MOTM

[ Roger sent this reply directly to me, but intended that it go to the list.
--AS ]

-----Original Message-----
From: rogerpellegrini [mailto:rogerpellegrini@...] 
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2007 6:08 PM
To: schabtach
Subject: Re: Imitative Synthesis and Implications for Hardware

--- In motm@yahoogroups.com, "schabtach" <lists@...> wrote:
>
> 
> > So, why is it that (performance) synthesizers have traditionally 
> > only had one measly filter?
> 
> Because it isn't needed for the vast majority of applications of
> (performance) synthesizers--applications which are not imitative 
> synthesis.

Well, the conclusion I drew from my experiment really wasn't "we need
serious EQ for imitative synthesis", it was more like "serious EQ is very
useful for making interesting sounds - imitative or otherwise". 
It is my opinion that if one were to walk up to a Minimoog, a Nord Lead or
even a modular patched in a traditional VCO-VCF-VCA chain, one would hear a
very similar sound.  Each of these synthesizers is using subtractive
synthesis in a similar and frankly rather crude way - with just one filter.
A synth with a powerful EQ would be able to sound quite different and
interesting.  Clearly, EQ's are used everywhere, to process any recorded
sound.  It's a travesty that the instrument which should sport the most
sophisticated EQ has none.

I propose that an interesting (digital) MOTM module would contain, say, 8
adjustable filter frequencies with a serious amount of gain or cut, perhaps
adjustable Q, and have the ability to parallel shift the filter frequencies
under 1v/octave control.  Settings could be stored and recalled.