Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Synthesizers are "babies" (Herbie Hancock)


Sundown

Recommended Posts

I think that there will always be new sounds and new instruments, so Wakeman wasn't right about all the sounds that can be made having been made, but in terms of popular usage, he was pretty close.

 

Yes to give RW a bit of a pass, context matters. :D

 

At the time he made the statement, two well known modular synthesists (Tomita and Carlos) had made extensive functional representations of virtually every musical sound that had been made to date. You want a brash plucked string? You want haunting human voice? You want warbling reeds? You want pelog tuning?

 

It was all in there.

 

Zoom in just a bit from that functional context and there is a plethora of undiscovered or as yet unused sound. Which is pretty exciting for the future of synthesis. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
My standard for modular synth work was Carlos also, but then I heard Tomita's Snowflakes Are Dancing, and was in love...

 

Well of course. Tomita is the other side of the Vangelis coin. I'd have to mentally squint a bit to come up with many others who play *romantically*. That's what is usually missing from synth music and why the poor instrument can't shake off the erroneous image of fakery.

These two do so by reintroducing elegance to the process.

 

 

 "I want to be an intellectual, but I don't have the brainpower.
  The absent-mindedness, I've got that licked."
        ~ John Cleese

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>> Listening to Wievund Reit now. Sounds great (thanks!) but are you sure it's a modular? I'm hearing some digital sounds here

 

True enough, as it came from 1986, which is for sure a few steps past early modular academia. Considering the unique complexity of some of the moments in the piece, I feel this subjective, resonant cognizance going born of experience. He could easily just have superior production chops, but a complex modular sound tends to reveal itself because there is no other way to MAKE a sound like that. Besides, the full scope of the piece has a character that compares with the cinematic tone Carlos achieved. I've rarely heard anyone paint so broadly.

 

http://avaxhome.cc/music/johannes_schmoelling.html

 

 

 "I want to be an intellectual, but I don't have the brainpower.
  The absent-mindedness, I've got that licked."
        ~ John Cleese

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there will always be new sounds and new instruments, so Wakeman wasn't right about all the sounds that can be made having been made, but in terms of popular usage, he was pretty close.

 

Yes to give RW a bit of a pass, context matters. :D

 

At the time he made the statement, two well known modular synthesists (Tomita and Carlos) had made extensive functional representations of virtually every musical sound that had been made to date. You want a brash plucked string? You want haunting human voice? You want warbling reeds? You want pelog tuning?

 

It was all in there.

 

Zoom in just a bit from that functional context and there is a plethora of undiscovered or as yet unused sound. Which is pretty exciting for the future of synthesis. :cool:

 

I also think this is exciting. Granted, the introduction of sample-playback synths gave synth users less incentive to dial up plucked string, human voice, etc. tones on modulars. As a Nord Modular G2 owner, I am fortunate to have at least a taste of those modular-born sounds, like a lively classical guitar patch, and there are tutorials for patching up horns, strings, etc. with the virtual modular.

 

It seems like today's modular users lean towards experimental stuff or dance music - which is not a negative as far as my personal tastes are concerned. However I do like it when somebody plays tonal music like certain classical pieces on their modulars - it's rare enough to be practically radical by today's standards. ;)

 

Bach BWV 784:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the coolest things is the accessibility if any young people are interested. 30-40 years ago it cost a lot of money to even find out if you could learn synthesis. Now someone can put Sonigen Modular on their laptop for free and learn how a synth works.

"It doesn't have to be difficult to be cool" - Mitch Towne

 

"A great musician can bring tears to your eyes!!!

So can a auto Mechanic." - Stokes Hunt

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the coolest things is the accessibility if any young people are interested. 30-40 years ago it cost a lot of money to even find out if you could learn synthesis. Now someone can put Sonigen Modular on their laptop for free and learn how a synth works.

 

Yeah, it's quite amazing. I have 3 virtual modulars on my iPad - I would not have thought I'd have any of these things when I was in high school.

 

Sub-$300 new analogs like the Microbrute also help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Rick called it too early, as there have been some breakthroughs since 1989:

 

Wavesequencing

Granular Synthesis (affordable granular synthesis)

Direct-from-Disk Streaming (Samplers)

 

One could argue that the latter 2 are refinements (granular synthesis probably existing in labs before 1989). DFD Samplers could also be a refinement, but I don't think anyone could imagine the depth of modern samplers back in 1989 (with key switches, Gigs upon gigs of samples, and fancy articulations).

 

I'd like to see what can be done with additive synthesis. It's great that you can buy a genuine analog synth for ~$500, but the subtractive approach can only go so far.

 

 

 

Sundown

 

Working on: The Jupiter Bluff; Driven Away

Main axes: Kawai MP11 and Kurz PC361

DAW Platform: Cubase

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see what can be done with additive synthesis. It's great that you can buy a genuine analog synth for ~$500, but the subtractive approach can only go so far.

 

There's a lot more to additive than what I could do with it. Here's why I know I am not a good patch designer. I've designed patches for the Nord Modular using additive ... you know what I had when I finished? ;)

 

I'd stack a bunch of sine (and other) waves at harmonic (and sometimes inharmonic) intervals. The NMs have a very convenient sine bank.

 

Add some chorusing/modulation/overdrive/bit reduction to create textural movement.

 

I'd add some kind of note-on interest (a pitch envelope or an attack partial from the drum module or something).

 

I'd add some envelopes for interest ... for swelling pads and things.

 

I'd make a patch I could really interact with, and then I'd stand back and like Winnie the Pooh walking round a tree ... realize I'd pretty much walked a few feet in Laurens Hammond's shoes ... Doh. :D:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents

it's the control, the human interface with the synth that is the rub.

A violinist can control pitch and timbre in such a "musical" manner. That is a single note ( mostly ) instrument. Can a single note synth do equally as well.. control pitch and timbre the way a sax, or violin can? Just asking! my 2 sense are done now!

You don't have ideas, ideas have you

We see the world, not as it is, but as we are. "One mans food is another mans poison". I defend your right to speak hate. Tolerance to a point, not agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why Wakeman is no longer relevant musically. Apparently, he thinks everything that can be done has been done already.

 

:facepalm:

 

Please elaborate. :wave::laugh:

 

If you need an explanation, then the explanation won't help.

 

 

Hitting "Play" does NOT constitute live performance. -Me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents

it's the control, the human interface with the synth that is the rub.

A violinist can control pitch and timbre in such a "musical" manner. That is a single note ( mostly ) instrument. Can a single note synth do equally as well.. control pitch and timbre the way a sax, or violin can? Just asking! my 2 sense are done now!

 

That was part of the fun of replicating some stuff I'd been working on the viola, on the Voyager. It's pretty hard, especially for techniques on the viola that require an extremely light touch. I think a breath controller might help. Ultimately though an alternative synth interface would probably be better - a Haken Continuum, Linnstrument, or TouchKeys-modded keyboard perhaps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are few bigger Wakeman fans than me, but he is the guy who set fire to a mellotron, drank himself to heart failure in his 20's, enjoyed a curry dinner on stage during the Tales From Topographic Oceans tour, has been married 4 times, and continually employs Ashley Holt as a singer, so we know he at times exercises poor judgment. :rimshot:

Stage: Korg Krome 88.

Home: Korg Kross 61, Yamaha reface CS, Korg SP250, Korg mono/poly Kawai ep 608, Korg m1, Yamaha KX-5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents

it's the control, the human interface with the synth that is the rub.

A violinist can control pitch and timbre in such a "musical" manner. That is a single note ( mostly ) instrument. Can a single note synth do equally as well.. control pitch and timbre the way a sax, or violin can? Just asking! my 2 sense are done now!

 

T,

 

I love how you ask the most thought provoking questions. :)

 

I'd suggest three answers. One answer for me, is that most synths cannot yet do what violins do is because they are still babies. Perhaps a more useful answer is that when synths do grow up, they do not need to grow up to be like violins. After all aren't there are a host of useful instruments, which would fail the "one note test" also?

 

Depending on your response to this video, you might agree that there is a third answer, that in the right hands synths can already do what saxophones and violins do ... captivate with a single note. It's just that the cultural conditions haven't arisen to make these kinds of applications widespread:

 

[video:youtube]Z_1UDyq7a_4

 

 

Which answer speaks most to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents

it's the control, the human interface with the synth that is the rub.

A violinist can control pitch and timbre in such a "musical" manner. That is a single note ( mostly ) instrument. Can a single note synth do equally as well.. control pitch and timbre the way a sax, or violin can? Just asking! my 2 sense are done now!

 

T,

 

I love how you ask the most thought provoking questions. :)

 

I'd suggest three answers. One answer for me, is that most synths cannot yet do what violins do is because they are still babies. Perhaps a more useful answer is that when synths do grow up, they do not need to grow up to be like violins. After all aren't there are a host of useful instruments, which would fail the "one note test" also?

 

Depending on your response to this video, you might agree that there is a third answer, that in the right hands synths can already do what saxophones and violins do ... captivate with a single note. It's just that the cultural conditions haven't arisen to make these kinds of applications widespread:

 

[video:youtube]Z_1UDyq7a_4

 

 

Which answer speaks most to you?

 

Tusker I only listened a tiny bit... and was really impressed by that instrument

What is that device?

I like the polyphony and the way timbre and micro tonal things are occurring all at once. Maybe it is just plain "musical" to me.

This is very hopeful to me.

Excellent!

You don't have ideas, ideas have you

We see the world, not as it is, but as we are. "One mans food is another mans poison". I defend your right to speak hate. Tolerance to a point, not agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 cents

it's the control, the human interface with the synth that is the rub.

A violinist can control pitch and timbre in such a "musical" manner. That is a single note ( mostly ) instrument. Can a single note synth do equally as well.. control pitch and timbre the way a sax, or violin can? Just asking! my 2 sense are done now!

 

T,

 

I love how you ask the most thought provoking questions. :)

 

I'd suggest three answers. One answer for me, is that most synths cannot yet do what violins do is because they are still babies. Perhaps a more useful answer is that when synths do grow up, they do not need to grow up to be like violins. After all aren't there are a host of useful instruments, which would fail the "one note test" also?

 

Depending on your response to this video, you might agree that there is a third answer, that in the right hands synths can already do what saxophones and violins do ... captivate with a single note. It's just that the cultural conditions haven't arisen to make these kinds of applications widespread:

 

[video:youtube]Z_1UDyq7a_4

 

 

Which answer speaks most to you?

 

Tusker I only listened a tiny bit... and was really impressed by that instrument

What is that device?

I like the polyphony and the way timbre and micro tonal things are occurring all at once. Maybe it is just plain "musical" to me.

This is very hopeful to me.

Excellent!

 

Tusker & Tee are spot on. At the end of the day its about how pitch, amplitude and timbre vary over time. The two ways of varying those over time are by what's structural to the patch and the realtime control from the player.

 

As Tusker mentions, the synth capability is here, and in my opinion has been for a long, long time. From a synthesis engine perspective we're far beyond the baby stage. From a controller perspective, we've just barely learned to walk.

 

This video is a good example of the capabilities already here once you apply a different controller and musical idiom. From a paradigm of how to utilize a synth, and the idiom of music to which we apply it, we're held back by what we've become familiar or what's 'popular' -- Wakeman's quote is accurate in his paradigm and idiom.

 

The synths have been grown up for a while. How we use and interact with them has to do so as well. And we're a quite a bit behind...

 

Manny

 

 

 

People assume timbre is a strict progression of input to harmonics, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timbrally-wimbrally... stuff

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coming from you Manny, that's high praise... :blush:

 

What is that device?

 

Glad you enjoyed it T. It's the Continuum:

 

http://www.hakenaudio.com/Continuum/

 

... possibly the Steinway of alternate controllers, although there are many such innovative instruments. The trouble is that it's 3K-10K, which is a lot less than a real Steinway, but until prices fall ... you can't get enough of them into the hands of enough music students to build a high performance idiom and a pedagogy. The high end is thin.

 

At the low end, you can write a $10 piano app for a phone, and you have thousands of customers.

 

A middle needs to emerge which has the right combination of "customer base," "idiom" and "instrument capability".

 

This is why I believe we will not have a common synth idiom which draws on physical virtuosity, anytime soon. The high-end instruments are there, the social structures ... not there yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From stillgigging earlier in this thread he quotes Vangelis:

Vangelis (a few decades ago) "don't try to tell me they're a real instrument. The 'playability' is not correct today. Not because we don't know how but because we think we don't need it. It's a matter of attitude, not technology."

 

The highlighting of the quote is mine. The attention needs to go towards playability. As Tusker said, who knows when it will be feasible?

You don't have ideas, ideas have you

We see the world, not as it is, but as we are. "One mans food is another mans poison". I defend your right to speak hate. Tolerance to a point, not agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tusker, that video is incredible...

 

Yes Todd, isn't Edmund Eagan awesome?

 

http://www.twelfthroot.com/twelfthrooteagan.html

 

I believe the piece is an elegy for Richard Lainhart which makes it especially poignant for me. Richard was a gifted experimental synthesist, a member of this community and a beloved cheerleader in moving synthesis idiom forward.

 

Mr. Eagan (and others) have worked tirelessly to show us what can be done with synths, if we use a little imagination and are willing to build technique. As pioneers and early adopters, their pieces are a call to the vast majority of synthesists like us who need to have a little faith in what is possible. We would be deaf not to hear. :)

 

Sincerely,

 

Jerry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edmund Eagan rocks.

 

BTW, the Continuum now comes with built-in synths - the EaganMatrix digital modular synth and some sounds originally developed by Eagan on the Kyma then ported over to the Continuum. In other words, it's a totally standalone instrument now, which dramatically increases the value that you get for your money if you buy this thing.

 

The Linnstrument is probably our best hope for a more affordable controller along those lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...