Most overpriced synths of all-time?

Discussions about anything analog, digital, MIDI, synth technology, techniques, theories and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
tallowwaters
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4998
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 4:11 am
Gear: LC-MS/MS
Location: snake's belly in a wagon rut

Post by tallowwaters » Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:29 am

burns46824 wrote:I have to agree with Bill, guys. Early samplers were basically pointless in my opinion...and most of my favorite records from that period (early 80s) did not use them at all.

If you were a rich musician in the early 80s, and you wanted some sax or choir sounds, I don't understand why you wouldn't just use a real sax player or a real choir (whether it be studio or live work). In a lot of cases, the same thing goes for today...especially for horns. Sampling really only worked well with percussive sounds in those early boards.

My pick for an over-priced synthesizer? Minimoog.
so just cause your favorite records didnt have them means they are useless?

burns, you could fall in a barrel full of titties and come out sucking your thumb.
Brains can be used like a "stress ball," but only once.

burns46824
No Longer Registered

Post by burns46824 » Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:57 am

Yeah, they really were. I don't understand why EVERYONE used a Fairlight. Makes absolutely no sense to me. It's not like people were using them for additive synthesis.

It's funny, when Duran Duran was on tour in '84, Nick tried to show off the additive synthesis capabilities of his fairlight (via that little computer screen it came along with)...but in truth we all know that he was just trying to look cool.

That titties line is pretty funny...but honestly, give me one good example of how someone effectively used a Fairlight.

User avatar
Huppo
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:58 pm
Gear: V-synth, broken Fusion 6HD, HPD10, MP-7, 60+ guitars, etc.
Band: naught
Location: Western Mars
Contact:

Post by Huppo » Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:23 am

burns46824 wrote:That titties line is pretty funny...but honestly, give me one good example of how someone effectively used a Fairlight.
Kate Bush - Hounds of Love

~huppo
~huppo

Please feel free to add me to your Foes list.

User avatar
ApolloBoy
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 142
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 5:25 pm
Gear: Korg ARP Odyssey
Korg Minilogue
Korg Monotron
Korg Volca Beats
Roland Jupiter-4
Roland JX-10
Squier P-Bass
Yamaha CS01
Yamaha CS-10
Location: Campbell, CA

Post by ApolloBoy » Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:47 am

burns46824 wrote:...but honestly, give me one good example of how someone effectively used a Fairlight.
Listen to any The Art Of Noise song made from around 1983 to 1986. I swear, they were practically masters of the Fairlight...
Had: DX7, AX-60, SR-16, Yamaha TQ5, 01/WFD, Juno-106, MG-1, JX-03
Want: OB-6, Prophet 6, Jupiter-6

User avatar
minime123
Expert Member
Expert Member
Posts: 1065
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:44 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by minime123 » Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:54 am

yup. art of noise were fairlight masters. lots of other europop from that period used the fairlight too.
VINTAGE SYNTH DEALER
- We Buy Sell Trade Repair Vintage Synths
- We Buy Broken Gear & Parts Too...
- Huge Selection, Dependable Service
- https://tonetweakers.com

burns46824
No Longer Registered

Post by burns46824 » Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:58 am

I have to say I haden't listened to Kate Bush before, though I've heard good things about her. But when I listened, I was annoyed. Then again, I've never liked female vocalists.

So as far as these Fairlight examples, you're not doing much for me here, guys.

User avatar
Stab Frenzy
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9723
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 5:41 pm
Gear: Eurorack, RYTM, Ultranova, many FX
Location: monster island*
Contact:

Post by Stab Frenzy » Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:14 am

burns46824 wrote:I have to say I haden't listened to Kate Bush before, though I've heard good things about her. But when I listened, I was annoyed. Then again, I've never liked female vocalists.

So as far as these Fairlight examples, you're not doing much for me here, guys.
Don't complain just cause you've got no taste in music. ;)

'Rich musicians of the 80's' didn't use the fairlight to replace a saxaphone, or a choir, or whatever. It would have been cheaper to actually get a saxophonist in and buy him a saxophone and a month long holiday in the tropics to get him in the mood to record. People used them cause they could get otherworldly sounds that you couldn't get from real, physical instruments.

User avatar
Blue Monster 65
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 3:19 am
Location: down in the lab ...

Post by Blue Monster 65 » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:01 pm

Just because you don't like the sounds presented, Burns, doesn't mean these are not valid examples. Ministry were also Fairlight users and I can't f**k stand them (him).

It's all personal taste here: someone is always someone else's favorite band, no matter how much you yourself think they suck. Look at Bad Company: a completely useless, untalented and unwarrented ripoff of another band that was a huge waste of vinyl: Led Zeppelin. I could easily go to my grave never having heard of either one, but millions love 'em and buy their records, so does that make them less valid?

Unfortunately, no.

And Art of Noise did some monster stuff there, boys. Don't forget that there were a TON of singles and albums that were produced via Trevor Horn's studio that also used them. Aussie acts (The Models, Icehouse, et al) used them quite a bit, too.

That said, I've never had the desire to even lay hands on one, let alone buy one. I prefer cheap.

Woof! - Scott
Muhahahahahahahahaha!

Analog Kid
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 6:55 pm
Location: Savannah
Contact:

Post by Analog Kid » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:24 pm

the keyboard OASYS

User avatar
BlackGnosis
Supporting Member!
Supporting Member!
Posts: 524
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:18 pm
Real name: Stormy
Gear: See signature image.
Band: Eridani V
Location: San Angelo, TX
Contact:

Post by BlackGnosis » Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:20 pm

Analog Freak wrote:The Roland SH-201 gets my vote, it costs 600 dollars. They should be giving them away with the purchase of a guitar pick. Mainly because only a guitarist with an interest in synthesis is going to take one very seriously. Flame me! :blob6:

I personally beleive its an awesome synth, yet its also overpriced due to brand...if it were any cheaper it would prolly be under BOSS, but we all like roland, the SH-201 was designed with a beginner in mind as you can see with its layout, so simple, almost color coded, and though it lacks many features found on other synths that would normally shame it it still shines in having nice filteres [not Acess Virus or korg grade but thats okay, I dont expect to do much filter control with a roland anyways unless its an 80's synth] you still have a PCM, VCA, and a ADSR to play with... and even a handy split board function. and its made to integrate into your PC as a VST which grants awesome control power... that last feature right there is enough for me to shell out 600 and be happy with it. then again I play a guitar and beleive that the TB-303, SH-101[old school =P] the OSCar and my microkorg are the most awesome machines of all time...

supermel74 wrote:
Sealed wrote:I tend to feel softsynths a little bit expensive for what they are.
I agree 100%. No soft synth is worth more than $50. I don't care how you use it or how it sounds, it's still just a f**k cd.
I agree with both of you and disagree, the time and people not to mention hardware it took to develop it costs alot but then again software is usually cheaper then hardware for a reason, Ill never pay over 400 for a freaking CD no matter how nice it sounds...Id rather have hardware at that point.



And for my personal opinoin I beleive, that the gloriously overadvertised RECEPTOR is overpriced, to build the same thing with computer parts and a rack [for a server] at the same spec and OS would be half the price...yes Im considering displays and interactive stuff too, I like VST's, beleive me but I'd rather drop 500 for a cheap laptop that would compleatly stomp the receptor, and have more room to grow.... :idea:

User avatar
shagghie
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 2:26 am
Location: Somewhere Between 0v and 5v
Contact:

Post by shagghie » Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:38 pm

I will humbly submit that there are no such things as overpriced synths, unless the synth in question tanks the company that produced it because it costed too much to produce compared to what the market bore.

Unfortunately, there are a fair number of examples of the above-defined 'overpriced synth'... :(

I though the Virus Ti Polar would have been overpriced, but after waiting a year to own one, and finally getting to use one in the flesh, and after seeing how uber powerful they are, and after seeing Access *NOT* go out of business after taking the risk to make it...I can honestly say that it is definately *not* overpriced for what you get...

User avatar
ItsMeOnly
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm

Post by ItsMeOnly » Wed Aug 30, 2006 4:50 pm

burns46824 wrote:So as far as these Fairlight examples, you're not doing much for me here, guys.
Peter Gabriel, long time CMI user,
Tears for Fears: Shout is the best example,
PSP used a series III extensivly on "Actually",
Frankie goes to Hollywood, CMI III all the way,
AON was mentioned,
Jarre- Zoolook is wonderful use of CMI II.

It's just an instrument guys, and it's a cool instrument- people liked it just for sheer fun of having, I know because I've working with II myself, and I know that's a great machine.

User avatar
Mr Rich
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 90
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 10:04 pm
Gear: Excessive.
Location: Ireland

Post by Mr Rich » Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:41 pm

Fairlights were bloody great burnsie. I've had a series II and a series III MFX and they were superb. Still got a II, but I can't be bothered to mess around with it in this day and age. I'm done with them now, but they were capable of making your brain hurt when I started with them. You'd show something to someone and they'd say 'It can do what...' in complete astonishment. They may appear old hat now, but it was a brand new idea at the time. I'm not quite old enough to have been in studios in '79* when they appeared, but it must have been amazing. (*I cut my studio teeth during the 80s)
Mr Rich
(Eventually tired of Clint.)

stillearning
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 756
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: N.E. Ohio

Post by stillearning » Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:03 pm

Mr Rich wrote: I'm not quite old enough to have been in studios in '79 when they appeared, but it must have been amazing.
I was, and it was.
As always, kindly allow for the possibility I have no idea what I'm talking about.

User avatar
ItsMeOnly
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:01 pm

Post by ItsMeOnly » Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:43 pm

Mr Rich wrote:(*I cut my studio teeth during the 80s)
Wait a second, therefore you can't be much older than me (30) :)

Post Reply