Why Can't More Synths Do This? 🤔 | Another Waldorf Blofeld Love Letter 

What's your favorite multitimbral synth? 🤔

By the time I got a Blofeld (late 2020), I noticed all the videos about it were along the lines of "is there any life left in this old thing?" It's really discouraging to encounter that attitude over and over. The thing is brand new to me, not some retro relic.

Korg Wavestate is 4 part multi timbral and you can assign a different MIDI channel to each part. The Joystick allows to cross fade between the parts which can also be automated as a "path".

Here's what analog has to offer: It's the sound. It sounds different. That doesn't mean it's better or worse, a particular sound is only better if you like it more than others at the time. I hear ppl say plugins have it nailed. No, no they don't. I have a rediculous number of plugins. V collection 8, Roland Cloud Ultimate, Komplete 13, CA Voltage etc, hundreds more. No i don't own Diva, but I've heard all the demos and no cigar, sorry. I seriously don't understand how some ppl say they can't hear the difference. You know what? I'm glad VA sounds different. I have a room full of analog synthesizers, I have an an entire shopping mall full of VA software synthesizers and I like them too, and use them plenty when I could use an analog. I don't always want a track to sound like an analog synth. You might say, wait a second, not all analogs sound the same. Nope, no they don't but I can hear that they are analog and sometimes I don't want it on a track. I don't want to debate that, I just do hear it. I also guarantee you Behringer is not selling those very limited monophonic synths by the shipload because they sound the same or because ppl buy into buzzwords. I feel like you haven't owned an analog synth probably. Get your hands on a Behringer Model D, otherwise known as a BOOG, then get a plugin to sound like that. If it's a good plugin the character will be there, but it will just not be the same thing. If you want more complex, go for an Odyssey or 2600, but the thing about trying a Boog is that it's just the simplest sounds, and you can't say it's the complexity of the patch making it sound so different. I could see how you're sick of how many analog style plugins come out with analog styled limitations, but you know of course many don't. Pigments, Synthmaster, Vital, Voltage, sure don't have those limitations. The reason why with hardwarare synths analog is a big deal, is that all digital can be had in a plugin. They know that's their competition and also why I don't buy new digital hardware synths. I have quite a few vintage ones, and those do manage to sound different to plugins, and or you can get them very cheap and that's just fun. I put a like because I subscribe to your videos and appreciate your time and effort I of course get some knowledge/opinions and enjoy your delivery.... even though I disagree with most of what you said in this one lol. I appreciate opinions and respect you taking the time to express yours. Mine is, I could care less about multimbrality. If it's going to be your only hardware synth I guess, to not have to re-edit midi tracks before commiting to audio or making layers, but I'm generally fine with just recording tracks one at a time or using multiple synths in a multitimbral way. In the 90's I cared about a synth or rompler/sampler being multimbral, but with how plentiful synths and audio tracks are I havent used anything multimbrally except my Electribe 2 in over 20 years.

I generally agree with you on this. One thing I've always thought, though, is that there are two separate use cases for multitimbrality. One is layering, and the other is keyboard splits (which is mostly useful for live performance). Is it possible that manufacturers who are making smaller keyboard synths and/or desktop synths (OpSix, Hydrasynth etc.) are making an assumption that nobody needs multitimbrality because it's only useful for splits on large keyboards? The point being that layering is *always* useful to have, regardless of the form factor, and they ought to remember this more often. A similar issue from the world of computers: I'm pretty fed up with having to click the column separator to see the full file name in file explorer apps (Windows File Explorer and Apple's Finder equally guilty here). Both of these companies pour billions into whizzy new features that I don't want, like animated chat icons etc. - but for decades now they haven't got off their backsides and done the one simple thing that would improve my workflow no end: auto-sizing columns! Just make the column auto-size to fit the contents, so that folders with long filenames in them actually show you the complete filenames without you once having to click with a pointing device.

Coffee is one of the most complex foods. It contains ~1200 molecular components. The problem with any paper filter is that, while removing the "harsh" components, it also removes some of the most flavorful ones. The end result is a smooth but less flavorful experience. Baby with the bathwater.

Correction: the Bofeld IS INDEED a VA (Virtual Analog) synth, as well as a WaveTable synth, and also a sample-playback and an FM synth. Beyond this single misstatement I noticed, a pretty good video and I agree with most of what you assert about how stupid it is that so many synths are Not multitimbral.

I think the reason is largely that the focus of external equipment has changed. While in the 90s they were mostly sound sources it would not fly anymore since plug-ins are just quicker to use and sound better most of the time. So they focus on immediacy and ease of use. You can arguably dial in the "perfect tone" quicker on a knob per function analog synth. And multi-timbrality (and even presets) obscure this to a large extent. Since you are not sure anymore that the positions of the knobs correspond to anything in the sound.

"what does this do that other things can't do" is my first question whenever I learn about a new piece of software. Often the answer is "nothing".... Which is really sad =/

Hi, you can layer sounds in Reason using combinator. It is great tool, you can build complex sounds by combining any synths and effects and save the whole thing as a patch. Or you can build effect pathes same way.

I have several favorite multitimbral synths: Dune, Omnisphere, Electra, Falcon, Rapid, Triton, Kontakt, Xpand. I also make my own using Ableton Racks and Unify.

I’m a multi enthusiast too, proud parent of my three faves which are the access virus ti2, blofeld, and my recent Jupiter Xm. I definitely use multi sound design on all of them. Love your coffee insight, lol.

You’re right not a lot of people are doing this, but Dave Smith Instruments / Sequential has this on several synths.

Back in the days DSP development was still low level machine code. They used real DSPs for computation. Today they mostly use general purpose CPUs with some DSP-like instructions and code them in higher level languages that are less performant. So even while they have much higher frequency, their performance is not DSP optimized and in reality they might perform worse. Additionally, back in the days you calculated sound differently. Waldorf mostly used fixed point calculation with some special tricks to use less instructions. You had lots of aliasing. Aliasing-free OSCs for proper wavetable playback are very taxing. Overall, I think because of better sound quality, CPU choice and probably less computational skills, newer synth developers might not be able to do more voices. Also it's a cost and time issue. DSPs are very expensive because nobody is buying them anymore.

If you like layering different waveforms, the hardware synth you want is the Nord Wave 2. Four part multitimbral with faders.

Another reason why I love Sequential so much, the rev2 is bi-timbral and I layer things on almost every patch I make. And with the new P10 update it can be bi-timbral too. Layering is the best.

Hmmm I do get the love for layering up synth sounds. But to me that doesn't mean synths need to be multitimbral. I always find multitimbral synths a bit confusing. It's like trying to fit a whole composition into one synth patch. I find layering up sounds in the recording process to be much more clear. Also when you layer up multiple different patches or different synths (even more fun!) to create layered sounds, it opens up much more possibilities for the rest of the production process as well. I do agree on the analog vs digital discussion having gotten way old. Who cares indeed.

MODX and Montage are 16-part multitimbral, with splits and layers galore. The new Hydrasynth Deluxe is bitimbral. So it's not completely absent from the market...just rare nowadays.

I love my Blofeld for exactly that. But I also hate it in some ways, one of which you accidentally showed. I can't count how many sounds I've lost because of me turning that damn knob when the machine didn't want me to😅

The Korg Wavestate is four-part multitimbral. Modwave is two-part.

The Access Virus is amazing for this same reason, 16 part multi with the TI 1 and 2 having 80-100 voices... I received the Blofeld today and I like it a lot, very capable synth. I think the Blofeld and Virus might use a similar DSP chip

Multi mode was the whole reason I bought a Blofeld. And the Alesis Micron, M-Audio Venom and Beat Thang. Also love slaving synths with a Quadra Thru.

You’re not alone, I definitely agree! I love analog, but I would never be able to do what I do without digital synths and fx.

This very reason is why I will always have a Blofeld in my collection, no matter what crazy new synths come out or what fancy analog stuff shows up on the market. I'm happy to see companies like Roland offering new multi timbral synths, FINALLY, and I find the new Jupiter X to be an absolute joy because of it. Great video!

Great video! I've been using the Blofeld and Pulse 2 since 2016. Waldorf synths like the Blofeld and Pulse 2 do not get the praise they so rightly deserve. The Blofeld is, unfortunately, a very underrated synth. With a bit of digging and exploration, this synth becomes a monster! Again, thank you for an excellent review. Best, Chip

Multi-timbral for layering sounds is nice, but multi-timbrality across multiple independent sync-able sequences/arps/tracks is the best! The KeyStep Pro, with 4 mono-timbral synths of your choice, is another way to go.

All through the late 80s and early 90s I had a Kawai K1R - like a poor man's D50. But that was multi timbral and I used to have each voice in a multi on a separate midi channel so I could get more tracks layered on my cassette 4 track. Later I had a Roland XP-30 and used multis on that to play live - either splitting across the keyboard or just getting more dense sounds. Don't play live now. Now I just layer soft synth sounds in a DAW. Seems easier and more flexible to me for recording.

You might want to check out the Sequential REV2 16-voice. You can stack, or split two completely different patches, in full analogue. You can even stack two duplicate patches, pan one full left, and the other right, and achieve binaural stereo patches.

This video convinced me about getting a blofeld, I was thinking in a novation peak, but I want something different, and the blofeld seems to be perfect for trance, I guess I will take advantage of the multitimbral =D thank you again!! I have learned so much with your videos

When you started explaining this, I kinda thought it was a feature I wouldn't use myself. But, then, thinking about it, in the DAW I do it all the time. Have multiple different synths layered, and then just dump the same MIDI in there. This is pretty much the same thing, if you think about it.

Actually, most of the hardware synths I still own are multitimbral. With plugins you can use as many instances, with different patches, as your DAW can handle.

I love how even the VST version of the Blofeld, Largo, is multitimbral. I mainly used to use my Blofeld with a computer and, while it isn't bad, the UI always turned me off from exploring deeper into the synth. I compared my Blofeld and Largo and found that (when the bass boost is turned on in Largo!!!) the sound is the same, aside from missing the Blofeld's PPG filter and sample rate/multi effect from Largo. I sold the hardware off for a more immediate synth and have been more than happy using the software version!

The Sequential Six-Trak is my first love and also still my favorite for it's six part multi-timbral monster mono stack mode (Kind of like a modular without the cables). It's old and it's single oscillator per voice, but the little things it does differently kind of put it in a special place. The poly glide is also nice when playing polyphonic stuff extra slippy like being on the edge of control; sort of intuiting which note will be the glide from source on your next legato key press (sounds like it's random and uncontrollable but actually you start to have an intuition.) The Synaesthesia Pipes does nice layering stuff it's a sample playback device, but like the MPCs and other devices it lets you stack up voices into very complex layer arrangements. I think the Korg Wavestate does similar things with wave sequencing. Agreed that the "Analog" word is abused but I still love analog filters and prefer them especially under modern digital control even if the 127 levels under MIDI CC is kind of exasperating considering that the standard is 45 years old.

Amen, Brother! That's why I'm still using 25-year old Alesis QS synthesizers that can stack up to 64 tones under one key and import (although painfully slow) custom samples for new content...Synth manufacturers seem to be most interested in selling you trash for a quick buck, with the notable exception of the Sequential Prophet X

things go in cycles, and we're in a sort of nostalgic 'analog is best' period at the moment. I think a mix of both is digital and analog (if you have the gear) is good and interesting. Great times to be making music indeed...

Great tutorial!

I picked up a mint condition Blofeld last month for $350. It's a beast and has radically changed my musical experience. I'm so impressed with your mastery of the programming. I've been thrilled with the onboard tones but now you've expanded my horizon to infinity. TY

Perhaps the best part of the Blofeld is the SL upgrade. Being able to add your own samples and run them through that architecture delivers tones with a character than can't be matched by either modern software or older hardware.

So... would it be at all feasible to do a tutorial on layering sounds? I started this journey a year ago, got a ton of synths, presets and all that (including Analog Mutations, thank you very much :-) ) and took a dive. Trying to learn sound design, I would spend hours randomly browsing, mixing and matching wavetables, with mixed effects,. Eventually I realized I could get much more convincing results if I used the same wavetable in 3 different ways, rather than using 3 different wavetables for the layers. Then the layers would be distinct, but still consistent, complementing each other. If not that, then I'd pick different wavetables from the same set, as they will usually share some qualities, e.g. they might be sourced from the same synth. But when picking from among hundreds of wavetables at random, it's easy to create lots of awesome weirdness, but not necessarily anything actually usable or listenable. Do you have any tips or guidelines for layering sounds?

Hello. I've just bought a second hand Blofeld. It's great. Perhaps, you've got this information : there is a noise parameter called "Noise Color". I would want to modulate it in the modulation matrix with some modulator (enveloppes, LFO and so on), but I don't find this parameter in the destination list. Do you know how to do that ? Thank a lot. Fred

I agree. The results and possibilities are much more important than any "analog" purity for me. I am looking forward to synth and plugin makers to move beyond replicating the past analog glory and find out how to completely flip the script using new tech.

Thanks for posting. I had one of these a few years ago. Great synth in theory, but extremely glitchy, (that is, unreliable for a live gig). And in the studio, every time I tried loading the librarian, Sibelius would open instead. Sadly, it was more trouble than it was worth.

You're absolutely right Cameron! It was a staple in the late 80s, all of the 90s. The fact that synths were multitimbrals made them all so powerful. Don't know why they won't do it nowadays, even with the "analog" craze... Hey, even sequential did it with a few of their analog synths back then! I own a Sequential Six Trak, which was a completely "analog" synth, with only 6 voices of polyphony, but has the ability of stacking up to 6 voices, or even play up to 6 different patches over midi! So.... No excuse for all today's synth manufacturers not to do it. They're so focused on making it the same as, but better sounding, synths of yesteryear recreation, that they forget this tiny detail. Keep up the good work! Still looooove my Blofeld keyboard so much .... What an incredible machine. Would love to have a quantum, but out of my reach money wise hehe...

When I bought my Blofeld desktop, it was around the same time I bought a Korg Radias. The Radias is four part multi timbral, and coupled with the onboard step sequencers, dual filters....and effects, it's a beast. But I digress...I loved the Blofeld so much, I bought the keyboard version within a few months 🤷🏻‍♂️

thank you, great review!

Listened to your introduction and immediately subscribed. You are so very right in all the points you make. The whole tech has been stagnant for the last 2 decades or so. Though, now that I think about it thoroughly, there are some "can do it all" instruments on the market (MPC, the Jupiter Xm, and more) - it just happens that people _really_ buy the "analog is betturrrr" mantra. "Hey, look at this 5 voice poly box that can do sounds from the 70s! It's only $2000". ;-)

Why my Blofeld's knobs are fucked up and how can i fix it? they just don't follow when you twist'em

Well said. Multi-timbrality was the first thing for me to buy a Sixtrack and later the K1 (a cheap 80s wavetable synth), which I own until now. And also my very old other HW-synths, like the D-110 and the even older MT32 sound really better just with this 😄.

Nostalgia is such a big part of it. People craved those big knob twiddlin' beasts in their youth but couldn't afford them, and now they are older, there are pretty faithful recreations of them that they can. I'm trying to cover my bases my having a Behringer Cat, Neutron and Crave on on hand, and a Roland D-110 and JV-2080 on the other :-)

The Waldorf Kyra seemed to not make much of an impact, but doesn't that have a lot of multi-timbral functionality?

Beautiful!

Tetr4 from DSI is quite a nice example of what an analog multitimbral portable synth could be!

Holly molly, I used the multitimbral feature in 2015, but I completely forgot about this. Thank you for reminding me. I just did it again. Very nice.

I watched this and actually wrote an absurdly long reply which I have since decided isn't a good fit for a comment here... maybe one day I do a video on this lol. bottom line is, just as you have pointed to plugins like diva.... there in is the issue. we don't want sound quality of rebirth, we want sound quality of diva. this takes a ton of DSP processing power. the synth market is VERY niche, so while you might be able to do this sort of thing cost effectively on an ipad, that same processor in a synth would be insanely expensive. I could go into so much more detail but I am biting my tongue lol. nice topic.

I use sequencers. I NEED multitimbral synths. I HAVE a Blofeld...... 😊 It can do lots !!!!, dub techno chords, rad basses, killer pads/atmospheric, etc........dont bother with drum sounds, as it's 1 midi channel Per Voice (which is weird, normally complete sets occupy ch10)..... But, sticking to multis is HEAVEN. I stack/layer basses or pads or arps

I completely agree with you, I'm using the Sledge 2.5 Black, and even though it's only layers two sounds, you can trigger a note or a cord holding sustain and change patches and the previous sound sustaining. Give it a try if you haven't yet. It gives real-time control to the Blofelds cousin.

Nice use of the multi mode. And you're right that's not something so common on digital synth.

Totally agree - I've been exploring multitimbral options, trialing a Micro Monsta 2 from Audio Thingies and more recently picking up an Access Virus C - 32 voices that can be spread over 16 (!) parts, and just as important (and something the Blofeld lacks), 3 seperate stereo outs.

The Novation Nova is great for this. It's also got 6 outputs, so you can route it into a mixer like it's 3 different stereo synths, or 6 different mono ones!

I think the obsession with analog has to do with the culture of synths and its evolution over the past 20ish years. When computer and digital synths were first coming out, they sounded...digital. Like your smooth coffee, analog synths and mixers sounded smoother. Digital could sound harsh. Hence, the analog obsession. Since then, companies have gotten so good at making synths and effects that the harshness is gone. But, the culture of thinking that analog is better has persisted. This is all my opinion. Maybe I'm wrong.

I think you said it yourself though - the fashion now is "analogue" or whatever - but a few years ago it was for workstations that layered and layered and offered the world, etc etc. "What stuff sells at the moment?". No doubt things will cycle.

Multi Timbre is what made me fall in love with the Kiev Radias. Manufacturers could go further and throw serum in a box, but for some reason are scared to dive into the digital or even software driven sound in a hardware format.

I totally agree with your frustrations. Surely if we compare the price and performance of DSP from the 90's compared to now, you would assume you would get far more packed into a VA synth nowadays. Possibly 32 parts Multitimbral and 3 filters, 5 LFOS, 5 OSC etc. I wonder if the extra DSP is now utilised to focus on quality of sound above all else. I know early VA's had more noticeable aliasing/stepping on the filters. But then I have a Nord Lead 1 and a Novation KS4 that still sound phenomenal even now, and as you have mentioned also provide multiple parts. I love my Cobalt8/Argon8/System8 and Hydrasynth also, but sometimes I wonder why they are limited to only 8 voice polyphony. My Virus TI2 has 110 voice polyphony and that is 10 years old. There must be a reason? Maybe it's because back then people used to only use their DAW to sequence and then route everything through an analog mixing desk and record to DAT, (hence the need for multitimbral synths with seperate outs whereas now manufacturers think that we can just record different parts to the DAW.

It's the marketing of analog that holds the multi-timbral back. When I was growing up, I insisted on multitimbral (because if I was going to go broke buying a synth, I wanted multiple voices!). Multi-timbral is much harder to "manage" the voicing with analog synths properly, otherwise previous "long running" patches start to get messed up with new parameters coming in for the next voice. Scaling up to many more analog voices is prohibitively expensive compared to software, which is why many modern synths are the bare minimum monotimbral analogue. I've kept my Virus TI (Snow), and microKorg, both of which are gems in their own right.

UNIFY... When Unify first came out I thought, "Who needs this?" because it is POSSIBLE to do it in DAWs, but the WAY Unify does it is SO GOOD for workflow and makes this layering work so well. I know it doesn't really work for hardware synths, but as far as that goes I think it's been overlooked there is because everyone has multiple synths, and nobody is using an Emu Proteus to do 8 different sounds in a song anymore... Oh, and yes, Chemex is great :-)

As far as coffee making recommendations go, my favorite is the Bialetti moka express.

THanks for the video. What are your thoughts on the Kyra?

*Another Blofeld love letter* Blofeld: _casually fucks up patch_

Thanks for this. I've been experimenting with using Bitwig's grid to create multitambiral, multi-section instrument, driving that all with ocellators and using the NDLR as the controller. I also love, love, love, love Voltage Modular for similar reasons But of late, I've been wondering if I should look for a could of nice desktop synths to expand my horizons, but unable to find ones that would give me the lush flexibility of the "roll your own" softsynths. So this video was spot on. I did a quick process check and the Blofeld looks life terrific value for money. Are the other synths ptions you'd recommend for a budding sound scape enthusiast?

This video made me get one!

Well, I think Korg is kinda stepping up their game with their latest line of synths like the Wavestate and Modwave bringing back the interesting format of wave synthesis. It has been abandoned for a while and I am happy that at least some manufacturers are noticing the gap it can fill in ones studio. Great video btw 👌 I found this one really interesting.

When I first got my Circuit Tracks I wrote to Novation hoping that they were, perhaps, going to develop a synth module that would replicate and supplement the two synth channels of their onboard synth for use with the Tracks. They wrote me back that they were not really thinking about this, which bummed me out. Then I found the Blofeld and I no longer cared what Novation did or did not do. (BTW Novation has not done a firmware upgrade in months). This thing does it all. So between the Circuit Tracks, the Blofeld, a Korg Minilogue XD and NTS-1, I can pretty much get it done. But really all I need is the Blofeld and the Circuit. It's 2021 FFS !!!

im really happy youre making an issue out of this, i feel the same way

I think some manufacturers fail to include the multi timbral aspect because they feel they're skating too close to a workstation and are not inclined to go the full mile on that product.

So i use a Rev 2 and its multitimbral. A lot of people dislike it because its not just another prophet 5. It has some great modulation choices and honestly i love it. Pretty easy to get it to make something beautiful in a small amount of time.

Yep. Analog isn't the end word in synthesis, though it has its advantages in creating classic sounds. It is hitting saturation point these days though. As for the lack of modern multi-timbral synths, it means old Viruses, Nords, Waldorfs, Korg's and the like will always have a place in many studios. Regarding the discussed issue here, to my mind the best examples are the Nord Lead 3 & Integra, followed by the Korg Radias & Monomachine, then Nord Lead 2/Virus/Novation Supernova.

One reason I'm so enthusiastic about the Hydrasynth Deluxe coming out soon. I don't have space for one, but it actually seems like they are going in the right direction.

Blofeld is one of the best digital synthesizer ever produced. A real MUST HAVE of our times....It's COOL, sounds good, it's not overpriced like 3/4 of the synthesizers on this planet, it packs tons of features for the most demanding sound designers but is loaded with lots of presets for the bread&butter kind of stuff nonetheless.

I love my Blofeld too! Totally agree about the obsession with analogue. The make great sounds, but a lot of the sounds have been done before. I'll be playing wiht my Blofeld this afternoon!

I recently bought a Blofeld, in part because of your videos. It really is an awesome synth. Now I'm eyeing the Waldorf M, but it will take some time until I have the funds to spend on something like that...

Love the blofeld, yes on the surface it sounds good, not amazing but the multi-timbral trick is great, have a Virus Ti now, great synth of course but missing the sound and control matrix of the blofeld lately, I think it's pretty easy to navigate

And this is why I love my VirusTI and will likely never sell it. Although Access seems to have abandoned the line forever, it has features, 15 years on, that even current attempts like the Kyra couldn’t get right. It’s 100% digital and it absolutely demolishes some current releases that swear by going after that “analog” brass ring. I also wish every synth has the ability to stream audio over usb to a daw and be used as a plug-in in real time (like the Virus can, until it won’t anymore).

Love it. Not the same obvs, but I love layering multiple piano sounds for live playing on Nord…

I used to do this with my Access Virus. Moreso to create different synth parts for different channels but sometimes I would gang them together. My "modern" workaround in DAW is using a Combinator in Reason and stacking/mixing synths in there to build big sounds in one playable instrument.

Hey! Did you have a video about Newfangled Elevate, did the plugin take root? And thanks for Your videos!

Yep, I've always said the Blofeld is one of the most underrated synths. All of my Ensoniq synths back in the late 1980s and throughout the 1990s were multitimbral, so the Blofeld was a blessing (especially considering it is still available today!) I miss my Blofeld terribly; the only reason I sold it was because I moved into Eurorack for my live performances (previously I was using 8 parts of the Blofeld being sequenced by the Elektron Octatrack... such a powerful performance combination!) and soundwise, I already also have the Waldorf Micro Q, the Waldorf XTk, and the Waldorf Quantum, so got all of those sounds covered. Still, I might want to get a Blofeld again just because it was so convenient for live performances.

I always had the same question I don’t understand why in the 90s keyboards were multitimberal so you could connect to a DAW and playback 16 tracks! Especially now competing with VSTZ’s that do this, it doesn’t make sense for hardware to not do this.

First time visitor to your channel. @8.30 ish i knew how this synth got it's name. 😂 Thanks for sharing your experience with this machine.

Ordered a Blofeld and take delivery today purely because of its multi-timbral capability. Been catching up on videos for the Blofeld and came across this one. I have an Hydrasynth Explorer and hate the fact it is not even 2 part Multi-Timbral. Cannot wait to get the Blofeld singing along with my Hydrasynth and Crave, I have a feeling it will be my main go to synth and as much as I love my Hydrasynth, I wish I had purchased the Blofeld before it.

Thanks for putting this together. I am a fellow Blofeld fan, and several of my most recent additions to the studio - an Alesis Micron and Kurzweil K2000RS - attest to a shared interest in deep synthesis. That said, I have probably gone the path of many people who want a deeper and more texturally interesting sound palette by buying a lot of mid-range synths fitting in certain niches rather than a few synths with multitimbrality. While I totally agree there's a lack of imagination on the part of most synth manufacturers, I think much of what's out there is driven by consumer demand. I feel like, aside from the Hydrasynth and a number of other manufacturers' $3000+ flagship synths, there's just very little interest in pushing the boundaries because most of the people buying synths are just interested in retreading the 1970-2000 soundscape. I also have this sense that the modular craze has drained away a lot of the interest in innovation. It's basically: oh, you want to do crazy shit? You should get into modular. Call me old fashioned, but I appreciate a well-made instrument, and very little about modular says 'instrument' to me. I also feel that most people do not go deep enough with their gear. The stuff you point out about the Blofeld only becomes apparent after one spends a great deal of time with it. How many people get to the outside edges of what a given piece of gear can do, enough to understand what it will never be able to do? That's how we got a lot of the synth technology we have now - Tangerine Dream and Brian Eno and others sitting down with hardware designers in the '70s and '80s because what was currently available couldn't do a thing they imagined was possible, but could find nothing that would do it. Which artists are pushing those boundaries now?

I think that a lot of the synth makers have this dilemma of "what cool stuff can we add" vs. "what are people going to buy?." I'm surprised that they aren't reaching out more to customers at trade shows.....or even their own YT channels. And yes, as Cameron points out, there's something to be said about a good analog synth. And for people who started on them, I think that they've been married to the idea/sound of Analog for so long, it's hard to get divorced from them. Cheers, Mr. Cameron!

I've preached the superpower of multi-mode and patch stacking.

Vital has the option of using resynthesis sound the we created and use as a wave table for oscilators.

Agreed. Metered drip feed of instrument features applied to a rotating roadmap. 'Buzz word, buzz word' feature gets pushed for a while then when the sales responses to that fade, insert new 'buzz word' feature. Sprinkle in the occasional Actual New feature then recycle and re-package the old stuff.

Hey. I also believe that technically digital DSP can be as good as "analog" or even better, and that the "analog" term is overused in the marketing of some of the VST plugins. Hoover there is a serious case when analog vs digital makes a serious difference. Both analog and digital domain have some downfalls, I don't mind if a hardware synth or FX pedal is digital, but I do mind a lot when it's digital in a "bad way". For example there are synths and fx pedals that can digitally clip, operate on low sample rate, produce unwanted nyquist related issues, reduce the dynamic range or affect the detail (usually in the topend and transients ) of the sound. In most cases with digital DSP based hardware the main issue is not the OSC, but the weak D/A converter or output amp, and the similar issue can be found with A/D and D/A conversion in cheap FX guitar pedals. In my "sound design rules book " there is no good or bad sound design process or effect, but in this case when I'm aiming for the most crisp and detailed sound with sharp transients, I would recommend staying away from the "digital synths and effects" unless you are absoluty sure that the product you are using has high quality DSP, A/D, D/A and AMP chip. With pure analog hardware products, it's less common to have a bad sound since the prices of analog gear are usually higher than their digital counterparts, and the analog hardware developers are paying more attention to the quality of their hardware to justify the higher price. Hopefully that helps you to understood why it still makes sense to prefer analog gear for some use cases.

analogue is a catch word, and will be used as a sales pitch for the rest of eternity. What you are basically saying is that additive synthesis and layering is something that should be examined more closely and offered in a physical domain. I agree thoroughly, but a lot of people would find this approach complicated, just a quick look at the creation of sound on a synclavier using PCM in comparison to a moog or roland module. presonus StudioOne can layer different VSTs beside, or on top of each other now. This approach certainly answers your question, but only in the digital domain, again NOT with a "physical" approach. I love your question and am happy that you asked it.

Im in the market for my first hardware synth and multi timbral is kind of a must. Is there anything else multi timbral around the price of the Blofeld?

i wish synth companies experimented more with new and novel synthesis methods. cos software synths are way ahead in that regard, with synths like chromaphone, razor, unfiltered audio lion etc.

Multi timbral synths have been somewhat replaced by having instances of plugins since the Blofeld maybe? I enjoyed watching you build patches from init. The multis were a lot of sound from one small box.

I agree, I bought a deepmind12 because I kept reading that analogue oscillators are god tier. While it sounds beautiful on its own I ended up selling it because dune3 and absynth let me do more with less menu diving.