AROIOS

Speaking of the Mustang Sally groove, Bruce Springsteen's song makes for a perfect mashup and great fit for the occasion. Merry Christmas, Sally .mp3

Those who wince at Mustang Sally will have a hard time producing anything dope. Both Hall & Oates and Mick Hucknall found gold in that groove.

Study subtractive synthesis and audio mixing for a month, instead of GASing for three decades.

As is that statement itself.

I stand firmly with your teenager self.

Sorry to break it to ya @GRollins, I live on the coast and most Liberals here are just as tone -deaf.

It's definitely Country and I would have disowned my daughter if she puts me through that sh*t for more than 3 days.

Tasty stuff, thanks for sharing it. Some arranger friend of mine used to study Scriabin in the conservatory over 20 years ago and swore by his approach to harmony. I'm gonna look into it and see if I can get some ideas.

I'm sure all your Jazz neural connections are still there in your brain and just waiting to be re-kindled. Classical can offer a lot of inspirations to other genres (e.g. Rachmaninoff and Eric Carmen). Maybe you can push some sonic boundaries with a fusion between Classical and Jazz. That sounds like a lot of fun even just thinking about it.

Anything with the idiotic 4~6 triad chords, except in Hard Rock, but those triads get old quickly even in that.

Just came across this Rhodes sound that's almost the polar opposite of OP's example, with an (arguable over-) emphasis on the bellish sound.

Love the keyboard harmony in this clip, can't wait to hear more of your jazzy works.

A "chorus" literally means copies of a sound that vary in "timing", "pitch", or often, both. "Pitch variation" as a Chorus technique appeared way before the invention of delay lines and LFOs. The 12-string guitar is a perfect example, not to mention the extremely common technique of combining two slightly detuned voices in synthesizers. (The audio example below simply detuned two identical samples and involved no delay-lines/phase-shifting at all. Ask a hundred musicians what effect they hear in it and every single one of them will tell you it's a chorus.) Even with the crude technologies of the 70's, companies like Roland and Eventide were making Chorus effects that altered "pitch" of the delay lines inside. Chorus doesn't require a stable pitch-shift on the delay lines. So we don't really need "heavy DSP power" for it. The early BOSS/Roland choruses were fully analog. It seems you were trying to make a distinction between a "harmonizer" and a "chorus", with the former requiring a stable pitch-shift, hence the "DSP power". That distinction might make more sense when we are using the harmonizer to generate stable parallel lines that "harmonize" the original line, in other words, several semi-tones apart. In the example you raised, the less-than-semi-tone detuning would have functioned literally as a chorus. But hey, call it anything you want. I've heard casual listeners describe it as "sweetener", "widener" or "cheezilizer" 😃. The fun is in the actual sound, labels don't matter nearly as much. Chorus by Detuning .mp3

😃 Chorus isn't "usually" done through phase-shifting, nor is phase-shifting "more common" than detuning. If anything, detuning was used way before phase-shifting for Chorus effects. All you need is to record the same instrument twice ("overdubbing"), or trigger two sound sources with tiny variation in tuning. For instruments with natural "drifts", like guitar or old synths, you can even skip the detuning. And pitch shifting is not hard as you imagined. This is fairly old tech that existed even in the 70's.

A few more usual suspects:

No need to split hair there, detuning is as common as phase shifting in Chorus designs.

The two albums "Jarreau" and "Breakin' Away" were full of beautiful Rhodes sounds. David Foster and Jeremy Lubbock really made it sing.

Playing, Yes. Sound, Hell no. The Scarbee Rhodes sounded warmer and fuller right out of the gate. In comparison, Stevie's original recording was thin and shrill. That sound might have worked well in the mix. In isolation, I'll choose the Scarbee sound every time.

Yup, in terms of tasteful application in actual music production. The analog resurgence and the resultant sales numbers are mostly just a fad sucking talent-less nerds into making fart sounds.

Nice studio and sweet sound you got @The Real MC I just happened to also be programming a layered AP last week and got a nice 80's/90's ballad sound. I'm a sucker for these type of sound and can never seem to get enough variations of them. 😆 AP_EP.mp3

Absolutely. Subtractive analog peaked in the early 80's, romplers peaked in the mid 90's. VA peaked in the early 2000s. Most stuff after the mid 2000s are just rehash of old sounds. It's been years since I heard any patches that made me "wow" the same way I felt in the 80's~90's. That's why I've developed a habit of creating my own 80's/90's patches in recent years. People often don't realize how powerful some old machines like the JV-1080 still are after 30 years. The JVs' only bottle neck is (was) their inability to replace Rom contents with your own samples. But now with re-programmable 3rd party SR-JV cards, you can inject a ton of new life into it.

😃 It was a silly joke. I don't know the first thing about Beethoven's approaches or intents, nor had I ever digged his music. You can safely ignore anything I say about him.

That's more of a philosophical statement. Kinda like those audiophile urban myths claiming digital can never "fully" replicate analog sound. The point of FT in audio engineering is to emulate ANY waveform. While Square and Saw require infinite series of Sine waves in FT in theory, most "simulations" are more than good enough for our biology. Audio in the real world pretty much never drops from full blast to 0 "instantaneously", nor does the processing in our ears and brains. Not sure I understood what you meant. Were you referring to its wave length?