Consider setting aside goals or targets altogether. Instead, take a simple patch and inject an isolated complex element into it; for example, a single lfo at audio rate, say 500hz. Apply that one by one to things like pulse width, filter resonance, whatever. Just range through what that one element does, leaving the patch otherwise the same. Slowly increase the rate and depth, change the waveform, each applied alone. The idea is get close to what kinds of sounds are there, later you can use that knowledge to hone in on a idea you hear in your head, it’s give a sort map of sound spaces, a synths timbral terrain.
2 Likes
Unconscious sound design is when you don’t know what you’re looking for, but you’ll know when you find it. I work this way frequently.
Conscious sound design is when you know what you’re looking for (though you may not succeed in finding it).
My own workflow on the Digitone employs both conscious and unconscious sound design.
For example, I know what chords I’m going to enter without having to listen to them or experiment with them. That is conscious. But, later in my process, when it comes time to balance all four voices in the mix, I rely on some experimentation and stumbling around in the dark, so to speak.
The results of unconscious sound design frequently help guide my conscious sound design the next time around. As I learn what works, I become more deliberate. And, also, I start experimenting with new things.
The way I am using the terms conscious vs. unconscious may be better described as deliberate vs. non-deliberate, or proactive vs. reactive.
My sound design skills, IMO, are pretty weak and undeveloped. Occasionally, I will fart around and make weird, exotic sounds on my DN, only to discover later that those sounds don’t play well with other sounds, at least not within the very tonal music I am arranging.
My thoughts on sound design are more focused on the way sounds interact with one another. In my music, a sound needs only to be as weird and exotic as is necessary to distinguish itself from other sounds. But not as weird as the musical equivalent of wearing two different kinds of plaid.
I grew up Catholic. In religion class we were taught about the Trinity. There was only one God, but that one God was actually three persons. The logical part of my brain never really reconciled this paradox.
Anyhow, the way sounds fit together in a great piece of music is like the Trinity. The parts, together, create a “one-ness”, but the individual parts still have their own character.
4 Likes
I think that can help, but I also imagine it’s possible to evolve the sound design during the production.
I’m pretty sure this have been listed before but here it goes:
https://www.soundonsound.com/series/synth-secrets-sound-sound
Every soundOnsound guide is pure gold.
Plenty of stuff to go through but it is simply fantastic. I hope it helps.
There isn’t a quick way but there is definitely a way 
3 Likes
This is definitely not an attempt to interpret or explain the above, but in a way aren’t we all sort of three people, our past, present and future selves?
My past self thought that was a worthwhile comment to make, my present self is desperately trying to find a way to relate the comment intelligently to sound design to stay on topic, my future self might less hastily jump to indulging in the sound of my own nonsense…
1 Like
strangely there’s a donut missing
Only because we perceive time linearly, perhaps all of these things exist at once. ‘Present’ is also a fascinating subject all on its own - a magical period of time that we declare as ‘now’ - somehow distinct from the recent past and the immediate future - as if there’s decay on time anchored around our conciousness.
And like rambling thought experiments like the above I like to approach sound design quite organically. I don’t often have goals or requirements, for me it’s more of a way to explore sound and is often a collaboration between me and the instrument. If I want a specific snare I’d probably sample it.
But tbf that’s different to what you’re describing, which is more about intent. I think if you spend a lot of time exploring sound then you start to become more familiar with it - you’ll know how to achieve certain aesthetics etc.
Lots of good YouTube material out there for prescriptive sound design - the Underbelly streams where he recreates sounds his audience suggests is good.
5 Likes
One of the things in conscious of are the things that I rarely alter. These things are especially apparent when I jam with others.
I’ve a friend who works in music and writes for film and TV. We get together and mess around at times. The first time he was in my music room and using my setup was great. He was doing things that I never do. The first thing that stood out was his use of resonance. On every synth he would spend 10 times the time I do with resonance. Also, envelopes. He takes time with ADSR settings far more than I do.
I think - rightly or wrongly - that getting more proficient in synthesis and sound design involves understanding how ALL the things that are adjustable on the synth contribute to the sound.
1 Like
The initial example of “model these objects” is interesting because if we took a literal approach to mapping it to synthesis, it’d look like early use of synths - we’d be striving to create something that accurately models acoustic instruments. But of course, synths get more interesting when they’re doing things those instruments can’t do. Synthesis has been around long enough that we have conventions of specific types of sound we’re going for, like sync leads, pads, etc. So, you could set the challenge for yourself to learn how to quickly dial in those types of sounds and understand how to the different variables change them.
In a way the conversation reminds me of Elvis (you know, the guy from the Machinedrum 
) vs the Beatles. Elvis is a great interpreter of songs other people wrote, and the Beatles wrote and performed their own songs. Both produced a result a lot of people liked. I think that’s true with synthesis and making your own patches. A lot of great songs use pretty identifiable stock patches, and others take the sound to really new places. So I think it’s important to think about what you’re trying to achieve with your work. I often get better results compositionally when I’m noodling with a preset. However I’ve also made some cool sounds that inspire more experimental work.
Much of sound design for media is known as what is called foley, but I assume the OP knows that. If we’re talking ‘music’ then this I would say relates more specifically to composition, with sound design relating to on or off screen sound effects.
You have physical processes to achieve this, and foley studios tend to be pretty industrial. Pouring things, cutting a lettuce, banging and moving things around, recording the twisting and manipulation of physical objects. You might call this physical sound design ie microphone based.
Virtually, this is possible too, and much like synthesis you can think about how you might work up a sound like you would working up a painting, thinking about individual elements and then working up to a final sound or collection of sounds.
I’m not sure what the hierarchy of matrices would be for sound, but you could consider things like
The sound of rain
The sound of a jacket moving
The sound a galloping horse
The sound a pedalling bicycle
The sound of tumbling rocks
The sound of thunder
The sound of a river
The sound of biting a carrot
Even just trying to complete the above 8 exercises, how would you go about? You could just record all these things. But what if you were to work it up virtually? Either with a programming language, or a synthesis engine.
That’s a way to do it, identify specific sounds you want to create, and see if you can create them.
Every sound has an ADSR, and you can think about the characteristics of a sound by thinking about this envelope. What does a sound sound like at each phase of the ADSR? Sometimes you can work on creating the specific phase, then combine them together to create a final sound. Often, sounds like rain which appear as noise are just the combination of many variations of the same sound, like one droplet of rain. So you can experiment with that one component and then duplicate it as needed.
Do a hundred of these and you’ll probably be getting better at sound design
9 Likes
For me I’d stage it as the following
Level 1: no idea what all the dials n buttons do, keeps pressing till it sounds good
Level 2: still no real idea what the dials n buttons do but know how to get sounds I like
Level 3: know what some of the dials do and understand some of the terms to be able to experiment abit more to aid learning
Level 4: decide I want to make this sound, and just go make it cos you know what all the buttons and dials do
I’m at level 2.5.
1 Like
Level 5 - save a bunch of wasted time while making music and find a preset that I can slightly tweak to taste.
2 Likes
- Shotgun approach
- Design in situ
- Listen back the next day with fresh ears and don’t get too precious about anything
- Reference stuff to make sure your sounds stand up
Yeah, I mean I’ve gone from knowing how to play bass with 2 finger, one on the fretboard and one plucking to now using a compressor to fine tune my live sound and knowing enough about bass cabs to know what frequencies to cut or add from my pre-amp depending on what gear I use. It’s sound design and comes from experience, studying theory and using your ears.
1 Like
Rick Beatos ear training course gets a lot of recommendations.
Thats kind of lame. You don’t learn anything and will always have to use presets as a crutch
Who says I don’t already know how to design all my own sounds? Is that what you are saying?
If that’s what you are saying, that’s lame, and incorrect. The only crutch is thinking everyone has to design every sound from scratch. Very lame.
1 Like
I’d think it takes as long to dial in a sound as it takes to go thru presets and fine tune. So why do it if you don’t need to?
Time spent trying to design sounds
Broadening your listening, plus reading about synthesis and sampling techniques
Time spent trying to design sounds
Rinse and repeat
1 Like
