tenthplanet Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 Programability is second to sound. The instrument has to have a sound I like. Even digital synths have a sound. With analog machines it's fairly easy to pick up on a machines sound. There are a few keyboards you never have to tweak but were mainly talking acoutic pianos at that point. If the sound is there other things fall into place and you'll proably want to tweak it at that point. That's where the knobs come in. Michael Q:What do you call a truck with nothing in the bed,nothing on the hitch, and room for more than three people in the cab? A:"A car".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitecrawler47 Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 Programibility is important. I started on a Mini-Moog back in '79. You have to tweak em to get your sound. Even with my stuff now, I am always adjusting something, if only EQ or effects, to make it fit better in the mix. The problem with many of the factory sounds are, they are designed for maximum effect while trying out the sounds in the store, and will make your mix muddy if you don't adjust em. Of course, today's synths are a lot more complicated than my old Mini, which forces me to read (ugggh!)manuals nitecrawler "Time to head down that old Colorado highway pardner." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 nitecrawler, You make an important point. I've found that with the major Japanese synth corporations (Roland, Korg, Yamaha), the default patch design seems almost intended to exaggerate the various patch characteristics, rarely do I find a preset in such instruments that's "useable" right out of the box. By the same token, a lot of preset patches that sound either "vanilla" or "over-effected" (the two extremes) can often be turned into marvelous things with just a little ear-sensitive adjustment of the patch or the efx. That's one of my definitions of a great preset: one which provides you a useful starting point and which makes it easy to roll your own (and by "easy" I don't mean lazy-easy, I mean you do things which would seem to make sense... and they work as you expect! . rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RABid Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 It is amazing how bad some patches get when you turn off effects. You should always apply effects after you create a nice sounding patch. Robert This post edited for speling. My Sweetwater Gear Exchange Page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Zeger Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 I leave the programming up to the guys at the factory. I like having to option of programmability, but can't say that I ever use it on any keyboard or module. I don't have the patience to scroll through page after page. If I had something with plenty of knobs, that would be different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realtrance Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 Lots of different forms of taste here, clearly. Some believe if a patch sounds bad w/out efx, it's a bad patch to begin with. Others believe efx are really just part of the patch architecture, so if it sounds good when all put together, who cares (i.e. how "good" does a violin string sound without the box behind it? isn't the latter just reverb? ). Some don't want to spend time tweaking, just like others are perfectly happy to pay hundreds or thousands for someone _else_ to put together an orchestra and then do all the technical work to produce a useful sample set. I have no religion myself in this, I just think it's all good. There are advantages and disadvantages to almost every approach you can tout as gospel. rt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucktunes Posted March 30, 2002 Share Posted March 30, 2002 Originally posted by Dave Bryce: When you buy a synthesizer, how important is the ability to program/tweak your own sounds? Modern synths have gotten deep enough that I more or less take it for granted that it should have plenty of "tweakability". But I do consider it important that it be deep enough that I won't be bored with it in a year. Do you go into the purchase thinking that you only want something that already has the sounds that you want, or are you into the idea that part of the thrill of owning such a beast is that you can learn how to edit and/or create your own custom programs? I expect the factory presets to include enough bread and butter sounds that I can take it out on a gig right away. But again, I want the ability to personalize those sounds even if they're cool to begin with. I'm not into programming abstract sounds from scratch, though. I prefer to find a preset that's close to what I want, then tweak to taste. If you do have the urge to tweak - after you've gotten a synth, do you find that you follow through with learning the machine's architecture more often than not? I usually learn the architecture on kind of a "need to know" basis. With something like the Kurzweil K series, you can get lost for days just diving into the abyss of the synth's engine. I'm usually looking for a more specific solution when I dig in. Conversely, if you enter into the purchase thinking that you're not interested in delving into the architecture, do you find that necessity/curiosity make you "lift the hood "? Again it's mostly out of necessity. If I'm going after a sound that's not right on the surface, I'll be more compelled to learn the finer details.Peace all, Steve ><> Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.