Digital Synthesis: History & Taxonomy

Taxonomy

Digital methods for sound synthesis can be grouped according to their underlying principle of operation. In 1991, Smith proposed four basic categories:

/images/Sound_Synthesis/synthesis_taxonomy_SMITH.png

Taxonomy of synthesis algorithms (Smith, 1991).

Processed Recording

Already a technique in the analog domain (Musique Concrète), this family of synthesis approaches makes direct use of previously recorded sound for synthesis. This can be the playback of complete sounds or the extraction of short segments, such as grains or even single periods of a sound (wavetable).

Spectral Models

Spectral models analyse and synthesize sounds through mathematical models of their spectra and their development over time. They are receiver-based, since they model the sound as it is perceived by the listener. As an extension of additive synthesis, spectral models use basic components like sinewaves and noise to create musical sounds with high accuracy.

Physical Models

Physical Models are digital emulations of physical processes in musical instruments. Basic building blocks like oscillators, resonating bodies and acoustic conductors are realized as buffers and digital filters. Physical modeling is regarded a source-based approach, since it models the sound generation process.

Abstract Algorithm

If it is not processed sound, a spectral model or a physical model, it is an abstract algorithm. Algorithms from this category often transfer methods from other domains, like radio technology (FM Synthesis), to the musical domain.

Neural Networks & Deep Learning

The above introduced taxonomy is still valid but misses some recent developments. Methods based on neural networks and deep learning for sound generation may be considered a fifth taxon.

Family Tree

The synthesis experiments at Bell Labs are the origin of most methods for digital sound synthesis. This figure illustrates the relations for a subset of synthesis approaches, starting with Mathews:

/images/Sound_Synthesis/bilbao_history.png

Evolution and family tree (Bilbao, 2009).

The foundation for many further developments was laid when John Chowning brought the software MUSIC VI to Stanford from a visit at Bell Labs (Chowning, 2011). After migrating it to a PDP-6 computer, Chowning worked on his groundbreaking digital compositions, using the FM method and spatial techniques.

2011

  • John Chowning. Turenas: the realization of a dream. Proc. of the 17es Journées d’Informatique Musicale, Saint-Etienne, France, 2011.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

2009

  • Bilbao, Stefan. Numerical Sound Synthesis. Wiley Online Library, 2009. ISBN 9780470749012. doi:10.1002/9780470749012.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]
  • Ananya Misra and Perry R Cook. Toward Synthesized Environments: A Survey of Analysis and Synthesis Methods for Sound Designers and Composers. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC 2009). 2009.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]
  • Tae Hong Park. An interview with max mathews. Computer Music Journal, 33(3):9–22, 2009.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1991

  • Julius O. Smith. Viewpoints on the History of Digital Synthesis. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference, 1–10. 1991.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1988

  • Miller S. Puckette. The patcher. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC). 1988.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1986

  • Emmanuel Favreau, Michel Fingerhut, Olivier Koechlin, Patrick Potacsek, Miller S. Puckette, and Robert Rowe. Software developments for the 4x real-time system. In Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference (ICMC). 1986.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1980

  • Curtis Roads and Max Mathews. Interview with max mathews. Computer Music Journal, 4(4):15–22, 1980.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1969

  • Max V. Mathews. The Technology of Computer Music. MIT Press, 1969.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]

1963

  • Max V Mathews. The Digital Computer as a Musical Instrument. Science, 142(3592):553–557, 1963.
    [details] [BibTeX▼]