Ivano Arrighetta

I summarized synthesis tools I'd like to use, but because I'm not sure, I'm asking here if I duplicated something. 

Please, read this summary and tell me if I can do anything by combining already listed techniques, and also if some technique can be constructed from simpler building blocks, because I'd like to dissect everything in the simpler possible form.

Hello everyone. 
I summarized  synthesis tools I'd like to use,  but because I'm not sure, I'm asking here if I duplicated something. 
Please, read this summary and tell me if I can do anything by combining already listed techniques, and also if some technique can be constructed from simpler building blocks, because I'd like to dissect everything in  the simpler possible form.
Here is the list:

Sound synthesis:
Oscillator 
LFO
Envelope 
Filter

Sound processing:
Convolution 
Phaser and flanger
Overdrive 
Compression with sidechaining
Audio routing/grouping
Gain
Vocoder
Noise gate
Waveshape

Music:
Arpeggio 
Slice samples
Notes playing samples and synthesisers

Hello everyone. 
I summarized  synthesis tools I'd like to use,  but because I'm not sure, I'm asking here if I duplicated something. 
Pleas

sound-synthesis

P. S. : also share math details where applicable

This might or might not be the sort of answer you're looking for:

 by Cipriani and Giri (in Italian!). If it's more math details you want, read 

This might or might not be the sort of answer you're looking for:
I suggest to read the MSP Tutorials and to read Electronic Music and Sound Design by Cipriani and Giri (in Italian!). If it's more math details you want, read The Theory and Technique of Electronic Music by Puckett.

It's not really about math, I just need something like "oscillators use trigonometric functions" or "filters use function limits/integrals" (I'm not sure about the latter) or "you can obtain chorus using a short delay"...

Please, I had enough theory ATM. 
Couldn't  you just tell me? 
It's not really about math, I just need something like "oscillators use trigonometric functions" or "filters use function limits/integrals" (I'm not sure about the latter) or "you can obtain chorus using a short delay"...

I'm not a computer nerd, I prefer to read tutorials, but with adding and storing some bytes and bits, and combining them, you can build more and more complex units, and eventually you end up with oscillators one day.

also if some technique can be constructed from simpler building blocks,  because I'd like to dissect everything in  the simpler possible form.

Kidding me this way isn't useful for anyone. 

I just wish to know about these modules. 

And if you're not going to help me, just don't reply.

Kidding me this way isn't useful for anyone. 
I just wish to know about these modules. 
And if you're not going to help me, just don't reply. 

But him provided advice too, while you didn't. 

Is that hard to answer this (IMHO) simple question, or is it a pride thing?

But him provided advice too, while you didn't. 
Is that hard to answer this  (IMHO) simple question, or is it a pride thing? 

what are you asking specifically? it is far from clear...

I know very few about this, while I know how to use it. 

Let's resume the delay example: AFAIK, chorus can be obtained by using a delay with very short delay time and almost full feedback. 

By the way, I'm just asking if is it there a way to obtain the listed effects using something simpler or if are such effects already at the barebone and they can only be obtained only by being specific. 

I hope this helps understanding the question.

Ok, I don't know how to be more clear. 
I know very few about this, while I know how to use it. 
Let's resume the delay example: AFAIK, chorus can be obtained by using a delay with very short delay time and almost full feedback. 
Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not sure. 
By the way, I'm just asking if is it there a way to obtain the listed effects using something simpler or if are such effects already at the barebone and they can only be obtained only by being specific. 
I hope this helps understanding the question. 

sorry for my cynicism, with gen~ you can build anything on a very low level.

sorry for my cynicism,  with gen~ you can build anything on a very low level.

Anyhow, how can I use gen for this purpose?

Well, it's a beginning. 
But what is gen? A waveform generator? 
Anyhow, how can I use gen for this purpose? 

Is it there an higher level, still lower than using those effects as they are?

In general I would say that looking for a quick answer for such large questions as build a reverb from scratch is unrealistic. I am not sure how familiar you are with Max but you can think of it as a programming language where you can find all the basics tools of programming. Plus there are libraries and packages that offer you some shortcuts to certain processes. I would look back at Christopher Dobrian's post to get some useful tools for learning Max. Start using Max without factoring in some time commitment for learning the basics is ... well, just a waste of time

In general I would say that looking for a quick answer for such large questions as build  a reverb from scratch is unrealistic. I am not sure how familiar you are with Max but you can think of it as a programming language where you can find all the basics tools of programming. Plus there are libraries and packages that offer you some shortcuts to certain processes. I would look back at  Christopher Dobrian's post to get some useful tools for learning Max. Start using Max without factoring in some time commitment for learning the basics is ... well, just a waste of time

Well, are the other effects "pure" as the reverb? 

Well, are the other effects "pure" as  the reverb? 
Aren't they made from other effects ?

My initial response was sincere. There really is a lot of useful information in tutorials, manuals, and books. I realize that the idea of researching rather than simply asking is old-school, but being old, I still believe in research. If I wanted to learn about chorusing, I would likely go to the Reference Manual (Chris! Dude! Who the hell does that?!?), enter the word "chorus" in the search field, and one of the first things that would come up is 

. That tutorial would refer me to an earlier chapter, the 

My initial response was sincere. There really is a lot of useful information in tutorials, manuals, and books. I realize that the idea of researching rather than simply asking is old-school, but being old, I still believe in research. If I wanted to learn about chorusing, I would likely go to the Reference Manual (Chris! Dude! Who the hell does that?!?), enter the word "chorus" in the  search field, and one of the first things that would come up is MSP Delay Tutorial 5: Chorus. That tutorial would refer me to an earlier chapter, the MSP Delay Tutorial 4: Flanging, e così via.

At least you pointed me toward the right direction. 

At least you pointed me toward the right direction. 
I appreciate this. 

With gen~ you can generate native audio signal processing routines, like oscillators and reverbs from the scratch (low level). Msp is on an next higher level. The next level would be something like a ready to go vst-plugin. gen~ and msp are a part of max. They come with a bunch of tutorials, help files and in the help menu on right site on max' menue bar you can find examples. But still, it makes sense to understand the basics of max.

Let's face it: I'm not interested in max, but I know sound engineers use it, so I thought I would had the answer here. 

It's not a short one, but is valuable as expected.

Let's face it: I'm not interested in max, but I know sound engineers use it, so I thought I would had the answer here. 
In fact, I did. 
It's not a short one, but is valuable as expected. 

no idea what you are asking, but some of your examples are correct in that way, that it would probably common knowledge / usual to name these modules as such or as one small, logical building block of a bigger something.

but it is not that absolute. you can see / build modules also on a smaller or bigger layers.

you could see a "synthesizer voice" including filters and envelopes as one building block. or even a whole hardware or software synthesizer or effect. from the viewpoint of a bigger music production computer program, you do not look at oscillators - you look at plug-in documents, you also dont look at "timeshifts", you just call it a "modulation effect".

you can - and you actually do in some cases - build an "oscillator" from two or more lower level components. a digital sinewave oscillator for example is often made of a "phase" ( 0. running up to 1. ) and "cosine distortion" ( running 0-1 through cosine function ). 

or, if you want to call it like that, the "time value" and the "waveform".

some oscillators allow to the change the phase independently from the waveform - others allwo you to change only the phase or only the waveform.

if a synthesizer gives you acess to only one part of the oscillator, what is the biuldong block? the oscillator in whole or the parts?

your "vocoder" isnt a small building block at all. it consists of a arrangement of lots of 3-4 different types of smaller building blocks. (to say it in your language: gain, frequency filters, routing and mixing, oscillators...)

one example for bigger: 
you could see a "synthesizer voice" including filters and envelopes as one building block. or even a whole hardware or software synthesizer or effect. from the viewpoint of a bigger music production computer program, you do not look at oscillators - you look at plug-in documents, you also dont look at "timeshifts", you just call it a "modulation effect".

one example for smaller: 
the "oscillator".
you can - and you actually do in some cases -  build an "oscillator" from two or more lower level components. a digital sinewave oscillator for example is often made of a "phase" ( 0. running up to 1. ) and "cosine distortion" ( running 0-1 through cosine function ). 
or, if you want to call it like that, the "time value" and the "waveform".
some oscillators allow to the change the phase independently from the waveform - others allwo you to change only the phase or only the waveform.
if a synthesizer gives you acess to only one part of the oscillator, what is the biuldong block? the oscillator in whole or the parts?

example for non valid:
your "vocoder" isnt a small building block at all. it consists of a arrangement of lots of 3-4 different types of smaller building blocks. (to say it in your language: gain, frequency filters, routing and mixing, oscillators...)


not pure at all. most reverb are made out of hundreds of delays and filters and some clever complex routing and mixing. :)

 Well, are the other effects "pure" as  the reverb?  Aren't they made from other effects ? 

with the years there are more and more different levels available for different kind of toolmakers, users and consumers.

and there are more and more enviroment which let you mix different levels.

max/msp would be a great example for having different layers all in one enviroment, flowstone or swift are. 

the physical eurorack standard, which allows you to use ditigal effects, analog effects, analog low level building blocks and custom soldering all in one place. 

 Is it there an higher level, still lower than using those effects as they are? 

and there are more and more enviroment which let you mix different levels.

max/msp would be a great example for having different layers all in one enviroment, flowstone or swift are. 
the physical eurorack standard, which allows you to use ditigal effects, analog effects, analog low level building blocks and custom soldering all in one place. 


I stop at the lowest level that doesn't require math and composition of filters and oscillators. 

So, in example, I would stop where vocoder is meant as an effect by itself. 

If none of the listed effects is made from effects which are in the list, I consider it pure.

I stop at the lowest level that doesn't require math and composition of filters and oscillators. 
So, in example, I would stop where vocoder is meant as an effect by itself. 
If none of the listed effects is made from effects which are in the list, I consider it pure. 

P.S.: exclude filters, envelopes, math and oscillators for this purpose.

P.S.:  exclude filters, envelopes, math and oscillators for this purpose. 

I don't understand what you're asking for. If you want to learn how these things work, and want math details, how can you simultaneously not want anymore "theory" and not be willing to understand the math? If you're asking for simplified versions, nothing you learn from that is going to be useful to you anywhere. If you're worried about having to know the complex math involved in these things, I can at least assure you that it's not THAT prevalent. I'm pretty bad at complex math, but I've gotten along just fine. Really, I encourage you to take Chris's advicd and just read the MSP tutorials. They're as easy to understand as possible. It's not like Miller Puckette or Julian Smith's way of explaining things through equations.

ok now it is halfway clear. yet it remains questionable to look at it as "the" level.

i understand your "vocoder" example now (and the "reveb" as well). if you are using a vocoder as vocoder effect you dont need to know that it contains a set of filters which could also be used in another way.

but why do you think an "envelope" could not also make an effect? in practice it might be used on the same level as the vocoder. the user looks at it, connects something as input source, gets something out of it, modified by the unit. black box.

we in max have both. some things would need to be built from scratch with a lot of math and othzer basic knowledge, some things exist as black box, like a reverb object which only takes audio and some vaues for lenght and density. or [omx.comp] for that matter. for many things you have both options. with ->gen and ->vizzie, and with C++, java or the use of third party VST plug-ins max has some 4-5 more, higher and lower levels.

what the "main" level is, that is mostly defined by a mixture of industry fascism, philosophy, and common languages. what is a reverb? may it have an additional denoiser and still remain a reverb unit? may it work best mostly only for human voice (and sucks for other things) but still may be called "reverb"?

I stop at the lowest level that doesn't require math and composition of filters and oscillators.  So, in example, I would stop where vocoder is meant as an effect by itself.  

ok now it is halfway clear. yet it remains questionable to look at it as "the" level. 

i understand your "vocoder" example now (and the "reveb" as well). if you are using a vocoder as vocoder effect you dont need to know that it contains a set of filters which could also be used in another way.
but why do you think an "envelope" could not also make an effect? in practice it might be used on the same level as the vocoder. the user looks at it, connects something as input source, gets something out of it, modified by the unit. black box.

we in max have both. some things would need to be built from scratch with a lot of math and othzer basic knowledge, some things exist as black box, like a reverb object which only takes audio and some vaues for lenght and density. or [omx.comp] for that matter. for many things you have both options. with ->gen and ->vizzie, and with C++, java or the use of third party VST plug-ins max has some 4-5 more, higher and lower levels.

what the "main" level is, that is mostly defined by a mixture of industry fascism, philosophy, and common languages. what is a reverb? may it have an additional denoiser and still remain a reverb unit? may it work best mostly only for human voice (and sucks for other things) but still may be called "reverb"?


No, I'm not looking for simplified effects, simply I want to use as few effects as possible, knowing such effects can be made by mixing 2 or more of them.

Since according to what you (community) told me, they are "pure" effects (and with "pure" I mean the first lower level it's made by Math, Filters and Oscillators, rather than combining some black boxes),so my question is already answered.

Simply put, all these effects are "pure", which, again, I mean there are no levels between the actual implementation (from the effect developer) and using hardcore oscillators, filter and math.

Envelope is another story, because it's used almost anywhere, while oscillators are less exposed in a DAW.

Take for example FL Studio: it has an envelope controller plug in, but no oscillators are available as "standalone" black box, instead they're put in Synthesizers.

And you can link that envelope to whatever automated enabled parameters. 

So, the question (already answered) were: is any of the effect in my list made from other, black box, effects?

And the apparent answer is no, so I can consider they as "pure", meaning that is needed they're supported out of the box and not constructed with low level math and oscillators.

So, if I have to choose a Digital Audio Workstation, I'm taking care of this information and pretend the software I'm going to use supports *at least* them.

For the chosen level, as I said, I'm considering the lowest *before* building from scratch with oscillators and filters.

Hope this clears things up a little more. Unfortunately, I'm not really a synth guy, I still use complex instrument plug-ins and tweak presets.

And so this also answers to the "why" question: because I want just the basic effects and combine them, at least until I'll feel confident with math, oscillators and filters, when I'll do all my sound synthesis tasks with math etc.

No, I'm not looking for simplified effects, simply I want to use as few effects as possible, knowing such effects can be made by mixing 2 or more of them.
Since according to what you (community) told me, they are "pure" effects (and with "pure" I mean the first lower level it's made by Math, Filters and Oscillators, rather than combining some black boxes),so my question is already answered.
Simply put, all these effects are "pure", which, again, I mean there are no levels between the actual implementation (from the effect developer) and using hardcore oscillators, filter and math.
Envelope is another story, because it's used almost anywhere, while oscillators are less exposed in a DAW.
Take for example FL Studio: it has an envelope controller plug in, but no oscillators are available as "standalone" black box, instead they're put in Synthesizers.
And you can link that envelope to whatever automated enabled parameters. 
So, the question (already answered) were: is any of the effect in my list made from other, black box, effects?
And the apparent answer is no, so I can consider they as "pure", meaning that is needed they're supported out of the box and not constructed with low level math and oscillators.
So, if I have to choose a Digital Audio Workstation, I'm taking care of this information and pretend the software I'm going to use supports *at least* them.
For the chosen level, as I said, I'm considering the lowest *before* building from scratch with oscillators and filters.

Hope this clears things up a little more. Unfortunately, I'm not really a synth guy, I still use complex instrument plug-ins and tweak presets.

And so this also answers to the "why" question: because I want just the basic effects and combine them, at least until I'll feel confident with math, oscillators and filters, when I'll do all my sound synthesis tasks with math etc.

now it is getting rather unclear again. :)

you will have your reasons for how the lists looks like, but the list contains several things which do neither fit into "black box" nor into "effects".

"oscillator" stuff usually files under "generator", because it does not take audio as input, and an "LFO" does have no input and no output, and it doesnt do much to audio, it can only be a part of something else (where it functions as control).

the stuff you have under "sound processing" would all be those basic building block you are looking for, except the noise gate mabye, because that is more or less compression/expansion.

technically one could also file all dynamic effects and mixing/routing/splitting under "gain". from a musical standpoint it make sense to make a difference.

now it is getting rather unclear again. :) 

 is any of the effect in my list made from other, black box, effects?

Well, as I said, I'm not a synth guy, I didn't group anything except distinguishing by generators and effects. 

It's almost the same as VSTi and VST, or if you prefer, LADSPA and DSSI. 

VSTi and DSSI synthesise a sound, while VST and LADSPA manipulate it. 

Now, you said noise gate is achieved by using a compressor, so you got straight to the point. 

Are there any other sound manipulator which can be achieved in alternative ways? 

I put LFO, Envelope and oscillators under the synth group exactly because they're not effects. 

Maybe I could have separated LFO and envelopes in a middle category, as they are also used in manipulators to automate.

Well, as I said, I'm not a synth guy, I didn't group anything except distinguishing by generators and effects. 
It's almost the same as VSTi  and VST, or if you prefer, LADSPA and DSSI. 
VSTi and DSSI synthesise a sound, while VST and LADSPA manipulate it. 
Now, you said noise gate is achieved by using a compressor, so you got straight to the point. 
Are there any other sound manipulator which can be achieved in alternative ways? 

 I put LFO, Envelope and oscillators under the synth group exactly because they're not effects. 
Maybe I could have separated LFO and envelopes in a middle category, as they are also used in manipulators to automate. 

they are not "synth" either. yes, make them a third group called "control". (technically the "envelope" is an audio effect though, at least in an analog circuit. )

After downloading Max 7 trial and looking at the docs and the object list, I got the following result (correct me if I'm wrong).

AFAIK, these are the basic building blocks for more complex effects/synths.

Sound processing:
Reverb
Vocoder
Waveshape
Delay

AFAIK, these are the basic building blocks for more complex effects/synths.
Am I right?

Cool post from Olivier at Mutable Instruments which is related: https://dsp.stackexchange.com/a/2478

Sounds a bit like you're trying to complete a college assignment or something? I remember this kind of boring paperwork kind of thing from college. Totally useless to just catalogue things without real work and experience. The previous answers are spot on.

At last, this is *exactly* the kind of info I were looking for.

Maybe I asked the wrong way, I understand such questions should be put "the right language" to be understood.

No, it's not for college, it's for my reference.

At last, this is *exactly* the kind of info I were looking for.
Maybe I asked the wrong way, I understand such questions should be put "the right language" to be understood.

No, it's not for college, it's for my reference.
