What is your favorite method of sound synthesis? Explain why

[JXC]

The title says it all

[Doomkid]

For the 99% of you out there who have no idea what this even means, it makes for a very interesting read: https://theproaudiofiles.com/sound-synthesis-basics/

I don't do enough composition to have a preference, but I'm interested to see the music/tech gurus preferences.

[JXC]

I like wavetable because it gives you a wide selection of waveforms including additive and fm-based ones. I could make the same argument for a sampler, but most samplers don't have LFOs, Modulation, filters (save for FX), or whatever. You can manipulate samples on the Waldorf Blofeld, which is also a VA and wavetable synth.

[MusicallyInspired]

Missing Linear Arithmetic (MT-32).

[JXC]

MusicallyInspired said:

Missing Linear Arithmetic (MT-32).

Do that for other. I am listing the most well-known methods of sound synthesis.

[Remilia Scarlet]

Subtractive is the easiest to use, and tends to be pretty well rounded. But I don't think I'd call it my "favorite", just my preferred method. So I'd say either FM or granular synthesis are my favorites.

FM sounds unique and can get some pretty cool sounds out of it. With careful programming, it can also emulate subtractive synthesis. Plus the learning curve made it fun to figure out when I was first digging into it. Technically Yamaha's implementation in the DX7 was phase modulation instead, but close enough. Similarly, Casio's use of Phase Distortion is also pretty cool.

Granular synthesis is just crazy fun. You can make sweet sounding synths, thick soundscapes, or use it as an effect. Wavetable synthesis, which is kinda similar, is pretty cool and can sound amazing, but I still prefer the almost esoteric nature (IMO) of granular synthesis.

Sampling... eh, it's useful. Certain workstation synths have some awesome samples. But I almost never, ever use it unless it's for individual drum sounds, orchestral sounds that I need to sound real, or vocals.

Additive is cool, but I'm not the biggest fan. I don't go for it very often. I did, however, design a large additive synth in Reaktor once, which was a fun experience.

And Linear Arithmetic is basically subtractive synthesis with a bit of sampling for the transients and extra body. But man, I'd kill for a Roland D-50 or a real ESQ1/SQ-80.

Also, there's physical modelling (ugh...), and vector synthesis (eee! <3) that could probably also fall under "Other".

[Use]

I went with FM synthesis, though it was a tough choice. FM to me creates great 'bare metal' sounds and can make some cool otherworldly noises without being overburdened with too much fiddling. Yes nostalgia might play a tiny role here, as my dad actually bought a DX7 in the late 80's, and made several compositions on it, though I was never as adept as my brother (who recently reacquired one in perfect condition) it was still my first exposure to a real synthesizer.
I'm also a huge fan of the YM2612, for obvious reasons, and would love to make a stand-alone MIDI box or whatever using one of these, though something like a TX81z would probably be a lot easier to deal with and sound very similar, hehe.

[JXC]

Use3D said:

I'm also a huge fan of the YM2612, for obvious reasons, and would love to make a stand-alone MIDI box or whatever using one of these, though something like a TX81z would probably be a lot easier to deal with and sound very similar, hehe.

Get a Yamaha DX21/27. It's Sega Genesis or Arcade board-like chip with a keyboard

[Jon]

Subtractive/Analog because I can't wrap my head around the other ones yet. My brother has a CZ-1000 so I might figure out FM one day.

[JXC]

Jon said:

Subtractive/Analog because I can't wrap my head around the other ones yet. My brother has a CZ-1000 so I might figure out FM one day.

CZ-1000 uses Phase Distortion. It is not true FM, but sounds more interesting.

[Jon]

JXC said:

CZ-1000 uses Phase Distortion. It is not true FM, but sounds more interesting.

Yes, it's close enough though that I understand neither, would understand each roughly equally more with a bit of effort, and would need much more effort to appreciate the distinction :)

My current understanding of PD is it's a Casio attempt to relabel FM with their own trademarked term.