RavenSmith wrote:Firstly additive came before analog(subtractive). Additive was the first form of synthesis! And when it did come out in the form of a synthesizer the only common thing this additive synth shared with analog synths is a filter.
i don't mean to hijack the thread but what was additive that came before the Moogs?
in the 70s, was it the Synergy that Wendy Carlos used for additive?
did the Fairlights have additive synthesis capability? that was why they had those plots of the harmonics on the green screen terminals, right?
that Technos Acxel resynthesizer would have been additive too after the initial analysis? i always thought that never actually shipped but it must have if there is one in the basement of that music store in Sweden!
any other additive synthesizers before the rudimentary Kawai K5? speaking of which, is there anyone out there actually using that software for the K5 that came from Quebec? i called them up once in the early 90s but my French wasn't very good and neither was their English - it was only a brief conversation to the effect that they were out of that business.
I'm not even talking about the Fairlight or Synclavier, they came long, long after.
http://www.jarrography.free.fr/details_ ... id_equip=7
kogmachine wrote: RavenSmith wrote:
kogmachine wrote:... but analog gave birth to VA, digital, hybrid, FM, additive, and all the other fancy new forms of synthesis. Didn't these newer forms come to be because of the first analog synthesizers?
Umm, that's bending the truth ALOT!
Firstly additive came before analog(subtractive). Additive was the first form of synthesis! And when it did come out in the form of a synthesizer the only common thing this additive synth shared with analog synths is a filter.
FM has nothing to do with analog(subtractive), so saying analog(subtractive) gave birth to it, is ridiculous.
As for the other ones, I'm not even going there.
I always thought that Moogs came out before the Fairlights but apparently I have to do more research. But compare a Hammond organ to the additive synths out now. Subtractive synths had so much sound editing capability and as far as I know Hammonds don't have as much. And I know that FM is entirely different from analog, but it did come after analog. It just my opinion but I don't see a big difference from an oscillator and an operator. Analog synths had LFO's and sub oscillators that modulated the sound from the main oscillators right? So I don't think FM is much different in that respect. I doubt FM would have come to be if the analog synth never existed. Certainly no one would disagree that VA is the child of analog and analog is at least half of a hybrid. Anyway thanks for enlightening me that additive came first, but my question remains, why do we see fewer and fewer new "real" analog synths on the market?
Here's your additive, the first additive synthesizer in the world:
And to answer your question: Cause they cost alot to make and maintain.
Not to mention that what people really want is a workstation, a machine that does it all and has it all.
Just a synth - is just that, just a synth.
Automatic Gainsay wrote:
SubliminalEffect wrote:i don't mean to hijack the thread but what was additive that came before the Moogs?
Thaddeus Cahill's Telharmonium, and then the Hammond organ.
One could even go as far as saying that pipe organs are the same. They add harmonics to generate sounds.