In light of the upcoming Sumu, I thought to inquire as to whether more/extra partials/high partial count, perhaps in different contexts, has any bearing where Sumu is concerned, and if so, what/how, or if not, what/how and if it's kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
I have heard, specifically on KVR music site for example, that apparently better synths, like Harmor, Razor or Loom 2, can work with 512 partials and higher or something like that, whereas other, apparently less capable synths, have less partials than that, like, say, 128 or less.
To help elaborate what I mean, consider this video (link below) that talks about how one can hack Native Instruments' Razor (maybe through its 'host' or some kind of 'host', like Reaktor?) to make it operate with more partials (thus with a higher 'sound resolution'?) if one's computer can handle it and that when Razor was first developed, computing power was less able to cope with more partials which is why it has the default it has.
The point also is that I seem to have read about Sumu as having a much lower partial count, but perhaps this has little or nothing to do with how it works, compared with other additive synths.
So what's the deal with Sumu and how might it compare and/or contrast in this and other ways with its synth relatives and other synths as well for that matter?
Here's the partial hack video-in-question:
Thanks for the question.
Sumu has 64 bandwidth-enhanced, frequency-modulated partials. So it's really comparing completely different things, to compare it against other synths. A single partial in Sumu would be a musically useful oscillator all by itself.
If your additive synth can make wide-bandwidth noise, then it has enough partials! Then the fun is in figuring out how to control all the parameters of a voice meaningfully and expressively — I'm much more interested in this "how" than in "how much" or "how many".
Hi randy, I appreciate the insight, thanks!