A synth voice's character is set by how its oscillator generates sound — the synthesis method

Software and hardware synthesizers share the same downstream signal path (oscillator/source → filter → amplifier, with envelopes and modulation), but differ fundamentally in how the oscillator produces its raw waveform. That choice — the synthesis method — is the primary determinant of a voice’s timbral palette. Common paradigms are: wavetable (scan through stored single-cycle waveforms), virtual analog (model classic analog oscillator/filter circuits), PCM/sample-based (play back recorded audio), Karplus-Strong and other physical modeling (simulate a vibrating string or tube), FM/phase-distortion (modulate one oscillator’s phase with another), and wave-sequencing (step through a timed sequence of wavetables). Because the rest of the voice is shared, a learner can compare paradigms by swapping only the oscillator core and listening — e.g. the same filter and envelope over a virtual-analog vs. a physical-modeling source. Knowing which paradigm suits a target sound (a plucked string wants physical modeling; a bright metallic bell wants FM) is a foundational sound-design decision, not an implementation detail.

Examples

SynthLab exposes six paradigms behind one voice architecture: WT (wavetable), VA (virtual analog), PCM, KS (Karplus-Strong), DX (FM/phase distortion), WS (wave sequencing). Building the KS voice vs. the VA voice with the same filter reveals how much the source method alone shapes timbre.

Assessment

Given three target sounds (a plucked nylon string, a warm analog bass, a glassy FM bell), name the synthesis paradigm best suited to each and justify the choice by how each paradigm generates its oscillator signal.