How many synthesizer are enough?

[zenophilix]

I am stunned you are still discussing this. World wide statistics have already shown that keyboardplayers/producers in average own 3,497812543723 synthesizers. Thus we can conclude that to all people in all contries, within all cultures, contexts, situations and for all possible purposes in past, present and future in this world, the next and all parallel universes that exist or will ever come to exist, should have minimum 3 synths and max 4. Anything above makes you a ressource wasting idiot, anything below, a poor ass that is not to be reckoned with.

And now I am going to report you all for species threatening low-intelligent behavior, making the whole human race vulnerable to the invasion of highly evolved space ants.

Have a nice life and parma ban, friggin degenerates.

I think someone's upset...

[chk071]

Just the usual.

[IncarnateX]

Just kidding of course but isn't the topic-question one of those that are a little hard to answer without a "to whom, when, where, in what context and for what purposes"? Miss some premises here, but never mind, Carry on

[Synthman2000]

if you want to be the most productive you don t need much of them except if you like to loose time browsing presets and learning to progam them..i could apply that advice first to me but it s true... take the 2 or 3 best softsynth out there you could be fine for makign music for 10 years.. and you would probably make better music with these 2 or 3 sofsynth traped in your studio insteed of going at kvr everyday checking what is new like a drug addict

There is an element of truth in this. However I like it. I browse in short breaks in my working day and the evening. And generally doing what you enjoy is good for you.

It is also about digitally communing with the global synth and music making enthusiasts. (We are a bunch of knob touching pixel fiddlers)

[Synthetic Wav]

if you want to be the most productive you don t need much of them except if you like to loose time browsing presets and learning to progam them..i could apply that advice first to me but it s true... take the 2 or 3 best softsynth out there you could be fine for makign music for 10 years.. and you would probably make better music with these 2 or 3 sofsynth traped in your studio insteed of going at kvr everyday checking what is new like a drug addict

There is an element of truth in this. However I like it. I browse in short breaks in my working day and the evening. And generally doing what you enjoy is good for you.

It is also about digitally communing with the global synth and music making enthusiasts. (We are a bunch of knob touching pixel fiddlers)

same i enjoying it but it's counter productive, but relaxing

[Lotuzia]

Actually, if you *know* 3 quite different synths *completely*, you know many more.

Then the only thing left is to know if you must have more -and more- synths to adress more/less different styles, genres, commissions etc.( especially if you're a pro, or intend to become one).

Or to know wich synths exactly correspond to your style and likes, ie wich synth(s) is/are really for YOU, and will serve you well. here, it's a matter of love as well as to have a good focus on what you want to achieve. Try many synths, listen, compose, understand differences between instruments, approve or reject without listening to what other people say -they are simply different from you-, and everything will become obvious at a certain moment ( probably a few years though, if you lack pure genius like 99,99% of us)

[Synthman2000]

If you think you can achieve all different timbres and characters with 3 synths I think you cannot hear very well. I am sure you may be able to achieve some sounds that are similar to another synth.

Sometimes you get characteristic overlap, I do not deny this. But to have many textures is good, difference in texture can start from a single oscillator routed directly to an amplifier and as we know there are many stages after this. All of which are a bit different than every other synth.

There are few hobbies and professions with the depth of music making, maybe art ? That depth makes the investment in music worthwhile IMO.

And if you cannot afford multiple synths don't be discouraged as you can get a huge amount of work done anyway with just a handful. How you approach it is personal.

I always consider you can own 10 excellent synths for €1,000.00 where that would have bought you 2/3 of a keyboard synth with 100-200 sounds onboard and you probably liked 20 of them 25 years ago.

You do what you can afford and desire.

[pottering]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkEXGgdqMz8

[Triplefox]

My present answer to this question is: It's not the synths, it's the workflow. A stronger overall workflow gets you farther with less time and effort - from initial recording and sequencing to final mastering. But you have to do some intentional design to make your process work. If you rely on a new piece of gear to solve every problem, you're a consumer. There is a "right number" of synths that depends on the rest of your process and how strongly it relies on different synth colorations.

I have had a longstanding preference for a "layer simple tone generators, add coloring effects" approach. When you layer two or three substantially different sources, you can get some really exciting stuff. But if you get lost programming the details of one source then you're definitely working at a "smaller range of intervals" - smaller palette, less vibrancy. I do design in a limited palette when I actually start putting together a soundscape so that it isn't all over the place. But in the same way that an 80's artist who only had a DX-7 or D-50 would end up having a "Yamaha sound" or "Roland sound", sticking to one synth, even today, is going to tie you more strongly to that design and its limitations or tendencies.

This means that synths that do everything aren't my most used tools. I've used IL Harmless - not Harmor(though I own both) - for many years because it gives me the better 80% of every subtractive sound I want, and it's much simpler to program. It can turn into quite a chameleon simply by having it resynthesize a sampled oscillator, then adjusting the filter width and envelope curvature. Only on the more elaborate sound design projects do I have to take out Harmor. Likewise, I enjoy free FM synths like JuceOPLVSTi, Dexed, and VOPM because they have the unmistakable qualities of the chips they're emulating, and I can mostly rely on presets without getting too lost in programming. One of my newest staples is Dagger, as it nails another kind of "character" leaky/sloppy analog sound. In all there are probably a dozen or so plugins that I will reach for; at least half involve some kind of modelling of an acoustic or electric instrument(e.g. SpicyGuitar, the various xoxos physical modelling plugins, the organ and keys plugins bundled in Mixcraft). I am not keen on authenticity since it's a treadmill of each generation of products being more authentic than the last.

Then I further shape the sound with effects. A good range of effects - saturation, distortion, reverb, multi-delay, EQ, compression - amounts to a multiplier on all your synths and can unify their sound, making you rediscover all of them and see them in a whole new light. Likewise synths whose presets are all bathed in the same delay effect are instant red flags for me as it indicates a lack of strength in the basic timbre.

[chk071]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkEXGgdqMz8

Man... the sound of my youth...

Some sick synth sounds in there btw. Regarldess of the quality of the music.

[Lutin mutin]

Hi !

I thought that 1 synth give me 1 "kind" of sound... so, a minimum of one very good synth by kind of "tech" :
- 1 of the best synth for subtractive synthesis (sound + workflow) : example -> Diva...
- 1 corresponding to FM synthesis : example -> FM8
- 1 for additive synthesis --> ...
- 1 for wave synthesis : example -> SERUM
- 1 for a mix of different synthesis : example -> ALCHEMY
- 1 for granular synthesis... etc...
- etc...
I don't really understand (and I don't really ear big difference sounding), In my opinion, what is the interest in having a lot of synths in the same kind of synthesis (example : 10 or more subtractive synthesis synths... etc...)
But I'm sure a lot of you guys totally disagree with me...
Ok.
So, this is my personal and different opinion... with my arguments...

My 2 cents
Cheers !

[hersoot]

Two are too many and fifty are not enough.

[EnGee]

Two are too many and fifty are not enough.

Actually, I agree with that!

Sometimes, I run one synth, and after doing some presets for it. I ask myself, why do I need another synth if this one can do all the sounds for me?!

But then, sometimes, I'm in the middle of a song and I want a 'special' sound. I keep looking in the presets including the ones I did to see if I can find what I want, but then I feel all those 50 synths or so (in the past, I shortened them to 30 or so now!) not exactly doing that 'special' sound I want! Anyway, recently, I stopped imagining the sound! I just browse what is there and choose what fits more (from harmonic point of view, of course personal taste!), so I'm more tolerate now

[Michael L]

Some create sounds based on their imagined composition, others imagine a composition based on the sounds they create; each has different synth requirements, yesno?

[MarlaPodolski]

Guess it depends what you use synths for.

Well, I've already discovered that they don't make very good doorstops.

I suppose jon is going to tell us what other "uses" there are, aside from the obvious of using them as the instruments they are, for making music and sounds?