Is is just me or does FM synthesis suck?

[whitelightening]

I know someone out there will grill me on this (mostly because I have no working knowledge of FM synthesis) but I have yet to hear a demo of any kind that isn't just some terribly crappy bell sounds or some weird twisting modulating sound effect. What gives? What don't I get about FM?

[Luca_Capozzi]

I've done a little demo of some FM patches.

Download MP3 Now!!!

Luca

[Enigma™]

Well, the thing about FM is that it's trying to physically re-create a similar sound wave as an instrument. Problem is that the bell was just the first one they've worked on/easier to replicate. But I've heard acoustic guitars, flutes, and some things like Trumpets that are PHENOMINALLY accurate, but you're right. Most FM stuff is... Well lacking because it's quite complicated, and you need a good FM engine to get anything resonable as well.
Sucks huh? Let me see if I can find some other MP3 samples of FM stuff that'll change your mind ;)

[hephiroth]

i'm sorry, what is FM? i've seen it on here a TON recently and it seems like everyone knows what it is...so i'm just sucking up my pride and asking

????

-jeff-

[Enigma™]

Okay, found some kinda crappy clips of a VL1-m - this is a prime example of a FM/PM synth that doesn't use ANY roms per-se. There's no wave files being played back, this actually MAKES these sounds :)

http://www.kbspace.com/vl1m/audio/

[Mike Martin]

The VL-1 is NOT an FM synth. Its all physical modeling.

Do some searching for an FS1R. Thats FM at its best.

[Omega Monkey]

FM kicks ass! It really provides a whole different world of sounds from regular subtractive synthesis or sample playback. For a good idea of what FM can do, check out the opening track of Tangerine Dream's Optical Race album, or the entire Bachbusters album by Don Dorsey (electronic versions of Bach pieces primarily done with FM synthesis).

Sorry Dave (dont ban me!) but you are confusing FM and physical modeling (which are of course VERY different). Basically FM stands for frequency modulation, and the way it produces sound is by multiplying 2 waves together to get a new wave. One wave is the "carrier" and the other is the "modulator". Basically the carrier is the one that you "hear" while the modulator effects the sound of the carrier. The carrier/modulator system is called an "operator" (at least in Yamaha world), and you can link several together (depending on the synth you have, DX7 is 6, some lesser Yamahas are 4, and the FS1R is 8) to create a single voice. The DX7 for instance provides a bunch of different algorithms for how the operators interact with each other (stuff like feedback loops and whatnot). I *think* the DX used only sine waves, but on later FM synths there are various other waves available as well, plus the SY/TG 77/99 had RCM (something like Recombinant Modulation synthesis) where you could use the AWM waves (ie PCM samples) as part of the FM structure (pretty cool idea, but tricky to implement).

FM is of course very tricky to program, because it can be very unpredictable and most of the parameters dont have effects as "obvious" as say the filter cutoff on a subtractive synth. It's maybe like trying to drive 2 cars at once. It's hard to coordinate the 2 together. That is why FM is largely misunderstood and subsequently why in the heyday of FM, most people just relied on the presets (like the infamous DX ep sound). But that trickiness really hints at the POWER inherent in FM synthesis. You can do things like have key velocity affect the EG of the modulator. Now on a regular subtractive, that would basically just make it "louder" when you press the key harder, but with FM, it can open up the whole timbre of the sound in a very interesting way that you cant really get any other way. There is also the Korg 707 which is an FM synth from the late 80s, but they prgrammed it "backwards". In other words, when you change a parameter, you are not actually changing that parameter, but another one (or group probably) which has the same effect. So in other words, you might choose to change the "filter" control (although Im sure they have some proprietary name for it, basically I mean the primary timbre control) but in reality you are affecting the modulator EG (or whatever). Basically this serves to make FM more intuitive (supposedly), but I've only heard about it, never used it. But I've heard samples and it sounds really good actually (a few months ago I posted a link to a german website with a bunch of sound samples of various synths done by this one guy, if you do a search you might be able to find it, and it has a clip of the 707).

Personally, I think FM hasnt even been fully explored yet, because other synthesis types are more immediately satisfying. But I think with some determination and perseverance, FM can get a lot of really great sounds and makes an excellent addition to any serious synth setup.

EDIT: Maybe you were thinking of Fizical Modeling?

i'm using a DX7s as my main synth.. and for me it works really fine.. though you are right because its very difficult to program.. doesn't have any filter and yeah.. it all sine wave!! you need an external processor so you can add effects on your patch.. FM can make very weird and out of this world sounds.. try to download the book how to make some noise( sorry i forgot the exact link to that site but its free) you can learn many things from it.. specially in programming an FM synth!!

[whitelightening]

Well, you're right, I suppose I shouldn't have said it "sucks". I just have yet to hear anything done with FM that makes me go "wow, that's great!". I suppose you could say that I am more into organic type sounds...the type of sound with warmth, breadth, balls and chunk.

[whitelightening]

Sorry Enigma and Axiom...I'm just not buying it. I'm sure there are extremely expansive things you can do with FM, but it sounds tinny and nasaly to me. I just don't like it at all.