How does it not meet the criteria?
How does it meet the criteria?
For the record, for all intents and purposes I think of electric organs as synths
We are tiptoeing around the ancient paradox of the sorites.
@wickfut I did not mean to offend you, have a good rest of your day.
the definition said “musical instrument”. Which admittedly leads us down another rabbit hole of definitions but that points to a certain intent.
I asked you first
Kidding. The guitar generates a waveform. The waveform is shaped into a different one via the effects pedals on the pedalboard. One simple timbre is shaped into a more complex timbre. That’s synthesis. It’s not dissimilar to a modular system.
And … the waveform is pretty much re-written from scratch if you’re using a fuzz pedal.
I think the definition is pretty clear. It says generate audio signal. The audio signal in your case is generated mechanically/acoustically and then processed electronically. it’s not generated electronically - thus no synthesis.
in the case of a sample/wavetables - the sample exists as digital data(not the same as audio signal!) which is fed in to various circuits(typically using PCM) to generate an audio signal. thus synthesis.
As has been said. The signal is generated acoustically. So per the definition this doesn’t hold up.
Can you also my question regarding iridium?
It seems my definition of synthesis is more broad than yours.
Ask Bob Moog.
So. Iridium playing back samples from its OSCs that were sampled into the iridium. Not a synth?
Will this thread result in a definitive outcome? Stay tuned for today’s edition of: Semantics with Strangers on the Interneeeeeeeeeet
To me, any sort of tone generator with some sort of pitch or tonal control options that is not primarily physical or electromechanical in origin.
Depends on packaging and use, as well, Is an isolated reference oscillator a synthesizer? A tunable offset comparator oscillator built into a filter pedal for harmonic/in harmonic content?
I suppose in use it could be the primary source of sound, versus making an existing tone more complex.
Surely this time answers will be had.
It is a synth.
It’s fun
So we’re back at saying the Hammond B3 organ is not a synthesiser ? Because it’s mechanical in nature ?
This is my point. Things can meet the criteria, but you wouldn’t necessarily call them synthesizers. But technically they are.