OK, sorry, I misunderstood your thread.
In old synth, it's not the wave form alone that make it smoother. And it can be smother or even harsher depending of the synth model.
But i'm sure that smother saw can be obtained from a Moog.

I'll prepare a little pack for you, but now I cant, as I'm traveling. I'll send it on Monday.

Meanwhile, you could have a try with this: Synthhacker Wavetable Collection Free
One of the folders is analog wavetables. With Moog, Jupiter, OBX a / pro and more.
https://synthhacker.com/products/wavetable-collection

 

Last edited: Aug 27, 2022

Just put your audio here. You don’t know how to make music, you don’t know how to explain things, you will probably misunderstand the advice coming to you aswell, lots of room for error and basically no room for improvement. I have yet to hear a vanilla saw bass that “kills your ears”

 

yes thats what i thought some models might sound a bit different, its ok man don't worry i'll google around too...thanks for your help

 

I think I understand your "problem". You are basically saying that your playback system is not producing certain (low) frequencies, which makes certain higher frequencies more dominant - thus making them "harsher". If you listen to shitty laptop speakers then of course you will only hear the higher frequencies (not the fundamental but only the overtones). Your headphones might go (way) deeper, making them less "harsh" since they produce the fundamental.

If you get a full-range system (speakers and a sub or two) and proper acoustic treatment, you will not have this problem.

 

Last edited: Aug 27, 2022

the main question i asked is if old synths provide different and possibly less harsh waveforms on the low notes as compared to that of sylenth1 to check them out

for example a saw on sylenth1 might be more harsh than an old synth i don't know about, because they have slight varieties in shapes or something, their circuit etc

 

Hi @Baxter, I've been meaning to tell you for a long time that you really share excellent expertise with us here.

 

If you test different synthesizers, with an init preset with just the SAW, you will quickly find that there are noticeable audible differences there. The Sylenth 1, as you can read in the interview below, is exceptionally well made. Trust your ears more than what you read, the longer you make music and train your hearing, the sooner you will also notice differences quickly.

Spoiler: Interview with Lennar Digital:

Interview with Lennar Digital:

Yes, I started to look at the known algorithms in order to improve them fundamentally. The oscillators were probably the biggest part. Most of the digital oscillators I know start to lose quality at very low and very high frequencies. Some companies use very large wavetables or long interpolation filters, but that requires a lot of CPU cycles and/or slow memory access.

I have developed a new technique to get around these problems. My oscillators sound clear and high quality over the whole frequency range. And they do this from 0 Hz up to half the sampling rate, while using only a fraction of the CPU. This makes it possible for me to create many oscillators at once without overloading the CPU. Some synthesizers use a trick to simulate unison. Mostly this is a simple chorus, which doesn't sound really good. In Synlenth, each voice is really a real independently generated oscillator, which of course sounds much better!

AMAZONA: Very interesting! So if you don't use wavetables, do you add something like a pulse on each steep edge to avoid aliasing? I've talked about this with other developers who also offer aliasing-free oscillators. But they are not as efficient as yours! It's almost funny that a "one-man-show" like you can show the big companies how the hare runs !!

Lennar: The technique you refer to is called minBLEP and is very popular with many developers. Especially for aliasing free hardsync (oscillator sync) and PWM (pulse wave modulation) it is very useful. But I don't use that. My method is already largely based on wavetables, but uses only very small ones. I have constructed a kind of intelligent morphing, which sounds just great over the whole spectrum. But I won't tell you more now ;-)

So there is an optimization of the algorithm on one side, as well as the full use of the SSE instructions on the other side. So the filters were written completely in SSE code. There are two stereo filters for each voice. With SSE I can calculate all four filters as fast as one without SSE. In addition, I wrote all the parts where I work with oversampling (e.g. distortion) also in SSE.

AMAZONA: Yes, I understand! The performance of the Sylenth is really the best I have ever seen in a VSTi. Did you base the sound of the oscillators and filters on hardware?

Lennar: I like the analog sound of the Minimoog, but also the unison sounds (supersaw) from the Virus or the JP8000. Although I didn't use them as a reference, they did indirectly inspire me when programming the Sylenth. And you can hear that, I think.

Source: www.amazona.de/interview-lennar-digital/

 

Last edited: Aug 27, 2022

Thank you!!! So do you!

 

you got that word right: "slight varieties" - not enough to make a significant difference. Not different to the point that Sylenth's waves break your ears and a Moog will sound smooth & silky. Trust me, is not the synth, is you/your monitoring