What patches impress you the most?

[Synthworld]

I program factory patches for part of my living and often wonder what sort of sounds YOU (the buying public) are really looking for in a new synth.

I know what sort of sounds I like, but tell me what type of sounds that YOU look for when checking out the latest and greatest that the industry has to offer.

 

Make my job easier so I can provide what you are hoping to find in the latest knobby-wonder.

 

I'm currently talking SYNTH sounds here, not acoustic instrument mimicry.

(That could be good for another topic).

 

What sort of synth patches actually make you whip out that wallet?

 

Thanks ahead of time for the feedback.

 

Zon

[Dave Bryce]

What sort of synth patches actually make you whip out that wallet?

 

Nice post, Zon.

 

Fat brass patches that make my molars rattle. Warm strings. Burbling pads. Searing, smooth filter sweeps. Electrically charged lead sounds that make me feel as if I'm touching live electricity...sorry if that sounds pretentious - it's the only way that I can think of to describe it...

 

Basically, any synth that keeps me playing patches and/or reaching for parameters to program is a candidate. If I find myself doing what I refer to as the "two-finger shuffle (play one note with one finger, press the program up button with the other finger, repeat) then it doesn't stand a chance. The Wavestation is still one of my favorite examples...I can't browse through ten programs without coming up with at leasrt one inspiring groove. Andromeda currently holds that status for me...

 

dB

[aeon]

I like to see a variety of pads...airy, icy, warm, evolving, funereal, string-esque...and when I hear those pads I like to have harmonic control mapped to aftertouch and some other creative timbral modifier mapped to modulation.

 

I also like to have complex and delicate textural ambiences and atmospherics based on the synth engine itself, not the effects section. This is not to say I don't like creative programming of an effects section if it is present, but I don't like the effects to be the dominant feature of the sound...I want patches that sound great dry and even better with some treatment. I don't mean to say that effects are not a valid part of a timbre, but they have been used to hide a weak engine or programming on some synths, and I do not like that.

 

I like aggresive, edgy sounds...sounds that are in-your-face in a unique way. I don't mean the typical screaming synth-lead, but sounds that exploit digital artifacts like aliasing, quantizing, odd digital waveshaping, and loop modulation.

 

I also like to hear a few drum sounds made from the engine itself, not a drum sample. This shows me the synth engine has good, fast envelopes and precise timbral control for attack transients and the like.

 

A few good basses are nice too. Good to me means electronic, with good attack envelopes and character, and without an excess of HF spectra.

 

Things I don't care about: acoustic emulations, most bells, emulations of electroacoustic devices like a Rhodes or Hammond, most plucked strings.

[aeon]

I had a couple more ideas...

 

I like to have a few arp-style bleep-beeps that have a number of modulation sources for timbral variation so I can apply aftertouch, mod wheel, ribbon, knob-twirl, etc., and hear some nice morphing and shifting.

 

Also, I like to have a few patches that may have no immediately-obvious musical use but show off the power of the engine - ya know, those single-finger symphonies that make me go "wow" when I hear the dancing harmonics and 37 modulation sources acting at once.

 

I appreciate good presets, but I do not weight my buying decision on them too heavily. I mean, if the factories can demonstrate the power of the synth, great, but I am far more likely to peep a manual and grok what I can, then start programming in-store. I love to program, and I want to see that the synth both has "the sound" and is easy to use from the front panel.

 

Fairly recent synths that had what I thought were incredible presets include the Clavia Nord Modular, Access Virus b, and the E-mu XL-1. The presets in the Waldorf Q were wack, but it didn't stop me from discovering what a gem-of-a-synth it is.

[Tusker]

I like the sound categories described above. I have an additional suggestion.

 

I like patches that are playable by synthesists, and lend themselves to real time timbral control. As a result, I am more interested in the range of (and musicality of) tone available in a patch, than the median tone. I find it a shame that today 99% of factory patches have the same generic modulation routings available through controllers.

 

1) Vibrato (lfo mod of pitch)

2) Brightness (filter cutoff)

3) Noise or distortion (fading in of additional tones/ EFX treatments)

4) Etc.

 

The trouble with these generic performance varations, is that synthesizer performance is becoming like a general midi set: predictable, and generic. We may (and all instruments may) have unique sounds, but if we all do the same performance articulations, we will sound like one instrument. I believe the trick is not in merely increasing the number and range of performance articulations, but designing-in the available performance articulations to give the patch a 'personality'.

 

I would love it if somebody released a synth with 10 factory sounds instead of 1000, but imbued each of those 10 sounds with controller routings that makes each patch a unique musical instrument.

 

Now, I know that's not possible, but...... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

 

Cheers,

 

Jerry

 

This message has been edited by Tusker on 02-26-2001 at 09:24 AM

[MICHAEL_dup1]

I GUESS I'LL JUST HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL THE TOPIC OF SAMPLED SOUNDS IS BROUGHT UP - BUT EVEN IF A SYNTH PATCH COULD SOUND LIKE ULLEAN PIPES, THAT WOULD MAKE ME OPEN MY WALLET. ONE OF THE GENRES THAT I ENJOY LISTENING TO IS NEW AGE. BEING A WRITER, I DON'T REALLY LISTEN THAT MUCH - BUT I OFTEN WONDERED WHY THERE ARE SO MANY ECLECTIC ETHNIC SOUNDS AVAILABLE THAT MOST PEOPLE NEVER HEARD OF BEFORE, AND WITH SOME CELTIC MUSIC BEING A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE NEW AGE GENRE, THAT THOSE SOUNDS AREN'T AVAILABLE. MAYBE IT'S JUST ME, BUT THOSE SOUNDS ARE VERY AURALLY PLEASING AND WHETHER THEY COULD BE SYNTHESIZED OR SAMPLED, I WOULD DEFINITELY 'OPEN MY WALLET' TO ACQUIRE THAT SOUND, REGARDLESS OF THE FORMAT OR TECHNOLOGY THAT WOULD PROVIDE IT. THNX

[joegerardi]

Well, I'll go in the other direction:

 

I want good acoustic emulations. I want a great piano, and killer Hammond. Actually, I want emulations of everything. For example: many MiniMoog programs might have the right wave, but they don't get that buzzy Moog filter sound a la "Welcome To The Machine" by Pink Floyd, and so mnay others. It was a signature sound of the Mini, just like "Orch. 5" was the signature of the Fairlight. (Well, that and the Fairlight "Ahhhs.") I'd love to see those signature sounds from a lot of instruments: The CP-70 with its chorus and tremolo, Mellotron string and choir. JP8's ballsiness, the GX-1's brightness, the PPG's clarity, yes, even the DX7's EP sound, ad nauseum to a lot of you.

 

Then I would like a lot of usuable pads. By that I mean something that doesn't intrude, because a pad is there in the background to BE a pad. OTOH, I really think too many programmers drop the ball on string sounds. Either it's an up-front string, or it's a string pad, but seldom do both, and well.

 

I would also like to see these sounds modulated well. Oft times the programmer gets the great sound and then just leaves it there. He/she doesn't develop it afterwards, perhaps adding filter freq. to the mod wheel or pedal, or whatever. Most times it's LFO, and when you've got a pad, adding filter brightness is one of the best things that you can spice it up.

[callengowanco.com]

Joegar,

 

I will second your statement concerning acoustic emulations. It seems as if we are in the age of taking a half decent patch and placing a great effect on it to make a usable patch. Give me something that sounds good dry and has some strong underlying harmonics. If you want to add some air to do it sparringly. On a particular Brand of synth/sampler I find most of the patches too wet and unusable for my purposes. I wonder if anyone can guess which keyboard that is LOL!!!

[marino]

I like *good* patches. Any kind. Really! (No wait, please read on)

 

I make different kinds of music, and I enjoy it. So what impresses me is quality and attention to detail, in many different kinds of patch. If it's a piano patch, a round, playable one; a synth sound, deep and complex; a brass program, biting and full; an otherworldly sound, evolving and involving.

 

Then I like controller depth: For example, if the pitch wheel also changes the filter a little, then I know the programmer is my friend. The same if I find that the vibrato LFO has a little intermodulation that makes it less predictable (and it's patched to some filter too), or if sustaining a clarinet sound I hear a little timbral evolution that makes the loops less obvious. When I hear this kind of thing, I just smile, because it spares me the time to do it myself.

 

I have a definitive test to check a sound coming out from a synth: Would it stand being used in an orchestration together with well-played, well-recorded acoustic instruments, playing an exposed part? After all these years, I know the answer without the need of verifying.

I don't mean it does *have* to sound like any acoustic instrument; but I like the richness of sound and the realtime control to be there.

 

Other synthetists may disagree, but since I find myself playing every day with some great acoustic player, I know I have to do my homework in order not to sound static and "electronic", both in terms of playing and in the quality of my sounds.

 

marino

[Steve44]

I'm not exactly a part of the buying public as I only have one synth, but I think what I usually listen for when sifting through synth patches is the bad stuff: if there are sounds that are just poorly done. Common bothers are: too much reverb (like the Kurzweil SP series), crappy reverb algorithms, too many patches with similar Echo/delays, too little or duplicated controller routings (the Yamaha EX5 being the prime target - so many knobs, so little programming), if there's too many similar patches, and if there's any general uneasiness in the samples. I also dislike it when there's too many patches with digital-sounding highs - I'd rather not hear the highs at all if they're going to sound so fizzy.

 

If the synth is based on new technology or trying to be the best VA, then I tend to look for patches that are really unique, that exhibit weird stuff that I haven't imagined yet. For instance, one of the major reasons I bought my K5000S was because of the "even-odd" additive control - the ability to slowly change any sound into either a pulse wave or a saw wave was just something I'd never imagined before. That, and its wacked-out distorted filter resonance. In all the Physical Modeling articles I've ever read, they've talked about how you can create unreal sounds like a bowed trumpet or something. I have yet to hear any sound like that in a factory bank of a synth (most notably the Z1 & the MOSS in the triton). Damnit, I wanna hear a useful mallet-struck saxophone! (no, I don't mean sampling the sound of smacking a real sax)

 

Also, when I think of new and imaginitive sounds, I no longer want there to be fluttering arpeggios in the background like the kind of stuff that made the D50 popular. If it's VA I especially want to hear dual-filter stuff and natural VCA distortion evocative of the Sherman Filterbank. When I go listen to the Andromeda for the first time, I expect to hear (besides a stape of beyond-fabulous analog leads and bases and pads) some really nutty Wendy Carlos type things that really boggle the mind.

 

 

On the side of all-in-one synths, I look for patches that push the envelope in instrument emulation in terms of musicality and effects. If I see a guitar patch on a synth, I want it to have useful distortion and switchable effects like Phasers and Chorus that mimic having several pedals. If I play any brass patches, I expect there to be key position & velocity sensitive filters along with a musical vibrato. Same goes for strings - if the string pads have aftertouch swells and filter changes it shows me that the synth was really made for a player!

 

 

Zon, are you involved in the actual sound-design process (i.e. designing the sample set) or just making the patches once the synth is mostly done?

[analogman1]

Hello all,

The things that impress me most are a patch's "playability". What I mean is that it should have the ability to respond to dynamics, like a piano; to be bent and modulated, like a minimoog; yet it should have the innocent, transparent qualities of the classical clavichord. I tend to gravitate towards patches that can play a wide variety of things, both chordal and linear, at the same time so that when I'm soloing, I don't feel like I'm stuck in only "1st gear".

Tom

[dansouth]

Patches that work in a mix. These are usually simpler patches. Play somethning with three or four layers in a mix, and you'll only hear one of the layers. I usually edit patches to make them simpler. Complex, percolating, crossfading sounds are great for music store showroom gear auditions, but they rarely work in the studio unless that sound is isolated. I wish manufacturers would send a disk along with every synth labeled "Sounds You'll Need When You Get It Home." You can erase all of the "Check Out Our Nifty Features" patches and load up the truly useful set.

[steadyb]

(originally posted by Dave Bryce) ...Fat brass patches that make my molars rattle. Warm strings. Burbling pads. Searing, smooth filter sweeps. Electrically charged lead sounds that make me feel as if I'm touching live electricity...sorry if that sounds pretentious - it's the only way that I can think of to describe it...

 

Basically, any synth that keeps me playing patches and/or reaching for parameters to program is a candidate. If I find myself doing what I refer to as the "two-finger shuffle play one note with one finger, press the program up button with the other finger, repeat) then it doesn't stand a chance. The Wavestation is still one of my favorite examples...I can't browse through ten programs without coming up with at least one inspiring groove. Andromeda currently holds that status for me...

dB

 

I agree completely, it can be almost any type of sound, if it has that elusive "can't tear yourself away" quality. From bass to strings to totally electronic etc., if you end up getting lost in the moment, for me, it's a great patch.

steadyb

[Alon]

Originally posted by callen@gowanco.com:

On a particular Brand of synth/sampler I find most of the patches too wet and unusable for my purposes. I wonder if anyone can guess which keyboard that is LOL!!!

 

Let me guess...Mmmmm....Does it have a silver finish ?

[dansouth]

Originally posted by Alon:

Let me guess...Mmmmm....Does it have a silver finish ?

 

I guess pressing Global --> Master Effects --> Off --> Save Global Settings is too complicated for some users.

[Guest]

Not exactly on the topic here but...

 

PLEASE, I beg all synth manufacturers when designing presets to go easy on the reverb. It amazes me how much reverb is used on factory presets, particularly bass sounds.

 

And, while I'm on the subject of dumb preset programming, I'd like to propose a worldwide ban on Roland random panning. Every time I play one of their drum kits I imagine a guy hanging from a long rope, swinging wildly back and forth, playing a ride cymbal pattern.

 

- Chris Beck

[Synthworld]

Thanks for the great replies!

This helps me out quite a bit.

(but...don't stop now!)

I'm getting some really varied opinions here and that's exactly what I was hoping for.

 

Zon

[Alon]

Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com:

I guess pressing Global --> Master Effects --> Off --> Save Global Settings is too complicated for some users.

 

Effects have been way overused in certain synths to hide weak sounds.

 

Sort of cheating in a way. (In my opinion)

 

I can make a Fart sound cool, if I put some Delay on it, a hint of reverb, slight EQ, perhaps some flanging, and put some auto-pan to it.

 

Good sounds impress me, not some multifx unit built into a synth.

 

ALON

[musicman1ovation.net]

Ditto on several others, including the "dental" brass-like patches. Hey, listen to the analog string sound on "As Falls Wichita So Falls Wichita Falls" (Pat Metheny & Lyle Mays - 3rd cut). It's so warm I head for the thermostat. I also LOVE the primitive flute sound. These are real winners and were done originally with a row of Oberheim SEMs.

 

Another kind of sound I love has a rich harmonically rich drone (think sitar) in the background that is musically compatible with a string/bell sustain lead. The trick is in the drone part, though; making it work in any key (the drone not effected by key).

[cidnbnet.nb.ca]

Pads!......I love swirling smooth thick pads!.....Also strings.....Give me a killer rhodes sound and i'm happy to!....I find alot of synths are weak when it comes to brass....I've got an old SY77, and the "Big Band" patch can't be beat!....I love it....it's thick and ballsy....anyway, that's my 1.5 cents.....

[Guest]

I guess I don't have too much to add since most of what I think has been mentioned, but I figured I'll give my 2 cents to enforce previous ideas.

 

1. Clever use of controllers. Vibrato on after touch and mod wheel is overused and boring a lot of times. How about moving the mod wheel changing the filter resonance slightly while shortening the release (creating a gate effect) and doing a slight detune (just an example; probably sounds like hell)?

 

2. Clever use of the arpeggiator (if the synth has it). Like 'puppy' in the cs6x. OK, the patch is not very useful but it's cool. ;-) There was one of the mixes in my kurzweil which is pretty cool, and the arpeggiator is pretty simple. A piano sound with a lower volume marimba that's arpeggiated.

 

3. Again, patches that don't need to be drenched in reverb (and other effects) to sound cool.

 

In general I like to see a mixture of 'useful' sounds and sounds which demonstrate the synths capabilities. And don't waste presets with variations of basically the same sound. It's important to be able to balance out the sounds between those required to ful fill the basic food groups and sounds that are so unique that make you want to buy the synth for that sound alone.

 

Sometime ago there was an article on keyboard mag about someone who wrote patches for the korg triton (can't remember the issue, but the article was in the last page). In the article the author mentioned how patches go through a 'selection' process and some never see the light of the day.

 

I agree that the preset patches need to show the instrument in its best light. But hell, throw the 'rejected' sounds in a cd rom or floppy and let people decide. Or post on the web with some disclaimer. I'd have no problem loading a bank of 64 sounds to only find 4 I like. Given the in depth of programability of some synths I would not complain to have a few more 'example patches'. I've always tweaked the sounds I use one way or another, but I rarely start from scratch. Having as many starting points as possible helps.

 

Rod

[Wiggum]

This is a great topic...I've watched it for a few days, but this is the first chance I've had to post....

 

There is a definite difference between patches that impress you in the store, and those that are useful in a mix. I play a Korg Wavestation and a Roland D20, and the Wavestation is certainly guilty of "one finger wonders". Was I impressed the first time I heard it? Sure. Would I ever use any of those arpeggiated, evolving patches in a composition? Hell no.

 

Why? Because they are not my own. The patch would instantly label the music. There are few things worse than listening to a track or advertisement, and being able to name the instrument and preset patch they are using (just think how many early 90's ads used the Korg M1 piano). Schick or Gillette used the W/S's "New Zealand Vice" in an ad, and it was instantly recognizable. Would the average person know the difference? Of course not. But I write music for myself and other players to enjoy, and I just can't get there with identifiable presets. I enjoy the evolving pads just like everyone else, but they become part of the composition. And as part of the composition, they have to come from me.

 

Regarding the effects argument, the horse has left the gate. Manufacturers almost HAVE to implement on-board effects to compete with other instruments in the store. If the average person were to try out a Nord Lead, and then play a Roland JP8000, they might lean toward the Roland just because of the polished, effected sound. At the same time, there are definitely instruments that use reverb and effects to hide lousy samples, and instruments that rely heavily on the effects section for timbre (Wavestation being one of them). If you shut off the global effects on a Wavestation, it sounds like crap. The flangers, choruses, and EQ's dictate much of the timbre. I usually shut down reverb if I am recording (just to keep the options open), but I don't try to recreate the other effects externally. If it sounds good, why bother? Before I buy any instrument, I disable the effects just to hear the quality of the raw oscillators / samples.

 

So what patches turn me on?

 

Wet, warm pads that complement other sounds (just check out the W/S's "Warm Strings", or the third party patch "Poseiden's Pad").

Wet, dynamic leads that drip expression (check out the "T Lead"(?) patch on the Kurzweil K2600)

Warm, fat filter sweeps

Ethereal patches

Good bells

Deep Timpanis

Fat analog brass and strings

Dynamic, playable basses

Expressive flutes, recorders, and french horns (I dig that warm, muted sound)

 

What patches suck?

 

Any piano, electric piano, or organ patches created by a third party (these sounds are highly dependent on samples -- if the sample isn't new, there ain't much you can do. Please don't give me any more detuned EP patches)

Anything with an arpeggiator, or patches with signature, evolving characteristics (too identfiable - see comments above)

Techno patches (again, too important to the composition -- you need to create them yourself)

Solo sax patches (still waiting for a decent one...)

Percussive clicks (I have banks of 3rd party patches that don't last more than 1 millisecond -- If I wanted an attack transient, I'd create one myself)

Nasal brass, or cold, thin strings

Lousy clavinets

Almost all guitars (acoustic and electric)

 

What are some specific patches that I like?

 

Whistling Soldiers - Roland D50

Wall Bob - Roland JP8000

Synth Strings - Roland U20

Bubble Synth - Roland JD800 / JD990

 

Warm Strings - Korg W/S

Bells - Korg W/S

Mini Lead - Korg W/S

Cat's Eye - Korg W/S

VS Bell Pad - Korg W/S

AT Sweep - Korg W/S (Eye and I)

Poseiden's Pad - Korg W/S (3rd party)

Digital Touch - Korg W/S

 

I could think of more, but I think I got the point across. I really think the usefulness and quality of factory patches has decreased over the past few years. I haven't heard anything that makes my jaw drop (other than the Korg CX-3, or some emulative patches on the Kurzweil K2600).

 

And for Rod, I think the feature in Keyboard mag you are referring to was an interview with Jack Hotop of Korg. It might have been Don Muro, but I'm quite sure it was Jack.

 

All the best,

 

Wiggum

 

 

This message has been edited by Wiggum on 03-01-2001 at 10:54 PM