Your lifelong equipment list

[griffin avid]

Bookmarked for purchase. Thanks.

[madtheory]

Also bookmarked, thanks

Should I bite?

No! It's a trap!!

Also that...KYNE (probably got the name wrong). That (little complicated programming box) was used in sound design and only after seeing the audio special behind-the-scenes of Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back

Well the main thing there is Ben Burtt! But the box is called the Kyma Capybara, made by Symbolic Sound. It's still awesome. And expensive.

[Zamise]

I only included my Pro-ish synth gear, no particular order:

Yamaha RS7000 x2
Yamaha CS1X (gave away)
Roland MC505 (Sold and missed)
Radikal Tech. Spectralis (sold to group member)
Yamaha AN1X
Yamaha CS-15
Roland JP-8080 (Sold)
Yamaha CS2X
Yamaha DX7s (Sold)
Alesis Micron (being borrowed)
Yamaha QY70
Roland tb-303
Korg Electribe ESX1(being borrowed)
ARP Odyssey MkII
Formanta Maestro
Oberheim OB-SX
Yamaha RX5 (Sold)
Yamaha CX5M
Korg Triton (sold)
Dave Smith Mopho Keys (Sold)
Quasimidi Sirius
Yamaha CS6X
Yamaha FS1R
Arturia MiniBrute
Yamaha AN200
Yamaha DX200
Korg MS2000R

[Automatic Gainsay]

Haken:
Continuum

You had a Continuum? What did you think of it?

Have. It's part of the permanent collection.

I am overwhelmed by its expressiveness, and realize that in the last 16 years, I've been so excited about analog tone that I forgot that I really enjoy expressing myself physically through music. It is one of the instruments that I play nearly every single day.

The synthesizer is the most powerful I have ever experienced in a hardware device. Ed Eagan's Eagan Matrix is ASTOUNDING. I have attended classes on it by Ed himself, and I have to admit... it exceeds me. I don't even entirely get it. But it is capable, especially through the Continuum interface, of making electronically-generated instruments that sound and play like acoustic instruments. And that's something I want for some of my music.

I adore it and treasure it.

[Automatic Gainsay]

Damnnit man. What do you mean?

If you listen to recordings of Moog modulars, ARPS, and other instruments from 1971 or so, there is a character that they possess. This character comes about from a number of design and component choices, a lot of electronic limitations, and the ears of the engineers who designed them. These instruments have a certain tone.

In examining the cause of the difference between the early analog instruments and the later analog instruments of the 70s, it becomes apparent that the earlier synths were noisy, unstable, and varied greatly in a variety of ways compared to the "better-designed" synths of the later 70s. But the later synths lacked a tonal character that was pleasing to the ear.

There is that factor, and then there was the factor that earlier synths had open possibilities for routing and sound design, allowing you to make a wide variety of complex sounds. As synthesizers became popular for contemporary popular musicians, they became simpler, tone-based, and limited to "standard functions," which had an impact on the sorts of sounds they made.

In the 90s, some of us grew bored with the stale, static emulative sounds of powerful digital synthesizers, and craved the tone and sounds from our youth. The analog craze started then, and we started buying up old analog synths from the past... the older, the better... because the older ones had "that sound." The newer, cheaper, more plentiful analog synths from the late 70s and early 80s were okay, but they didn't have that tone, the functionality, etc. that were really fun and nostalgic. They were more like the modern synths of the time.

As the analog craze progressed into the aughts, scarcity started to play a role, and people who hadn't grown up with analog synths got into buying them. These people were interested in anything that was analog, including stuff that was popular in the 80s. Suddenly, there was a new glut because they started buying the analog synths that had been less popular with the first wave of analog buyers. These synths were cool, but tended to lack the character of the older synths. They were smoother, quieter, more stable, and less inclined to the sorts of variation and distortion that made analog sound really pretty. But they were still cool.

Bob Moog and Dave Smith started making analog synths again, but both of them were subject to the stability of pitch requirements of people making popular electronic music. Due to the requirements of the time, their synths had to be really pitch-stable, as well as feature modern features. This meant that their synthesizers, while great, didn't sound like the really vintage analogs.

And then, in the 10s, when other companies jumped on the bandwagon, they followed suit... making very pitch-stable devices with really stable and perfect waveforms, low noise, no distortion, etc. The result is analog sound, but it becomes challenging to discern it from the finally-really-great sounds made by digital synths and software. Analog function is REALLY easy to emulate digitally, but analog tone was not.

So, the result was that the analog synths sound great but lack the one of really vintage analog synths, and digital synths have introduced enough variation to sound effectively like analog... but still not VINTAGE analog. So, people became confused about what was actually THE POINT of pursuing analog.

Today's consumers grew up at a time where all they knew was that analog was in some way desirable. So, that notion, and the fun of good knob-per-function interfaces, is somewhat attractive to them. But at the same time, they require perfection in pitch, no noise at all ever, digital LFO shapes for sync, etc., digital integration for DAWs, and a host of other functions and applications that are more suited to modern music than anything remotely connected with that which made analog desirable in the first place.

And many would say, "so what?" And fair enough. But that's why I say analog really isn't that analog anymore.

[griffin avid]

I knew you were going to hurt my feelins sooner or later.

I can't express the difference without using vague terms like 'behaves'.
And I find that sound manipulation is different than sound generation.
And it's when you want to get beneath the surface that things get different.

I'm going to read that a few more times.

[Automatic Gainsay]

I knew you were going to hurt my feelins sooner or later.

I didn't mean to hurt your feelings, and I don't know how I did!

[antilles]

Here's my lifelong list, excluding everything but programmable synths.

Roland Jupiter 4
Roland Juno 60
Roland MKS-50, with PG-300
Roland JX-8P
Roland JX-3P with PG-200
Roland Paraphonic RS-505
Roland JD-800
Roland JD-990
Roland JV-1080
Roland SH-09
Roland VK-09
Roland TR-8

Yamaha CS-30
Yamaha TX-802
Yamaha TX-81Z
Yamaha SY-1
Yamaha QY-80
Yamaha Reface CP

Korg M1
Korg MS-20
Korg 707
Korg Triton
Korg MicroKorg

Novation Bass Station Rack
Novation Drum Station

Casio CZ-101
Casio VL-1

Sequential Circuits Pro One

Access Virus C

Oberheim Matrix 6R

Hohner String Melody II

[MOS-FET]

My list including synths/keyboards and drum machines.

Roland Juno 60 x2
Roland Juno 106, JX8P, MKS-70, D20, U-110, U-20, RD-600, Integra 7, JD-800, JD-990, TR-707, JP-8000, TR-8
Korg R3, Poly-61, M-50 (88), EX-8000, CX-3, M1 x2, T3, Triton Pro X, Minilogue
Yamaha CS-6X, Motif ES-6, DX-11, DX-7iiFD w E!
Oberheim OB-Xa (8 voice)
Modal Electronics 002
John Bowen Solaris
Alesis Andromeda, QS-7
Crumar Bit One
Fender Rhodes 73, Chroma Polaris x2
Moog Opus-3, Sub 37 tribute
Novation KS-5
Akai S300XL
Ensoniq TS-10, EPS-16+
Casio CZ-3000, FZ-1
Arturia MiniBrute SE red
Quasimidi Sirius
Mutable Instruments Modular system
DSI Prophet 08

[griffin avid]

Modal Electronics 002
John Bowen Solaris

Those two alone make me want to see a picture of your studio and see how you have that all set up.
What kind of workspace does that illicit and um- what the h**l do you make?

Oh, I gotta hear something......

[pflosi]

There is that factor, and then there was the factor that earlier synths had open possibilities for routing and sound design, allowing you to make a wide variety of complex sounds. As synthesizers became popular for contemporary popular musicians, they became simpler, tone-based, and limited to "standard functions," which had an impact on the sorts of sounds they made.

Modern modular anyone? Endless possibilities for routing and sound design

AG, I'd love to hear your take on ultra-precise analog like Cwejman. Did you ever have your hands on a good selection of his modules or a S1? They are precise and do exactly what they say. For some people, that means "sterile". But it's all in the patching - the way they react to (audiorate) modulation is unparalleled.

[MOS-FET]

Modal Electronics 002
John Bowen Solaris

Those two alone make me want to see a picture of your studio and see how you have that all set up.
What kind of workspace does that illicit and um- what the h**l do you make?

Oh, I gotta hear something......

LOL. Though the Modal and the Solaris cost me a large chuck of change, I thought the Andromeda was the better sounding instrument and the better buy.

[MOS-FET]

Modal Electronics 002
John Bowen Solaris

Those two alone make me want to see a picture of your studio and see how you have that all set up.
What kind of workspace does that illicit and um- what the h**l do you make?

Oh, I gotta hear something......

My temporary studio (before I added my Andromeda) with my Solaris and Modal 002, as well some others. With many more in storage due to space constraints.

[griffin avid]

Very wicked. What do you do for drums or percussive elements?

[MOS-FET]

Very wicked. What do you do for drums or percussive elements?

Was using a TR-707 and the drums on my M50. Just picked up a fully expanded TR-8. That will be my primary drum machine use moving forward. But thinking about adding the "Volca 6 pack" to the arsenal.