SAW2's sound

After finally setting up my Matrix 6 and checking most of the 1000 presets for the Matrix 1000, I'm a bit confused. So far I've identified this one preset called Rain..something that most definitely was used for the piano sound in On. But as far as SAW2 goes though, I can't really find any presets though that sound like they were used. I've seen it mentioned numerous times here and other boards and I think it's about time someone just solve it once and for all: which sounds on the Matrix 1000 were used on SAW2?

I was told not too long ago by analogue wings that a lot of the Strings presets sound like it. Well, I'll just ask here, which ones in particular? It's bugging me to death here, if he really used this thing then someone must have some specific patches he used.

I didn't buy this synth specifically just to have patches that Rich used and then play his songs like a dufus, but since I have this thing I'd like to know what I've got here now :p I was thinking all this time I'd find for example that calming almost organ-like sound from Cliffs was on it, or even the incredible Stone in Focus pad. That is assuming he only used this synth for all pads anyway(which was my assumption..).

While I'm at it, is there a specific name also for that atmospheric sound at the beginning of Tha and Blue Calx? Assuming that's also from the Matrix 1000 I'd love to know if that's available somewhere. Really nice sound :)

It was always my understanding that Richard wasn't one for using presets, so you not being able to find any makes sense... Concentrate on making your own, original sounds, friend. It is rewarding...

saw2 was done mostly with a certain yamaha synth that could do microtonal tuning.

the CS-5?

I've seen the Matrix 1000 mentioned enough that I thought it must be true. Someone must have proof somewhere :p

saw II was made entirely with tape saturation presets

most of saw ii is monophonic leads, so i doubt the matrix is the main synth. those big smeary washed out pads with slow attacks could easily be matrix, but i mean the whole notion that that synth was used is based on one unsubstantiated internet claim

also, the main "instrument" on saw ii, to my ears, is the delay/reverb processor. it would seem to be an 80s 12 bit model with a really thick, almost analogue sound. i'd say any synth run though that would sound like saw ii

shit i can crank up my analogue delay to 600ms and put a fucking casiotone through it and it will sound like saw ii

lots of people do that and it don't sound like SAW 2 though. I think the SAW albums have a very 80's lexicon style reverb sound. That grainy washed out sound.

Its all about the analog delays and Quadraverb.

I want to know what he used for the woodwind sounds in Rhubarb, goddamn

i've tried to get watmm to explain this album to me from many different angles, but it always fails. i realized i'd have to just figure it out for myself.

  hahathhat said:

saw II was made entirely with tape saturation presets

close

I think parts of it were also made by recording to tape at high speed and playing it back slowly

Nope, It was a certain synth. Not a monophonic one. Rhubarb and other pad tracks are straight up PRESETS on this synth

Rhubarb sounds like processed mellotron flutes

  marf said:

Nope, It was a certain synth. Not a monophonic one. Rhubarb and other pad tracks are straight up PRESETS on this synth

It sounds like you know but are keeping it a secret which synth. tell us already! :p

I don't know. Im just kidding

  marf said:

Nope, It was a certain synth. Not a monophonic one. Rhubarb and other pad tracks are straight up PRESETS on this synth

I'm calling bullshit

Microtuning and being from Yamaha, I was thinking either the DX7s/II or an SY77/99(I think those had microtuning).

I guess there never will be a true answer for this one.

  marf said:

Nope, It was a certain synth. Not a monophonic one. Rhubarb and other pad tracks are straight up PRESETS on this synth

theres something sampley about those flutes. analogue cant quite do it.

i'm wondering if its D50 or something through an analogue lpf

  Diao said:

Its all about the analog delays and Quadraverb.

yeah......the Quadraverb, powdery reverb, huge. I had two they're great. He had a DX 100 as well, plus the synthesis stuff on a FZ-1 (he had one I'm pretty sure) is fun.

Some, straight up presets, ran through other hardware effects (combination of delay/reverb, very subtle). The "tape" thing, was not intended by Richard, is just a side effect of making music in that era.

V/Oct CV controlling pitch on multiple Korg MS-20's (normally Hz/V)

  WWBJD said:

V/Oct CV controlling pitch on multiple Korg MS-20's (normally Hz/V)

yeah, this is a really good technique for getting that growing detune as notes rise/fall...

  noise said:

  WWBJD said:

V/Oct CV controlling pitch on multiple Korg MS-20's (normally Hz/V)

 

yeah, this is a really good technique for getting that growing detune as notes rise/fall...

usual reaction would be, "man, i wish i didn't have to use a converter for it to speak w/ my roland shit" instead of HAY COOL. file this under "you know you're [braindance|idm] when..."

  On 7/5/2009 at 7:11 AM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

How do you know that?

Indeed. If people are going to just say "presets", they can just as easily state which synth and which presets if that's really the case, unless they;re just pretending to know and pulling this out of their ass. How many times do I see this when it comes to questioning people gear? :/

The general "sound" of the album(that is, the effects and such) is something I think is fair to take a stab at the dark at guessing with, but as far as statements like "it's presets" and all that crap, I don't how anyone even dares say that stuff without any proof at all. Unless they're just messing with us :x

  On 7/5/2009 at 8:26 AM, Bramsworth said:

Indeed. If people are going to just say "presets", they can just as easily state which synth and which presets if that's really the case, unless they;re just pretending to know and pulling this out of their ass. How many times do I see this when it comes to questioning people gear? :/

 

The general "sound" of the album(that is, the effects and such) is something I think is fair to take a stab at the dark at guessing with, but as far as statements like "it's presets" and all that crap, I don't how anyone even dares say that stuff without any proof at all. Unless they're just messing with us :x

Casio SK-1 presets