) - now either the modulator is a long sample, or looped. Sadly, there's only so high NNXT can go, though I guess that can be solved with some self-sampling at higher pitches. - IF that is even going to squeeze out those new frequencies of the Carrier. I'd try that with the help of Thor's audio to CV... Oh damn, there still could be a problem with NNXT. Unless there's an easier solution with Thor. I'm not even sure it's really possible when it comes to doing FM with samples and not oscillators. - Heck, especially when it comes to using multiple operators.
AM and RM should be easier in case of samples. If I read right, in case of AM, it's a simple 'audio level' modulation of the carrier sample, with the modulator sample.
RM on the other hand takes negative values and somehow inverts them. Christ, how to do that in Thor, using samples...? xD

Finally, using samples is sort of a ghost topic here, but some later, to-be-discussed effects there will go into graining territory, but that will be deeper, for another topic. This is still just a generated raw sound which doesn't even really get any modulation yet.

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11170
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

17 Apr 2018

I would remove distortion and rather replace it by "Modify". As you can see, modifiers like in eXpanse are actually pretty famous and change the general waveform statically or dynamically through modulation. Also additive synths have a lot of modifiers. Maybe "morphing" can be called here too, like in Oberon or Spectra. Maybe PWM can be called a modifier here too, and is missing in your list.

I would not take envelopes aside, because they can have a huge impact. Just consider additive synths like Parsec or Spectra, which have individual envelopes for different spectra. A lot of sound are defined in there attack phase, rather than in sustain phase.

In general you are talking about modulation of the basic wave(forms) with different strategies, targeting the sound parts at all (frequency/pitch, volume).

Maybe what is missing in general is mixing of different waveforms, unison is the easiest part. Mixing different tuned/pitched/type of additional waveform has an impact too. Also different mixing types (subtractive, additive, ...), sync/unsync, phase offset and so on comes here in my mind.

Considering FM limitations with samples - i dont care, i do it. Just route a sampler through Thor and you are done. Regarding the resulting sound, well, depends on the frequency of the modulator and carrier. There are also other FM/RM/AM possibilities with samplers, just use Malstroem, Nostromo, PMS-20 and probably more...
Reason12, Win10

RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

17 Apr 2018

Loque wrote:
17 Apr 2018
I would remove distortion and rather replace it by "Modify". As you can see, modifiers like in eXpanse are actually pretty famous and change the general waveform statically or dynamically through modulation. Also additive synths have a lot of modifiers. Maybe "morphing" can be called here too, like in Oberon or Spectra. Maybe PWM can be called a modifier here too, and is missing in your list.

I would not take envelopes aside, because they can have a huge impact. Just consider additive synths like Parsec or Spectra, which have individual envelopes for different spectra. A lot of sound are defined in there attack phase, rather than in sustain phase.

In general you are talking about modulation of the basic wave(forms) with different strategies, targeting the sound parts at all (frequency/pitch, volume).

Maybe what is missing in general is mixing of different waveforms, unison is the easiest part. Mixing different tuned/pitched/type of additional waveform has an impact too. Also different mixing types (subtractive, additive, ...), sync/unsync, phase offset and so on comes here in my mind.

Considering FM limitations with samples - i dont care, i do it. Just route a sampler through Thor and you are done. Regarding the resulting sound, well, depends on the frequency of the modulator and carrier. There are also other FM/RM/AM possibilities with samplers, just use Malstroem, Nostromo, PMS-20 and probably more...
That's interesting now that I think of it, because the other "FX" that I mentioned, are in theory just the result of creative modulation, too. Something I'm a bit hesitant about, when it comes to sound design. That's because I feel like it's just a method; a creative combination of basic modulation techniques. I prefer to see what's going on, with total creative freedom.
I wouldn't mind, to say the least, if all these raw effects would be available in samplers, as well. Or if there for example was an FM device which has a carrier input and a modulator input (with all the necessary CV out, etc. so it works) - unless some are impossible.
I meant more simple envelopes, like the most common ADSR. - It could be that I haven't discovered the type of envelope you mentioned, yet. Sometimes it's easy to confuse some words (such as frequency - can be affecting pitch or filtering for example as far as I know).

Correct, my target is creating a complex, raw synthesizer voice with as much modulation possibilities as possible. Definitely starts out with an analog oscillator, and ends up being a sample - which I also want to modulate further with all the possibilities, and so on (which might or might not be grain effects).

The mixing of different waveforms is what I generalized (or wanted to) in the layering section. Say, we duplicate 1 sound and detune them, offset phases, etc.

Really good input, all in all! Thank you very much!

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11170
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

17 Apr 2018

RobC wrote:
17 Apr 2018
Or if there for example was an FM device which has a carrier input and a modulator input (with all the necessary CV out, etc. so it works)
THAT is on my whishlist since a long time! I dunno why nobody already created a simple RE synth without a oscillator, but rather audio inputs. I guess the problems come in, when we talk about polyphony and so on. There is (yet) no poly-audio in/out or build in poly CV in/out in Reason. Maybe there are more problems than i now can imagine. But i could live with mono atm (since i have Distributor). I cross my fingers for the coming update of Resonans...
Reason12, Win10

RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

17 Apr 2018

Loque wrote:
17 Apr 2018
RobC wrote:
17 Apr 2018
Or if there for example was an FM device which has a carrier input and a modulator input (with all the necessary CV out, etc. so it works)
THAT is on my whishlist since a long time! I dunno why nobody already created a simple RE synth without a oscillator, but rather audio inputs. I guess the problems come in, when we talk about polyphony and so on. There is (yet) no poly-audio in/out or build in poly CV in/out in Reason. Maybe there are more problems than i now can imagine. But i could live with mono atm (since i have Distributor). I cross my fingers for the coming update of Resonans...
For me, the monophonic would be enough, since like I said I just create a voice, and in the end, it will be a sample.
If synthesizers would have something like "per voice" output, monophonic effects wouldn't be that much of a problem. Unless I'm totally wrong. xD

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11170
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

17 Apr 2018

RobC wrote:
17 Apr 2018
Loque wrote:
17 Apr 2018


THAT is on my whishlist since a long time! I dunno why nobody already created a simple RE synth without a oscillator, but rather audio inputs. I guess the problems come in, when we talk about polyphony and so on. There is (yet) no poly-audio in/out or build in poly CV in/out in Reason. Maybe there are more problems than i now can imagine. But i could live with mono atm (since i have Distributor). I cross my fingers for the coming update of Resonans...
For me, the monophonic would be enough, since like I said I just create a voice, and in the end, it will be a sample.
If synthesizers would have something like "per voice" output, monophonic effects wouldn't be that much of a problem. Unless I'm totally wrong. xD
Did not said, it is not possible. Just for every voice an additional audio input. But the synths normally have only one (2 mono or 1 stereo) output. So in the end it remains mono. The audio out and in should share the same voice (tune) - that might be difficult in a poly setup if multiple audio out/in were used/possible. IN the end, a mono setup would be easier.

Dont forget, that a "sound" may consist of additional harmonics, which can also be created with chords (poly voice).
Reason12, Win10

RobC
Posts: 1832
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

17 Apr 2018

Loque wrote:
17 Apr 2018
RobC wrote:
17 Apr 2018


For me, the monophonic would be enough, since like I said I just create a voice, and in the end, it will be a sample.
If synthesizers would have something like "per voice" output, monophonic effects wouldn't be that much of a problem. Unless I'm totally wrong. xD
Did not said, it is not possible. Just for every voice an additional audio input. But the synths normally have only one (2 mono or 1 stereo) output. So in the end it remains mono. The audio out and in should share the same voice (tune) - that might be difficult in a poly setup if multiple audio out/in were used/possible. IN the end, a mono setup would be easier.

Dont forget, that a "sound" may consist of additional harmonics, which can also be created with chords (poly voice).
Yeah, as is what I suggested with the multiple outputs, that would make quite a clutter and confusion (then again, I wanted to create a 120 band vocoder with audio splitting and an envelope follower for each - talk about a cluttering...). Could come in handy, though sometimes.

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests