The Musical Art of Synthesis

New synths with unique features and layers of complexity

are released frequently, with hundreds of different synths
currently available in the marketplace. How do you know
which ones to use and how do you get the most out of the
ones you already own? The Musical Art of Synthesis presents
synthesizer programming with a specific focus on synthesis
as a musical tool. Through its innovative design, this title
offers an applied approach by providing a breakdown of syn-
thesis methods by type, the inclusion of step-by-step patch
recipes, and extensive web-based media content including
tutorials, demonstrations, and additional background infor-
mation. Sam McGuire and Nathan van der Rest guide you
to master synthesis and transcend the technical aspects as a
musician and artist.
Synths are presented using a multi-tiered system beginning
with basic instructions for all common synth techniques. His-
torical information is included for each type of synth, which is
designed to help you understand how each instrument relates
to the bigger picture. Advanced level instruction focuses on
modern implementations and on mobile devices, with spe-
cial focus on performing and practical usage. The goal of The
Musical Art of Synthesis is to bring all of the different types of
synthesis together in the same discussion and encourage you
to see the similarities and differences that force you to gain a
better overall understanding of the synthesis process.
Key features of this title:
• This book will teach you how to put synthesizers to use with
easy-to-use synth patch recipes.
• Using a unique, multitiered approach applicable to the level
of equipment in use, this publication introduces concepts that
apply to a wide range of hardware/software synthesizers.
• A robust companion website, featuring video demonstra-
tions by synthesizer experts, further supports the book:
www.focalpress.com/cw/mcguire.
Sam McGuire, an active audio engineer, composer, and Uni-
versity of Colorado Denver faculty member, is the primary
author on three audio technology books and multiple audio
software instructional videos. He has scored and mixed mul-
tiple award-winning documentary and feature films.
Nathan van der Rest is a University of Colorado Denver
graduate student and a professional audio engineer and
composer.
THE MUSICAL ART
OF SYNTHESIS

Sam McGuire and

Nathan van der Rest
First published 2016
by Focal Press
70 Blanchard Road, Suite 402, Burlington, MA 01803
and by Focal Press
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
Focal Press is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2016 Taylor & Francis
The right of Sam McGuire and Nathan van der Rest to be identified as the authors
of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised
in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or
retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.
Notices
Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing. As new
research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods,
professional practices, or medical treatment may become necessary.
Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and
knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or
experiments described herein. In using such information or methods they should be
mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they
have a professional responsibility.
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are
used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
McGuire, Sam, author.
The musical art of synthesis / Sam McGuire and Nathan van der Rest.
  pages cm
1. Synthesizer (Musical instrument)—Instruction and study. 2. Electronic music—
Instruction and study. I. Rest, Nathan van der, author. II. Title.
MT724.M36 2016
786.7’4—dc23
2015006003
ISBN: 978-1-138-82978-7 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-138-82977-0 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-73759-1 (ebk)

Typeset in Palatino
By Apex CoVantage, LLC
This page intentionally left blank
CONTENTS

Prefaceviii

1 Subtractive Synthesis 1

2 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis 60

3 Modulation Synthesis 94

4 Additive Synthesis 120

5 Wavetable Synthesis 175

6 Granular Synthesis 200

7 Vector Synthesis 244

8 Combination Synthesis and Modeling 273

9 Performing Live 315

Glossary357

Index368

vii
PREFACE

Most musical instruments are locked into sounding a cer-

tain way. In a blindfolded listening test, you could identify a
piano from a guitar. Most of the time, you could also tell if an
instrument is a synthesizer; but because of the wide-ranging
sonic palette available in synthesis, you might not be able
to guess correctly. Perhaps it sounds like a gentle breeze or
like the crickets on a summer evening. It could sound like a
robot from the future or a flute from medieval times. There
are synths that sound like electric guitars or fog horns. Synths
are instruments that don’t necessarily require musical ability
in the traditional sense, but when you explore further, you’ll
discover that they have a soul in the same way that a Stradi-
varius violin does; both require the touch of a musical artist
to bring them to life at their fullest potential.

Recipe Creation
It’s easy to focus on the technical aspects of synthesizers
because so many of them require advanced knowledge when
programming, because many vintage synths are aging, and
because you have to have technical skills to keep them fully
functional. New synths with unique features and layers of
complexity are released frequently, with hundreds of differ-
ent synths currently available in the marketplace. How do
you know which ones to use and how do you get the most
out of the ones you already own? What does it take to master
synthesis and transcend the technical aspects as a musician
and artist? That’s why this book exists, because we asked
those questions and we want to share what we found with
you. We didn’t, however, approach it haphazardly; we want

viii
 Preface

Figure 0.1 Synth recipe.

to be sure that you will transform as a person as you read

this and that you return often to these pages as the learning
process evolves.
There is a spectrum on which you fall when you use synthe-
sizers and it starts with using presets and ends with the cre-
ation of patches from your own imagination. Unfortunately
it isn’t possible to put a lifetime of knowledge into a single
book, but what we’ve done is something that is as close as we
could make it. You see, Nathan and I have smelled the dust
of original Arps and we have patched instruments crafted by
Moog’s own hands. We’ve tinkered for thousands of hours
in the dim light with patch cables and knobs, and with each
passing day, we have gained new insights into how each
synthesizer lives and breathes. We remember the first synth
we ever touched and catalog our lives in terms of the synths
we’ve owned.
One day not too long ago, as we were preparing for the third
annual Electronicatopia concert on the University of Colo-
rado Denver’s campus, we started designing a system of
patch recipes that could be used to create sounds on a range

ix
Preface

of synthesizers. That’s when we decided to make a master

spreadsheet of every hardware synthesizer ever released,
which includes a comparison of every major parameter. The
idea is that with an analysis of the similarities of every synth,
we can create a patch template which matches the largest pool
of instruments and permits a single recipe to work univer-
sally. It might sound like a simple task with obvious results,
but synthesizers are widely different and we had to overcome
challenges that sometimes proved difficult.

A unified recipe system as a learning tool is going to change

the way you understand basic synthesis. You will be able to
create patches in Logic Pro that translate onto an Oberheim
and into Ableton and beyond. It’s not hard to learn the indi-
vidual parameters and you can start tweaking your synths
immediately, but our goal is for you to be proficient on the
technical side of synthesis so that you can progress to explore
the art and musicality of these amazing instruments.

The recipes are designed very carefully to provide insight

into how things work together and to showcase patches for
near instant use and also to teach you how to program your
own. Recipes can be used in a variety of ways and much of
this depends on your skill level. You can use them exactly as
written to program sounds, or you can use them as launching
pads for endless exploration. The recipes are designed pri-
marily with subtractive synthesis as the primary focus, but
in time, there is the possibility of expanding into some of the
more difficult to document formats such as FM synthesis and
Wavetable synthesis.

Synth Addiction
The past few years have experienced a synthesizer renais-
sance, and prices for some rare instruments have skyrock-
eted. Several instruments that were readily discarded a few
years ago as new digital technology was released are now dif-
ficult to find and quite expensive to buy. A functional Moog
Modular is impossible to come by and there are many others

x
 Preface

that new generations of synth users will only be able to read

about online or in books. Some “vintage” synths which aren’t
as popular are available at discounted prices such as Yama-
ha’s DX-7 or much of the Casio line.
There are also many new software and hardware synths for
sale, such as the modular Eurorack synths, which are cur-
rently making their mark on the music industry. There are
small synths and big synths, with software emulators and
analog replications. Mobile phones and tablets have enabled
ultracheap and portable synths that sound quite good and fit
in your pocket. It feels like an epidemic that started with a
small group of synthesizers and synth users, but it has spread
to the general public across the world.
There is a bug that many synth owners catch which often
turns into an unstoppable addiction and causes perfectly
rational people to sell their possessions and obsessively stalk
eBay for synthesizers. This addictive behavior fuels the fire
for manufacturers to make new synths and keeps innovation
alive in a field that could have easily folded when computers
became strong enough to model classic synthesizers. One of
the draws for hardware synths is that you have the tactile
experience of turning knobs and patching cables.
Why are synths so popular? What are synths used for in the
modern world? Some are used in the studio on records and
others are used on stage for live performances. Some synths,
however, are used for the sake of creative outlet by the synth
purists that envision themselves as mad scientists hunkered
over an invention brought to life after being patched together
in the same way as Frankenstein’s monster. These synthesiz-
ers are often controlled without musical keyboards, which
are seen as an unnecessary crutch for the expert program-
mer; instead, the sounds are triggered by step sequencers,
sample and hold modules, and other creative voltage control
solutions.
How many synths do I have in my home studio? There are
more than I care to admit and even if I did count them up,

xi
Preface

it would only take a few weeks before that number changes.

My goal is to have one from every manufacturer and at least
one of every type. It’s getting close, but just like every junkie,
I go through phases where I wonder if I should give them up.
My newest rule is that if I don’t use any one of them at least
once a month then I should consider replacing it with some-
thing else. I am a mild case because there are musicians with
entire rooms dedicated to their synthesizers and they have
hundreds of synths and modules.

Hands-on Learning Process

If you read this book from cover to cover and expect to be a
synthesizer expert, but you don’t spend a lot of time experi-
menting and creating patches on an actual synthesizer, then
you will be disappointed. We are going to teach you the names
of all of the parts and we’ll teach you how to create sounds:
this is equivalent to memorizing vocabulary when learning a
new language but never speaking it out loud. Speaking is an
important part of learning a new language and is critical to
mastering the necessary skills.

To get the most out of each section of this book, it is rec-

ommended that you follow along with a synth and put the
concepts into immediate practice. This helps cement your
understanding of the topics and then repetition reinforces
that knowledge for future reference. You aren’t going to be
able to master your instruments in a single sitting, but if you
take a consistent approach to using them and learning their
quirks, then it’s only a matter of time before you’ll know
them inside and out.

If you don’t have a synthesizer that matches the type dis-

cussed in a particular chapter, then there are a couple options.
Since it is critical that you have an instrument to practice with,
you should either borrow or purchase an instrument. If you
have a tablet or smart phone, then it is relatively cheap to buy
app versions of each synth type, but if you are on a laptop
or desktop, then one good option is to pick the right digital

xii
 Preface

Figure 0.2 Our favorite DAW,

Logic Pro X.

audio workstation (DAW) that has all of the included synths.

In each chapter, we’ll include information about which synths
are recommended in the recipe areas, but a Google search will
also help you find up-to-date information.
Synthesizers come in many shapes and sizes, and they use
a variety of technologies in the synthesis process. The goal
of synth recipes, and the unified system of notating them, is
to bring all of the different types together in the same dis-
cussion; this encourages you to see the similarities and dif-
ferences in such a way that forces you to walk away with a
better overall understanding of the synthesis process.

xiii
This page intentionally left blank
SUBTRACTIVE
SYNTHESIS1

Subtractive synthesis has been used on thousands of records,

and, in spite of its continued evolution, its essence remains
the same at the very core. The reason it has continued to
inspire musicians is because it can take electronic sounds
and give them life through filters and envelopes that breath
motion into the lifeless in order to create new, organic, excit-
ing sounds or mimic the natural organic progression of acous-
tic instruments. Sounds are nothing less than magical when
programmed by the experienced user.

The Synthesizer Database

When conducting research for this book, we thought it would
be interesting to examine as many of the commercially avail-
able synthesizers that was physically possible in order to
come up with averages of their capabilities. We compiled a
comprehensive database that featured as many synths as pos-
sible (around 800 individual instruments) and outlined, in
depth, their functionality. We examined things like the num-
ber of oscillators and low frequency oscillators, the number
of filters and filter shapes, the number of envelope genera-
tors and their capabilities, the various wave shapes the synth
could produce, the modulation routings, and the inclusion
of various forms of performance control. We then averaged
this database in relation to synthesis format so that we could
provide you with the average number of synthesizers that
feature a specific parameter throughout this chapter. As you
will see in the coming pages, each parameter of subtractive
synthesis will be complimented with the average percent of

1
Subtractive Synthesis

synthesizers that feature that particular function. So without

further ado, let’s begin with subtractive synthesis.
Subtractive synthesis starts with a sound. This sound is
then filtered, modulated, mangled, and mashed, resulting in
something beautiful. The starting sound comes from what is
known as an oscillator, which is the heart of any synthesizer.
Often underrated, the design of a synthesizer’s oscillator ulti-
mately determines the status that a synthesizer holds in his-
tory. Every parameter on a subtractive synthesizer—be it a
filter, an envelope generator, a low frequency oscillator (LFO),
or an amplifier—relies on the oscillator or oscillators in order
to stand out amongst the vast and ever growing market of
synthesizers. Take a MiniMoog for example; just listening to
a single oscillator playing a triangle wave with no envelopes,
resonance, or modulation is enough to send shivers down
someone’s spine. An average triangle wave is rather boring,
but, for some reason, a MiniMoog’s triangle wave connects
with its users and instantly inspires them to reach out and
turn every knob, opening up a world of creativity. The fact
that every single waveform on a MiniMoog elicits this same
response is the very reason that the MiniMoog became one of
the most famous subtractive synthesizers in history.
Based on the information collected, subtractive synthesizers fea-
ture three oscillators on average.

So what makes an oscillator so iconic? The functionality and

features of an individual oscillator definitely play a role, but
the sound of the individual waveforms an oscillator creates
is where its iconic status ultimately rests. Let’s examine what
makes up a waveform as well as what makes a sawtooth
wave sound different from a triangle or a square wave.

Harmonics
A waveform consists of a fundamental frequency and a series
of additional frequencies called harmonics. The fundamen-
tal frequency is the frequency of the note being played. For
example, the middle “A” note has a fundamental frequency

2
 Subtractive Synthesis

of 440Hz, but most instruments do not produce just a single

frequency. When a pianist strikes the middle “A” note on a
piano for example, 440Hz is not the only frequency that is
heard. Many higher frequencies, called overtones, emit from
the piano as well. In a piano, these overtones are caused by
the way the string vibrates, the resonance of the body of the
piano, and other strings resonating in conjunction with the
string being struck. The frequencies above 440Hz that emit
from a piano when the middle “A” is struck are multiples
of the fundamental frequency; these are called harmonics.
The harmonics are produced in what is called the harmonic
series, which is a pattern of harmonics that occurs naturally
with musical instruments. In the harmonic series, the first
harmonic is the fundamental frequency. Using our “A” 440
example, 440Hz is the first harmonic of the harmonic series.
The second harmonic is twice the fundamental, or 880Hz. The
third harmonic is three times the fundamental, or 1320Hz, etc.
Although the harmonic series is present in every instrument
or sound, the amplitude at which these harmonics are heard
vary from one instrument to another due to the material the

Figure 1.1 The harmonic series

as demonstrated with vibrating
strings.

3
Subtractive Synthesis

instrument is made of, as well as the way in which sound is

generated (strings, resonant tubes, membranes, etc.). These
differences explain why instruments have unique sounds;
a piano sounds different from a tuba which sounds differ-
ent from an accordion and so on and so forth. This differ-
ence in tonal quality is called timbre. Synthesizers are such
an attractive instrument because they can change timbres in
an instant. The user is free to emulate a natural instrument
or make a sound that is so earth shattering that it questions
the very meaning of what is musical, all with the turning of
a few knobs.

Waveforms
When dealing with synthesizers, each waveform has a
unique sound due to the varying harmonic content that is
produced. This is why a square wave sounds worlds apart
from a sine wave. Let’s take a look at the harmonic content of
the most common waveforms found in subtractive synthesis
in order to better understand the tonal quality of each of these
waveforms.
Sine waves are the most simple of the waveforms. They
contain only the fundamental frequency and no harmonics.
A sine wave is something that is unique to synthesis because
there are no nonelectronic instruments capable of such a tone.
Just because a sine wave is simple does not mean that it is

Figure 1.2 The standard

synthesis wave shapes.

4
 Subtractive Synthesis

boring or less than useful. A sine wave, when placed in the

audio spectrum correctly, will rumble the floors of a venue or
pierce through the densest of mixes.
Take a Roland TR 808 drum machine for example. The 808
uses analog subtractive synthesis to create its drum sounds.
The iconic kick drum sound of an 808 has destroyed sub-
woofers and left an everlasting impression on anyone who
has heard it thanks to its huge sine wave “ring” on the fall-
ing end of its sound. Sine waves have also long been cov-
eted as a foundation for the largest of synth bass sounds.
The extremely memorable bass sound on Nine Inch Nail’s
“Closer” would not have been possible without a sine wave
in the mix.
Based on the information collected, 34% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature audio oscillator sine wave generation.

Triangle waves sound fairly similar to sine waves but with a

bit more harshness. A triangle wave contains the fundamental
frequency as well as all odd harmonics. This means that a tri-
angle wave is made up of the first harmonic, or fundamental
frequency, the third harmonic, the fifth harmonic and so on.
The rate at which the higher harmonics drop in amplitude is
proportionate to the inverse square of the harmonic number.
For example, the third harmonic is 1/9th the amplitude of the
fundamental and the fifth harmonic is 1/25th the amplitude
of the fundamental. This rapid decline in the amplitude of the
harmonics causes very few harmonics to be audible, which is
why the triangle wave sounds similar to the sine wave. The
few harmonics that are audible separate the triangle wave
from the sine wave. As stated earlier, the MiniMoog’s triangle
wave is one of the many reasons the MiniMoog is still being
talked about today. When overdriven into a filter, the triangle
wave adds everything a sine wave is capable of adding to a
sound, but also adds a new dimension of grit and glam that is
only attainable through this means of synthesis.
Based on the information collected, 48% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature audio oscillator triangle wave generation.

5
Subtractive Synthesis

Sawtooth waves have a very distinct, raspy sound quality.

A sawtooth wave can scream and it pierces through any sound
it’s up against. At the same time, however, a sawtooth can be
filtered back to create soft, delicate, and smooth sounds that
can be placed in the most “moody” of R&B songs. Sawtooth
waves get their name from their resemblance of a physical
sawtooth when viewed on an oscilloscope. Unlike a triangle
wave, a sawtooth wave contains the fundamental frequency
as well as both even and odd harmonics. The rate at which
the harmonics drop in amplitude is inversely proportion-
ate to the fundamental rather than the inverse square of the
fundamental like in a triangle wave. This means that the sec-
ond harmonic is 1/2 the amplitude of the fundamental, the
third harmonic is 1/3 the fundamental, the fourth harmonic
is 1/4 the fundamental and so on. Due to the slower decline
in amplitude of the harmonics as well as having the even and
odd harmonics audible, the sawtooth wave is extremely rich
sounding and is very useful in subtractive synthesis. Due to
the rich and harsh tonal quality of the sawtooth wave, it is
extremely well suited for re-creating bowed string sounds
such as cellos and violins and, as stated earlier, piercing lead
and punchy bass synth sounds. The sawtooth wave is a staple
amongst synthesizers and no instrument besides a synthe-
sizer can come close to re-creating it.
Based on the information collected, 68% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature audio oscillator sawtooth generation.

Ramp waves, or reverse sawtooth waves, are simply back-

wards sawtooth waves. Rather than the wave peaking and
then sharply sloping down, the ramp wave sharply slopes up
and then peaks and drops back down to zero. The ramp wave
contains the exact same harmonic content as the sawtooth and
sounds identical. However, it is when using the oscillator as a
control source for an LFO or as an envelope that ramp waves
differentiate themselves from sawtooth waves and become
one of the most overlooked and coveted of the waveforms.
Mark Mothersbaugh of DEVO sent his MiniMoog back to the
engineers at Moog in order to have it customized in order

6
 Subtractive Synthesis

to produce a ramp wave. Mark’s customized MiniMoog can

be heard in the extremely memorable synth parts of DEVO’s
“Smart Patrol/Mr. DNA.”

Based on the information collected, 41% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature audio oscillator ramp wave generation.

Next to sawtooth waves, square waves are the most recogniz-

able of the waveforms. Square waves have a rich but hollow
sound quality. Their name is derived from their square-like
appearance on an oscilloscope. Like the triangle wave, square
waves are made up of the fundamental frequency as well as
all odd harmonics meaning they contain the first harmonic
(fundamental), third harmonic, fifth harmonic, and so on.
Unlike a triangle wave however, the rate at which the har-
monics drop in amplitude are inversely proportionate to the
fundamental. This means that the third harmonic is 1/3 the
amplitude of the fundamental, the fifth harmonic is 1/5th
the fundamental, the seventh is 1/7th the fundamental and
so on. Because of the square wave’s richer sonorities of har-
monics, it imparts a full tonal quality to any synth sound that
can only be described as legendary. Keith Emerson’s synth
solo towards the end of Emerson, Lake & Palmer’s “Lucky
Man” are perfect examples of what a square wave can add to
a screaming lead line. The alternative band Passion Pit makes
extensive use of the square wave on most of their synth parts
throughout their entire catalog of music. The square wave is
truly a synth staple and, for that reason, it can be found on
almost 99% of synthesizers from the most basic and budget
models up to the most expensive.
A pulse wave is, in essence, a variable square wave. Like a
square wave, the pulse wave contains the fundamental and
all odd harmonics with the same inversely proportionate har-
monic amplitude drop. The difference is that the width of the
wave in the positive and negative direction is variable. One of
the most sonically pleasing and sought after sounds in synth
history is created by modulating the width with an LFO. Typ-
ically, this variable width is continuously adjustable (from so

7
Subtractive Synthesis

narrow that it’s not audible to all the way up to a full square
wave), but some synthesizers have set width amounts. The
song “Warp” by The Bloody Beetroots and Steve Aoki makes
great use of pulse width modulation.
Based on the information collected, 85% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature square or pulse wave generation.

A Note on “Hyper” Waves

Many current manufacturers are including variations of the
basic waveforms into their synthesizer designs and are label-
ing these new variations with the descriptor “hyper”; such as
“hyper-saw” or “hyper-square” waves. These new waveform
variations typically use wave folding or wave multiplying
technology in order to alter the tonal characteristics of these
waves to give the user more possibilities for sound creation.
Wave folding technology works by “folding” the wave back
on itself causing more harmonics to be present at different
levels. Wave folding can be thought of as the opposite of a
filter; whereas a filter takes harmonics away from a sound,
wave folding devices add harmonics into a sound. Wave
multiplying technology multiplies the wave and usually
shifts the pitch of the multiplied waves. These features not
only give the user more sonic capabilities, but can make a
single or dual oscillator synth sound like it has more oscilla-
tors, which is a great benefit to some of the low-cost models.
The extremely popular analog subtractive synth from Artu-
ria, called the MiniBrute, utilizes these hyper waves for all
of the waveforms of the single oscillator, which makes it an
extremely powerful single oscillator budget synthesizer.
Another hyperwave generation technique that warrants a
discussion is wave shaping. Wave shaping produces similar
results to wave folding, but rather than folding the wave back
onto itself, wave shapers actually change the shape of simple
waves, which creates sharper corners and increases harmonic
content. The most common use of wave-shaping technology
can be found in guitar distortion pedals and fuzz boxes. The

8
 Subtractive Synthesis

clean guitar signal present at the device’s input is amplified

and forced to clip, which adds in newer harmonics, creating
the distorted sound at the output. Wave-shaping technology
is rarely seen outside the modular synthesizer world, but it is
beginning to surface in some of the new analog synths due to
the high demand for distorted synth sounds.

Different Types of Oscillators

Now that we have explored how oscillators and their wave-
forms make or break a synthesizer, let’s examine the differ-
ent types of oscillators that are available. When dealing with
subtractive synthesis, there are three main types of oscilla-
tors one can expect to encounter—voltage controlled oscil-
lators (VCO), digitally controlled oscillators (DCO), and
software-based oscillators. These three types of oscillators are
by no means the only type found on subtractive synthesizers,
but they are by far the most common. Similar to the wave-
forms themselves, each of these types of oscillators imparts
unique features and tonal qualities onto the synthesizer.

Voltage Controlled Oscillator (VCO)

The VCO is an oscillator that gets its pitch information from
voltage input. Although many people experimented with dif-
ferent types of ways to control oscillators in the early years
of synthesis, Bob Moog is most often credited with introduc-
ing the voltage controlled oscillator. Moog’s early oscillators
introduced the 1volt/octave standard found in most analog
synthesizers both past and present. This standard divided a
single volt into 12 parts to accommodate the 12-tone Western
scale. This means that each half step is related to a 1/12-volt
change. This 1volt/octave standard not only made it pos-
sible for synthesizers to produce tonal music, but also made
it possible for synthesizers to communicate with each other.
In the days before MIDI (and still today), analog synthesiz-
ers featured control voltage (C.V.) inputs and outputs. This
means that a user could connect two or more synthesizers
together and control each of them with a single keyboard.

9
Subtractive Synthesis

Bernie Worrell used three separate MiniMoog synthesizers

connected through C.V. to achieve the gigantic synth bass
sound on the Parliament song “Flashlight.” This type of con-
nectivity would not have been possible without the 1volt/
octave standard.
It is important to note that not all synthesizers use the 1volt/
octave standard. Synths like the Korg MS-10 and MS-20, as
well as Buchla synths, use their own Hz/octave standards.
Connecting synthesizers together in order for them to com-
municate with one another has been, and still is, a must-have
skill for the electronic musician. By having a multitude of syn-
thesizers connected together, an artist can create an orchestra

Figure 1.3 Visual representation

of the 1volt/octave standard.

10
 Subtractive Synthesis

of synthesizers, all playing together in perfect rhythm and

harmony, allowing one user to be the composer, conductor,
and performer of his or her synthesized symphony.
Although VCOs are coveted for their “warm” tonal quality,
they oftentimes drift in and out of tune and are susceptible to
temperature and environmental changes, making them quite
finicky to use. For this reason, the digitally controlled oscilla-
tor was introduced.

Digitally Controlled Oscillator (DCO)

DCOs get their name because they are controlled digitally, typi-
cally through integrated circuit chips (ICs). Although forms of
DCOs were present in some of the early monophonic analog
synthesizers, it wasn’t until the introduction of polyphonic syn-
thesizers like the Sequential Circuits Prophet 5 that DCOs really
came into the spotlight. A polyphonic synthesizer is a synth that
can play multiple notes at the same time. In hardware analog
synthesizers, polyphony is achieved by having a separate synth
voice for each note. Take the Prophet 5 for example, which has
five voices of polyphony with each voice containing two oscil-
lators, two envelope generators, a filter, and an amplifier.
At the time of the Prophet 5’s creation, having ten separate
VCOs all staying in stable tuning while tracking the keyboard
perfectly would have been an engineering nightmare and so
it made more sense to use DCOs, which are far more stable.
DCOs were used extensively through the eighties and early
nineties and are still found on new synthesizers today. In
fact, Van Halen’s iconic polyphonic synth sound on the song
“Jump” would not have been possible had the Oberheim
OBXa synthesizer not utilized digitally controlled oscillators.

Software-Based Oscillators
Software-based oscillators are typically found in software
or VST (Virtual Studio Technology) synthesizers. There are
a few hardware synthesizers such as the Arturia Origin and
Access Virus line that also utilize software oscillators. As

11
Subtractive Synthesis

can be assumed, software-based oscillators use digital signal

processing to produce tones. Most software oscillators are
designed to emulate physical oscillators, but a few soft synths
such as Logic’s Sculpture utilize the capabilities of software
in order to create new and interesting sounds through instru-
ment modeling.

Using Oscillators
Now that we have covered the technical details of oscillators
and the waveforms they produce, we can explore how oscil-
lators are used in the sound creation process. When creating a
sound, the user combines the onboard oscillators in the mixer
section in order to create huge, rich walls of sound or delicate,
beautiful sounds, which will then be filtered and modulated.
Although the way in which the user utilizes the oscillators is
solely up to the user, many parameters are provided on oscil-
lators in order to aid in the sound creation process.

Tune/Detune
Sound creation starts with the pitch of the individual oscil-
lators. Each oscillator can be set perfectly in tune with the
others in order to create what effectively sounds like one
mega oscillator, or the user can slightly detune the oscilla-
tors from each other resulting in a thick phasing, animated
sound. Changing the octave of one of the oscillators (usually
referred to as “range”—measured in footage in reference to
organ pipe lengths) will result in a sound so large, it will be
the dominate sound in any mix. The user can also tune one of
the oscillators up or down an increment like a third or a fifth
in order to create harmonies.
Based on the information collected, 74% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature oscillator detune capabilities.

Oscillator Sync
By listening to the synth solo on Herbie Hancock’s “Chame-
leon,” one understands the sheer depth of what oscillator sync

12
 Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.4 With oscillator sync

engaged, the master oscillator
retriggers the slave oscillator each
time its wave cycle restarts.

can add to a synth patch. When oscillator sync is engaged, the

first oscillator retriggers the second oscillator’s wave when
the first oscillator’s waveform falls back to zero. This feature
allows the user to adjust the second oscillator’s pitch without
getting the oscillators out of tune. The timbre of the sound
will change depending on how the second oscillator is tuned,
which creates extremely interesting sonic capabilities. Under-
standing and using oscillator sync is one of the things that
separates the novice from the experienced. Oscillator sync is
an essential tool in the synthesist’s sonic toolbox.
Based on the information collected, 56% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature oscillator sync capabilities.

Sub-oscillator
Many synthesizers feature what is known as a sub-oscillator.
A sub-oscillator clones the output of an oscillator and trans-
poses it down one or two octaves. This allows the user to add
an extra low end to a sound without using an entire oscillator
to do so. A well-placed sub-oscillator thickens a synth patch
to such a degree that once disengaged, it leaves users think-
ing their synths have become small and thin.
Based on the information collected, 28% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature sub-oscillators.

Noise
Noise is a crucial aspect of synthesis. Many synthesizers have
an onboard noise circuit that produces white or pink noise.

13
Subtractive Synthesis

The user can mix the noise with the oscillators when creating
drum sounds, or in order to add a pseudo-distortion to the
sound that is unique from any type of distortion pedal.
Based on the information collected, 76% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature noise generation.

Spectral Shaping (Filtering)

When thinking about a subtractive synthesizer, be it an ana-
log monster such as an ARP 2600 or a modern DSP based
beauty such as the Roland Aria System 1, it is impossible to
imagine not reaching for the cutoff frequency knob of the
filter and rolling it back to produce that ever-amazing fil-
ter sweep. This has become one of the most instantly recog-
nizable sounds in music, and, for some reason, it seems to
sound good in almost any musical setting. If the oscillator is
a synthesizer’s heart, then the filter is its diaphragm, lungs,
and vocal chords—always breathing life into any patch,
while giving the synthesizer a unique and distinguishable
voice.
Bob Moog introduced the resonant low pass filter into his
modular systems in the 1960s. Once he unveiled the 904a
Transistor Ladder Filter, a paradigm shift took place, result-
ing in the landscape of synthesis that we know today. Every

Figure 1.5 The standard

synthesis filter shapes.

14
 Subtractive Synthesis

synthesizer company since Moog’s unveiling has included a

resonant low pass filter into their designs. The very fact that
the Moog 904a filter was the only module for which Moog filed
a patent shows the importance of the resonant low pass
filter. Although the low pass filter is by far the most common
filter type found in synthesizers, there are others and it is
worth examining the differences of each one.

Low Pass Filter

As stated earlier, the low pass filter is the most common type
of filter when dealing with subtractive synthesis. A low pass
filter works by “rolling off” or cutting all frequencies above a
user-specified point known as the cutoff frequency. The rate
at which the filter reduces the amplitude of these frequencies
is called its slope and is measured in dB/octave. The clas-
sic Moog filter is a 24dB/octave filter, which means all fre-
quencies above the cutoff frequency are attenuated by 24dB
at every octave. Another classic filter slope is a 12dB/octave
filter. With a 12dB/octave filter, all frequencies above the cut-
off frequency are attenuated by 12dB at every octave. Often-
times, the filter’s slope is labeled in “poles.” One pole loosely
relates to a 6dB/octave attenuation. Therefore, a 12dB/octave
filter is known as a two-pole filter and a 24dB/octave filter
is known as a four-pole filter. Some synthesizers have the
option to switch the filter’s slope in order to have more con-
trol over the end sound. Low pass filters are used to create the
instantly recognizable filter sweep. Many synthesizers even
allow external audio to be patched into the synthesizer’s fil-
ter in order to perform this filter sweep on drums, vocals, or
the song as a whole. Daft Punk uses low pass filters in order
to filter all the instruments of a song back right before a huge
climax in a large number of their songs. An example of this
type of filtering can be found on the intro of Daft Punk’s song
“Around the World.” The low pass filter is truly an icon in
subtractive synthesis and will remain an icon for the foresee-
able future and beyond.
Based on the information collected, 97% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature a low pass filter shape.

15
Subtractive Synthesis

High Pass Filter

The next most commonly found filter on a subtractive syn-
thesizer is a high pass filter. A high pass filter (HPF) is the
exact opposite of a low pass filter. In an HPF, all frequencies
below the cutoff frequency are attenuated. HPFs are found
alongside low pass filters on synthesizers and although not
typically user selectable, high pass filters can have different
slopes as well and follow the same dB/octave formula found
on low pass filters. The Korg MS-20 synthesizer is famous for
its filter section because it offers a resonant low pass alongside
a resonant high pass filter. Extremely screeching leads can be
produced when properly using a high pass filter. Although
typically overlooked for bass patches, using a resonant high
pass filter with just the slightest amount of filtering can pro-
duce one the largest synth bass sounds imaginable due to the
resonant frequency being on the low end of the audio spec-
trum, but while still allowing all the bright, high-end sound
to pass through. The Chemical Brothers are known to use the
high pass filter of their MS-20s on most of their songs. An
example of the screeching sounds only a high pass filter can
provide can be found in the introduction of The Chemical
Brother’s “We are the Night” track. The high passed MS-20 is
the screeching modulated sound that is heard while the rest
of the song is low passed in the background.
Based on the information collected, 53% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature a high pass filter shape.

Band Pass Filter

Another filter found on some subtractive synthesizers is
known as a band pass filter. A band pass filter (BPF) is a
combination of a high pass filter and a low pass filter. The
band pass filter attenuates all frequencies above and below
a set “band” of frequencies centered on the cutoff frequency.
A band pass filter often has a fixed bandwidth, meaning the
amount of frequencies around the cutoff frequency that won’t
be attenuated is a fixed amount. Band pass filters are great for

16
 Subtractive Synthesis

creating nasally thinner sounds such as oboes, saxophones,

and other reed instruments.
Based on the information collected, 37% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature a band pass filter shape.

Band Reject or Notch Filter

The final filter type usually associated with subtractive syn-
thesizers is known as a band reject or notch filter. A band
reject filter is the exact opposite of a band pass filter in that
the frequency band around the cutoff frequency is attenu-
ated while leaving the frequencies on either side to remain
unaffected. Although typically used in music production as
a means to eliminate problem frequencies, the notch filter,
when properly used on a synthesizer, can produce interest-
ing sounds not otherwise attainable.
Based on the information collected, 24% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature a band reject or notch filter shape.

Using Filters
Like with anything on a synthesizer, the way in which the
user utilizes the filter is completely up to the user. Most fil-
ters have predetermined parameters available to the user in
order to aid in the sound-creation process. Let’s take a look
at some of the commonly found parameters of a subtrac-
tive synthesizer’s filter in order to better understand what
they do.

Cutoff Frequency
If you are only going to adjust one parameter on a synthe-
sizer, chances are this is it. The cutoff frequency determines
the frequency at which the filter will start working and it is
this control that produces those infamous filter sweeps. The
cutoff control is usually a prominent knob or slider in the
filter section with easy access so that the user can manually
adjust it in real time.

17
Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.6 Cutoff frequency.

Resonance
Ever since Moog released the 904a transistor ladder filter in
the 1960s, resonance, sometimes known as “peak” or “empha-
sis,” has been a nearly universal parameter on all synthesizer
filters. Resonance is a feedback circuit that feeds the cutoff
frequency back into the filter, causing that frequency to jump
above the center line and boosting the cutoff frequency and
the adjacent frequencies. As the user turns up the resonance
knob, the filter begins to ring or “resonate” at the cutoff fre-
quency. Some filters self-oscillate when turned up, producing
a sine wave at the pitch of the cutoff frequency. When used in
conjunction with the filter cutoff, resonance imparts an amaz-
ing, animated sound onto any synth patch. Resonance can be
thought of as the secret ingredient that makes filters so amaz-
ing and memorable.
Based on the information collected, 94% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature resonant filters.

Filter Voltage Control

Like with analog oscillators, analog filters are controlled via
control voltages. These voltages are used to set the cutoff fre-
quency without the need for the user to manually adjust the
cutoff frequency knob. By patching an LFO or other modula-
tion source into a filter’s control voltage input, the user can be

18
 Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.7 Resonance creates a

“bump” in the frequencies around
the cutoff frequency.

free to play more complex lines while the filter automatically

sweeps.

Envelope Amount
The envelope amount control determines the depth at which
an envelope generator affects the filter’s cutoff frequency.
Although the way in which the envelope controls the filter
is covered in depth later in the chapter, it is important to
know that most filters allow the user to determine just how
much an envelope controls the filter. Most filters even allow
the user to decide the polarity of how the envelope controls
the filter, meaning that the envelope can control the filter in a
positive or negative manner. By using an envelope to control
a filter, the user can set the exact way the filter opens and
closes every time a key is struck. Although some lower-end
analog synthesizers do not allow envelope control over the
filter, it has become an almost universal feature on synthesiz-
ers today.
Based on the information collected, 88% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature an envelope amount control over the synthesizer’s filter.

Key Follow
Because analog filters are controlled via control voltage,
the same controllers used to determine pitch on an oscilla-
tor can be used to determine the cutoff frequency of a filter.

19
Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.8 Visual

representation of key follow.

This means that the synthesizer’s keyboard that produces

higher voltages the higher up one plays can control the fil-
ter, and so most filters offer a function called “key follow” or
“keyboard control.” When engaged, this function increases
the filter’s cutoff the higher one plays on the keyboard, caus-
ing higher notes to be brighter and lower notes to be darker.
Since this is such a sought-after feature on analog synthe-
sizers, most modern digital and software synthesizers offer
this feature using digital control instead of voltage control.
Key follow can be used in more extreme degrees as a way to
have a bass-sounding filter response at the lower end of the
keyboard while having a lead-sounding filter response at the
higher end. When used more subtly, key follow will impart
an ever-evolving filter response as one plays across a key-
board. One lesser-known way in which to use key follow is
to crank the resonance to its highest degree, causing the filter
to self-resonate; then, by tuning the cutoff frequency so the
filter resonates at a specific note, the user can “play the filter,”

20
 Subtractive Synthesis

meaning that the resulting sine wave will track up and down
the keyboard and allow the user to have a fully functional
sine wave generator.

Based on the information collected, 77% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature key follow functionality.

Filter Selection
Rather than having individual filters for low pass, high pass,
band pass, and band reject filter types, many synthesizers
allow the user to switch filter types using the onboard filter,
allowing the synthesizer to have one, all-encompassing filter.
The Oberheim multimode filter found on their analog synths
is usually credited as being the first successful, multimode
filter. That being said, it is not uncommon to see a high pass
filter in conjunction to the main multimode filter on many
synthesizers.

Amplitude Shaping (Amplifiers

and Envelope Generators)
In an analog oscillator circuit, sound is always present at the
output stage whether a key is pressed or not. Because oscil-
lators continuously produce a pitch, it is necessary to have
a circuit that only lets sound out of the output when a key
is pressed. The circuit responsible for releasing sound to
the output or withholding sound when the user specifies is
known as the amplifier. In an analog synthesizer, the ampli-
fier is controlled via control voltage in the same vein as the fil-
ter and oscillators. The amplifier allows sound to pass when
a positive voltage is present and refuses sound from pass-
ing when no voltage is present. This voltage is known as a
gate signal and is typically made up of a +5v pulse wave.
If synthesizers just produced sound the instance a key was
depressed and immediately fell silent the instant the key was
released, they would neither be very musical nor beneficial
to most users. Therefore, it is necessary to be able to control

21
Subtractive Synthesis

the way in which the synthesizer’s sound begins, maintains,

and falls. This type of sound control is achieved with what is
known as an envelope generator.

Envelope Generators
When a pianist strikes a key on a piano, the sound does not
maintain its full amplitude and energy throughout the dura-
tion of the key being depressed. Once a key is struck on a
piano, the sound level quickly peaks and then falls and con-
tinues to fall slowly until it is inaudible. This type of sound
characteristic is known in the synthesizer world as the instru-
ment’s envelope. An envelope generator replaces a gate sig-
nal with a modified gate signal in which the user specifies the
rate at which the sound peaks and falls.
The most common type of envelope generator found on
synthesizers is known as an ADSR envelope. ADSR stands
for attack, decay, sustain, and release. The user specifies the
length of each of these parameters in order to create a desired
envelope for the sound. Although many synthesizers offer
full ADSR envelope generators, some offer variations such as
an AR envelope, which would just have attack and release
controls, or an ADR envelope which would just have attack,
decay, and release controls. This is especially true when syn-
thesizers feature more than one envelope generator, in which
case, one will usually be an ADSR while the others might be

Figure 1.9 The standard ADSR

envelope generator shape and its
parameters.

22
 Subtractive Synthesis

a variation. Let’s take a look at each of these parameters in

depth to better understand how they affect the overall sound
of the synthesizer.

Based on the information collected, subtractive synthesizers fea-

ture an average of three envelope generators.

Attack
The attack portion of an envelope generator controls the speed
at which the sound is heard when a key is struck. A short
attack yields a sound that is heard at the instant the key is
depressed, while a slow attack yields a sound that slowly
rises in amplitude from when the key is depressed. The rate
at which the attack of an envelope can be adjusted is differ-
ent from synthesizer to synthesizer, but is usually adjustable
from a few milliseconds to a few seconds. By simply slow-
ing down the attack, beautiful string sounds can be created
that rise and build to their climax slowly. Slowing down the
attack time is also great for making long, warm synth pad
type patches.

Based on the information collected, 96% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature an envelope attack control.

Decay
The decay portion of an envelope generator specifies the
amount of time it takes the sound to fall from its highest peak
to its sustain point. Like the attack parameter, the decay con-
trol can typically be adjusted from a few milliseconds up to a
few seconds. Decay can be thought of as the amount of time
it takes the piano to fall to its sustaining sound once the tran-
sient sound of the string being struck has died down. Setting
a long decay time will help create an ever-moving and evolv-
ing synth pad sound.

Based on the information collected, 93% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature an envelope decay control.

23
Subtractive Synthesis

Sustain
The sustain parameter of an envelope generator determines
the amplitude at which the sound remains while the key is
depressed after its initial attack and decay times. Unlike the
attack and decay parameters, the sustain parameter is not
measured in time. Instead, a lower sustain results in a signal
with a lower amplitude once it reaches its sustain point, while
a greater sustain results in a sound with a greater amplitude.
Many budget synthesizers unfortunately neglect to include a
user-adjustable sustain parameter on their envelope genera-
tors, even though the sustain parameter is extremely impor-
tant in sound creation. When setting an extremely low sustain
with a short attack and decay, a synth can produce extremely
short percussive sounds great for drum creation, chirping
rhythms, or complex sequences. When cranking the sustain
to its highest level, the amplitude will stay at its highest peak
for the duration of the key being depressed, resulting in huge
walls of sound sure to rock the foundation of any piece of
music the sound is inserted into.
Based on the information collected, 91% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature an envelope sustain control.

Release
The final parameter found in an ADSR envelope is known as
release. The release determines the amount of time it takes
the sound to fall down to an inaudible level once the key is
released. This is like the way that a piano still “rings out”
even once the player releases a depressed key. Release time
is another important parameter that is sometimes left out of
budget synthesizers. The release parameter, when set to lon-
ger lengths, allows a user to have notes continue to sound
until the next note is triggered, effectively mimicking the way
a sustain pedal works on a piano when the pianist releases
the pedal at the next note. When using the release parameter
in this way, the user is free to move his or her hands up or
down the keyboard in anticipation of the next phrase without
the synthesizer abruptly going quiet when a key is released.

24
 Subtractive Synthesis

Setting a long release not only aids in creating long, moving

synth pads, but also helps create screaming synth solos.

Based on the information collected, 87% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature an envelope release control.

Envelope Control over Filters

An envelope generator is used for more than just controlling
amplifiers. One common parameter that is controllable via
an envelope is the filter. In fact, many synthesizers contain
a second ADSR envelope generator designed specifically to
control the filter. Having an envelope available to control the
filter allows the user to program filter sweeps and evolving
filter sounds without having to manually adjust the cutoff
frequency. Although the envelope controls are the same when
controlling a filter, the results each parameter has on the fil-
ter are different than with an amplifier, so it is important to
examine the effect each parameter bestows when controlling
a filter.

Filter Envelope Attack

When using an envelope generator to control a filter, the attack
determines the amount of time it takes the filter to reach the
cutoff frequency once a key is pressed. By adjusting the attack
time, the user effectively creates a filter sweep up to the cutoff
frequency when striking a key. With a bit of resonance and a
slightly longer attack time, the filter opens shortly after the
note sounds, creating an almost wet, bouncy type of sound
that lends itself to bass patches beautifully. This type of sound
is heard on Prince’s “Controversy” song. A long attack time
slowly increases the cutoff frequency, allowing for extremely
animated synth pad and lead sounds. Adjusting the attack
time of a filter also aids in creating brassy sounds.

Filter Envelope Decay

When controlling a filter, the decay control determines the
amount of time it takes the filter cutoff frequency to fall from

25
Subtractive Synthesis

its highest level right after the attack, to its set sustain point.
This parameter allows the user to have a filter that sweeps
down after a key is pressed; this allows it to pierce through a
mix at the instant the note is heard and then fall back into the
background while still being audible. Like with an amplifier
envelope, the decay works in conjunction with the sustain
parameter.

Filter Envelope Sustain

The sustain parameter in regards to the filter envelope deter-
mines a new cutoff frequency that the filter will remain at
while a key is being depressed after the initial attack and
decay times have run their course. By setting a low sustain
with a long decay, the filter slowly closes while a key is being
held, creating beautiful, evolving pads and lead sounds.
A low sustain with a short decay yields extremely sharp and
percussive sounds that, when mixed with resonance, are used
to create slap bass or kick drum-like sounds.

Filter Envelope Release

The release control of a filter envelope determines the speed
at which the filter closes once a key is released. Adjusting
each parameter of a filter envelope generator allows the user
to create ever-evolving filter responses that can sound either
beautiful and musical or extremely crazy and exciting. By
having an ADSR envelope for both the filter and the ampli-
fier, the possibilities are endless on the sounds that can be
created.

Envelope Control over Pitch

One final use for an envelope generator found on certain
synthesizers is the ability to control pitch. A pitch envelope
is used for creating sound effect-type sounds but it can also
be quite musical. When using a pitch envelope, the attack
control determines the speed at which the oscillator rises in
pitch until it reaches the set pitch of the oscillator. The decay

26
 Subtractive Synthesis

determines the speed at which the pitch will fall from the
highest point to the user-set sustain pitch. The sustain con-
trol determines the frequency at which the oscillator will stay
while a key is being depressed. And finally, the release con-
trol determines the time it takes the pitch to fall from the sus-
tain pitch down to an inaudible range once a key is released.
The ability to have so much control over every aspect of the
sound is one of the main reasons synthesizers are able to cre-
ate the sounds that they can.

A Note on Envelope Generators

It is important to understand that an envelope generator is
the same exact circuit whether it’s controlling an amplifier, a
filter, or an oscillator’s pitch—the only difference being the
destination it is routed to. For example, when using a modu-
lar synthesizer, which uses patch cables to connect individual
modules such as oscillators and filters together, the envelope
generators one would use to control amps, filters, and oscilla-
tors would all be the exact same module. The number of des-
tinations to which one could route an envelope in a modular
system would be reliant on how many individual envelope
generators were in the system. On a hardware, nonmodular
synthesizer such as the MiniMoog, the synthesizer designer
determines a fixed number of envelopes and destinations.
In the case of the MiniMoog, there are two individual ADSR
envelope generators with one permanently routed to the fil-
ter and one to the amplifier.

Modulation (LFOs and Sample

and Hold)
An LFO, or low frequency oscillator, is an oscillator which
produces frequencies below the audible range in order to con-
trol other aspects of the synthesizer. LFOs are the main source
of modulation in a synthesizer, and like an envelope genera-
tor, the LFO can change the sound of various parameters on
a synthesizer. In some synthesizers, LFOs can be used to trig-
ger envelope generators in order to create precise repeating

27
Subtractive Synthesis

rhythms. LFOs are one of the most versatile features on a

synthesizer because they can be used to add slight vibrato
or tremolo onto a sound, or be used to create rhythmic man-
gling of a sound heard on the most intense of electronic music
songs. The stereotypical “Dub-Step” wobble bass sounds are
created using LFOs. Let’s examine just what an LFO is and
what it does in order to better understand how it can be used.

LFOs vs. Oscillators

As stated above, an LFO is an oscillator that produces fre-
quencies that are lower than the audible frequency range. It
should be understood that an LFO circuit is virtually identi-
cal to an oscillator circuit, with the only difference being that
the frequencies they produce are lower. In the MiniMoog for
example, there is no stand-alone LFO; instead, the third oscil-
lator can be switched into “LO” mode, which lowers the fre-
quency range of oscillator three in order for it to be used as
an LFO. Because LFOs are identical to oscillators, all the wave
forms of a traditional oscillator can be utilized in an LFO.
In order to keep costs down, many synthesizer companies
limit the amount of waveforms their LFOs can produce. That
being said, higher-end synthesizers usually have LFOs that
can produce most if not all waveforms that their oscillators
produce. Therefore let’s examine each of the standard synthe-
sizer waveforms again, this time concentrating on what effect
they will produce when used as an LFO.

Based on the information collected, subtractive synthesizers fea-

ture two LFOs on average.

LFO Sine Wave

A sine wave has gently rounded peaks and troughs, which
correspond to the gentle rise and fall of the parameter being
modulated at the speed of the LFO. The sine wave is often
used to create vibrato and tremolo effects and is one of the
most common LFO waveforms offered on both expensive
and budget synthesizers. When used at their extreme, sine

28
 Subtractive Synthesis

wave LFOs impart an intense wobble onto whatever param-

eter is being modulated.
Based on the information collected, 44% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature LFO sine wave generation.

LFO Triangle Wave

Next to the sine wave, the triangle wave is the second most
common waveform found on LFOs. Similar to the sine wave,
the triangle wave is used heavily for both vibrato and trem-
olo effects. Based off of the triangular wave shape, a triangle
wave LFO imparts a sharper rise and fall onto the parameter
being modulated, allowing for sharper vibrato in their more
modest settings and harsher wobbles in their more extreme
settings.
Based on the information collected, 80% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature LFO triangle wave generation.

LFO Sawtooth Wave

When used as a modulation source, the sawtooth wave
imparts an immediate rise and then elongated fall onto the
parameter being modulated. Sawtooth modulation sounds
like rhythmic knife slices are being taken out of what-
ever they are modulating, and so sawtooth wave modula-
tion is extremely effective when creating sound effects on a
synthesizer.
Based on the information collected, 54% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature LFO sawtooth wave generation.

LFO Ramp Wave

The ramp wave is a reversed sawtooth wave and when used
in oscillators, ramp and sawtooth waves are virtually indis-
tinguishable. When used as a modulation source, however,
ramp and sawtooth waves are very different. A ramp wave
modulation imparts a rise and then instantaneous fall onto
the parameter being modulated. Like sawtooth modulation,

29
Subtractive Synthesis

ramp wave modulation is extremely useful when creating

sound effects on a synthesizer and effectively does whatever
sawtooth modulation does, only reversed.
Based on the information collected, 40% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature LFO ramp wave generation.

LFO Pulse/Square Wave

Square wave modulation is often used to trigger envelope
generators in a synthesizer. When used as a trigger source,
a square wave LFO triggers the synthesizer to sound every
time the wave cycle repeats. This means that instead of hit-
ting a key on the keyboard repeatedly on every beat, the user
can use an LFO to achieve this sound with exact timing and
precision. Pulse/square wave modulation is not limited to
envelope triggering, and a pulse/square wave can also be
used to modulate any parameter that is available to be modu-
lated. When used as a modulation source rather than a trigger
source, a square/pulse wave imparts up/down modulation
onto the parameter being modulated, producing anything
from “glitchy,” stabbing sound effects to rhythmic, pulsating
sounds.
Based on the information collected, 78% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature LFO pulse or square wave generation.

LFO Pitch Modulation

A common destination that can be modulated via an LFO is
pitch. Pitch modulation works by routing the LFO output into
the oscillator’s pitch control. When using pitch modulation,
the pitch rises with the rising LFO waveform and falls with the
falling LFO waveform. The amount that the LFO affects pitch
can be determined with an LFO depth control, such as a knob
or controller wheel. Pitch modulation creates a vibrato effect
at lower depths and a harsh, frequency-modulated effect at
higher depths. If oscillator sync is engaged and the LFO is
set to modulate only the sync’d oscillator’s pitch, some of the
most exciting sounds in synthesis can be created.

30
 Subtractive Synthesis

LFO Amplifier Modulation

When used to modulate the synthesizer’s amplifier, the LFO
can be used to create a tremolo effect. When modulating an
amplifier, the amplitude increases with the rise of the LFO’s
waveform and decreases with the fall of the LFO’s waveform.
At greater depths, the sound cuts in and out at the rate of the
LFO. When the LFO’s frequency is increased to near audio
rates, the synth gets an almost distorted quality to it that
sounds truly amazing.

LFO Filter Modulation

Another common LFO destination is the filter. When engaged,
the filter opens with the rise of the LFO’s wave and closes
with the fall of the LFO’s waveform. This means that an LFO
can be used to increase and decrease the cutoff frequency of
the filter, creating pleasing, long filter sweeps or “Wah-Wah”
type effects. When filter resonance is increased, filter modu-
lation imparts an extremely pleasing animated sound to the
filter at lower depths and extreme glitchy sounds at more
extreme depths.

LFO Pulse Width Modulation

Pulse width modulation (PWM) is a staple in subtractive
synthesis. To achieve pulse width modulation the LFO must
be routed to the pulse width control of one or more of the
oscillators. The width of the pulse wave changes with the
rise and fall of the LFO’s waveform. Most higher-end syn-
thesizers as well as budget synthesizers offer pulse width
modulation due to its sonic qualities and high esteem held
by users.
Based on the information collected, 74% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature pulse width modulation.

Sample and Hold

Although not exactly an LFO waveform, many LFOs feature
sample and hold functionality. A sample and hold circuit

31
Figure 1.10 Visual representation
of sample and hold.
 Subtractive Synthesis

takes voltage snap shots of a signal at its input stage and

then applies them to a parameter of the synthesizer at a set
rate. The most common signal typically fed into an LFO is
white noise. Because white noise contains all frequencies, a
sample and hold circuit takes a snapshot of a different fre-
quency at every interval, resulting in a random sequence at
the output stage. One way in which sample and hold is uti-
lized is by feeding the output stage to an oscillator, causing
random pitches to be produced at the rate of the sample and
hold circuit. Another typical use of sample and hold is for the
output stage to be routed to the filter, causing random cutoff
frequencies to be produced. Arp was famous for its versatile
sample and hold circuits on their synthesizers. When the late
George Duke was Frank Zappa’s keyboardist, he used the
sample and hold of his Arp Odyssey on many iconic Zappa
songs. Pete Townshend used the sample and hold circuit in
conjunction with a sequencer patched into the filter on his
Arp 2500 to create the iconic opening sound on The Who
song “Baba O’Riley.”
Based on the information collected, 58% of subtractive synthesiz-
ers feature sample and hold capabilities.

Controlling a Synthesizer
In the early days of electronic music synthesizers, control-
ling pitch, especially the fixed pitches of a 12-tone Western
scale, was troublesome. Many people were experimenting
with different ways to produce set pitches. By far the most
common type of synthesizer control is the keyboard (simi-
lar in look and function to a piano keyboard). Bob Moog is
most often credited with introducing the traditional black
and white keyboard into synthesis. At the same time that
Moog was using keyboards to control his modular systems
however, Don Buchla was experimenting with new and
interesting ways to control his modular synthesizers in an
effort to release the electronic musician from feeling trapped
to tonal, Western music. The types of controllers that Buchla
was designing included sequencers, push buttons, and metal

33
Subtractive Synthesis

touch plates. Although the right type of controller to use in

order to control a synthesizer is solely up to the user and
his or her wishes, the traditional keyboard is by far the most
common.

Keyboards
Analog synthesizers are controlled via voltages known as
C.V., and so analog synthesizer keyboards produce control
voltages whether they are stand-alone keyboard control-
lers for modular synthesizers or built-in keyboards, such as
is found on the Arp Odyssey or the Korg MS-20. Each key
on an analog synthesizer typically produces two voltages,
a 1/12-volt increment (or different volt/Hz/octave stan-
dard) for controlling pitch, and a +5v pulse for producing
gates. On a stand-alone synth, such as the MiniMoog, the
volt/octave voltage is internally routed to the oscillator for
pitch, for filter, and for key follow, while the pulse voltage
is internally routed to the envelope generators and ampli-
fier. In many modern synthesizers, even modern analog
synthesizers (such as the Arturia MiniBrute), the keyboard
is connected to the oscillators and filters via MIDI. The key-
board is the most prominent pitch controller for synthesiz-
ers due to the ease in which users can play the synthesizer
musically.

Figure 1.11 Traditional

synthesizer keyboard as seen on
the Sequential Circuits Pro-One
synthesizer. Photo courtesy of
www.switchedonaustin.com.

34
 Subtractive Synthesis

Sequencers
A sequencer is a device that produces note and gate infor-
mation in order to control a synthesizer without the need
for a user to physically play a keyboard. The most common
type of sequencer is what is known as a step sequencer. An
analog step sequencer usually has either 8, 16, or 24 steps
that can each be programmed individually to produce a note
in a given range (around three octaves). A step sequencer
receives its clocking information from a gate pulse, either
internally or from an external source. Step sequencers have
the ability to place a mute on any of the steps to create com-
plex patterns. Analog sequencers, both vintage and modern,
produce control voltages, while modern digital sequenc-
ers typically produce MIDI notes. Because sequencers pro-
duce either control voltage or MIDI information, it is easy
to integrate them into any synthesizer setup. Although early
sequencers were stand-alone units or modules, many syn-
thesizer companies began including them in their synths
in the mid-1970s and still do today. Giorgio Moroder used
sequencers extensively in his music, which in turn changed
the course of electronic music and practically paved the
way for modern dance music. Moroder’s ground-breaking

Figure 1.12 Division 6 SQ18

Eurorack step sequencer.

35
Subtractive Synthesis

sequences can be heard extensively in Donna Summer’s

song “I Feel Love.”

Based on the information collected, 29% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature sequencers.

Arpeggiators
Like a step sequencer, an arpeggiator produces note and gate
information in a step-like pattern. The main difference being
that an arpeggiator gets its note information from keys being
held down on a keyboard and reproduces these notes in a
low-note-to-high-note order. Therefore, arpeggiators are far
more limited in their ability to be programmed and are gener-
ally used as a means of live performance control rather than
a stand-alone synthesizer controller. Arpeggiators get their
name because they physically arpeggiate chords that are
being held down on the synthesizer’s keyboard.

Based on the information collected, 28% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature arpeggiators.

Other Means of Synthesizer Control

As stated earlier, designers like Don Buchla were experiment-
ing with various types of synthesizer controllers at the time

Figure 1.13 Visual representation

of an arpeggiator.

36
 Subtractive Synthesis

of the traditional keyboard’s introduction to synthesis. These

more esoteric controllers are very much still alive today and
are available to artists who want to veer away from tradi-
tional, Western, tonal music. Modern Buchla synthesizers, for
example, use touch plates that react to a variety of different
factors, such as where a finger physically is on the plate, the
amount of surface area a finger takes up, as well as pressure.
Other controllers such as the Haken Continuum use ribbon
technology, which allows a user to smoothly glide between
notes by sliding his or her finger across the controller. Some
synthesizers utilize a combination between esoteric control
and traditional keyboard control. The EMS Synthi AKS, for
example, used a touch plate printed to look like a tradi-
tional keyboard that responds to the 40Hz hum present in
the human finger. The EDP Wasp synth used a similarly flat
touch plate, but responds to heat rather than the 40Hz hum
in the human finger. The amount of esoteric controllers on the
market is vast and it would fill many chapters to detail each
and every one.

Performance Control
Most synthesizers offer various means of performance con-
trol. These controls are designed in order to give the user
maximum control over the synthesizer in order to perform
live or in the studio. Let’s examine some of the more common
types of performance control on subtractive synthesizers.

Glide
Glide, sometimes referred to as portamento or glissando,
allows the user to create a smooth slide between notes when
playing on the keyboard. With glide engaged, the oscillators
will rise in pitch, at a rate determined by the user, from the
first note to the next when playing up the keyboard, and will
fall in pitch from one note to another when playing down the
keyboard. The glide function is similar to bending a guitar
string from one note to another, meaning that one note slides
in pitch to the next rather than just producing the first note

37
Subtractive Synthesis

and then producing the second. The glide time can usually
be set between a few milliseconds up to a few seconds. Using
the glide function while performing on a synthesizer imparts
a musical attribute to the sound that, when applied correctly,
can transform a synth line from being boring and stagnant to
being exciting and moving. In more extreme cases, the user can
set the glide time to extremely long lengths in order to create
a sound that keeps slowly rising or falling in pitch as an effect.

Based on the information collected, 79% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature glide capabilities.

Pitch Wheel
Most synthesizers feature a way in which to “bend” the pitch
of an oscillator up or down. Most often, this control is seen in

Figure 1.14 MiniMoog Voyager

pitch wheel (left) and modulation
wheel (right).

38
 Subtractive Synthesis

the form of a wheel, but joysticks, levers, and knobs are not
uncommon as well. Many synthesizer pitch wheels, joysticks,
and levers are spring loaded; in this way, the user can quickly
bend the pitch and let go of the controller so that the pitch
will quickly return back to its starting pitch.

Based on the information collected, 60% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature pitch wheels.

Modulation Wheel
When using an LFO to modulate a certain parameter of a
synthesizer, the user can set the depth of the modulation.
Most synthesizers offer a wheel, joystick, or lever similar to
the pitch control for setting the modulation depth. Unlike the
pitch control, however, a modulation wheel is typically not
spring loaded, so the user can increase the depth and leave it
for as long as desired.

Based on the information collected, 52% of subtractive synthesiz-

ers feature modulation wheels.

Ribbon Controllers
Although not nearly as common as wheels, joysticks, and
levers, ribbon controllers are found on certain synthesizers.
A ribbon controller works by sliding a finger across its flat
surface. A ribbon controller can usually be set to control a
variety of parameters on a synthesizer, but pitch, filter, and
modulation depth are the most common destinations for the
ribbon controller to affect.
It is because of this vast amount of user-controllable fea-
tures that subtractive synthesis has survived throughout the
decades since its introduction. By learning what each param-
eter does and how it affects the sound, the user creates a
physical connection between them and the instrument, which
imparts a sentimental quality to the music that is produced.
People have long coveted their synthesizers and held them
in the highest regards like a classically trained violinist cher-
ishes their violin. Music would not be where it is today had

39
Subtractive Synthesis

the electronic music synthesizer not come onto the scene and
produced a paradigm shift in which the entire music land-
scape was altered.

Recipes
The following ten recipes have been handcrafted by us and
are designed to help teach some of the theories and techniques
mentioned in this chapter. For the beginner, these patches
will provide you not only with an eclectic set of patches, but
will also help instill some fundamental synthesis knowledge
by physically re-creating these patches. For the experienced,
these patches can be a jumping-off point as well as a source of
inspiration for creating your own patches. Either way, these
patches are designed to sound good, represent and feature
various functions of a subtractive synthesizer, and provide
you with some fun synth explorations.

Recipe 1: Punchy Bass

This first recipe is designed as a synth-heavy bass patch. The
patch features a quick filter envelope, which causes the filter
to close rapidly and only allowing for a small fragment of full,
harmonic content. With added resonance, this filter envelope
setting really makes the sound become animated. This patch
is well suited for really any type of genre that requires a super
synth bass.

Figure 1.15 Recipe 1—Punchy

Bass.

40
 Subtractive Synthesis

When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators will be set

to sawtooth and square waves respectively. The two oscil-
lators should be set perfectly in tune with one another. If
desired, the two oscillators can be slightly off tune with one
another by a few cents to thicken up the sound. This patch
was designed as a bass patch so the oscillators should be
set to 32’ or 16’ ranges. The low pass filter’s cutoff should
be set at 260 Hz in order to roll off much of the high-frequency
content of the sound. Resonance should be set to around 40%,
but this can be tuned to taste depending on your particular
filter. This patch requires two separate envelope generators
with one routed to control the amplifier and one routed to
control the filter. Starting with the filter envelope, the attack
control should be set to zero seconds, or as short as it can go.
The decay parameter should be quite short, around 0.25 sec-
onds. The sustain should be all the way down at 0% and the
release should also be turned all the way down. By having
such a short decay time with no sustain, the filter will be open
right as a key is pressed, and then it will quickly close, result-
ing in a quick filter sweep that plays on the resonance setting
with each key press. Moving onto the amplifier envelope, the
attack and decay parameters should be set to zero seconds,
while the sustain should be set to 100%. Finally, the release
should be set to around 0.3 seconds. By having the sustain set
to 100%, the amplifier will stay at its max amplitude for the
duration of a key being depressed. The release is set slightly
longer in order to ensure no pops will be heard when a key
is released. This patch was designed without any glide, but
a short glide time could be added to add a bit of an extra
flair. An LFO routed to the oscillators pitch and controlled via
a mod wheel should be set to about 15Hz with around 15%
depth to add vibrato when desired.

If a bit more punch is desired, a bit of white or pink noise

could be added at a low level. Because of the shape of the fil-
ter envelope, most of the high frequency of any added noise
will be cut out quickly, resulting in a nice, low-end oomph
at each key press. Additionally, a third oscillator producing

41
Subtractive Synthesis

a sine or triangle wave could be added at an octave higher

than the first two oscillators in order to add some extra beef
to the sound.

Recipe 2: Evolving Lead

The second patch in our list is a slightly different take on
a traditional lead patch. The filter will slowly open once a
key is pressed, revealing more high frequency content as
the sound progresses while a heavy dose of resonance will
animate the sound and help it pierce through any mix. This
patch was designed to fit greatly in an ambient or alternative
setting, but will bode well in any R&B or even EDM track.
This patch is extremely versatile; by simply adjusting the fil-
ter envelope’s attack, the sound can take on whole new life.
When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators will be set to
produce sawtooth waves. One of the oscillators will be tuned
an octave below the other to create a rich tone. The low pass
filter cutoff is set relatively low at around 236Hz, while the
resonance is set extremely high at around 85%. The filter
envelope’s attack is set quite long at 2.5 seconds, while its
decay is set longer—still at around three seconds. Sustain is
set at 35%, while the release is set all the way up. This type of
envelope shape will result in a filter that slowly opens once a
key is pressed, and then slowly dies down to a more subdued

Figure 1.16 Recipe 2—Evolving

Lead.

42
 Subtractive Synthesis

state until it slowly closes once a key is released. This type

of filter envelope shape lends itself well to a lead line that is
played slowly while notes are held out. Unlike the filter enve-
lope, the amplifier envelope shape is fairly basic with attack
and decay set as short as they can go and sustain and release
set to full. Glide is set to about 20%, but can be fine-tuned to
taste. Finally, a vibrato LFO is set up at around 10Hz with
about 20% depth.
As was said above, simply adjusting the attack parameter of
the filter envelope will result in drastically different sounds.
In addition to this, adjusting the decay and sustain param-
eters of the filter envelope will adjust how the sound initially
fades and remains while a key is being depressed. Changing
the LFO to affect the filter cutoff will also allow for some cool,
wah-wah-type effect.

Recipe 3: Effected, Evolving Pad

This patch is designed to be an out-of-the-ordinary pad
sound. Being a pad, it is helpful to have some amount of
polyphony available, but the patch sounds good monophonic
as well. Due to a relatively fast LFO-controlling filter cutoff,
the pad has a type or bubbly sound that makes it quite inter-
esting. This type of pad would lend itself to most genres, but
is mainly designed for an alternative pop genre.

Figure 1.17 Recipe 3—Effected,

Evolving Pad.

43
Subtractive Synthesis

When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators are set to pro-
duce sawtooth and square waves respectively. The square
wave oscillator is tuned to minus seven semitones from
the sawtooth oscillator. The low pass filter’s cutoff is set to
472Hz, while the resonance is almost fully engaged at 92%.
The filter envelope’s attack time is set extremely long at nine
seconds, while the decay is set to 2.5 seconds. The sustain
level is semi-low at 35% and the release is turned to full. This
envelope shape allows for an extremely long filter evolution
that will work hand in hand with the LFO. The amplifier
envelope is fairly basic with attack and decay set to zero and
the sustain set to 100%. The amplifier envelope’s release is set
to full. A fairly strong glide is set at 28%. Finally, a sine wave
LFO is set fairly fast at 35Hz and is routed to the filter. The
LFO in this patch is designed to constantly be engaged rather
than controlled via a mod wheel. A 50% depth on the LFO is
what was imagined for this patch, but it can be more or less
based on your own personal preferences.
If desired, a third oscillator can be added either in tune with
one of the others, or at another interval for a fuller sound. It is
highly recommended that either pink or white noise is added
at a low level to add some extra texture to the sound.

Recipe 4: Funk Lead

This Funk Lead patch is a fun lead sound that also works
well as a rhythm or melody sound. The patch contains a
chord-like sound with a tight, percussive filter envelope.
Both the cutoff frequency of the filter and the resonance are
set quite high resulting in an extremely bright sound. This
patch will easily fit in a funk song, but will lend itself to any
genre with a pop influence.
When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators are set to
produce sawtooth waves with the second oscillator tuned
up five semitones from the first. Both oscillators should be
in a mid-to-high range, so 8’ or 4’ ranges are recommended.
The low pass filter cutoff is set to 7200Hz with resonance at

44
 Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.18 Recipe 4—Funk

Lead.

80–100% (just under the point of self-oscillation). The filter

envelope’s attack time is set to zero while the decay time is set
to 0.1 seconds. The sustain and release controls are both set as
low as they go. This envelope shape will create an animated
percussive sound that bodes well for the rhythmic aspects
needed for fun music. The amplifier envelope is a basic “on”
shape with attack, decay, and release set to zero while sustain
is set at 100%. A slight glide is set at 10%, and a relatively
quick LFO, set to 18Hz, is routed to the oscillators pitch and
is controlled via modulation wheel.
If a thicker sound is desired, a third oscillator producing a
square wave and tuned to the first oscillator can be added.
White or pink noise can be added in a small amount to add
extra punch to the sound. If you find that the envelope is
too percussive for your taste, increasing the filter envelope’s
decay time to around two seconds should suffice.

Recipe 5: Thick Bass

This bass patch differs from the first bass patch in that more
emphasis is put onto the sound’s “oomph.” This bass patch
is extremely thick and will be sure to rumble any subwoofer.
As this is a fairly straightforward synth bass sound, it will fit
nicely in any genre of music.

45
Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.19 Recipe 5—Thick

Bass.

When re-creating this patch, one oscillator is set to a saw-

tooth wave, while the second is set to a square wave that is
an octave lower than the sawtooth. Since this is a bass patch,
a low range should be set with the first oscillator at 16’ and
second oscillator at 32’. The lowpass filter cutoff should be
set to 170Hz with resonance set fairly high at 65%. Both the
filter envelope’s attack and decay times are set to 0.5 seconds
while the release is set to 0.4 seconds. Finally, the sustain is set
to 0%. The amplifier envelope features the same “on” setting
found in some of the previous patches with attack and decay
set to zero and sustain set to 100%. The amplifier envelope’s
release, however, is set to 0.4 seconds. The glide should be set
at around 8% and finally a 15Hz LFO should be routed to the
oscillators’ pitch for vibrato when engaged by the modula-
tion wheel.
A third oscillator set to sine or triangle in the range of the first
oscillator can be added for extra low end. Likewise, white or
pink noise can be added to add extra grit to the sound.

Recipe 6: Percussive Staccato Pad

The sixth patch in our list is sort of unique in that it is
designed to be a pad-like sound played on a monophonic
synthesizer. That being said, this patch will also sound great

46
 Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.20 Recipe 6—

Percussive Staccato Pad.

on a polyphonic synthesizer, it’s just designed in such a way

to make the most out of a monophonic synthesizer. The way
the two envelopes are set up allows for a short, percussive
sound, which then fades into a held-out, dark sound. This
patch is not geared toward any type of genre and will lend
itself well to any musical setting.

When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators are set to

sawtooth and square with the square oscillator tuned down
a full octave from the sawtooth oscillator. The low pass fil-
ter’s cutoff is set to 220Hz, while resonance is fully cranked
to 100%. The resonance can be toned down a bit if you do
not like the self-oscillation sound present from full reso-
nance. The filter envelope’s attack is set to zero seconds,
while the decay is set to about half a second. The sustain is
left at 60% and, finally, the release is turned fully down to
zero seconds. This envelope shape will yield a percussive
sound that does not leave the filter fully closed. The ampli-
fier envelope’s attack and decay times should both be set to
zero seconds as well. Both the sustain and release param-
eters are turned fully up. With such a short filter envelope
and long amplifier envelope, the sound will be piercing and
bright at its onset and then quickly become dark and ring
out for a long time.

47
Subtractive Synthesis

This patch was designed with no glide, but it can certainly be

added. The LFO should also be tuned to taste. Another idea
is a slow filter LFO that can move the filter open and closed
while the sound is ringing out. If you want a weirder sound,
a fast LFO around 35 or 40Hz controlling the filter could be
added in via modulation wheel.

Recipe 7: 60s Organ

Although this patch is named 60s Organ, it is not meant to be
a patch that faithfully emulates any type of organ. Instead,
this patch gets its inspiration from 60s organs such as the Vox
Continental.
When re-creating this patch, both oscillators are set to triangle
waves with the second oscillator tuned an octave below the
first. Pink or white noise should be added in a small amount
in order to mimic the noise present in these old organs. The
low pass filter’s cutoff is set at 2800Hz with full resonance.
The filter envelope’s attack and release times are set to zero
seconds while the decay is set at 0.16 seconds. Finally, the sus-
tain is set at 34%. The amplifier envelope’s attack and decay
should both be set to zero seconds, while the sustain is set at
100%. Finally the release should be set around 0.17 seconds.
No glide is required for this patch. If available, a 1Hz LFO
should be routed to the amplifier in order to generate a slow,

Figure 1.21 Recipe 7—60s

Organ.

48
 Subtractive Synthesis

tremolo effect. If your LFO cannot be routed to your synthe-

sizer’s amplifier, routing the same 1Hz LFO to the filter’s cut-
off frequency is a good alternative.
This is a fun patch that can lend itself to any genre. Alterna-
tive or pop is most recommended, but it will fit nicely into any
mix. The patch was designed with a polyphonic synthesizer
in mind, but melodies and lead lines can be well executed on
a monophonic synthesizer with this patch.

Recipe 8: Slow, Effected Lead

The eighth patch in this list is another take on a lead sound
that is different from the stereotypical lead sounds out there.
This patch contains an evolving filter with high resonance,
which creates an effected sound that would be a nice addition
to any piece of music.
When re-creating this patch, the two oscillators are set to
square and sawtooth respectively, with the sawtooth oscilla-
tor tuned an octave above the square oscillator. The low pass
filter’s cutoff is set to 90Hz while, the resonance is cranked
as high as it will go. The filter envelope’s attack and decay
are both set to zero seconds, while the sustain and release are
both set to 100%. Both the amplifier envelope’s attack and
decay parameters are set to zero seconds, while the sustain
and release are set to 100%. Glide is added at 30%. A 0.6Hz

Figure 1.22 Recipe 8—Slow,

Effected Lead.

49
Subtractive Synthesis

sine wave LFO is routed to the filter cutoff with 100% depth
to slowly open and close the filter as you play.
An additional oscillator set to either sawtooth or square
would be a good addition if you wish to beef up the sound. If
your synthesizer has the capability of oscillator sync, engag-
ing it on either oscillator would allow you to add some inter-
esting harmonics to the sound.

Recipe 9: Chorded Trumpet

The ninth patch in our list draws its inspiration from a trum-
pet section, but is obviously designed so that it sounds more
like a Roland Jupiter or Juno horn sound. The patch features
two oscillators tuned at an interval in order to create a chord
like sound.
When re-creating this patch, both oscillators are set to saw-
tooth waves with the second oscillator tuned up seven semi-
tones from the first oscillator. The low pass filter’s cutoff is
set to 156Hz with the resonance at 64%. The filter envelope’s
attack time is set to 5.5 seconds, while its decay is set to 1.7
seconds. The sustain is set at 18% and the release is set at 0.05
seconds. The amplifier envelope’s attack and decay are both
set at zero seconds, while the sustain is turned up to 100%.
Finally, the amplifier envelope’s release is set at one second.
No glide or noise is present in this patch, but can certainly

Figure 1.23 Recipe 9—Chorded

Trumpet.

50
 Subtractive Synthesis

be added if desired. The LFO is set fairly standard at around

15Hz and routed to pitch for a vibrato effect.

Recipe 10: Wall of Sound

The final patch in our list is a great patch that can really
thicken up an entire mix. The sound is massive and can be
thought of in the same light as a huge power chord played on
a guitar. This particular patch is perfect for industrial, hard
rock, metal, or EDM music.
When re-creating this patch, both oscillators are set to square
waves with the second oscillator tuned a full octave below
the first. The low pass filter’s cutoff is set at 2600Hz with
resonance turned up to 65%. The filter envelope’s attack is
set to zero seconds with the decay at 0.25 seconds. The sus-
tain is set at 20%, while the release is set to 0.38 seconds. The
amplifier envelope’s attack and decay times are both set to
zero seconds, while its sustain is set at a full 100%. Finally,
the amplifier envelope’s release time is set identical to the
filter envelopes release time at 0.38 seconds. Glide is set to
20% and a 15Hz LFO can be routed to either the filter cutoff
or pitch.
A third oscillator set to a sawtooth wave and tuned identi-
cally to the second oscillator so that it’s a full octave below

Figure 1.24 Recipe 10—Wall of

Sound.

51
Subtractive Synthesis

the first oscillator is a great addition to this sound. Addition-

ally, white or pink noise can be added in order to introduce
more grit to the sound.

Historical Perspective
on Subtractive Synthesis
Subtractive synthesis can be traced back to the dawn of
the electric age. The first leaps forward in electronic musi-
cal instruments often happened by accident when inventors
were experimenting with electricity. One of the first instances
of electronic tone generation came in the form of the oscil-
lating light arc invented by Elihu Thomson in the late 1800s.
Although not intended as an electronic tone generator, Thom-
son found that his light arc would hum when operated.1 Wil-
liam Duddell, another early inventor, took Thomson’s design
a bit further by wiring many oscillating light arcs together in
order to perform “God Save the Queen.”2 Duddell’s perfor-
mance on the oscillating light arc is often considered to be
the first performance of an electronic instrument. In essence,
what Thomson, and later Duddell, invented was the world’s
first oscillator.

Early Electronic Instruments

Not long after the oscillating light arc, inventors such as
Thaddeus Cahill and Leon Theremin began inventing elec-
tronic devices designed to play music. Cahill’s Teleharmo-
nium and Theremin’s Etherphone (later named Theremin)
were among the first electronic instruments ever designed.3
The Theremin went on to achieve success influencing future
electronic music inventors. The Theremin, which is still in
production today by numerous companies, is a noncontact,
electro-harmonic instrument. The Theremin features two
antennas (one for pitch, one for volume) that the user places
his or her hands between in order to control the instrument.
Two internal oscillators then produce one continuous wide
range pitch via beat frequencies.4 The Theremin was widely

52
 Subtractive Synthesis

Figure 1.25 A modern Moog

Theremin; a direct ancestor to the
original Theremin. Photo courtesy
of www.switchedonaustin.com.

used in virtuoso performances as well as a wide array of early

science fiction movies.
Soon after the Theremin’s debut, a French inventor by the
name of Maurice Martenot released a similar sounding instru-
ment known as the Ondes Martenot.5 The Ondes Martenot
utilized a similar principle as the Theremin, but a keyboard
and suspended ring was used as a means of control rather
than antennas. Users would place their finger in a small, sus-
pended ring underneath the keyboard and move their hand
up and down the length of the keyboard in order to control
pitch in a continuous manner.6 Due to the fact that a keyboard
was available to be used as a reference, users could create sta-
ble pitches much easier with the Ondes Martenot than with
the Theremin. Finally, the Ondes Martenot featured a physi-
cal block that the user would depress in order to change the
amplitude of the instrument.
In the late 1930s, a new electronic musical instrument,
designed by John M. Hanert, Laurens Hammond, and C. N.
Williams, would be introduced that would revolutionize elec-
tronic instruments. This instrument was known as the Ham-
mond Novachord. Not only was the Hammond Novachord

53
Subtractive Synthesis

able to electronically generate tones, it was able to do so with

full polyphony, meaning that each key on the keyboard could
be played simultaneously. Full polyphony was so revolution-
ary that it wouldn’t be commonplace on synthesizers until
the late 1970s and 1980s. The Novachord was also revolution-
ary in the fact that it is considered to be the first synthesizer
to utilize envelope generators.7
Soon after the Hammond Novachord was released, a new syn-
thesizer called the Ondioline made its debut. The Ondioline,
invented by Georges Jenny in 1941, was unique in that not only
did it offer envelope generator control and a complex filter bank,
it was one of the first synthesizers to feature a wealth of adjust-
able parameters that could easily be recalled, resulting in the
first successful synthesizer to utilize a primitive form of preset
control.8 Thanks to its complex filter bank and advanced enve-
lope contours, the Ondioline was especially good at re-­creating
various orchestral sounds like oboes and violins.
As early electronic instruments like the Theremin, Ondes
Martenot, and Odioline began to make an impression on the
music industry, many influential people were taking notice.
Two such people, Herbert Belar and Harry Olson, who were
working for RCA, began work on their own electronic musi-
cal instrument. The instruments Olson and Belar would
create would end up being known as the first fully program-
mable synthesizers—the RCA Electronic Sound Synthesizer
MK I & II. The RCA synthesizers featured 12 and 24 oscil-
lators respectively as well as a wide array of envelope and
filter control. Perhaps what was most revolutionary about
the RCA synthesizers was that they were fully controllable
via an early binary computer that acted as a sequencer. The
user would program the synthesizer by not only adjusting
the machine itself, but by creating a sequence on perforated
paper that would then be fed into the binary computer, effec-
tively allowing the synthesizer to play itself. Although the
RCA synthesizers were never produced commercially, they
have gone down in history as the direct ancestors of the syn-
thesizers we know and cherish today.

54
 Subtractive Synthesis

Moog and Buchla Modular Systems

In the early 1960s, two synthesizers would emerge from sepa-
rate ends of the country almost simultaneously that would
change the face of synthesis forever. These instruments were
the Buchla 100 Series Modular Electronic Music System and
the R. A. Moog Modular System. Many heated arguments
have arisen as to whether Moog or Buchla created the first
voltage controlled analog subtractive modular synthesizer. It
is hard to determine who in fact was first, since they both
emerged around the same year—1964. It is undeniable that
the Moog went on to have more success, but the Buchla intro-
duced things to synthesis that are still utilized today.
Dr. Robert Moog got his start in electronic musical instru-
ments by building Theremin kits. Moog’s love for the
Theremin not only got him interested in electronic musical
instruments, but would introduce him to early electronic
musician Herb Deutsch. Deutsch began to work with Moog
on creating an electronic instrument that was desperately
wanted by electronic musicians. Moog began creating a series
of voltage controlled modules that each provided a different,
sound-modifying function. Quickly thereafter, Moog began
placing each of these modules in a wooden enclosure and
selling them to the public. The modules Moog created varied
from oscillators and LFOs, to envelope generators, attenua-
tors, and amplifiers, and to filters and mixers. The modules
would then be physically connected together via quarter-inch

Figure 1.26 The first Moog

modular system commercially
produced. The instrument is part
of the Stearns collection at the
University of Michigan.

55
Subtractive Synthesis

patch cables in order to build a desired sound. Moog is often

credited with introducing the traditional keyboard as a means
of designating pitch. Although using a keyboard to control a
synthesizer was controversial among early, electronic music
pioneers such as Morton Subotnick and Vladimir Ussa-
chevsky, the idea caught on and has become the standard
means of control among synthesizers.9
While Moog and Deutsch were creating what would become
the Moog Modular in New York, Don Buchla was working on
a modular synthesizer of his own near San Francisco, Califor-
nia. Buchla was approached by Morton Subotnick, along with
a variety of other experimental electronic music artists work-
ing out of the San Francisco Tape Music Center, in order to
build an electronic musical instrument. Subotnick made very
clear that he did not want the synthesizer to be controlled via
a traditional keyboard as he thought it would trap him into
making tonal music, something he did not want to do. A few
months later, Buchla arrived at the San Francisco Tape Music
Center with a prototype of his modular system. Unlike the
Moog, the Buchla synthesizer utilized a combination of touch
plates and sequencers in order to designate pitch. In fact,
the Buchla sequencer proved so successful, Moog ended up

Figure 1.27 A 1969/70 Buchla

100 Series manufactured by
CBS Musical Instruments. Image
courtesy of Rick Smith with www.
electricmusicbox.com.

56
 Subtractive Synthesis

producing a similar sequencer for his modular system years

later. Buchla’s approach to synthesis was quite different than
Moog’s, and the term West Coast and East Coast synthesis
has been coined for Buchla and Moog’s synths respectively.10
As stated above, the Moog went on to monumental success
and began showing up in a number of studios and musi-
cian’s homes despite the enormous cost. One such adopter
of the Moog modular—Walter (now Wendy) Carlos—created
an album featuring reworkings of famous Bach pieces on the
synthesizer. This album, “Switched on Bach,” is responsible
for bringing the synthesizer out of the experimental music
studios and into popular culture.11

Analog Mono Synths of the 1970s

With the success of the Moog modular, synthesizers started
to become a hot commodity. Due to the high cost and steep
learning curve, though, many musicians were begging for
something smaller, cheaper, and easier to use. Answering
their call, Moog released the MiniMoog in 1974. The Mini-
Moog was a compact, road-ready synthesizer and keyboard
combo that was internally wired, which negated the necessity
of using patch cables to produce sound. For the first time,

Figure 1.28 Arp Odyssey.

Photo courtesy of www.
switchedonaustin.com.

57
Subtractive Synthesis

the synthesizer became something practically anybody could

learn and was small enough to be brought on tour. The Mini-
Moog revolutionized synthesis and, soon, a wealth of com-
panies began releasing compact analog synthesizers. ARP,
Yamaha, Korg, Roland, EMS, Crumar, EML, Oberheim, and
Sequential circuits were among the vast number of compa-
nies that produced analog mono synths that would create a
paradigm shift in the music industry.

The Digital Age and Beyond

As analog subtractive synthesizers became commonplace
amongst musicians, companies began producing digital syn-
thesizers at a lower cost. Musicians began flocking to these
new digital synthesizers due to their low cost, the fact they
stayed reliably in tune, and because they featured presets
making large, time-consuming tweaking unnecessary. As
more and more musicians began selling off their old analog
subtractive synthesizers for more complex digital synths,
subtractive synthesis seemed all but doomed. The mid 1990s,
however, brought with it a small resurgence of analog inter-
est. At first, this new appreciation for analog subtractive syn-
thesizers seemed to only have a cult following, but it was
soon determined that users wanted new, subtractive synthe-
sizers. Companies began producing software emulations of
old analog gear as well as a number of digital subtractive syn-
thesizers. As demand grew, companies like Moog and Dave

Figure 1.29 The Korg Little-Bits

synthesizer system is a modular
DIY analog synthesizer, which
gives users an insight into the
electronics and mechanics present
in analog synthesizers.

58
 Subtractive Synthesis

Smith of Sequential Circuits began producing all-new ana-

log subtractive synthesizers. In an almost ironic turn of fate,
the synthesizer market was once again being flooded with
not only analog subtractive synthesizers, but with modular
analog synthesizers as well. The synthesizer industry has
effectively come a full 360 degrees from where it started, and
suffice it say, it is an exciting time for synthesis.

Notes
1. Mary Jenkins, Analog Synthesizers, Focal Press, 2007, p. 20.
2. Jenkins, p. 63.
3. Jenkins, p. 24.
4. Vasilyey Yurii, “History and Design of Russian Electro-musical
Instrument ‘Theremin.’ ” Paper presented at the annual Audio
Engineering Society Convention. May 20–23, 2006, Paris, France.
5. Jenkins, p. 31.
6. “Ondes Martenot,” Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/428993/ondes-martenot
7. Michael Murphy and Eric Kupp, “An Examination of Early Analog
and Digital Sampling—The Robb Wave Organ Circa 1927.” Paper
presented at the annual Audio Engineering Society Convention.
May 4–7, 2013, Rome, Italy.
8. Carlton Garner, “Electronic Instrument,” Encyclopedia Britannica.
Retrieved from www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/183802/
electronic-instrument/53835/The-tape-recorder-as-a-musical-tool#
ref111938
9. Moog, DVD. Directed by Hans Fjellestad, 2004.
10. I Dream of Wires, Blu-Ray. Directed by Robert Fantinatto, 2013.
11. Robert A. Moog, “Electronic Music,” Journal of the Audio Engineer-
ing Society vol. 25, no. 10/11 (November 1, 1997), pp. 855–861.

59
SAMPLING AND
SAMPLE-BASED
SYNTHESIS2

Synthesizers changed music forever, and even though they

are capable of a wide variety of sounds, designers have con-
tinuously sought to emulate acoustic instruments. Yamaha’s
DX-7 was one of the first synths that came close, and it did
what no other instrument had done before; offer an afford-
able instrument that realistically mimicked other instru-
ments. Once that door was slammed open, developers sought
to do a better job of emulating traditional instruments with
improving technology, and sample-based instruments started
to take over.
Another draw to sampling is live performance where the
efficiency of resources and access to a variety of instruments
is paramount. Instead of bringing every single individual
instrument on tour, a sampling setup allows you to have all
of the sounds you want to use in a single place. There is some-
thing magical about using your actual vintage synthesizers
on the road until something goes wrong or until you try to
make quick patch changes between songs.
Sampling has its own history separate from synthesis and it
is big enough to fill an entire book all by itself. Some of the
history is explored later, but the bulk of this chapter is a look
at the point where synthesis and sampling overlap. In spite
of having substantially different sound engines, both synthe-
sizers and samplers have similar modulation, envelope, and
effects sections. These similarities mean that a sampler can

60
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.1 Sampling goes mobile

on iOS with Garageband.

easily be used in the same way you would use many types of
synthesizers, with very similar results.
Sampling is a tedious art form because it can take hours and
hours to create a sampled instrument, but there is still an ele-
ment of art and you have to become a craftsperson with a
special attention to detail. The caution that you should keep
in the forefront of your mind throughout this entire chapter is
that you shouldn’t get lost in the technical aspects of sam-
pling. During the process of creating a sampled instrument,
you should always ask yourself if the decisions you are mak-
ing will make a more expressive instrument or just one that
is accurate. Embrace the art over the science when it comes
to sampling!

Basics of Sampling
The process of sampling has the following phases:
1. Source capture
2. Editing
3. Mapping
4. Tweaking
After covering the basics of sampling, there are several spe-
cific projects which are described in detail to showcase the

61
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

power of collaboration between sampling and synthesis.

The examples in this chapter are DIY instruments that take
advantage of envelopes, filters, and other synthesis modules.
Projects that you could do could also include nontraditional
sound sources, which create synthesizers out of sounds from
everyday things such as wind, shutting doors, or just about
anything you can record.

Sampling Overview
Sampling is the process of mapping audio files to MIDI notes
so they can be triggered for playback. The only real difference
between sampling and synthesis is that sampling uses audio
files as the sound source instead of generated sounds from
oscillators or other tone generators. Digital synths such as the
DX-7 mimicked instruments, such as brass or pianos, but a
sampler uses actual sound files recorded from these instru-
ments, and that means they will sound exactly like the actual
instruments.
As computing technology improved and became more
affordable, samplers and ROMplers (with no recording capa-
bilities and only sample playback functionality) became more
popular and overtook synths such as the DX-7. Samplers are
as popular now as they have ever been and are a common
production tool due to the power and flexibility of software
offerings.

Figure 2.2 Editing samples in

Logic’s EXS24.

62
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Every major, digital audio workstation has its own sampler,

which can be used to create complex instruments, but there
are couple samplers such as MachFive and Kontakt that have
even more features and can be used with any DAW. Mach-
Five in particular is a sampler that is of interest to synthesizer
users because it has a series of synth engines that work with
recorded samples to create amazing sounds. Examples of this
include a four-operator FM synth, a granular synth, and a
wavetable synth. In many ways, MachFive is the only instru-
ment you’d ever need, but we all know that one is never
going to be enough to satisfy our creative juices.
Another new trend in sampling involves mobile devices that
can record, edit, and trigger samples using intuitive touch
interfaces in a portable package. Very few mobile samplers are
capable of complex instruments, but that is going to change
and improve as mobile devices improve. For the purposes of
this chapter, we are going to use the EXS24 for illustrations,
due to the popularity of using Logic Pro X for this type of
musical creation.

Source Capture
Capturing good sound sources is the most important part of
sampling because nothing you do afterwards will be able to
significantly change the original source material. Sampled
instruments are created from the recordings made during the
capture phase, and so it is critical that the sounds are recorded
at the highest quality possible. There are three typical ways
to record the source, which include using microphones, direct
connections, and internal connections.

Sample Recording Considerations

Using a microphone in the sampling process is the tradi-
tional method for capturing acoustic instruments, but when
it comes to synthesizers, microphones should only be used
when no other option is available. Some instruments do not
have output ports, but they do have built-in speakers that can

63
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.3 USB microphone from

sE Electronics.

be recorded with microphones. Using microphones also cre-

ates a more complex situation because there are many dif-
ferent types of microphones, and preamps/converters are
required.
If you decide to use a microphone in the sampling process,
then you’ll want to make sure to check a few things to maxi-
mize the quality of the audio recordings. The first is that you
should listen to the output of the synth speaker to make sure

64
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

there isn’t too much noise. If the instrument has two speakers,
then make sure that you are recording the one that sounds
better and has less noise. You also want to make sure that
there isn’t any mechanical noise from the keys or from ped-
als. Many issues you can fix, but you should try to minimize
the ones you can’t.
The other consideration you need to think about is the acous-
tic space of the room where you are recording. This needs to
be a quiet room and a room that sounds good because every-
thing that is in the space will be recorded by the microphone.
If you have to record in a nonrecording studio space, then
make sure that you listen carefully before recording to see
if there are any soft buzzes, hums, or other sounds coming
from inside/outside the room. Don’t compromise in making
sure there are no noises because if there are, then it will affect
your sounds in a negative way that will be very difficult to
fix later.
The best way to check for audio quality while sampling is to
put on a nice pair of headphones, and then listen critically to
each sample. If you have access to a professional, quality stu-
dio, then using their speakers to monitor the sound is likely
acceptable: but if there is any doubt, then use high quality
headphones which can act as a microscope for a sonic analy-
sis to ensure low noise and great sound.
While it is possible to use an inexpensive microphone and
equipment set-up, this should be avoided because you will
not be capturing the best possible version of the sound. The
cheapest microphones have the potential to add noise into
the signal at the very earliest stages, which might make your
sampled instrument unusable.
Even though you don’t need to worry about the acous-
tics of the room, you still need to listen for buzz and hum
and other noises in the signal. Some vintage instruments
are likely to have more noise than others and we will talk
about some things you can do when we get to the section
on editing.

65
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Sample Recording Tools

As stated above, describing an entire microphone setup is
outside the scope of this chapter, but here are some examples
of equipment options to give you an idea of the possibili-
ties. The three scenarios are a USB microphone, an all-in-one
interface with a separate microphone, and a setup with all
individual components.

USB Microphone
I use a sE Electronics 2200a USB microphone, which con-
nects to a laptop or iPad and is an excellent choice because it
is low noise and sounds great. The microphone has a built-in
headphone jack, which means you can listen to what you
are recording directly on the microphone. Plus you can use
the microphone with other audio interfaces since it has a
traditional XLR connector in addition to the USB port. This
option is literally a complete studio that can be used for
sampling.

Figure 2.4 USB connection and

headphone port.

66
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Audio Interface
There are many different audio interfaces available in the
marketplace, and they come in a variety of configurations
at a wide variety of prices. Assuming you are planning on
sampling synthesizers, then you won’t need an audio inter-
face with a lot of inputs and can likely manage with one or
two. Most interfaces connect with your computer via USB,
Firewire, or ThunderBolt. After verifying compatibility with
your computer and choosing the number of inputs, you’ll
want to verify it has microphone preamps and XLR inputs.
The choice of microphone is complex because there are many
different types and brands, and, honestly, you may really want
to use different microphones for different recording projects.
The three primary types are dynamic, ribbon, and condenser.
All three convert acoustic energy to electrical energy but do
it in different ways that result in different sound character-
istics. Dynamic microphones rely on a moving diaphragm
in a magnetic field, which results in a less detailed sound
with less clarity in the upper frequency range. The character
of these is often great for electric guitars, live performance,
or other percussive sources. Ribbon microphones rely on a
delicate strip of metal in a magnetic field, which makes them
among the most sensitive, but also the most expensive and
prone to damage from rough handling and voltage from
phantom power. The condenser type relies on the difference

Figure 2.5 Focusrite Saffire Pro

40 Firewire interface.

67
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

in distance between two charged metal plates and is very sen-

sitive to small differences in acoustic energy, which translates
to higher clarity in frequencies and sensitivity for sound at
softer levels.
A condenser microphone is recommended for most synthe-
sizer sampling, but any of the types could work. In addition
to a microphone, you’ll also need a microphone cable, which
is typically a three-pin XLR cable. Condenser microphones
also require power in the form of phantom power, which is
available on most interfaces. This 48-volt power option is
required for the microphone to work. Buying an interface and
microphone can cost as little as $500–1,000 or be as expensive
as $1,000–10,000.

Individual Components
This option is essentially the same as the one previous, but
breaks the audio interface into its individual pieces. These
include a microphone preamp, an analog to digital converter,
and a computer interface. This chain has the potential to be
the very highest quality, but is definitely the most expensive
and most complex. If you are sampling synthesizers for your
own use and for live performance, then the individual com-
ponent option is likely overkill because the quality of the
first two options are both acceptable, but if you want to sell
sampled instrument banks, then a higher quality option is
important.

Microphone Guidelines
It is possible to set your input levels too high so they dis-
tort or too low so additional noise is introduced, and so you
want to set it at the highest level possible without distort-
ing. If the source synth sounds best when turned up very
loudly, then adjust the microphone preamp appropriately.
In some cases, you’ll have to use a pad on either the micro-
phone or on the interface, which turns down the input by a
set amount.

68
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Direct Connections
Recording a synthesizer with the direct connection is the
ideal way because it removes acoustics and room consider-
ations from the process. While you still need an audio inter-
face for your computer, you’ll connect the instrument with
cables instead of using microphones. While this is the optimal
method for recording from a synthesizer instrument, it is just
as complicated as any of the other methods and so there are a
few things we need to cover to help you be prepared.

Matching Outputs
The first step in recording samples using direct connections is
to match the number of outputs on your instrument with the
number inputs on your audio interface. In most cases, you’ll
be dealing with mono or stereo outputs, but in some cases,
you’ll have four, six, or eight outputs. If you want to be able
to record all outputs simultaneously, then you need to have
an audio interface that matches. It is unlikely that you’ll need
multiple outputs, but some synths have alternate outputs for
layering patches and a few instruments have surround out-
puts, which can all be sampled into a single patch.
In addition to matching the right number of outputs, you
also have to match the type of output. If the instrument uses
1/4” unbalanced cables, then you’ll need to make sure the
interface can accept an input with that type. If the instrument
has a digital audio output, then having an interface that can
accept that format is critical. Typical connections include the
following:
1/4”—Balanced (TRS) and unbalanced (TS)
1/8”—Balanced (TRS)
XLR
Optical
Coaxial / RCA
Some audio interfaces have combination connectors which
accept both 1/4” and XLR cables, but you’ll still need to
choose between a mic level input and a line level input. One

69
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

important troubleshooting tip is to make sure the synth is

working and sounding like it should in your audio interface
by plugging in headphones into the headphone jack of the
instrument to make sure that the sound of the synth is there
and matches what you are expecting.
Once everything is connected, the next part of the recording
process is to set the levels appropriately. Nearly every inter-
face has level adjustments that make it possible to turn up or
down the input levels. If these are set too low, then there is a
chance that there will be too much noise in comparison to the
signal in the recording; but if they are set too high, then you
will face distortion. Distortion is worse, but both are a prob-
lem when creating high-quality sampled instruments.

Recording Notes and Layers

To create realistic-sounding instruments, you need to record
as many notes as possible and, when appropriate, at differ-
ent velocities. Some synthesizers don’t have velocity-sensitive
capabilities and so it makes sampling of them very easy, but
when a synthesizer has variable velocity or any modulation
controlled by key velocity, then sampling becomes a more
intricate process. If the synthesizer sounds different when you
play the keys with more or less velocity, then recording at mul-
tiple levels is important. Listen closely to the synthesizer when
you play it at different levels because if the loud sounds are
just turned up, but are no different than the soft ones, then you
don’t need to record alternate velocities. Samplers can easily
play recorded samples at different levels, but it’s the change
in sound across the velocity spectrum that can’t be replicated
without recording additional samples. If the instrument has
MIDI or C.V. input, then sequencing the notes for sampling
can often help ensure an even velocity spread for samples.

Figure 2.6 Velocity layers

example.

70
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Editing
The editing process of your source material involves remov-
ing empty space, making sure the levels are correct, removing
noise, and anything else needed to make sure the samples
sound good. If you recorded all of the notes for one set of
the instruments into a single file, then start by processing the
audio with everything that needs be done to all of the notes
at once. This includes adjusting the level globally, performing
noise reduction if necessary, and adding any additional audio
effects if desired.
Once you’re satisfied with the entire file, then you begin
to split all of the notes into individual regions. Most digi-
tal audio workstations have a feature called Strip Silence,
which removes parts of the audio file that fall below a cer-
tain threshold, and this is very useful when working with
this type of file because it will save time by splitting the files
up automatically. It is important to look at the beginning and
end of every file while zoomed in to make sure the start point
is at the very beginning of the audio portion of the file and at
a zero crossing point, which means that the waveform starts
at the exact point where the audio is crossing the axes instead
of partway through a wave (this is to prevent a popping

Figure 2.7 Editing individual files

in the Logic File Editor.

71
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

sound). Use fades to smooth the start or end of each file if

needed.
The next step is to have each sample converted to its own file,
which is important for the sake of organization and to keep
things simple for the sampler. Audio software references the
original long audio file, and even when it looks like they are
separate files, there is a good chance that they are still all one
big file. Converting clips to new files is especially important
if you are using a sampler that is a part of your editor, such as
the sampler in Logic Pro X, because you can drag the sample
files into the sampler and it still won’t use individual files.
The best option is to export all of the samples as individual
files into a folder with descriptive filenames that are num-
bered sequentially and then import them into your sampler.
While you can use any naming convention you want, it is eas-
iest when you use a name that includes the note name, note
octave, and some indication of the patch from the original
instrument. Double check each file by opening them to make
sure they are the appropriate length and the correct note.

Mapping
The mapping process takes each individual sample and
assigns them to MIDI notes. Sample files are loaded into
zones, which tell the sampler the root note, the key range,
and the velocity level. If you recorded a sample for each note,
then each zone will cover a single note, but if you recorded a
sample with the goal of covering multiple notes, then you’ll
need to adjust the zone range to match the desired range.
All zones require a root note setting, which tells the sam-
pler what transposition to use for the sample. The root note

Figure 2.8 Mapped zones.

72
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.9 Zone settings.

should correspond to the pitch of the sample and many sam-

plers will set this automatically based on the sample name or
analyzed pitch upon import.
The next task in mapping is to set the velocity layers, but only
on instruments where you originally recorded multiple levels
of velocity. Due to the limitations of MIDI, there are only 128
steps of velocity, but there are no guidelines on where to set
the velocity ranges for the samples you’ve recorded. The pro-
cess for setting velocity ranges is part common sense and part
trial and error, and the only way to confirm that it is set cor-
rectly is by testing it out to see if it sounds right. In addition to
playing the instrument using a controller keyboard, you could
also use a MIDI test file, which plays through all notes and
ranges so you can hear how consistent it is in each of them.

Loops
Looping is another important task that takes place inside the
sampler and unless your sampler has an auto loop function,
this is something that can potentially take a very long time.
Not all instruments require looping, but when working with
synthesizers, looping often makes the most sense. The best
approach when setting loop points is to be very methodical
and pay close attention to the details. Following are a few
steps to follow in the looping process.

Find an Optimal Loop Section

A looped section is repeated over and over for the purpose
of sustain and so it has to be a section where the beginning
and end are similar in level and timbre, otherwise there will
be a bump in the sound when the note is sustained. If you are
sampling using the waveform option, then the entire file is
typically looped, which makes this very easy, but you’ll still

73
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.10 Looping at the zero

crossing point.

need to check each zone. Instruments that change over time

with either envelopes or filters may be more difficult to loop,
but as long as you can find even a short section to loop, then
it will work. Some loop points will be short and some will be
long, and this depends on the type of sound of the samples.
Instruments with a very consistent sound will often work
well with short loop points while some instruments benefit
from longer loop points.

Choose the Loop Direction

Typical options for loop direction include forward, backward,
and forward/backward. Forward is the most common and,
after it plays the loop section once, it goes back to the begin-
ning and plays it over and over while the note is sustained.
Forward/backward is a good option when you aren’t able to
make the forward loop work, because there is never a transi-
tion bump in level since the loop playback bounces forward

74
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.11 Typical looping

options.

and backward over and over. The main issue with that is that
the bouncing back and forth is often quite audible.

Set Crossfades
In addition to setting your loop points at zero crossings, it is
an option to use fades that cross over the loop point. Cross-
fades create overlap so that, as one sound ends, the level goes
down just as the level comes up from the beginning of the
loop. If you aren’t able to create a loop that sounds smooth
as it continuously loops, then try a crossfade to smooth it out.
The length of the crossfade is less important than making it
sound good, so start with a short one and increase it until it
sounds just right. The best crossfade is one that you can’t hear.

Adjust the Release

Samplers handle the release section in a variety of ways, which
include fading out in the loop section or continuing in the sam-
ple after the loop section. Sometimes this is called a release and
other times it is called a note-off trigger. It is unlikely that you’ll
have that much control over this, but you will want to test it to
make sure that the release settings work for your instrument.

Advanced Features
The rest of the mapping process involves using the advanced
features of your sampler. Many samplers let you use key-
switching, which means that you’ll map all of the zones as

75
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

previously discussed, but each key-switch layer needs a trig-

ger. You can either use a note lower on the keyboard to trigger
different players or something like the mod wheel.
Another advanced feature is round-robin, which uses multi-
ple zones in the same key range and velocity range, which are
cycled through each time the same note is played. This mim-
ics the way that many instruments make different sounds,
even when the exact same note is played over and over. If
you want to use this technique, then it easily means two or
three times the amount of recording.
Scripting is perhaps the most advanced feature and only
exists in the most advanced samplers, such as Kontakt from
Native Instruments. Scripting relies on computer-style pro-
gramming to create additional parameters for mapping and
performance. An example is a script that recognizes a played
chord and then offsets the timing of each note to mimic the
strum of a guitar. It could also translate the MIDI input perfor-
mance of a piano-style keyboard so that it sounds more like
a nonkeyboard instrument, such as a violin or trumpet. This
could affect timing and sample selection so that it sounds and
feels like the real instrument. Scripting is the most advanced
feature and is complicated enough that most mere mortals
aren’t able to program much, but these same samplers almost
always come with sampled instruments that take advantage
of this amazing technology.

Figure 2.12 The advanced

features of Logic’s EXS24 are
just as powerful as any other,
but perhaps the hardest to use
because the interface is difficult to
understand and use.

76
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.13 A MIDI test file

triggers the samples at different
velocities across the entire range.
Adjust the tempo to try them at
different speeds.

Tweaking
Once you have created your instrument by recording the
source, editing the samples, and mapping them across the
keyboard, then it’s time to put it through its paces and begin
the tweaking process. It is unlikely that you will create the
perfect instrument in your first try and it is more likely that
you’ll start with something fairly close and then spend a sub-
stantial amount of time adjusting velocities, zone ranges, and
other parameters. Every instrument is different and you will
need to make yours work through a lot of experimentation.
The process of testing the completed instruments involves
playing them with MIDI controllers, using any MIDI files you
have to test them out, and having a bunch of other people
test them out too. While tweaking the instruments is one of
the most rewarding parts of the process because it all comes
together as a useable instrument, it is important to pay atten-
tion to the smallest details and not lose sight of the goal of
creating a realistic instrument that sounds great and is very
playable.

Sampling Examples
The following three scenarios showcase typical situations
that you face when sampling synthesizers.
1. Waveform sampling
2. Basic instrument
3. Advanced instrument

Waveform Sampling Example

Recording the waveforms of a synthesizer is the most basic
way to create a sampled synthesizer, even though it isn’t

77
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

usually the oscillators that give a synthesizer its distinctive

sound. Most samplers, however, have built-in filters and
modulators, so you can use the basic waveforms from an
instrument and then use the rest of the sampler to create a
synthesis experience. When sampling the basic waveforms,
you can use as little as one cycle of the oscillator or much
longer segments in the cases of the analog synthesizer that
may have pitch drift. When there is drift present, it can add
to the authentic sound of the sampled instrument. You’ll have
to use your best judgment when deciding between the two,
but both will work.
The first step is to set the synthesizer so that the oscillator is
reaching the outputs unprocessed, which means turning off
all filters, envelopes, modulators, or other effects. Listen to
the synthesizer in different ranges to see how consistent the
oscillator plays across the entire range and this will help to
determine if you need to record the oscillator on every note or
if you can record it once every three or four notes. Samplers
use a time function to transpose notes when using a limited
number of samples, which means you can have a single root
note be triggered for multiple notes on the keyboard and each
note that isn’t the same pitch as the root note will be trans-
posed up or down.
When recording the waveforms, you can either start a new
recording for each note or you can record all of the notes with
pauses in between them into a single file. Some tasks like
noise reduction or adjusting gain can more easily be accom-
plished when all of the waveforms are in the same file, but it

Figure 2.14 Single cycle of a

sine wave.

78
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

comes down to a personal preference and choosing a work-

flow that makes sense to you.

Basic Instrument Example

In this scenario, you’ll create a patch on your synthesizer that
has the oscillators active, but also runs through filters and
other modulators. The basic sound can include motion with
filters and envelopes, but should not involve more advanced
motion, which relies on the modulation wheel or after-touch.
Even though some of the most interesting parts of using syn-
thesizers live are real-time control of filters and other modu-
lation effects, for this scenario, you want to create a complete
patch, but still keep it simpler than the full potential of a
synthesizer.
When creating a sampled instrument using simple wave-
forms, the sampler has to loop each waveform to create sus-
tained sound. In this scenario, if you are using a patch with
any motion in the filters or with the envelope, then you’ll
have to record the entire length of the sound until it reaches a
sustain point or until it dies out. Using the loop feature allows

Figure 2.15 Basic instrument

example recipe.

79
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

you to sustain a note even if it isn’t recorded at the full length,

but if the patch you use doesn’t have a suitable looping point,
then you have to record the full length of the patch during the
sampling process.
A finished instrument of this type sounds exactly like the
original synthesizer patch, but you won’t have any control
over the sound in the same way that you would when using
the original synthesizer.

Advanced Instrument Example

The first two scenarios are relatively easy to create, but with
the third scenario, there are a lot more elements to manage
and the final instrument can be quite unwieldy. The goal with
this instrument is to capture the same performance ability
that you have with the actual synthesizer. This is possible by
using advanced sampler capabilities that aren’t available with
every sampler, but if you are serious about sampling, then
you should invest in any one of the most powerful samplers.

Figure 2.16 Key-switching with

EastWest. Different shade of gray
on keyboard represent notes that
switch between sample sets.

80
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

The primary feature that you can use to create more per-
formance control is called key-switching; this allows you to
create multiple versions of the same instrument, which are
selected by using an additional controller such as the mod
wheel or a lower key on the keyboard. Several samplers allow
you to crossfade between these instruments as you adjust the
mod wheel, which creates a similar effect to the actual instru-
ment as you move its mod wheel.
The recording process for this scenario involves recording all
of the notes and velocities for each of the settings you want to
be involved with the key-switch. An example of this would be
recording a variety of sounds with a filter cutoff frequency at
different settings or with different attack times in the primary
envelope. The amount of work required in the recording pro-
cess in this scenario is substantially more than with the two
previous scenarios because of the sheer amount of audio you
have to record. Keep things organized because in the editing
and mapping process, things become more complicated.

Synthification
Samplers fit as a single piece of a much bigger ecosystem of
digital audio tools, processors, and effects. It is possible to
use the default filters and effects in your sampler of choice
and while they may be excellent, it is possible to use external
effects as a part of the sound. Combining elements in your
DAW creates a modular synth type experience that creates
a more powerful experience than a sampler is capable of by
itself.
There are several tools that allow you to emulate individual
synth modules, such as filters and effects, and these can be
powerful additions to the realism provided in the sampling
process. The primary option is any Convolution Reverb,
which has the ability to create impulses. Impulse response
(IR) technology is able to send a sweeping sine wave through
a component and then extract spectrum information from the
result. The resulting IR can be applied to other audio signals

81
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

to change their spectral content to match the same effect as if

it was being processed by the original module. The primary
limitation is that the IR is a snapshot of the spectral content
and isn’t able to dynamically change based on the input sig-
nal. If the input has a loud bass component that is slightly
distorting, the IR process will not react in the same way and
will not have the same results.

Auto-Samplers
Auto-samplers are capable of creating fully finished sam-
pled instruments without needing to manually edit, loop,
or anything. The process works by sending MIDI data to a
destination instrument, recording the audio output, and then
syncing the MIDI information with the audio material. The
parameters of the instrument are established before begin-
ning the sampling process, and the application does all of the
rest. Auto-samplers can save an enormous amount of time by
finding and optimizing loop points, setting velocity layers,
creating multiple layers for key-switching, and even tuning
out of tune notes.

Figure 2.17 Ever since Apple

closed Redmatica, Sample
Robot has been one of the
few companies interested in
auto-sampling.

82
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

All instruments with MIDI inputs and audio outputs can be

auto-sampled, but also instruments with C.V. inputs will work
if you have a MIDI-to-C.V. converter. The best auto-sampler,
called Keymap Pro, was bought by Apple in 2010 and closed
down permanently. Another company has stepped up to the
plate with Sample Robot, and it is capable of creating very
functional instruments. An example with Sample Robot is
included here to showcase the power of the process and, after-
wards, you will likely wonder why anyone would ever take
the time to manually sample these types of instruments. The
simple answer is they shouldn’t, but the art of sampling lives
on with acoustic instruments that can’t be triggered by MIDI.

Sample Robot Example with

Vermona Analog Drum Synthesizer
The following images highlight an auto-sampling project
with an analog drum synth from Vermona. The reason that
this is an excellent instrument to sample is because, as an
instrument, it doesn’t have presets; so if you create a set of
percussion instruments that you like, then you have to either
make detailed notes or use a camera to remember the settings.
The sampling process lets you create a digital version of the
synth patches that you can use any time you want without
having to adjust all of the knobs. The actual instrument is far
more fun to use, but there are many times I am glad to have
the sampled version.

Figure 2.18 Analog drum

synthesizer.

83
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

The DRM1 MKIII is an amazing drum synth that is made in

Erlbach, Germany. There are eight different sounds that are
manipulated by a series of knobs on the front of the unit.
The back panel of the DRM1 MKIII has two audio outputs
and a MIDI In/MIDI Through. There is an expansion pack
that adds individual trigger inputs for each sound, but the
MIDI is most important for sampling. There are also individ-
ual outputs for each channel on the front panel. The silver
button on the left side of each sound is a trigger, which means
you can manually trigger sounds without a MIDI input.
Sample robot is designed to create new instruments with
very little effort. Its wizard walks you through all of the set-
tings and then you simply start the process. Afterwards, the

Figure 2.19 Inputs and outputs.

Figure 2.20 Sample Robot

Wizard.

84
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.21 Final instrument.

instrument can be exported to a file type that is compatible

with the EXS24 for use in music production.

Nontraditional Sound Sources

One possible scenario when creating synthesizer-type instru-
ments is to record nontraditional sound sources in the capture
phase and then process them with traditional synth modules.
The sources can be either everyday objects around your house
or exotic, out-of-this-world-type sounds. Once you catch the
sampling bug, you’ll find yourself walking around listening
to sounds and wondering if they would make good sound
sources.

Examples

1. Metal Bowl
Metal bowls are capable of making very interesting sounds
when spun on counters, scraped with utensils, and filled with
various liquids. Experiment with different techniques to find
a sound that is both interesting and has the potential to be a
good synthesis source.

Equipment
A USB microphone is fed into Logic Pro X and different
sounds are recorded. The most interesting sounds are edited
and imported into the EXS24.

85
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.22 Kitchen bowl.

Figure 2.23 Screenflow capture

sound samples online.

2. Comet Landing
The Philae lander made history by landing on a comet and,
before stopping communication, it sent a recording of what
it sounds like on the comet. This is a perfect example of a
unique sound source that can be used as an instrument.

Equipment
The sound of the comet is available online as a video, so you
won’t need a microphone. Audio can either be looped from

86
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

an available output on your computer to a different input,

or you can use a screen capture program such as Screenflow
to record the sound. In the example, we use Screenflow and
then import the sound into Logic for editing and preparation
for the sampler.

3. Vocalization
Perhaps the most flexible sound source is the human voice,
which can be twisted and morphed into many differ-
ent sounds. This example requires you to record sounds
using your voice, and the editing and mapping forces you
to decide if you want to make a percussive or melodic
instrument and if you want to manipulate the recordings
to fit across the range in Logic or use your voice to create
them all.

Equipment
A USB microphone is perfect for this and it is often a good
idea to use a pop-filter to prevent the vocalizations from puff-
ing on the mic. The EXS24 is also used in this example.

Figure 2.24 Never discount your

body as an excellent source for
sampling.

87
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Sample-Based Synthesis
Some digital synthesizers use sampled waveforms instead of
oscillator models, which are perhaps the easiest way to cre-
ate sound sources, but means that you won’t have any ele-
ments of unpredictability. Instruments that do this are often
less interesting, but in the case of a vintage instrument, you
can “borrow” a little bit of its sound for a new instrument.
It can be hard to tell if a digital synth uses a recording of a sin-
gle waveform of a different analog synth’s oscillator unless it
is published information, and even if a recording is used, it
doesn’t meant it is a good or bad instrument. Synth sources
come in all shapes and sizes and a recorded waveform can
be an excellent starting place for synthesis. It may be worth
adding both analog and digital synths to your collection so
that you can have a plethora of options in your sonic tool kit.

Historical Perspective on Sampling

In the quest to make music using technology, there has been a
division between those who use these innovations to enhance
popular musical production techniques and those that have
sought to redefine what music is by breaking away from tra-
ditional conventions. The effort to reproduce the sounds of
acoustic instruments in a workstation environment is one of
the issues at the core of the division, but even though sam-
pling has enjoyed widespread adoption, even newer options
such as modeling are able to overcome its limitations.
At the time when electronic music was still in its infancy,
inventors such as Harry Chamberlin and the Bradley broth-
ers in the UK used analog tape to record individual notes
of instruments and then created a mechanism attached to a
piano-style keyboard to play them back. The most popular
version of this sampler is called the Mellotron and it can be
heard on a wide range of records starting in the era of the
Beatles up to the present day. Accurate representations are
now available in your favorite DAW and even on iOS for
your iPad.

88
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

As digital technology evolved and improved, instruments

such as the Fairlight CMI computer improved sampling, but
remained expensive and impractical. Even though the origi-
nal models had low resolution digital specs, it could repro-
duce incredible sounds that were used by artists such as
Stevie Wonder and Peter Gabriel.1 This line of sampling and
music production tools has survived a rocky road and is still
being developed. You can install and use an accurate replica-
tion on your iPad, with all of the quirks and limitations that
came along with the popularity.

Computer-based sampling and hardware-based sampling

have been in competition ever since, starting with the DX-1
from Decillionix that worked with both the Apple II in the
early 1980s and the frontrunner hardware developer AKAI.
Early AKAI samplers and then subsequent MPC work-
stations have set the standard for hardware, but software
options have been able to leverage modern processing power
to create sonically detailed instruments that are very realistic.

Gigasampler and Gigastudio from Nemesys, and later Tas-

cam, proved that software sampling could work and pro-
vide full-length, high-quality samples for music production,
but in a sad turn of events, it was discontinued after sam-
ple developers withdrew their support and moved towards
Native Instrument’s Kontakt sampler. The core issues were
copyright protection and poor product management, leaving
composers and producers to find other solutions.2

Samplers in the software realm have changed the music

world forever, giving access to any instrument you can think
of at your fingertips, with the ability to produce an entire
orchestra on a single computer. It wasn’t easy at first because
of limitations in drive speeds, RAM amounts, and overall
processing power. Every instrument had to be optimized
very carefully to be playable, and so in the 1990s, a number
of hardware developers used sampling technology to create
sample playback units that allowed musicians to be able to
have access to instruments without requiring a significant

89
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

drain on computing processes. E-MU created a popular line

of modules under the label Proteus, and Roland also had a
long line of devices.
A MIDI studio would have a computer sequencer at the cen-
ter and multiple external devices for sound creation all feed-
ing into a mixing console. This type of studio could overcome
the limitations of poor processing by compartmentalizing the
roles of each part with hardware/software that matches in
capability. As computing power increased, developers made
consistent efforts to transition the sampling experience into
software, and eventually external samplers and sample play-
back devices began to disappear. At first, you would have to
use multiple computers to handle the large projects of orches-
trators and composers, but the latest computers are able to
handle almost everything by themselves.
Software samplers are now almost all universal in their ability
to play back sample libraries in various formats. For example,
the EXS24 in Logic Pro X can still import Giga libraries from
the now discontinued Gigastudio. This makes the choice of
sampler or DAW less important because each one can do

Figure 2.25 Gigastudio import

option.

90
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

similar things; however, sample libraries are still highly indi-

vidual and varied in what they offer.

For a period of time, musicians were likely worried that

samples might reduce the amount of work they could get
in the studio because a single MIDI programmer can play
piano, bass, drums, and nearly everything else. While this
is true and in fact a number of projects use sampled and
synthesized sounds exclusively, samplers haven’t been able
to reproduce the subtle nuances of performance to match
skilled musicians. Even in cases with detailed sample librar-
ies that have the potential to sound as good as the real thing,
it often requires more time and effort to do the same thing
that a group of live musicians could do in a short amount
of time.

So it is the list of limitations in sampling that defines its

current place in music production because some say it has
reached the peak of what it is able to do. Instruments can be
sampled on every note, at many velocities layers, and with
complex round-robin/key-switching implementation. A few
samplers even offer advanced scripting features that mimic
human performance. In spite of all of the advances over the
years, sampled instruments have not completely replaced
live, human performances. While new sample libraries are
being consistently released, the future of virtual technology
is modeling and nothing is likely to ever fully replace live
musicians.

The one task that remains an important resource with sam-

pling is creating patches of synthesizers for use on the stage
and even in the studio. Instead of dragging every big synth
with you on the road, you can sample the patches and play
them on your laptop. Some functionality is lost because per-
forming with a synth involves actively manipulating filters
and effects, but these can also be emulated using effects in
your software. An example of this is an iPad app created by
Jordan Rudess of Dream Theater: it is a set of 57 instruments
that he has used on albums and on tour. The app is called

91
Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

Figure 2.26 Jordantron on iOS.

Jordantron and is an intimate look into the sounds that Jor-

dan has sculpted over the years.

The Future?
Where is sampling going to go next? The basic technology
hasn’t changed in some time, and yet there is so much poten-
tial to improve what could be done. The promise of sampling
has always been that the home studio enthusiast could create
instruments without needing to know how to use computer
programming languages. Modeling is the next step in evolu-
tion for the needs of musicians, but sampling still has value
if only someone would invent a fully automated system for
created instruments. The problem is that the money required
for development would never be recouped because it isn’t
something that people are banging down the doors to buy.
This chapter is near the beginning of this book because sam-
pling and synthesis have been intertwined for a long time and
many of the same modulation and effects apply to both types

92
 Sampling and Sample-Based Synthesis

of instruments. Perhaps this is an overgeneralization, but

most synth geeks have also dabbled in sampling, and under-
standing both processes help form a more well-rounded
musician.

Notes
1. “History (and future),” November 19, 2014. Retrieved from http://
petervogelinstruments.com.au/history/
2. “Are Composers to Blame for GigaStudio’s Demise? Some Observa-
tions,” November 19, 2014. Retrieved from http://www.filmmusic
mag.com/?p=1770

93
MODULATION
SYNTHESIS3

Synthesizers that use modulation as their fundamental sound

source are capable of creating exciting sounds; they remain
unlike any other instrument since being introduced, and they
continue to be a source of experimentation and sonic depth.
Widely used in the 1980s and 1990s, Modulation Synthesis
set the standard for digital synthesis and proved that synths
could realistically replace instruments such as basses and pia-
nos in pop arrangements.

Types
There are five types of modulation that this chapter explores,
and in spite of a substantial amount of overlap, each pro-
vides a unique sonic palette. Modulation as a principle of
synthesis has been a part of every major synthesis type as a
secondary tool since the beginning of commercial synthesis.
Along the way, designers realized they could give modula-
tion a more prominent role in the tone-creation process, so a
number of new synths were developed and released. Some
efforts succeeded and have a sustained presence in modern
practices, while others types of modulation have remained in
a supporting role.
The most prominent of all synths that have modulation at
their core is the DX-7 from Yamaha, which was released in the
1980s. It was labeled as a Frequency Modulation synth (FM)
and was so popular that it single-handedly cemented both
digital synthesis and MIDI as a part of the music production
toolkit. The DX-7 is still a synth that is available and remains

94
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.1 The famous DX-7

from Yamaha.

in use, but there is still some controversy over which Modula-

tion Synthesis that it uses.
The DX-7 is and always has been the most complex and
tweakable preset keyboard ever invented. You have control
over the entire sonic process, but most people only use the
standard presets that shipped on the instrument. The default
bass sound was used on hundreds of records and is arguably
the most famous synth sound ever. Artists such as Queen,
The Cure, Tina Turner, Michael Jackson, and so many more
all used the DX-7 on their records and made this an incred-
ibly popular and recognizable instrument.
The DX-7 has been called a FM synthesizer, but, if you look
closer, you see that it actually uses Phases Modulation, which
is related to the way it modulates the Operators that the DX-7
uses. If you Google FM Synthesis online, then you’ll find a
bunch of sites and books that present the math behind the
sound, but this is outside the scope of this book and out-
side the scope of many peoples’ ability to understand. Since
the math doesn’t help us understand how to craft specific
sounds, we are not including it here. Phase Modulation and
Frequency Modulation are nearly interchangeable, but FM
Synthesis wouldn’t be able to maintain the same fundamental
frequencies in a multioperator system like Phase Modulation

95
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.2 DX-7 Algorithms.

can. But we are getting ahead of ourselves, so let’s take a step

back and explore the DX-7 in order to understand the full
potential of FM and PM Synthesis.
The DX-7 uses six sine waves in various combinations to cre-
ate all of the sounds it is capable of making. It doesn’t have
any filters or other effects, and it doesn’t need them. The
six sine waves, called Operators, are modulated together
to create a wide range of sounds. There are 32 Algorithms
that are used to determine how the Operators are combined.
The relationship among Operators is defined by the roles of
Carriers and modulators. The Carrier is the initial sine wave
that is modulated by the modulator. The 32 Algorithms can
have as few as one Carrier and five modulators, or as many
as six Carriers and no modulators. It makes sense to think of
each Carrier (and associated modulators) as individual synth
engines that are combined together.
In Algorithms with two Carriers, it is possible to create lay-
ered sounds or patches with two segments. You could use the
first Carrier/modulator to create the attack portion of a sound
and the second Carrier/modulator for the body of the sound.
With three Carriers, this concept expands, but the more Carri-
ers you use, the simpler each individual element will be. If all
six Operators are used as Carriers, then all you have are six

96
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.3 Data entry slider.

sine waves that are mixed together and the resulting sound
has very little complexity.
In Chapter 1, LFOs were described as having the ability to
modulate a target’s pitch, amplitude, or filter cutoff. LFOs are
generally low enough frequencies that they are inaudible, but
their effect on other parameters can be substantial. The Oper-
ators in the DX-7 work in a similar way, where the modulator
(which is in the audible frequency range) modulates the Car-
rier’s phase. In audio, phase and frequency are intertwined,
just as distance and time are connected with a moving object.
The DX-7 set the foundation for what remains the most thor-
ough modulation experience available. The Algorithms that
have minimal Carriers are loaded with modulators upon
modulators. One modulator often modulates a second one
before finally modulating the Carrier. A modulator might
even have a feedback loop, which means it will be able to
modulate itself. The level of complexity in some of the Algo-
rithms is quite high and the resulting sounds are often quite
exciting. The change in timbre resulting from the implemen-
tation of different Algorithms and modulator/Carrier ratios
is often described mathematically through the use of a modu-
lation index. This index is a perfect example of how complex
the DX-7 is, both when programming patches and under-
standing why those patches sound like they do.

97
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.4 Modulators and

Carriers.

The tonal relationship between the Carriers and their modu-

lators determine the complexity of the resulting sound. When
audible frequencies are modulated together, the waves are
inherently changed, and when certain waves are combined,
then sideband frequencies are introduced into the result-
ing sound, which often matches fairly closely with bell-like
sounds and metallic sounds. The last element of the DX-7 that
is important to understand before we begin exploring how to
create sounds is the inclusion of unique envelopes.
Each Operator has an individual envelope that controls its
amplitude over time. Considering the complexity that an
Algorithm may include, adding motion to the amplitude of
each Operator has the ability to shake things up. The envelope
generators (EG) are nontraditional and are both powerful but
complex to operate. Each EG has four stages, each with Rate
and Level settings. The Levels are set to any number between
zero and 99, and then the Rates determine how long it takes
to reach the next Level. There isn’t a specific time correlation
with the Rate settings because they change depending on the
distance to the next level. T = d/r is a formula that describes
the time corresponding to the Rate setting, where T is time, d
is distance, and r is rate. If the EG transitions from a Level of
60 to 70, it will happen quicker than from 40 to 80, even when
the Rate is set identically.
A very exciting feature of this EG system is that you can cre-
ate complex delays in Operator levels in a set pattern, which
is useful for pseudo sequences. Using an Algorithm with all
Carriers set at different pitches, each one can be set to varying

98
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.5 DX-7 envelopes.

initial Rate settings, which turns on each of them at different

times. This enhances the sound creation process with so much
more than just FM Synthesis. On the DX-7, you should never
set the Level below 50 because it will cause erratic behavior
and a value of 50 is essentially an inaudible level.
The modulation process is flexible enough that very musical
sounds can be created that mimic keyboards or basses, but
it can also create screeching leads that sound like they come
from another planet. Let’s look at an example of how this pro-
cess works using a DX-7 as an example.

Example 1: Algorithm 1/
Operators 1 & 2
Explanation
• Operator 1 (Carrier) is set to 1.0, which is the fundamental
frequency.
• Operator 2 is shown with four different settings, 3.0–6.0,
which are set as harmonics based on the fundamental of 1.0
(ratio setting).

Results
Each subsequent modulator increase results in a more complex
sound, particularly in the higher frequencies. All four sound
similar.

99
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.6 Harmonic content of

various modulator combinations.

The DX-7 is a classic synth and is well suited to demonstrating

the power of Modulation Synthesis. It isn’t, however, going to
be a synth that has patches, which translate very well to other
FM/PM synths. Most synths that have FM capabilities only
use a single Carrier/modulator, which is still capable of very
typical sounds, but not to the extreme that a six-Operator sys-
tem can. Newer software synths often add extensive features,
which make it more of a hybrid synth rather than solely an

100
 Modulation Synthesis

FM synth. FM8 from Native Instruments or Operator from

Ableton both do amazing things with Modulation Synthesis,
but they incorporate Subtractive Synthesis and other types of
synthesis and they are examples of the power that soft synths
are able to offer.
Once the capabilities of the DX-7 are explored, then we’ll
branch out into the other Modulation Synthesis offerings such
as Amplitude Modulation (AM), Ring Modulation (RM), and
Phase Distortion Modulation (PDM). Each of these is very
similar to FM Synthesis, and, yet, they haven’t remained
prominently active as modern synth offerings.

Creating a DX-7 Patch

The first step in creating a new, DX-7 patch is deciding what
you want it to sound like. That may seem obvious, but unlike
Subtractive Synthesis, which lends itself better to tweaking
and twiddling, the DX-7 is more like a black hole unless you
approach it with a specific plan in mind. The three elements that
you should plan for are sound segments, layers, and length.

Sound Segments
The number of desired segments of your sound will help
determine the Algorithm that you choose. Here are several
examples:

Hammond organ example

1st segment—percussive attack.
2nd segment—sustained note with layers.

Bass example
1st segment—sustained note body.

Piano example
1st segment—slight percussive attack.
2nd segment—sustained note.
3rd segment—decaying release.

101
Modulation Synthesis

Each example demonstrates the differences between sounds

that require alternate Algorithms on the DX-7. Is it possible
to create an accurate acoustic piano clone on the DX-7? No,
but it is possible to have patches that resemble the real thing.
Unfortunately, there isn’t a clear path to creating those types
of sounds without extensive trial and error.

Layers (and Texture)

After deciding on the appropriate number of segments, you’ll
need to pick the Algorithm that has the right composition of
modulators. Each segment needs to achieve a specific sound
quality, and only some Carrier/modulator combinations will
work. If the middle segment needs a complex sound for a metal-
lic pad, then choose an Algorithm that has at least one Carrier
set with multiple modulators. The DX-7 displays the Algo-
rithms with Carriers that are numbered, but those numbers
don’t necessarily determine the order of playback timing in the
final patch; you can set those independently with the envelopes.
If the patch you envision requires additional layers, you can
utilize another Carrier group that is set to a different fre-
quency or texture, which is assigned to the exact same timing

Figure 3.7 DX-7 librarian.

102
 Modulation Synthesis

information. If you need two segments, but want to layer

sounds, then you might find that a four-Carrier Algorithm
is needed to make the sound; one would be used for the first
segment and three for the layered second segment.

Length
You should have the Algorithm chosen before assigning
envelope lengths to the individual Operators. The DX-7 uses
a unique envelope system that has five rates with five associ-
ated levels. The first segment can start immediately, while the
second segment is delayed at a zero level for a set amount
of time. Using the envelopes to time each segment appropri-
ately, you can ensure that each portion happens exactly when
you want it to.
In Subtractive Synthesis, it is possible to create harmonic
motion though the use of envelope-controlled filters or mod-
ulation with LFOs. The DX-7 has neither, so motion over time
is created by assigning envelopes to the levels of Operators so
that they shift modulation intensity as the note is sustained.
The end result is much different than the movement of a fil-
ter’s cutoff frequency, but the effect can be sculpted to play
the same role of creating movement in the patch.

Miscellaneous Features
Pitch modulation on the DX-7 is limited to global param-
eters, which makes sense given that changing the pitch of
individual Operators midstream would likely result in very
unpredictable and unmusical sounds. Of course, that may be
exactly what you want, and several software synths are able
to do just that.
The DX-7 has a number of other performance aids, such as
adjustable sensitivity for key velocity, keyboard level scaling,
a pitch bend wheel, a mod wheel, and an input for breath
control. None of these features are integral to the Modulation
Synthesis process, but they are nice to have when using the
DX-7 as a performance instrument.

103
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.8 DX-7 parameters.

Programming the DX-7

The DX-7 is not fun to program because of the tiny screen and
the single data entry slider. There are a lot of menus that you
have to access and the entire process is very tedious. In addi-
tion to a difficult interface, tweaking parameters is an exercise
in mental toughness in trying to remember which Operator
is doing what, and keeping track of everything without any
visual cues. There are blank patch sheets available online that
you can print out and write on to help keep things organized,
but there are also software control apps that are very helpful
in the programming process. Either way, the more you use
the DX-7, the better you’ll be able to navigate its unique pro-
gramming structure. After the DX-7, Yamaha released a num-
ber of different instruments that use FM synthesis, some of
which have attempted to increase the programmability, but
none of which ever became as popular as the original. Head
to the recipe section for examples of FM programming.

Other Types of Modulation Synthesis

Amplitude Modulation and Ring Modulation are both used
as tools on synthesizers to create interesting sound sources,
but are never the defining element. The Arp 2600 has both a

104
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.9 Arp 2600 modulation.

Ring modulator module and the flexibility to use one of its

three oscillators for AM, but the instrument is still considered
a subtractive synthesizer.

Amplitude Modulation
Amplitude Modulation is the most common carryover from
LFOs in Subtractive Synthesis, but it is also capable of creat-
ing very useful and interesting sounds. An LFO is used to
create tremolo by slowly modulating an oscillator’s level (or
pitch for vibrato), but when you speed up the modulator into
the range of audible frequencies, you begin to create brand
new sounds. A key distinction is that AM synthesis doesn’t
use the same bipolar oscillation that you typically find in
oscillators and LFOs, and instead uses a unipolar modulator

105
Modulation Synthesis

that keeps the phase in the positive between 0–1. This differ-
ence isn’t important when using a module designed for AM
synthesis, but it helps explain the difference between AM and
Ring Modulation, which is discussed later on.
The frequency of the modulator in AM synthesis functions
very similarly to a two-Operator FM synth, but it’s chang-
ing the amplitude level instead of frequency. There aren’t any

Figure 3.10 AM synthesis

example using the modulation
matrix in Logic’s ES2. LFO 1 is set
to control Osc1Level.

106
 Modulation Synthesis

examples of 3+ Operator AM synth modules; in fact, there

aren’t any examples of synths at all that are labeled as AM
synths. The only exception is with individual modules or as
an additional feature of other synths.

AM Evolution
The modulation of the level of signals has been a widely
used technique since the earliest days of synthesis, primar-
ily in the form of LFO control. The level oscillates accord-
ing to the speed of the LFO, creating a tremolo effect that
is a standard offering on most instruments. When the rate
of modulation is sped up into the audible range, the result-
ing sound is more complex and additional frequencies are
introduced.
Modern instruments are almost universally capable of AM
through the use of full-range LFOs. While they are still called
Low Frequency Oscillators, most extend into the audible
range and are capable of interesting AM Synthesis. Many
software synths have LFOs with a variety of wave shapes;
the result is sonically complex modulation. As is discussed
later in the chapter, the most interesting uses of AM Synthesis
are possible when the modulator is modulated.
Using a modulator to change the level of a Carrier is only
truly synthesis when the rate is such that sidebands are

Figure 3.11 An LFO is used to

modulate the level of an oscillator
in the Modular App.

107
Modulation Synthesis

introduced and multiple frequencies meld together. In the

analog realm, AM Synthesis is limited, just as it is with the
other types of modulation, but with software instruments
and DAWs, there are quite a few additional ways to use
AM functionality. See later in the chapter for a closer look at
using modulation matrixes and track automation for more
complex AM.

Figure 3.12 Ring modulator.

108
 Modulation Synthesis

Ring Modulation
The next form of Modulation Synthesis is known as Ring
Modulation. Although not necessarily a synthesis type in
itself, Ring Modulation utilizes Modulation Synthesis and is
an integral aspect of synthesizers both vintage and modern.
Sometimes referred to as balanced modulation, Ring Modu-
lation works by multiplying two signals together—one sig-
nal typically being a simple waveform, such as a sine wave.
Many people think Ring Modulation gets its name from the
bell-like ringing sound that ring modulators produce. In
actuality, ring modulators get their name because an analog
ring modulator circuit features a series of diodes that are con-
nected in a ring-like shape.
A ring modulator will feature two inputs, typically named
“X” and “Y,” for signals to be fed into. Like with other forms
of Modulation Synthesis, one signal will act as a Carrier while
the other will act as an incoming signal. Once the signals are
combined and multiplied together, the ring modulator will
output the sum and difference of the two signal’s frequen-
cies. One of the biggest differences between Ring Modulation
and all of the other types of Modulation Synthesis is that it
requires both signals to be present in order to work. If you
suppress the Carrier signal so that you only hear the modu-
lated output, then when there are breaks between notes, there

Figure 3.13 Ring Modulation

circuit.

109
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.14 Ring Modulation

diagram.

won’t be any extraneous sounds. When using a ring modula-

tor, the resulting sound ideally doesn’t contain the original
source, but only a signal rich in harmonics created from the
sum and difference of the two signals.

Ring Modulation in Synthesizers

Traditionally, ring modulators were used as an effect on syn-
thesizers. Many analog subtractive synthesizers featured
limited Ring Modulation capabilities in order to add extra
tonal qualities to the overall sound. The Korg MS-20, for
example, allowed users to combine the two oscillators using
Ring Modulation in order to produce a slightly grittier sound.
Many other early subtractive synths made by the likes of
Moog and ARP featured similarly limited Ring Modulation
in order to create bell-type tones. Because of the inclusion of
limited functionality ring modulators, many synthesists felt
that Ring Modulation was more of a gimmick than a power-
ful synthesis tool.
Despite the gimmicky vibe many people get from ring modu-
lators, they are actually quite useful and powerful when used
by someone willing to put in the time to experiment with their

110
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.15 MS-20 Ring

Modulator.

vast capabilities. Ring modulators, for example, are fantastic

at creating bell and gong-type tones. Although FM synthesis
most often comes to mind for creating bell-like tones, Ring
Modulators will impart a much grittier and almost distorted
aspect to the sound from the get-go. Because the inputted sig-
nals will not be present at the output stage of a ring modula-
tor, extremely unique and weird sounds can be produced that
are nearly impossible to re-create with any other synthesis
technique.
A great example of Ring Modulation can be heard on the
opening track of the movie A Clockwork Orange. Walter (now
Wendy) Carlos used the Ring Modulator on her Moog Modu-
lar system in order to create percussive elements to the elec-
tronic rendition of “Music for the Funeral of Queen Mary”
originally written by Henry Purcell. The first note on Carlos’s
electronic rendition is accompanied by a ring modulated,
gong-like sound that can really only be appreciated when

111
Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.16 Bode Ring

Modulator.

heard. Carlos used her technique of ring modulated percus-

sive sounds throughout her whole body of work. The score
for the science fiction classic Forbidden Planet, created by Louis
and Bebe Barron, also made great use of Ring Modulators.
Ring Modulators are actually quite old in design, but it was
not until diodes were used in their circuitry that Ring Mod-
ulators were found to be useful in sound synthesis. One of
the first synthesizers to use a Ring Modulator was the Melo-
chord built in 1947 by Harald Bode. Due to the success of
Bode’s Ring Modulator, he went on to design a designated,
stand-alone Ring Modulation known as the Bode Ring Mod-
ulator. The Bode Ring Modulator was later built in module
format for inclusion in Moog modular systems. Buchla, Ober-
hiem, EMS, and Yamaha all followed suit and began includ-
ing ring modulators into their synthesizers. Ring modulators
are by no means only found in analog synthesizers. Ring
modulators can be found on virtually every synthesizer. Ring
modulators have become a synthesis staple and, for that rea-
son, they are found on a wealth of new synthesizers both ana-
log and digital based.

Phase Distortion Modulation

The DX-7 was extremely popular, but its technology was pro-
tected by a patent, and so other companies couldn’t release
FM synths that used FM/PM without getting in trouble.
Casio came up with a related synthesis process called Phase

112
 Modulation Synthesis

Figure 3.17 Casio PDM.

Distortion Modulation, which meant they could achieve a

similar sound without it infringing on the patent.
Casio is the only developer to explore PDM and, while it is
capable of creating sounds which sound just like FM and PM
offerings, it expanded on the basic premise of existing modu-
lation techniques by adding more complex waveforms. The
DX-7 relied on a patent that identified the Carriers and mod-
ulators as sine waves, and Casio expanded into other wave-
forms such as the triangle and the square. These modulate the
phase of additional waveforms by adjusting their phase play-
back. A change in the modulator results in a faster or slower
playback of the Carrier, which creates complex distortion.
PDM is similar to another type of synthesis, which is cov-
ered in a different chapter, called Wavetable synthesis in that
the primary waveforms are not played back in linear fashion,
but the timing is changed through modulation. The changes
in time occur in a cyclic manner, which is the reason that it
resembles FM synthesis. Casio’s PDM is particularly similar
to the DX-7 algorithms, which have multiple modulators in
a single chain because, in both instances, the Carrier is mod-
ulated by complex waveforms; PDM uses sounds that are
more complex at the source, and the DX-7 builds complex

113
Modulation Synthesis

modulators by having sine waves modulate each other. The

end results are not identical, but can be tweaked to be very
similar.
The basic waveforms used in PDM are as follows:
Saw-tooth
Saw-tooth alternates
Square
Pulse
Double Sine
Saw-tooth and pulse combo
Triangle
Trapezoid
Systems typically have only two oscillators, but that is enough
to create a wide range of sounds with the available tones.

Modulation in DAWs
Software innovation has increased the power of Modulation
Synthesis by providing more ways to connect various com-
ponents and certainly more flexibility while doing so. Most
digital synths, such as the DX-7, are limited in the modula-
tion process by their design, which means you can’t use an
external option to modulate the Operators in the Algorithms.
Software design removes the limitations of the hardware
instruments and expands through the incorporation of mod-
ern automation.
Automation is attached to user-determined destinations and
is easily assigned to control instrument parameters. The sync
consideration that is important is whether you want the mod-
ulation to speed up or slow down depending on the triggered
pitches, or if you want a stationary modulation rate. Using
an automation track, you can set a modulation rate, but it is

Figure 3.18 Automation

example—controlling amplitude
via automation curve.

114
 Modulation Synthesis

more difficult to set it to vary with the pitch. The instrument

itself is more likely to have a KBD assigned modulation vari-
ance that follows the pitch of the triggered notes.
Modulating the modulators is one way of using MIDI control
and automation in your DAW. Incorporating the tools of the
DAW into the synthesis process means creating an experience
that is semimodular, much like patching in a new module on
an old Moog. Many DAWs also have a mapping feature that
connects physical controllers with software destinations, and
then the modulation parameters are controlled by external
means.
The key is to keep track of all modulation sources and desti-
nations and then to realize when too much is too much. You
can create some very intense tones, but without having a
specific reason to do so, you might end up with an unusable
sound. The key to crafting the sound you want is to have the
end sound in mind, to understand the tools you have, and
then to put forth the effort to achieve your goal.

Brief History of FM Synthesis

The history of modular synthesis is pretty nearly the history
of synthesis and so it isn’t practical to describe the evolution
of each technique here. The context of FM Synthesis as it per-
tains to the DX-7 is worth exploring because it made an impact
on popular music and beyond. John Chowning studied and
subsequently worked at Stanford University where he stum-
bled on FM Synthesis. John was a pioneer of computer music
and studied the correlation between acoustic instruments
and digital synthesis. One day, he was experimenting with
vibrato at higher speeds and recognized the resulting tonal
complexities. John himself has called the discovery naive, but
his ability to recognize the importance of this discovery and
then be able to describe it in a meaningful way is the contri-
bution that is the most important.
FM Synthesis in the digital realm was put under patent and
Yamaha recognized its value and put this new technology

115
Modulation Synthesis

into the DX-7, which became one of the most popular syn-
thesizers ever. The default sounds on the DX-7 were carefully
crafted to sound like real instruments, which were latched
onto by performers as a stage and studio instrument that
replaced their other acoustic and expensive instruments. FM
Synthesis may have started as a technique capable of com-
plex synthesis, but it quickly became a tool that was used as
preset piano and not as a synthesizer at all. Several of the
default sounds have been used so often that they are easily
recognizable and a staple of pop/jazz music in the 1980s and
1990s. You can hear the DX-7 on songs from Michael Jackson,
Tina Turner, Brian Eno, and so many more.

The DX-7 has a horrible interface, which discourages musi-

cians from programming new sounds, and, even though it
was extremely popular, it has never been a bridge for musi-
cians to enter the realm of synthesis. Once other keyboards
came to market that could more realistically reproduce other
musical instruments, the DX-7 lost its appeal and fell out of
favor. The good news is that you can now buy an original
DX-7 for a fraction of the cost of the original price and it is
still an excellent instrument capable of creating wonder-
ful sounds. You can even use a software editor to aid in the
programming process, which is critical when experimenting
with this instrument.

The DX-7 created a legacy of success that has often been

sought after by other designers, but never replicated. Now
that rights to FM Synthesis are open, there are a number of
software instruments that accurately emulate the DX-7 and
others that greatly expand on its toolset. Several software
instruments can even exchange patches with the DX-7, and
that makes programming it substantially easier.

The greatest success of FM Synthesis and Modulation Syn-

thesis is that they provided us with complex results without
requiring unreasonable amounts of computing power. To
create the same complexity of sound with analog or additive
synthesis would have been cost prohibitive in the 1980s and

116
 Modulation Synthesis

the DX-7 demonstrated a way to craft useable sounds out of

minimal resources.

Recipes
The DX-7 is an entirely different beast than subtractive synths
and it makes creating a common recipe format more inter-
esting. The emphasis is on the Algorithm and the individual
Operators, but with a substantial amount of information
associated with each Operator, it makes it difficult to create a
visual recipe that translates to all FM synthesizers. As with all
of the included recipes, the primary objective is to help read-
ers master the basics of synthesis: this section is no different.
The exception is that an analysis of several default patches
from the DX-7 are included to demonstrate basic techniques
while also showcasing patches that have been used on many
records and remain iconic in their sound.

Recipe 1: Brass 1
The initial patch on the DX-7 is the Brass 1 patch, which shows
just how flexible the FM engine is in the creation of sounds,
both realistic and not. In the case of Brass 1, the DX-7 takes a
more traditional approach with a dash of FM synthesis mixed
in. The core sound is a three-Carrier set all modulated by the
same modulator. Each has the same basic frequency rela-
tionship, but all are detuned slightly, which gives the brass
sound additional texture and depth. The modulator/Carrier

Figure 3.19 DX-7 Brass 1

settings shown in DX7 Librarian
software.

117
Modulation Synthesis

relationship is simple, which is common in sounds that are

designed to emulate acoustic instruments and are musical in
nature.

Recipe 2: Bass 1
This is the most famous patch on the DX-7 and has been used
on countless records over the past few decades. It doesn’t
get used as much as it once did, but it’s hard to argue with
artists such as Michael Jackson, Madonna, Depeche Mode,
and so many more. The parameters that are involved with
making this patch are not as intuitive as you might guess,
and the recipe format had to be expanded to cover all of the
elements.

Figure 3.20 DX-7 Bass 1

settings shown in DX7
Librarian software.

Figure 3.21 DX-7 E. Piano

settings shown in DX7 Librarian
software.

118
 Modulation Synthesis

Recipe 3: E. Piano
This is another classic DX-7 patch that has been heard on
hundreds of records in the 1980s, including artists such as
Chicago, Phil Collins, and Luther Vandross. As with so many
of the popular presets, this is another attempt at re-creating
another instrument, but with a DX-7 flavor.

119
ADDITIVE SYNTHESIS 4

Additive synthesis can be considered the holy grail of syn-

thesizer formats. Additive supplies the user with the greatest
amount of options and sonic possibilities when creating sound.
In theory, any sound imaginable is able to be re-created with
the utmost precision and accuracy when using an additive
synthesizer. No other synthesis formats come close to its gar-
gantuan nature. That being said, additive synthesis is one of
the more complex synthesizer formats and therefore requires
a deeper understanding and sharper learning curve in order
to master it. Once mastered however, the possibilities are lit-
erally endless in sound creation and re-creation. In simple
terms, additive synthesis is the ultimate sound-creation tool.

Additive Synthesis Theory

As briefly mentioned in the subtractive synthesis chapter, any
sound, be it a trumpet, a voice, or an explosion, is made up
of a series of harmonics. In essence, these harmonics are all
individual sine waves that are multiples of the fundamental
frequency of the sound. These harmonics differ in amplitude
and also change amplitude over time, resulting in the com-
plex sound that we hear. Additive synthesis utilizes this by
allowing the users to combine a set amount of sine waves, as
well as designate their amplitudes, in order to create sound.
Additive synthesis has its roots in the Fourier series. Jean-
Baptiste Joseph Fourier is credited with conducting research
that led to and inspired the Fourier series. A Fourier series is
basically a way in which to represent a waveform as a com-
bination of its various, individual harmonics in their most
simple state—sine waves. Any wave analyzed via the Fourier
series is subsequently broken down to its key elements. In

120
 Additive Synthesis

practice, the Fourier series is often used as a way of display-

ing the various or even infinite independent sine waves that
make up a sound. For this reason, additive synthesis is some-
times referred to as Fourier synthesis.

The Fourier series is often used in FFT (Fast Fourier Trans-

form) units as well as a vast array of software devices, such as
phase vocoders and resynthesis engines. Engineers theorized
that if sound was made up of individual sine waves, each
at different frequencies and amplitude as the Fourier series
determines, any sound could hypothetically be resynthesized
simply by adding in these same sine waves to their exact pro-
portions. The theory behind additive synthesis is actually
quite old and even predates subtractive synthesis.

By using additive synthesis, the user is free to adjust each

harmonic and its amplitude, resulting in an extreme level of
control. An additive synthesizer has a number of sine wave
generators that are able to be set to any frequency or ampli-
tude. These sine wave generators are used in order to cre-
ate the various harmonics needed to build a sound. Early
additive synthesizers were capable of producing only a few
harmonics, while the first commercial additive synthesizers
could produce up to around 64 individual harmonics. The
advent of software additive synthesis has brought that num-
ber up to the many hundreds. In additive synthesis, the more
harmonics you are able to produce, the better.

When building a sound, the user will tune each sine wave
generator to correspond to various harmonics. By allowing
the user to control every single harmonic in a sound, not
only are incredibly accurate sound re-creations possible, but
extremely complex and new sounds seem to seep from an
additive synthesizer. Because sound is constantly changing
and rarely remains stagnant, various types of amplitude
modulation are employed on an additive synthesizer in
order to bring life to a patch. In fact, if one were to simply set
the amplitudes of the individual harmonics and leave them,
the resulting sound would be stagnant and be reminiscent

121
Additive Synthesis

of an organ. For this reason, many additive synthesizers

will feature independent envelope generators and LFOs for
each harmonic, or set of harmonics, so the user can create
extremely complex patches. By incorporating envelope gen-
erators and LFOs, the user can designate specific harmonics
to rise or fall in amplitude before, during, or after the funda-
mental frequency is heard. By manipulating harmonic ampli-
tude over time, incredibly complex filter sweep-type sounds
can be produced that cannot be replicated on a subtractive
synthesizer.
Chances are that many of you have used some form of addi-
tive synthesis without knowing it. In fact, just combing wave-
forms in the mixer section of a subtractive synthesizer can be
thought of as a very basic form of additive synthesis. When
combining various waveforms, say a sawtooth wave and
a square wave, you are effectively creating a new complex
wave via additive synthesis. In addition to this, many vintage
analog subtractive synthesizers were capable of performing a
small amount of additive synthesis. The Roland SH-3A, for

Figure 4.1 Creating filter

responses through additive
synthesis.

122
 Additive Synthesis

example, allowed the user to combine various octaves and

wave shapes on its single oscillator as a means to create more
complex waves. The Oxford Synthesizer Company’s Oscar
synth featured a more advanced form of additive synthe-
sis. When using the synth in “harmonic creation mode,” the
upper register of the keyboard allows users to manually add
in up to 24 harmonics. The user was able to hear the addi-
tional harmonics added in real time as the sound became
richer. The newer Arturia MiniBrute analog subtractive syn-
thesizer features similar additive capabilities to the Roland
SH-3A in that the user can combine various wave shapes on
the single oscillator. Although these basic forms of additive
synthesis pale in comparison to what stand-alone additive
synthesizers can do, they feature a form of additive synthesis
none the less.
Additive synthesis is most often employed on digital or
software-based instruments. By utilizing digital signal pro-
cessing, a degree of precision is inherent that would not be
available if one were to use analog circuitry. In an analog syn-
thesizer, for example, temperature fluctuations can lead to
pitch drifting in an oscillator. Although pitch drift is accept-
able or even sometimes desired on a subtractive synthesizer,
it can wreak havoc on an additive synth. Because additive
synthesis incorporates so many individual sine waves in
order to designate the timbre of the overall sound, the slight-
est unwanted pitch variation in any of the harmonics can
cause dramatic changes to the sound as a whole. Digital sig-
nal processing allows for extreme pitch stability resulting in
much more stable timbres.

Figure 4.2 The Oxford

Synthesizer Company Oscar
synth featured limited amounts of
additive synthesis. Photo courtesy
of www.perfectcircuitaudio.com.

123
Additive Synthesis

Problems with Analog

Additive Synthesis
In order to understand the inherent difficulties in having an
analog additive synthesizer, let’s go through what is needed
in order to build an analog additive synthesizer. The first,
most important thing needed for an additive synthesizer
is a tone generation source. In the analog world, tone pro-
duction, even sine wave production, is easy enough via an
oscillator. For an additive synth, we would need a number
of individual oscillators: the more, the better. Let’s imagine
a synthesizer capable of producing 20 harmonics—which is
much greater than the earliest analog incarnations of addi-
tive synthesizers, but when compared to digital additive
synthesizers that contain anywhere from 64 individual sine
wave generators up to a few hundred, 20 is a rather conser-
vative figure. In order to produce 20 individual harmonics,
our synthesizer would need 20 individual analog oscil-
lators. When one takes into consideration that the famous
MiniMoog synthesizer only has three oscillators, it quickly
becomes apparent how big a 20-oscillator system would be.
Tone generation however, is only the beginning. The next
thing we would need in our synthesizer is amplifiers, 20 of
them to be exact. In order to be able to control each harmonic
individually, a dedicated amplifier for each oscillator will be
required.
Now we have a synthesizer able to create up to 20 individ-
ual harmonics, each with an individual amplitude. As was
discussed earlier, just setting the amplitude of individual
harmonics and leaving them results in stagnant, often bor-
ing sounds. So now, in order to add amplitude control over
time to our individual harmonics, we will need 20, separate
envelope generators. As great as envelope generator control
is however, more means of modulation are necessary to cre-
ate the interesting sounds that additive synthesis is capa-
ble of. In order to add another dimension of control to our
synth, we will have to add 20 individual LFOs to our system
so we can really manipulate each harmonic amplitude in a
suitable way.

124
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.3 Our analog

20-oscillator system.

So now we’re at a synthesizer capable of creating 20 har-

monics, each with envelope and LFO manipulation. So far,
our synthesizer contains 80 individual modules—that is no
small number not even taking into consideration the costs.
Despite this large number of modules, we are still not done
building our additive synthesizer. All natural sound contains
some sort of noise, such as the user’s breath when using a
woodwind instrument. Although noise is certainly able to be
broken down to its individual sine waves using the Fourier
series, the sheer amount of sine wave generators necessary to
re-create noise would be unattainable. In order to add noise
to our system, we will add a few noise generators capable of
producing different noise shapes.

125
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.4 Our analog

20-oscillator system with 20
envelope generators and LFOs.

Finally, we will have to add some sort of summing bus to mix

all our 20 harmonics together into a single output as well as
a means to route our keyboard’s pitch and gate information
to the various oscillators and envelope generators. Although
not exactly necessary, it might be desirable to add one final
envelope generator and LFO in order to control the entire
sound as a whole.
So now we have a respectable, 20-harmonic additive synthe-
sis with all the bells and whistles one would expect. The sheer
size, weight, power consumption, and cost are extreme, but
we are free to make the sounds of our dreams. We are forget-
ting one thing though, because our synthesizer uses analog

126
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.5 Our analog 20 partial

additive synthesizer.

circuitry, every single circuit is susceptible to temperature

and pressure changes, movement, power inconsistencies
and a variety of other maladies. All these little problems that
become amplified through these circuits cause our oscilla-
tors to drift in and out of tune as well as wreak havoc on our
envelope generators, amplifiers, and LFOs. In all likelihood,
our additive synthesizer we just built won’t be very useful
for re-creating sounds with exact precision or maintaining a
sound we create for very long. It is quite apparent that addi-
tive synthesis and analog circuitry were simply not meant for

127
Additive Synthesis

each other. It would take the digital synthesis revolution to

bring additive synthesis out of the universities and labora-
tories and into the hands of musicians and sound designers.

Early digital synthesizers that included additive synthesis,

although powerful, were not very practical. Instruments such
as the Fairlight CMI had advanced computational powers for
the time, but lacked the ability to make changes to an addi-
tive synthesis sound in real time. The problem with not being
able to make changes in real time was that the synth effec-
tively acted as a sample-based synthesizer when played. In
fact, the Fairlight CMI would load newly synthesized sounds
into its onboard RAM, or random access memory, once the
user pressed “compute.” Therefore, these early digital addi-
tive synthesizers were oftentimes less than useful when one
considers the full potential of an additive synth.

The first, successful digital additive synthesizer that allowed

users a number of available harmonics with real time control
and computing while remaining somewhat affordable came
out of Japan—the Kawai K5. The Kawai K5 was revolution-
ary in that it offered 64 independent harmonics with a whop-
ping eight notes of polyphony!1 Eight notes of polyphony
might seem laughable today, but at its inception, only the
Yamaha DX series offered more. When using the K5, a user
could sacrifice polyphony by half in order to have 128 indi-
vidual harmonics. Having this many harmonics was com-
pletely unheard of at the time, especially when taking into
consideration that the K5 was somewhat affordable. In fact,
the K5 and its 64 or 128 harmonics still stands today as a quite
respectable additive synthesizer.

Arguably, one of the biggest drawbacks to additive synthe-

sis is the amount of time it takes to program a sound. Each
harmonic needs to be tuned and set at a specific amplitude
and then amplitude modulation via envelope generators and
LFOs need to be set. When working with an instrument that
is capable of producing 64 or 128 individual harmonics, this is
no easy or quick task. The Kawai K5 had some fairly unique

128
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.6 Kawai K5. Photo

courtesy of www.perfectcircuit
audio.com.

tricks in order to speed up the sound-creation process. Firstly,

the K5 displayed each harmonic with a bar representing its
amplitude (similar in look to a bar graph). By showing all of
the harmonics and their individual levels visually, the user was
able to quickly visualize what was happening with the sound.
Next, the K5 allowed the user to group harmonics together
in order to adjust them simultaneously. The K5 allowed users
to select groups consisting of even harmonics, odd harmon-
ics, octaves, fifth intervals, or custom groupings. The user was
also free to manually adjust individual harmonics so that no
customization was hindered by creating these groups—it just
allowed for quicker adjustments. Allowing users to group
various harmonics together was a completely new feature in
the additive synthesis world. Once a bank of harmonics was
selected, they could be raised or lowered in amplitude while
maintaining their proportions with one another in order to
maintain their harmonic hierarchy. The K5 was the first addi-
tive synthesizer to utilize this type of control.2
The Kawai K5 offered a wide variety of envelope genera-
tors in order to further shape the resulting synth patch. Like
with the individual harmonics, the K5’s envelope genera-
tors were easy to adjust as well. The K5 featured envelope
generator short cuts for effectively copying and pasting
envelope generator responses to higher harmonics so that

129
Additive Synthesis

the user didn’t have to start from scratch every time.3 The
Kawai line of additive synthesizers has gained monumen-
tal status in the additive world similarly to the Moog and
Arp synths of the subtractive world. Kawai has remained a
leader in additive synthesis. Kawai updated their famous K5
synthesizer in 1996 with the K5000 line, which modernized
and reintroduced the world to hardware additive synthesiz-
ers. The K5000 and subsequent models not only offered the
users more harmonics, but higher levels of controls than the
K5. Firstly, the K5000 worked by having multiple “sources”
that can be assigned and played. Each “source” could be an
additive synthesis engine or a sample playback engine. When
used as additive synthesis engines, each “source” can contain
up to 64 individual harmonics. When combining multiple
additive synthesis “sources,” a large number of harmonics
are able to be combined. Next, each harmonic was paired
with an individual amplitude envelope generator, allowing
for much more control than was offered on the K5. Finally,
virtually every additive synthesis parameter offered on the
K5000 was assignable to various performance control fea-
tures. For example, key velocity, or the pressure applied to
keys, key tracking, or playing up and down the keyboard,
as well as onboard knobs, sliders, and wheels can all be set
to control various additive synthesis parameters. The Kawai
K5000, although perhaps not as successful as its older sibling,
helped bring additive synthesis back into the mainstream.
The K5 and K5000’s innovations have influenced virtually all
modern software additive synthesizers.

Figure 4.7 Kawai K5000. Photo

courtesy of www.perfectcircuit
audio.com.

130
 Additive Synthesis

Types of Sounds Possible with

Additive Synthesis
Describing the types of sounds that additive synthesis excels
at is quite difficult. In theory, any sound imaginable is able
to be created on an additive synthesizer as long as you have
a sufficient number of sine wave generators, envelopes, and
LFOs, as well as a deep understanding of additive synthesis.
For this reason, it is nearly impossible to say which types of
sounds additive synthesis are best at creating. That being
said, certain types of sound are more often created on addi-
tive synthesizers than other synthesis formats. The first, and
most common, sound type additive synthesis is used for
is sound resynthesis. Because additive synthesis is ­capable of
rebuilding any sound using the Fourier series, it is frequently
used in this way. Although modern sampling synthesizers
have oftentimes made sound re-creation obsolete using addi-
tive synthesis, the degree to which sound can be re-created
accurately, as well as the amount of customization one can
add to the re-created sound, is unique to additive synthesis.
Therefore, many people still prefer using additive synthesis
to re-create sounds rather than using a sample-based syn-
thesizer. Rich, evolving pads are also frequently produced
on additive synthesizers. Sonic soundscapes and complex,
evolving drones reminiscent of Vangelis’s Blade Runner score
are also among the most popular patches designed on addi-
tive synthesizers. By controlling the envelope for each har-
monic, pads are able to evolve in timbre in a way that is
mostly unachievable using other synthesis formats that only
have envelope control over amplitude or filter responses.
When using an additive synthesizer, the user can create a
pad that starts out dark and warm and then slowly evolves
to feature shimmering high-end harmonics while the lower
harmonics slowly begin to become frequency modulated
and darker as midrange frequencies become prominent,
all through the means of envelope control over individual
harmonics. The possibilities are literally endless for creating
evolving pads when using an additive synthesizer.

131
Additive Synthesis

Additive synthesis can also theoretically be used in order to

emulate classic analog synthesizers. Oftentimes, digital syn-
thesizers, which utilize virtual analog emulation, can impart
digital artifacts such as aliasing and stepping onto the sound
itself, causing these synthesizers to not sound accurate.
Many engineers have toyed with utilizing additive synthesis
in order to re-create various analog sounds. Although using
additive synthesis in this way has rarely been used on com-
mercial instruments, many studies have been conducted that
have shown that additive synthesis can in fact be used to emu-
late subtractive synthesis sounds.4 It is possible that as the
analog subtractive resurgence grows, software synthesizer
companies may begin to implement additive synthesis into
their instruments in order to create more accurate-sounding
analog emulations.

Additive Synthesis in Practice

So now that we have covered a brief outline of additive syn-
thesis, let’s go more in depth on additive synthesis theory
as well as all of the parameters one might expect to find in
an additive synthesizer in an attempt to learn how to use it
successfully.

Tone Generation
As stated earlier, additive synthesis uses a number of sine
wave generators in order to build sound. Many instruments
will call these sine waves either harmonics or partials. Some
users might be asking themselves why additive synthesis is
limited to sine waves. Why not have sawtooth, square, and
triangle wave generators in addition to sine wave genera-
tors in order to create more complex tones? As we discussed,
all sound can be broken down using the Fourier series. The
Fourier series breaks sounds down into their most basic ele-
ments: sine waves, or harmonics. Therefore, if the additive
synthesist wanted to have a screaming sawtooth lead sound,
all he or she would have to do is build a few sawtooth waves.
Because a sawtooth wave contains both even and odd har-
monics, all the user would have to do is add in both even and

132
 Additive Synthesis

odd harmonics to his or her sound, as well as set the ampli-

tude of each harmonic in correspondence to the inversely
proportionate relationship they hold with the fundamental
frequency and presto—a sawtooth wave is created.
Although additive synthesis is capable of so much more than
the basic wave shapes, it is a helpful exercise to build the
basic wave shapes using an additive synthesizer. So let’s go
through each of the common wave shapes and deconstruct
them to their basic elements and then build them back up
using additive synthesis.

Triangle Waves
Because a triangle wave only contains odd harmonics (third,
fifth, seventh, etc.), we would have to add in harmonic sine
waves at each of these intervals. Thankfully, most modern
additive synthesizers do the math for us and display har-
monics via their harmonic number rather than making a user
calculate what frequency each harmonic would be. However,
if using an older model or making an analog modular addi-
tive synthesizer, one can figure out the harmonic number’s
frequency simply by multiplying the fundamental frequency

Figure 4.8 Harmonic content of a

triangle wave.

133
Additive Synthesis

by the harmonic number. For example, if taking “A” 440, one

would multiply 440 by the desired harmonic number (let’s
say the third harmonic). We would then multiply 440 by
three and get 1320Hz, which is “A” 440’s third harmonic. It
must be remembered that a triangle wave’s upper harmon-
ics are proportional to the inverse square of the fundamental
frequency; meaning, the third harmonic is 1/9th the ampli-
tude of the fundamental while the fifth harmonic is 1/25th
the amplitude. Using this inverse square proportion, we must
lower the amplitude of each subsequent harmonic accord-
ingly while also inverting the phase of every other sounding
harmonic (i.e. third, seventh, eleventh). If this inverse square
proportion and phase inversion is followed exactly, a perfect
triangle wave will result. But additive synthesis is magical
in the fact that we do not have to be confined to re-creating
perfect wave shapes. In fact, one could be free to add in a
few extra harmonics at a higher amplitude, resulting in some-
thing that is in between a triangle wave and a square wave.
The possibilities are literally endless.

Sawtooth Waves
As stated above, a sawtooth wave contains both even and odd
harmonics. Unlike a triangle, however, the upper harmonics

Figure 4.9 Harmonic content of a

sawtooth wave.

134
 Additive Synthesis

of a sawtooth wave are just inversely proportional to the fun-

damental frequency. This means that the second harmonic is
1/2 the amplitude of the fundamental while the third and
fourth harmonic are 1/3 and 1/4 the amplitude respectively.
When programming a simple sawtooth wave on an additive
synthesizer, the user is free to follow these guidelines exactly,
but again, due to the extreme customizable nature of additive
synthesis, the user is free to experiment and make the second
harmonic louder than the fundamental and each harmonic
thereafter louder still. An interesting experiment to perform
is to raise and lower the amplitudes of the upper harmonics
once a sawtooth wave is created. The resultant sound will be
reminiscent of a filter being opened and closed. This happens
because all a filter does is effectively lower the amplitude of
upper harmonics. Many classic analog subtractive synthesiz-
ers can be emulated this way. Emulating a filter response is
only one of an endless amount of things one can do with an
additive synthesizer.

Square Waves
Like a triangle wave, a square wave contains only odd har-
monics. In order to create a square wave on an additive
synthesizer, one must add in each odd harmonic. The rate

Figure 4.10 Harmonic content of

a square wave.

135
Additive Synthesis

at which these upper harmonics diminish in amplitude,

though, is much less than with a triangle wave. A square
wave’s upper harmonics will drop in amplitude at a rate that
is inversely proportionate to the fundamental frequency or, in
other words, the same as with the sawtooth wave mentioned
above. Again, the additive synthesist is free to adjust these
harmonics however they see fit, but producing these stan-
dard wave shapes provides a learning experience that is quite
helpful to the beginner as well as the experienced additive
synthesist. It should also be remembered that additive syn-
thesis is capable of so much more than producing traditional
wave shapes, so creating the standard waveforms should be
used as a jumping-off point to the wonderful world of addi-
tive synthesis.

Envelope Generators
As stated in the subtractive synthesis chapter, an envelope
generator affects various parameters of the circuit it is routed
to. Typically, an envelope generator will contain attack,
decay, sustain, and release parameters. In additive synthesis,
envelope generators are usually routed to amplifiers for both
individual harmonics or for the sound as a whole. Either way,
an envelope generator will affect how the sound’s amplitude
changes over time while a key is being depressed and once
it is released. Envelope generators are key when it comes
to additive synthesis in order to make the resulting timbre
sound interesting and not stagnant. Early additive synthe-
sizers did not have the functionality of envelope generators,
which made them sound like novelty instruments in the lens
of modern additive synthesis. When programming an addi-
tive synthesizer, if one only sets the frequencies and initial
amplitudes of the upper harmonics, the resulting sound will
be, well, like an organ. That is because this is exactly how
organs work. So in order to make additive synths sounds
more interesting, one must use envelope generators. The pos-
sibilities are endless when using envelope generators. If one
sets the envelope generators of all the upper harmonics to
fall shortly after a key is pressed, the resulting sound will be

136
 Additive Synthesis

reminiscent of a filter closing on the sound. If the envelope

generators are set to rise once a key is depressed, the result-
ing sound will be reminiscent of a filter opening. One might
ask—if envelope generators re-create filter responses, why
not just add a filter to an additive synthesizer? The answer to
that valid question is that creating filter responses is only one
small aspect of the power of envelope generators when used
by the additive synthesist.
When using envelope generators, one can set certain higher
harmonics to rise in amplitude once the fundamental and
lower harmonics die out in order to create interesting evolv-
ing pads. Likewise, one can set just the higher harmonics to
be heard when a key is pressed and then have those die away
while the fundamental and lower harmonics rise in ampli-
tude. The types of sounds that can be created using the enve-
lope generators of an additive synthesizer cannot be created
using any other type of synthesis format. That last statement
is very important to note. In theory, all sounds created by
any of the synthesis formats can be re-created using additive
synthesis but an additive synthesis sound can rarely be cre-
ated using a different format. It is also important to note that
most modern additive synthesizers will feature an additional
envelope generator that can be used to affect the sound as a
whole. By using this overall envelope generator, the entire
sound can be swept up, swept down, held, muted, and any-
thing in between.
Envelope generators are not just limited to amplitude con-
trol. Certain additive synthesizers will also allow envelope
control over pitch for individual or groups of harmonics.
Being able to designate how a harmonic changes pitch over
time can greatly influence the overall timbre of the sound. For
example, when setting the envelope to change the pitch of
many harmonics drastically as the sound evolves, the result-
ing sound will start off very uniform and slowly become
more and more mangled as time goes on. Another routing
many additive synthesizers offer for envelope generators is
the panning of individual harmonics. Newer additive syn-
thesizers are typically stereo instruments, meaning they have

137
Additive Synthesis

a left and right output. By using envelope generators to adjust

the pan function of individual harmonics, certain aspects of
the sound can shift from one speaker to another, creating
extremely immersive synth sounds. A world of opportunity
opens when one incorporates envelope generators into an
additive synthesis patch.

LFOs
LFOs, or low frequency oscillators, are a must when it comes
to additive synthesis. Many modern additive synthesizers
will feature independent LFOs for each and every harmonic.
LFOs are typically used as another source of amplitude mod-
ulation similar to envelope generators. However, LFOs can be
used as a means of frequency modulation for individual har-
monics as well. Using LFOs to modulate the pitch of various
harmonics will yield small, tonal variations at more modest
levels while creating intense sonic warping at more extreme
levels. As stated in the subtractive synthesis chapter, LFOs
are oscillators that produce frequencies at lower than audible
ranges. Because of this, LFOs are capable of producing the
range of standard waveforms, which can then be used as a
means of control. Due to the cyclical nature of wave shapes,
LFOs are able to produce repeating modulation, which can
impart new and creative effects when programming an addi-
tive synthesizer. Many modern additive synthesizers will
also feature one or more overall LFOs that will be able to
affect the sound as a whole. These overall LFOs can be used
to create vibrato and tremolo effects as well as a wealth of
interesting and unique effects that are only limited by the
user’s imagination.

Borrowed Synthesis
Although many additive synthesis purists might scoff at this
next statement, many additive synthesizers feature param-
eters borrowed from other synthesis formats in order to make
the instrument more beneficial to the user. The inclusion of
these various parameters not only makes the instrument more

138
 Additive Synthesis

user-friendly, but can also be used as a marketing tool to not

only differentiate the instrument from other additive synthe-
sizers, but make it more appealing to the user that is thinking
about getting into additive synthesis. Although often over-
looked, having an overall envelope generator or LFO on an
additive synthesizer is technically a means of incorporating
borrowed synthesis because the resulting sounds could tech-
nically be achieved by only using additive synthesis rather
than incorporating an overall envelope or LFO.

Filters
Many additive synthesizers, including many of the Kawai
instruments, contain filters. Filters, especially resonant, low
pass filters, have become synonymous with synthesis. Being
able to perform a filter sweep in real time is practically a
must on most synthesizers. Therefore, it was only a matter of
time before additive synthesizer designers began including
filters into their instruments. Any type of filter response can
be achieved on an additive synthesizer by manipulating the
amplitudes of the individual harmonics. For example, a low
pass filter sweep can be achieved by setting the higher har-
monics to fade out prior to the lower harmonics. Likewise, a
high pass filter sweep can be achieved by setting the lower
harmonics to fade out prior to the higher harmonics. Even
more complex filter responses such as band pass sweeps and
notch sweeps can be achieved. By including a filter into the
instrument, however, these sounds can be achieved much
faster without having to go back into submenus and desig-
nate each harmonic to change amplitude. Having a filter on
an additive synthesizer comes in handy when playing live or
improvising in the studio. If staying true to additive synthesis
is what your heart desires, the filter can typically be switched
off or just left unused.

Formant Filters
Formant filters are a type of filter that can be used to impart
human speech-type effects onto a sound such as vowel

139
Additive Synthesis

sounds. Formant filters are typically found on formant syn-

thesizers (a type of physical modeling synthesis). Formant
filters are oftentimes found on modern additive synthesizers,
although they are not additive in nature. Incorporating a for-
mant filter into an additive synthesizer effectively opens up
more possibilities for sound creation.

Sample Playback
Another feature many additive synthesizers will include is the
ability to utilize sample playback in conjunction with the main
additive synthesis engine. This functionality is more common
on the workstation type of synthesizers that have many differ-
ent synthesis formats, but many standalone additive synthe-
sizers will feature some sort of sample playback. Having the
ability to start with a sampled sound and then add additional
harmonic content onto it is greatly beneficial to the novice or
even expert synthesist. Including sample playback features
on an additive synthesizer is just another way companies are
making their synthesizers remain relevant in an age where any
type of synth sound can be recalled with the click of a mouse.

Waveform Generators
Although all of the basic waveforms can be re-created on an
additive synthesizer, many additive synthesizers will allow
users the option to start with premade wave shapes, which can
then be altered and expanded upon. This type of functionality
helps synthesists arrive at the sound they are trying to create
faster and can often be extremely beneficial to the beginner.

Noise Sources
As mentioned above, most, if not all, sound contains some
form of noise that plays a role in the timbre of the overall
sound. This noise can be the sound of a bow scratching on
a string, a woodwind or horn player’s breath, or just atmo-
spheric noise that influences the way in which the harmon-
ics are heard. Using the Fourier series, one, in theory, could
deconstruct noise down to individual sine waves, but it would

140
 Additive Synthesis

take up far too many of an additive synthesizer’s sine wave

generators to re-create. For this reason, many additive syn-
thesizers will feature an onboard noise generator that allows
for noise shaping through filtering. By adding in noise at
small amounts, the user can more faithfully re-create sound.
When used to more extreme degrees, noise will impart sonic
attributes to a sound much like when it is used in subtractive
synthesis.
The filter used to shape noise will typically have some sort of
contour control, such as an envelope generator. By using an
envelope generator for the noise-shaping filter, the user is free
to designate how the noise is shaped over time. An additional
envelope generator for the noise’s amplitude is also typically
found on an additive synthesizer in order to control how the
noise rises and falls in amplitude over time. By incorporating
noise into an additive synthesizer patch, sounds can be con-
vincingly re-created.

Performance Control
Now that we have covered how sounds are created using
additive synthesis, let’s examine how sounds are controlled.
Like with most forms of synthesis today, additive synthesiz-
ers utilize keyboards in order to trigger sound. Because most
additive synthesis exists in the digital world, additive syn-
thesizer keyboards trigger sound digitally rather than with
control voltage like on analog subtractive synthesizers.

Pitch and Mod Wheels

Most additive synthesizers will feature separate pitch and
modulation wheels. Similar to subtractive synthesizer key-
boards, the pitch wheel will shift the overall pitch up or
down while the modulation wheel will control the depth of
the overall LFO. Since additive synthesis is typically digital,
the modulation wheel (and sometimes pitch wheel) can be
routed to a variety of different parameters. For example, one
could control an onboard filter cutoff or the envelope amount
of a bank of harmonics.

141
Additive Synthesis

Data Sliders
Due to the sheer amount of controls that can be tweaked on
an additive synthesizer, having an individual potentiometer
or slider for each and every parameter would result in a huge,

Figure 4.11 Data slider.

142
 Additive Synthesis

heavy, and cumbersome instrument. For this reason, most

additive synthesizers will require the user to scroll through
various menus and submenus on an LCD screen in order to
tweak parameters. Once a parameter is selected, it will typi-
cally be altered via a data slider or bank of data sliders on
the instrument’s surface. A data slider typically looks and
functions like a fader on a mixing console. Utilizing menus
and data sliders not only allows the synthesizer to be con-
tained in a manageably sized instrument, but allows the user
to have a number of parameters routed to the data sliders
at any given time in order to perform functions in real time
while performing.

Sequencers/Arpeggiators
Similar to subtractive synthesizers, most additive synthesiz-
ers will feature onboard sequencers and arpeggiators. An
additive synthesizer’s sequencer and arpeggiators will func-
tion much the same as their subtractive synthesis counter-
parts, only they will almost always be controlled via digital
means such as software or MIDI data.

DSP Effects
Although DSP, or digital signal processing, has nothing to do
with synthesis itself, most modern synthesizers, especially
digital and software synths, will feature DSP effects in order
to further modify a sound. DSP effects are wide ranging and
can include delay, reverb, phase shifting, chorus, and flange
effects. Due to the popularity of including DSP effects on a
synthesizer, most new additive synthesizers will feature at
least a few DSP effects. Adding a delay or a rich reverb onto a
synth patch will impart a new dimension of animated sound
that, in most cases, is extremely desirable.

Resurgence of Additive Synthesis

Additive synthesis has always been more of an esoteric syn-
thesis format. Although it is one of the earliest theorized

143
Additive Synthesis

synthesis formats as well as an extremely powerful one, addi-

tive synthesis has never had the wide acclaim that has been
granted to subtractive, sampling, or even FM synthesis. This is
perhaps due to the amount of time it takes not only to build a
patch but to alter it on the fly. Having one of the steepest learn-
ing curves also hasn’t helped additive synthesis. Sampling
synthesizers single-handedly made sound re-creation via
additive synthesis obsolete since any sound could be recorded
and then played on a sampling synth rather than painstak-
ingly re-created on an additive device. Once accurate sound
re-creation was cast aside, many users felt that using sub-
tractive or FM synthesis to create new sounds was sufficient
enough, leaving additive synthesis behind. Although additive
synthesis has never died away in the eyes of additive enthusi-
asts, sound designers, and academic institutions, it seemed all
but dead before it came into its own for the average synthesist.
With the advent of software synthesizers and the ever-
increasing amount of CPU in today’s computers, however,
additive synthesis is finally having its long-awaited day. Addi-
tive synthesis has finally found a platform in software synthe-
sizers that allows it to be realized to its utmost potential.
Native-Instrument’s Razor software synth is an additive
synthesizer that is capable of producing up to 320 harmon-
ics. Take into consideration that the Kawai K5, arguably the
most famous hardware additive synthesizer of all time, could

Figure 4.12 Native-Instrument’s

Razor synthesizer.

144
 Additive Synthesis

only create 64 harmonics or 128 if one was ok with losing

four notes of polyphony. The fact that Razor can produce 320
harmonics while maintaining full polyphony is nothing short
of amazing.
Many software synth manufacturers are including additive
synthesizers or at least elements of additive synthesis into
their new products. It is an exciting time in the additive syn-
thesis world. As CPU power increases, the limits of additive
synthesis will continue to expand resulting in capabilities
much beyond our current understandings.
It is appropriate to say that software is the perfect additive
synthesis format. Not only will a software additive synth
be much cheaper in cost than its hardware counterpart, but
it will also be much more powerful. In fact, software addi-
tive synthesizers are free to be expanded and built on with
subsequent updates keeping them relevant and state of the
art so long as the software company stays in business. This
is an extremely important note because it means that once
a user buys a software additive synth, it can potentially be
kept up to date with every advancement in technology for the
small cost of updating the software. Updating a synthesizer
as technology improves can really only be possible through
the means of software synths.
Like Native-Instrument’s Razor synthesizer, AIR has its
own software additive synthesizer called Loom. Loom can

Figure 4.13 AIR Loom

synthesizer.

145
Additive Synthesis

be considered even more powerful than Razor because

it offers the user 512 individual harmonics. The trend in
software additive synthesis to feature as many harmonics
as possible with average CPU power is both exciting and
amazing. Comparing the power of Razor or Loom to the
likes of the Kawai K5 show that software is the next logical
evolution for additive synthesis thanks to the sheer power
it affords.

Utilizing software for additive synthesis not only allows for

huge numbers of harmonic generators, but allows for huge
numbers of individual amplitude control as well. Returning
back to the Kawai K5, only a select number of envelope gen-
erators were available. Users would have to assign individ-
ual envelope generators to a group of harmonics. Although
certain hardware additive synthesizers featured indepen-
dent envelope generators for each harmonic, it was not the
norm. Software additive synthesizers, on the other hand,
almost exclusively offer individual envelope generators for
each harmonic. Many software additive synths go as far as
to add more parameters than the standard attack, decay,
sustain, and release into their envelope generators. Some
software synthesizers even include multiple envelope gen-
erators per harmonic. For example, Camel Audio’s Alchemy
Synthesizer features 600 individual harmonics and includes
three envelope generators for each harmonic. When using
Alchemy, the user has a designated envelope for each har-
monic’s amplitude, pitch, and panning. Alchemy is an addi-
tive synth that can only exist in the software world due to
its sheer power. Camel Audio’s Alchemy is a great example
of the new era of additive synthesis. Not only does Alchemy
sport one of the most powerful additive synthesis engines
available, but it also has a designated subtractive synthe-
sizer and fully featured sample-based and granular synthe-
sizers as well. Alchemy, like many other modern software
synthesizers, is taking advantage of CPU power in order to
give the user the most sonic possibilities available for sound
creation.

146
 Additive Synthesis

Recipes
No two additive synthesizers are exactly alike. The number
of available tone generators, the way in which partials or
harmonics are laid out, and the ways in which they can be
manipulated will be unique to each instrument. Because of
this, simply drawing out recipes for various patches will not
work because, chances are, an additive synthesizer that you
are using to re-create these patches will not have the same
features as the additive synth we are using to create these
patches. Instead, we have created ten patches that we feel
show the capabilities of additive synthesis with an empha-
sis on patches that stray away from the stereotypical additive
pad type sounds. We will then demonstrate how we created
each of these patches on our given soft synth with plenty of
descriptions and figures.
Each of these ten patches were created using the soft synth
Loom by AIR. Loom was chosen for not only its popularity
as an additive synthesizer, but for its capabilities as well. In
the following pages, we will walk you through the creation of
each of these patches in an attempt to help demystify some of
the functions of additive synthesis. Before we delve into the
patches themselves, let’s go over the various parameters of
Loom and what each function does.

Loom
Loom is a software additive synthesizer that is laid out in a
modular manner. In the edit page of the synth, there are ten
spaces where users can select which function module they
would like to put. Each subsequent module will affect the
sound that is coming from the previous module. In addi-
tion to the function module, there are some overall attributes
that can be affected as well as a fairly cool Morph page which
allows for point-and-click sound morphing. Let’s start with
exploring the edit page and the various function modules.
Once Loom is launched, we click the edit tab in the upper left
corner and then we can load the main sound creation page. In

147
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.14 Loom’s default blank

screen.

the upper part of the screen, we have the ability to select the
number of partials present per voice. Loom has the ability to
produce up to 512 partials per voice. Moving down the page,
we see ten blank spaces, which we can load sound and func-
tion modules into. As stated before, each module is fed into
the next, so it’s important to think about where in the chain
each sound module should be placed. By clicking the bar at
the top of each module space, we can select which function
module we would like to insert. Let’s look at each of the mod-
ules to know what they do.

Gain
The Gain module acts like an amplifier in that it controls the
volume of all the partials together. A Gain module is needed at
some point in the chain in order to designate partial volume.

Odd/Even
The Odd/Even module is one of the most crucial modules in
Loom. The module controls the level of the fundamental fre-
quency and all partials. The Odd/Even module also allows
you to change the level relationship between the odd and
even harmonics in order to change the timbre of the overall
sound. Finally, a damping control is available that dampens
higher harmonics, giving the user just one more avenue of
sonic manipulation.

148
Figure 4.15 Loom Gain module.

Figure 4.16 Loom Odd/Even

module.
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.17 Loom Sync module.

Sync
The Sync module changes the partial relationships in a way
that attempts to mimic an oscillator sync type sound on a
subtractive synthesizer. The user has the ability to change the
frequency of the imaginary second oscillator as well as the
depth of the effect. Finally, the ability to smooth the effect as a
whole is present. It’s important to note that this module is not
truly adding a second oscillator and then syncing it; the mod-
ule is simply changing the tuning and levels of individual
harmonics in order to mimic a synced sound.

Second Tone
The Second Tone module is another module that changes the
relationship of harmonics. The module is described as one
that attempts to mimic the sonic changes inherent in a sub-
tractive synthesizer when another oscillator is added into the
mix. However, in practice, the module sounds more like it
is putting more focus onto another fundamental frequency,

150
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.18 Loom Second Tone

module.

which allows the sound to change drastically. By detuning

the Second Tone module, extremely interesting harmonics
begin to become present.

Octaver
The Octaver module is a fairly simple module which creates
copies of the original sound spectrum and shifts their octave.
The user has the ability to control the depth of the effect as
well as the number of copies and octaves that are made.
Finally, a damping control is available with which to lessen
the effect.

Organ I and II
The organ modules are simple modules that just remove cer-
tain harmonics in an attempt to create a sound which is akin
to an organ. The difference between Organ I and Organ II is
simply the harmonics they remove.

151
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.19 Loom Octaver

module.

Figure 4.20 Loom Organ I and II

modules.

Discrete
The Discrete module is similar to the organ modules in that
it removes certain harmonics in an attempt to mimic certain
sounds. In the case of the Discrete module, harmonics are
removed in order to mimic the spectrum of a bell or drum.

152
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.21 Loom Discrete

module.

Filtering Modules
Loom features a series of “filtering” modules that attempt to
mimic the sound of various filter shapes. Although many of
you may be screaming that filtering is not an additive syn-
thesis trait, Loom’s filtering modules are not exactly filters
in and of themselves. The filtering modules in Loom mimic
traditional filter shapes through additive synthesis by remov-
ing harmonics, changing the relationships of harmonics, and
adding harmonics in the case of mimicking resonance.

Figure 4.22 Loom filtering

modules.

153
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.23 Loom decay module.

Decay
Located under the filtering tab, Decay is a pretty handy mod-
ule that should not be overlooked. The decay module allows
users to determine how individual partials will fade out.
There’s a control that determines the amount of time it takes
for the entire sound spectrum to fade out as well as a control
to designate whether higher or lower partials will fade out
first.

Effect Modules
Loom features a series of effect modules that each have spe-
cific tasks. In the lineup, is a Detune module, which changes
the levels of partials in an attempt to mimic the way a sub-
tractive synthesizer sounds when a number of oscillators are
detuned from each other. Next is a Modulator that modulates
the levels of various partials in a random manner. Finally
there are Phaser, Stereo, Pan, and Blur modules. The Phaser

154
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.24 Loom effect

modules.

adds a phaser-type sound, whereas the Stereo and Pan mod-

ules allow users to designate how the sound will fit in the ste-
reo field. Finally, the Blur module affects individual harmonic
volumes randomly at various degrees in an attempt to blur
the sound.

Phrase and Random Drops

The Phrase module increases the level of individual harmon-
ics using predefined patterns inside the software. Users can
scroll the many rhythmic patterns inside the software. The
Random Drops module effectively does the same thing as the
Phrase module, but in a random manner rather than set to a
rhythmic pattern.

Figure 4.25 Loom Phrase and

Random Drops modules.

155
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.26 Loom time modules.

Time Modules
The two time modules—Tail and Repeater—are designed to
mimic specific effects using additive synthesis. Tail adjusts
partial levels to create reverb like effects while Repeater does
the same thing to create a delay type effect.

Tool Modules
There are a variety of modules in the tool category. Each of
them has a small, but specific purpose. The Adder module
adds a constant level to specific harmonic even after it might
have been filtered out while the Constant module does the
same thing to a set of harmonics. The Enhancer module adjusts
the overall sound much like a sonic enhancer would. The Clip
module adds a pseudo-distortion type effect. The Threshold
module can act like a compressor or limiter and, finally, the
Noise module adjusts harmonic levels to create what sounds
like noise.

Figure 4.27 Loom tool modules.

156
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.28 Loom Wave module.

Wave
The Wave module is actually a really cool module. It’s not spe-
cifically an additive synthesis module, but it’s a great addi-
tion. Using the Wave module, users can import audio clips of
their choosing, which can then affect the levels of all partials
like a vocoder. There are a bunch of controls to customize the
sound, but some really interesting effects can be generated
using this module.

Globals
Now that we have finished discussing individual modules,
let’s take a look at some of the global parameters which can be
assigned to affect each module. At the bottom of Loom’s edit
screen, we are greeted with a variety of parameters, such as

Figure 4.29 Loom globals.

157
Additive Synthesis

envelope generators, LFOs, and pitch control. The envelopes

and LFOs can all be routed to individual parameters of the
aforementioned modules in order to add modulation to each
module while the global pitch parameter allows us to have
the envelopes and LFOs affect the pitch of the synthesizer as
a whole. Loom features three AHDSR (attack, hold, decay,
sustain, release) envelope generators as well as a fourth slope
envelope generator. The three LFOs have a wide variety of
waveforms including sine, square, saw up, saw down, and
sample and hold. Two additional LFO responses are avail-
able, pump and drift, which create weird modulation shapes
that are quite fun to play with.

FX and Master
Directly above and to the right of the global parameters are
two small sections entitled FX and Master. As can be guessed,
the FX section allows the user to add an overall effect to the
sound, such as distortion or reverb, while the Master section
acts as an overall level and stereo width control.

Figure 4.30 Loom FX and

Master sections.

158
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.31 Loom Spectral

Modulation/Distortion sections.

Spectral Modulation/Distortion
In the top left corner of the edit screen are two sections enti-
tled Spectral Distortion and Spectral Modulation. The Spectral
Distortion section adjusts algorithms inside the software to
affect the frequencies of the partials. The Spectral Modulation
section allows for modulation of the partial frequencies via
LFO or envelopes. Both these controls are unlike the individ-
ual modules previously discussed. These two sections both
affect harmonic frequency rather than harmonic level.

Morph Screen
The morph pad in the morph screen acts sort of like a vector
plane on a vector synthesizer. Users can place four variations
of the sound at each quadrant and draw paths for the sound
to move through at set speeds and directions. The morph
screen is quite cool and allows for some really extraordinary
movement and modulation options. The morph control is
pretty deep and is out of the scope of additive synthesis, so

159
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.32 Loom morph screen.

we won’t go into it in depth. Just imagine it as a glorified vec-

tor plane and control.
We have now covered the various parameters in AIR’s Loom
additive synthesizer. Now that you have a brief understand-
ing of how the synthesizer works as well as what it can do,
let’s examine each of the additive patches we have created
and hopefully they will serve as jumping-off points for you to
explore the wonderful world of additive synthesis.

Recipe 1: Ambient Bass

The first patch we created is a take on the synth bass sounds
heard in electronic ambient music. The patch features 192
partials and begins with an Odd/Even module with the fun-
damental fully cranked and a slight amount of damping on
the harmonics. The Odd/Even knob is turned so more even
harmonics are heard than odd harmonics. Next in the chain
is a Discrete module, which has its depth turned fairly high.
The brightness, fundamental, random, and spectrum controls
are also turned fairly high allowing for some weird sonic
attributes. After the Discrete module, a Second Tone module is
placed with full detune to add more complexity to the sound.
After that, a small amount of Blur and Decay are added to
smooth out the sound as well as let the low harmonics ring
out longer rather than the high. Finally, a Tail and Gain mod-
ule are placed to add some reverb type sound as well as

160
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.33 Screenshot of

Ambient Bass patch.

control the level of the sound as a whole. The overall pitch of

the patch is being slightly affected by LFO one, which is set
to a sine wave and beat-synced. A slightly driven distortion
is placed on the sound as well as a 50% reverb setting. This
patch at first sounds like a weird natural distorted bass and
then gets more and more mangled as the sound fades out.

Recipe 2: Cool Repeater

The second recipe in our list plays on the use of additive
synthesis in creating a delay-type effect. The sound features
256 partials and starts with an Odd/Even module with only a
slight amount of the fundamental frequency added in. The
harmonics are fairly damped and mixed in order for both

Figure 4.34 Screenshot of Cool

Repeater patch.

161
Additive Synthesis

odd and even harmonics to be heard at the same level. Next,

a Detune module is placed in the chain with two stages of
detuning and only a slight detune. After the Detune module,
a Low Pass Filter module is placed fully “open” with a bit of
resonance and a large amount of envelope modulation. Next,
an Enhancer module is placed with just a slight amount of the
effect being heard. Finally, a Gain and Tail modules are placed
at the end of the chain. An important note is that the Tail
module is placed after the Gain module in order to make the
reverb effect still ring out once the sound has ceased. Finally,
distortion, reverb, and delay are added in the Master section
of the synth.

Recipe 3: Distorted Bells

The “Distorted Bells” patch we created was designed so that
when a note is first played, the bell tone is fairly clear. Once
the notes start ringing out and overlapping, however, the dis-
tortion begins to emerge and change the sound drastically.
The patch contains 256 partials and is made up of an Odd/
Even module with a bit more emphasis on the odd harmonics.
A bit of damping is added while the fundamental is turned
about half way up. Next, a Discrete module is added in order
to achieve the bell sound that we were going for. A Band EQ
filter module is placed with a small amount of gain and a
bit of key tracking just to smooth out the sound and let it

Figure 4.35 Screenshot of

Distorted Bells patch.

162
 Additive Synthesis

evolve. Next, Blur, Decay, and Tail modules are added not
only to smooth the sound, but to add a fairly long ring out
that becomes darker as it progresses. Finally, a Gain module
is added for level control. In the Master section, distortion and
delay are added as well as the overall pitch being modulated
by envelope four.

Recipe 4: Distorted Movement

The “Distorted Movement” patch we created was designed
to fully utilize the type of digital grit that can be achieved
using an additive synthesizer. The sound features 192 partials
and starts with an Odd/Even module with a small amount of
damping and hardly any fundamental present. Again, more
emphasis is placed on the odd harmonics. Next, a Decay mod-
ule is added in order to let the sound ring out. A Gain module
is placed directly after these to allow for level control over just
this aspect of the sound. After the Gain module is a Sync mod-
ule, which adds a lot of the digital grit we were looking for.
A Stereo module is then added with max depth to influence
the sound’s presence in the stereo field. Directly after the Ste-
reo module is a Low Pass Filter module with heavy influence
from its respective envelope and LFO. The frequency control
is slightly rolled back on the Low Pass Filter module as well.
Finally, the sound chain ends with another Gain module in
order to control the level of the sound as a whole. Distortion,

Figure 4.36 Screenshot of

Distorted Movement patch.

163
Additive Synthesis

delay, and reverb are all added in the Master section as well
as a slight amount of envelope four modulating the overall
pitch.

Recipe 5: Electric Guitar Lead

This next patch was not originally created with an electric
guitar sound in mind, but as it progressed, it was evident
that an electric guitar is what sprang to mind. The patch
features 256 partials and begins with an Odd/Even module
with a fair amount of the fundamental added in as well as
a good amount of harmonic damping. The Odd/Even knob
is left in the middle with equal levels for both odd and even
harmonics. Directly after the Odd/Even module are Low Pass
Filter and High Pass Filter modules. The Low Pass Filter mod-
ule’s frequency is left fairly high with a large amount of key
tracking, while the High Pass Filter module’s frequency is
rolled further back and an extreme amount of resonance
added. After the two filter modules, Decay and Tail mod-
ules are added to affect how the sound rings out. Next, an
Enhancer module is added with a large amount of depth fol-
lowed by a Gain module to control the overall level of the
sound. Finally, distortion and reverb are added in the Master
section. The patch itself is fairly straightforward and sounds
menacing.

Figure 4.37 Screenshot of

Electric Guitar Lead patch.

164
 Additive Synthesis

Recipe 6: Low String Repeat

The “Low String Repeat” patch we created is pretty inter-
esting. The initial sound is akin to natural strings played in
a pizzicato manner, but then LFO-caused repeats are heard
from select harmonics making for a strange delay-type of
sound that almost appears to be a completely different
instrument. This patch features 192 partials and begins with
an Odd/Even module with full emphasis on the odd harmon-
ics. The fundamental is almost entirely left out and a bit of
harmonic damping is added. Next a Discrete module with
a heavy depth and a good amount of brightness is added,
which plays heavily in the repeating aspect of the sound.
Next in the chain is a Second Tone module with full level
and a bit of damping, which helps not only the pizzicato
string aspect of the sound, but the repeating aspect as well.
Next there are Blur, Decay, and Tail modules, which will
heavily affect the repeating aspect of the sound due to the
sharp decline of the pizzicato sound. Finally, a Gain module
is added for overall harmonic level control. Distortion and
reverb are added in the Master section as well as a slight
pitch modulation from envelope four. LFO three is set to
a square wave with retrigger initiated: it is controlling the
Spectral Modulation section of the synthesizer that is causing
the repeated sound.

Figure 4.38 Screenshot of Low

String Repeat patch.

165
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.39 Screenshot of

Natural Low Strings patch.

Recipe 7: Natural Low Strings

The “Natural Low Strings” patch we created was designed
to sound like a heavily affected recording of some type of
stringed instrument. The patch features 128 partials and
begins with an Odd/Even module. The fundamental is fully
cranked with about half damping and equal representation of
odd and even harmonics. Next, a Band EQ module is added
with a midrange frequency. A small amount of key tracking
is enabled as well as slight envelope modulation. Next, a Low
Pass Filter module is added with the frequency knob turned
up about 75%. Pan, Blur, and Decay modules are then added
to affect the sound’s tail as well as presence in the stereo
field. Finally, Moving Filter and Gain modules are added. The
Moving Filter module is set to “stop” but can be initiated as
desired. Delay and reverb are then added at the Master stage.

Recipe 8: Metallic Sequencer

The “Metallic Sequencer” patch is designed as a digital-heavy
patch that lends itself well to a step sequencer. The patch fea-
tures 256 partials and begins with an Odd/Even module with
little damping and fundamental present. Heavy emphasis is
placed on the odd harmonics. Next, a Gain module is added
in order to have control over just the sound coming from the
Odd/Even module. Next, a Repeater module is added with a

166
 Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.40 Screenshot of

Metallic Sequencer patch.

low level. Directly after the Repeater is a Low Pass Filter mod-
ule with its frequency turned all the way up and a bit of reso-
nance as well as heavy emphasis width. Next, Stereo and Blur
modules are placed in order to affect the sound as a whole
as well as its place in the stereo field. Another Low Pass Filter
module is added to darken the sound a bit as it is quite harsh
at this stage. The Low Pass Filter module is placed after the
Stereo and Blur modules to ensure it is darkening the sound
emitting from these modules. Finally, a Gain module is added
to control the level of the entire sound. Reverb is then added
in the Master section.

Recipe 9: Moving Bell

The “Moving Bell” patch is a cool, sonically evolving bell
sound that sounds quite different from any bell sound we
had heard. The patch contains 128 partials and begins with an
Organ I module with a heavy amount of depth and damping.
Directly after the Organ I module, a Discrete module is placed,
which aids in getting the bell sound required for this patch.
Next, two Low Pass Filter modules are added with different
cutoffs in order to give the sound two stages of filtering.
Next, a Gain module is added in order to have control over
the sound at this point. An Adder module is then added with
a fairly high frequency in order to add some high harmonic
artifacts back into the sound. Next, Stereo and Tail modules

167
Additive Synthesis

Figure 4.41 Screenshot of

Moving Bell patch.

are added in order to allow the sound to fit nicely in the ste-
reo field and ring out. A Phrase module is then added with the
“oct-1” pattern. Finally, a Gain module is added for overall
control. Delay and reverb are both added in the Master sec-
tion as well as slight pitch modulation from envelope four.
Envelope one is set in a trapezoid type shape and is slightly
modulating the Spectral Modulation section of the synth.

Recipe 10: Synth Bass

The Synth Bass patch we created was designed to mimic old,
acid-style synth basses with a bit of additive flair. The sound
features 192 partials and begins with an Odd/Even module
with heavy emphasis on odd harmonics as well as a strong
fundamental. The sound moves on to feature both Discrete

Figure 4.42 Screenshot of Synth

Bass patch.

168
 Additive Synthesis

and Second Tone modules, which help achieve some of the

piercing “squeakiness” present in acid bass sounds. Next,
Blur, Decay, and Tail modules are added to affect how the
sound rings out. A Gain module is then added for level con-
trol. Distortion and reverb are then added in the master stage.

Historical Perspective
on Additive Synthesis
One of the earliest instruments to incorporate additive syn-
thesis into its sound creation was the Teleharmonium.5 The
Teleharmonium was invented by Thaddeus Cahill in 1897.
Cahill, who studied physics of music at Oberlin Conserva-
tory in Ohio, was consumed with the idea that music could
be made via electronic means. While working on the designs
for an electronic typewriter, Cahill began work on the Tele-
harmonium. The Teleharmonium was originally designed as
a device that could play music over telephone lines. Cahill
was hoping to market the Teleharmonium to hotels and res-
taurants in order to have one instrument feeding music to a
variety of places at the same time. Cahill hoped the Telehar-
monium would convince hotel and restaurant owners to stop
paying pianists and small string ensembles and instead pay
him a lower cost to produce music at their venue via tele-
phone lines. During the time Cahill was working on the Tele-
harmonium, however, there was no way in which to amplify
sound coming from a telephone’s headset. Cahill surmised
that if his device created enough electricity, it would create a
loud enough signal that could then be fed from a telephone’s
earpiece into an elongated cone, much like a gramophone
cone, causing the signal to be heard by an audience. Cahill’s
early work on sound amplification also helped pave the way
for loudspeaker design.6
The Teleharmonium was an extremely large contraption that
took up at least two rooms and, in some instances, weighed
upwards of two hundred tons. The first Teleharmonium
Cahill built was a scaled-down version of his original plan
and incorporated 35 elongated cylinders that contained a

169
Additive Synthesis

number of tone wheels each. The tone wheels on the Tele-

harmonium were a series of wheels that had several raised
bumps on their surface. The tone wheel cylinder would then
spin while a magnetic coil was placed close to the bumps.
When a bump passed by the magnetic coil, electricity was
generated. The space between the bumps generated little or
no electricity. This alternating current, caused by the bumps
on the tone wheel, is what produced sound. The cylinder was
divided into a number of sections that had a different number
of raised bumps, causing different pitches to be created. The
sections of the cylinder were capable of rotating at a various
speeds, resulting in a wide range of frequencies. The various
tone wheels could then be combined in order to produce rich,
pleasing tones.7
The second Teleharmonium that Cahill built was much larger
and contained 145 tone wheel cylinders, resulting in much
more complex tones that could be generated. Cahill built a
final, third Teleharmonium and displayed it in 1910. This
final Teleharmonium was again larger than its two predeces-
sors, but the novelty of the instrument had worn off and the
public had grown tired of it. The diminished interest as well
as the sheer weight and size of the Teleharmonium caused its
ultimate downfall.8 However, the Teleharmonium secured its
place in history not only as the first machine to use additive
synthesis, but the first synthetic instrument.

Hammond Tone Wheel Organ

Following in the footsteps of Thaddeus Cahill, Laurens Ham-
mond and John M. Hanert manufactured the Hammond tone
wheel organ. Like the Teleharmonium, the Hammond organ
utilized tone wheels. The tone wheels on the Hammond,
however, were small discs that had designated electronic
pickups in close proximity to the disc. Alternating Current
(AC) motors were responsible for spinning the discs at exact
speeds. The speed at which the tone wheels spun, as well as
the number of physical bumps on their surface, determined
the frequency that would be produced.9

170
 Additive Synthesis

The Hammond organ was unique in that it had a series of

controls called drawbars that the user could engage in order
to produce higher harmonics. If only one draw bar was
engaged, the organ would produce a close proximity of a
sine wave. The sine wave would produce a frequency corre-
sponding to the note being held down on the keyboard. This
first draw bar represented the first harmonic, or fundamental
frequency. Engaging subsequent drawbars would introduce
higher harmonics into the sound with each draw bar repre-
senting the next harmonic. The user was able to control the
amplitude of the various harmonics by physically pulling the
drawbar out further or pushing it back in, resulting in louder
and softer harmonics respectively.10
Being able to incorporate individual harmonics into a sound,
as well as their amplitude, is the fundamental concept of
additive synthesis. However, the Hammond organ, as well
as the Teleharmonium before it, was incapable of changing
the amplitude of these higher harmonics overtime, which is
another key element of successful additive synthesis.

Early Electronic Additive Synthesizers

Although the Hammond organ and the Teleharmonium used
additive synthesis in order to generate sound, they did so
via mechanical means. Both instruments incorporated tone
wheels that physically spun in order to create sound. Addi-
tive synthesis produced through electronic means would
be the next evolution for this synthesis format. One of the
earliest all-electronic additive synthesizers was produced by
E. L. Kent in 1942, an experimental machine that helped drive
early research into electronic additive synthesis.11
Building on the research of E. L. Kent, James Beauchamp,
working out of the University of Illinois, invented and built
the first practical electronic additive synthesizer in 1964,
known as the Harmonic Tone Generator. The Harmonic Tone
Generator was a relatively small (compared to the monstrous
Teleharmonium) electronic instrument that was capable

171
Additive Synthesis

of producing up to six exact harmonics with a varying fre-

quency range up to 2,000Hz.12 The unique thing about the
Harmonic Tone Generator, besides its all-electronic construc-
tion, was the fact that the individual harmonic’s amplitude
and phase relationships could be controlled. The Harmonic
Tone Generator used control voltage (the same technology
referred to in the subtractive synthesis chapter) in order to
control the various harmonic attributes. The ability to control
the amplitude of individual harmonics was no small matter.
By simply incorporating harmonic amplitude control in the
time realm, additive synthesis could finally become recog-
nized as the powerful synthesis technique that it is.

Prior to the Harmonic Tone Generator, instruments that incor-

porated additive synthesis only allowed the initial amplitude
of individual harmonics to be set. This means that the tone pro-
duced, although often interesting and pleasing, was stagnant.
Natural sounds, as you may know, are rarely stagnant; they have
a movement to them that allows them to evolve and remain inter-
esting. The fact that harmonic amplitudes could be controlled
via control voltage in the Harmonic Tone Generator meant that,
finally, interesting and moving sounds could be produced.

The Harmonic Tone Generator used LFOs and envelope

generators as a source of control for the individual harmon-
ics.13 By setting a slow attack on individual, higher order har-
monics, the sound produced would grow more complex as
time went on and as richer sonorities of harmonics became
audible. Using LFOs would result in ever-changing sonori-
ties of harmonics. Although the Harmonic Tone Generator
was revolutionary, it was limited to the fact that it could only
produce up to six harmonics. Being that the Harmonic Tone
Generator used analog circuitry, it was also susceptible to the
common problems of analog in that the pitches were unstable
and tended to drift, which proved more troublesome in an
additive synthesizer than a subtractive one.

The next evolution of additive synthesis would come once

the digital revolution took over synthesizers. Although a few

172
 Additive Synthesis

analog subtractive synthesizers incorporated some additive

elements into their design, a practical, full-fledged additive
synthesizer was still not available to the masses.

Arguably the first commercially successful additive synthe-

sizer was the New England Digital Synclavier II. The Syn-
clavier II was a state-of-the-art sampler/workstation that
was released in 1980. Although typically thought of solely as
a sampler, the Synclavier II featured an advanced additive
resynthesis engine. The Synclavier II was extremely expen-
sive, often costing upwards of 50 thousand dollars, and there-
fore was not adopted by the average musician and synthesist.
The first steps into producing an affordable, fully featured
additive synthesizer would be in the form of the DK Synergy
and Kurzweil K150 synthesizers. Both of these synthesiz-
ers offered the user extremely powerful additive synthesis
engines with the Kurzweil K150 boasting an impressive 240
oscillators!

Although the K150 and Synergy synthesizers were powerful

and much less expensive than the New England Digital Syn-
clavier II, they never caught on to the degree as other synthe-
sizers utilizing different formats that were released around
the same time. This is due in part because of the amount of
time it took to program a patch as well as the steeper learn-
ing curve that came along with additive synthesis. As stated
above, it would not be until the Kawai K5 was released that
additive synthesis would finally fall into the hands of the
average synthesist.

Additive synthesis, although old in theory, is still evolv-

ing every day. The limits of additive synthesis are yet to be
explored. Beginning with the Teleharmonium and Hammond
organ, additive synthesis evolved to utilize electronic sound
generation in the Harmonic Tone Generator. As the digital
age dawned, additive synthesis was on the forefront of the
technology with instruments like the Kawai K5. As digital
hardware synths moved into virtual software synths, addi-
tive synthesis followed and became even more powerful. It

173
Additive Synthesis

seems that every new additive synthesizer released has more

features and harmonics available to the user. Additive syn-
thesis will continue to grow and become even more powerful.
Although additive synthesis might never become a widely
adopted synthesis format like subtractive or FM synthesis, it
has made its mark and continues to do so amongst the most
die-hard of synthesis enthusiasts. I urge you to experiment
with an additive synthesizer and see the extreme potential
this synthesis format is capable of.

Notes
1. Paul Wiffen, “Synth School, Part 4: Additive Synthesis,” Sound
on Sound (October 1997). Retrieved from https://www.soundon
sound.com/sos/1997_articles/oct97/synthschool4.html
2. Paul Wiffen, “Synth School, Part 4: Additive Synthesis.”
3. Paul Wiffen, “Synth School, Part 4: Additive Synthesis.”
4. Amar Chaudhary, “Band-Limited Simulation of Analog Synthe-
sizer Modules by Additive Synthesis.” Paper presented at the
annual Audio Engineering Society Convention. September 26–29,
1998, San Francisco, California.
5. Robert A. Moog, “Electronic Music,” Journal of the Audio Engineer-
ing Society vol. 25, no. 10/11 (November 1, 1997), pp. 855–861.
6. Jay Williston, “Thaddeus Cahill’s Teleharmonium.” Retrieved from
http://www.synthmuseum.com/magazine/0102jw.html
7. Jay Williston, “Thaddeus Cahill’s Teleharmonium.”
8. Jay Williston, “Thaddeus Cahill’s Teleharmonium.”
9. J. W. Beauchamp, “Additive Synthesis of Harmonic Musical Tones,”
Journal of the Audio Engineering Society vol. 14, no. 4 (October 1966),
pp. 332–342.
10. Robert A. Moog, “Electronic Music.”
11. J. W. Beauchamp, “Additive Synthesis of Harmonic Musical Tones.”
12. J. W. Beauchamp, “Additive Synthesis of Harmonic Musical Tones.”
13. J. W. Beauchamp, “Additive Synthesis of Harmonic Musical Tones.”

174
WAVETABLE SYNTHESIS 5

Wavetable synthesis is perhaps the most unique type of syn-

thesis and is like a chameleon that can imitate other types of
synthesis. It combines elements of sampling, vector synthe-
sis, and subtractive synthesis, all in a system that can produce
a range of sounds from subtle tones to otherworldly sound-
scapes. At the heart is a wavetable that has many individual
waveforms, and the familiar sound of wavetable synthesis
comes from playing them in order, front to back, back to
front, or in any manner the available modulators can manage
at a variety of speeds.
The concept of wavetable synthesis was created by Wolf-
gang Palm of PPG (Palm Products GmbH) in the years just
before MIDI was invented: his original instruments, called
PPG Wave, are still sought after today. The PPG Wave series
(2.0–2.3) spanned the 1980s and, as has happened again and
again, they couldn’t survive in a market that brought cheaper
and cheaper instruments. The good news is that other com-
panies such as Waldorf picked up where the PPG Wave left
off and there are some excellent wavetable synths currently
available.

Figure 5.1 PPG Wave 2.3.

175
Wavetable Synthesis

Basic Principles
The wavetable is a collection of single cycle sounds that are
accessible for manipulation. A common example is a set of very
similar waveforms that, if played sequentially, would sound
like a sawtooth waveform that is being sent through a filter
that is opening up. The wavetable process allows the sequence
of files to be played back slowly, quickly, or back and forth
with an LFO. Sweeping through waveforms can sound very
organic if the waves are very similar, and when a synth uses
interpolation techniques to mix from one to the next, it can
potentially sound like an independent waveform. If the indi-
vidual waveforms are varied and not consistent from one to
the next, then they can still be swept through, but it will sound
quite surprising and you will hear the steps between them.
How many waveforms are available in wavetable synthesis?
It varies from instrument to instrument, but early PPG instru-
ments had hundreds of individual waveforms, organized into

Figure 5.2 Wavetable instrument

codex.

176
 Wavetable Synthesis

30 wavetables with 64 individual waveforms in each. One of

the most recent wavetable synths called Nave from Waldorf
has 84 wavetables, some with nearly 400 individual wave-
forms. There isn’t a standard specification for which types of
tables and how many waveforms, and so each instrument has
their own individual options.
Once a wavetable is loaded, there are many adjustable param-
eters for how it will sound when performed. The terms used
in this section are taken from the standard naming conven-
tion of Waldorf, which continues to be the primary contribu-
tor to wavetable synthesis.

Travel
The simplest movement through the wavetable is forward or
backward and this directionality and its accompanying speed
are determined by the travel parameter. When you hold a
note with a travel setting that is set to positive at 5–10%, then
the wavetable slowly cycles in a forward direction through
all of the sounds. If the travel setting is set to negative at
90–100%, then the wavetable very quickly cycles through all
of the sounds in reverse. At higher values, the travel settings
are capable of FM-like sounds as the cycling begins to oscil-
late at audible frequencies.

Figure 5.3 Wavetable movement.

177
Wavetable Synthesis

The starting point is the first thing to set because that deter-
mines where the travel begins. Some instruments use looping
instead of travel, and they have different options for moving
forward/backward through the wavetable. Locating the best
start position is critical to achieving different sounds, and
deciding which direction to move through the wavetable can
change the entire sound of the patch.

Wave Modulation
The ability to modulate the playback of waveforms is at the
heart of wavetable synthesis, and so most instruments that
specialize in wavetable synthesis are going to have a lot of
options. Here are a few of the most interesting options.
1. Key tracking—This modulation source maps the individual
sounds across your MIDI keyboard, which creates an instru-
ment that morphs depending on the range it is played in.
A patch might have thick, round, lower notes, but it will
morph into an edgy, screaming lead several octaves higher.
The strength of this technique is that it makes performing
with a wavetable very intuitive.
2. LFO—A low frequency oscillator is a classic modulation
tool that is able to add a slightly different variation to what
the travel option is able to provide. The results end up in a
similar vein, with a cyclic pattern moving through the wave-
table. If the LFO has a sample and hold option, then it is
even more flexible and can create random timing cycles.
3. Envelope—An envelope is able to create motion through
the wavetable in a very calculated manner, which involves
various speeds through the envelope time periods. If this
is applied to wavetables that involve traditional synth

Figure 5.4 Modulation matrix.

178
 Wavetable Synthesis

waveforms then it can readily mimic the evolution of sound

over time.
4. Velocity—Using velocity to move through the wavetable
is another elegant way to make performing with a wave­
table more intuitive. In the same way that creating a­ dditional
velocity layers in a sampled instrument adds to its overall
realism, a wavetable that is mapped to velocity is probably
as close to a natural instrument as any synth can get because
it often involves more than 60 levels of changing timbres.
5. Modulation Pads—An X-Y pad is effective at controlling
the wavetable, but it means you have to limit your playing
to one hand while the other performs the modulation. The
benefit to a pad is that it can control multiple parameters in
addition to the wavetable location.
6. Modulation Wheel—The benefit to using a mod wheel is that
many performers are already used to playing with one hand
while using a wheel, but the biggest limitation is that it only
modulates one parameter while limiting you to one hand.
As you can see, there are many ways to control the wavetable
playback using modulation. None of them are the “right”
way, and each one has a time and place to be used. Some
wavetable synthesizers also have a spectrum control, which
has the ability to be controlled by all of the same modulators,
and this controls the frequency content of the wavetable just
as an equalizer would.

Creating Wavetables
Wavetables can be created from any audio file and, with a
little careful planning, you can harness the power and tools of
wavetable synthesis. It hasn’t always been easy to create cus-
tom wavetables, and the earliest instruments required addi-
tional modules. The PPG Waveterm is a rack-mounted unit
that adds sampling to the PPG Wave, and it is very different
from sampling as we know it today.
There were two available versions of the Waveterm called
Waveterm A and Waveterm B. The Waveterm B updated
the Waveterm A sampling rate from 8-bit sampling to 12-bit
sampling, which is archaic by modern standards, but since

179
Wavetable Synthesis

wavetable synths most often mangle the original sounds,

this limitation makes less of a difference. The Waveterm also
has a limit of three seconds for sampling, which seems like a
major shortcoming, but it is amazing what you can do with
such a short sample. The best part? The Waveterm editor is
essentially a text editor and relies on a 5.25-inch floppy disk
system. Things have certainly come a long way.
The most recent process for creating wavetables is to import
an audio file and let the instrument do the rest. Knowing how
to manipulate audio files in a DAW is a plus, and as you’ll see
in the following examples, there are many things that have to
be done outside of the wavetable synth itself.

Preparation Examples
1. The easiest method is to record your source into a single file,
export it, and then import it into your instrument. The Wal-
dorf Nave instrument lets you import from the clipboard or
copy files from your computer via iTunes. The benefit to this
approach is that you can focus on making a simple record-
ing without the editing or complex signal processing, and
then it is a simple transfer to your instrument. Homework:
download an audio file and import it into your wavetable
synthesizer. A particularly fun file that is available online is
the Mac startup sound, which has a rich timbre and is fun to
twist around using wavetable synthesis modulators.

Figure 5.5 Editing waveforms in

Logic Pro X.

180
 Wavetable Synthesis

2. A more complex example involves basic editing and signal

processing, which is easiest when accomplished in a DAW.
Editing involves trimming the beginning and ending of the
file, while signal processing involves adding audio effects.
Homework: record the output of a synthesizer and program
it to have a filter that opens slowly over time. Add a distor-
tion effect and automate it to start in the off position and
have it ramp up towards the end of the file. Edit the begin-
ning and ending, and then export the final file. Once again,
it is then a straightforward import into your instrument.
3. In this example, the final export should be a collection of
different sounds that are combined into a single project. The
original elements are prepared separately, the same way as
in number two above. After each is completed, import them
all into a new project and edit them together. When you play
it back, it will sound like a sequence of different elements
and may not make musical sense, but that is perfectly okay
for use in a wavetable. Homework: create a patch with 15
to 20 different individual sounds. Keep them short, even as
short as a single wave form.
4. This final example recycles sounds made in your wavetable
synthesizer for reimport into a new wavetable. The idea
is to perform a patch using modulators to alter the sound
and then record the output into a new file, which is subse-
quently imported as the source for a new wavetable. Home-
work: pick an initial wavetable and decide how you want to
modulate it. I recommend a real-time modulator such as an
X-Y pad or modulation wheel so that you can create a very
customized end result. Perhaps your instrument can handle
the recording and reimporting of the sound, but if not, then
you’ll use your DAW for this task. Create a performance and
then see what you can do with it after importing the result-
ing file back in.
Wavetable synthesis uses single cycle waveforms and each
of the above examples contains far more than a single cycle,
which means that the wavetable synth has to analyze the
audio and prepare the file for proper playback. This shouldn’t
change the way you prepare files except with number three,
which involves different sounds and should be edited as sin-
gle waveform elements.

181
Wavetable Synthesis

Figure 5.6 Typical envelope

example.

Envelopes
As with most types of synthesizers, the envelopes play an
integral part of the sound generation process. Perhaps, with
wavetable synthesis, the envelopes are even more important
to master because of the way you can use them to control the
amplitude and filter, while at the same time controlling the
travel of the wavetable. Aligning these together can create an
impressive effect that controls the volume up and then back
down in sync with the motion of the wavetable. The way to
create this is to set the wavetable modulation source to the
same envelope that is controlling the parameter you want to
match. The end result of an envelope match with the ampli-
tude envelope is that as the initial volume rises, the speed of
the wavetable travel also increases. Then, as the release returns
to a zero level, the speed of the wavetable travel slows down.

Double Modulation
Many wavetable synthesizers have a modulation matrix
because of how important modulation is to this type of syn-
thesis. The benefit to this is that you can create complex mod-
ulation chains that are sonically very interesting.
1. Assign an LFO to control the speed of a second LFO.
2. Assign the second LFO to control the position of playback in
the wavetable.
3. Assign the modulation wheel to control the speed of the
first LFO.

182
 Wavetable Synthesis

Figure 5.7 Modulation example.

This modulation chain creates an effect where the motion of

the wavetable speeds up and slows down as a result of the
compound speeds of both LFOs. The modulation wheel con-
nection allows you to have real-time control over the speed
for further adjustment.

Waldorf Nave
Waldorf didn’t invent wavetable synthesis, but when PPG
closed, they took over and even hired some of the PPG team.
Waldorf continues to develop new synthesizers using wave-
table principles, and have created one of the most important
and powerful iOS apps for the iPad. Because of the unique-
ness of this instrument and the platform it was developed
for, the following is a full profile of its capabilities with the
goal of continuing the discussion of how to use wavetable
synthesizers.

Figure 5.8 Waldorf Nave app

load screen.

183
Wavetable Synthesis

Basic Interface
There are five primary pages that encompass everything Nave
has available, and each is accessible by touching a menu strip
in the top left corner. One of the things that is different about
this instrument is that it is designed for a multitouch interface,
and so there are high expectations for the touch experience.
While the buttons are small, they are easy to use and it is hard
to miss the choice you want. It is the touch experience, how-
ever, that is one of the most exciting parts of this instrument.

Wave Section
This initial section is where the wavetable is accessible, along
with spectrum controls, the mixer, oscillator sections, and a
keyboard. In the middle of the screen, there is a graphical rep-
resentation of the wavetable, with full colors and the ability
to touch and drag the graphics around to explore the sound
in three dimensions. The representation is very informative
about the harmonic content and is useful when performing

Figure 5.9 Nave interface.

184
 Wavetable Synthesis

because you can see a direct representation of the content you

are performing.
The wavetable representation view is customizable with
wave view options vs. spectrum view. It is possible to zoom
in on the waveform and also adjust the color scheme, all using
buttons immediately below the display. In addition to the
initial section with the graphic representation, you can also
enter a full screen mode that gives you additional tools and
functions. These include a ribbon for auditioning sounds, an
import file menu, and perhaps the most important tool in the
entire app: the edit tool.
The edit tool gives you full control over a large number of
parameters that affect the wavetable. These include:
Level
Expand/Contract
Permute
Rotate Waves
Shift Waves
Rotate Partials
Shift Partials
Gyrate
Random

Figure 5.10 Nave edit window.

185
Wavetable Synthesis

The sliders adjust the portion of audio that is manipulated,

leaving portions outside of the selection unchanged. The
amount of mangling that can occur in this editor is impres-
sive, along with the amount of fine tuning and smoothing
out. This editor is clearly the result of a team that has years of
experience working with wavetables and they have poured
that experience into an amazing interface that looks and
works great.

Oscillators and Mixer

The other welcome addition to Nave is an oscillator sec-
tion with traditional, simple waveforms. These can be used
on their own or to enhance a wavetable instrument. The
mixer is a good example of a smart-touch interface because
it fits into a very small footprint on the screen, but when

Figure 5.11 Nave mixer in

action.

186
 Wavetable Synthesis

you touch one of the options, then it grows to a significantly

larger fader with higher resolution data steps. They even
threw in a ring modulator between W1 and W2, and then
the Osc and W1.

Waves
There are two wavetables available and you can switch between
them by swiping up and down along the left edge. The layout
is clear about signal flow, and makes it easy to adjust modula-
tion sources and amounts. As you adjust the starting point for
wavetable playback, a red line moves across the 3D rendering.
Unfortunately, this isn’t animated during playback, but this is
likely due to limited resources on a tablet device.
Parameters such as travel are compounded with modulators
in the matrix, so if you are using both, then it is important to
keep track of what is being modulated. The spectrum section
is also able to receive modulation data and this can vastly
change the sound of the instrument at extreme settings.

Überwave
The Überwave option is used to double up on several of the
oscillator waveforms, much as the unison setting does on
many other synths. The density knob adds up eight total
duplicate voices, while the spread option detunes each of
them. These are great sounding oscillators and they can be
modulated, filtered, and processed in Nave just as you would
on any subtractive synth.

Figure 5.12 Überwave controls.

187
Wavetable Synthesis

Filter and Envelope Section

The rest of the sections are covered here in less detail because
many of them have fairly traditional parameters, so they are
covered in other chapters of this book. It is the less common
items, however, that are the focus of the next paragraphs. In
the filter and envelope section, there are three envelopes, one
filter, and a drive section. While perhaps it is a little uncom-
mon to have three envelopes, it’s certainly not unheard of,
and even the linear and exponential switches aren’t com-
pletely foreign, but are certainly less common.
It is the envelope looping function which is both interesting
and highly useful for synthesis. Looping the attack and decay
(AD) parameters for the amplitude envelope is something
that you may have accomplished previously using an LFO,
but this is different because you have access to a greater range
of options by looping the envelope. One warning: be careful
setting the release to its highest setting because there isn’t a
panic button to stop it and it will continue on regardless of
most attempts to stop it.
The drive effect is also very nice, but not revolutionary. It
is always helpful to have a processing option built into the
instrument itself for situations when performing live or when
you are too lazy to pull up an even better distortion proces-
sor. As with all of the other tools in Nave, this distortion
module is thought out and useful, while still being incredibly
streamlined and simple. It would be nice to have this module
as a destination for modulation sources, instead of keeping it
separated from everything else.

Figure 5.13 Nave filters and

envelopes.

188
 Wavetable Synthesis

Modulation and Keys Section

The section includes the LFOs, the modulation matrix, the
X-Y pad, and customization controls for the keyboard por-
tion of Nave. With ten matrix connections available, both
LFOs being full featured and the X-Y pad being pretty awe-
some, this is a section that you should be visiting fairly
often.

LFOs
The LFOs have the standard waveform offerings, with the
addition of a very useful sample and hold option. As dis-
cussed in previous chapters, sample and hold is often used
to sample noise at a predetermined rate to achieve a random
output signal. This is useful for creating random pitch or fil-
ter sequences in patches, but is also excellent at controlling
the wavetable mix levels.
The delay setting fades in the LFO over time, which creates
a slow pitch ramp when the LFO is set to control the pitch.
The phase parameter adjusts the start of the LFO so that it
either starts exactly at zero when triggered, or at any point in
the waveform. At a full setting, the phase option lets the LFO
run free regardless of when notes are triggered. This means
that when you play a note, the LFO might already be halfway
through its cycle. The sync options enable the LFOs to work
in tandem or reference the project grid, which is useful for
connecting through other apps (see Figure 5.18).

Figure 5.14 Nave modulation

and keys.

189
Wavetable Synthesis

Modulation
The modulation options are pretty straightforward and flex-
ible. When using the matrix, follow the listed steps to estab-
lish modulation connections.
1. Assign the modulation source.
2. Assign the modulation destination.
3. Press the power button.
4. Adjust the modulation level.

Keys
There are three different control options and it is highly rec-
ommended that you explore these to determine which one
you prefer the most. These don’t affect the controls of an
external MIDI controller, but they can potentially enrich your
Nave experience.
1. Traditional Keyboard—This option is the default and looks
just like a piano keyboard. The scroll mode is switchable so
that dragging a finger along the keys move the keys for dif-
ferent ranges. It can be set to glissando so that dragging a
finger plays the different notes. Changing ranges is limited
to the Mod & Keys page, and X-Y Touch, which provides
modulation control when fingers are moved across the keys.
2. The Blades—This is an alternate control method that is
loosely based off of Don Buchla’s synthesizer designs. By
leaving the tradition piano format behind, there is added
flexibility in assigning notes to blades, and developers
added chord and scale functionality.
3. X-Y Pads—This is a fun way to control Nave because it
maps multiple parameters onto separate pads that are easily

Figure 5.15 The blades.

190
 Wavetable Synthesis

accessible for playing using thumbs. There is a limitation

because you can’t trigger notes using them, which means
that you either have to use them in conjunction with an
external controller or use the arpeggiator in hold mode.

FX and Arp Section

This section contains excellent effects for sculpting the ulti-
mate patch. Here is a list of available effects:
• Phaser
• Flanger
• Chorus
• Stereo Delay
• Reverb
• Parametric EQ
• Compressor
In addition to these effects, there is also a very capable arpeg-
giator. One of the most enjoyable ways to test out modula-
tors is to turn on the arpeggiator in hold mode, and trigger a
pattern to start playing. After it starts, you can move to other
sections of Nave and make changes while still hearing the
original pattern as it responds to the new settings.

Tape and Sys Section

This section houses the master controls and a four-track
recorder. The biggest part of this section is the recorder,

Figure 5.16 Nave tape and

system.

191
Wavetable Synthesis

which is designed to look like a tape machine. There really

is no reason for the tape machine theme, but it is pretty cool
looking and it works adequately well. The biggest limitation
is that the recorder only records audio and not MIDI, which
means that whatever you record can’t be edited nearly as eas-
ily as MIDI. The biggest strength of this system is that you
can record the output of sounds and immediately use them
as the source of a new Nave instrument.
An even better option is to use Inter-App Audio and record
your Nave performance directly into an app like Garage-
band, which is capable of more than four tracks and has
enhanced editing and effects. Inter-App Audio has to be
developed into both the master and slave apps, and, when
connected, the tempos and transport are locked together.
When you press record in either app, the master app
records the audio into one of its tracks. This functionality

Figure 5.17 Inter-App Audio in

Garageband.

192
 Wavetable Synthesis

is immediately available with any apps that are Inter-App

Audio compatible.
Nave is also WIST compatible, which is another inter-app con-
nection protocol, but is less used now that iOS has Inter-App
Audio functionality. WIST was created by Korg and is useful
for syncing multiple instruments together over a wireless Blue-
tooth connection. Transport and tempo information are trans-
mitted and make it possible for both devices to play together.

MIDI
In this section, there is also a MIDI device menu and a MIDI
map menu. The device menu shows all currently connected
devices, including wireless connections, which is useful for
troubleshooting and establishing the MIDI clock. The map-
ping menu shows all currently mapped parameters and the
incoming Continuous Controller Messages (CC) that con-
trol them. Most parameters can be mapped to MIDI, even
when they are not in this menu. To add a new map connec-
tion, double click on any parameter in Nave and follow the
instructions that pop up. The double-click option is actually
a little annoying because, in many apps, double clicking on
a parameter resets it to the default value and, in Nave, there
isn’t an equivalent function.

Figure 5.18 Nave MIDI mapping.

193
Wavetable Synthesis

Nave Summary
Nave is an incredible app that brings serious sound design
and synthesis to a powerful, mobile environment. It would
certainly be tempting to buy an iPad just to have this instru-
ment, and is a clear reason to not buy any other tablets. Very
few other wavetable synthesizers provide as much power
and flexibility as Nave: it demonstrates what is possible
when a wavetable synthesizer is designed for a multitouch
experience.

Other Wavetable Instruments

Wavetable synthesis is going through somewhat of a renais-
sance of late, with a new instrument being released from
Waves, wavetable synthesis incorporated into several Nord
instruments, Waldorf continuing to develop new instru-
ments, and even MachFive incorporating it inside a sampler.
The power of wavetable synthesis is that it doesn’t neces-
sarily have its own sound and can sound like a lot of things
depending on the waves in the wavetable. Acoustic instru-
ments are perhaps the hardest to emulate using wavetables,
but there are plenty of other options for doing that.

Example Projects
Explaining projects for wavetable synthesis is tricky since
every instrument is different and has different waveforms. To
keep things manageable, the waveforms associated with each
wavetable are either readily available online or provided as
downloads at the official text website. You are also always
welcome to use your own recordings or files.

Recipe 1: Voice Patch

A favorite wavetable source is spoken or synthesized speech,
and instruments like Nave actually include a built-in speech
synthesizer. If the file is played at a normal rate without severe
modulation, then the words would remain recognizable.

194
 Wavetable Synthesis

Figure 5.19 Recipe 1 – Voice

Wavetable in Nave App.

When played as a single waveform at a time and then some-

times scanning through to other portions, you can achieve a
metallic or industrial type of sound that sometimes still has
elements of speech. There are very few other ways to achieve
this sound and using the X-Y pads live often has very pleas-
ing results.

Recipe 2: Hulusi Gourd

Reed instruments are excellent sources for wavetables
because they sound good when split into single cycles; and,
also, as the playback location is modulated, they also have
a very interesting sound. The hulusi is a tradition Chinese
instrument that has a unique, but familiar sound and is easy
to manipulate. The focus of this patch is in setting the LFO
modulators to control the wavetable performance.

Recipe 3: Arpeggiated Sawtooth

It might seem that manipulating a simple sawtooth with an
associating arpeggiator is better accomplished using the orig-
inal synth and arpeggiator, but if you export an audio of the
pattern, then there are some things you can accomplish as a
wavetable that greatly alter the original to make an entirely
new sound. The focus of this recipe is in modifying and mod-
ulating the travel parameter to enhance the arpeggiation and
even throw in a stutter effect.

195
Figure 5.20 Recipe 2 – The
Hulusi is a popular traditional
Chinese instrument and is
sampled for this Wavetable.
 Wavetable Synthesis

Figure 5.21 Recipe 3 – Using

Nave’s arpeggiator to create a
new Wavetable.

Recipe 4: Simple Waveform

Collection
This recipe uses a wavetable made of a collection of
single-cycle waveforms taken from all of the primary types.
The individual waves are not tied together, so it won’t make
as much sense to travel through them. Though, there are
some alternate uses of wavetables that don’t require as much
motion through them. The sound sources for the wavetable
are all recorded from vintage synths and the synth is used to
mix and match their sounds, while providing access to enve-
lopes and filters. The wavetable can still be swept through,
but don’t be surprised if you don’t like how it sounds. On
the other hand, it may be the exact sound you are looking for.

197
Figure 5.22 Recipe 4 – Cutting
single waveforms in Logic Pro X
to create a new Wavetable.

Recipe 5: Heavy Metal

This final recipe for the wavetable is based on sounds sam-
pled from metal objects. The sounds were edited and mixed
in a separate audio editor and then exported as a single file.

Figure 5.23 Recipe 5 –

Sampling a household item
as a source for a Wavetable.
 Wavetable Synthesis

The uniqueness of the source material mixed with the excit-

ing modulation of wavetable synthesis creates a sound you
won’t soon forget . . . it might haunt your dreams. The focus
of this recipe is to accomplish some seriously intense audible
madness.

Wavetable Synthesis Summary

Wavetable synthesis is one of the most interesting types of
synthesis because it is capable of so many different sounds
and sonic results. It can focus in on single cycles, or speed
up a file until it modulates into a completely different sound.
There are applications for this in almost every genre of music
and in both the studio and live performance. It is one of the
few synthesis types that by default has to live in the digital
world, and it makes good use of the functionality that lives in
the digital realm.

199
GRANULAR SYNTHESIS 6

Out of all the synthesis types covered in this book, granu-

lar synthesis is the newest to be implemented into commer-
cial synthesizers. This is not to say that granular synthesis
theory is new; on the contrary, granular synthesis theory has
its roots dating back to the sixteenth century. Implementing
granular synthesis, on the other hand, is very new indeed.
Granular synthesis had not been properly and commercially
introduced until the last decade or so. Granular synthesis is
often shrouded in mystery and, many times, granular syn-
thesists are not even completely sure how it works. This
synthesis type is often explained in vague terms and defini-
tions. This chapter will serve as a means of demystifying this
esoteric synthesis technique in hopes to convey its awesome
sound-generation capabilities.

What Is Granular Synthesis?

In its most basic form, granular synthesis is the means of
creating a single sound through a variety of extremely short
snippets of sampled audio called grains. Picture a roaring
crowd at a sports game. The sound emitting from the crowd
is heard as a roar, but it is in fact made up of individual dialog
and shouting happening all at once. In the same vein, think of
a digital picture. Although a digital picture is interpreted as a
single picture, it is in fact made up of a number of small, col-
ored dots known as pixels. The fact that we interpret a bunch
of incoherent dialog and shouting as a single roaring sound
or a variety of colored dots as a single picture is the core con-
cept behind granular synthesis. Like with crowds or digital
pictures, each grain in a granular synthesizer is unintelligible
by itself, but it is when it is combined with thousands of other
grains that it becomes a coherent, unified sound.

200
 Granular Synthesis

Because of the sheer number of grains and controls that are

necessary in order to create desired sounds using granular
synthesis, it has only become viable as a synthesis format
with the advent of computers and digital signal generation.
More accurately, it was not until computing power reached
a high enough point, about a decade ago, that granular syn-
thesis could truly be adopted. With computing power being
increased almost daily, granular synthesis will hopefully
become adopted more and more by sound designers and
composers in the near future.

Additive Synthesis vs. Granular

Synthesis
If reading the brief definition of granular synthesis above
sparked your memory of additive synthesis (covered in Chap-
ter 4) you’re not alone. In fact, many people actually confuse the
two forms of synthesis. It is easy to see the similarities of build-
ing a single sound with a large number of individual parts.
With additive synthesis, we use a number of individual sine
waves to create a single sound, while with granular synthesis,
we use a number of individual grains to do the same thing. So
how is granular synthesis different from additive synthesis?
The simple answer is that additive synthesis uses pure sine
waves that are added together to create a tone, while granular
synthesis uses a flurry sampled sounds to create a tone.

The Grain
We have made repeated mention of grains in reference to
granular synthesis. So what exactly is a grain? In short, a
grain is a single sound source with a designated duration that
will be combined with many other grains in order to make
a final sound using granular synthesis. A grain is similar in
theory to a harmonic or partial used in additive synthesis, but
the grain is typically much more complex.
The grain is the fundamental building block of granular syn-
thesis. Grains can be made up of any sound source imaginable.

201
Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.1 The grain and its

contents.

In a similar fashion to additive synthesis, granular grains can

contain a single sine wave. However, the beauty of granu-
lar synthesis is that it is not limited to sine waves, though
such is the case with additive synthesis. Besides sine waves,
a grain can be made up of any simple or complex waveform.
Sampled sounds are most often used for creating grains. This
means that any sound, be it a sampled voice, piano, explo-
sion, or siren, can make up a grain. When creating a grain,
there are two ways to go about it. The first way is to use short
snippets of sound that are the same duration of the individ-
ual grain. By doing this, the full length of the sample or syn-
thesized tone will be heard each time the grain sounds. The
second way involves using longer starting tones in order to
create a number of grains, with each grain being made up of
a different section of the sound. Although these two methods
may seem similar, they will produce very different results.
Another powerful attribute to grains is that they can be cre-
ated using sounds produced by any other forms of synthesis
such as FM or wavetable. Being able to create a grain from
any sound source desired is an extremely beneficial function.
Grains can also be created using white or any other color
noise. It is important to note that, by themselves, each grain
is rather insignificant and is oftentimes perceived as more of

202
 Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.2 Two approaches to

using sampled audio for grain
content.

a transient sound or “whoosh” when listened to indepen-

dently. As we will see later, it is when grains are combined
into what are known as granular populations that interesting
and desired sounds can be created.

Grain Duration
Once a sound source is decided upon for each grain, the
user must set a duration for the grain. Typically grains are
set to a duration between one and 50ms (milliseconds). As
we learned earlier, in order to interpret pitch, a sound must
be played for a minimum duration. Although we will not go
into the various mathematical formulas used to determine
these durations, it is important to know that typically, a mini-
mum length of 13ms is required for higher frequencies while
a minimum of 45ms is required for lower frequencies.
The duration of the grain is determined with an envelope
generator much like the ones used in the previous synthesis
formats. The term windowing is often used for adding a dura-
tion envelope onto individual grains. Grain envelopes have a
few parameters that call for adjusting and, although they act

203
Granular Synthesis

in similar fashions to the envelope parameters discussed in

previous chapters, it is important to discuss them in regards
to granular synthesis.

Amplitude
The amplitude parameter of a grain envelope generator
determines the max amplitude that the grain will sound at.
This control allows the user to designate how loud each grain
or granular population is in relation to the other grains.

Duration
The duration parameter determines the full duration of the
grain. As already stated, a grain can be anywhere between
one and a few hundred milliseconds in length. The duration
parameter of the grain’s envelope generator is what is used
to set this length.

Attack
Much like the envelope generators of other synthesis formats,
the attack time of a grain envelope determines the amount of
time it takes for the grain to reach full amplitude. The attack
time is extremely important in regards to granular synthesis
because it shapes the sound itself. When a sound makes a
sudden jump from 0dB to anything audible, a resulting dis-
torted transient will be heard that sounds much like a click
or pop. Because granular synthesis utilizes thousands of tiny
audio fragments, the risk of creating clicks and pops is very
great. Therefore the attack parameter of the grain’s envelope
generator is used in order to smooth out each grain as they
are heard.

Sustain
The sustain parameter of a grain’s envelope generator deter-
mines the amount of time the envelope remains at its maxi-
mum amplitude. At first glance, the sustain parameter may
seem to be performing the exact same function as the duration

204
 Granular Synthesis

parameter. Although they both ultimately affect the length of

the grain heard, they are two different controls and special
care must be taken in order to ensure they are not fighting
against each other.

Decay
The decay parameter of a grain’s envelope generator deter-
mines the amount of time it takes for the sound to fall back to
an inaudible level. Like with the attack parameter, the decay
parameter is crucial for eliminating audible clicks and pops
when the sound falls back down to 0dB.

A Few Forms of Granular Synthesis

Although granular synthesis is a single-sound generation
format, there are at least two different ways of achieving
granular synthesis. These two formats are known as synchro-
nous and asynchronous granular synthesis. In synchronous
granular synthesis, grains are added to the overall sound tex-
ture at exact repeating intervals, or periods. In asynchronous
granular synthesis, the rate of the grains is randomized. Syn-
chronous granular synthesis is more easily controllable and
is therefore used often to create the exact, desired sounds.
Because of the randomization inherent with asynchronous
granular synthesis, it is most often employed to create rich,
evolving, interesting textures that might not have been origi-
nally intended.
Although these are the two main forms of granular synthesis,
a third form known as quasi-synchronous granular synthe-
sis may be employed. This third form is really just a median
between the two forms and allows the user some randomness
without going full asynchronous.
Whether using synchronous or asynchronous granular syn-
thesis, a user will typically have a few functions they can con-
trol in order to craft the sound. Although the functions will
be the same in both synchronous and asynchronous granular
synthesis, the effect they will have will be slightly different.

205
Granular Synthesis

Pitch
The first and most important parameter that will need to
be determined is the pitch of the sound. Typically, pitch is
determined by the various sample rates grains are played
back at. For example, a sound sampled at 48kHz played back
on a granular synthesizer at 44.1kHz will be lower in pitch.
Likewise, a sample recoded at 48kHz played back at 96kHz
will be higher in pitch. The keys on a keyboard will corre-
spond with different sample rates in order to spread different
pitches across the keyboard. Although traditional, Western,
12-tone increments are most often used, microtonal tunings
are also possible when using granular synthesis.

Grain Density
The grain density control is what determines the amount
of grains spread in the sound spectrum at a given point of
time. In other words, grain density determines the amount of
grains that will be heard per second. The grain density control
is one of the more dramatic timbre-shaping controls in all of
granular synthesis. When using synchronous granular syn-
thesis, grain density will affect the overall timbre, amplitude,
and pitch of the sound. As the grain density increases, the
complexity of the sound will increase. The amplitude of the
sound will also increase with greater grain density. Rhythmic
effects can also be created simply by lowering the grain den-
sity to around 20 to 30 grains per second.
Grain density will yield slightly different results when
using asynchronous granular synthesis. Because asynchro-
nous granular synthesis spreads grains across the spectrum
in a random-like manner, much more complex and unpre-
dictable sounds can be created. Pitch, for example, will not
change with grain density when using asynchronous granu-
lar synthesis. If one were to set the grain density to, say, 120
grains per second, then 120 grains would randomly be placed
in the texture in that second rather than them playing in a
repetitive manner. Therefore, pitch will not be related to the

206
 Granular Synthesis

grain density feature. Like with synchronous granular syn-

thesis, rhythmic effects can be obtained by lowering the grain
density when using asynchronous granular synthesis.

Putting It All Together

So now that we have discussed what makes up a grain, let’s
examine how to control the sound as a whole. Based off the
quantum theory of sound discussed earlier in the chapter,
we can see that we do not interpret the sounds created using
granular synthesis as individual sound samples played in
succession, but rather as a complete cohesive sound. This is
mainly due to the short durations of the grains, as well as
how they are placed into the texture.

Grain Order
An important thing to note when using granular synthesis is
the order of the individual grains. When creating sounds, the
order that the grains are placed will make a considerable dif-
ference over the sound as a whole. One method when using
sound samples is to have the grains organized in an order
that matches the sample. For instance, if using a long sample
with many grains, each grain containing a small splice of the
sample, the grains must be placed in an order that would
allow them to reproduce the full sound sample accurately.
This means that grains consisting of splices from the begin-
ning of the sample would be placed before grains consisting
of splices from later in the samples and so on. Maintaining a
grain order that matches the original sound sample, however,
is not mandatory and, in fact, many extremely innovative and
random sounds can be achieved by not using the exact order.

Grain Stream
The discussion thus far has been concentrated on single
grains and groups of grains known as grain populations.
Using a single grain population, however, can yield a very
basic and uninteresting sound. Because of this, it is necessary

207
Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.3 Grains consisting of

segments of sampled audio can be
arranged in their original order or
in a random manner.

to incorporate multiple grain populations together into what

are known as streams. In essence, a grain stream can be lik-
ened to a guitar part being doubled or tripled on a recording.
With each pass of the same guitar part, new elements will be
added to the sound as a whole, creating one comprehensive,
interesting part.

208
 Granular Synthesis

The individual grain populations in each stream can be made

with various means, but most typically, each sound sample
will be used for each corresponding stream, meaning that
the first stream will contain grains obtained through a single
sound sample while the second stream will contain grains
made using a second sound sample. It is important to note
that each granular synthesizer may have a different naming
scheme for grain streams and populations and also might
have different ways of controlling grain populations and
streams. We’ll take a look later on in the chapter at some of
the most popular granular synthesizers available and look at
their functions and naming schemes in depth.

Grain Playback Speed

Once grains are determined and created, the speed at which
these grains are played back will make a significant differ-
ence in the overall timbre of the sound. At slower playback
speeds, granular synthesis is capable of producing some of
the eeriest, unique, and interesting soundscapes. At faster
playback speeds, more novel notes and synth parts begin to
take shape until turning into utter chaos and distortion at
the highest of playback rates. Adjusting the playback speed
of the grains, grain populations, or grain streams is one of
the most effective ways of changing timbre using granular
synthesis.

Problems Inherent
in Granular Synthesis
It can be seen based off of the information covered thus far
that granular synthesis requires a lot of fine tuning to say the
least. When considering the number of controls that must be
determined for each grain, and then multiplying that number
by the number of grains that will be used, the sheer number
of controls becomes daunting. For this reason, many granular
synthesizers will feature complex algorithms to do much of
this work for the user.

209
Granular Synthesis

Borrowed Synthesis
As is the case with most synthesis formats these days, mod-
ern granular synthesizers will typically offer parameters
that should be familiar to the user, such as filters, LFOs, and
envelope generators. Although using these types of controls
is not technically part of the granular synthesis process, they
are included to aid sound generation. These other synthesis
controls will work much in the same way as they do with
other synthesis formats in order to achieve desired, predict-
able results.

A Note on Formant Synthesis

Although not directly related to granular synthesis, a brief
understanding of formant synthesis is required in order to
utilize the full potential of many granular synthesizers. For-
mant synthesis is based around the science of formants, or
spectral peaks of the acoustic instruments. Formant synthe-
sis is most closely related to physical modeling synthesis, but
is its own synthesis format none the less. Formant synthesis
is most commonly used to create vocal-like sounds akin to
speech. Formant synthesis employs a series of complex band
pass filters in order to mimic naturally occurring formants.
The type of filters used in formant synthesis, known as for-
mant filters, will often be employed on granular synthesiz-
ers. Because granular synthesizers almost exclusively exist
in the software realm, formant filters are an easy addition to
a granular synthesizer in order to maximize sound-creation
potential. It is important to note prior to delving into formant
filters that they are not a granular synthesis parameter but,
instead, a parameter found on certain granular synthesizers.

Formant Filter
Formants are, in essence, resonances in the human voice that
designate aspects of timbre. A formant filter utilizes a series
of narrow, band pass filters in an attempt to mimic these reso-
nances. A formant filter will typically allow a user to morph

210
 Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.4 Grendel formant filter.

the sound between a series of set formants with various

means of control, such as LFOs and envelope generators. For-
mant filters can be extremely beneficial on granular synthe-
sizers because they add a depth to the sound creation process
that cannot be reproduced through any other means.

The Complex Granular Synthesis

Environment
Granular synthesis is most usually used as an all-
encompassing term for a variety of similar synthesis formats.
Any synthesis format that utilizes sampled audio in order to
create short snippets of sound, and then plays them back at
varying speeds and frequencies while layering other snip-
pets of audio, is typically referred to as granular synthesis.

211
Granular Synthesis

However, there are a few other forms of synthesis that use

similar principles for sound creation, but are not technically
granular synthesis.

Wavelet Synthesis
Wavelet synthesis is often confused with granular synthesis.
Although the two synthesis formats are extremely similar,
they are in fact two separate synthesis formats and merit a
discussion. Like granular synthesis, wavelet synthesis utilizes
individual grains that, when combined, create sound. Unlike
granular synthesis however, wavelet synthesis has strict rules
for its grains. In granular synthesis, individual grains can be
of any length and playback speed where as in wavelet synthe-
sis, grain duration and speed are directly related to the pitch
of the grain. Therefore, wavelet synthesis offers less flexibility
and customization than granular synthesis. Often thought of
as yet another synthesis format all together, grainlet synthesis
(which is talked about much less often) is, in actuality, just
another term for wavelet synthesis.

Glisson Synthesis
Out of all of the synthesis formats confused with granular
synthesis, glisson synthesis is perhaps the most similar. Glis-
son synthesis is almost identical to granular synthesis in that
it consists of individual grains, each derived from sampled
audio, and played back at various speeds and with different
combinations. The main and only difference between glis-
son synthesis and granular synthesis is that glisson synthe-
sis modifies its individual grains with the use of glissando or
glide type effects.

Pulsar Synthesis
Pulsar synthesis is extremely similar to granular synthesis in
that thousands of individual sounds are combined together
in order to create an end sound. Because of this similarity,
it is understandable that it is often confused with granular

212
 Granular Synthesis

synthesis. In actuality, pulsar synthesis is considered a form

or particle synthesis. Pulsar synthesis utilizes impulse gen-
erators in order to create its individual sounds, known as
pulsars. Besides using impulse generators to create its start-
ing sounds, pulsar synthesis is nearly identical to granular
synthesis.

Sample-Based Synthesis vs. Granular

Synthesis
Up to this point, we have constantly mentioned the use of
sampled audio in regard to the content of grains. So what
then is the difference between sample-based synthesis and
granular synthesis if they both make use of samples and sam-
pling? The answer lies in the way the samples are utilized. In
sample-based synthesis, entire sound samples are typically
used in order to mimic the sound of a particular instrument,
or to be able to modulate, mangle, and mutate a sound of
your choosing. In granular synthesis, however, extremely
short samples, or extremely small snippets of samples are
used. When used in this way, the resulting sound coming out
of the synthesizer will most often not sound anything like the
sample being used. Samples are used just as a means to create
grain content.
While we’re on the subject, let’s examine some ways in which
sampled audio can be used in granular synthesis. The first
most common technique is to create a number of grains from
a single audio sample. Imagine a pianist striking an octave on
the lower register of the piano and letting the sound ring out.
The sound will begin extremely rich and with high amplitude
when the hammers first strike the strings. Once the hammer
strikes the string, the sound will then fade down to the reso-
nating strings until it is finally inaudible.
If we had this sound as a sample and loaded it into a gran-
ular synthesizer, we could then chop this sample up into a
large number of small, 1–50ms samples. If we simply played
back each of these small samples in rapid succession, and in

213
Granular Synthesis

order, we’d get something that sounded similar to our origi-

nal sample.

However, granular synthesis not only allows us to slow

down or speed up the playback speed of our samples, but
also allows these new samples to be played back out of order,
resulting in extremely interesting sounds. What is more, we
can create grain populations and grain streams with these
samples, meaning we can combine individual samples while
adjusting their playback speeds, resulting in something that
sounds nothing like the original piano strike we started with.
Here lies the true power of granular synthesis. Truly inspir-
ing sounds can be created using this format that cannot be
created otherwise.

Another technique for incorporating samples into granular

synthesis is beautifully employed by Daft Punk on the track
“Robot Rock/Oh Yeah” on of the album Alive 2007. As the
song opens, two odd, robotic sounds are heard in succession
to each other. As the song progresses, the two sounds seem to
morph into faintly comprehendible words as they speed up.
Then as the two sounds reach their maximum speed, the two
sounds are no longer heard as musical tones, but instead are
heard as the spoken words robot and human. Daft Punk accom-
plishes this effect through the means of granular synthesis.

In order to create this effect, samples of the words robot and

human were taken from the songs “Robot Rock” and “Human
after All,” respectively. Then, using granular synthesis, the
samples were split into a large number of short samples, or
grains. In the case of robot, individual samples would be cre-
ated for each letter resulting in R-O-B-O-T. Once each letter
is split into individual grains, the word can be elongated by
looping each grain resulting in RRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOO
OOOBBBBBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTT. Each subse-
quent time the phrase is played, the number of times each
grain is looped reduces, resulting in the phrase finally
being intelligible as a word instead of a sound. As we will
explore in the next section, this same technique is employed

214
 Granular Synthesis

in the tempo-shifting technology found in software such as

Ableton Live.

Granular Synthesis in Various Technologies

Granular Synthesis technology is not only limited to use in
synthesizers. On the contrary, many other devices utilize
granular synthesis. Although these other technologies are
not strictly related to granular synthesizers, they are used in
many facets of music production.

Time Stretching
In the recording studio, being able to shorten or lengthen a
segment of audio or change its tempo is an absolute must.
In years past, when recording on analog tape, changing a
piece of audio’s speed was accomplished by physically slow-
ing down or speeding up the magnetic tape. By changing the
playback speed of the tape, the pitch of the audio was invari-
ably altered—becoming higher or lower in pitch as the tape
was sped up or slowed down respectively.
There was no real way to change the tempo without changing
the pitch. In modern digital audio workstations, or DAWs,
such as Pro Tools, Logic, or Ableton, this is not the case. Being
able to manipulate the tempo of recorded audio while main-
taining its relative pitch is not only common, but is heavily
used. So how then how is this accomplished? The answer lies
in granular synthesis.
Time-stretching plug-ins utilize granular synthesis in order
to maintain pitch while warping tempo. Let’s examine the
time-stretching capabilities in Avid’s Pro Tools. When elongat-
ing a section of audio, the software will find repeating wave
shapes and loop them for a set amount of time. By creating
short loops, the software is able to elongate the piece of audio
as long as the user desires while maintaining its original pitch.
Likewise, when shortening an audio clip, the software will
detect repeating wave shapes and delete them, allowing for

215
Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.5 Granular synthesis

is used in modern, digital,
time-stretching plug-ins.

shorter duration while maintaining pitch. The software is

effectively using granular synthesis because it is adding or
subtracting small snippets of sampled audio. The software
will also add envelopes to each piece of audio in order to
avoid clicks and pops in the same way that it is done in gran-
ular synthesizers. It should be noted, however, that extreme
shortening or lengthening of audio will result in sound arti-
facts, so it is best used in small changes rather than large ones.

216
 Granular Synthesis

Relative Pitch Shifting

Like with time stretching, most digital audio workstations
will allow users to alter the pitch of a recorded segment of
audio while maintaining the audio’s tempo. As mentioned
above, pitch and duration are linked together thanks to the
laws of physics. Therefore, shifting pitch higher or lower
will result in faster and slower audio, respectively. Granu-
lar synthesis allows this law to be shattered. Using the same
time-stretching technique, modern DAWs will duplicate or
delete small snippets of repeating waveforms in order to
maintain tempo while altering pitch. When raising pitch, the
software will raise the pitch traditionally and then duplicate
repeating waveforms in order to bring the new, shorter audio
clip back to its original length.
Likewise when lowering pitch, the software will pitch shift
the audio down and then delete repeating waveforms on the
new, longer audio clip to bring it back to its original duration.
Similarly to time stretching, extreme pitch altering will result
in audible artifacts, so it is best used in moderation.
Software such as Auto-tune, Melodyne, and Ultra-pitch all
utilize granular synthesis in order to perform their respec-
tive functions. Had it not been for granular synthesis and its
subsequent experiments and implementations, we might not
have the time-stretching and pitch-shifting capabilities that
we now rely on every day.

Granular Synthesis in Action

Now that we have covered the logistics of granular synthe-
sis, let’s take a look at some of the synthesizers available that
feature granular synthesis. As mentioned earlier, granular
synthesis typically needs a software environment to flourish
and, therefore, there are virtually no hardware granular syn-
thesizers, save for a few workstation synths that are capable
of performing a small amount of granular synthesis. Because
of this, all of the synthesizers we will cover in this section are
solely software based.

217
Granular Synthesis

Camel Audio Alchemy

Alchemy is a powerful, multisynthesis software instrument.
Although Alchemy features an impressive array of synthesis
formats, the granular synthesis section of Alchemy is where it
really shines. Alchemy creates its grains from user-imported
or preinstalled .AIFF or .WAV files. Grain length is variable
from 2ms to 230ms. Once grains are determined, Alchemy
allows users to shape the grain through their window fea-
ture. In essence, Alchemy’s grain window is an envelope and
amplitude setting. Once this is determined, users can modify
the grain’s overall pitch and pan settings.
Alchemy offers users extremely useful time and pitch
manipulation tools for further sonic mayhem. Using
Alchemy’s time-stretching tool, users are able to play back
grains at slower and faster speeds, without affecting pitch,
by utilizing the technique covered in the time-stretching
section of this chapter. One interesting feature Alchemy
offers in its time-stretching section is the ability to freeze
samples at any given point. This is done by extracting a
number of grains from a determined section of the sample
and looping them.

Figure 6.6 Camel Audio Alchemy

synthesizer.

218
 Granular Synthesis

Likewise, Alchemy offers users advanced pitch-shifting capa-

bilities. Users can raise or lower pitch without affecting grain
playback speed. The ability to alter pitch without affecting
grain playback speed has become an absolute must for gran-
ular synthesizers and Alchemy does not disappoint in this
regard.
Alchemy is a powerful granular synthesizer and has unof-
ficially become the industry’s standard granular synthesizer
since its inception. Artists like Trent Reznor, Charlie Clouser,
and Phaeleh make great use of Alchemy and it can be heard
on some of their most influential tracks.

CrusherX-Live!
CrusherX-Live! is a granular synthesizer in the most tradi-
tional sense of the word. It is based around the granular syn-
thesis theories of Xenakis, Roads, and Wilkins—three of the
early granular pioneers. CrusherX-Live! offers users the abil-
ity to determine grain duration and envelopes. One unique
feature on the CrusherX-Live! software is its floating buffer,
which allows for real-time inputs and outputs. This is espe-
cially impressive since many granular synthesizers do not
typically offer real-time playability. The designers behind
CrusherX-Live! designed the software to not only be used as
a standalone synthesizer, but also as a powerful effects unit in
the modern DAW environment.

Figure 6.7 CrusherX-Live!

synthesizer.

219
Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.8 Symbolic Sound

Kyma X synthesizer.

Symbolic Sound Kyma X

Kyma X is an advanced audio editing and synthesis tool
designed for musicians and sound designers alike. When
using Kyma X, users are provided with over one thousand
synthesis algorithms and synthesis-based effects. Users can
audition each preset with onboard sampled audio. Each syn-
thesis algorithm can be fully adjusted and manipulated by
the user. Kyma X has been used by sound designers Ben Burtt
and Gary Rydstrom in the movies Wall-E and Finding Nemo,
respectively.

Propellerhead Malstrom Graintable

Synthesizer
Propellerhead offers a hugely powerful granular synthesizer
for their Reason software called the Malstrom Graintable Syn-
thesizer. What is a Graintable, you ask? Well, Propellerhead
explains it as a hybrid granular/wavetable synthesizer. In
essence, Malstrom allows for traditional granular synthesis
while combining the awesome power of wavetable synthesis.

Figure 6.9 Propellerhead

Malstrom synthesizer.

220
 Granular Synthesis

By combining these two synthesis formats, extremely com-

plex sounds can be created that must be heard in order to
understand their full potential. In addition to its powerful
synthesis engine, Malstrom also offers users extreme mod-
ulation possibilities as well as most filter types one could
wish for.

Image-Line Granulizer
The engineers at Image-Line also offer their own granular
synthesizer for their FL Studios software. The Granulizer is
a traditional but powerful granular synthesizer. When using
Granulizer, users load in their own sound samples in order to
attain grains. Although Granulizer is a fairly traditional gran-
ular synthesizer, Image-Line offers a few helpful innovations
that make Granulizer stand out amongst some of the other
granular synthesizers on the market in regards to playability.
The two biggest innovations are the inclusion of fully auto-
mated and routable grain spacing and wave spacing wheels.
The grain spacing wheel controls the spacing of individual

Figure 6.10 Image-Line

Granulizer synthesizer.

221
Granular Synthesis

grains during playback, while the wave spacing wheel con-

trols the amount of grains generated from the sound sam-
ple. Having these two controls at your fingertips on a MIDI
controller allows for much greater real-time control than is
offered on many other granular synthesizers.

Max/MSP
Rather than being a synthesizer in the traditional sense, Max/
MSP is a visual programming language environment that is
often utilized by musicians. Using the Max software, users can
create almost any audio device imaginable, ranging from sim-
ple oscillators to signal meters, all the way up to complex, mul-
tiengine synthesizers. The Max/MSP software is modular in
that users create small pieces of code that serve specific func-
tions that are then connected to other similar pieces of code.
Max/MSP can be used to create granular synthesizers. The
unique thing about Max/MSP is that a granular synthesizer
created inside the software can technically be as complex as
the user is willing to create so long as computer power permits.

Figure 6.11 Max/MSP

programming environment.

222
 Granular Synthesis

Recipes
Granular synthesis is a fairly new technology. Because of this,
it is not met with the same standards that years of research
and performing has granted synthesis formats such as sub-
tractive and frequency modulation. Therefore, many of the
granular synthesizers available today are completely differ-
ent from one another in reference to their capabilities. That
being said, the parameters discussed throughout this chap-
ter are likely to be found on most granular synthesizers, just
perhaps in different configurations. Due to this, we have
chosen to create our recipes on the synthesizer Alchemy by
Camel Audio. Alchemy’s granular environment is one of
the best currently offered and features most, if not all, of the
parameters mentioned in this chapter. Let’s quickly discuss
Alchemy’s capabilities as well as a brief outline of how to use
it before delving into the creation of the recipes.

The Interface
When launching Alchemy, the default screen that appears
is the browser window. Using the browser window, users can
scroll through hundreds of presets in order to gain an under-
standing of what the synthesizer is capable of. The next screen
that can be loaded is known as the simple window. Using the

Figure 6.12 The Alchemy

advanced window.

223
Granular Synthesis

simple window, users can have access to a few select param-

eters as well as performance control functions. The main win-
dow to become familiar with, though, is the advanced window.
The advanced window is the main window to use for sound
creation. Each sound source is displayed with each control
available: filtering, modulation, envelope generators, and
amplifier sections are all visible as well as an in-depth modu-
lation matrix. Morph pads and various performance control
features like sequencers, arpeggiators, and effects are also
available in this screen. Let’s now go “under the hood” and
see how to use Alchemy in reference to granular synthesis.

Sound Sources
Alchemy offers four sound sources, A, B, C, and D, which can
be combined and fully modulated. By default, each sound
source is switched to sawtooth waves, and only sound source
A is engaged. By clicking on black space to the right of the
sound source letter, the type of sound can be selected.
When dealing with granular synthesis, we will be utilizing
sampled audio. This means that we will select either the “load
audio” or “import audio” tab. Using the “import audio” tab,
one can load any sample that one wishes for granular manipu-
lation. For our recipes however, we have stuck to the on-board
audio files in order for you to follow along if you happen to
have access to Alchemy. Once a sample is selected, we can go
in and manipulate said sample by clicking the corresponding
sound source letter directly above the sound source.

Figure 6.13 Alchemy’s sound

source view.

224
 Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.14 Sound source

expanded view.

Once inside the manipulation section, the “granular” box

should be engaged and lit up blue. Once it’s engaged, a vari-
ety of granular controls become available. These controls
include grain volume, grain size, grain density, window,
RTime, and RPan.

Grain Volume, Size, and Density

The grain volume, size, and density controls allow the user to
manipulate these functions. Grain volume adjusts the level of
individual grains, grain size controls the length of each grain,
and the grain density controls how the grains are dispersed.
Besides grain volume, grain size will yield the most audible
results with the sound becoming more distorted and less rec-
ognizable, in terms of pitch, when the length is shortened.

Window
The grain window control allows users to select the envelope
shape that will be placed on each grain. The selections are
Hann, Needle, Ramp Down, Ramp Up, Rectangle, Trapezoid,
Triangle, Tukey05, and Tukey05e. Each will yield slightly dif-
ferent results with Needle, Ramp Down, and Ramp Up pro-
ducing the most noticeable.

Figure 6.15 Grain volume, size,

and density controls.

225
Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.16 Window shape

selection.

Figure 6.17 RTime and RPan

controls.

RTime and RPan

The RTime and RPan controls allow the user to set random
time and pan changes to the individual grains. As one
increases the RPan level, individual grains will rhythmi-
cally bounce from left to right, causing extremely pleasing
effects.

Modulation Matrix
Alchemy features one of the most useful and complex modu-
lation matrixes available. The modulation matrix view has
five pull-down menus allowing for five individual modula-
tion sources for each destination. When setting a modula-
tion source and destination, one simply clicks on the desired

226
 Granular Synthesis

Figure 6.18 Alchemy’s

modulation matrix.

destination which then changes the modulation matrix view

showing the five sources corresponding to that particular
destination. Modulation sources include:
• LFOs
• AHDSR (Attack, Hold, Decay, Sustain, Release) envelope
generators
• Multiple Segment envelope generators
• Sequencers
• A variety of note properties (velocity, key follow, aftertouch, etc.)
• MIDI controller CC messages
Each knob in the advanced screen can be assigned five, sepa-
rate modulation sources. This is nothing short of amazing.
What is more, the numbers of LFOs, envelope generators,
sequencers, etc. are endless, meaning each parameter can be
modulated by five discreet envelope generators. In essence,

Figure 6.19 Modulation controls.

227
Granular Synthesis

pitch can be modulated by five independent envelope gen-

erators; grain size can be modulated by five more indepen-
dent envelope generators, etc. The modulation possibilities
offered in Alchemy are literally endless.
Once a modulation source is selected, the modulation
manipulation section of the interface can be used to custom-
ize the source of modulation. This is the section that will be
used to set the parameters of envelope generators, set LFO
speed, etc.

Master Section
The final section we will use with the granular synthesis
engine is the Master section. In the Master section, we can set
things like overall glide, voices of polyphony, main level, and
panning, as well as course and fine tuning. Again, like every-
thing else in Alchemy, all parameters of the Master section can
be modulated by simply clicking a parameter and setting its
five, discreet modulation sources.
Now that we have covered the basics of Alchemy’s granular
synthesis engine, let’s dive into the recipes we created for this
book and discuss how we created them.

Figure 6.20 Alchemy’s Master

section.

228
 Granular Synthesis

Recipe 1: Cinematic Tension Pad

The first recipe in our list is a slowly evolving cinematic-type
pad. During its evolution, dissonant metallic sounds and
shimmering midrange synth drones rise and fall. The recipe
itself remains interesting and exciting throughout a long time
period with only one note held. We began this patch by load-
ing three Alchemy audio files: “Feedback-E1,” “MAX-Grain-
Ambience-Maj-A2,” and “DarkSpace-C2.” Inside of the
“Feedback-E1” sample, we set the panning a small amount
to the left and the grain volume turned all the way up. The
grain size was fairly long with the size knob set to around
175ms. Next, the density was set to seven grains each with a
trapezoid-shaped window. Finally, RTime was set to around
75% and RPan was completely disabled. Moving onto the
“MAX-Grain-Ambience-Maj-A2” sample, grain volume was
turned fully up while grain size was set to around 120ms.
Grain density was set to one grain, causing it to sound quite
distorted with a trapezoid-shaped window. RTime was set
to about 48%, while RPAn was set to around 82%. Next, the
“DarkSpace-C2” sample featured a full grain volume and
about a 112ms grain length. The grain density however, was
set to five grains with a rectangular-shaped window. Finally,
RTime and RPan were both set to around 48%. Lastly, a single
envelope generator was used to control the amplifiers output

Figure 6.21 Screenshots of

Cinematic Tension Pad patch.

229
Granular Synthesis

featuring a slight 0.001-second attack, full sustain, and a

0.37-second release.

Recipe 2: Pleasantly Dissonant Pad

The second recipe on our list is actually a fairly elegant
sounding, subtly percussive pad with an evolving disso-
nant quality to it. It was created using three Alchemy sound
samples: “FlightOfAngels-Min-D2,” “Dark Emulation,” and
“DeepSpiral-C1.” The “FlightOfAngels-Min-D2” sample
featured a fully cranked grain volume and around a 180ms
grain length. The grain density was set to four grains, each
with a shaped window. Finally, RTime was completely disen-
gaged while RPan was set to around 62%. The “Dark Emula-
tion” sample featured a slightly lower grain volume (right
around 1.75dB) with a grain size of around 114ms. Grain
density was set to six grains with a Tukey05 window shape
as well. Finally, RTime was set to around 42%, while RPan
was set to around 40%. The “DeepSpiral-C1” sample featured
around a 8.3dB grain volume, which was being modulated
by an envelope generator set to have full sustain and release.
The grain size was set to around 114ms with a density of five
grains. Each grain featured a Tukey05 window shape. Finally,
both RTime and RPan were completely disabled. The overall

Figure 6.22 Screenshots of

Pleasantly Dissonant Pad patch.

230
 Granular Synthesis

amplifier featured an identical envelope to the third sound

source’s grain volume envelope in that both sustain and
release were set to 100%. Finally, the amplifier envelope fea-
tured a 0.001-second attack time.

Recipe 3: Plucked Ambient Thump

The third recipe we created features a heavy pluck sound,
which reminds one of the lowest string on a steel string bari-
tone acoustic guitar being strongly plucked with a metal
pick. Blurred sounds seem to emanate from the plucked
sound almost like it was being fed through a slow, motion
delay-type effect. The sound is comprised of four Alchemy
samples: “Autoharp-C1,” “Violin-Pizz-A2,” “FB01-Eqota,”
and “Clavinet-C0.” The “Autoharp-C1” sample is set to full
grain volume and a grain size of around 145ms. The grain
density was set to seven grains with a trapezoid-shaped win-
dow. RTime was set to around 67% and RPan was set to 100%.
Moving onto the “Violin-Pizz-A2” sample, grain volume was
set to full volume, while grain size was set just short of full
at around 216ms. Grain density was set to five grains, each
with a Tukey05 window shape. Finally, RTime was com-
pletely disengaged, while RPan was almost fully engaged at
around 85%. The “FB01-Eqota” sample featured an almost
full grain volume set to around 2.75dB with a grain size of
around 170ms. The grain density was set to full with ten

Figure 6.23 Screenshots of

Plucked Ambient Thump patch.

231
Granular Synthesis

grains, each with a Tukey05 window shape. RTime was set

to around 60%, while RPan was set to around 94.5%. Finally,
the “Clavinet-C0” sample featured full grain volume, a grain
size of 165ms, full grain density, Tukey05 window shape and
RTime and RPan settings of about 46 and 39%, respectively.
A sine wave LFO set to 1/4Beat Sync was routed to the RPan
level of sound source D, Grain volume of sound source C,
and both RTime and RPan of sound source B. Lastly, a basic
amplifier envelope with 100% sustain, 0.37-second release,
and 0.001-second attack times was set.

Recipe 4: Tyrell Corporation Pad

The fourth recipe was meant to mimic some of the synth
sounds found in the favorite movie of one of the authors—Blade
Runner. The sound is made up of three Alchemy samples:
“BubbleWorld-C2,” “Smear Atmo C2,” and “Trombone-C1.”
The “BubbleWorld-C2” sample featured a full grain volume
and around a 115ms grain size. The grain density was set to
five grains with trapezoidal windows. Both RTime and RPan
were set to 0%. The “Smear Atmo C2” sample featured full
grain volume, size, and density, with a Tukey05 window
shape. Finally, RTime and RPan were set to 70 and 90%,
respectively. The “Trombone-C1” sample had a full grain vol-
ume with a grain size of around 200ms. The grain density
is set to eight grains with triangle-shaped windows. Finally,
RTime and RPan are set to 36 and 60%, respectively. Lastly,

Figure 6.24 Screenshots of

Tyrell Corporation Pad patch.

232
 Granular Synthesis

an envelope generator with full sustain and release param-

eters with a 0.001-second attack is routed to the synthesizers
amplifier.

Recipe 5: Low Burst Pad

The fifth recipe in our list is interesting in that it utilizes a sam-
ple of a human laugh to create a low, weird effect that pans
from speaker to speaker via LFO modulation. Then, three
low brass samples are played to create a sinister low growl.
The sound consists of four Alchemy samples: “Tuba-C0,”
“Trombone (sfz),” “Trombone-C1,” and “Jonni-Laugh.” The
“Tuba-C0” sample featured full grain volume and size with
a grain density of nine grains each with a RampDown win-
dow shape. Finally the RTime and RPan controls were set at
about 32 and 84%, respectively. The “Trombone (sfz)” sample
consisted of a full grain volume and a grain size of around
207ms. The grain density was set to eight grains with a trape-
zoid window shape. RTime and RPan were set to 18 and 72%,
respectively. The “Trombone-C1” featured full grain volume,
size, and density with a triangle-shaped grain window. The
RTime was set to 68%, while the RPan was cranked up to 100%.
The final sample, “Jonni-Laugh,” featured full grain volume

Figure 6.25 Screenshots of Low

Burst Pad patch.

233
Granular Synthesis

with a grain size of around 189ms. Grain density was set to

nine grains with a Tukey05 window shape. Finally, RTime
was fully engaged, while RPan was set to around 92%. A sine
wave LFO was set to around 0.28Hz and was modulating the
pan control on the “Jonni-Laugh” sample. It should be noted
that the LFO was set to “TRIGGER,” meaning that each time
a key was pressed, the LFO would restart its cycle. Finally,
an envelope generator with a 0.001 second attack and fully
cranked sustain and release parameters was set to module
the amplifier and each grain volumes of sound sources A, B,
and C.

Recipe 6: Glistening Auto-Harp

Although not utilizing an auto-harp sample, the sixth recipe
in our list is reminiscent of the instrument with an added
cosmic flair. The sound consists of three Alchemy samples:
“014-SantoBrasil,” “Sitar (sfz),” and “dw8-bars (sfz).” The
“014-SantoBrasil” sample featured full grain volume with
a grain size of around 115ms. The grain density was set to
four grains with a Tukey05 window shape. Both RTime and
RPan were completely disengaged. The “Sitar (sfz)” sample
featured full grain volume with a fairly short grain size at

Figure 6.26 Screenshots of

Glistening Auto-Harp patch.

234
 Granular Synthesis

around 16ms. Grain density was set to full with a Tukey05

window shape. Finally, RTime was set to around 68% with
RPan completely disengaged. The “dw8-bars (sfz)” sample
featured full grain volume, size, and density with a Tukey05
window shape. Both RTime and RPan were set to 100%.
A basic envelope generator with a 0.001-second attack, 100%
sustain, and full release was routed to the grain volume of the
“Sitar (sfz)” sample as well as the overall amplifier.

Recipe 7: Grain Length

Modulated Plucking
The seventh recipe is a constantly evolving patch that at first
sounds like a plucked Stratocaster, but then, when the LFO
kicks in, the entire sound becomes thin and distorted before
returning back to the plucked Stratocaster sound. The patch
consists of three Alchemy samples: “Steel String- E1,” “Ghosts
of gaia-Min-E2,” and “Appalachian Dulcimer (sfz).” The
“Steel String-E1” sample contained a full grain volume with
a grain size of about 112ms. The grain density was a full ten

Figure 6.27 Screenshots

of Grain Length Modulated
Plucking patch.

235
Granular Synthesis

grains with the Hann window shape. RTime was set to around
82% with RPan fully engaged. The “Ghosts of gaia-Min-E2”
sample contained full grain volume with a grain size of
around 110ms. Grain density was set at four grains with the
Tukey05 window shape. Finally, both RTime and RPan were
completely disengaged. The final sample, “Appalachian Dul-
cimer (sfz),” contained a full grain volume with a grain size of
about 110ms. The grain density was identical to sound source
B at four grains with the Tukey05 window shape. Both RTime
and RPan were fully disengaged. A sine wave LFO set to
0.11Hz was routed to the grain size of each of the three sound
sources. Note that the “TRIGGER” function of the LFO was
not in use, meaning the LFO was free running. Lastly, a basic
envelope generator with a 0.001-second attack, 100% sustain,
and 0.37-second release was routed to the amplifier.

Recipe 8: Glistening Bells

This recipe was designed to sound like tubular bells with a
haunting ethereal quality. The sound consists of three Alchemy
sound samples: “Feedback-E1,” FinetoothPad-Maj-F3,” and
“Electric Synth Keys v127.” The “Feedback-E1” sample con-
tained full grain volume, size, and density with the Tukey05

Figure 6.28 Screenshots of

Glistening Bells patch.

236
 Granular Synthesis

window shape. RTime was set at about 20%, while RPan was
set to 100%. The “FinetoothPad-Maj-F3” sample featured a
full grain volume with a grain size of about 110ms. The grain
density was set to nine grains and featured a Tukey05 win-
dow shape. RTime was set to about 77%, while RPan was set
to 62%. The final sample, “Electric Synth Keys v127,” con-
tained a full grain volume with a grain size of about 122ms.
The grain density was set to four grains with a Tukey05 win-
dow shape. Both RTime and RPan were turned all the way
off. An envelope generator with a 0.0085-second attack, full
sustain, and 16-second release was routed to the amplifier as
well as the grain volumes of sound sources A and B.

Recipe 9: Dampened Metallic

Hammer Shimmer
The ninth recipe in our list was designed to sound like a mix
between steel drums and a celesta with a shimmering elec-
tronic quality. The sound consists of three Alchemy samples:
“F2M C1 (sfz),” “013 Etiopia,” and “Dulcitone-f (sfz).” The
“F2M C1 (sfz)” sample contained a full grain volume with
a grain size of about 18ms. The grain density was set to ten

Figure 6.29 Screenshots of

Dampened Metallic Hammer
Shimmer patch.

237
Granular Synthesis

grains with the Tukey05 window shape. RTime was set to

about 92% with RPan fully engaged. The “013 Etiopia” sam-
ple contained a full grain volume with a grain size of about
111ms. Grain density was set to nine grains with the Tukey05
window shape. RTime was set to about 30%, while RPan was
set to about 7.5%. The “Dulcitone-f (sfz) sample featured a
grain volume of about 6.98dB with a grain size of 230ms.
Grain density was set to eight grains with the Tukey05 win-
dow shape. Finally, RTime and RPan were both set to 100%.
An envelope generator with a 0.001-second attack, full sus-
tain, and 0.37-second release was routed to the amplifier.

Recipe 10: Rhythmic Modulation

The final recipe we created was designed to be a rhythmic
patch that contained both bass and lead sounds playing
together while the rhythmic pulses maintained in the back-
ground. The patch is comprised of four Alchemy sound
samples: “Harp (sfz),” “Dulcitone-f-A2 (sfz),” “Cronofy,”
and “FracturedSignal.” The “Harp (sfz)” sample featured full
grain volume with a grain size of about 112 ms. Grain density
was set to five grains with a Tukey05 window shape. Both
RTime and RPan were turned totally off. The “Dulcitone-f-
A2 (sfz)” sample contained full grain volume with a grain

Figure 6.30 Screenshots of

Rhythmic Modulation patch.

238
 Granular Synthesis

size of about 150ms. Grain density was set to five grains with
a Tukey05 window shape. Both RTime and RPan were fully
disengaged. The “Cronofy” sample contained a full grain
volume with a grain size of about 150ms. Grain density was
set to ten grains with a Tukey05 window shape. RTime was
set to about 63% with RPan set at 100%. The final sample,
“FracturedSignal,” features a full grain volume with a grain
size of about 114ms. The grain density is set to four grains
with a Tukey05 window shape. Both RTime and RPan are
completely disengaged. One sine wave LFO is beat synced
at 1/2T and is routed to the grain size of sound sources A,
B, and D. A second sine wave LFO set to 0.09Hz is routed to
the overall pitch of the synthesizer by +/-2 semitones. Lastly,
an envelope generator with a zero-second attack, hold, and
decay, with full sustain and release is routed to both the over-
all amplifier and grain volume of sound source A.

Historical Perspective
of Granular Synthesis
Granular synthesis, although new in implementation, is actu-
ally quite old. As stated earlier, granular synthesis theory
began at the onset of the quantum theory of sound. These
early theorizations of granular synthesis, however, only
existed in vague theories. It was not until Dennis Gabor theo-
rized a system in 1946 that used grains to produce sound that
granular synthesis theory began to take form.1 Gabor gave
a series of lectures in which he examined Fourier’s work on
sound. Gabor was not attempting to prove that Fourier’s the-
ories were wrong. On the contrary, Gabor believed Fourier’s
theories to be correct, just incomplete. Gabor claimed that
Fourier’s theory of sound did not allow for common sounds,
such as sirens, which have variable pitches. Gabor went on to
state that Fourier’s theories could only be used to create one
sound at a time. Likewise, Gabor was among the first to take
criticism with Fourier’s use of sine waves due to their infi-
nite nature. Gabor stated that duration of sound was a crucial
aspect in defining it.

239
Granular Synthesis

Gabor went on to conduct a wealth of research on hearing.

Most notably, Gabor conducted research involving the time it
took for people to interpret sound as having pitch. For exam-
ple, Gabor found that frequencies between 500 and 1000Hz
must have a duration of at least 10ms in order to be inter-
preted as tone rather than noise.
Gabor went on to build a variety of tone-producing machines
that used primitive granular synthesis techniques. One such
device was built from a film projector. Gabor ran a film
through a projector that would move at constant velocities.
As the film moved, it would pass by a rotating drum which
contained a number of slits that allowed light to be projected
onto a photocell. The photocell would then convert light into
sound. After tinkering with the device, Gabor decided to
add more slits to the drum. Gabor realized that this would
produce tones. However, there would be a loud click at the
start of every cycle that was undesirable. By grading the win-
dow, the sound would effectively fade in and out, which got
rid of the clicks. This can be considered the first use of grain
envelopes in granular synthesis. Gabor’s research into the
perception of sound and hearing paved the way for granular
synthesis.
Possibly going off of Gabor’s research, the German company
Springer produced a device known as the Tempophon which
was similar to Gabor’s device. The Tempophon was installed
in a number of early electronic music studios and is often
considered the first commercial device that utilized granular
synthesis.

The Godfather of Granular Synthesis

Granular synthesis would advance a step further in the 1960s
in the hands of Greek composer Iannis Xenakis. Xenakis was
born in 1922 in Romania to parents who were both inter-
ested in music.2 Introducing Xenakis to music at an early age
helped pave the way for his future career as a composer. In
the 1960s, Xenakis came across Gabor’s theories and began

240
 Granular Synthesis

applying them to a compositional format. Xenakis began

composing using grains of sound. Xenakis was perhaps the
first to define a grain as containing duration, frequency, and
intensity. Xenakis also theorized ways in which these grains
could be used in conjunction with one another. This simple
idea of combining grains in different ways led to the idea of
textures and soundscapes being created using grains. Xena-
kis went on to record “Analogique B,” which has become
the first composition to be created using granular synthesis.
“Analogique B” utilized hundreds of splices of magnetic tape
in order to create its sounds.
After Xenakis, composer Curtis Roads used similar granular
synthesis techniques in order to create his pieces of music.
Many of the early experiments Roads used in his composi-
tions paved the way to the granular synthesis we know
today. The next key player in the inception of granular syn-
thesis was Paul Lansky. In the 1990s, Lansky created a series
of compositions known as the Idle Chatter series, which uti-
lized granular synthesis in the creation of the pieces. The
three songs off of his More Than Idle Chatter album that utilize
granular synthesis are “Idle Chatter,” “just_more_idle_chat-
ter” and “Notjustmoreidlechatter.” These three pieces all
use hundreds, if not thousands, of small audio fragments of
speech that are pitch shifted and placed together in order to
create pseudo-melodies. Like Xenakis, Roads, and Lansky,
Barry Truax was yet another early adopter of granular syn-
thesis for use in a vast number of his compositions. All these
early composers helped solidify granular synthesis’s spot as
a valid sound creation technique.
Although Xenakis, Roads, Lansky, and Truax all used gran-
ular synthesis for their compositions, they used a primitive
analog version of what granular synthesis would ultimately
become. Early implementations of granular synthesis often
took a huge amount of time and resources, and it was some-
what limited in its scope. The advent of computers would
finally allow granular synthesis the power needed to be used
in full.

241
Granular Synthesis

As we have seen, granular synthesis uses thousands of indi-

vidual grains derived from sampled audio. The sheer power
needed to not only analyze this sampled audio and chop it
up, but also to create individual grain envelopes and play-
back the grains at various speeds, is extremely large. There-
fore, modern computers are necessary in order to fully realize
granular synthesis.
As stated before, granular synthesis can still be considered
in its infancy. It will continue to evolve as computer power
increases. The sound capability that granular synthesis offers
is nothing short of amazing. Although it is often shrouded in
mystery and not used deeper than the preset level, granular
synthesis is capable of some of the most interesting, creative,
unique, and awe-inspiring sounds in synthesis. I beg you to
try your own hand at granular synthesis and let it open up a
whole new world of sonic opportunity.

The Future of Granular Synthesis

Granular synthesis can almost be considered in its infancy.
Although it has been implemented and used, it is constantly
evolving as computer power reaches higher and higher levels.
The next logical step in my eyes for granular synthesis is the
use of live audio as grain content rather than sampled audio.
Granular synthesizers that allow users to feed live audio into
the unit for manipulation is rarely, if ever, seen. What then, is
preventing someone from using granular synthesis technol-
ogy on the fly with a live audio input? The answer is nothing.
Although most granular synthesis software mostly work with
previously recorded audio, there is really nothing stopping
someone from using live audio recordings as the source mate-
rial for grains, besides developer restrictions. Modern com-
puters have finally reached a level of CPU power that allows
live audio to be analyzed, split into grains, and warped with-
out much delay, if any. Therefore, it is my prediction that we
will soon see granular synthesizers that allow for live audio
sampling in the near future. Some granular synthesis-based
effects in fact already allow real-time manipulation of live

242
 Granular Synthesis

audio. Native Instrument’s Spektral Delay and Smartelectro-

nix’s KTGranulator both allow real-time granular synthesis.
Many real-time vocal processors and pitch shifters also use
aspects of granular synthesis. However, these effects are not
fully functional granular synthesizers.
Granular synthesis holds extreme promise solely because it is
in its infancy. Other synthesis formats such as subtractive, FM,
additive, and modeling have all been around long enough to
inherit fixed structures and stringent rules. Although these
aforementioned formats are still being implemented and
expanded upon, many users expect them to work in certain
ways, which leaves little room for developers and engineers
to create new and interesting takes on these classic formats.
Although I am by no means calling these other synthesis
formats inferior (quite the contrary, I love and use each of
these formats on almost a daily basis), I am simply stating
that granular synthesis holds the greatest potential for future
embellishment and ingenuity. Since granular synthesis is still
so new in its implementation, preconceived notions about
what a granular synthesizer should do have not been fully
formed. Developers are free to implement new and interest-
ing functions into granular synthesizers that will hopefully
take the technology above and beyond where it currently is.

Notes
1. Timothy Opie, “Sound in a Nutshell: Granular Synthesis,” Novem-
ber 12, 1999. Retrieved from http://granularsynthesis.com/hthesis/
hthesis.html
2. Iannis Zenakis, “Autobiographical Sketch,” 1980. Retrieved from
http://www.iannis-xenakis.org/xen/bio/biography.html

243
VECTOR SYNTHESIS 7

In 1986, Sequential Circuits released their final synthesizer

called the Prophet VS, and in doing so, they invented one
of the most expressive and powerful performance synthe-
sis types, called Vector Synthesis (VS). The concept is simple
with four different sound sources that are mixed together
with a joystick on a two-dimensional plane. There are sev-
eral reasons why VS caught on and is still an important type
of synthesis, all of which are related to musicality in perfor-
mance and efficiency in programming.
The Prophet VS is a digital synth that has a tragic history
because it had so much promise, but it came at a time when
Sequential Circuits was about to close. It is hard to fix, and
parts are rare, which makes it difficult to invest in. However,
if you can find one in good condition, then you will certainly
enjoy its unique sound. With its extended envelopes and its
customized waveforms, you won’t be able to treat it like any
old synth and will have to learn its nuances.
The key elements in the original VS instrument are four
sound sources that can be set to basic waveforms or to more
complex sounds. These sources are then combined together

Figure 7.1 The original vector

synthesizer from Sequential
Circuits—Prophet VS.

244
 Vector Synthesis

at various levels using a joystick or other modulator. Even

though the mix process could have easily been developed
as a square with four corners, it was designed as a diamond
shape, which purportedly led to the Prophet VS nearly being
called the Prophet Diamond.
Each stage of the VS is controlled by envelopes that have
more detailed stages than the traditional ADSR and can help
craft very interesting sounds. The modulation matrix is also
very powerful and can be used to synthesize sounds that
are exciting and full of complexity. Here are the modulation
parameters available on the original Prophet VS:

Sources
LFO 1
LFO 2
Pressure
Velocity

Figure 7.2 Close-up on the

Prophet Diamond.

245
Vector Synthesis

Keyboard
Filter Envelope
Mod Wheel

Destinations
Frequency
Filter
Mix
LFO 1
LFO 2
Amplitude
Pan
Chorus

An example of a modulation patch that demonstrates the

power of VS is the mix destination, which lets the mix (joy-
stick) be controlled between A–C and B–D. Attach LFO 1 to
the mix between A and C, and then modulate the rate of LFO
1 by the modulation wheel. The sounds created in this situa-
tion are unlike anything else and are difficult to create using
any other synthesis types. Shifting the mix between sounds
using LFOs is an incredible way to make new sounds that can
be as harsh as desired or rich and mellow.

The envelopes, which can be assigned to a variety of param-

eters, are also slightly nontraditional because they have four
stages and each has a level and a rate. Many envelopes use a
single level for the sustain and rates for the rest, but the VS
has a rate and level for each stage, which offers the ultimate
in flexibility.

The Prophet VS has never been an easy instrument to pro-

gram because of its single data slider, but it is quite flexible
if you have the patience. Even VS instruments that came
after the original almost all use similarly difficult program-
ming methods and haven’t done any favors for musicians.
VS synthesis is a very powerful tool for live performance, but
patches typically have to be completely prepared in advance.

Once Sequential Circuits closed, Yamaha continued work on

VS and eventually Korg also released several instruments.

246
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.3 Wavestation vector

motion.

Each new iteration brought new features that enhanced the

VS process and make each new generation unique and valu-
able. The Yamaha instruments introduced joystick tracking
that could record mix automation and also added integration
with FM synthesis. Korg introduced multisampled sources
and wave sequencing that added sample playback for mixing
full music loops in as one or more of the four sound sources.
VS has relied on digital technology since its beginnings, and,
with the proliferation of software synths, VS has continued
as a popular technique. Virtual instruments have given it
new life and DAWs can be used with non-VS instruments to
achieve the same general effect. Logic Pro X has two instru-
ments with vector capabilities: the ES2 and Sculpture.

ES2
The ES2 has a semitraditional vector option with an X-Y
pad that mixes various parameters, but it can also be pro-
grammed using a sequencer to create vector-controlled pat-
terns. In addition to the vector module, the three oscillators
are also mapped into a mix “triangle” used for combining the

247
Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.4 Logic Pro X—ES2.

sources. Thus, the ES2 has two levels of VS combined with

subtractive synthesis and FM synthesis to create one of the
most powerful software synths available.
The ES2 is made even more powerful because it exists inside
of Logic Pro X, with access to complex arpeggiators and other
MIDI/audio effects. This system allows devices such as the
Leap Motion to connect through Logic to the ES2 and uses
hand motions to generate MIDI CC data. Instead of needing a
joystick, it is possible to wave your hand in three dimensions
to morph between the different parameters.

Sculpture
Another instrument in Logic Pro X is Sculpture, which is a
much different type of instrument and relies on a modeled
string as a sound source. It has a five-node, vector-like mod
section, which gives the user the ability to mix between
five different sounds. Instead of simply using five different
sounds or wave shapes, each of the five nodes represents full
instrument presets that include effects, filters, string settings,
and so much more. Sculpture is just as much of a synth as it

248
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.5 Logic Pro X—

Sculpture.

is a modeled instrument, and it demonstrates the power of

vector synthesis in working with old and new musical tech-
nologies in creating very useable sound textures. The Leap
Motion can also control the morph pad in Sculpture, which
means it can not only create very interesting sounds, but can
also be performed in a very expressive manner.

Figure 7.6 Sculpture’s

morph tool.

249
Vector Synthesis

There is very little doubt that Sculpture’s morph features are

based on the concepts introduced with the Prophet VS, and,
due to a complex interface with too much clutter, Sculpture
is almost as difficult to program. Unfortunately, time hasn’t
made a difference in our ability to create easy–to-use instru-
ments that are also complex, but if mastered, both the Prophet
VS and Sculpture are capable of incredibly complex sounds
that can be very expressive.

Creative DAW Control

It is possible with many digital audio workstations to create a
vector synth-like experience by controlling faders from mul-
tiple sound sources. While this is perhaps an oversimplifica-
tion of vector synthesis, there is very little difference from the
original instruments. Pro Tools is one of the few DAWs that
is still restricting custom control surfaces and it still isn’t pos-
sible to use their surfaces in nontraditional ways, but systems
like Logic Pro and Ableton Live are very flexible in the ways
you can use MIDI controllers and OSC.
A default instrument in Pro Tools called Xpand 2 has four
sound sources that can be loaded with different sampled
instruments. Each sound has its own mix level and can easily

Figure 7.7 Sounds sources

in Pro Tool’s Xpand 2.

250
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.8 Track Stacks in

Logic Pro X.

be assigned to incoming MIDI control data using Xpand’s

MIDI mapping feature. This is an easy way to create a vec-
tor synthesis-style environment. By using creative MIDI tech-
niques, it is possible to create a map that even lets a joystick
control the various levels.
An example of a powerful way to work with Logic Pro X and
a VS type of experience uses Track Stacks, which let you com-
bine multiple instruments into a single “track” that responds
to a single MIDI input, and yet you can still modulate each
instrument separately. In Logic, you can control volume lev-
els of individual instruments using MIDI control data and so
it is relatively easy to attach an external device such as an
iPad or Leap Motion to mix the different instruments.

iPad Control
It’s hard to beat a joystick in terms of performability when
it comes to controlling the vector, but a multitouch interface
does something special because it can create multiple X-Y
controls that can be used at the same time. An app such as
Touch OSC or Lemur can be programmed to create perfor-
mance data for more than just volume/mix relationships,
and you are only limited by the number of fingers you have
and by your imagination.
If the app permits you to create a custom interface, then think
about what you could do with 6 or 12 X-Y pads all attached
to parameters on different instruments. You can play the
instrument using a keyboard in one hand and then control an
incredible amount of parameters using the other hand. In a
recording studio setting, you can record the MIDI track with

251
Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.9 iPad Running Lemur.

both hands and then use both hands to perform an additional

layer of modulation.

Programming Vector Synths

This next section explores programming using many of the
instruments discussed above. The primary objective is to
give you an idea of how each actually works so that you can
decide if one of these belongs in your instrument collection,
or perhaps you’ll feel like avoiding them completely. The best
news is that a virtual replica of the Prophet VS is now avail-
able as an iOS iPad app, which means that the iPad collection
is continuously growing and you should consider buying
one. This app’s OS X version is used below to demonstrate
programming the original VS instrument.

Prophet V
The Prophet V instrument from Arturia improves on two
Sequential Circuit originals in all of the right places and cre-
ates a massive, new instrument that uses both. The Prophet V

252
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.10 Arturia’s Prophet V.

combines the first and last synths made by Sequential, the

Prophet 5, and the Prophet VS. You can use the instrument in
either mode, or as a combination of them to create a very pow-
erful, new instrument. For this example, only the Prophet VS
portion is used to demonstrate the programming techniques
of the original VS instrument.
The first step is to choose the waveforms and tuning of the
four sound sources. The first time you do this, you’ll likely
feel a little lost in knowing what to do—but after you go
through the entire process, it will become more clear how to
set the initial sounds. It is important to get used to sweeping
through with the joystick, because if you don’t, then you’ll
miss the core elements of the sound. Make small adjustments
and then move the joystick to see how the new settings play
with the other sounds.
For this example, four basic wave shapes are used, even
though other more complex sounds are also available. Once
the sounds are selected, then the tuning, envelopes, and filters
are set. This portion of the process is very similar to creating in
subtractive synthesis. After that, modulators are available to
further change your performance experience. For this exam-
ple, an LFO is used to modulate the mix parameter along just

253
Figure 7.11 Close-up of
oscillators.
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.12 Digital waveforms.

one axis. The sources are tuned together but an octave apart
so that the LFO rhythmically switches between them and cre-
ates a sequence-like pattern. The other axis doesn’t have this
same pattern, so it is possible to turn it on or off by moving
the joystick to a different quadrant.
This sample patch demonstrates the ability of vector synthesis
to take existing sound creation tools and make an instrument
that is more expressive, flexible, and complex. It is possible to
use other synths to create all of the same sounds, but there is

Figure 7.13 The Prophet V

modulation matrix.

255
Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.14 Prophet V LFOs.

something easy about the way vector tools work in combing

certain sounds together that makes it unique and a certifiably
different type of synthesis.
If you use the same LFO example above and apply it to each
individual axis and create rhythms in both directions, but
use different tempos for the LFOs, then you’ll begin to see
the complexity of using vectors in situations that result in
unexpected sounds that are unpredictable. Each axis can be
treated as completely different patches that are subsequently
mixed between, just as a DJ might mix together two com-
pletely unrelated LPs. The key is to be creative and willing
to explore new sounds as you search for the perfect mix of
various elements.

Korg Wavestation
The original Wavestation was released in 1990 and picked up
with vector synthesis where the Prophet VS had left off. At
the time, it represented a bridge between traditional synthesis
and an ever-expanding sonic experience. You have all heard
the Wavestation in both pop music tracks and in an unlikely
place when you hear an Apple computer turn on. Jim Reekes
claims he used the Wavestation to create the startup sound

Figure 7.15 Korg Wavestation

A/D.

256
 Vector Synthesis

used first in the Quadra 700 (1991) and has been used ever
since. If you own a Wavestation, then try the Sandman fac-
tory preset as it apparently is a slightly modified version of
the sound, played as a stretched, C major chord.
The Wavestation SR came after several other Wavestation
releases and is one of the most powerful vector synthesizers
ever made, but also one of the most difficult to program. It
is an example of a device that clearly wants to be a preset
playback instrument while still maintaining all of the power
of what the original Prophet VS and other in-between instru-
ments could do. For this example, let’s look at a performance
patch that has a maximum part limit of eight different sounds.
In addition to the four-source mix vector, the eight parts in
the performance patch can be split across the keyboard or by
velocity range. This means that you could have a patch that
has bass in the lower keys, a piano in the middle keys, and
a lead synth on the high keys, and when you play harder/at
a higher velocity, then all of the sounds switch to something
different.
The Korg SR uses PCM waves as the sound source for each
patch. It has 484 individual internal waveforms and more
can be loaded with expansion cards. Each voice has access to
effects, envelopes, and modulation. The hardest part about
programming the SR is that you have a tiny screen and very
few buttons, and yet there are so many pages of editable data.
There is even a vocoder, which is something Korg is known
for on many of their instruments.
For this example, we are using very similar sounds to the
example above with the Prophet VS and you can see how dif-
ficult it can be using the buttons on the front face. The first

Figure 7.16 Korg Wavestation

SR LCD screen.

257
Vector Synthesis

step is to initialize a patch so we can start from scratch. We

can experiment by switching out the oscillators with various
waveforms, but because there are 484, we have an incred-
ibly large pile to search through. The SR can also place these
together into a wave sequence and can create a whole differ-
ent world of sounds and combinations.
The SR does not have a joystick, but you can attach a MIDI
joystick or another MIDI source with adjustable controller
data. By default, the SR is set to CC 16 and CC 17 for this con-
trol and so you can set your MIDI controller’s faders to these
or change the settings on the SR to whatever your equipment
is set to. Once again, the Leap Motion or iOS apps can also
easily be set to these and are able to control the vector mix. It
may be best to use a DAW to manage the MIDI data because
it can combine different inputs into a single output to control
the SR. In Pro Tools, you can use a MIDI track with the input
set to “All” and the output sending to the SR. The same is true
for Logic Pro or nearly every other DAW.

Korg Wave Sequencing

Vector synthesis and several other types of synthesis have
crossed paths in several specific ways, and so the lines are
gray concerning what type of synthesis is actually taking
place. Wave sequencing on the Wavestation uses a series of
wave files that play in order as any of the four “oscillator”
sources. This is very similar to wavetable synthesis, which
also has access to a series of sounds that can be manipulated
in a very similar fashion. Wave sequencing has not expanded
outside of Korg instruments, but it has continued to be avail-
able in more recent Korg releases, such as their OASYS instru-
ment and the amazing Korg Kronos. The one place where

Figure 7.17 Illustration of

a three-step wave sequence
based on drawings in the original
Wavestation manual.

258
 Vector Synthesis

wave sequencing hasn’t appeared yet is in the wildly popular

Korg Gadgets app for iOS.
Wave sequencing is a technique that Korg introduced with
the Wavestation, but it is not integral to the vector synthe-
sis engine. The performance manual describes the wave
sequencing process in enough detail that it seems they are
making sure no one confuses it with wavetable synthesis, but
the similarities are remarkable. Here are the basic specifica-
tions of wave sequencing, which you can compare to wave­
tables in the wavetable synthesis chapter.
1. Memory banks have 32 wave sequences (0–31).
2. Each sequence has up to 255 individual steps.
3. Banks have a maximum of 500 steps.
4. Steps and step ranges can be looped.
5. The initial step and step motion can be modulated.
6. Layering patches in performance mode means that up to
32 wave sequences can be triggered simultaneously.
7. Wave sequences can be populated into each of the four
sound sources, for full vector synthesis mixing.

Figure 7.18 Korg Gadget

for iOS.

259
Vector Synthesis

Prophet VS Patches in the

Wavestation
The sound of the original Prophet VS is unique, partially
because of the wave shapes included, but also because of the
limitations and quirks of the early digital audio capabilities. If
you want to explore the waveforms of the original Prophet VS,
then all you need is a Wavestation, which has them in its mem-
ory as stored waves. These original waves are reproduced and
used in patches and performances. They are labeled VSxxx,
with the xxx being an associated number for each wave.
If for no other reason, it is worth buying a Wavestation or
Wavestation SR just to have the experience of working with
these original waves in a hardware-based system that is both
difficult to program and yet full of rewarding results. The big-
gest difference is that the Wavestation instruments have no
analog components and different filters/effects. This means
that even if you program them as closely as possible, there
will still be some significant differences in sound color.

Effects and Multisets

Another consideration to think about with the Wavestation is
that it has the ability to perform using performance settings
and multiset patches. The performance option lets individual
patches to be mixed together to create an all-inclusive instru-
ment. The multisets allow 16 patches to be accessed indepen-
dently on each of the 16 standard MIDI channels. This sounds
like it is a powerful way to work because it essentially gives
you 16 Wavestations for programming, but the primary limi-
tation is that there are still only two global effects that cannot
be accessed individually by each of the 16 patches. Even in
performance mode, you lose access to the effects for each lay-
ered sound, but performances are often designed with this in
mind and so the effects work within this framework. Either
way, it is recommended that you use the Wavestation as a
single patch/performance tool, and avoid trying to get 16
patches working simultaneously.

260
 Vector Synthesis

ES2
The ES2 is both easier to program and more difficult at the
same time. The advantage list includes a graphical interface
and the ability to look at all of the parameters at once. The
disadvantage list includes a difficult-to-understand interface
with few labels and poor instructions. Instead of having four
clear sources, the X-Y matrix is attached to various param-
eters and/or the oscillator level mixer. This means you can
modulate filter frequencies and oscillator mix parameters
simultaneously using timing nodes on the interface.
In this example, we are creating a simple pattern that affects
the cut-off frequency and a mix between oscillator one and
white noise. Instead of a joystick, we are using the matrix tim-
ing line to set when the X-Y parameters will change. We could
use milliseconds or a subdivision of the project tempo grid,
and so we are using 1/8 note variations.
When a node is selected, you can alter the settings for the
cut-off and the oscillator mix amount before moving on to the
next one and changing its settings. Turn off solo mode before
testing the patch to see if you are happy. There are so many
additional parameters available for tweaking, such as loop
settings and X-Y mode settings. While there is no joystick and
only three oscillators, this is clearly based on the original VS
instruments.
Here’s an example of connecting an iPad to control the X-Y
parameters in real-time instead of using a defined sequence/
tempo.

Figure 7.19 Vector view in

Logic Pro’s ES2.

Figure 7.20 Setting the grid

resolution.

261
Figure 7.21 X-Y assignments.

Figure 7.22 Smart control

routing to X-Y.
 Vector Synthesis

Sculpture and Leap Motion

The primary part of this example is to demonstrate how to
hook up the Leap Motion controller to modulate between
the five nodes in Sculpture. You’ll need the basic drivers
installed, the GecoMIDI app for converting Leap data to
MIDI (or equivalent software), and information about which
MIDI data Logic Pro is expecting when it comes to controlling
Sculpture. This last part always seems to be the hardest to
figure out for each DAW, but all it takes is knowing where to
look in Logic: this is highlighted in the accompanying image.
In GecoMIDI, it is easiest to use the “Up & Down Position”
along with the “Left & Right Position” to control the modu-
lation. Looking at the GecoMIDI interface, you’ll see much
more than that available, but in most cases, it is important to
keep it as simple as possible because the technology is still

Figure 7.23 GecoMIDI.

Figure 7.24 Logic’s environment

window with MIDI viewer.

263
Vector Synthesis

imperfect, and complex hand motions are not always inter-

preted correctly by the software. One of the easiest ways to
decide which hand motions are the best for you is to wave
your hand around and see what GecoMIDI sees the most
clearly. Down below, you can set the MIDI CC data and that
will be sent to your DAW by default when the GecoMIDI app
is running. If Logic Pro isn’t receiving the data, then check
the preferences in GecoMIDI and troubleshoot online in the
user forums. The GecoMIDI data will be recorded into your
track if you engage recording mode on the initial pass, or
you can record keyboard information first and then record
a pass of Leap Motion second. There is an option in Logic to
automatically combine MIDI regions when recorded on top
of one another or if put in loop mode, so it won’t be an issue
to record everything separately.
In the case of Sculpture, the parameters that control the
morph pad are MorphX and MorphY, which are controlled
by CC 322 and CC 323. The MIDI specification doesn’t techni-
cally extend beyond the default 128 controllers, and so calling
them CCs is a stretch but this is how Logic deals with instru-
ments having many more than 128 different parameters.
GecoMIDI only works with the traditional 128 controllers, so
you have to use the Smart Control system to map the output
of GecoMIDI to the morph controls. The Smart Controls are
a very easy way to route MIDI data from external sources to
internal destinations.
Once the Leap Motion is configured, then there is a learn-
ing curve to performing because it unlike anything you’ve
ever “played” before. There isn’t any physical feedback, so

Figure 7.25 Sculpture’s smart

control assignments.

264
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.26 Leap Motion in

action.

you have to learn to move your hand around with imaginary

boundaries. The parameters in GecoMIDI can be adjusted
for sensitivity and boundaries, but the default settings are
satisfactory for most situations. Expect, however, to spend a
number of hours getting used to it before using it live or in a
pressure situation.

Vector Synthesis “Evolved”

Most synth types are becoming less independent in mod-
ern software implementations. A full-featured subtractive
synth is likely to have FM, additive options, and even vec-
tor synthesis-style oscillator mixing. When Dave Smith began
producing his own instruments again under the name Dave
Smith Instruments, he released a hybrid digital/analog synth
called the Evolver. This little beast has two analog oscillators
and two digital oscillators . . . which should sound very famil-
iar in the context of this chapter. Since its release, we have
seen a number of instruments from Dave Smith, and most of
them have embraced digital technology in ways many people
did not expect.
The Evolver is a lesson on mixing sounds from different
worlds into a single instrument that can speak both lan-
guages. This is what vector synthesis is all about and Dave
Smith Instruments continues that tradition by continuously
expanding the definition of what a synthesizer is in a modern

265
Vector Synthesis

context. It honestly doesn’t seem like he is interested in call-

ing a synth digital or analog, but by using the best of both
worlds, he can create an instrument that is capable of more
than either by themselves.

Korg Gadget iOS App

Once again, Korg is pushing the boundaries of music creation
by developing and releasing a series of iOS music apps. At
first they were most interested in creating mobile versions of
classic hardware instruments, but, more recently, they have
started to move into releasing new instruments that have
been designed with new ways of doing things. Korg Gadget
is a perfect example of this with a newly developed sequencer
that follows in the tradition of Ableton Live and includes a
large number of sound-source modules.
Among these modules is a newly designed vector synth
called Kiev. Even though it is called a spatial digital synthe-
sizer, it is in fact a vector synthesizer and it demonstrates the
key elements in vector synthesis in a very streamlined design.
For this next section, Kiev is explored as perhaps the most
recently designed vector synthesis available and released in a
multitouch experience.

Figure 7.27 Kiev module in

Korg Gadget.

266
 Vector Synthesis

Kiev Interface
The bright yellow face is designed to look like an old piece
of submarine sonar equipment or something similar. Almost
immediately noticeable are the orange lights that move back
and forth/up and down along the OSC MORPHER in the
center of the device. In the top left corner is a menu to select
between various presets, called Sound Programs. There are
41 provided and a place to save user presets.
There are four oscillators, each with basic pitch and tuning
settings. Each oscillator can be assigned to one of 92 wave-
forms, some of which resemble traditional, simple wave-
forms, while others are substantially more complex.

Kiev Modulation
The Morpher is exactly what you would expect in a vector
synth and it mixes between the four oscillators, labeled A–D.
There are modulators hardwired to A/B and C/D, which
affect the mix between them using an LFO model. You can
adjust the depth and speed of the modulation, but not the
waveform or other parameters. The lights on the edge of
the Morpher represent the modulation speed between the
oscillators.

Figure 7.28 Morpher Interface.

267
Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.29 Filter and amp

settings.

Kiev Filter/Amp
Press the button at the top of the instrument and it switches
into the Filter/Amp mode. The filter can be switched between
low pass, high pass, and band pass modes. There is a four-stage
envelope, which is activated by adjusting the depth knob and
is fairly straightforward. The Morpher pad switches from
controlling the oscillator mix to controlling the peak and cut-
off frequencies. This is a very intuitive way to adjust the filter
settings and can even be used during a live performance.
The effects section provides access to a single effect engine,
which can be assigned to any one of 25 different effects. These
range from reverbs to delays, compressors, distortion units,
and equalizers. Each effect is customizable using two knobs,
which unfortunately are not labeled as to what they do. This
results in a little trial and error, but that is also something that
can be fun.
The interface also includes a master volume and an ampli-
tude envelope. The keyboard below is barely playable, but at
least you can assign a custom scale to make up for the small
size and you can change the available octave.

Kiev MIDI Mapping

One of the best parts about Korg Gadget is that you can cre-
ate a custom MIDI map for controlling all parameters. This

268
 Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.30 Gadget MIDI

mapping options.

means you can connect an external controller and easily

manipulate all of the instrument functions. There are mul-
tiple ways to connect a controller to Gadget and not all of
them are created equal.
1. Camera Kit—The camera connection kit is a pretty reliable
way to connect a MIDI controller to the iPad as it uses a USB
cable and if the controller is class compliant, then it should
automatically be recognized and work. Class compliancy is
a standard that has been agreed to by developers that lets
hardware and software work together without any addi-
tional drivers being required. Essentially, the needed drivers

Figure 7.31 Apple iPad

camera kit.

269
Vector Synthesis

Figure 7.32 OSX audio MIDI

setup utility.

Figure 7.33 Bluetooth MIDI.

and software are already made available. The primary limi-

tations include low power availability and it ties up the only
port on the iPad, which would no longer be available for
charging the iPad. A solution for powering a MIDI keyboard
is to connect a powered USB hub to the camera kit and then
the keyboard to the hub.
2. Wi-Fi Connection—If you are on the same wireless network,
then you can connect using MIDI over the network, but the
reliability of this system is based on network traffic and is
prone to poor latency response times.
3. Bluetooth MIDI—iOS 8 and OS X Yosemite include a new
option to communicate with MIDI over Bluetooth. The

270
 Vector Synthesis

initial implementation has not been trouble free and it often

takes a fair amount of time to set it up in a working state.
Once it is configured and working, it is very solid and very
responsive. Hopefully, Apple continues to develop this and
further enhance its reliability.

Using a DAW such as Logic Pro X in conjunction with Gadget,

it is once again possible to attach other external controllers
such as the Leap Motion for X-Y control. You might wonder
why someone would want to use Gadget if they already have
Logic Pro X and that might be a legitimate point, but there is
something very captivating about having a full production
studio in a tablet thinner than a pencil that you can take with
you everywhere you go. It is also nice that you can still plug it
into a bigger production studio and use the larger controllers
and MIDI tools available in a full-featured DAW. The only
missing piece is getting full quality audio in/out of the iPad
and into your DAW. It is certainly going to arrive at some
point in the near future.

Kiev Summary
This is an incredibly limited vector synthesizer, but it shows
a refreshing trend away from the past 15 years, where every
new instrument had to have everything possible under the
sun. Korg, with all of their experience in vector synthesis,
decided that four sound sources, two hardwired modu-
lation LFOs, a filter, a single effects bank, and an output
envelope are everything needed at the core of this instru-
ment. Even wave sequencing has been omitted from this lat-
est iteration—not because of the iOS format, but because it
is clear from some of the other modules in Gadget that it
could have been accomplished. How does Kiev sound? It is
capable of creating very complex sounds that are exciting
because they are never stagnate and remain very intuitive
for live performance. The main thing I wish Kiev had is the
ability to import custom waveforms for creating your own
patches.

271
Vector Synthesis

Vector Synthesis Summary

Of all of the types of synthesis covered in this book, it often
feels like vector synthesis is the least innovative or the one
that is least able to stand on its own. Even at its creation, it
was as much of an experiment with digital synthesis as it was
an exploration of vectors. It is extremely easy to accomplish
the same end results of mixing sources together using a num-
ber of other techniques.
At the time it was packaged, it made a big enough impact that
it has remained a contributing synthesis tool all of these years.
Very few companies are currently releasing new instruments
with an exact replica of vector synthesis as it was originally
designed, and I wonder if it is because the rights to doing so
are still covered by patents. Arturia has released Prophet VS
clones, and Korg continues to work with vectors, but exciting
new releases from MOTU (MachFive) and others have left it
off as a primary synthesis type.
The current state of instruments leads us to believe that vec-
tor synthesis is less a type of actual synthesis and more of a
vehicle for synth engines to accomplish certain modulation
tasks. You won’t see a diamond grid on every instrument, but
you will often have the ability to mix between two patches or
automate mix levels for various sounds. The original Prophet
VS taught us a different way to think about programming
sounds that has evolved over time and morph into new
timbres.

272
COMBINATION
SYNTHESIS AND
MODELING8

Up to now, all of the synthesis formats discussed in this book

have been stand-alone, concrete formats that follow a predict-
able path and feature set rules and guidelines pertaining to
how they are designed. This chapter introduces synthesis for-
mats that do not necessarily follow such a rigid structure. The
landscape that physical modeling, emulation, and combina-
tion synthesizers exist in is murky at best. In fact, the term
combination synthesis is used more as a catch-all phrase for
synthesizers that do not fit an exact mold and are difficult to
categorize. That being said, there are some rigid ideas behind
physical modeling synthesis, but due to its prevalence in
workstation synthesizers and virtual instruments, the strict
forms that are used to categorize synthesizers are oftentimes
thrown out the window when dealing with physical model-
ing instruments. Hopefully this chapter will not only aid in
clearing up a few misconceptions about the powerful synthe-
sizers that exist in this grey area of synthesis, but also show
them in a new light by detailing their strengths.

Introduction to Physical Modeling

Physical modeling synthesis, or PM for short, is the act of
re-creating sound through algorithms which emulate physi-
cal properties. For instance, a physical modeling synthesizer
that is modeling a stringed instrument, such as a cello, will
have algorithms and formulas in place to mimic the way the

273
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

bow is pulled across the strings as well as the way in which

the body of the instrument vibrates while being played. Phys-
ical modeling synthesis will go as far as having algorithms in
place that allow users to adjust the density of the wood of a
cello, as well as how the bridge sits on the surface of it. PM
synthesis can be thought of as a behaviorally based synthe-
sis technique, in that it mimics the behavior of various com-
ponents of physical instruments. In essence, the behavior of
the wood, strings, bridge, pegs, body, and way it’s played are
all re-created through complex mathematical formulas and
equations. Physical modeling synthesis is an extremely pow-
erful synthesis tool that allows users to re-create the sounds
of physical instruments with much more control and dexter-
ity than might be allowed with sample-based synthesizers.
Physical modeling synthesis is most often associated with
orchestral stringed instruments, but it is technically capable
of emulating any type of instrument or sound. Many PM syn-
thesizers will model percussion instruments or mallet instru-
ments such as marimbas and xylophones as well.

Although both physical modeling synthesis and sample-based

synthesis attempt to re-create an instrument or sound, there
is actually quite a large difference between the two technolo-
gies. Sample-based synthesis uses any number of recordings
of the instrument it is trying to mimic as a starting point in
its tone creation process. By using recordings, the user is basi-
cally stuck with the individual instrument and environment
used when creating the recordings. Obviously, the user has
some freedom such as reverberation and pitch shifting in
order to change the sound, but for the most part, the user is
stuck with the instrument recorded. Physical modeling syn-
thesis, on the other hand, frees the user from being stuck with
a single instrument or environment. This freedom comes
because PM synthesis does not use recordings as the base of
its sound-creation process. Instead, formulas and algorithms
are created based off of the physical attributes of the materials
that make up the instrument and environment. Although this
book will not make an attempt to go into the various laws of

274
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

physics taken into consideration by PM synthesis designers

and developers, it is safe to say that the way in which wood,
metal, or plastic interacts with its environment when struck,
plucked, bowed, or strummed is painstakingly analyzed and
then coded into the PM synthesizer’s software.
Many people might rightfully assume that a physical mod-
eling synthesizer is unnecessary in today’s ever-expanding
music technology environment. Many could argue that since
it is possible to buy huge sound libraries that contain hun-
dreds if not thousands of samples of just one type of instru-
ment, physical modeling is not necessary. This statement
however, is narrow-minded and only focuses on physical
modeling synthesis’s ability to faithfully re-create instruments
and pays no heed to arguably the most powerful aspect of
PM synthesis: its ability to unfaithfully re-create instruments.
When using PM synthesis, not only is the user free to change
the makeup of the instrument in order to change from a dark
wooded instrument to a light wooded instrument, but the
user is free to change properties that might not be possible,
or advisable, in the physical world. For example, some PM
synthesizers might allow for creating cellos made of metal
and played by felt mallets being struck against its strings. The
possibilities are endless in reference to the crazy and inspir-
ing sounds that can be thought up and created using physical
modeling synthesis.

Key Features of Physical

Modeling Synthesis
Because physical modeling synthesis does not adhere to the
strict rules and regulations found in various other synthe-
sis formats, each individual PM synthesizer is quite unique
from any other PM synthesizer. We will explore some of the
most famous and current physical modeling synthesizers in
depth later in the chapter, but it is important to first focus
on some of the controls one might expect to find on a physi-
cal modeling synthesizer. Because the controls and adjust-
able parameters will change based off of the instrument it

275
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

is designed to model, we will divide this exploration into

three categories—stringed instruments, nontuned percussion
instruments, and, finally, tuned percussion instruments.

Stringed Instruments
Perhaps the most prevalent category of instrument modeled
for PM synthesis is stringed instruments. Stringed instru-
ments include the range of stringed orchestral instruments
such as cellos, violas, violins, and basses as well guitars, bass
guitars, and even harpsichords and world instruments such
as Zithers.

String Material
Although each physical modeling string synthesizer will
have its own unique set of controls, a few controls are more
common than others. Firstly, a way of controlling the strings
themselves will typically be available. This type of control
includes the ability to change strings from steel to nylon,
or even change how hard they are pressed by the finger or
damping device. Finally, the tuning of each string, as well as
the harmonic overtones it produces will typically be adjust-
able by the user in order to create an instrument that is per-
fectly in tune, from its highest harmonic to a more realistic
instrument that has some out-of-tune harmonics, all the way
up to a completely out-of-whack experimental instrument.

String Excitation
The next most common type of control found is known as
exciter controls. An exciter control relates to the way in which
the instrument is played or how its strings are set into vibra-
tion. Typically, a PM string synthesizer will allow users to
choose from a number of ways in which to excite the string
such as bowing, finger plucking, picking, or smacking with a
mallet or hammer. The user will not only have control over
how hard the string is excited, but will typically be able to

276
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.1 Various methods

of exciting a string.

designate where the string is struck, such as above or below

the string or higher or lower on the body.

Physical Makeup
In addition to designating the material that strings are made
of and the way in which they are excited, users will also be
able to designate the material and physical properties that
make up the body of the instrument. The physical makeup
section of a PM synthesizer will usually have a huge amount
of parameters that the user can adjust. Some examples of
these parameters are the overall size of the instrument, the
material it is made up of, how thick the instrument as a whole
is, and, finally, the thickness of the material that makes up the
instrument. Changing the physical attributes of the instru-
ment’s body will drastically change the overall timbre of the
sound.

Tuned Percussion Instruments

The next type of PM synthesizers we will examine model
tuned percussion instruments. These instruments range from
pianos to mallets and xylophones, all the way to tubular bells
and beyond. As with the modeling of stringed instruments,
PM synthesizers that model tuned percussion instruments
will vary greatly between instruments. That being said,
we will examine a few of the controls one might expect to
run into.

277
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Exciter Section
Like with stringed instruments, the exciter section of a
tuned percussion PM synthesizer will designate what sets
the instrument into vibration. Users will usually be able
to choose between exciters such as beaters, mallets, ham-
mers, and sticks as well as the material they are made up of.
Users can designate the exciter with extreme precision and
mix and match materials to make new types of exciters that
might not be common in the physical world, such as metal
mallets with felt tips. Additionally, it is not uncommon for
users to designate not only the exciter’s material, but also
how stiff it is.

Resonator Section
The next most common thing users will be able to determine
on a PM-tuned percussion synthesizer is its resonator—or
what is being set into vibration on the instrument. Choices for
the user include strings, plates, beams, membranes, marimba
beams, pipes, and tubes, as well as a variety of other, less
common resonator sources. Like when modeling stringed

Figure 8.2 Example of a

resonator.

278
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

instruments, changing the resonator material will result in

drastic changes to the timbre of the sound.

Nontuned Percussion Instruments

Tuned and nontuned percussion instruments are quite similar
and oftentimes have a lot of overlap, but they merit a separate
discussion. Nontuned percussion instruments involve drums,
save for tom toms, cymbals, bongos, congas, and various other
percussion instruments. Although individual drums can be
“tuned,” they are typically not tuned to individual pitches and
therefore are not considered tuned percussion instruments.
Like with tuned percussion and stringed instruments, users
will often be able to designate the material and stiffness of the
exciter as well as the material and size of the resonator. Many
PM percussion synthesizers will allow users to choose the
material of the drum cavity as well as its inherent thickness.
Like with granular synthesis, many separate synthesis forms
are lumped together under the phrase of physical modeling.
These separate but related synthesis formats are waveguide
synthesis; modal synthesis; McIntyre, Schumacher, and
Woodhouse synthesis; Karplus-Strong synthesis; and for-
mant synthesis. These other synthesis formats can be thought
of as different approaches for physical modeling synthesis.
Although they are all closely related, it is important to have a
brief understanding of each format.

Figure 8.3 Digital waveguide

synthesis attempts to mimic
traveling sound waves through
various mediums.

279
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Waveguide Synthesis
Digital waveguide synthesis is a form of synthesis that
attempts to mimic the way in which sound waves travel
through a physical medium. For example, think of a clarinet.
Once vibrations are created at the reed of a clarinet, sound
waves propagate through the tube of the instrument. The
material in which the clarinet is made of as well as which
tone holes are open or closed, all play a part in the overall
timbre of the instrument. Digital waveguide synthesis uti-
lizes complex mathematical formulas in order to replicate
these functions. In essence, a waveguide can be thought of as
the medium that guides the wave, such as the tube and bell
of a clarinet. Digital waveguide synthesis is used heavily in
most physical modeling synthesizers in order to accurately
replicate physical mediums.

Figure 8.4 Modal synthesis

focuses on the frequency domain
of vibrating objects.

280
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Modal Synthesis
Modal synthesis is one of the more complex techniques
employed in physical modeling synthesis. Modal synthe-
sis focuses on the frequency domain of a vibrating object.
Modal synthesis can be crudely compared to additive or
Fourier synthesis in that a vibrating object is deconstructed
to base frequencies or modes that can then be analyzed
and resynthesized. The formulas used in modal synthesis
are complex and exist outside the scope of this book, but a
basic understanding is helpful. In essence, modal synthe-
sis is used to designate frequency information resultant of
sound moving through various mediums. Returning back
to the clarinet example, modal synthesis can be utilized to
create a much more accurate representation of how pitch
changes when tone holes are covered or opened. For this
reason, modal synthesis is used heavily in physical model-
ing synthesizers.

McIntyre, Schumacher, and

Woodhouse Synthesis
McIntyre, Schumacher, and Woodhouse synthesis, or
MSW for short, is yet another technique employed in the

Figure 8.5 MSW synthesis

focuses on the time domain of
vibrating objects.

281
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

modern physical modeling synthesizer. While modal syn-

thesis focuses on the frequency domain of vibrating objects,
MSW synthesis focusses on the time domain of vibrating
objects. Again returning back to the clarinet, MSW synthe-
sis focuses on the linear and nonlinear excitation resulting
from the user blowing on the clarinet’s reed. An inherent
pitch is present on any clarinet simply from the relation of
the length of the instrument and the amount of blowing
force applied to the reed. MSW synthesis is used to decon-
struct this inherent pitch and then apply it to a resynthe-
sized model.

Karplus-Strong Synthesis
Karplus-Strong synthesis is used in plucked string and
drum PM synthesis. Karplus-Strong (KS) synthesis utilizes

Figure 8.6 KS synthesis focuses

on frequency and amplitude loss in
plucked string over time.

282
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

waveguide synthesis for its algorithms. KS synthesis uses

complex waveguides at the onset of every note and then
sharply diminishes the frequency content in quick succes-
sion. By starting with a complex set of frequencies and then
quickly diminishing that amount, plucked string and drum
sounds can be created quite accurately. When a violinist
plucks a string, for example, the sound is extremely rich
at the onset and then quickly falls to a much simpler, sine
wave-like tone once the higher order harmonics fade away.
KS synthesis attempts to mimic this through complex algo-
rithms and formulas.

Formant Synthesis
Formant synthesis involves passing signal through a num-
ber of complex resonant filters. In practice, formant syn-
thesis is most often used in speech synthesis and creating
vowel-type sounds. In its traditional sense, formant synthe-
sis is not typically used outside of laboratories and univer-
sities. That being said, aspects of formant synthesis, such
as formant filters, are used heavily in commercial physical
modeling synthesis. Unlike the previous synthesis formats
and algorithms examined, formant filters are used as a fea-
ture on PM synthesizers rather than a sound-generation
source. Formant filters are often sought after for the unique
and interesting sonic characteristics they impart on the
overall sound.

Figure 8.7 Formant synthesis

utilizes a series of filters known as
formant filters to mimic individual
formants found in acoustic
instruments.

283
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

The Physical Modeling Model

These various synthesis techniques are all utilized to some
extent in most modern physical modeling synthesizers.
Because each technique is extremely well suited for its exact
purpose, they all can be utilized to create an extremely pow-
erful physical modeling synthesizer. Much like LEGO bricks,
aspects of each of these formats can be used together in order
to create a single instrument. Most PM synthesizers will not
advertise that they use these types of algorithms nor will they
offer the user the ability to turn on or off individual algo-
rithms. Instead, all or most of these algorithms will be work-
ing “under the hood” of a PM synthesizer in order to create
the complex and awesome sounds one desires.

Putting It All Together

Up to now, we have discussed the various attributes one can
expect to find with a physical modeling synthesizer as well as
the theory behind its numerous algorithms. In past chapters,
once the discussion of individual parts is given, an explana-
tion and examples are provided on how to build a sound
from scratch. This is not the case with physical modeling syn-
thesis. In reality, the algorithms used to achieve the breath-
taking sounds physical modeling synthesis offers are just
too complex to be useful to the average musician. Because of
this, most physical modeling synthesizers will rely on factory
presets as starting points and give users the ability to adjust
certain parameters. Although this might seem prohibitive to
some, it is really the only way in which physical modeling
synthesis can be useful to the masses. So instead of start-
ing new sounds completely from scratch, users will build
up their sounds from the factory presets or factory default
settings. Each PM synthesizer will allow for unique sound
modification, but most users can expect to see a few stan-
dard parameter controls: including the ability to designate
the material an instrument is made of, how the instrument
is excited or played, and individual tensions and frictions of
various parameters. Most PM synthesizers will also provide

284
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

some standard synthesis adjustability such as pitch bending,

modulation, and some type of filtering.
Every synthesis format discussed up until this point requires
practice and patience in order to master it. Physical model-
ing synthesis is unique though in that it requires an extreme
amount of practice to master. While most synthesizers can
simply be plugged in and fiddled with to create useable
sounds, PM synthesis requires extreme precision in order
to create desirable sounds that are useful and not cheesy.
Because PM synthesis emulates real instruments through
algorithms representing physical attributes, extreme care
must be taken when playing to ensure things like breath
amount are interpreted as real sounding, rather than odd,
digital artifacts. Sample-based synthesis is free from this
challenge as things like breath noise is recorded into the sam-
ples. Unlike sample-based synthesis, PM synthesis requires
the user to delicately add in things like breath noise when
appropriate.
The amount of time and practice it takes to create realistic
sounds using PM synthesis should not deter you. On the con-
trary, the time spent with a physical modeling instrument
should be viewed as fun and engaging. To this day, despite
all the advancements made in synthesis and sampling tech-
nology, physical modeling synthesis is still the most power-
ful way to emulate physical instruments. PM technology is
still evolving and becoming better every time CPU power
increases.

Hardware Physical Modeling

Synthesizers
Now that we have discussed physical modeling synthesis
and the technology behind it, let us examine some physical
modeling synthesizers. By examining the various options
users have when it comes to picking a PM synthesizer, we
can explore some of the features unique to physical modeling
synthesis.

285
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Yamaha “VL” Line

Often cited as one of the earliest physical modeling synthe-
sizers to hit the market, the VL-1 brought life back into the
often stagnant and stock synthesizers of the day. With the
VL-1, Yamaha introduced their own version of physical mod-
eling technology, which they called Virtual Acoustic Technol-
ogy. Yamaha shipped the VL-1s with a MIDI foot and breath
controller to provide the most amount of control possible.
With certain brass and woodwind patches, the breath con-
troller would add more and more breath noise into the sound
the harder one would blow. At extreme levels, pitch and
timbre instability would arise that would oftentimes sound
extremely musical and interesting. The VL-1 revolutionized
the way in which musicians interacted with a synthesizer. For
many users, playing the VL-1 made them feel that they were
interacting with a real, physical instrument, rather than a
keyboard-controlled computer: something that had not been
felt since the days of analog subtractive synthesizers.
Due to the extreme complexity of the VL-1’s sound-generation
engine, Yamaha did not provide the possibility for users
to create their own patches from scratch. Instead, Yamaha
included a wealth of customization capabilities that could
be applied to the factory set sounds. The user adjustment
options included:

• Pressure (bow speed)

• Scream (a type of controllable chaotic distortion)
• Tonguing (emulates tongue dampening of reeds)
• Amplitude
• Breath Noise
• Throat Formant (emulates effects of lungs, mouth, and
throat)
• Damping (emulates friction)
• Growl (LFO effected pressure control)
• Dynamic Filter (filter cutoff adjustment)
• Harmonic Enhancer
• Embouchure (emulates the tightness of a players lips)
• Vibrato

286
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

• Absorption (emulates natural high frequency loss)

• Pitch (affects overall pitch of the instrument)

All of these parameters could be mapped to any MIDI con-

troller, allowing for use with traditional sliders and knobs as
well as foot and breath controllers. So although Yamaha did
not allow users to create their own sounds completely from
scratch, the sound could be dramatically changed from the
factory presets. Despite the extreme attraction many people
had towards the VL-1, it was extremely cost prohibitive to
many people. Yamaha then released the VL-7, which was
more affordable. Although slightly less powerful than its
older sibling the VL-1, the VL-7 was widely adopted by peo-
ple excited about physical modeling technology.

Technics SX-WSA1
The Technics SX-WSA1 synthesizer is an elaboration on phys-
ical modeling synthesis. The Technics SX-WSA1 uses what it
calls acoustic modeling rather than physical modeling. Both
acoustic and physical modeling are extremely similar and
do not necessarily warrant separate names. The engineers at
Technics decided that they wanted to create a more accessible
physical modeling synthesizer. They felt that synthesizers
like the Yamaha VL-1 were too complex and unintuitive to
be useful. When creating the SX-WSA1, the physical model-
ing model was examined in depth and deconstructed in order
to make it simpler. The engineers at Technics decided that in
order to accurately emulate physical sounds, they could split
sound into three parts: drivers, resonators, and modifiers.
According to Technics, drivers are what produce raw sound
like a piano hammer hitting a string, or the reed of a clarinet
vibrating. Moving on, resonators are what color the sound
emitting from the driver. An example of a resonator is the body
of a musical instrument. Finally, the modifier is what shapes
and colors sounds—mainly a filter. By breaking sounds down
into these three categories, the engineers at Technics believed
they could create a synthesizer that used drivers, resonators,

287
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

and modifiers to create emulations of physical instruments

in a much more user-friendly manner than the physical
modeling-monster synths that came before it.
The SX-WSA1 provided users with a large number of driv-
ers (over three hundred), and tons of resonators. Users could
then combine various drivers with various resonators in
order to build sounds. For the first time, users were free to
create sounds from the ground up rather than starting at fac-
tory presets. Although starting with premade drivers and
resonators is not really starting completely from scratch, it
was leaps and bounds more customizable than the Yamaha
VL platform. The SX-WSA1 proved to be a quite successful
synthesizer and the new approach it offered to physical mod-
eling synthesis paved the way to the physical modeling soft
synths we know and love today.

Software Physical Modeling

Synthesizers
Due to the complex nature of physical modeling synthesis
algorithms, as well as the number of computations that must
be made instantaneously, a physical modeling synthesizer is
really only as good as its computational power. Therefore,
physical modeling synthesis really excels in a software or
VST environment where it can harness the user’s computer
for CPU power. There are a large number of software PM syn-
thesizers on the market, so we will only discuss a few of them
that offer unique and interesting features.

Ableton Live—Tension, Electric, Collision

Three physical modeling synthesizers are officially offered
to Ableton Live users—Tension, Electric, and Collision. Ten-
sion acts as a physical modeling string synthesizer while
Electric adheres to electric pianos and Collision focuses on
drums and percussion. All three of these PM synthesizers are
extremely powerful and are extremely impressive, especially
when compared to their low price point.

288
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Tension allows users to designate almost every attribute of

a stringed instrument through a variety of PM algorithms.
Using a similar Acoustic Modeling architecture to the Technics
SX-WSA1, users adjust parameters of drivers, resonators, and
modifiers. Starting with the drivers, Tension allows strings to
be excited through the means of picking, bowing, plucking,
or even being struck with a mallet or hammer. Next, users can
choose the size, shape, thickness, and material of the body
of the instrument. Combining various excitation and reso-
nator models allows for anything from extremely accurate
instrument emulation all the way to extremely bizarre and
alien-type sounds. In addition to choosing drivers and reso-
nators, users can also determine the amount of finger pres-
sure applied to strings, as well as the amount of mechanical
dampening from things like the felt on piano hammers.
Ableton’s Electric is a physical modeling synthesizer designed
to emulate electric pianos such as the famed Rhodes and
Wurlitzer electric pianos of the 1970s. Electric follows a simi-
lar model to Tension in that it is based off the Acoustic Model-
ing model found in the Technics SX-WSA1. Electric allows for
a wealth of user-adjustable control that relates directly to elec-
tric pianos. Some parameters that are able to be adjusted are:
• Mallets (how the tines are struck)
• Tines (tone producing mechanism in electric pianos)

Figure 8.8 Ableton Live’s Tension

PM string synthesizer.

Figure 8.9 Ableton Live’s Electric

PM keyboard synthesizer.

289
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

• Pickups (transducers that turn physical vibrations into

electricity)
• Dampers (mechanism which stops the vibration of tines)
Electric is capable of extremely accurate electric piano emu-
lation and, in most instances, behaves more accurately than
even some of the best sample libraries on the market. Electric
even gives the user the ability to change the sound of the elec-
tric piano to emulate the way age affects the instrument.
Ableton’s final official physical modeling synthesizer is
known as Collision. Collision is a drum and percussion emu-
lation synthesizer that uses the same Acoustic Modeling model
as Tension and Electric. Collision excels at mallet instruments
such as marimbas, xylophones, and glockenspiels. Besides
mallet instruments, Collision is capable of most drum and
percussion emulation as well as some percussion stringed
instruments like pianos and dulcimers. When programming
on Collision, the user first selects the resonator, which in this
case is both the physical playing surface as well as the reso-
nating body. The choices of resonators are:
• Beam (emulates beams of different materials and sizes such
as are found in xylophones)
• Marimba (form of beam that produces characteristic over-
tones of marimbas)
• String (emulates strings of varying size and material found
in piano and dulcimers)
• Membrane (drum head with adjustments for material
and size)
• Plate (acts as rectangular plate with adjustable material
and size)
• Pipe (emulates a long cylinder with one open end and adjust-
able other end)
• Tube (emulates a long cylinder open at both ends)

Figure 8.10 Ableton Live’s

Collision PM drum synthesizer.

290
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Together, Tension, Electric, and Collision offer some of the

best physical modeling synthesis options available on the
market. The user control, playability, low price point, and
overall sound quality are second to none. These three physi-
cal modeling synthesizers truly demonstrate the power PM
synthesis offers.

Sculpture
Logic Pro’s Sculpture synthesizer is, in essence, an extremely
powerful physical modeling and combination synthesizer
(more on combination synthesis further in the chapter).
When creating a sound in Sculpture, the first thing that must
be determined is the material being used. Logic has intro-
duced an exciting way of choosing materials in the form of
a material square. The material square is a square in which
each corner represents a different material—nylon, wood,
steel, and glass. A ball is present in the square, which deter-
mines the material being heard, and can be moved at any
point in the square allowing for any combination of the four
materials imaginable. Besides just choosing the material of
the instrument, Sculpture provides a huge number of excit-
ers that range from traditional plucking and mallet strikes to
symbiotic excitation.

Figure 8.11 Logic Pro’s

Sculpture PM synthesizer.

291
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Although Ableton Live’s Tension, Electric, and Collision PM

synthesizers may be best suited for instrument emulation,
Sculpture is best suited for creating new sounds via physical
modeling synthesis. In fact, Sculpture is one of the first and
only PM synthesizers designed to emulate not instruments
themselves, but the way in which they interact with the envi-
ronment. By focusing on individual aspects of physical instru-
ments rather than the instrument as a whole, the user is free
to create sounds completely unrestricted by the bounds of
factory presets. Besides the extremely powerful physical mod-
eling engine found on Sculpture, a few other features are pres-
ent that make Sculpture even more powerful. To start with,
Sculpture allows for a type of vector-like control over various
aspects of the synthesizer. This vector-like control is known
as Sculpture’s morph pad and it contains five points in which
morph-able parameters can be routed to. Once parameters are
routed to individual morph points, the user can manually drag
the placement ball across the points and seamlessly move from
one parameter setting to another. The placement ball can also
be fully automated as well. Finally, Sculpture features some
traditional synthesis capabilities such as filtering, LFOs, and
envelope generators. Sculpture is an extremely powerful phys-
ical modeling synthesizer and is one of the most intuitive and
creative software synthesizers available on the market today.

Analog Modeling
Another, perhaps more popular, version of physical mod-
eling synthesis is available in the form of analog modeling
synthesis. Analog modeling, sometimes referred to as virtual
analog, is a derivative of physical modeling synthesis. As the
analog resurgence began to sound in the 1990s and 2000s,
many synthesizer companies felt the pressure to start produc-
ing analog synthesizers. Because of the uncertainty of how
long the analog resurgence might last, as well as the difficulty
of convincing shareholders to rehash old technologies, many
synthesizer companies began offering analog modeling and
virtual analog synthesizers as a compromise.

292
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

An analog modeling synthesizer will use many of the same

techniques found in traditional physical modeling synthesiz-
ers. However, the goal of analog modeling synthesis is not
just to re-create the sound of a particular analog synthesizer,
but to mimic the way in which the individual analog compo-
nents act. By mimicking the analog components rather than
the overall timbre, analog modeling synthesizers are capable
of creating much more realistic and believable sounds when
compared to a digital subtractive synthesizer.
For example, one complaint many users have with digital
subtractive synthesizers is the stepping heard when adjust-
ing a parameter such as a filter’s cutoff frequency. This digital
stepping is resultant of digital increments being cycled when
performing a parameter sweep. In reference to the synthe-
sizer’s filter, the filter can be heard opening or closing at small
increments rather than a smooth transition as would be heard
in an analog synthesizer.
By modeling the behaviors of the various analog compo-
nents, analog modeling synthesizers can come much closer
in sound to their analog counterparts. The algorithms used
in analog modeling synthesis are designed to mimic circuitry
behavior rather than physical property behavior like in tradi-
tional physical modeling synthesis.
Many hardware synthesizers, as well as VST plug-in syn-
thesizers, have been released that use this analog modeling
technology. Perhaps the most famous synthesizer to use ana-
log modeling technology is the Clavia Nord line, such as the
Nord Lead and Nord Modular synthesizers.

Figure 8.12 Filter responses on

a digital subtractive synthesizer
(right) and analog modeling
synthesizer (left); notice the
stepping present in the digital
subtractive synth.

293
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.13 Clavia Nord Lead

analog modeling synthesizer.

Released in 1995, the Clavia Nord Lead was a revolutionary

new synthesizer that got a lot of people excited for the future
of synthesis. The Nord Lead came at a time when subtrac-
tive synthesis was often overlooked and found only as after-
thoughts on some combination digital synthesizers. For the
first time in a long time, a hardware subtractive synthesizer
was available that not only sounded great, but featured des-
ignated knobs for each parameter found on the synthesizer.
The Nord Lead was capable of creating analog subtractive
synth sounds, with full adjustability, without the hindrances
of analog circuitry. The Nord Lead’s great sound was created
solely through analog modeling technology.
Reminiscent of an analog subtractive synthesizer, the Clavia
Nord Lead features two discreet oscillators, a multifilter, two
envelope generators, a fully featured LFO, and an amplifier:
in essence, full subtractive bliss. Many diehard analog users
either covet or at least respect the Clavia Nord Lead thanks
to the brilliant sounds that can be achieved all through the
means of analog modeling technology.
Like the Clavia Nord Lead synthesizer, another influential
synthesizer, the Access Virus, utilizes analog modeling as a
sound generation engine. First released in 1997, the Access
Virus line of synthesizers has gone on to enjoy wide acclaim.
Both the Clavia Nord Lead synths as well as the Access Virus
line of synths can be heard extensively on Nine Inch Nails
tracks and newer Depeche Mode albums to name a few.
Even in the height of the analog synthesizer resurgence, new
analog modeling synthesizers are being offered. Taking after
the Nord Lead and Access Virus line of analog modeling

294
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.14 Access Virus analog

modeling synthesizer.

synthesizers, Roland has entered the analog modeling mar-

ket with their Aira line of synthesizers. Roland’s new Aira
line uses what they call “Analog Circuit Behavior” technol-
ogy. Roland’s “Analog Circuit Technology” is really just ana-
log modeling technology with a higher number of individual
algorithms. Nonetheless, the Aira line sound amazing and
respond as if they are truly analog synthesizers. The Aira
line consists of the flagship System-1 Synthesizer, TR-8 Rhythm
Performer, TB-3 Touch Bassline, and the VT-3 Voice Transformer.
Each of these synthesis devices are extremely powerful and
display an incredible use of analog modeling technology.
Roland also introduced a new “plug out” technology into the
System-1 that allows users to perform a system dump of a

Figure 8.15 Roland Aira

System-1 analog circuit behavior
synthesizer.

295
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

VST synthesizer into the System-1’s memory so that it can be

recalled without having to be connected to a computer. The
Aria line of synthesizers and most notably the System-1 are an
exciting direction for the analog modeling climate.

Workstation and Combination

Synthesizers
As digital recording became more prevalent in the 1990s,
synthesist’s demands for synthesizers capable of being rel-
evant in the digital recording studio became more wide-
spread. As a response, companies like Roland, Yamaha,
and Korg started producing workstation synthesizers. Work-
station synthesizers are basically keyboards that feature a
number of synthesis engines as well as multitrack recording
and sampling capabilities. These workstation synthesizers
will typically feature a number of synthesis engines such as
subtractive, FM, sample based, etc. In addition to offering a
number of sound synthesis engines, many workstation syn-
thesizers will allow users to combine various elements of dif-
ferent synthesis engines. For example, a user could create a
sound through FM synthesis, and then apply a resonant low
pass filter such as is found on subtractive synthesizers. This
ability to combine synthesis techniques is extremely attrac-
tive because it allows users to free themselves from the con-
fines of a single synthesis format. The best attributes of each
synthesis format can be combined in order to create one cus-
tomized synthesizer that is perfectly suited for the user. Com-
bination synthesis, as this combining functionality is termed,
is found on most modern software synthesizers. Most soft-
ware synthesizers will allow some sort of combination syn-
thesis whether it is fully functional synthesis engines, or just
a simple low pass filter.
The number of synthesizer workstations that have been
released, and are subsequently on the new and used mar-
kets, could fill many chapters and do not warrant an in-depth
model by model exploration. That being said, the Korg Kro-
nos and Oasys are among the first workstation synthesizers

296
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

and will serve to outline the features one might expect to find
in a workstation and combination synthesizer.

Korg Kronos and Oasys

Both the Korg Kronos and the Oasys before it are power-
ful workstation synthesizers that boast nine discreet sound
synthesis engines. The various synthesis engines available
to Kronos and Oasys users include virtual subtractive syn-
thesis, sample-based synthesis, physical modeling synthesis,
wave shaping, and frequency modulation. The Oasys was
Korg’s flagship workstation synthesizer up until the Kronos
was introduced with better memory and greater computing
power.
Besides just allowing for complex synthesis capabilities, the
Kronos allows users to digitally record up to 16 tracks at
24-bit resolution as well as full MIDI connectivity. The trend
of including digital recording capabilities on synthesizers
became extremely widespread in the early 2000s and is still
very much found today. Although widespread use of DAW
software has somewhat eclipsed the usefulness of record-
ing capabilities on workstation synthesizers, many users still
desire the function ability.

Workstation Breakdown
Although what is desired in a workstation synthesizer is
constantly changing, a few key elements will most likely be
present in most, if not all, workstation synthesizers. These
elements include a number of individual synthesis engines,
as well as a complex sampling interface, both a complex
sequencer and arpeggiator, multitrack digital audio record-
ing interface, full MIDI connectivity, and, finally, a wealth
of controller types including keys, sliders, knobs, and drum
pads. In today’s ever-changing digital recording climate, the
desire for workstation keyboards is dwindling. Multitype
MIDI controllers seem to be replacing workstation synthesiz-
ers since they can easily be utilized in a DAW environment

297
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

such as Logic Pro, FL Studio, or Ableton Live. Perhaps in an

ironic twist of fate, all-in-one workstation synthesizers will
regain popularity in the future and be coveted as “vintage
synthesizers.”

Recipes
The recipes provided in this chapter will be geared towards
physical modeling synthesis as it is the only completely
unique synthesis format introduced in this chapter. For many
years, the allure of modeling synthesis was its uncanny abil-
ity to re-create sounds with the utmost precision. Many peo-
ple felt that this was modeling synthesis’s most prominent
strength. Although modeling synthesis’s ability to re-create
the sounds of physical instruments is astounding, we feel its
true strength is its ability to create new sounds not attainable
through any other form of synthesis. Therefore, we have cho-
sen to take this direction in the creation of the recipes for this
chapter. We chose to use the modeling soft synth Sculpture,
which comes with the DAW Logic Pro. Before we delve into
each of the recipes, let’s take some time to explore, in more
depth, what Sculpture has to offer.

Sculpture
Sculpture is an immensely powerful modeling synthesizer.
Besides its awe-inspiring modeling engine, Sculpture features
a wealth of resonant filters, wave shaping capabilities, power-
ful DSP effects, and an immensely cool vector-inspired move-
ment section. Add to this the powerful modulation matrix and
various performance control features and Sculpture shines as
a software synthesizer. To stay true to the modeling aspect
of this chapter, we have chosen to create patches that only
use Sculpture’s modeling engine. Therefore, traditional filters
and effects will not be found in these recipes. Instead, the ten
recipes that follow will serve to explore the sheer power that
modeling synthesis has to offer. Before going through each of
the recipes in depth, however, it is necessary to explain a few
of the parameters we will be using inside of Sculpture.

298
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.16 Sculpture’s string

section.

The String
Sculpture’s sound engine is based around the concept of
a string. The entire synth is designed so that the user can
determine the material this string is made of, how the string
is excited into motion, how the string’s sound is captured,
and then, finally, how the captured sound is modulated and
effected. The circular section in the middle of the interface
is where we can determine the material and stiffness of the
string. Inside this circular section is a square labeled Material.
By moving the sliver ball around this material square, we can
determine the material the string is made up of. Our options
are nylon, wood, steel, and glass. It is important to note, how-
ever, that similarly to a vector plane, this ball can be moved
anywhere in this square allowing for an extreme amount of
tonal changes.

Objects
Once we have determined the material of our string, we
can choose up to three objects to excite said string. Each of
the three objects has a wide variety of types, which relates

299
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.17 Sculpture’s object

section.

to how the string will be excited. The range of types is vast

but includes thing like bouncing, bow, strike, and impulse.
All of these types are models. This means that if one were to
choose the bouncing object type, Sculpture would produce an
algorithm that mimicked something physically bouncing on
the main string. The sounds that can be created with these
models are truly breathtaking. You can think of these objects
as oscillators with the type selector akin to a wave shape
selector. Each object and type will add sonic character to the
sound as a whole. We also have the ability to choose how the
object responds to a key being pressed. We can choose to have
the object excite the string either when a key is depressed,
released, or have the object constantly exciting the string.
A few additional options are available to us in which to fur-
ther sculpt how the object will excite the string.

Pickups and Object Positions

The Pickup section of Sculpture allows us to choose how we
capture the sound emanating from the main string. Think of
the two Pickups like pickups on a guitar, based off where the
pickups are on a guitar’s body will determine the timbre of

300
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.18 Sculpture’s Pickup

and object position section.

the sound. The two Pickups in Sculpture, A and B, can be sep-

arately moved across the entire length of the string. The two
Pickup positions can also be modulated. Inside the Pickup
section, we can find the object positions. These controls allow
us to move each of the three objects to different areas of the
string, causing different responses and timbres. Each of the
three objects can be placed at any point on the string

LFOs and Modulation

Sculpture offers two freely assignable LFOs that can be
routed to virtually any parameter on the synth, a third LFO

Figure 8.19 Sculpture’s

modulation section.

301
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

dedicated to pitch modulation, or vibrato, two envelope gen-

erators, a jitter generator, and, finally, two randomizers. Each
of these parameters can be sculpted by the user and routed to
a variety of places for extreme modulation capabilities. The
two main LFOs have a wealth of wave shapes and can be free
running or beat synced.

Master Section
The final parameter in Sculpture’s modeling engine is the
Master section. In the Master section, we have the ability to
adjust the main amplifier envelope generator as well as the
panning of keys and Pickups, and then, finally, the overall
level of the synth.

Other Parameters
As stated earlier, we are just focusing on the modeling engine
inside of Sculpture, but there are a wealth of other parameters
that Sculpture offers that warrant mention even though we
will be disregarding them in our recipes. First and foremost is
Sculpture’s powerful multifilter. Sculpture’s filter is fully res-
onant with high pass, low pass, peak, band pass, and notch
filter shapes. Next is the wave shaper. Adjusting Sculpture’s
wave shaper will add an amount of distortion or harshness to
a patch that is quite astounding. Finally, a full-fledged morph
pad and corresponding morph envelope allow for extreme
amounts of animated movement, which is sure to take your
patch to the next level.
Now that we have covered the basics of Sculpture’s modeling
engine, let’s explore each of the patches we have created for

Figure 8.20 Sculpture’s Master

section.

302
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

this chapter. If you own Sculpture, feel free to follow along

and expand upon these patches.

Recipe 1: Stiff Bouncing Shimmer

The first recipe on our list sounds like a soft mallet bouncing
on the high strings of a piano. The sound is quite pretty and
would fit well in most pop or ambient songs. The patch con-
sists of all three objects with a string material that is between
steel and nylon with about 60% resolution. Object one is set
to Impulse with a keyOn gate. Object two is set to Bow with
a KeyOn gate as well. Object three is set to Bouncing with a
KeyOff gate so that the bouncing sound comes in once a key is
released. Object one has about 75% strength while object two
has 50% strength. Object three is weaker still, with about 20%
strength. All the objects are placed in chronological order on
the string with object one starting about 1/5th up the string
from the left-hand side, while object three is about 4/6ths
up the string. The amplifier’s envelope has zero attack with
medium range decay and release and a slightly lower sus-
tain. Both Key and Pickup are panned to the center. Pickup
A is set at 1/4th up the string from the left while Pickup B is
set at 3/4ths up the string from the left. A sine wave LFO set
to 0.75Hz is routed to Pickup B’s pan control, almost fully
engaged in the positive domain.

Figure 8.21 Screenshot of Stiff

Bouncing Shimmer patch.

303
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.22 Screenshot of

Distorted Dissonant Pop patch.

Recipe 2: Distorted Dissonant Pop

At first, this second recipe sounds like a distorted FM synth
sound, but then it quickly turns dissonant in an extremely
pleasing manner. The patch consists of just the first two
objects both turned to Impulse. Object one has a strength set-
ting of 100% while object two is set to 50% strength. The string
material is fairly close to the Steel corner with full resolution.
Object one is placed about 1/3rd up the string from the left,
while object two is placed directly in the center. Pickup A is
placed about 1/4th up the string from the left, while Pickup B
is placed 3/4ths up the string. The Pickup parameter is spread
modestly into the left and right while Key is fully spread. The
amplifier envelope is set to an extremely short attack, mid-
range decay, full sustain, and nonexistent release. Finally, a
100Hz sine wave LFO is routed to the position of both Pick-
ups with about 30% depth in the positive domain.

Recipe 3: Realistic Muted Bass

The third recipe on our list is extremely reminiscent of a
slightly muted electric bass being played with a pick. The
sound consists of the first two objects with a type setting of
Impulse and Strike, respectively. Both objects feature about a
50% strength setting. The string material is set between steel
and nylon with the setting close to nylon and about 60%

304
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.23 Screen shot of

Realistic Muted Bass patch.

resolution. Pickup A is placed about 1/5th up the string from

the left while Pickup B is placed about 3/5ths up the string.
Object one and two are placed on either side of the halfway
mark with about a full 1/4th space between them. The ampli-
fier envelope features an extremely short attack time, mid-
range decay time, full sustain, and about a 3/4ths full release
time. The Pickup setting is fully spread.

Recipe 4: Odd Shimmering Pad

The fourth recipe on our list is a weird pad-type sound that
can only be explained by imagining a steel bow scraping

Figure 8.24 Screenshot of Odd

Shimmering Pad patch.

305
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

across a resonant steel sheet. The sound consists of all three

objects with Strike, Blow, and Bouncing type settings respec-
tively. Object one has a 50% strength setting, while objects
two and three have a 25% setting. Object one is placed 3/4ths
up the string from the left, while object two is placed 1/4ths
up and object three placed about halfway up. Pickup A is in
line with object two while Pickup B is placed directly before
object one. The string material is set between steel and glass
with the selector being closer to steel with full resolution. The
amplifier envelope features a 3/4ths-full attack time, half-full
decay, full sustain, and 3/4ths-full release. Both Key and
Pickup are fully spread. A 6.70Hz sine wave LFO is routed
to the panning of Pickup A and B with 100% positive depth,
while a second 0.08 sine wave LFO is routed just to the pan-
ning of Pickup A with about a 50% positive depth.

Recipe 5: Deep Synth Bass

The fifth recipe on our list is reminiscent of a traditional,
eighties’ synth bass, but with a weird elastic rubber quality
to it. The sound is made up of all three objects with Strike,
Pick, and Bouncing settings respectively. Object one has a
100% strength setting, while both object two and three feature
50% strength settings. Object one is placed just shy of 3/4ths
up the string from the left, while object two is placed 1/5th
up and object three is almost directly between objects one

Figure 8.25 Screenshot of Deep

Synth Bass patch.

306
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

and two. Pickup A is perfectly in line with object two, while

Pickup B is perfectly in line with object one. The string mate-
rial is between nylon and steel with heavy emphasis towards
steel and full resolution. The amplifier envelope features an
extremely short attack with a midrange decay, full sustain,
and 3/4-full release.

Recipe 6: Vibrating Bells

The sixth recipe on our list sounds a bit like if one were to
gently strike bells with a felted mallet. The sound consists
of the first two objects set to Impulse and Bow respectively.
Object one features a strength setting of about 90%, while
object two’s strength is set to about 75%. Object one is placed
about 1/5th up the string from the left, while object two is
placed 4/5ths up. Pickup A is perfectly in line with object
one, while Pickup B is placed about 3/5ths up the string. The
string material is between steel and glass but inching towards
the middle of the plane, allowing for a slight mix between all
the materials. The string features full resolution. The ampli-
fier envelope features an extremely short attack, midrange
decay, full sustain, and 3/4-full release. Key is slightly spread.
A 0.19Hz sine wave LFO is routed to object two’s position
with 100% positive depth. An additional 0.07Hz sine wave
LFO is routed to the position of Pickups A and B with 100%
positive depth.

Figure 8.26 Screenshot of

Vibrating Bells patch.

307
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.27 Screenshot of Full

Spectrum Synth patch.

Recipe 7: Full Spectrum Synth

This seventh recipe is a cool synthesized mix between a low
guitar string pluck and high-end piano. It’s made up of just
two objects with Impulse and Noise type settings, respec-
tively. Object one is set to a KeyOn gate with 100% strength,
while object two is set to a KeyOff gate with about 65%
strength. Object one and two are both placed about 1/3rd
up the string from the left with object one slightly further
to the right than object two. Pickup B is slightly to the left
of object two while Pickup A is about 3/4ths up the string
from the left. The string material is in the bottom left corner,
allowing for a mix between steel, glass, and nylon with most
emphasis placed on steel. The string features full resolution.
The amplifier envelope features an extremely short attack,
almost full decay, zero sustain, and slightly more than half of
a full release. Finally, a 0.12Hz triangle wave LFO is routed
to the position of Pickups A and B with about 36% positive
depth.

Recipe 8: High Rate of Wobble

The eighth recipe on our list sounds like an acoustic guitar
being strummed under water. It’s made up of all three objects
with Impulse, Noise, and Bouncing type settings, respectively.

308
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.28 Screenshot of High

Rate of Wobble patch.

Object one features 100% strength setting, object two features

34% strength setting, and object three features 62% strength
setting. Objects one and three are placed almost on top of
one another about 1/3rd up the string from the left, while
object two is placed 3/4ths up the string from the left. Pickup
A is placed directly to the left of objects one and three, while
Pickup B is placed directly to the left of object two. The string
material is in the bottom left of the square resulting in a mix-
ture between nylon, steel, and glass, with a heavy empha-
sis on steel. The string features full resolution. The amplifier
envelope generator features an extremely short attack with
almost full decay, nonexistent sustain, and a little more than
half of a full release. The Pickup parameter is fully spread.
A 31Hz triangle wave LFO is routed to the panning of Pick-
ups A and B with 100% positive depth, which results in the
underwater aspect of the sound.

Recipe 9: Synth Keys

The ninth recipe on our list is reminiscent of an electric piano:
only with a metallic, synthetic flair. The patch consists of only
the first object engaged with a GravStrike type setting and a
75% strength setting with an Always gate. Object one is placed
directly in the center of the string with Pickups A and B 1/4th
in from either side of the string. The string material is in

309
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.29 Screenshot of Synth

Keys patch.

between nylon and steel, but much closer to steel. The selec-
tor ball for the string material is a bit inward in the plane,
so a mix is able to be heard of all materials. The string also
features a resolution of 100%. The amplifier envelope features
an extremely short attack, full decay and sustain, and, finally,
a 1/4th-full release. Pickup is fully spread. A 1/2-beat sine
wave LFO is routed to the position of Pickups A and B with a
20% negative depth.

Recipe 10: Distant Rhythms

The final recipe on our list is one of the coolest. It’s a highly
animated pad that sounds like an electronic music concert
heard from outside of a tent. This patch was designed to be
used in the lower register of a keyboard. This patch consists
of only the first object engaged with a Noise type setting and
about 50% strength. The timbre and variation settings on the
object are both set at 100% in the positive direction. Object
one is placed slightly to the left of center while Pickups
A and B are both 1/6th in from either side of the string. The
string material is almost fully set to steel with a 76% resolu-
tion. The amplifier attack is extremely short, while both the
decay and sustain parameters are set to full. Release is set just
shy of halfway. The Pickup parameter is almost fully spread.
A 1/4 beat “Rect01” shaped LFO is routed to the positions of

310
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Figure 8.30 Screenshot of

Distant Rhythms patch.

Pickups A and B as well as object one’s timbre. The routing

to the Pickups has a 100% positive depth, while the object
timbre routing has a 100% negative depth. This first LFO also
features a 48% positive curve setting. The second LFO is a
1/8th-beat sawtooth LFO with a negative 16% curve setting.
This LFO is routed to object one’s timbre as well, only with a
40% positive depth.

Historical Perspective on Modeling

Synthesis
Like some of the other synthesis formats discussed in this
book, physical modeling synthesis was conceived before
the technology existed with which to implement it. The first
strides in physical modeling synthesis came from Lejaren
Hiller and Pierre Ruiz. Hiller and Ruiz, who worked out
of the State University of New York and Bell Laboratories,
respectively, conceived of a way of creating realistic models of
physical instruments through using finite difference approxi-
mations of the wave equation.1 In essence, Hiller and Ruiz
examined vibrating objects, such as strings, and attempted
to describe them via differential equations that could then
be coded and programmed for a digital computer. Although
Hiller and Ruiz only concentrated on vibrating strings, they

311
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

were able to prove their methods for use with other vibrat-
ing objects such as bars, plates, membranes, and spheres.
Although Hiller and Ruiz were able to successfully model
limited stringed instruments, it was not until the develop-
ment of the Karplus-Strong algorithm that physical modeling
synthesis started to gain traction in the scientific world.2
Alexander Strong invented, while Kevin Karplus analyzed
and described, the algorithm that would become known as
the Karplus-Strong algorithm. The algorithm models the
sound of a plucked or hammered string by looping a short
waveform through a filtered delay line. Imagine a plucked
string, such as a cello played in a pizzicato manner. Directly
after the string is plucked, the sound will be harmonically
rich. Shortly after the string is first plucked, however, the
higher harmonics will start to drop in amplitude followed
by the lower harmonics, until the sound is finally inaudible.
When using the Karplus-Strong algorithm, a short wave-
form is produced and then looped back into a low pass filter,
eliminating some of the higher frequencies. The new, filtered
waveform is looped back into the filter and more high har-
monics are filtered out of the sound. The resulting waveforms
are continuously looped and filtered until the sound is inau-
dible, mimicking the way in which a plucked string would
naturally fade away. Each loop corresponds to approximately
one period, or cycle, of the waveform.
The introduction and success of the Karplus-Strong algo-
rithm piqued the interest of a lot of engineers and synthe-
sizer companies. Brief murmurings about the promise of
this new technology could be heard among a few, select
individuals. One such person was Julius Smith, who went
on to create an extension of the Karplus-Strong algorithm,
which would become known as digital waveguide synthe-
sis.3 Digital waveguides are basically computational models
for the way in which acoustic waves move through physical
media. Using waveguide synthesis, engineers were able to
successfully model a number of instruments with extreme
accuracy.

312
 Combination Synthesis and Modeling

Although the theory was there, DSP power simply was not. It
would not be long, however, until DSP power would catch up
with physical modeling theory and begin being implemented
in commercial instruments. Yamaha was one of the first com-
panies to see the potential of physical modeling synthesis.
In 1989, Yamaha signed a contract with Stanford Univer-
sity to begin designing instruments that would feature this
new technology. The first such instrument to utilize physical
modeling synthesis was the Yamaha VL-1 released in 1994.
The VL-1 was a revolutionary instrument that held extreme
promise. Although many people were able to realize the sheer
power of VL-1, it was far out of the reach of many people’s
budgets. In order to try and bring more appeal to Yamaha’s
new synthesis technology, the company released the VL-7,
which was a slightly scaled back but much less expensive ver-
sion of the VL-1. The VL-7 proved to be quite successful and
even encouraged more manufacturers to release their own
physical modeling synthesizers. However, sampling technol-
ogy and low budget rompler synthesizers overshadowed the
much more powerful physical modeling synthesizers of the
day, resulting in a declining number of sales.
Physical modeling technology would, more or less, stay dor-
mant throughout the 1990s and early 2000s. Although the
occasional physical modeling sound engine would show up
in a workstation synthesizer every now and again, no worth-
while advancements were made in the technology. This all
started to change with the coming of digital audio work-
stations and software-based synthesis engines. CPU power
began to reach levels that allowed for extremely powerful
synthesis engines without much computational strains. Phys-
ical modeling synthesis has since flourished in the software
domain with programs such as Reason and Ableton Live
offering users a wealth of physical modeling capabilities.
Physical modeling synthesis is often confused with sample-
based synthesis and is often overlooked and disregarded.
Because of the extreme realism that can be achieved using
physical modeling synthesis, many people just assume it to

313
Combination Synthesis and Modeling

be interchangeable with sample-based synthesis. This view-

point, however, fails to realize the power physical modeling
synthesis holds as an independent synthesis engine. The truth
is that physical modeling synthesis can not only re-create
physical instruments beautifully, it can create new and inter-
esting sounds that do not exist outside the world of physi-
cal modeling synthesis. Because of this, physical modeling
synthesis should never be overlooked and should, instead,
be realized for what it is, an amazing and truly inspiring syn-
thesis format.

Notes
1. Diana Deutsch, The Psychology of Music, San Diego, CA: Gulf Profes-
sional Publishing, 1999, pp. 132.
2. J. O. Smith, “Delay Lines,” in Physical Audio Signal Processing,
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/pasp/Delay_Lines.html, online book,
2010 edition.
3. Julius O. Smith, III, “Physical Modeling using Digital Waveguides,”
Computer Music Journal vol. 16, no. 4 (Winter 1992), pp. 74–91.

314
PERFORMING LIVE 9

Musicians have long realized the benefits of incorporating

synthesizers into their performances. Besides just allowing
for a richer sonic palette, the synthesizer can add a cool fac-
tor to a performance that is unattainable through any other
means. Seeing someone on stage surrounded by stacks of
keyboards and synthesizer panels reminiscent of a mad sci-
entist in a dark laboratory is enough to kick a viewer’s imagi-
nation into high gear.
Being that there are so many synthesizers and controllers
currently on the market, there are virtually hundreds, if not
thousands, of synthesizer setups that could be examined for
live performance. Due to this, we will examine a few tradi-
tional setups, as well as various categories of synthesizers
and controllers that one may use live. The categories of syn-
thesizers and setups covered in this chapter will vary from
all analog gear, to all digital gear, to all software gear, and,
finally, a number of combinations of each. The pros, cons,
connections and playability, and portability of each setup will
all be considered.

Using Analog Synthesizers Live

Performing live with analog synthesizers is not for the faint
of heart. Analog synthesizers are finicky at best and down-
right unreliable at worst. In the very best of cases, a synthesist
must make an extreme amount of control changes during a
song as well as the short time between songs to create vari-
ous sounds. More often than not, however, synthesists must
constantly be tuning and maintaining their analog synthesiz-
ers throughout a single performance as well as troubleshoot-
ing circuitry problems mid show. That being said, analog

315
Performing Live

Figure 9.1 Classic live setup

featuring analog gear.

synthesizers are capable of some of the warmest, richest,

most mind-blowing sounds imaginable. Because of this,
many musicians are determined to use them live despite the
headache they may cause. Before delving into ways in which
one may utilize analog synthesizers in a live environment,
let’s examine in depth some of the pros and cons of using
analog synthesizers live.

Pro—Extreme Sonic Manipulation

Due to the nature of analog synthesizers having designated
controls for every single parameter available, a musician is
free to adjust these controls on the fly. Having control over
the entire synth without having to menu dive on a small LCD
screen allows the user to make changes with ease to virtually
any parameter.

Pro—Logical Interfacing
with Musicians
Most analog synthesizers require the synthesist to tune the
individual oscillators to a set pitch. While this may seem
like a chore, it actually allows for much easier collaborations
between musicians and synthesizers. Take an orchestra for
example. When musicians are tuning their respective instru-
ments, they tune to one another rather than a pure tone. By
doing this, the orchestra as a whole might be slightly off of
A 440. A synthesist can then adjust the tuning of his or her
analog synthesizer in order to be perfectly in pitch with the
orchestra. The same theory holds true in a rock band where

316
 Performing Live

Figure 9.2 Visual representation

of an envelope follower.

the synthesist can tune to the guitar or bass player. In addi-

tion to this, many analog synthesizers will feature a circuit
known as an envelope follower. An envelope follower basically
applies the envelope of a signal, such as a guitar, voice, or
drum set, and then applies it to the synthesizer. While digital
and software synthesizers surely offer this capability as well,
analog synthesizers will typically allow for more fine tuning
and customization of the envelope follower in order to ensure
the synthesist gets the sound he or she desires.

Pro—Sonic Improvisation
As previously mentioned, analog synthesizers oftentimes
feature designated controls for each and every parameter.
Because of this, a synthesist is free to constantly change the
timbre of the instrument. Having such unlimited control over

317
Performing Live

the sound of the synthesizer allows the synthesist to keep up

in a heavily laden improvisational setting. For instance, the
synthesist can create more subtle sounds as the band plays
more piano and harsher sounds when the band plays more
forte.

Pro—Amazing Sound/Cool Factor

It is hard to deny that analog synthesizers are capable of pro-
ducing some of the warmest, fattest, most inspired sounds
capable in sound synthesis. Besides the sheer awesomeness
of the sounds produced, many synthesists feel a certain
connection to analog synthesizers, perhaps due to the large
amount of physical contact needed to perform on one. Lastly,
a large array of blinking lights, knobs, and even patch cords
convey a certain amount of coolness that many people desire.

Con—Unstable Circuitry
Analog circuitry, especially vintage analog circuitry, can often-
times be quite unstable. Things like temperature and pres-
sure changes, dust, old age, and fluctuating voltages can
wreak havoc on an analog synthesizer. At best, the user will
experience oscillators that drift in and out of pitch and must
be recalibrated. At worst however, analog synthesizers can
begin to crackle, pop, and even suddenly cease making noise.

Con—Patch Storage/Performance
Mapping
For many years, analog synthesizers simply did not feature
patch storage. Once they started to incorporate patch stor-
age in the late 1970s, it was extremely limited. Although
many modern analog synthesizers will offer patch storage,
a good percentage of the analog synthesizers being used
do not. Another function found on many digital synthesiz-
ers, but absent on analog synthesizers, is performance map-
ping. Performance mapping is designating individual preset
sounds to different ranges of the keyboard in order for the

318
 Performing Live

synthesist to have access to different sounds at once. Analog

synthesizers are almost wholly incapable of this function.

Con—Large, Cumbersome, and

Limited
Analog synthesizers are oftentimes seen as large, heavy
machines. Although a MiniMoog is leaps and bounds smaller
than its Moog modular counterpart, it is still deemed large in
today’s musical environment. Therefore, many users feel that
it is a burden to lug around analog synthesizers from show to
show. Furthermore, many musicians choose to use multiple
analog synthesizers on stage at once to have different sound
options. Bringing multiple analog synthesizers to every show
can start to take a toll on a musician who does not have a
large bus and roadies.

A Note on Unstable Circuitry

Although all analog circuitry is susceptible to environmental
changes, most modern analog synthesizers are much more
stable than their vintage counterparts. In fact, once a modern
analog synthesizer has fully warmed up (typically 20–30 min-
utes after powering on), it will most likely stay in tune for the
duration of the show. Although modern analog synthesizers

Figure 9.3 The MiniMoog

Voyager is a modern analog
synthesizer.

319
Performing Live

are extremely stable, many musicians choose to perform with

vintage models, so unstable circuitry must remain as one of
the potential cons of using analog synthesizers live.

Controlling Analog Synthesizers Live

Once the decision has been made to use analog synthesiz-
ers live, a user must decide how to control his or her analog
synthesizers. Luckily, there is a wide variety of controllers
and setups available to the analog synthesizer purist. Before
delving into the various controllers available, a discussion on
control voltage is warranted. Control voltage, or simply C.V.,
is used to determine pitch and gate information on an analog
synthesizer. Because analog oscillators produce a continu-
ous pitch, something is needed in which to map out various
notes so the synthesizer can be played musically. Tradition-
ally, synthesizers use the 1volt/octave standard, meaning
one volt is divided into 12 equal parts to accommodate the
Western 12-tone scale. This means that two “A” notes played
an octave apart will also be one volt apart. Not all synthe-
sizers adhere to this volt/octave standard, though, so special
precaution must be taken when interfacing multiple analog
synthesizers. Control voltage is also used for creating gate
signals on an analog synthesizer. Because an analog oscilla-
tor is always producing sound, an amplifier and gate trigger
are needed in order to make sound heard only when a key is
depressed. Traditionally, this voltage is +5volts.
As you probably already know, many synthesizers feature a
piano-like black and white keyboard, which acts as the syn-
thesizer’s pitch and gate controller. These keyboards will
send control voltage to the synthesizer whenever a key is
depressed or let go. The easiest way in which to play an ana-
log synthesizer live is to simply set up a few synths and play
away on the key beds. When using this approach however, a
synthesist is limited to only playing two synths at once with
one hand on each keyboard. Although this surely works and
has been used by thousands of musicians, there are many
instances when an additional synthesizer is desired to play a

320
 Performing Live

droning note or a pattern that changes pitch with the song. By

using the control voltage outputs on an analog synthesizer,
one can control a variety of synthesizers with just a single
keyboard.

Patching the control voltage and gate outputs of a synthe-

sizer into the control voltage and gate inputs on an additional
synthesizer will allow for simultaneous control. When used
in this way, a synthesist is able to trigger the second synthe-
sizer via the first synthesizer’s keyboard. This technique is
extremely useful when creating extremely large synth sounds
that are far too big to be contained on a single synthesizer.
A similar and equally awesome technique is to only patch
the pitch control of the first synthesizer into the second synth
while opening the amplifier of the second synth. By doing
this, a pattern can be played on the first synth while the
second synth produces long, droning notes that match the
pitches played on the first synthesizer. When using this tech-
nique, there are a variety of ways in which to open the filter of
the second synthesizer that are dependent on the synthesizer
itself. Some synthesizers feature a button that leaves the fil-
ter continuously open; this is usually labeled something like
“hold,” while other synthesizers will require an external con-
tinuous gate source to be patched into them.

While these techniques are extremely useful and quite musi-

cal, some musicians require additional patterns and synth
lines that cannot be created using just two hands. One way
in which to produce these additional patterns and lines is to
use a laptop or playback device. Although laptops and play-
back devices certainly have their place, this discussion is cen-
tered on analog gear, so we will focus for the time being on
sequencers and arpeggiators.

Sequencers have long been a staple in synthesis. A sequencer

is basically a device which spits out pitch and gate informa-
tion at regular intervals. Sequencers can be used in a number
of ways, but by far the most traditional use of a sequencer
is a repeating pattern that stays constant or gets transposed

321
Performing Live

Figure 9.4 Multiple synthesizers

connected through control voltage.
Synthesizer photos courtesy of
www.switchedonaustin.com.

with key changes. As sequencers only produce control volt-

age and gate information, they can be used to create a pattern
on any synthesizer parameter that accepts control voltage,
such as a filter. By patching a sequencer into a filter, the filter
will open and close rhythmically based off of the settings of
the sequencer. Pete Townshend is famous for employing this
technique on a number of Who songs, the most notable being
“Baba O’Riley.”
A sequencer gets its timing information from a gate source
known as a clock, which is usually a pulse wave-producing
oscillator. Most sequencers will feature internal clock sources
as well as have the ability to be clocked from an external
source, such as a separate synthesizer or metronome. Using a
master metronome or clock source for a number of different
synths and sequencers will allow for all synth patterns to be
played in time with one another, which will help the analog
synthesist in performance. By using a sequencer in this way
in conjunction with other synthesizers, complex patterns can

322
 Performing Live

be created while the performer is free to play lead lines over

the pattern.
Like a sequencer, an arpeggiator is a device that also pro-
duces pitch and gate information in a repeating manner. An
arpeggiator will almost always be built into a given synthe-
sizer and is more limited in scope than a sequencer. An arpeg-
giator gets its pitch information from keys that are physically
depressed on the synth’s keyboard and repeats them in low
to high or high to low order. Many arpeggiators allow for the
addition of octaves of the notes being played. Some arpeg-
giators even allow for dotted or swung rhythms. Unlike
sequencers however, arpeggiators almost always get their
clock from an internal source and typically don’t allow for
external clocking. Despite their more limited nature, arpeg-
giators are great for creating simple, repeating patterns that
bode well to the live performance environment.

Using Modular Synthesizers Live

In recent years, a resurgence of analog modular synthesiz-
ers has taken place with a number of companies creating
new modular gear in both traditional 5U and newer Euro-
rack sizes. The modular synthesizers of today are in many

Figure 9.5 A clock source is

used to send timing information
to various devices.

323
Performing Live

aspects more powerful and even better than modular synthe-

sizers created in their heyday in the 1960s and 1970s. Analog
circuitry has come a far way since the 1960s and allows for
much more stable synth modules. While not many people
even toyed with the notion of bringing their modular synthe-
sizers onto the stage in the 1970s, many musicians are begin-
ning to perform with modular equipment.
A modular synthesizer is made up of individual modules
that each act as standalone synthesizer blocks. This means
that in order to have a three-oscillator, two-envelope gen-
erator, and single-filter modular synthesizer, three oscilla-
tor modules, two envelope generator modules, and a filter
module must all be present in a system. The number of indi-
vidual modules a system contains is typically left up to the
user as he or she can purchase and add on as many modules
as he or she wishes. Being that each module exists separately
from one another, patch cords must be connected between
modules. Using modular synthesizers live requires the same
care given to analog synthesizers as well as a wealth of spare
patch cables and parts. Using a modular synthesizer live can
be considered the ultimate creative tool for sonic manipula-
tion, but like with anything else, it takes practice to perform
with a modular synthesizer.

Figure 9.6 A modern, modular

synthesizer setup.

324
 Performing Live

You are probably starting to notice that creating interesting,

complex analog synthesis performances requires a wealth of
equipment all behaving nicely with one another. In order to
create an environment with evolving patterns and additional
lead lines, the minimum equipment needed is a sequencer, a
synth that will play said sequence, and an additional synth
to play lines of the pattern. If more than one synth sound is
desired in a song, additional synths will have to be added to
the mix. Because analog circuitry is finicky, constant tweak-
ing will be necessary not only to keep the synths working
and communicating correctly with one another, but also to
maintain stable tuning and creating various sounds between
songs. That being said, this is a small price to pay for the ben-
efit analog synthesis has to offer.

Using Digital Synthesizers Live

If lugging around a large number of synthesizers and con-
stantly tweaking them to maintain them does not seem like
your cup of tea, digital synthesis may be right for you. In fact,
digital synthesizers became popular for this very reason; musi-
cians were sick of bringing so many synthesizers on stage just
to have a variety of different synth sounds. Once digital syn-
thesizers like the Yamaha DX7 started to hit the market, musi-
cians were finally free to bring a single synthesizer on stage
that was capable of switching sounds in an instant while main-
taining extreme levels of stability. The Yamaha DX7 and digi-
tal synthesizers like it helped all but kill analog synthesis until
recent years. As with analog synthesizers, let’s explore some of
the pros and cons of using digital synthesizers live before we
delve into some of the possible setups a musician can use.

Figure 9.7 The Yamaha

DX7. Photo courtesy of www.
switchedonaustin.com.

325
Performing Live

Pro—Preset and Patch Storage

Perhaps one of the biggest advancements that digital syn-
thesizers brought to live performance was the ability to not
only to change the synthesizer’s sound instantaneously, but
also to store patches as presets. By allowing patch storage
and instantaneous recall, musicians were free to start a song
with a pad sound and then change to a screaming lead sound
in an instant without changing any settings on the synth
itself. Many musicians flocked to this technology with just
the promise of preset technology. Digital synthesizers such
as the Yamaha DX7 also allowed musicians the capability of
re-creating natural instrument sounds such as organs and
electric pianos very easily, which allowed them to leave their
heavy organs and electric pianos at home when they went
on tour.

Pro—Extremely Stable Circuitry

Due to the presence of integrated circuits and digital signal
processing (DSP) technology in digital synthesis, digital syn-
thesizers are extremely stable machines. Unlike analog syn-
thesizers, which are susceptible to environmental changes,
digital synthesizers will typically remain 100% stable from
powering up to powering down. Being able to fully rely on a
synthesizer through not only the duration of a show but an
entire tour was and is hugely attractive to most musicians.

Pro—Small, Compact Size

Although analog synthesizers began getting smaller and
smaller before digital synthesizers took over, most were still
too large and cumbersome for many musicians. Digital syn-
thesizers, on the other hand, were often much more compact
than their analog counterparts. Offering the powerful tools of
digital synthesis in a relatively small, compact package not
only allows for ease of portability, but also allows musicians
to have more tools and sounds at their disposal than could be
had with an equal number of analog synthesizers.

326
 Performing Live

Con—Less Instantaneous
Customization
Although digital synthesizers allow for instantaneous pre-
set recall, customizing each preset on the fly is troublesome.
Many digital synthesizers require users to dive deep into
the many menus and submenus of the synth itself in order
to adjust various parameters such as filter cutoff, resonance,
and envelope generator settings. Although many musicians
might feel that simply recalling and playing presets is ade-
quate for their performances, many people prefer the ability
to adjust parameters live. That being said, many modern dig-
ital synthesizers have included the ability to make real-time
adjustments to various parameters with the inclusion of
potentiometers and sliders dedicated to each parameter.

Con—Limited Field Repair

Although no musician hopes for their synthesizer to suddenly
stop working on a tour, it oftentimes cannot be avoided. When
touring with analog equipment, most repairs are fairly simple
to someone with even a basic understanding of electronics.
Parts can be purchased and swapped out on an analog synthe-
sizer with only a few hours and a soldering iron. Digital syn-
thesizers, although more stable than analog, seem to fail more
catastrophically. It should be known that most digital synthe-
sizers, especially modern digital synthesizers, will rarely fail,
but if they do, they might not be repairable on tour and would
have to be shipped to the factory. If a digital synthesizer sud-
denly stops producing sound, it might be a more complex fix
than simply tracing signal through the synth or swapping out
the output jack. In these instances, a complete overhaul of the
internal memory, DSP, or motherboard might be necessary.

Con—Less Flexibility When

Interfacing with Musicians
Although analog synthesizers are finicky, they are more
suited for direct interaction with other musicians in a live

327
Performing Live

performance setting. Digital synthesizers mainly require

MIDI information or physical playing to control them. This
means that in order to be triggered from a drummer, the
drummer must be using either a MIDI drum set or have
access to MIDI pads. This is not to say that musicians have
not incorporated inventive ways to get around this and suc-
cessfully integrated themselves with digital synthesizers,
only that digital synthesizers are not as easily suited for this
purpose as analog synthesizers.

Controlling Digital Synthesizers Live

Like with analog synthesizers and control voltage, digital syn-
thesizers have their own communication protocol known as
Musical Instrument Digital Interface, or simply MIDI. MIDI
is a proprietary control technology that is used in many areas
outside of synthesizers and even outside of music. MIDI has
become the dominant control force in the industry since its
inception in 1983. Virtually every synth created today, be it
analog, digital, or software, will be able to send and receive
MIDI messages. Basically, MIDI is a two-way communication
protocol that relays information such as notes, velocity, con-
troller wheel positions, etc. Using MIDI, musicians can con-
nect various synthesizers in a similar fashion to their analog
counterparts, connect designated controllers to MIDI sound
racks, and, finally, connect synthesizers and controllers to a
computer.
Like with analog synthesizers, digital synthesizers fea-
ture step sequencers and arpeggiators as well. As might be
guessed, sequencers and arpeggiators that exist on digital
synthesizers will most likely be completely digital. In the case
of step sequencers, rather than sending out voltages for pitch
and gate information, digital sequencers will output MIDI
data, which will control the synthesizer. Digital sequencers
and arpeggiators will most often be capable of longer, more
complex, and more customizable patterns. Digital sequenc-
ers and arpeggiators can be used in the same way as they are
used in the analog world.

328
 Performing Live

One feature digital synthesizers offer that is rarely, if ever,

seen on analog synthesizers is the ability to key map. Basi-
cally, key mapping refers to the ability to place individual pre-
sets onto different ranges of the synthesizer’s keyboard. Using
key mapping, a bass patch can be placed on the lowest two
octaves of the keyboard, a pad sound on the middle octaves,
and, finally, a lead patch on the highest octaves of the key-
board. Key mapping offers musicians the ability to have mul-
tiple sounds on a single keyboard that can be played together
or separately without having to physically move to a different
synthesizer. Effects that might be present in a digital synthe-
sizer can also usually be key mapped allowing for evolving
effects as one moves up and down the keyboard. When inter-
facing laptops, tablets, or other playback devices with digital
synthesizers, key mapping can be used to trigger samples or
even lighting cues. The possibilities of key mapping are liter-
ally endless.
In my mind, one of the largest benefits to digital synthesiz-
ers and, more poignantly, MIDI is the ability to utilize sound
modules and controllers in a live set up. A sound module is a
rack-mounted device that has a large number of presets and
effects that can be controlled via a MIDI controller. Although
this type of technology is not new and even exists in the ana-
log world with devices like the Oberheim SEM modules,
MIDI and digital technology allows for more possibilities
than analog technology. By bringing a single MIDI sound
module and a small MIDI controller, musicians are free to
have as many sounds as they desire, ranging from strictly
synthesized sounds to high quality samples. As we will
explore later in the chapter, laptops and tablets have mostly
replaced MIDI sound modules, but the theory and core con-
cept of them stays the same.

Using Software Synthesizers Live

The climate of software synthesizers is constantly evolv-
ing. In the beginning, software synthesizers required tons
of CPU power and were found only on desktop computers

329
Performing Live

in studios. It was not until computer power, as well as the

release of powerful laptops, began to increase that software
synthesizers began appearing on stage. Today’s software syn-
thesizer climate looks different still with the use of hardware
synthesizers, laptops, tablets, and even smartphones all run-
ning software synthesizers. As software synthesis is such a
large topic, I will divide the discussion into various sections
for each of the platforms one can run software synthesizers
on for live performance.

Laptop Computers
Laptops are one of the most popular platforms with which to
play software synthesizers live. Most laptops made in the last
few years are fully capable of storing a ton of sound libraries
and independent software synthesizers. With minimal equip-
ment, just a controller, USB cable, and a laptop, musicians are
free to have a whole arsenal of powerful synthesizers at their
disposal. On average, most laptops will utilize MIDI over

Figure 9.8 Basic laptop and

MIDI controller setup.

330
 Performing Live

USB, meaning that MIDI information is transmitted to and

from the computer via a USB cable rather than a traditional
five-pin MIDI cable.
There are many benefits to performing live with a laptop
besides just having access to powerful software synthesiz-
ers. The on-stage laptop can be running a DAW, or digital
audio workstation, like Ableton Live, Pro Tools, or Logic,
in order to playback samples and manipulate live audio in
real time. Inside of the running DAW, the musician is free
to have as many software synthesizers running as the com-
puter or software can handle. Using a DAW live in this fash-
ion allows musicians to bring the studio to the stage and
perform in a way that might have seemed impossible a few
decades ago.

Tablets and Smartphones

When the iPad was released, it changed the face of live per-
formance for electronic musicians forever. Like with laptops,
a multitude of software synths and workstations can be

Figure 9.9 Apple iPad.

331
Performing Live

utilized on stage inside a tablet or smartphone. This how-

ever, is where the similarities end between the two platforms.
While laptops can be viewed as just glorified sound modules,
tablets bring a new aspect to soft synth live performance that
had been missing—physical interaction. Because tablets uti-
lize advanced touch screen technology, app makers are free
to incorporate all types of physical interaction scenarios into
their programs.
Tablets can be used as either platforms for hosting software
synthesizers and workstations or controllers with which to
control software and hardware synths. To me, use as a con-
troller is where the iPad, and tablets like it, really shine. Using
MIDI over Wi-Fi or Bluetooth frees musicians from being
physically connected to a laptop, sound module, or hard-
ware synth, and allows them to move about the stage freely.
Due to the advanced touch screen capabilities tablets have
to offer, many exciting apps are available that allow for eso-
teric and interesting means of control. Some apps give users
the ability to move around shapes, which act as parameter
controllers, and bounce them across the screen with seem-
ingly real physical properties, while some let you customize
your own controller with as many knobs and sliders as you
wish. Some apps of note that allow this type of control are
“Touch OSC,” “Control,” “TouchDAW,” and “MIDIDroide.”
The beauty about most of these tablet controller apps is that
they are many times 100%-user customizable, meaning that
you can designate a particular knob, slider, or shape to con-
trol anything that is transmittable via MIDI. Tablets seem to
be bringing back the physical interaction between musicians
and their synthesizers, which has been absent since analog
synthesizers.

OSC
Shortly before the iPad came out, a different touch screen tab-
let device was beginning to gain huge traction among musi-
cians and DJs. The device was called the Jazz Mutant Lemur
and it attempted to be everything that music production on

332
 Performing Live

Figure 9.10 The Jazz Mutant

Lemur. Photo courtesy of www.
switchedonaustin.com.

the iPad would eventually become. Although the iPad all but
killed the physical Lemur (an app version of the Lemur exists
and is extremely popular), the Lemur did change people’s
notions about how these types of devices could be used in
a live setting. The Lemur is perhaps best remembered for
bringing OSC (Open Sound Control) out of universities and
into consumer’s hands.
OSC is a protocol that was designed to be an alternative to
MIDI. One of the benefits of OSC is its speed. Because OSC is
transmitted through ethernet cables, it allows for immensely
faster speeds than is possible through traditional five-pin
MIDI cables. OSC also allows for much more customiza-
tion on the part of the user than MIDI traditionally allows.
Although it showed much promise, OSC seems to have
drifted back out of the spotlight. Although it’s no longer in
the forefront, however, OSC did address problems with the
MIDI protocol as well as offer new and inventive control
means that are beginning to be incorporated into tablet MIDI
controller apps.

A Note on Hardware/Software
Synthesizers
Software synthesis is not limited to just laptops, tablets, and
smartphones. On the contrary, many “hardware” synthesizers

333
Performing Live

Figure 9.11 Roland Aira

System-1 synthesizer. Photo
courtesy of www.switchedonaustin.
com.

feature software synthesis sound engines. Synths like the

Access Virus line, Roland Aria line, and Arturia Origin all
create sound through software synthesis. Although these
synthesizers surely seem like physical hardware synths, they
are really just a MIDI controller, computer, and software built
into a tidy box. These synths might not offer the flexibility
of a standalone laptop and controller, but they have the abil-
ity to exist outside the realm of computer integration and are
more comfortable to some musicians.

Controlling Software Synthesizers

Like with all other forms of synthesizers, software synthe-
sizers feature unique ways in which a musician can con-
trol them in a live setting. As was discussed in the laptop
section, the most common control setup is simply a MIDI
controller connected via USB to a laptop running a software
synthesizer. Although this setup seems fairly straightfor-
ward, a huge variety of MIDI controllers exist that should
be examined.
A MIDI controller is any device that transmits MIDI data
when played. MIDI controllers come in a variety of shapes
and styles to best suit the needs of musicians. Most MIDI con-
trollers will feature a combination of performance features
including keys, knobs, wheels, pads, joysticks, and sliders.

334
 Performing Live

The orientation as well as number of individual performance

features is decided by the manufacturer of the controller.
As you probably already know, the keys on a MIDI control-
ler are similar in look and function to traditional black and
white piano keys. Knobs can either be continuous, mean-
ing they can rotate continuously without stopping, or fixed
point potentiometers, which have stops at both spectrums of
the knob’s turn. Like knobs, wheels come in two varieties
as well, with one type being free to move while the other is
spring loaded so it will bounce back to its starting position
when released. Pads are rubberized squares that are touch
and pressure sensitive. When using pads, the user physically
smacks his or her fingers against each pad. As you can prob-
ably guess, a joystick on a MIDI controller looks and acts
the same as a joystick on an arcade game. Finally, sliders are
reminiscent of faders on a mixing console and act much in
the same way.

Each MIDI controller will feature some of these types of per-

formance features. The beauty of MIDI and software syn-
thesizers is that a user can decide what each performance
feature controls. This means that wheels can be assigned
to pitch and modulation control while pads can trigger
samples. Many creative setups can be created by assigning
various parameters to features on a MIDI controller. Ulti-
mately, it is up to each individual musician to create a setup
that is both logical and comfortable while making sense for
his or her particular needs. Most software synthesizers and
even DAWs will have easy, user-intuitive ways in which to
assign functions to a MIDI controller. One of the most com-
mon ways is having a MIDI message window where a user
selects the particular function they wish to assign. Then, by
turning the desired control on the MIDI controller while
the function is highlighted, the software will automatically
assign the highlighted function to that part of the control-
ler that is being touched. A simpler version of that same
method is the ability in some cases to right- or control-click

335
Performing Live

a parameter, which will engage its assignment. When a

parameter is engaged to be assigned, the user must then
turn a knob or slider on his or her MIDI controller to assign
the activated function. When assigning samples or individ-
ual drums to MIDI controller pads, the user will typically
open an editor program that came with the MIDI controller
and assign individual MIDI notes to each pad. Once MIDI
notes have been assigned, the user can assign drum sounds
or samples to be triggered via those MIDI notes inside of his
or her DAW or software synthesizer. Ableton Live has really
changed the climate for sample and MIDI controller inter-
facing. Ableton’s intuitive clip launch features have made
many software companies streamline their MIDI integration
processes.

MIDI Controller Connections

When using sound modules, controllers will typically be
connected to the module with a standard, five-pin MIDI
cable. When connected to a laptop, a few options exist. The
first option is to connect the controller with a MIDI cable
into a fire wire or USB interface that is connected to the
computer. Next, a MIDI-to-USB converter box can be in
place, which will accept the five-pin MIDI cable from the
controller and spit out a USB connection to the computer.
Although these two setups are seen quite often, it is becom-
ing even more common to have a MIDI controller that has a
USB output on the back. In these instances, MIDI would be
transmitted to the computer itself through MIDI over USB
technology. With the introduction of Apple’s Yosemite oper-
ating system, MIDI can now be transferred via Bluetooth. It
is my prediction that fairly soon (in the next few months to
a year), MIDI controllers will start shipping with Bluetooth
built into them.
When connecting a MIDI controller to a tablet, there are fewer
options. It used to be that the only way to get MIDI to input
into an iPad was to buy the iPad camera kit that allowed for

336
 Performing Live

Figure 9.12 Various forms of

MIDI connections.

USB MIDI to be transferred. Now, dedicated devices exist to

accomplish the same thing. Besides using MIDI over USB,
many people choose to connect their controllers to their
iPads via Wi-Fi. Although MIDI over Wi-Fi is an extremely
cool tool, it oftentimes prove troublesome and, depending
on your network, can even cut in and out frequently in short
spans of time. Like with laptops, MIDI over Bluetooth is start-
ing to gain more traction in the tablet world as well due to its
stability.
One setup we have neglected to mention thus far is using a
tablet as a controller for a software synthesizer installed on a
laptop. To me, this is one of the strongest and creative setups
available in the software world. By using an iPad as a MIDI
controller, users are free to create a controller that is com-
pletely customized and suited to them and use it to control
a synthesizer that may take up too much CPU power to be
hosted on an iPad. As it stands now, there are far more soft-
ware synthesizers available for computers than for tablets.

337
Performing Live

Many people also feel that the synthesizers that are avail-
able for tablets are not as powerful, nor professional, as their
computer counterparts. Therefore, using a tablet as a custom-
izable controller in which to control these more powerful syn-
thesizers is hugely attractive. Also, tablets have both Wi-Fi
and Bluetooth built in, allowing them to take full advantage
of MIDI over Wi-Fi or MIDI over Bluetooth technology as it
becomes more prominent.
Until now, we have treated the various platforms of synthe-
sizer technology as entities that exist in a bubble. The beauty
about synthesis is that you are free to use analog gear along-
side digital gear as well as software in order to create your
ideal setup. There is no wrong way to create a live, synth rig.
Luckily, in today’s day and age, there is technology avail-
able with which to interface all facets of synthesis technol-
ogy while getting them to communicate with one another
perfectly. For the first time in synthesizer history, not only is
it possible to interface software with vintage analog gear, its
actually quite easy. Being able to interface various technolo-
gies is just another step that helps musicians create their per-
fect live rig.

MIDI to C.V. Converters

As has been stated earlier, analog synthesizers both old
and new use control voltage as a means of generating pitch
and gate information. Since MIDI is doing this same thing,
albeit with more options, it was only logical that some-
one would come along and create a way to interface the
two technologies. A MIDI to C.V. converter or C.V. to MIDI
converter is a device that filters MIDI information and con-
verts MIDI pitch and gate information into voltages and
vice versa. By using a MIDI to C.V. converter, artists can
use digital sequencers, which are more complex than their
analog counterparts, to control vintage or modern ana-
log gear. MIDI to C.V. converters are perhaps the single
best invention when it comes to interfacing modern and
vintage gear.

338
Figure 9.13 Synthesizers.com
MIDI to C.V. converter module.
Performing Live

Volt/Octave Converters
As has been described, although most analog synthesizers
adhere to the volt/octave standard control voltage, some
synthesizers do not. A famous example is the Korg MS-20.
The MS-20 was a hugely popular monophonic subtractive
synthesizer introduced in the 1970s by Korg that instantly
became a classic. The MS-20, however, uses a linear C.V. that
is different from the volt/octave standard found on other
synthesizers like Moogs. If you tried to control an MS-20 with
a volt/octave synth or vice versa, you would soon find that
the pitches were all over the place as well as the gate sig-
nal being reversed (meaning the note sounds when a key is
released rather than pressed). With the new-found interest in
analog synthesizers as well as Korg’s reissue of the famous
MS-20, companies have begun offering devices that can con-
vert C.V. or MIDI to Korg’s proprietary voltage levels. Most
of these devices exist in Eurorack modular format and some
work better than others. However, for the first time in history,
an MS-20 can happily exist and be controlled with traditional
volt/octave or MIDI synthesizers.

MOTU Volta
Although MIDI to C.V. converters allow for some software to
analog communication, it is quite limited. When going from
MIDI to C.V., typically the only thing transferred is pitch and
gate information with a few exceptions in the form of trig-
ger and velocity info. Parameters such as the filter cutoff fre-
quency are not controllable via MIDI data in vintage analog
gear. This is where MOTU’s Volta software comes in. Volta is
an instrument plug-in that effectively allows users to output
control voltage from their audio interface. Many vintage ana-
log synths feature control voltage inputs to various param-
eters for use with other synthesizers and controllers. Volta
takes advantage of this by converting automation data writ-
ten by the user into control voltage signals, which are output-
ted from the quarter-inch TRS outputs on an audio interface
and then plugged directly into control voltage inputs on an

340
 Performing Live

Figure 9.14 MOTU Volta

Software

analog synthesizer. Using this technology, it is finally possi-

ble to perform complex filter sweeps, envelope adjustments,
pitch shifts and a variety of other techniques simultaneously
without having to touch a knob on a synthesizer. When using
Volta with vintage or modern analog modular synthesizers,
the possibilities literally become endless. Using Volta live or
in the studio opens up whole new worlds to synthesists and
allows another level of software/analog compatibility.

Examples of Live Setups

At this point in a chapter, recipes are usually provided as
means to not only convey the information discussed, but
provide a jumping-off point for readers to begin experiment-
ing with the information learned. As this live performance
chapter is quite different from the individual synthesis for-
mat chapters, the recipes provided must be different as well.
Therefore, this section will provide the reader with a number
of possible live performance setups. These setups have been
created outside of a historical context and are designed for
the contemporary synthesist who has access to both vintage
and modern equipment. It is highly recommended that each
of these setups include a small, multichannel mixer so the
synthesist can mix each synth or sound source together and

341
Performing Live

provide the sound with a stereo feed. This keeps the indi-
vidual sound levels in the control of the synthesist. By using
a submixer, the synthesist is free to mute channels at his or
her discretion to retune, adjust patches, or eliminate problem
synths.

Setup 1: The Best of Both Worlds

The first setup in this list is designed with both analog and digi-
tal equipment in mind. This setup would bode well in an alter-
native band that might have some synth-heavy tracks as well as
the need for traditional keyboard instruments and samples. The
setup features a single centerpiece modern analog synthesizer as
well as a multisound keyboard setup like a workstation synthe-
sizer or MIDI controller and laptop. Finally, the setup includes a
laptop computer with a sample-based synthesizer installed and
a flexible MIDI controller. With this setup, the synthesist is free
to utilize modern patch storage capabilities along with the huge,
warm sound of analog synthesizers when playing lead, melody,
or bass patches. By using a modern analog synthesizer, the syn-
thesist can easily switch between patches in between songs. For
songs that require a piano, organ, clav, or electric piano, the syn-
thesist can quickly turn to their multisound keyboard. Finally,

Figure 9.15 The Best of Both

Worlds live setup.

342
 Performing Live

when samples are needed, be it a piece of dialog, granular

atmosphere, or song sample, the synthesist need only to trig-
ger a sample with one of the pads on his or her MIDI control-
ler. Although there are a number of individual instruments and
devices that would fit these descriptions, the following is what
we were imagining when creating this setup.
Modern Analog Synthesizer—Dave Smith Instruments Pro-
phet 12
Multisound Keyboard—Nord Stage 2
Laptop—Apple Mac Book Pro
Software—Ableton Live
MIDI Controller—Ableton Push

Setup 2: The Jack of All Trades

This particular setup is designed for a scenario in which the
synthesist is not only required to create inspiring melodies
but also atmospheric and drum sounds as well. For this rea-
son, this setup focuses on equipment that might be a bit out of

Figure 9.16 The Jack of All

Trades live setup.

343
Performing Live

place for synth-only connoisseurs. This setup is centered on a

laptop with a variety of virtual instruments being controlled
by numerous MIDI controllers both keyed and padded. The
setup also has a multisound keyboard with a bit more control
and sculpting options than just a simple rompler unit. A pow-
erful, yet compact analog synthesizer is also utilized for more
sonic options. Finally, the setup is capped with a real-time,
standalone audio manipulation unit. Using this setup, the
synthesist is free to trigger loops and patterns via the laptop
and MIDI controllers all while performing on the multisound
keyboard and analog synth. At select points in the show, the
synthesist can manipulate and warp sounds coming from the
vocalist, guitarist, or any other musician in the band. The syn-
thesist can create an entire environment for the music to exist
in complete with pads, basses, leads, percussion, and sam-
ples. Again, there are number of instruments and controllers
that fit the bill, but these pieces are what we were imagining.

Multisound Workstation—The New Korg Kronos Workstation

Synthesizer
Laptop—Apple Mac Book Pro
Software—Ableton Live
MIDI Controllers—Ableton Push, Akai MPK 49
Optional Standalone Drum Machine—Roland Aira TR-8 or Akai
Rhythm Wolf
Analog Synthesizer—Moog Sub Phatty
Audio Manipulation Unit—Roland Aira VT-3

Setup 3: The Millennial

This third setup focuses on harnessing the complete connec-
tivity between mind, body, soul, and mobile devices with a
helping of ironic perfectness. The setup is designed with the
idea of creating a performance environment that lends itself to
use with tablets and mobile devices while being able to exist
in a physical environment. The setup is centered on a laptop,
a tablet, a mobile phone, a powerful budget synthesizer, and
a cheap, but surprisingly useful, toy synthesizer. The synthe-
sist can trigger samples and patterns via a MIDI controller
and laptop while having access to a variety of interesting

344
 Performing Live

Figure 9.17 The Millennial live

setup.

sounds on a tablet. The smartphone is used as an additional

trigger source for use with the laptop. The budget synthesizer
can be used to add additional bass or lead lines throughout
the show. Finally, sounds can be sampled and played for live
flair with what was once thought of as a toy. This is what we
had in mind when creating this particular setup.
Laptop—Apple Mac Book Pro
Software—Ableton Live
MIDI controller—Akai MPK 49
Tablet—Apple iPad
Smartphone—Apple iPhone
Tablet Apps—Korg iMS-20, Korg Gadget, Moog Animoog
Phone Apps—Touch OSC
Budget Synthesizer—Arturia MicroBrute
Ironic Synthesizer—Casio SK-1

Setup 4: The Analog Purist

This fourth setup has the sound-creation purist in mind. This
setup is for those who appreciate the sonic potential analog
equipment offers without being swayed by the problems
that may arise from bringing analog gear on stage. Since this
setup is designed for the synthesist who craves the best of

345
Performing Live

Figure 9.18 The Analog Purist

live setup.

the best, vintage and modern analog gear is used. The setup
is centered on a powerful analog synth with sequencing
capabilities as well as liberal I/O options. Next, a few select
synths will compliment this centerpiece synth. No comput-
ers or tablets will be found in this setup: just pure analog
goodness. The entire setup will be placed above or around
a well-maintained, vintage electric piano. This setup bodes
well for most styles of music ranging from ambient and alter-
native all the way to hip-hop and hard rock. The possibilities
are endless for this setup. Here is the gear we had in mind.
Vintage Electric Piano—Fender Rhodes or Wurlitzer 200
Main Centerpiece Synth—Tom Oberheim Two Voice Pro Re-issue
or Moog Sub 37
Polyphonic Synth—Sequential Circuits Prophet 5 or Roland
Jupiter-8
Additional Synth—Vintage Korg MS-20
Additional Synth—Dave Smith Instruments Pro-2

346
 Performing Live

Figure 9.19 The Processor

Programmer live setup.

Setup 5: The Processor Programmer

This fifth setup is neat and tidy and relies on a good computer,
controller, and user. The setup is designed to be run on a sin-
gle computer with a single controller. The variety comes from
the user’s ability to map a number of sounds, functions, and
performance-control capabilities onto different sections of the
controller. Using this setup, the synthesist is free to have the
keyboard divided into a number of sounds that all change for
the next song with the press of a button. The equipment we
had in mind for this particular set up is as follows.
Computer—Apple Mac Book Pro
Software—Ableton Live or Apple MainStage or FL Studio
MIDI Controller—Arturia KeyLab 88

Setup 6: The Wireless Wizard

This setup is designed around the desire to go completely
cable free be it for logistical or merely cool factor purposes.
The setup is rather small, but has a lot of potential for huge
sounds. The setup is centered on a central hub laptop run-
ning Ableton live. Two tablets are then utilized for launching

347
Performing Live

Figure 9.20 The Wireless

Wizard live setup.

clips while a body sensor senses limb movements and a hand

sensor senses hand gestures. When using this setup, the syn-
thesist will launch clips that can then be manipulated via the
Xbox Kinect and Leap Motion sensors. Using a few programs
for recognition and controlling, various gestures on the Kinect
and Leap Motion can be used to control desired parameters
inside of Ableton, such as delay feedback, reverb amounts,
or even pitch and tempo changes. Here’s the equipment we
were imagining for this setup.
Computer—Apple Mac Book Pro (Yosemite or later operating
system if MIDI over Bluetooth is desired)
Software—Ableton Live and Max for Live—Max/MSP
Tablets—Apple iPads
Body Sensor—Xbox Kinect
Hand Gesture Sensor—Leap Motion

Setup 7: The Eurorack Guru

The world of modern analog modular synthesizers is grow-
ing daily. There are a huge amount of companies producing
analog modules for a variety of different size and power for-
mats. By far the most popular is the Eurorack format. The
modular company Doepfer, based out of Germany, helped
bring about the monumental rise in Eurorack modular sys-
tems and helped solidify the format that has become known

348
 Performing Live

Figure 9.21 The Eurorack Guru

live setup.

as Eurorack. The Eurorack format is rather small and com-

pact. The format relies on 1/8-inch patch cables and has a set
height. The format most commonly uses +/-12V power with
some major exceptions that require an additional +5V power
rail. As the modular resurgence gains more popularity, more
and more artists have begun bringing Eurorack systems to the
stage. There are a wealth of difficulties that arise from bring-
ing modular synthesizers to the stage. The most obvious is the
complete and utter lack of patch storage. Due to the modular
nature, it is almost impossible to re-create patches once knobs
have been turned and patch cables disconnected. Changing a
patch is also a nightmare as not only do parameters have to be
adjusted, but the rat’s nest of patch cables must be navigated
and moved. This being said, bringing a modular synthesizer
into a live environment is an exciting and rewarding venture.
Due the large market of individual modules in the Eurorack
format, we will provide an outline of a system that is capable
to adapt to a variety of live performance environments and
musical genres. Perhaps most important to consider when
building a Eurorack system with the idea of performing live is
the case. A case that can be closed and easily transported is a
must, and the ability to close a case while leaving patch cables
in place is greatly encouraged. Here’s our ideal live Eurorack
setup.
Case: Pittsburgh Modular Move [208] Double Row Case with
internal power supply
Oscillators:
 Pittsburgh Modular Oscillator (2).
 Pittsburgh Modular Waveforms (1)

349
Performing Live

Filters:
 Dave Smith Instruments Curtis Filter (1)
 Modcan Multimode (1)
 Grendel Formant Filter (1)
Envelope Generators:
 Pittsburgh Modular ADSR (2)
Amplifiers:
 Pittsburgh Modular Dual VCA (1)
Utility Modules:
 Pittsburgh Modular Toolbox (1)
 Division 6 Multiplicity xv (1)
 Acidlab Mixer (2)
 Intellijel Designs OR (2)
 Intellijel Designs UM (2)
Modulation:
 Pittsburgh Modular LFO2 (1)
 Happy Nerding FM Aid (1)
Sequencer:
 Division 6 Mattson sq816 Sequencer (1)
Effects:
 Pittsburgh Modular Analog Delay (1)
 Audio Damage aeverb (1)

Figure 9.22 The EDM Star

live setup.

350
 Performing Live

Setup 8: The EDM Star

The eighth setup in our list is geared towards electronic dance
music festivals. This setup is designed to streamline signal
and give the musician the ability to adapt the music based off
of the responses of the crowd. The setup centers on a laptop
and MIDI controller with a few hardware devices for process-
ing and programming. Using this setup, the artist is free to
play back entire sets with the ability to launch and mute clips,
warp tempo and pitch, filter individual instruments or the
track as a whole, and program bass and drum lines on the
fly. This is the equipment we had in mind for this particular
setup.
Computer: Apple Mac Book Pro
Software: Ableton Live
Main MIDI Controller: Akai APC40 MKII
Tablet: Apple iPad or Jazz Mutant Lemur
External Filter: Moog MiniMoog Voyager Rack Mount or stand-
alone Moog 500 Series Filter
Hardware Drum Machine: Roland Aira TR-8 Rhythm Performer
Hardware Bass Machine: Roland Aira TB-3 Touch Bass Line
Hardware Processor: Roland Aira VT-3 Voice Transformer

Setup 9: The Retro DJ

At one point in synthesis history, when people imagined syn-
thesizers onstage, they imagined DJs playing small clubs and
warehouses. At this high time before the laptop’s presence
on stage, DJs used hardware instruments, samplers, drum
machines, and mixers for making their music. Therefore, we
have designed this setup with the hardware-inspired DJ in
mind. For this particular setup, both vintage and modern
gear will be examined. It should be noted that each of these
setups is centered on an audio playback DJ mixer, such as
vinyl or CD turntables in the vintage domain, and a laptop
and mixing controller in the contemporary domain. The
equipment listed below are the synthesizers and hardware
devices needed to add all of the sounds, chirps, melodies, and
bass drops necessary for the modern retro DJ.

351
Performing Live

Figure 9.23 The Retro DJ live

setup.

Vintage Setup
Drum machine: Roland TR-808 or TR-909
Bass Synth: Roland TB-303
Melody Synth: Moog Prodigy
Audio Playback Mixer: Vinyl Turntables and Mixer

Modern Setup
Drum Machine: Roland Aira TR-8 or Akai Rhythm Wolf, or New
Korg Electribe
Bass Synth: Roland Aira TB-3 or Akai Rhythm Wolf
Melody Synth: Roland Aira System 1 or Moog Sub Phatty
Computer: Mac Book Pro
Software: Ableton Live
Controller: Ableton Push or modern MIDI mixer controller

Setup 10: The Art Instillation

The last setup focuses more on the limitless possibilities that
synthesizers can offer the live performer. Synthesizers have

352
 Performing Live

always been, and will always be, harmoniously married with

cutting-edge technology. It seems that with every advance-
ment of technology and computational power, synthesizers
are among the first things to benefit from the new technol-
ogy. What is more, many musicians, engineers, and tinkerers
are constantly inventing apps, software, controller interfaces,
hardware devices, and various media-interfacing capabili-
ties for synthesizers. A whole subculture known as control-
lerism has emerged that is filled with individuals designing
complex fusions of art, technology, and music all centered on
synthesizers and MIDI controllers. With the advent of pro-
grams like Ableton Live and Max/MSP, the creative climate
for art installation synthesis is ripe. Although the possibilities
are literally endless for the equipment one could use in this
art installation movement, here are some options for getting
started.

Hardware
Livid Instruments MIDI Brain
Arduino Boards
Rasberry Pi
Ableton Push
Escoteric Eurorack Modules
MIDI to C.V. converter

Software
Ableton Live
Max/MSP
Max for Live
MOTU Volta

Historical Perspective on the

Synthesizer’s Role in Live
Performance
Despite synthesizers typically being considered studio tools,
synthesizers have long been a staple in live performance.
William Duddell was perhaps the first to incorporate an

353
Performing Live

electronic musical instrument into performance when he

wired multiple Oscillating Light Arcs together to play “God
Save the Queen.” Years later, the members of the Italian
improvisational group Musica Elettronica Viva were pioneers
in electronic music by becoming early adopters of the Moog
synthesizer and realizing its benefits in a live performance
setting. Using the huge Moog modular synthesizer live was
no small feat. In the mid to late 1960s when the Moog system
was beginning to get recognition, it was seen only as a perma-
nent piece of hardware for large studios. In fact, Robert Moog
often spoke about the burdens and impossibilities of lugging
one of his systems to a show.1 Aside from the sheer weight
and size of a Moog modular system, the system itself was
rather delicate and needed ample warm-up time and tuning
to be remotely reliable. Add to this the time it takes to cre-
ate a musical patch, and you can begin to see the difficulties
inherent in gigging with a large, modular synthesizer. These
concerns did not faze Musica Elettronica Viva, however, and
they performed a number of improvisational electronic jazz
pieces incorporating the Moog modular.

The next evolution of the synthesizer’s role in live perfor-

mance came during the infamous “Jazz in the Park” con-
cert held at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City
on August 28, 1969. Robert Moog and longtime collaborator
Herb Deutsch were approached about using their newly cre-
ated modular synthesizers for a live concert. Although skep-
tical at first, Moog and Deutsch finally agreed and decided
to incorporate four individual Moog modular systems into
the performance. The musicians included Deutsch on lead
synthesizer, Hank Jones on Moog and electric piano, Artie
Doolittle on modular bass synthesizer, and, finally, Jim Pirone
on modular percussion synthesizer. The “Jazz in the Park”
concert generated a large amount of interest for synthesizers
and electronic music and helped sell a large number of Moog
modular systems. Keith Emerson was rumored to have been
present at the “Jazz in the Park” performance and ended up
purchasing one of the Moog modular systems used that day.

354
 Performing Live

Emerson would go on to have huge success with Emerson

Lake and Palmer and is famous for lugging his large Moog
modular onstage along with a variety of other synthesizers.2
The synthesizer’s role in live performance would finally be
brought to the mainstream with the introduction of the Mini-
Moog Model D monophonic analog subtractive synthesizer.
The MiniMoog finally brought synthesis technology to a
small, portable format that could be adopted by musicians.
The introduction of the MiniMoog created a paradigm shift in
the music industry, and, soon, many other companies began
offering small, portable synthesizers to meet the needs of
touring musicians.
Throughout the 1970s, electronic instruments were used
onstage mainly as additional instruments in rock, jazz, and
fusion groups. At this point in electronic music history, syn-
thesizers were mainly instruments set aside for traditional
keyboardists, therefore, keyboard players would have a
MiniMoog, ARP Odyssesy, or other small monophonic syn-
thesizer stacked on top of their Hammond organs or Fender
Rhodes electric pianos. During the second half of the 1970s,
however, a class of musicians started to appear under the
name of “synthesists.” Frank Zappa and Devo were among
the first to recognize the importance and promise of syn-
thesizers and incorporated them as standard instruments in
their repertoire.
Throughout the 1980s, many popular bands had designated
synthesists who would create sequences, bass lines, lead
lines, and even drum sounds on their synthesizers. Many
synth pop bands in the likes of Depeche Mode, Gary Neu-
mann, and Kraftwerk helped solidify the synthesizer’s role
in live performance. Once the synth pop genre became passé,
the synthesizer went on to have an almost universal presence
among the dance and rave music of the late 1980s and 1990s.
Synthesizers have gone on to appear onstage in almost every
musical genre. The backing bands of pop icons can be seen
hammering away on their synthesizers while the alternative

355
Performing Live

rock super stars can be seen fiddling away on the knobs of

their vintage analog synths. Hip-hop artists have long seen
the benefit of synthesizers, and modern rock, blues, and
even country performers have had the occasional synthe-
sizer stacked on top of a piano or organ. One would be hard
pressed to go to any show today and not see a synthesizer at
least set up onstage.
Using synthesizers in a live setting can open up new, sonic
worlds that might not have been imagined. Although play-
ability and reliability might seem daunting at first, it is really
no harder to incorporate a synthesizer into a live setup than
any other instrument. Whether your particular setup involves
gear that is strictly analog, digital, software, or a combina-
tion, many devices and programs exist to not only aid the
performer, but to provide inspiring and helpful tricks for syn-
thesis live performance.

Notes
1. Moog, DVD. Directed by Hans Fjellestad, 2004.
2. Thom Holmes, “Jazz Embraces the Moog Synthesizer,” April 21,
2013. Retrieved from http://moogfoundation.org/moog-a-history-
in-recordings-early-moog-jazz/

356
GLOSSARY

Ableton Live Versatile audio recording and live perfor-

mance software environment.
AC Alternating Current; Oscillating electrical current.
Additive Synthesis A form of synthesis where sounds are
created by combing single harmonics.
Alchemy A multiengine software synthesizer made by
Camel Audio.
Algorithm In FM synthesis, an algorithm is the orientation
of the onboard modulators and carriers.
Aliasing The introduction of unwanted frequencies in the
digital to analog conversion process.
Amplifier In synthesis, an amplifier is a circuit that ampli-
fies or attenuates sound when a gate signal is present.
Amplitude A measurement relating to the size of acoustical
vibration; typically in reference to perceived loudness.
Amplitude Modulation Modulation of a synthesizer’s
amplifier.
AM Synthesis Amplitude Modulation Synthesis; A form of
synthesis where sounds are created by the amplifier being
modulated via an audio rate modulation source.
Analog Physical circuitry that utilizes voltages.
Analog Circuit Behavior Synthesis A form of analog mod-
eling synthesis that attempts to model analog circuits
and their behavior in an attempt to create a more realistic
sounding re-creation.
Analog Modeling A type of physical modeling synthesis
that aims to model the sound of analog synthesizers.
Arpeggiator A device often built into synthesizers that
plays back notes being held down on the keyboard at a
specified rate and order.

357
Glossary

Artifact Unwanted sonic material caused in the digital

realm.
Asynchronous Granular Synthesis A form of granular
synthesis where individual grains are spaced randomly
from one another in playback.
Attack In envelope generators, the attack parameter con-
trols the amount of time it takes a parameter to reach its
user set amount once a key is depressed.
Band Pass Filter A filter shape where frequencies both
above and below a set band of frequencies are attenuated.
Bass A descriptive term used to reference low frequencies.
Beat-Sync The ability to align an LFO or clock source with
tempo information; typically through MIDI beat clock.
Carrier A signal that is modulated via a modulator.
Chorus A delay type effect where each delayed sound is
heard in rapid succession, causing the entire sound to be
perceived as a single tone.
Clock A repeating gate signal that is used to control
sequencers, arpeggiators, and drum machines.
Combination Synthesis A form of synthesis that utilizes two
or more synthesis formats in its sound generation engine.
Complex Wave Waves consisting of multiple overtones.
Control Voltage A set of voltages that are used to control
analog synthesizers.
Controller A device that is used to generate pitch and gate
information and relay it to a synthesizer; typically a key-
board, sequencer, touch plate, etc.
Cutoff Frequency The frequency at which a filter begins its
attenuation of the inputted sound.
Data Slider A physical device that is used to control digital
information.
Decay In envelope generators, the decay parameter con-
trols the amount of time it takes a parameter to fall back
to its user set point after the attack time has run its course.
Decibel A logarithmic measurement unit for sound.
Delay An effect that takes a sound and reproduces it soon
after its occurrence at a user set amplitude and rate.
Digital Circuitry that uses integrated circuits and DSP.

358
 Glossary

Digitally Controlled Oscillator An oscillator that is con-

trolled via DSP instead of control voltage.
Driver In physical modeling synthesis, a driver is in refer-
ence to how a sound is created; akin to a piano hammer
striking a string.
Duophonic The ability to play two notes simultaneously on
a synthesizer.
Emphasis See Resonance.
Envelope Generator A circuit that receives a gate signal and
allows users to set designations for how the sound will
change in amplitude or timbre once a key is depressed,
held down, and released.
Envelope Follower A circuit which takes an audio input
and creates an envelope shape that mimics the audio sig-
nal allowing for the synthesizer to be controlled by an
audio device such as a voice or guitar.
Exciter In physical modeling synthesis, an exciter is in ref-
erence to how a sound is created; akin to a piano hammer
hitting a string. Another term for “Driver.”
FFT Fast Fourier Transform; An algorithm that is used to rep-
resent individual frequencies or harmonics present in a
sound at any given time.
Filter A device that attenuates frequencies in a sound.
Filter Modulation Modulation of a synthesizer’s filter cut-
off frequency.
FL Studio Digital audio workstation made by Image-Line.
FM Synthesis A form of synthesis that generates sound by
using audio rate oscillators, known as operators, to mod-
ulate other audio rate oscillators.
Formant An emphasized frequency band; typically repre-
sentative of speech sounds such as vowels.
Formant Filter A series of band pass filters, placed in paral-
lel, which are designed to mimic vocal formants and cre-
ate vowel-type sounds.
Formant Synthesis A complex form of synthesis typically
used to create speech-type sounds.
Frequency A representation of the number of vibrations per
second in a sound; measured in Hz.

359
Glossary

Frequency Modulation Modulation of a synthesizer’s

oscillator or tone generation source.
Frequency Response The measurement of electronic equip-
ment’s capabilities in regards to the frequency spectrum.
Gate A signal that is used as a trigger source; typically gen-
erated when a key is depressed. In analog synthesizers, a
gate signal is made up of a +5volt signal.
Gating The technique of using a signal to prevent or allow
another signal to be heard.
Glide A type of performance control that allows notes to
gently rise or fall into each other; akin to a guitar string
being bent from one note to another.
Glissando See Glide.
Glisson Synthesis A form of granular synthesis where each
grain is modified by the presence of glissando.
Grain In granular synthesis, a grain is a multiple-millisecond-
long fragment of sampled audio.
Grain Density In granular synthesis, grain density refers to
how many grains are played per second.
Grain Duration In granular synthesis, the grain duration
refers to how long a particular grain is; typically between
ten and fifty milliseconds.
Grain Order In granular synthesis, grain order refers to the
order in which the grains are played back.
Grain Playback Speed The speed at which individual
grains are reproduced in granular synthesis.
Grain Stream In granular synthesis, grain streams are a
designated group of grains.
Grain Window Individual grain envelope shape; typically
limited to attack and release.
Grainlet Synthesis A form of sound synthesis.
Graintable A form of synthesis that melds granular and
wavetable synthesis together for the software synthesizer
Malstrom; made by PropellerHead.
Granular Synthesis A form of synthesis in which small
fragments of samples audio, called grains, are played
back at varying speeds, pitches, and orders.

360
 Glossary

Harmonics Overtones present in a sound that are multiples

of the fundamental frequency.
Harmonic Series The integral order of harmonics present
in a sound.
Headphones Device placed over or in the ears and pro-
duces sound.
High Pass Filter A filter shape where frequencies below a
designated cutoff frequency are attenuated.
Hold In an envelope generator, the hold parameter places a
set time between the attack parameter and the rest of the
envelope generator parameters.
Hyper Wave A modified version of a traditional wave
shape; i.e. hyper-saw, hyper-square.
Intensity The strength of a signal.
Joystick A stick-like controller which can move anywhere
on an X and Y axis.
Key Follow A patch in which the higher one plays on the
keyboard, the more the filter opens and vice versa.
Keyboard A pitch controller that features black and white
keys in the same fashion as a piano or organ.
KS Synthesis Karplus-Strong Synthesis; A form of physical
modeling synthesis that filters a short waveform through
a delay line in an attempt to model hammered or plucked
strings.
Leap Motion A controller that recognizes hand gesture
and movement; can be used as a MIDI controller with
third-party software.
LFO Low Frequency Oscillator; An oscillator that produces
subaudible signals, which can be used to control various
synthesizer parameters such as amplifiers, filters, and
pitch.
Logic Pro A digital audio workstation software made by
Apple.
Loom A software additive synthesizer made by AIR.
Loudness The interpretation of the intensity of sound.
Low Pass Filter A filter shape where frequencies above a
designated cutoff frequency are attenuated.

361
Glossary

MIDI Musical Instrument Digital Interface; A protocol trans-

mitted via 5-pin DIN and USB cables, which is used to
control digital instruments and devices.
MIDI over Bluetooth The act of transferring MIDI data
over a bluetooth connection.
MIDI over Wi-Fi The act of transferring MIDI data over a
wireless connection.
Mixer On a synthesizer, a mixer is a circuit that combines
the various oscillators, noise sources, and external signals.
Modal Synthesis A form of physical modeling synthesis
that focuses on the frequency domain when modeling
physical instruments.
Modular Synthesizer A synthesizer where each component
is independent of one another and must be connected
together via patch cables.
Modulation A routing in which a control signal is used to
affect a component of a synthesizer.
Modulation Wheel A wheel controller that designates the
modulation amount.
Modulator A signal that is used as a modulation source.
Monophonic When only one note can be played at once.
MSW Synthesis McIntyre, Schumacher, and Woodhouse
Synthesis; A form of physical modeling synthesis that
focuses on the time domain aspect of modeling physical
instruments.
Noise Generator A component that produces random
noise, which can be mixed in with the oscillators.
Notch Filter A filter shape that attenuates a small band of
frequencies around a designated center frequency.
OSC Open Sound Control; A control protocol that is trans-
mitted via ethernet cable and can be transferred at faster
speeds than MIDI information.
Oscillator A tone-producing circuit on a synthesizer.
Oscillator Sync The ability for an oscillator’s waveform to
be reset at the start of a separate oscillator’s wave.
Overtones Frequencies present in a sound that are above
the fundamental frequency.

362
 Glossary

Paraphonic The ability for a synthesizer to produce multi-

ple notes simultaneously; each note is not an independ-
ent voice and shares envelope generators, filters, and
amplifiers.
Partial A harmonic added above the fundamental fre-
quency in an additive synthesizer.
Patch A sound created on a synthesizer.
Peak See Resonance.
Period The measurement of time it takes for a wave to
repeat itself.
Phase Distortion Synthesis A type of synthesis much like
FM synthesis; typically uses a single modulator carrier
pair instead of multiple modulator carrier pairs seen in
FM synthesis.
Physical Modeling Synthesis A form of synthesis that uti-
lizes complex algorithms in order to mimic the physical
properties of instruments in order to create a more realis-
tic sounding re-creation.
Pink Noise Noise that has equal energy at each octave
interval.
Pitch Shifting The ability to raise or lower the pitch of a
sound.
Pitch Wheel A wheel controller used to temporarily raise or
lower the pitch of a synthesizer.
Polyphonic The ability for a synthesizer to produce mul-
tiple notes simultaneously, each being complete, inde-
pendent voices.
Portamento See Glide.
Potentiometer A variable resistor with a rotating or sliding
contact; often referred to as pot or knob.
Preset A stored patch on a synthesizer.
Pulsar Synthesis A form of granular synthesis where each
grain is created by an impulse generator.
Pulse Wave A variable width waveform that contains all
odd harmonics above its fundamental with a harmonic
amplitude drop inversely proportionate to harmonic
number.

363
Glossary

Pulse Width The width of a pulse wave in the negative and

positive domains.
Pulse Width Modulation The ability to vary the width of a
pulse wave through a modulation source such as an LFO.
Quantize The ability to shift MIDI notes previously
recorded into proper alignment in regards to musical tim-
ing; in essence, a way to fix timing errors.
Ramp Wave (Reverse Sawtooth) A waveform that contains
the same harmonic content as a sawtooth wave, but with
reversed shape; i.e., a short ramp up then instantaneous fall.
Release In an envelope generator, the release parameter
controls the amount of time it takes a parameter to fall
back to zero once a key is released.
Resonance A circuit that feeds the cutoff frequency back
into the filter, effectively boosting the cutoff frequency
and immediate surrounding frequencies, which causes
the filter to ring.
Resonator In Physical Modeling synthesis, a resonator is
a control that adjusts the modeled resonance cavity or
vibration source such as a drum shell or piano sound
board.
Retrigger The ability to start an LFO’s wave cycle when a
key is depressed independent of where the LFO is in its
current cycle.
Reverb The interpretation of a sound after it has been pro-
duced; resultant of reflected sound waves off of various
surfaces.
Ribbon Controller A controller that responds to touch in a
sliding motion.
Ring Modulation An effect that multiplies two signals
together and outputs the sum and differences of each signal.
Sample A previously recorded piece of audio.
Sample and Hold A circuit that takes figurative snapshots
of a voltage source at a set rate and then outputs those
voltages; typically used as a random pitch generator.
Sample-Based Synthesis A form of synthesis that utilizes
recorded audio and then manipulates it through various
synthesis techniques.

364
 Glossary

Sawtooth Wave A waveform that contains all harmonics

above its fundamental in the harmonic series with a har-
monic amplitude drop rate, which is inversely propor-
tionate to harmonic number; the shape, when viewed on
an oscilloscope, resembles a saw blade with an instanta-
neous rise then sharp ramp down.
Sculpture A physical modeling software synthesizer pre-
sent in Apple’s Logic Pro DAW.
Sequencer A device that produces pitch and gate informa-
tion and that is used to control a synthesizer.
Simple Wave Waves consisting of limited overtones.
Sine Wave A waveform that only contains a fundamental
frequency.
Slew See Glide.
Slider A potentiometer that moves back and forth rather
than in a circular motion.
Square Wave A waveform that contains only odd har-
monics above its fundamental with a harmonic ampli-
tude drop that is inversely proportionate to harmonic
number.
Sub Oscillator A device that takes an oscillator, divides it,
and then produces a tone that is one or two octaves below
the original tone; once created, the new, lower, tone can
be played along the original oscillator, creating the effect
of two oscillators.
Subtractive Synthesis A form of synthesis where tim-
bres are created by removing harmonic content from a
harmonically rich tone in both the amplitude and time
domains.
Sustain In an envelope generator, the sustain parameter is
used to designate a level the sound will stay at, while a
key is depressed, once the sound completes its attack and
decay cycles.
Synchronous Granular Synthesis A form of granular syn-
thesis where individual grains are spaced equally apart.
Timbre The way in which a sound is interpreted and distin-
guished; resultant of a variety of variables such as instru-
ment makeup, force applied, overtones, and environment.

365
Glossary

Time Stretching The ability to elongate or shorten an audio

clip without affecting pitch; typically accomplished
through granular synthesis.
Touch Pad A device that responds to touch on an X-Y axis
and is used as a form of control.
Touch Plate A device that responds to touch via pressure,
heat, or internal body frequency, which is used to control
a synthesizer.
Transistor A device used to switch and amplify electronic
signals; used heavily in analog synthesizer circuitry.
Tremelo An effect where amplitude is quickly brought up
and down creating a chop-type effect.
Triangle Wave A waveform that contains all odd harmonics
above its fundamental with a harmonic amplitude drop
proportionate to the inverse square of harmonic number.
Trigger A signal that is used to start a function such as a
sequencer, LFO, or envelope generator.
Vector Plane In vector synthesis, a vector plane is an arbi-
trary square that puts each sound source at each corner.
Vector Synthesis A form of synthesis that contains four or
more sound sources and moves the output from sound
source to sound source, creating rich textures as the vari-
ous sound sources mix.
Vibrato An effect where pitch is slightly raised and lowered
back and forth at a set rate.
Voltage An electrical force; the creation of electrical current.
Voltage Controlled Oscillator An oscillator that gets its
pitch information via control voltage.
Waveform The shape of a repeating wave.
Wave Folding A technology that duplicates waveforms and
then inverts and overlays them onto existing waveforms
in an attempt to create richer textures.
Waveguide Synthesis A form of physical modeling syn-
thesis; a digital waveguide is a computational model for
how waves propagate through physical media.
Wavelet Synthesis Extremely similar to granular synthesis,
but with stricter guidelines on grain length.

366
 Glossary

Wavetable A compilation of the various waveforms availa-

ble on a wavetable synthesizer listed in a particular order.
Wavetable Oscillator An oscillator capable of creating a
large number of wave shapes that can be swept continu-
ously with little or no artifacts or sudden jumps.
Wavetable Synthesis A form of synthesis where interesting
textures are created by sweeping through a large number
of wave shapes in order to create a constantly evolving
harmonic atmosphere.
White Noise Noise that has equal energy at each frequency.
Workstation Synthesizer A physical synthesizer that con-
tains a number of synthesis engines as well as recording
and arranging capabilities.
Xbox Kinect A motion sensor device manufactured by
Microsoft; can be used as a MIDI controller with third
party software.

367
INDEX

Ableton Live physical modeling (PM) software ADSR envelope 22

288 – 91 advanced instrument example 80 – 1
additive synthesis 120 – 74; analog problems with AIR 145 – 6
124 – 30; borrowed synthesis and 138 – 9; data Alchemy, Camel Audio 218 – 19; grain volume,
sliders and 142 – 3; Decay module and 154; size, and density 225; interface 223 – 4; Master
digital signal processing effects 143; Discrete section 228; modulation matrix 226 – 8;
module and 152 – 3; early electronic 171 – 4; RTime/RPan controls 226; sound sources 224 – 5;
effect modules for 154 – 5; envelope generators window 225 – 6
and 136 – 8; filters and 139; formant filters algorithm 1/operators 1&2 example 99 – 101
and 139 – 40; FX parameters 158; Gain module algorithms 96, 98, 102 – 3
and 148, 149; global parameters of 157 – 8; aliasing 132
vs. granular synthesis 201; Hammond tone alternating current (AC) 170
wheel organ 170 – 1; historical perspective on ambient bass recipe 160 – 1
169 – 70; LFOs and 138; loom and 147 – 8; Loom amplifier modulation, LFO 31
filtering modules and 153; Master parameters amplifiers 21 – 2
158; morph screen 159 – 60; noise sources and Amplitude Modulation 104 – 8; evolution of 107 – 8
140 – 1; Octaver module and 151, 152; Odd/Even amplitude shaping 21 – 5
module and 148, 149; Organ I and II modules analog additive synthesis, problems with 124 – 30
151, 152; performance level and 141; Phrase Analog Circuit Behavior Synthesis 295
module 155; pitch/modulation wheels for analog modeling 292 – 6
141; Random Drops module 155; recipes 147, Analog Purist live setup 345 – 6
160 – 9; resurgence of 143 – 6; sample playback analog synthesizers, performing live with 315 – 23;
140; sawtooth waves and 134 – 5; Second Tone circuitry and 318, 319 – 20; controlling 320 – 3;
module and 150 – 1; sequencers/arpeggiators extreme sonic manipulation and 316; logical
and 143; sound types possible with 131 – 2; interfacing with musicians and 316 – 17; patch
Spectral Distortion/Modulation 159; square storage and 318 – 19; size and weight as con of
waves and 135 – 6; Sync module and 150; theory 319; sonic improvisation and 317 – 18
120 – 3; time modules 156; tone generation and arpeggiated sawtooth recipe 195, 197
132 – 3; tool modules 156; triangle waves and arpeggiators 36; additive synthesis and 143
133 – 4; waveform generators and 140; Wave artifacts 132, 216, 217
module 157 Art instillation live setup 352 – 3

368
 Index

Arturia MiniBrute 8, 34, 123 controllers 30, 33 – 4, 36 – 7, 39 – 40

asynchronous granular synthesis 205 control voltage (C.V.) 9, 18 – 19, 34
attack portion of envelope generators 23 cool repeater recipe 161 – 2
audio interfaces 67 – 8 crossfades 75
auto-samplers 82 – 3 CrusherX-Live! 219
cutoff frequency 15, 17 – 18
balanced modulation 109
band pass filter (BPF) 16 – 17 dampened metallic hammer shimmer recipe
band reject filter 17 237 – 8
basic instrument example 79 – 80 data sliders 142 – 3
bass 20, 45 – 6 DAW control: modulation in 114 – 15; Vector
beat synced 302 Synthesis and 250 – 1
Beauchamp, James 171 Decay module 154
Belar, Herbert 54 decay portion of envelope generators 23
Best of Both Worlds live setup 342 – 3 deep synth bass recipe 306 – 7
Bode, Harald 112 digitally controlled oscillator (DCO) 11
Bode Ring Modulator 112 digital signal processing (DSP) effects 143
borrowed synthesis 138 – 9; granular synthesis digital synthesizers 58 – 9; performing live with
and 210 325 – 9
Buchla, Don 33, 36, 56 – 7, 190 digital waveguide synthesis 279 – 80, 312
Buchla Modular Electronic Music System 56 – 7 Discrete module 152 – 3
distant rhythms recipe 310 – 11
Cahill, Thaddeus 52 Distorted Bells recipe 162 – 3
Carrier 96 – 8 distorted dissonant pop recipe 304
Chamberlin, Harry 88 Distorted Movement recipe 163 – 4
chorded trumpet recipe 50 – 1 double modulation, wavetable synthesis and 182–3
cinematic tension pad recipe 229 – 30 drawbars 171
clock 35, 322 drivers 287 – 8
Collision 290 Duddell, William 52
combination synthesis 273 – 314; defined 273, 296; DX-7 patch, creating 94 – 6, 101 – 4; features of
formant synthesis 283; historical perspective 103 – 4; layers 102 – 3; length 103; programming
on 311 – 14; Karplus-Strong synthesis 282 – 3; 104; sound segments 101 – 2
McIntyre, Schumacher, and Woodhouse
synthesis 281 – 2; modal synthesis 281; overview East Coast synthesis 57
of 273; physical modeling synthesis 273 – 9, EDM Star live setup 350 – 1
284 – 96; recipes 303 – 11; waveguide synthesis, effected, evolving pad 43 – 4
digital 279 – 80; workstation synthesizers and effect modules, for additive synthesis 154 – 5
296 – 303 electric guitar lead recipe 164
complex wave 122 – 3 emphasis 18
continuous knobs 335 envelope amount 19
controllerism subculture 353 envelope follower 317

369
Index

envelope generators 22 – 7; additive synthesis and glide 37 – 8

136 – 8; attack and 23; decay and 23; described glissando 37
22; filter control with 25 – 7; release and 24 – 5; glisson synthesis, granular synthesis and 212
shape of 22; sound control and 22; sustain and glistening auto-harp recipes 234 – 5
24; types of 22 – 3; understanding 27; wavetable glistening bells recipe 236 – 7
synthesis and 182 globals, additive synthesis 157 – 8
ES2 model 261 – 2; Vector Synthesis 247 – 8 grain, granular synthesis and 200, 201 – 3
Eurorack Guru live setup 348 – 50 grain density, granular synthesis and 206 – 7
Evolver 265; Vector Synthesis (VS) and 265 – 6 grain duration 203 – 5; amplitude and 204; attack
evolving lead recipe 42 – 3 and 204; decay and 205; sustain and 204 – 5
exciter controls 276 grain length modulated plucking recipes 235 – 6
extreme sonic manipulation 316 grainlet synthesis 212
grain order, granular synthesis and 207
FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) 121 grain playback speed, granular synthesis and 209
filter envelope 25 – 7; attack 25; decay 25 – 6; grain stream, granular synthesis and 207 – 9
over pitch 26 – 7; release 26; sustain 26 Graintable 220 – 1
filtering 14 – 21; band pass 16 – 17; band reject 17; grain window 225
cutoff frequency and 17, 18; envelope amount granular populations 203, 207 – 8
and 19; high pass 16; key follow and 19 – 21; low granular synthesis 200 – 43; vs. additive synthesis
pass 15; notch 17; overview of 14 – 15; resonance 201; Alchemy and 218 – 19; CrusherX-Live!
and 18, 19; selection 21; shapes 14; using 17 – 21; 219; defined 211; environment, complexity of
voltage control and 18 – 19 211 – 13; formant filter and 210 – 11; formant
filter modulation, LFO 31 synthesis and 210; forms of 205; future of
filters, additive synthesis and 139 242 – 3; glisson synthesis and 212; grain and
filter selection 21 201 – 3; grain density and 206 – 7; grain duration
filter voltage control 18 – 19 and 203 – 5; grain order and 207; grain playback
fixed bandwidth 16 speed and 209; grain stream and 207 – 9;
FL Studios 221, 298 historical perspective of 239 – 42; Image-Line
FM Synthesis 95 – 6, 104, 111, 115 – 17 Granulizer 221 – 2; Kyma X 220; Max/MSP
formant filter 139 – 40; formant synthesis and 283; 222; overview of 200 – 1; pitch and 206; pitch
granular synthesis and 210 – 11 shifting and 217; problems 209; Propellerhead
formant synthesis 283 Malstrom Graintable Synthesizer 220 – 1; pulsar
Fourier synthesis 121 synthesis and 212 – 13; recipes 223 – 39; vs.
four-pole filter 15 sample-based synthesis 213 – 15; synthesizers
frequency modulation 94, 95 – 6 available with 217 – 22; time stretching and
full spectrum synth recipe 308 215 – 16; wavelet synthesis and 212; Xenakis as
Funk Lead recipe 44 – 5 godfather of 240 – 2
FX parameters 158
Hammond, Laurens 53
Gain module 148, 149 Hammond Novachord 53 – 4
gate signal 21 Hammond tone wheel organ 170 – 1

370
 Index

Hanert, John M. 53 laptop computers, software synthesizers and

hardware synthesizers 11 330 – 1
harmonics 2 – 4 Leap Motion 248, 251, 263 – 5
harmonic series 3 LFO (low frequency oscillator) 27 – 33; additive
Harmonic Tone Generator 171 – 2 synthesis and 138; amplifier modulation
headphones 65 31; filter modulation 31; vs. oscillators 28;
heavy metal recipe 198 – 9 overview of 27 – 8; pitch modulation 30; pulse/
high pass filter (HPF) 16 square wave 30; pulse width modulation 31;
high rate of wobble recipe 308 – 9 ramp wave 29 – 30; sample and hold 31 – 3;
hold 27 – 8 sawtooth wave 29; sine wave 28 – 9; triangle
hulusi gourd recipe 195, 196 wave 29; TRIGGER setting of 234, 236
hyper waves 8 – 9 logical interfacing with musicians 316 – 17
Logic Pro 63, 180, 248, 271
Idle Chatter series 241 Loom 145 – 6; filtering modules, additive
Image-Line Granulizer 221 – 2 synthesis and 153; software, additive synthesis
iPad control, vector Synthesis (VS) and 147 – 8
and 251 – 2 loop 73 – 5; crossfade and 75; direction 74 – 5;
optimal, section 73 – 4; release adjustments
Jack of all Trades live setup 343 – 4 and 75
Jazz Mutant Lemur 332 – 3 low burst pad recipe 233 – 4
Jenny, Georges 54 low frequency oscillator see LFO (low frequency
Jordantron iPad app 91 – 2 oscillator)
joysticks 39, 246, 247 low pass filter 15
Low String Repeat recipe 165
Karplus, Kevin 312
Karplus-Strong algorithm 312 Malstrom Graintable Synthesizer 220
Karplus-Strong (KS) synthesis 282 – 3 mapping 72 – 7
Kent, E. L. 171 Martenot, Maurice 53
keyboard control 19 – 21 Master parameters 158
keyboards 34 Max/MSP 222
key follow 19 – 21 McIntyre, Schumacher, and Woodhouse (MSW)
Keymap Pro 83 synthesis 281 – 2
key-switching 81 Mellotron 88
Kiev 266 – 71; see also Korg Gadget iOS app Metallic Sequencer recipe 166 – 7
Kontakt 76 MIDI see Musical Instrument Digital Interface
Korg Gadget iOS app 266 – 71; Kiev Filter/Amp (MIDI)
268; Kiev interface 267; Kiev MIDI mapping Millennial live setup 344 – 5
268 – 71; Kiev modulation 267 MiniBrute 8
Korg Kronos workstation synthesizers 297 MiniMoog 2, 5, 6 – 7, 27, 34, 57 – 8, 124, 319, 355
KS (Karplus-Strong) synthesis 282 – 3 mixer 186 – 7
Kyma X 220 modal synthesis 281

371
Index

modifiers 287 – 8 Organ I and II modules 151, 152

modular synthesizers, performing live with OSC (Open Sound Control) 332 – 3
323 – 5 oscillators 2, 9 – 13; digitally controlled 11; vs.
modulation 27 – 33; see also LFO (low frequency LFOs 28; software-based 11 – 12; sub 13; tune/
oscillator) detune features of 12; types of 9; using 12 – 13;
modulation synthesis 94 – 119; algorithm voltage controlled 9 – 11
1/operators 1&2 example 99 – 101; Amplitude oscillator sync 12 – 13
Modulation 104 – 8; in DAWs 114 – 15; DX-7 overtones 3
patch and 101 – 4; history of 115 – 17; phase
distortion 112 – 14; recipes 117 – 19; Ring Palm, Wolfgang 175
Modulation 108 – 12; types of 94 – 9 partial 127, 132
modulation wheel 39 peak 18
modulators 96 – 8 percussive staccato pad recipe 46 – 8
Moog, Bob 9, 14, 33 performance controls 37 – 40; glide 37 – 8;
morph screen 159 – 60 modulation wheel 39; pitch wheel 38 – 9; ribbon
MOTU Volta software 340 – 1 controllers 39 – 40
Moving Bell recipe 167 – 8 performance level, additive synthesis and 141
MSW synthesis 281 – 2 performing live 315 – 56; Analog Purist live
Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI) 328; setup 345 – 6; with analog synthesizers 315 – 23;
controller connections 336 – 8; to C.V. converters Art instillation live setup 352 – 3; Best of
338 – 9; over Bluetooth 337 – 8 Both Worlds live setup 342 – 3; with digital
synthesizers 325 – 9; EDM Star live setup 350 – 1;
Native Instruments 76 Eurorack Guru live setup 348 – 50; historical
Natural Low Strings recipe 166 perspective on 353 – 6; Jack of all Trades live
Nave 177 setup 343 – 4; Millennial live setup 344 – 5;
noise, subtractive synthesis and 13 – 14 with modular synthesizers 323 – 5; Processor
noise generators 141 Programmer live setup 347; retro DJ live setup
noise sources, additive synthesis and 140 – 1 351 – 2; with software synthesizers 329 – 41;
nontuned percussion instruments, physical Wireless Wizard live setup 347 – 8
modeling (PM) synthesis and 279 periods 205, 312
notch filter 17 phase distortion modulation 112 – 14
note-off trigger 75 Phrase module 155
physical modeling (PM) synthesis 273 – 9; analog
Oasys workstation synthesizers 297 modeling and 292 – 6; creating 284 – 5; described
Octaver module 151, 152 273 – 5; features of 275 – 6; hardware 285;
Odd/Even module 148, 149 nontuned percussion instruments and 279;
old shimmering pad recipe 305 – 6 software 288 – 92; stringed instruments and
Olson, Harry 54 276 – 7; Technics SX-WSA1 and 287 – 8; tuned
Ondes Martenot 53 percussion instruments and 277 – 9; VL line,
Ondioline 54 Yamaha and 286 – 7
Open Sound Control (OSC) 332 – 3 pink noise 13, 41
Operators 96 pitch, granular synthesis and 206

372
 Index

pitch modulation, LFO 30 synth 308; high rate of wobble 308 – 9; old
pitch shifting, granular synthesis and 217 shimmering pad 305 – 6; realistic muted bass
pitch wheel 38 – 9 304 – 5; stiff bouncing shimmer 303; synth keys
pixels 200 309 – 10; vibrating bells 307
play the filter 20 – 1 recipes, granular synthesis 223 – 39; Alchemy,
pleasantly dissonant pad recipe 230 – 1 Camel Audio and 223 – 8; cinematic tension pad
plucked ambient thump recipe 231 – 2 229 – 30; dampened metallic hammer shimmer
polyphony 54 237 – 8; glistening auto-harp 234 – 5; glistening
portamento 37 bells 236 – 7; grain length modulated plucking
PPG Wave 175 235 – 6; low burst pad 233 – 4; pleasantly
preset control 54, 58, 326 dissonant pad 230 – 1; plucked ambient thump
Processor Programmer live setup 347 231 – 2; rhythmic modulation 238 – 9; tyrell
Propellerhead Malstrom Graintable Synthesizer corporation pad 232 – 3
220 – 1 recipes, modulation synthesis 117 – 19; Bass 1 118;
Prophet V, Vector Synthesis (VS) and 252 – 6 Brass 1 117 – 18; E. Piano 119
Prophet VS: patches in Wavestation and 260; recipes, subtractive synthesis 40 – 52; chorded
Vector Synthesis 244 – 7 trumpet 50 – 1; effected, evolving pad
pro-sonic improvisation 317 – 18 43 – 4; evolving lead 42 – 3; Funk Lead 44 – 5;
pulsars 213 percussive staccato pad 46 – 8; punchy bass
pulsar synthesis, granular synthesis and 40 – 2; 60s Organ 48 – 9; slow, effected lead
212 – 13 49 – 50; thick bass 45 – 6; wall of sound 51 – 2
pulse wave 7 – 8; LFO 30 recipes, wavetable synthesis 194 – 9; arpeggiated
pulse width modulation (PWM), LFO 31 sawtooth 195, 197; heavy metal 198 – 9; hulusi
punchy bass recipe 40 – 2 gourd 195, 196; simple waveform collection
197 – 8; voice patch 194 – 5
quasi-synchronous granular synthesis 205 release 22; adjustments 75; parameter of envelope
generators 24 – 5
R. A. Moog Modular System 55 – 6 repeater 156
ramp wave 6 – 7; LFO 29 – 30 resonance 18, 19
Random Drops module 155 resonators 287 – 8
range 12 retro DJ live setup 351 – 2
RCA Electronic Sound Synthesizer 54 reversed gate signal 340
realistic muted bass recipe 304 – 5 rhythmic modulation recipe 238 – 9
recipes, additive synthesis 147, 160 – 9; ambient ribbon controllers 39 – 40
bass 160 – 1; cool repeater 161 – 2; Distorted Ring Modulation 108 – 12; in synthesizers 110 – 12
Bells 162 – 3; Distorted Movement 163 – 4; Roland TR 808 drum machine 5, 352
electric guitar lead 164; Low String Repeat 165; rolling off 15
Metallic Sequencer 166 – 7; Moving Bell 167 – 8; Rudess, Jordan 91
Natural Low Strings 166; Synth Bass 168 – 9
recipes, combination synthesis modeling 303 – 11; sample and hold, LFO 31 – 3
deep synth bass 306 – 7; distant rhythms 310 – 11; sample-based synthesis vs. granular synthesis
distorted dissonant pop 304; full spectrum 213 – 15

373
Index

sample playback, additive synthesis and 140 MIDI to C.V. converters and 338 – 9; MOTU
sampling/sample-based synthesis 60 – 93; Volta software and 340 – 1; OSC and 332 – 3;
advanced instrument example 80 – 1; analog tablets/smartphones and 331 – 2; volt/octave
drum example 83 – 5; audio interfaces and 67 – 8; converters and 340
auto-samplers 82 – 3; basic instrument example sonic improvisation 317 – 18
79 – 80; basics of 61 – 2; described 62 – 3; direct Spectral Distortion/Modulation 159
connections and 69; editing 71 – 2; future of spectral shaping see filtering
92 – 3; vs. granular synthesis 213 – 15; historical square waves 7; additive synthesis and 135 – 6;
perspective on 88 – 92; loops and 73 – 5; mapping hyper 8; LFO 30
72 – 7; matching outputs and 69 – 70; microphone step sequencer 35
guidelines for 68; nontraditional sound sources stereo instruments, defined 137 – 8
85 – 7; notes and layers, recording 70; overview stiff bouncing shimmer recipe 303
of 60 – 1; recording considerations for 63 – 5; stringed instruments: excitation 276 – 7; material
recording tools for 66 – 8; source capture and 276; physical makeup of 277; physical
63; synthification 81 – 2; tweaking 77; USB modeling synthesis and 276 – 7
microphone and 66; waveform sampling Strip Silence 71
example 77 – 9 Strong, Alexander 312
sawtooth wave 6; additive synthesis and 134 – 5; sub-oscillators 13
hyper 8; LFO 29 subtractive synthesis 1–59; amplifiers 21–2;
Screenflow 87 amplitude shaping 21–5; arpeggiators and
Sculpture: Leap Motion and 263 – 5; morph 36; Buchla Modular Electronic Music System
pad 292; physical modeling software 291 – 2, 56–7; controlling 33–4; described 2; digital
298 – 303; Vector Synthesis 248 – 50 synthesizers and 58–9; early electronic
Second Tone module 150 – 1 instruments for 52–4; envelope generators 22–7;
sequencers 35 – 6; additive synthesis and 143 esoteric controllers 36–7; filtering and 14–21;
simple waveform collection recipe 197 – 8 harmonics and 2–4; historical perspective
simple window 223 – 4 on 52–9; keyboards and 34; MiniMoog 57–8;
sine wave, LFO 28 – 9 modulation and 27–33; noise and 13–14;
60s Organ recipe 48 – 9 oscillators and 9–13; performance controls
slider 17, 97, 130, 142 – 3 37–40; R. A. Moog Modular System 55–6; recipes
slope 15 40–52; sequencers and 35–6; waveforms and 4–9
slow, effected lead recipe 49 – 50 sustain parameter of envelope generators 24
smartphones, software synthesizers and 331 – 2 synchronous granular synthesis 205
Smith, Dave 265 Sync module 150
software, physical modeling (PM) synthesis Synth Bass recipe 168 – 9
288 – 92; Ableton Live users and 288 – 91; synthification 81 – 2
Sculpture and 291 – 2, 298 – 303 synth keys recipe 309 – 10
software-based oscillators 11 – 12
software synthesizers, performing live with tablets, software synthesizers and 331 – 2
329 – 41; controlling 334 – 6; hardware tail 156
synthesizers and 333 – 4; laptop computers and Technics SX-WSA1 synthesizer 287 – 8
330 – 1; MIDI controller connections and 336 – 8; Tempophon 240

374
 Index

Theremin, Leon 52 volt/octave converters 340

thick bass recipe 45 – 6 VST (Virtual Studio Technology) synthesizers 11,
Thomson, Elihu 52 288, 293, 296
timbre 4
time modules 156 Waldorf nave 183 – 7; interface 184; mixer section
time stretching, granular synthesis and of 186 – 7; oscillator section of 186 – 7; wave
215 – 16 section of 184 – 6
tone generation, additive synthesis and wall of sound recipe 51 – 2
132 – 3 wave folding 8
tool modules 156 waveform generators 140
touch plates 37 waveforms 4 – 9
tremolo 28, 29 waveform sampling example 77 – 9
triangle wave 5; additive synthesis and 133 – 4; waveguide synthesis, digital 279 – 80
LFO 29 wavelet synthesis 212
trigger 30, 76, 84 Wave module 157
tuned percussion instruments: exciter section Wavestation, Korg: effects and multisets with 260;
278; physical modeling synthesis and 277 – 9; Prophet VS patches in 260; Vector Synthesis
resonator section 278 – 9 and 256 – 9; wave sequencing and 258 – 9
tweaking 77 wavetable synthesis 175 – 99; creating wavetables
two-pole filter 15 179 – 81; double modulation and 182 – 3; drive
tyrell corporation pad recipe 232 – 3 effect 188; envelope looping function 188;
envelopes and 182; FX and Arp section of 191;
Überwave 187 keys and 190 – 1; LFOs 189; MIDI section of
USB microphone 66 193; modulation options for 190; movement
of 177 – 8; overview of 175; principles of 176 – 7;
vector plane 159 – 60 recipes 194 – 9; tape and sys section of 191 – 3;
Vector Synthesis (VS) 244 – 72; DAW control and Überwave and 187; Waldorf nave and 183 – 7;
250 – 1; ES2 model 247 – 8, 261 – 2; Evolver and wave modulation 178 – 9; waves and 187
265 – 6; iPad control and 251 – 2; Korg Gadget West Coast synthesis 57
and 266 – 71; Leap Motion, Sculpture and white noise 13, 41
263 – 5; overview of 244 – 7; programming 252; Williams, C. N. 53
Prophet V and 252 – 6; Prophet VS model 244 – 7; windowing 203
Sculpture 248 – 50; Wavestation, Korg and Wireless Wizard live setup 347 – 8
256 – 60 workstation synthesizers 296 – 303; described
vibrating bells recipe 307 296 – 7; elements of 297 – 8; Korg Kronos 297;
vibrato 28, 29 Oasys 297; recipes 298; Sculpture and
Virtual Acoustic Technology 286 298 – 303
virtual analog 292
VL line, Yamaha synthesizer 286 – 7 Xbox Kinect 348
voice patch recipe 194 – 5 Xpand 2 250 – 1
voltage control, filter 18 – 19
voltage controlled oscillator (VCO) 9 – 11 Yamaha VL line synthesizer 286 – 7

375