Who needs a million and one synths

Discussions about anything analog, digital, MIDI, synth technology, techniques, theories and more.
User avatar
23
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:19 am
Gear: TB-303, MC-505, MC-09, V-Synth GT, FR-777, FR-XS, MFB: Synth II, EMU Proteus 2500/CS, FS1R, Supernova II, Fusion 6HD, ER-1 MKII
Band: 23, A23P, Piss Ant
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by 23 » Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:13 pm

JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote:I couldn't help but read through that thread and think "God....what a retard"
The guy you are calling a retard is someone who has put in alot of time and effort in genres of music that utilize synths. To me, the guy has earned the right, over 99.9% of the people in the world, to be a collector.
Well if it's just collecting he's looking to do, I suppose that is one thing. But I was taking it from the angle of "work environment", and from that end, it made zero sense to me. Sorta like me going out and buying each model of the original Nintendo that was made. I mean there will be subtle differences between them all, but in the end, they're all pretty much going to get me to the same place and be capable of playing the same games. To that same end, I think most people would agree, if anyone of us ran into someone that had every body style of the original N.E.S. game system ever made and had them all out, we'd probably turn to them and go "Why? What's the point?"

Escobar
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:45 pm

Post by Escobar » Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:14 pm

I agree with you Syn303 - LESS IS MORE. But I like older gears better than new ones because newer gears (read synth's/samplers) use to be cluttered with too many features that I don't understand, need, or even are aware of - which make the instrument too complicated and it ends up making me less creative and more frustrated.
Older equippment aren't that full of fetures but simpler to use (I know you can give an example of the opposite to that) :D .
An example: older vs. newer samplers; Emulator II has ONLY 1mb of RAM to play with compared to modern PC's and the latest Akai sampler with 512mb!
Now you can "sample" a whole song without doing anything else than pushing the record button!
But if you only have 1mb RAM at your disposal then you're forced to be creative and work with your sound/sample.
So one can extend the statement of *less is more* in other ways and not just how many samplers/synth's, but how many fetures they also have.

But you're right, older instruments are more unreliable and need more repair but that will also new equippment eventually need.
Maybe I'm just trying to fill that empty hole I have in my soul... NAAHHH just kidd'n! 8)
Roland MKS-70 | Roland SuperJX | Roland S-770 | Roland S-50 | Roland MC-500 | Roland TR-505 | Emulator III rack | Emulator II+HD | Emax HD rack | Emax Kb | Prophet 2002 | Yamaha TQ-5

User avatar
JSRockit
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3911
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:15 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Who needs a million and one synths

Post by JSRockit » Sat Jul 21, 2007 4:58 pm

23 wrote:
JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote: I could understand having one guitar that's a 6 string, and another that is say a 12. I can understand having one that is acoustic, and one that is electric. Etc. But when it gets to the point when it's like "Wow...so you have 4 different guitars, all with similar pickups, all with same tuning, and pretty much the body style and wood is the biggest difference between them". I mean that is just retarded to me. Same goes with synths as far as I'm concerned.
kit: Future-Retro 777 (2x), Roland TB-303, Roland MC-09 (2x) :lol: On the surface, unless your an acid geek, these 5 machines of yours seem to mirror the guitar scenerio above.
FutureRetro 777 is an entirely different beast from the TB. ENTIRELY.
The reason for two of them is quite simple actually, being that they are monophonic, in live situations, if I want more than one going on, I only have one option, which is to tack on an additional. Further, the second one is pending a pretty serious mod (being pretty much being combined with a modular). In any regard, a situation where I have one 777 doing a bass drum kick while the other is doing something else is a totally feasible. Granted, in the studio, I pretty much only ever have one hooked up. The only time the two come into the fray has been in live situations.

The Dual 09s were a similar deal to the 777 giving their mono nature. So they were doubled up. Again, the 09, believe it or not, is a much different beast than say the 303 or even the 777. To full on ADSR envelopes (filter and amp), one LFO (assignable to pitch, filter, and/or amp), 24 and 12db multimode filters (LPF, BPF, HPF), etc. And it goes on. So it's really on the surface that it resembles the TB and/or 777. So beyond it as a synth, I found there were times were I was doing sampling work with on my (originally) one, and I'd be in this rut of "damn, wish I could just reach over and have another totally free one to do 'X' on while I'm screwing with this sample work on this one". Thus the two came into fray. To the same end, in the studio, only one is every hooked up, and the second only comes into play during some live situations.

The 303 I really can't logically justify, nor would I ever try to. It exist soley because I'm a lover of that piece.

In any regard, truly, 303 aside, there really isn't a piece I have around that didn't have a specific purpose/function that it was to fill that I couldn't achieve via some means I already had available.
I know what you mean, but we are synth geeks. To guitar geeks, each guitar has subtle differences that makes them worth having seemingly redundant, to the outsider, guitars.
Korg Volcas / 6 x TE POs / MicroBrute / EH Space Drum & Crash Pad

User avatar
JSRockit
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3911
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:15 pm
Location: New York City

Post by JSRockit » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:00 pm

23 wrote:
JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote:I couldn't help but read through that thread and think "God....what a retard"
The guy you are calling a retard is someone who has put in alot of time and effort in genres of music that utilize synths. To me, the guy has earned the right, over 99.9% of the people in the world, to be a collector.
Well if it's just collecting he's looking to do, I suppose that is one thing. But I was taking it from the angle of "work environment", and from that end, it made zero sense to me. Sorta like me going out and buying each model of the original Nintendo that was made. I mean there will be subtle differences between them all, but in the end, they're all pretty much going to get me to the same place and be capable of playing the same games. To that same end, I think most people would agree, if anyone of us ran into someone that had every body style of the original N.E.S. game system ever made and had them all out, we'd probably turn to them and go "Why? What's the point?"
How is owning every moog as redundant as owning the same NES system? The NES system will play the same games...the Moogs will each allow you to do something differently.
Korg Volcas / 6 x TE POs / MicroBrute / EH Space Drum & Crash Pad

User avatar
23
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:19 am
Gear: TB-303, MC-505, MC-09, V-Synth GT, FR-777, FR-XS, MFB: Synth II, EMU Proteus 2500/CS, FS1R, Supernova II, Fusion 6HD, ER-1 MKII
Band: 23, A23P, Piss Ant
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by 23 » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:20 pm

JSRockit wrote: How is owning every moog as redundant as owning the same NES system? The NES system will play the same games...the Moogs will each allow you to do something differently.
Well take like a Voyager. With a Voyager you pretty much have a Model D covered plus some. So what's the Model D going to give you that the Voyager won't?
Same basic thought can be placed behind say a Voyager and a Lil phatty.

Yes, there are Moogs out there that are going to have significant differences, but not all of them do.
When you get to the point of where you're having trouble recalling the architecture of a given piece (as is apparently the case in that vid), I mean that's sort of a sign that "Whoa buddy, you sure that thing actually had something to offer up that you didn't already have available?"

So that's how owning a Moog can end up as redundant as multiple NES systems that all play the same game. If someone has say a Voyager, Model D, and Lil Phatty, and is using them all on a singular basis/has no need to get past their monophonic nature and single timbrality, I mean it's all sort of redundant (like with the NES). Might as well drop the D and Phatty and retain the Voyager.
That's just my view.

Now in any regard, like I said, if it's collecting one is doing, that's an entirely different case all together. As logic and capability sort of goes out the window.

pworks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:31 am

Post by pworks » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:26 pm

JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote:I couldn't help but read through that thread and think "God....what a retard"
The guy you are calling a retard is someone who has put in alot of time and effort in genres of music that utilize synths. To me, the guy has earned the right, over 99.9% of the people in the world, to be a collector.
i couldnt agree more i mean everyone is dissing this guy like they`re is a band or situation that is even remotely close to the sucsess of the cure and have toured the world headlining huge festivals selling millions of records geeze what do you guys need to be impressed its not all about fame and money but if anyone has earned the right its him

User avatar
23
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:19 am
Gear: TB-303, MC-505, MC-09, V-Synth GT, FR-777, FR-XS, MFB: Synth II, EMU Proteus 2500/CS, FS1R, Supernova II, Fusion 6HD, ER-1 MKII
Band: 23, A23P, Piss Ant
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by 23 » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:35 pm

pworks wrote: i couldnt agree more i mean everyone is dissing this guy like they`re is a band or situation that is even remotely close to the sucsess of the cure and have toured the world headlining huge festivals selling millions of records geeze what do you guys need to be impressed its not all about fame and money but if anyone has earned the right its him
I like The Cure, don't get me wrong, but really, outside of liking The Cure, I couldn't care less about how much money they have made or how much money they have made. Going by that logic, I'd think Tiesto was the greatest thing to ever happen to electronic music, but the matter is I really don't think much of the guy or his work.

To that same end, even though I like The Cure, every single one of them is just as human as anyone else as far as I'm concerned. I'll question someone that was once a member of them just as quickly as I would the next guy.

pworks
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:31 am

Post by pworks » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:43 pm

23 wrote:
pworks wrote: i couldnt agree more i mean everyone is dissing this guy like they`re is a band or situation that is even remotely close to the sucsess of the cure and have toured the world headlining huge festivals selling millions of records geeze what do you guys need to be impressed its not all about fame and money but if anyone has earned the right its him
I like The Cure, don't get me wrong, but really, outside of liking The Cure, I couldn't care less about how much money they have made or how much money they have made. Going by that logic, I'd think Tiesto was the greatest thing to ever happen to electronic music, but the matter is I really don't think much of the guy or his work.

To that same end, even though I like The Cure, every single one of them is just as human as anyone else as far as I'm concerned. I'll question someone that was once a member of them just as quickly as I would the next guy.
point taken im with you on that one

User avatar
JSRockit
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3911
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:15 pm
Location: New York City

Post by JSRockit » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:51 pm

23 wrote: If someone has say a Voyager, Model D, and Lil Phatty, and is using them all on a singular basis/has no need to get past their monophonic nature and single timbrality, I mean it's all sort of redundant (like with the NES). Might as well drop the D and Phatty and retain the Voyager.
That's just my view.
But those 3 Moogs sound different enough to warrant owning them all if the Moog sound is your favorite type of sound... especially if you are a working professional who is making a living off those tools.
Korg Volcas / 6 x TE POs / MicroBrute / EH Space Drum & Crash Pad

User avatar
23
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:19 am
Gear: TB-303, MC-505, MC-09, V-Synth GT, FR-777, FR-XS, MFB: Synth II, EMU Proteus 2500/CS, FS1R, Supernova II, Fusion 6HD, ER-1 MKII
Band: 23, A23P, Piss Ant
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by 23 » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:06 pm

JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote: If someone has say a Voyager, Model D, and Lil Phatty, and is using them all on a singular basis/has no need to get past their monophonic nature and single timbrality, I mean it's all sort of redundant (like with the NES). Might as well drop the D and Phatty and retain the Voyager.
That's just my view.
But those 3 Moogs sound different enough to warrant owning them all if the Moog sound is your favorite type of sound... especially if you are a working professional who is making a living off those tools.
Like I said, that was just my view point. To go back to my former point, I've owned multiple 106s, and at the end of the day, I don't feel that there is anything they have to offer me that I can't already achieve via something else already in my tool set (excluding it's noisy chorus....which I could always just add noise).

Hmmm, I suppose it'd be like me owning a JV synth and an XV. I mean really, there's no reason why I would need the JV around save not being able to transfer some patches I had made on it (and really really really liked).
To that same end, if it weren't a matter of some of the non-analogue based ROM waves that were on a Virus C, I'd pretty much think redundant to own both a Virus C and a Waldorf Q. (I'd say just take the Q and you'd have your Virus bases covered and then some).
Similarly, I wouldn't tell someone to get a Poly 6 and a Juno 6 as the Poly would pretty much cover the bases of the Juno capabilities. Get where I'm coming from?

User avatar
JSRockit
Synth Explorer
Synth Explorer
Posts: 3911
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:15 pm
Location: New York City

Post by JSRockit » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:13 pm

23 wrote:
JSRockit wrote:
23 wrote: If someone has say a Voyager, Model D, and Lil Phatty, and is using them all on a singular basis/has no need to get past their monophonic nature and single timbrality, I mean it's all sort of redundant (like with the NES). Might as well drop the D and Phatty and retain the Voyager.
That's just my view.
But those 3 Moogs sound different enough to warrant owning them all if the Moog sound is your favorite type of sound... especially if you are a working professional who is making a living off those tools.
Like I said, that was just my view point. To go back to my former point, I've owned multiple 106s, and at the end of the day, I don't feel that there is anything they have to offer me that I can't already achieve via something else already in my tool set (excluding it's noisy chorus....which I could always just add noise).

Hmmm, I suppose it'd be like me owning a JV synth and an XV. I mean really, there's no reason why I would need the JV around save not being able to transfer some patches I had made on it (and really really really liked).
To that same end, if it weren't a matter of some of the non-analogue based ROM waves that were on a Virus C, I'd pretty much think redundant to own both a Virus C and a Waldorf Q. (I'd say just take the Q and you'd have your Virus bases covered and then some).
Similarly, I wouldn't tell someone to get a Poly 6 and a Juno 6 as the Poly would pretty much cover the bases of the Juno capabilities. Get where I'm coming from?
I get what you are saying, I mean I don't really own anything redundant either...but I understand why someone would own most Moogs...or a few different 303 clones.
Korg Volcas / 6 x TE POs / MicroBrute / EH Space Drum & Crash Pad

User avatar
OggeOJ
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:40 pm

Post by OggeOJ » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:57 pm

Actually, if you dont happen to own the EPIC ULTRAMODULAR ROLAYAMAMOOG that would feature 48db everymode filter and all the oscillators that you could ever dream up (including human throat), most synths sound quite different.

All synths dont just have 3 osc, 2 envelope gens and 1 filter. Its exactly comparing a Fender and a Gibson guitar.
And then there is different amps, too.

Its a deep world of deep s**t.
Image
yeah, im also obsessed with it.

User avatar
23
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:19 am
Gear: TB-303, MC-505, MC-09, V-Synth GT, FR-777, FR-XS, MFB: Synth II, EMU Proteus 2500/CS, FS1R, Supernova II, Fusion 6HD, ER-1 MKII
Band: 23, A23P, Piss Ant
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Contact:

Post by 23 » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:58 pm

JSRockit wrote: I get what you are saying, I mean I don't really own anything redundant either...but I understand why someone would own most Moogs...or a few different 303 clones.
HA HA HA, I know I'm on a slippery slope with this one ;)
but I don't even get the multiple 303 clones really.

Like I said, though many would argue that I own multiple 303 clones, I'd venture off and say that I only own one 303 and then 4 other synths that are well endowed to do 303 like things but that are anything but 303s.
The 777 architecture is vastly different for example. Dual Oscs, Two Sub Oscs, Continously variable waveshaps, 42db filter along with the 18db filter, high pass filter, FM synthesis capability, etc.
Similarly, the 09 ends up with well over a hundred different tonal sources, some FM capability (though more minor the 777), two ADSR envelopes (filter and amp), LFO (pitch, filter, amp), 2 selectable multimode filters and a 3rd filter that seems to be of the 18db variety, etc.

In essence, line all three synths up and take away their sequencer (the thing they most have in common), and it becomes pretty readily apparent that the three things are pretty different. The 303 lacks all the mentioned features of the 777 and 09 (and more), the 777 doesn't have a clue what an ADSR envelope is (let alone two), or what a multi-mode filter is, and the 09 really has not the faintest clue what a 42db filter is, flexible FM synthesis capability is, etc.

Now venturing off and getting something like an X0X Box, Acid Lab, Revolution, Tee Bee, etc., all of that becomes nonsense from my stand point as when it comes to the question of "O.K., what are these bringing to the table?"
Well, I wouldn't be able to say much outside of renaming capabilities I already have. Thus my interest in these things is nonexistant outside of just giving them a nod in regards to existing.
Same type of thinking I apply to Moogs, or any kind of synth really.

In essence, if person A owned a Juno 106, a Poy 6, a Juno 60, and lets just say a Prophet 5 for good measure.
And then we had person B whom owned only a a Matrix 12 or A6 (not both, just one or the other).

I'd say Person B was the smarter of the 2. Though he'd have much less gear, the biggest draw back he'd have was that he would have lost 7 to 11 voices of polyphony (that's all the poly of person A combined). He would however have gained +8 to +11 in multi-timbrality. Added on to his modulation routing capabilities. Added on to his selectable filter types. And added on numerous other things while maintaining pretty much every single feature person A had with all of his combined synths. Thus, unless it was a matter of sheer polyphony being needed OR additional keyboard controllers, or just sheer collecting, Person A had little reason to bypass Person B's much simpler and more capable setup.

nlapenn
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:51 pm

Post by nlapenn » Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:43 pm

As I think about this, it went from something that was extremely simple in my head to something that was much more complex. Now, I feel like its something that changes depending on 2 different viewpoints"

First, I play both guitars and synths. If I look at the guitars I've owned and look at the basic setup a lot of guitar players use: Guitar -> Amp a different guitar can mean a completely different sound. Certain brands and types of guitars have signature sounds that lend themselves very well (and possibly even help create) different genres. Unlike most synths, there isn't really much you can do to make the guitar sound like a different type. Because, of this, at first I thought the analogy was kind of weird. Thats when I arrived at my first viewpoint: Certain synths with similar capabilities are sought after for their presets. Sure, Synth A might have the architecture to be able to create the sound of a popular preset on Synth B, but it almost never sounds exactly the same. This also relates to the 303 and clones thing. All the 303 clones are great alternatives for people who either can't afford, or don't believe the price is justified for a real 303, but when you A/B them, none of them really sound super close to a 303 (at least to my ears).

For synths, I don't feel like I really fit in to that first category very well. I buy synths to make my own sounds and when I want a popular preset sound, I'm not picky enough nor do I usually want that exact sound. Because of this, I tend to agree with most of what you said. I like having a few synths with different architectures and types of synthesis that I know really well. Of the synths and softsynths I own, there are only a few I've worked with enough to own inside and out. I can boot them up and get the sound I hear in my head to come out of the synth pretty quickly. The synths I don't know as well (simply from an efficiency of programming standpoint) take me a lot more work to even get in the ballpark. If I'm not careful in choosing a synth that can add a lot it might actually have a negative effect on my ability to produce musically.

I've know that a lot of people like synths for the small changes in character between them. I, personally, feel that sometimes people jump the gun in hearing those differences without a lot of hands on experience. I see a lot of posts in synth forums where somebody will post an example of sounds they made on Synth A, and person with Synth B (which is perfectly capable of emulating the sounds of Synth A) will jump the gun and say "I HAVE to get Synth A!!!" Is this justified? I honestly don't know. When I hear a sound I really lke on another synth, the first thing I do is try to copy it on one I own. If I can't come close enough, maybe, just maybe that synth is worth looking in to!

-Nlapenn

User avatar
neandrewthal
Active Member
Active Member
Posts: 472
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:43 am
Location: Ontari-ari-o

Post by neandrewthal » Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:19 pm

23 wrote: I'd say Person B was the smarter of the 2. Though he'd have much less gear, the biggest draw back he'd have was that he would have lost 7 to 11 voices of polyphony (that's all the poly of person A combined). He would however have gained +8 to +11 in multi-timbrality. Added on to his modulation routing capabilities. Added on to his selectable filter types. And added on numerous other things while maintaining pretty much every single feature person A had with all of his combined synths. Thus, unless it was a matter of sheer polyphony being needed OR additional keyboard controllers, or just sheer collecting, Person A had little reason to bypass Person B's much simpler and more capable setup.
I totally disagree. I would rather have several simpler synths that each have their own character and slightly different set of features than one supersynth. What if the sound or aesthetic of said supersynth just doesn't do it for you? And by aesthetic I don't mean just looks but the interface as well and the overall experience. Synths or not just tools, they are also toys, and some people would have more fun with synths that have individual and pleasing characters and an interface they find inspiring than a fancy new monster synth full of modulation matrices. Your synth philosophy leaves no room for the flat-out charm that some synths posess. It seems some people here think that when a person buys a synth they are accepting a solemn responsibility to make the best music possible with this synth in the most no-nonsense and effecient way to be shared with the world, and if you don't then you don't deserve the synth on which you spent your hard-earned money. Can't somebody want synths just because they enjoy them? It's not all about workflow.

Post Reply