bochelli wrote:As I expected you failed to see the point if korg think this is going to make a real impact in the use of electronics then they are wrong, in a software form I could see a reason for it, young people get easily bored with things today whats new today is history in months in respect of the purpose for such product who exactly is it marketed for ? a studio ? a group? wolfgang flur? gary numan ? or someone who does not know what the h**l to do with it you tell me .
It's obvious who they're selling to, they're selling to kids who would be interested in experimenting with knob-twiddling, patching, and general noise-making but don't have thousands to blow on a real modular or even $500+ for a full-fledged "real" semi-modular like the MS-20 Mini. If it works as advertised, that ~$160 starter kit costs less than a lot of kids get in Christmas presents these days and gets you close to the functionality of an MS-20 Mini with more flexible patching. Granted, the MS-20 Mini has labels and a real keyboard, but it also costs $600. For some kid wanting to experiment with synthesizers, it'd be a perfectly adequate and eminently affordable way to start.
To anyone born long after the age of vacuum tubes and analog mono synths (i.e. the 1970s...so teenagers, 20 and 30-somethings), their interest might be because they have heard (older) people talking about how the old stuff was better and real knobs is better than mousing. But when they get their new retro gear they find out that VCOs drift, tube amps hum and hiss and that at least some of the sounds they are after require modern
gear...bitcrushed wobbles are hard to create on an MG-1, scooped death metal guitar tones can't be made with a Fender Champ, etc.
The real future is probably a fusion of the old and new. Like DSI's half digital/half analog Evolver and Prophet 12, analog monos integrated into DAWs as VSTs, Expert Sleepers software/hardware bypassing MIDI to get high resolution CV control of a modular from inside a DAW and tube guitar amps with onboard DSP effects processing.
[...] Of possible related interest:
go to Klaus Schulze's website
to read some interviews where he keeps getting asked about modern electronic music and he mostly dismisses anyone who is trying to do it like he, TD and Kraftwerk did it back in the day. In one interview he likens it to "Dixieland bands", a phenomenon in post WWII US music where (mostly white) musicians chose to deliberately play in the style of young Louis Armstrong and other earlly jazz artists of the 1920s. It was highly controversial at the time as to whether it was just a poor imitation of what was a living and breathing music in the past. He talks about how the EM of the 70s was of it's time, that time is past and musicians should move on and embrace change rather than imitating music without the context it was made in. Read it for yourself and think about it.
As someone who's in his 20-somethings (not for very long, but still,) my experience has been quite the opposite: the more I move to vintage or retro-vintage gear, the less I find myself desiring the modern stuff I'm leaving behind. Granted, there are exceptions (I still use softsynths for guitar/bass/organ/drums in my compositions because I can't play guitar, bass, or drums and my organ is not MIDIed,) but the more hands-on and direct I get with analog synthesis, the more liberating it is. I can take my MS-20 Mini and just sit down and invent
sounds in a very tactile, intuitive way that I just can't
with software. Real knobs are
better than mousing - I'm not saying this from nostalgia, since I never grew up with this stuff, it's just a simple fact. Virtual analog rarely sounds like the real deal. VCOs drift - so what? That same slight instability is one of the things that gives real analog gear its character, to the extent that VAs and even modern DCO synths have had to deliberately
introduce "slop" they otherwise lack in order to capture some of that sound.
The idea that "the real future" is X, Y, or Z stems from the quite frankly false
notion that "technological progress" is some kind of linear path with a defined end-goal, like those sci-fi stories where aliens are said to be "more evolved" and therefore inherently superior at everything (and biological evolution doesn't actually work that way, either!) "The real future" is whatever we want it to be for whatever reasons we want it to be that; with all due respect to Klaus Schultze, he's full of s**t. People are making music in the old fashion because people like the sound of the music that was made that way. People are coming back to analog synthesis because people like what it has to offer
. It has its own sound because it is its own thing.
Digital synthesizers have their own sound, too, or rather, they did
back when they weren't all trying to be either analog or indistinguishably "lifelike" fancy-schmancy physical-modeling. The DX7 and the D-50 had and have things to offer that their analog competitors didn't, which is why they're still beloved today. Modern digital isn't trying to sound digital, it's trying to sound like every other thing in the world but a digital synthesizer, which is why people are losing interest in it.