bx_oberhausen from Plugin Alliance has landed

[c1c2]

Just found out, that the velocity response is related to waveform selection.
If you chose anything else than 100% pulse or saw waveform makes a difference. Hm.
A bug? Intended?

[Ploki]

what an exotic bug, eh bones.

[LoveEnigma18]

Just found out, that the velocity response is related to waveform selection.
If you chose anything else than 100% pulse or saw waveform makes a difference. Hm.
A bug? Intended?

Yeah, you are right. But it still seems to be a bug, because there is still no velocity response as such even after doing that. So it is most likely a bug unless the hardware behaved that way.

[e-crooner]

The thing is, they wouldn't still have one because they'd have traded it in decades ago for a DX-7 or a D-50 or an M1.

All three of them have a very different sound character compared to analog synths. Sure, I can replace a bass with a bass, and a pad with a pad, etc. Live that's fine, good enough for groupies yelling along, but still, audiophiles concentrate on every sound and they hear the difference immediately.

[Funkybot's Evil Twin]

You know...sometimes you replace gear cause you're touring and it's more convenient, not because it sounds better. Or because something is new, and "better" then 20 years later you think, "oh shit, what was I thinking?"

[revvy]

I must have lived in a parallel universe too. First time I tried a DX7 in a shop I thought 'where are the f**king knobs and who needs piano sounds?'

[BONES]

If that's true, you'd have been the only musician in the world who thought like that. After all, the DX-7 was far and away the biggest selling synth of the 80s, only surpassed since by other digital synths.

All three of them have a very different sound character compared to analog synths.

You really don't get it, do you? Nobody gave a shit about that at the time. These things were really expensive, half a year's before tax wages for most people, so you really couldn't afford to think about anything as esoteric as character. I traded the character of my Mono/Poly for the shittiest sounding digital synth imaginable because it gave me polyphony, multi-timbrality and patch memory. You bought a Jupiter 8 because it was a grand or more cheaper than a Prophet V or an OB-Xa and it was much easier to get them fixed here in Australia, too, not because you thought it had a more suitable character.

When digital synths came along, offering greater stability and a far broader sonic palette for less money, everyone jumped at the chance to own one. It's only decades after the fact that people started to think of old, useless analogue synths as anything special or different. At the time people had other priorities.

Sure, I can replace a bass with a bass, and a pad with a pad, etc. Live that's fine, good enough for groupies yelling along, but still, audiophiles concentrate on every sound and they hear the difference immediately.

So what? Why would anyone care? A good song will sound good if you play it with a kazoo. If the only thing it has going for it are the instrument patches, it's not going to be much of a song, is it?

This is something that has been made glaringly obvious to me during the process of creating almost 40 80s covers over the last few months. As you may or may not know, I don't listen to the original before I load up a MIDI file and start work on a song. It's only once I am happy with my version that I go and listen to the original to compare. And do you know what I discover, time after time (which is not one of the songs I've covered, btw)? That my version sounds heaps better than the original. Every time, without exception. That's not me big-noting my abilities, it's down to the fact that I am doing it in 2020, with all the latest technology at my fingertips, so it's trivial for me to do a better job than the original artists and their producers. e.g. I spent days agonising over the right bassline patch for Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This). I tired a dozen instruments and I didn't get anything that I thought was close to the original. In desperation I listened to the original album version, only to discover that far from doing terrible, it was actually way better than the original. In my head it was this amazing half cello, half synth sound but the reality is that it's kind of lame and relies on the mix to carry it.

[revvy]

I learned keys on a home organ. Then synths came and blew my mind. Then DX7 came along and reminded me of organs again. No thanks.

If anything, nostalgia means I think more kindly of the DX than should.

[BONES]

Really? You couldn't get past the cheesy presets? More fool you, I got some awesome sounds out of my DX-9. The process was a bit random but when it worked, it was phenomenal.

[revvy]

Look as well. Looked like a dad synth to me.

[e-crooner]

If that's true, you'd have been the only musician in the world who thought like that. After all, the DX-7 was far and away the biggest selling synth of the 80s, only surpassed since by other digital synths.

All three of them have a very different sound character compared to analog synths.

You really don't get it, do you? Nobody gave a shit about that at the time. These things were really expensive, half a year's before tax wages for most people, so you really couldn't afford to think about anything as esoteric as character. I traded the character of my Mono/Poly for the shittiest sounding digital synth imaginable because it gave me polyphony, multi-timbrality and patch memory. You bought a Jupiter 8 because it was a grand or more cheaper than a Prophet V or an OB-Xa and it was much easier to get them fixed here in Australia, too, not because you thought it had a more suitable character.

When digital synths came along, offering greater stability and a far broader sonic palette for less money, everyone jumped at the chance to own one. It's only decades after the fact that people started to think of old, useless analogue synths as anything special or different. At the time people had other priorities.

Sure, I can replace a bass with a bass, and a pad with a pad, etc. Live that's fine, good enough for groupies yelling along, but still, audiophiles concentrate on every sound and they hear the difference immediately.

So what? Why would anyone care? A good song will sound good if you play it with a kazoo. If the only thing it has going for it are the instrument patches, it's not going to be much of a song, is it?

This is something that has been made glaringly obvious to me during the process of creating almost 40 80s covers over the last few months. As you may or may not know, I don't listen to the original before I load up a MIDI file and start work on a song. It's only once I am happy with my version that I go and listen to the original to compare. And do you know what I discover, time after time (which is not one of the songs I've covered, btw)? That my version sounds heaps better than the original. Every time, without exception. That's not me big-noting my abilities, it's down to the fact that I am doing it in 2020, with all the latest technology at my fingertips, so it's trivial for me to do a better job than the original artists and their producers. e.g. I spent days agonising over the right bassline patch for Sweet Dreams (Are Made of This). I tired a dozen instruments and I didn't get anything that I thought was close to the original. In desperation I listened to the original album version, only to discover that far from doing terrible, it was actually way better than the original. In my head it was this amazing half cello, half synth sound but the reality is that it's kind of lame and relies on the mix to carry it.

I am talking about today. Today we do pay attention to the sound of synths, not least because in hindsight they are linked to certain eras. In the 80s there was no 80s nostalgia, obviously, but today there is.
Again, with your music it doesn't matter what synth you use. But there are other genres where it matters a lot.

Back in the 80s 'made in Japan' meant lower price, but not lower quality. In fact, I would prefer a Jupiter 8 to a Prophet 5, regardless of the price.

Nor does the fact that many people bought a digital synth like the DX7 or one of those sample-based ones (M1 etc.) mean that they no longer used their analog ones. An M1 or DX7 just doesn't produce all the sounds people might need, so they complement each other nicely.

I don't agree. While a good song is a good song, the way it sounds is also important. A bad production can destroy even a good song.

When you think that your cover versions sound better than the originals, it is your opinion. But frankly, I doubt it. Post your versions so we can compare, else it is just your word, which means nothing to me. I don't think I have ever heard a cover version that was better than the original. Not to mention that it lacks the whole non-musical context of the time the original was recorded.

There is no real bass line in Sweet Dreams in my view.

[BONES]

I am talking about today. Today we do pay attention to the sound of synths, not least because in hindsight they are linked to certain eras. In the 80s there was no 80s nostalgia, obviously, but today there is.

That's right, if artists in the 80s had thought the way you do, they'd have been trying to make music that sounded exactly like Glen Miller. But they didn't because they weren't navel-gazing losers, they were pushing boundaries and creating something new and fresh.

Again, with your music it doesn't matter what synth you use.

It matters to me. A lot.

But there are other genres where it matters a lot.

Not really, it's just that the people who work within those genres don't know their craft well enough to be able to use other synths to do the same job. They think that if their favourite artist used "x" synth, then that's what they have to use which, most of the time, is simply rubbish.

Back in the 80s 'made in Japan' meant lower price, but not lower quality. In fact, I would prefer a Jupiter 8 to a Prophet 5, regardless of the price.

Easy to say in 2020 but at the time a Prophet V cost as much as a brand new car (literally).

Nor does the fact that many people bought a digital synth like the DX7 or one of those sample-based ones (M1 etc.) mean that they no longer used their analog ones.

Of course they did, all of them. Try and find a live video from 1988 that shows anyone who could afford better using an analogue synth on stage. It came down to cost - most of us couldn't afford a new synth unless we sold the old one to pay for it. And today they all use softsynths, like this -

An M1 or DX7 just doesn't produce all the sounds people might need, so they complement each other nicely.

Again, that's rubbish. A DX7 can do pretty much anything, imitate pretty much everything. And an M1 had plenty of passable synth sounds.

I don't agree. While a good song is a good song, the way it sounds is also important. A bad production can destroy even a good song.

It's never held Metallica back.

When you think that your cover versions sound better than the originals, it is your opinion.

Of course it's not, it is completely quantifiable. My mixes have far greater clarity, each instrument is far more clearly defined and there is zero noise in the mix (although I've discovered Studio One will put some in if I want to sabotage my work).

But frankly, I doubt it.

You probably won't like them as much, I'd be surprised if you did, but from a technical perspective their production is measurably, quantifably better.

Post your versions so we can compare, else it is just your word, which means nothing to me.

I can do that, what would you like to hear?

I don't think I have ever heard a cover version that was better than the original.

You prefer Gloria Jones' version of Tainted Love to Soft Cell's? Interesting.

Not to mention that it lacks the whole non-musical context of the time the original was recorded.

That's a bit irrelevant these days, given that music hasn't progressed much in 30 years or more, although you do have to cut older songs a lot of slack over their production quality.

There is no real bass line in Sweet Dreams in my view.

Not a "bass line", a bassline, the rhythm that underpins the part, sometimes the whole song.

[AnX]

I prefer Soft Cells to the original (didn't know it was a cover at the time anyway)

[AnX]

There is no real bass line in Sweet Dreams in my view.

oh dear

[Sinisterbr]

Guys, let's get back to the topic, please.