Keyboards: Love 'em and leave 'em

[Con Brio]

In my search for a workstation, some people have recommended discontinued gear so I've searched around. It's rather surprising to find keyboard ads with words like "only 6 months old," or "still in the box."

 

Do people trade up (or out) that often?

 

[MikeT156]

Yep. Especially with workstations. The user interface is the key. Workstations that are NOT intuitive (like a Motif ES) can frustrate a new user that is ready to make music and not ready to deal with how to use the instrument. There are other devices that take time to make the best use of. I bought a Digitech Vocalist off Ebay for 110 bucks a few years ago, in just about MINT condition. I already owned the model I bought, so I knew how to operate it. I bought it as a spare. It was obvious when I took it out of the box that the person that owned it hardly used it. It appeared that a child was playing around with it and re-naming some of the "styles" (e.g. harmony intervals) by pressing down on the alpha display. None of the programs were changed (I've edited quite afew on my original and put them in order so I can select them quickly in a live show).

 

Now, it may be that some people are BSin' you about the actual condition, so I would ask for email photos of the actual unit, from prints that have a date on it, just to be safe. A lot of scammers copy photos from a website and post them. Many of them don't own anything but a good line of bull.

 

Happy Hunting.

 

Mike T.

[ProfD]

In addition to MikeT's assessment, newer gear ends up on the used market quickly as a result of lost interest and/or hard times economically too.

[Con Brio]

How long do most musicians hang onto a keyboard (on average, if there are such statistics)?

 

 

[MikeT156]

Con brio:

 

That really depends on the individual musicians. There are players on this site that buy just about everything, some that are selective and are more conservative with their purchases, and players like me that typically tries to squeeze every last ounce of use out of any KB I buy. I will replace a KB when newer technology forces me too. Example, an Ensoniq TS10 I had about 12 years as my workstation. I listened to MP3 demos of new boards, like the Motif ES, Roland Fantom, what Kort Triton series, and it was obvious that I was playing an out-of-date KB. Conversely, I still have most of my ancient analog synths, and they are work fine and still sound like.....analog synths.

 

Sometimes you can stretch the use of a workstation up to 8 years. And if you have lots of money to burn, and/or a large credit card line, and no wifey telling you not to buy anything or else, you might indulge yourself to every new model that comes out. I only know of one or two players on this site that do that, but I WON'T mention their names!

 

Mike T.

[Tonysounds]

Ive had gear that last less than the return policy and went back; Ive had other gear that got spun within two years. Ive been using Roland M120 line mixers since 1990; Roland A90 since 1992 (or whatever year they came out), and my Roland JD990 since 1995. My Electro Ive had almost 7 years. How long I keep it really depends on how long it is useful to me. Most of the Korg gear I owned would get spun as they were just flavor of the month sounds for me (I stress for ME; YMMV). But a couple trusty pieces are things I go to a lot, or at least remain viable for me.

[MikeT156]

That's a good point Tony. Sound equipment can last for decades and still be very usable and sound great. As long as you get the stuff cleaned and don't drop it, a mixer can last for 30 years! I know, I'm still using a 8 channel Studio Master Mixer I bought in the late seventies! It still does what I need it to do. Plenty of overhead room and......it was paid for long ago!

 

Mike T.

[Blue JC]

I typically keep keyboards 7 to 8 years. 1,000 to 1,200 gigs.

 

When they start breaking down, I keep repairing them until the repair estimate exceeds the current street value of the keyboard. The action is usually shot at that point anyway so I know when it's time to retire a keyboard.

 

Everyone is different and has different musical requirements. This works for me.

[Con Brio]

I typically keep keyboards 7 to 8 years.

 

That makes more sense. Buying the "newest and latest" technology would bankrupt many of us.

[mate stubb]

The single piece of gear I have owned the longest is a Crown DC300 amp that I bought USED in 1972. It has been in continuous use ever since either on stage or driving my JBL 4311 monitors (purchased in 1978).

 

Then of course I have two Hammonds, one built in 1956 and the other in 1958.

[JeffLearman]

I kept my CP70 for 20 years. Had my MR76 for 11 now, though it's getting a bit long in the tooth -- a couple damaged keys I don't care for. Mixers, yep, have 27- and 22-yr olds, along with a 3-yr-old. (Plus a couple 30-yr-olds I have when I need 'em. Thank goodness for contact cleaner!)

 

Except for my 1982 Martin, all my guitars date back to the 60's -- well, except for the archtop which has face and back made in 60's but was built in '97.

 

Otherwise, I generally didn't keep a synth more than a handful of years. Things were changing too fast. I'm amazed that my '97 MR76 still sounds decent compared to modern ROMplers, but it was an exception for that time.

 

[Al Coda]

I typically keep keyboards 7 to 8 years.

 

That makes more sense. Buying the "newest and latest" technology would bankrupt many of us.

 

Well,- I´ve read all the posts in this thread.

It depends on the musician ...

It depends on the gear already available

It depends on the service-situation you´re in ...

It depends on what your gear, you already have, can do or not,- musically,- not technically ...

 

There are always new machines being released,- let´s see what these really do .

 

Most of this machines do the same older ones did already decades before.

Why shall I buy virtual analog synths if I have analog synths?

This is just an example ... :-)

 

Well, I have a lot of gear really. My experience is, if you buy new gear for any amount of money,- today, you will lose a lot of money within 3-5 years,- because it´s digital. It´s the same w/ computer equipment in general!

 

All I can say is,- I sold a lot of items from the past,and today, I regret this sometimes because my experience w/ my gear from the past is (I have a lot left over!),- it works since 20-30 years without too much service or total failure.

 

Synthesizers:

Subtractive synthesis exists since 3 or more decades,- Moog, Oberheim, Sequential Circuits,- that´s the dream of most keyboardists today.

It is not a dream if you have it and have the chance to get it serviced. (It´s not sooooo difficult to get it serviced b.t.w.)

 

You don´t get this sonic quality really by a VA. Period.

 

ROMplers:

 

They all do the same more or less,- some have better filters or faster envelopes,- or better sampling sets,- anyway...

 

I have some ROMplers from the past and they do their work as they did yesterday,- musically.

There might be better DA converters, better sampling sets or they might be smaller physically,- who cares?

 

If you find a track in your song usable w/ only one of the sounds of THAT ROMpler and the song becomes popular and makes money,- THAT´S the sound !!!

 

The Pet Shop Boys did complete albums w/ a Roland U-220 and Quincy Jones used a Korg M1 for "New Kids on the Block",- so what?

 

Samplers:

 

Wow, there happened so much if you use computers,- I mean: "So much" regarding the amount of RAM ... :-)

 

Did you ever seen a workstation which offers more a AKAI S-1100 could do in respect of sampling,- except the amount of RAM ??? No!

Ooops, sorry, a EMU E4 Ultra would kill the S-1100 easily by features,- no question ...

 

But does Kontakt, EXS 24 or any software sampler available?

No!

All is full of bugs, does not import samples as advertised, you wait for updates years and so on... is that reliability ?

O.k., there are some more features you can use depending on the power of your computer. But who want to buy new computers every year and is this really neccessary for your musical expressivity?

 

Do we really need to exchange reliability to promised flexibility which doesn´t exist in the moment you buy any gear,- just only exist by a promise of upcoming updates?

 

These are only a few examples, I could tell more but it would fill pages ...

 

All in all,- new and innovative keyboards are rare if you look at any new keyboards carefully.

 

I myself hate buying new gear unless I´m sure it´s neccessary,- or better,- it will replace some of my old gear that way the old gear works musically.

 

Don´t forget "musically" also means some unperfection, not "binary" perfection.

 

Who cares if a modern workstation delivers all imaginable sounds in a quality, each sound covers the complete frequency spectrum w/ sizzeling highs and extended lows and full dynamics.

Only techs think that way IMO.

 

Is a Hammond going beyond 8 KHz ?

What´s the frequency range of our beloved (Fender)Rhodes pianos or the Wurlys?

Are the most beloved creamy sound of Moogs and Arps going up to more 800 or 1.000 Hz ??? No !

Do you remeber, if you did pads w/ a Memorymoog, you wished it has a HP-filer because the pads were too fat in a mix?

Wasn´t a Roland Jupiter 8 or a MKS80 an 70 the right ones for pads because they had a HP-filter?

Is there any VA existing which replaces a Oberheim Matrix12 or a Xpander ??? No !

 

I´m happy to be an owner of a Minimoog D, a Roland MKS80 and 70 as also a Oberheim Xpander and a Matrix 1000 up today,- even I own a lot of softsynths also!

 

Investing in software was the worst investment in my life since I started to buy gear,- that´s the truth! I have a direct comparison.

There are many advantages w/ software and the biggest advantage is total recall.

The question is,- do we need it really.

The magic of performing live is what happens in a moment,- that´s music to me,- real arts.

IMO, the basic idea of recording music was, to capture this moment.

This is lost IMO.

All the new gears target is to make everything recallable, storeable, controlable, usefull for everyone w/ a more or less easier to use user interface. There´s nothing new in creating timbres.

 

Means: All users do the same w/ the same gear and everything is exchangeable,- the actors too ...

 

If I´m listening to music today (if I do it) I´m relatively fast bored.

 

Maybe we should think about what´s more imporatant:

 

The gear or the human which uses the gear ?

 

A.C.

 

 

 

[RABid]

... you might indulge yourself to every new model that comes out. I only know of one or two players on this site that do that, but I WON'T mention their names!

 

Mike T.

 

You better not.

 

I've noticed that there seems to be a window of opportunity when trading gear. I considered trading my Fantom X for a Fantom G becaue I like the screen and the extra effects channels. I did not trade because there are a few thngs about the G that I did not like as well as my Fantom X. On the other side I have not traded my old Fantom 76 because to me it is worth more as a controller than the going rate for a workstation that old. Thus, the window of opportunity has passed for that unit. I do need to dump a few keyboards though and a Motif ES6 and Korg Extreme 7 are prime trade bait.

[MusicWorkz]

As it has worked out, I've upgraded every five years or so one way or the other, with my most recent upgrade being only 3 or so from the Motif Classic to the XS. When it first came out, I didn't feel the ES was a big enough jump for what I do musically so I skipped that consideration initially. How I got to the XS though was a result of my search for a used ES.

 

But why did I upgrade? I wanted to both keep current as a gigging musician so I timed it at a point where I could get the most bang for the buck. If you time your purchase right and not be an early adopter, you can find great deals on CURRENT workstations without breaking the bank.

 

Case in point, everyone is dumping the Fantom X's so they can sell thru the Fantom G's. If you were buying today, budget no option, the Fantom X is still a much better value than the G could ever be becasue IMO, it is over priced for what it offers. The market is very much in your favor with Roland stuff right now.

 

I faced a similar situation on the flip side with the Motif. I was actually looking for a used ES7, but by the time I was ready to buy, the ES was sill pricey on the secondary market, but the XS7 had dropped just enough to be in reach (only by a few extra gigs).

[MikeT156]

Al Coda:

 

One other use of a VA you may want to recognize. Its replacable. I bought an Alesis ION to use for my live shows. That keeps my vintage analogs safely at home to be enjoyed AND to A/B patches I create/edit on the Ion to the genuine artical.

 

Quote by Musicworkz:

 

"I didn't feel the ES was a big enough jump for what I do musically so I skipped that consideration initially."

 

Same thing applies from an ES to an XS, at least for me. Yamaha made some nice improvements over the ES, like the acoustic piano having half-pedaling capability. It is a different piano sample than the ES, and there is a nice color screen. But still a 16 track recorder and 8 insert effects. Not enough for me to warrant an upgrade, even if I could afford to buy one. Once I've learned a user interface, I can get my work done quicker and make music. Re-learning what I can do already on the ES is not the best use of my time. As it is I don't spend enough time PRACTICING. I spend most of my time creating/editing/mixing sequences.

 

Mike T.

[Blue JC]

I typically keep keyboards 7 to 8 years.

 

That makes more sense. Buying the "newest and latest" technology would bankrupt many of us.

 

Well,- I´ve read all the posts in this thread.

It depends on the musician ...

It depends on the gear already available

It depends on the service-situation you´re in ...

It depends on what your gear, you already have, can do or not,- musically,- not technically ...

 

There are always new machines being released,- let´s see what these really do .

 

As I said, everyone is different and has different musical needs.

 

I don't need thousands of sounds. I need about 20 excellent sounds: piano, rhodes, wurlitzer, clav, hammond, trumpet, flugel, sax, trombone, violin, viola, cello, bass, marimba, vibes, glock, bells and a couple of pads. That's about it.

 

However, some players need the most current sounds to get work with artists that require those sounds.

 

Most of the artists that I work with now are more worried about whether their stage costumes still fit than whether my synth hit on some forgettable dance song is authentic.

[DirtyRubberDuck]

I often gripe to my guitar player as he shows off his 60s Les Paul:

 

Old guitars are classic.

Old keyboards are obsolete.

 

DRD

[retrokeys]

Old keyboards are obsolete unless they are a B3, Rhodes, Wurli, Clavinet, Mini Moog, Mellotron or are, in short, "retrokeys" : )

[Postman]

I try to get as much as possible out of my keyboards for three reasons:

 

1) GAS is really expensive.

2) It takes a lot of time to learn new operating systems.

3) Even yesterday's keyboards sound good enough that the audience doesn't have the ears to tell them apart.

 

 

 

[J. Dan]

I only upgrade for one of 2 reasons:

1) Reliability - if I feel even slightly uncomfortable that I might experience a failure on stage, it's time to replace. I do repairs myself mostly, but I won't take gear past a point where it's very reliable - it's just not worth it.

 

2) New technology that will make my life easier in one of 3 ways:

• Easier Transport, Setup, or Teardown
  
• Quicker to program patches, sequences, etc.
  
• Some new feature that I've REALLY been wanting but didn't have
  

Even when I get new stuff, I usually hang on to the old as a backup, which has come in very handy on occasion.

 

 

 

[ProfD]

In the late 80s/early 90s, I flipped KBs regularly due to ever-changing technology.

 

The longest I've kept the same KB is 7 years. Replaced it with a similar KB, better soundset and more features.

 

It really does depends on musical needs. Performing musicians can get away with using the same KB longer than producers who require the latest sounds.

 

Nowadays, with the old becoming new again, it's harder to keep up. Thanks goodness for a ROMpler and the ability to program and edit.

 

Otherwise, my GAS is satisfied by checking out newer gear and walking away with my wallet intact. Every KB is still just a tool.

[The Real MC]

If I buy anything, I expect to get at least ten years use out of it. That rules out any software music utility that runs on a desktop OS.

 

That philosophy has served me well and has kept me off the upgrade treadmill.

[yorgatron]

Old keyboards are obsolete unless they are a B3, Rhodes, Wurli, Clavinet, Mini Moog, Mellotron or are, in short, "retrokeys" : )

you forgot the RMI 368X,a forgotten classic,much like the Edsel... http://www.happygolarry.com/life/photos/edsel.jpg

[MikeT156]

The Edsel was sure ugly, no wonder it failed.

 

Mike T.

[zahush76]

Synthesizers:

Subtractive synthesis exists since 3 or more decades,- Moog, Oberheim, Sequential Circuits,- that´s the dream of most keyboardists today.

It is not a dream if you have it and have the chance to get it serviced. (It´s not sooooo difficult to get it serviced b.t.w.)

 

You don´t get this sonic quality really by a VA. Period.

 

 

As an owner of two analog keyboards and a former owner of a VA, i can tell you it goes the other way around as well. VA don't get the sonic quality of a real analog. But there's stuff that analog can't do, and will never be able to do.

The term "VA" is misleading. When someone uses the phrase "Virtual Analog", he assume that the main goal of the designer was only to mimic or re-create vintage analog synths of the past, and that all the electronic sounds players crave for are those names you used (Moog, Oberheim, Prophet). I think VA synths are way past that point these days, and that musicians seek for more then just imitating synths from the past. These synths have a few presets that try to sound analog, but the rest of it is something else altogether. The only VA synths i consider as "pure" VA - are the creamware re-creations (minimax, pro-12 etc).

 

It's a little like what the first analog synths were intended for, and what came out of them enetually. Synths were first created, among other reasons - in order to try and mimic acoustic instruments. They tried to re-create strings, brass, etc. After a while, musicians discovered that they're unique on their own, without trying to imitate or re-create anything. And they made use of them in ways that were not intended initially.

 

Same goes for virtual analog. Maybe at the begining they were created as an attempt to mimic analog synths and offering a digital, more stable version. But they ended up with personality of their own. Then can make some zaney sounds that real analog simply can't do.

So if you're looking for a synth in order to use it for cover songs from the 70's - 80's, it's stupid not to go for a real analog. But if you want some more "up to date" sounds, than real analog can't cover it all. You'll need more than a good Moog to create electronic music today. And even if we're not talking about club music - i don't think that nine inch nails (for example) would be what they are if they had only vintage analog synths.

[Al Coda]

 

VA don't get the sonic quality of a real analog. But there's stuff that analog can't do, and will never be able to do.

 

This is why I don´t have not only some analog synths, but also several FMs, ROMplers, samplers and a Wavestation (vector wave sequencing). That´s only the hardware b.t.w. ...

 

 

The term "VA" is misleading. When someone uses the phrase "Virtual Analog", he assume that the main goal of the designer was only to mimic or re-create vintage analog synths of the past, and that all the electronic sounds players crave for are those names you used (Moog, Oberheim, Prophet).

 

Why is the term "VA" misleading, if it translates to "virtual analog" which means nothing else than "it´s a virtual model of an analog synth"?

 

If you look at these synths, it´s obvious, the way of creating a tone by using a oscillator models waveform (which are very often just only the waveforms real analogs delivered,- saw, square/pulse, tri and noise) running into a virtual mixer, in a virtual filter and virtual vca plus modulators like lfo and envelopes,- this is pretty much the same as a real analog synth, but doesn´t come too close to the originals sound (what you confirmed in your 1st line above already).

 

I think VA synths are way past that point these days, and that musicians seek for more then just imitating synths from the past.

 

Are we talkig about hardware VAs here or both,- hardware and VSTis ?

 

If I look at the most popular hardware VAs, let´s say: Nord Lead, Virus and V-Synth,- they all try to mimik analog synths.

There are some additional features like combinig different forms of synthesis ( wavetable in the Virus p.ex.) or (special) FX to tweak sound additionally,- but these features aren´t new at all. It´s only more in one box. The Nord Lead comes w/ a complete soundset of a Prophet 5,- why ??? Rolands VAs tried to replicate their former flagships, Jupiter 8 and 6 ever, but can´t.

 

These synths have a few presets that try to sound analog, but the rest of it is something else altogether. The only VA synths i consider as "pure" VA - are the creamware re-creations (minimax, pro-12 etc).

 

If I layer my older and different tonegenerators (see above)and use their different features, internal FX plus external FX, it´s also "something else together" ... :-)

 

B.t.w.,- the Minimax is a very good emulation of a original.

 

It's a little like what the first analog synths were intended for, and what came out of them enetually. Synths were first created, among other reasons - in order to try and mimic acoustic instruments.

 

No, that´s absolutely wrong. Synths 1st were new to the music industry and the market and the musicians listening habit was addicted to the traditional instruments they knew. The only way to sell synths to musicians in the late 60th was, to create sounds w/ the machine that remind to the sound of instruments these musicans know. That´s why you find these patches in factory patchbooks and later in the memory of the synths.

 

It was the demand of most of the musicians and producers. The developers/manufacturers of synths, they knew very well, their creations cannot sound like accoustic instruments.

 

The 1st intention of producers to use synths was,- saving money.

Why booking a string section if only one musician can create a string section w/ one or more synths.

 

After a while, musicians discovered that they're unique on their own, without trying to imitate or re-create anything. And they made use of them in ways that were not intended initially.

 

After a while ... :-)

I have the impression you forgot the avantgarde musicians who created real electronic music before analog synths came up ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trautonium

Oskar Sala p.ex.

 

Same goes for virtual analog. Maybe at the begining they were created as an attempt to mimic analog synths and offering a digital, more stable version. But they ended up with personality of their own. Then can make some zaney sounds that real analog simply can't do.

 

Synthesizers don´t have any real personality, not the ones from the past and not todays ones. But they become personality if being programmed and/or played by an artist w/ personality.

A synthesizer is a machine which does nothing itself, like a computer b.t.w. ( which runs softsynths). You, w/ your personality, have to discover what you can do w/ a machine that way, it hopefully supports your ideas and helps realizing them, this in a intuitive and possibly fast way, without any extended learning curve and without the neccessity to read manuals thick as telephone books. If the machine dominates you, you lose your abilitys as a musician and/or composer, and you lose a lot of time.

 

With this in the background, we should come back to the theme of the thread. I repeat and harden my conclusions of my former post: There´s no need to buy new gear all the time if older one is available and just to create good sounds as also not by being afraid the old gear will fail or is impossible to service.

 

If new gear, maybe released 6 month ago, appears in the sales of used gear more and more often these days, there must be a reason.

Most of the times the reason is: Sounds and behaves not as advertised and/or expected, this by "not ready", "needs upcoming updates over years", bad OS, non-intuitive user interface, you can use the preprogrammed patches only because you need 3 years to learn to program the machine or worst case scenario: There will be no updates because it´s already discontinued,- he, he, he.

Partially all this rules also for software.

 

So if you're looking for a synth in order to use it for cover songs from the 70's - 80's, it's stupid not to go for a real analog.

 

What? You really would invest a lot of money in retro-gear to play in a cover-band,- just only to have the original instruments available for each song you cover? Really? You´re kidding !

If I´d do cover gigs, I´d come up w/ 2 masterkeybds. and Arturia plus NI Komplete running on a Macbook and a Receptor. That´s good enough for cover music.

 

But if you want some more "up to date" sounds, than real analog can't cover it all. You'll need more than a good Moog to create electronic music today.

 

I don´t create "electronic music",- I play bass, leadlines and solos on my Moog.

 

And even if we're not talking about club music -

 

We aren´t ! We were and are talking about the reliability and overall quality of new gear and why these appears in the sales as "used" so early and if it´s neccessary to buy new gear all the time.

 

i don't think that nine inch nails (for example) would be what they are if they had only vintage analog synths.

 

I don´t know the gear of "Nine Inch Nails" and it doesn´t interest me b.t.w.. Like most artists which are successfull, record, tour and sell,- they use what they get, I´m pretty sure they endorse their gear, probably get payed for using it.

This is some kind of a unfair comparison because the original poster of this thread asked for choosing a workstation, not an endorsement or an advertisement of gear used by NIN.

 

A.C.

[Synthoid]

I'm always amazed when someone has a fairly new keyboard listed for sale.....with no manual. I guess that got thrown out with the box.

 

[zahush76]

This is why I don´t have not only some analog synths, but also several FMs, ROMplers, samplers and a Wavestation (vector wave sequencing). That´s only the hardware b.t.w. ...

 

I meant "electronic" sounds. So, you having romplers and samplers has nothing to do with it.

 

Why is the term "VA" misleading, if it translates to "virtual analog" which means nothing else than "it´s a virtual model of an analog synth"?

I agree in the case of the creamware minimax, pro-12, prodyssey etc. They are hardware, virtual models of analog synths. The virus, blofeld, nord, etc - aren't like that. They emulate (as much as they can) analog synths, but that's not all they do. That's not all they were meant to do.

 

If I look at the most popular hardware VAs, let´s say: Nord Lead, Virus and V-Synth,- they all try to mimik analog synths... The Nord Lead comes w/ a complete soundset of a Prophet 5,- why ???

 

That's where you are wrong. Specially when you use the word "try". The virus has one bank of what they like to call "dinosaur sounds", while all the rest of the banks are for electro, techno, trance, house, experimental, and other stuff that sounds nothing like moog, prophet or oberheim. And the point is that it's not even trying to sounds like "traditional" vintage analog, as you suggested.

The nord has a prophet 5 bank. True. But why ignore the fact that it has more than that bank? That's the point: it can emulate analog, but doesn't stop there.

 

I think that a lot of musicinas (not all of them, of course) that buy, say, a virus - don't necesseraly care how close it can sound to a moog or any other vintage synth. And with today's price tags on new real analog models - who ever wants that sound can afford himself a real moog.

 

After a while ... :-)

I have the impression you forgot the avantgarde musicians who created real electronic music before analog synths came up ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trautonium

Oskar Sala p.ex.

 

I forgot to take notes in my notebook when you gave your lecture.

I took a course on electro-acoustic music, so i know about the avantgarde music created before analog synths came out. But when i wrote that "musicians discovered that they're unique on their own" - i used the word "musicians", and not a very small group of "mad professors" with an experimental instrument nobody knows about, that "regular" musicians can't afford.

A good example of what i meant is in one of rick wakeman's interviews about the minimoog. He said that someone from a studio called him about a new synth that he thinks is broken. It can only play one sound at a time. Rick got there and took it for himself, and the rest is history. When analog synths were first available and affordable - lot's of musicians didn't know what to make of them. So there's no need for you to get wise and throw in names of esoteric musical instruments.

 

What? You really would invest a lot of money in retro-gear to play in a cover-band,- just only to have the original instruments available for each song you cover? Really? You´re kidding !

 

In case you haven't heard, i'll let you in a little secret: There are new, real analog, mono and poly synths. To cover this sonic ground (of 70's - 80's cover songs) you can get anything from a Prophet 08, Andromeda, Sunsyn, etc. Nobody said anything about getting all the vintage synths.

 

I don´t create "electronic music",- I play bass, leadlines and solos on my Moog.

 

Good for you.

[Al Coda]

I meant "electronic" sounds. So, you having romplers and samplers has nothing to do with it.

 

You forgot to mention my FM-synths here.

What do you want to tell me "electronic sounds" are?

Plug a prong in the wall, switch on an electronic instrument, press a key and bingo,- you have an "electronic" sound.

Pull the prong out of the wall and there´s no sound at all.

 

You also forgot my countless software (synths),- I myself mentioned I have software too in my last post.

 

My experience is,- all what todays hardware-VAs do, the software versions do also and sometimes better but always cheaper.

 

I know very well what all these virtual instruments do.

If I´d need your "electronic" sounds, I´d use the software versions.

 

If anyone cannot afford the hardware, he´s addictied to use the software w/ all it´s disadvantages mentioned in former posts regarding bugs, compatibility and marketig issues.

 

 

I think that a lot of musicinas (not all of them, of course) that buy, say, a virus - don't necesseraly care how close it can sound to a moog or any other vintage synth. And with today's price tags on new real analog models - who ever wants that sound can afford himself a real moog.

 

Why, a Virus TI comes w/ a moog ladder filter emu then, if no one is interested to mimik a Moog filter ?- please explain...

 

If anyone can not afford a vintage synth, that´s no disadvantage or social prob.

The software solutions are so cheap, sometimes even free available, that anyone is able to do music today if he owns a halfway good computer for this.

 

I´m also pretty sure an Arturia Moog Modular V and/or ARP 2600V are pretty nice virtual machines to create "electronic" sounds,- even they are purists clones of real analogs,- VAs.

You don´t need any hardware VAs for these sounds maybe w/ the exception of a Nord Modular G2 or such ...

 

Using NIReaktor is also a way to go ...

 

So there's no need for you to get wise and throw in names of esoteric musical instruments.

 

That´s your interpretation,- b.t.w. a childish to me.

 

Start a new topic/thread on "electronic" sounds.

 

 

In case you haven't heard, i'll let you in a little secret: There are new, real analog, mono and poly synths.

 

Oh, wow, thx a lot.

 

To cover this sonic ground (of 70's - 80's cover songs) you can get anything from a Prophet 08, Andromeda, Sunsyn, etc.

 

Yep, but which I and others don´t have to buy because we already have older gear which works flawless up today and does all the sounds we need.

 

B.t.w., a Prophet 08 doesn´t sound any better as a Jupiter 6 or Oberheim Matrix6 or 1000. It doesn´t sound like a Prophet 5 in any way. I agree on the Andromeda,- but this is a discontinued product since years too AFAIK.

 

And why, in the world, you try to make me and others believe, I or anyone isn´t able to make "electronic" sounds w/ vintage gear like a Moog ? I own a Oberheim Xpander which makes pretty good "electronic" sounds. I don´t need a VA as long as my older machines survive. Did you ever program a Yamaha TG77 w/ advanced FM and operators modulated by samples ?

 

No "electronic" sounds? No?

250 bucks used, built like a tank and sounds like hell p.ex.

 

You can get quality used gear on the market which is so good no one needs to buy new (workstation)-gear all the time just because it´s "new" and comes up w/ "new" features. Often these new features are just new names for old functionality you also find elsewhere.

 

 

I don´t create "electronic music",- I play bass, leadlines and solos on my Moog.

 

Good for you.

 

Yes, it´s very good for me !

 

A.C.

[zahush76]

Why, a Virus TI comes w/ a moog ladder filter emu then, if no one is interested to mimik a Moog filter ?- please explain...

 

I will. Pay attention. Here it comes:

 

Yes. The virus ti comes with a moog ladder filter emu, to mimic a moog filter. It can do that if you want to. The point is that people don't necesseraly buy the virus TI to get this specific feature. It's not "the thing" that makes them buy it. Along with the ladder filter emulation, there is plenty of other stuff that sounds nothing like moog and doesn't try to: multimode filters, formant, graintable, wavtables etc.

 

In other words, the virus TI isn't just a machine that was made for the cause of imitating a moog synth.