[56j56n65u656]

Good lord what a horrible recommendation. This is like telling someone to learn programming by starting with assembly.

If you want to actually learn subtractive synthesis minus the complexity use an all in one synth VST like Surge which is free and open source and you won't have to worry about tedious fundamentals that don't actually matter unless you're doing modular synthesis. Helm is another great VST.

Once you understand subtractive you can graduate to more complicated methods of synthesis like FM, vector, ETC.

[weatherlight]

I disagree... those "tedious fundamentals" is how all synths work, irregardless of synthesis type.

Watch the video. It's 15 minutes. I wish I could learn assembly in 15 minutes! You build the synth one module and one connection at a time all connected to an oscilloscope.

If I gave someone a SH-101 with no context, and let them noodle around with it and then asked them, to explain the architecture, they wouldn't be able to.

Sure, they may make some cool noises buy they wouldn't understand, what is what, why is hooked up to what and how that might differ on some other fixed architecture synth.

[tarentel]

While I agree that basically all subtractive synthesizers work the same way I started "learning" how they work when I was ~12. It wasn't until my mid 30s until I got into modular and I realized "hey all my synths are basically routed this way, neat." Has it changed the way I think about how I make a patch? Not at all. It is cool to know how they're architected but it in no way will really help you in learning how to use them so I agree with the comment you're replying to. Get an all in one synth and start making patches.

If you gave someone an SH-101 and explained to them how it was architected it wouldn't really help them make that signature acid bass sound so ya they'd be a little more knowledgeable on how synthesizers technically work but they still wouldn't be able to make any music with it. Whereas if I showed them how to make that bass sound they could now go try it on every other subtractive synth they run into even if it doesn't sound the same. Besides that, they'd learn how a lot of it works in a musical sense which is way more important to using synths than any technical knowledge will give you if you actually want to write music.

[weatherlight]

The original post is about synthesis and learning about synthesis. Not music theory or how to program an acid patch. Those are separate skills.

[adriand]

No it isn't, the original post is "Learning Synths", not "Learning Synthesis". It actually is a tutorial on how you might go about programming an acid patch (or a bass, or a wind instrument, or whatever).

[weatherlight]

The first two-thirds of this tutorial seems to be focused on breaking down the components of a standard subtractive synthesizer (essentially the synthesis process itself). However, it doesn’t really delve into how these components are interconnected or how they operate as a cohesive system. The latter part of the tutorial is more aligned with what you're referring to. That said, the knowledge gained here isn’t universally applicable to all synthesizers, it's only applicable to Subtractive Synths. If the tutorial took just one additional step, it could provide a more complete foundation, but as it stands, it leaves you wanting more (or worse, not know you need to know more). For a more versatile pointed approach, I suggested using something like VCV Rack, because Its modular interface allows you to import only the modules you need to explore or explain a specific synthesis method. This hands-on method enables you to experiment and internalize the concepts, which can then be applied to the synthesizers you have on hand.

Most tutorial videos are 5-10 minutes long, and completely reproducible and it's very clear the signal flow from one part to the next.

[adriand]

Fair enough. I should try it, although I have a pretty good grasp of how subtractive synths work. What about FM synthesis, do you have any suggestions on that? I find it the least intuitive by far, not that my experience extends to many other kinds (I mainly use wavetable, sample-based and subtractive synths these days).

[dingnuts]

> You build the synth one module and one connection at a time all connected to an oscilloscope.

making my music hobby feel like my job sounds terrible lol

[officeplant]

Some of us are just synthesis hobbyists and the musical part comes second. Exploration is a joy.

[weatherlight]

I’m sorry :( I get it. It’s how I feel about DAWs.

[b3orn]

It's not how all synths work, probably the most famous FM synth the DX-7 never had a filter, additive synths don't really need filters either, but for a subtractive synth this would be unthinkable. And the general architecture of any synth is usually not that hard, you have a source, possibly filters, an amp and some modulators.

[weatherlight]

My friend, with the app above you can take 6 VCOs, have them modulate each other and understand how the FM(phase) synthesis on a DX7 works. Instead of guessing. Explore why certain ratios produce bell like tones etc.

One of may favorite digital synths is the TX-81z. 4op FM. One of the first digital synths where the operators weren’t restricted to sine waves. (DX7 had 6op FM)

If you just look at the specs. And even play with the values you won’t understand why one synth could obtain sounds the other couldn’t.

That “source” is usually the synthesis method.(usually the complicated part outside of anything that’s not a traditional VCO)

If you have a filter, the resonance imparts a particular sound as well.

Digitone is 4op fm as the source then that’s funneled through a pretty standard east coast architecture.

[brudgers]

Sure, they may make some cool noises

That is the point of making music.

The rest is exhaust fumes.

You don’t have to know how something works to know how it sounds.

And nobody ever danced to a lecture on signal flow.

[weatherlight]

Again, the OPs post is an introduction to synthesis. Good luck finding those “sounds.”

[brudgers]

You don’t have to know theory to make acid with a TB-303, i.e. the subtractive synth that changed music the most.

[weatherlight]

Not every one has a 303, Maybe they want to take that cheap Behringer mono synth and do acid on that?

one could argue what made it great was that it only has 5 parameters that affects it's sound and it's sequencer, (and it was a total flop financially for Roland and could bought 2nd hand for like 50 bucks in Detroit. and dance music is better for it!)

and as per the subtractive synth that change music the most...I'm going to go with Moog or mini-Moog, without them there's no 303, 101, Juno, Jupiter, etc.

I love me some good acid-house though, and much rather have a 303 then a mini-moog. :)

[brudgers]

much rather have a 303 then a mini-moog

Thanks to Uli, I can afford the both. And a 2600, etc.

[beAbU]

Surge is incredibly complex and powerful and will be way overwhelming to a new user. They will be rediced to browsing the patch library not really understanding how things work.

With VCVRack and the right tutorial, a user will build a basic synth with an oscillator, filter, amp and envelope generator - which together make up the fundamental core of subtractive synthesis. The manual patching of modular is a great way to actually learn how these building blocks interact with one another to create sound.

[webstrand]

I actually really think that starting with assembly would be a great place for someone to start learning programming. But not x86 and not on a traditional PC. Instead using some microcontroller attached to a breadboard with a few simple peripherals like a keypad, simple LCD (or maybe an 8-segment).

The control-flow is obvious, the syntax is simple enough that novices shouldn't struggle with it, and writing directly to pins to control the peripherals gives immediate concrete feedback.

[mtizim]

I don't agree at all, vcv rack helped me understand synthesis in a much deeper way than I would have otherwise. What's a retrigger? Oscillator drift? Why do you modulate with a lfo? These are much simpler to understand when you're patching modules by hand in vcv, especially when you start with a blank slate.

On the other hand, before vcv, seeing a vst synth just had me overwhelmed instead.

I'd recommend everyone reading this to get free vcv + the surge vcv library, and just play around with it.

[xtagon]

> This is like telling someone to learn programming by starting with assembly.

Believe it or not, this is some people's preferred learning style. See also: Nand2Tetris, Linux From Scratch

[AnthonBerg]

One man’s horrible recommendation is another’s… emancipation?

We’re all uniquely different!, I promise; After a number of other paradigms had failed to teach me programming, assembly was what finally did it.

And with synthesis, it was FM first and then subtractive. The picture is more concise when looking at it from the perspective of frequency modulation because all oscillators can do everything, you know? –That’s the sense it made to me, privately and personally.

[javier123454321]

Don't have a dog in this fight as I don't know much about synthesis, but I always remember the old saying. The best book to learn about "hard subject" is the third book you read on it.

How many people will comment on a youtube video, course, strategy or book, and say something like - It's the best explanation. I tried all these different things and only this worked. The common denominator is previous failed attempts at the subject.

[rambojohnson]

OP actually gave pretty sound advice. maybe be a little more constructive next time and less edgelord.

[officeplant]

Free VSTs are great and all, but VCV Rack + a wealth of online tutorials and synth knowledge seems like the perfect option to me. Especially if someone is actually more interested in the synthesis part than being musical. Plus VCV Rack is also free to start with until you want to go much much deeper.

I think they are both acceptable places to start and learn.

[import]

Came here to say this. I would recommend surge or vital as a starting point.