EDP Wasp on Analord

ever play with a good analog synth? It sounds amazing. There is a difference.

Interface is another issue. I think guitarists come up with diff types of melodies than pianists. So yeah. interface does affect composition IMHO. but fucking hell. Good equipment sounds amazing and you can hear the difference. Its usually the medium you choose that fucks it all up

i like teh moosics mucho

well, just from my own position.

While I have had the chance to play with/own a few analogue synths, I have never (and doubt I ever will) get the chance to play with and compare for example the different models of 2600's, or to play with supposedly legendary synths, like a fenix, or spend enough time with a Moog modular to be able to completely defend the £30 000+ price tag attached.

I honestly cannot see the point in trying to be envolved in an analogue vs digital discussion without having pleanty of experiance in both environments.

While I love to geek out watching videos of Buchla modulars on matrixsynth, and read reviews of £5000 compressors in a music magazine, I do so because of a geeky tech head motivation, not because I think these things would improve my music in any way, besides I know I'd never be able to afford them.

Would say also, using the phrase "good equipment" is a bit inappropriate. If I could own a good sized Doepfer system, Id be over the moon, but you can be certain that there will be someone with a complete Cwejman synth who would describe my pride and joy as "shitty".

Equpiment is only worth what it gives to you. My laptop wasnt a very expensive one, but it gave the power I need to be able to run enough instances of reaktor without having to worry, which in turn allows me to worry less about the cpu load of my project and more about the compostitional aspect, so to me my laptop is priceless. Faaaar more than any (more expencive) synth I may own.

All that really irritates me about the whole argument is A, the immediate assumption that anything analogue is good, which is utter horse shit.. and B, anything digital is bad which again is complete tripe..

My personal preferance, I'd rather have a computer that boots up fine, saves my project, stays in tune and allows me to work on more than one thing at once. A £5000 ancient modular with a couple broken osc, scratchy pots, tuning issues, unpredictable envelope, and buzzing power supply are not going to be of any beneficial influence to a creative process for me.

Just my 2 cents, please feel free to tell me Im wrong, just a matter of taste tho innit.

  On 8/27/2010 at 11:57 AM, TechDiff said:

While I love to geek out watching videos of Buchla modulars on matrixsynth, and read reviews of £5000 compressors in a music magazine, I do so because of a geeky tech head motivation, not because I think these things would improve my music in any way, besides I know I'd never be able to afford them.

So you like hardware but can't afford.

  On 8/27/2010 at 11:57 AM, TechDiff said:

Would say also, using the phrase "good equipment" is a bit inappropriate. If I could own a good sized Doepfer system, Id be over the moon, but you can be certain that there will be someone with a complete Cwejman synth who would describe my pride and joy as "shitty".

Unlikely.

  On 8/27/2010 at 11:57 AM, TechDiff said:

Equpiment is only worth what it gives to you. My laptop wasnt a very expensive one, but it gave the power I need to be able to run enough instances of reaktor without having to worry, which in turn allows me to worry less about the cpu load of my project and more about the compostitional aspect, so to me my laptop is priceless. Faaaar more than any (more expencive) synth I may own.

You want hardware but can't afford it, so you've settled with an inexpensive laptop and trying to say its way better than owning expensive hardware.

  On 8/27/2010 at 11:57 AM, TechDiff said:

My personal preferance, I'd rather have a computer that boots up fine, saves my project, stays in tune and allows me to work on more than one thing at once. A £5000 ancient modular with a couple broken osc, scratchy pots, tuning issues, unpredictable envelope, and buzzing power supply are not going to be of any beneficial influence to a creative process for me.

You want hardware you realize its way too expensive and so you've started to say its shit and it wont do anything for you.

"My personal preferance, I'd rather have a computer that boots up fine, saves my project, stays in tune and allows me to work on more than one thing at once. A £5000 ancient modular with a couple broken osc, scratchy pots, tuning issues, unpredictable envelope, and buzzing power supply are not going to be of any beneficial influence to a creative process for me."

lol comparing broken analogue to not-broken digital hardware is not 100% fair now is it?

why eat health organic foods when you can eat mcdonalds everyday

  On 8/27/2010 at 2:10 PM, Berk said:

"My personal preferance, I'd rather have a computer that boots up fine, saves my project, stays in tune and allows me to work on more than one thing at once. A £5000 ancient modular with a couple broken osc, scratchy pots, tuning issues, unpredictable envelope, and buzzing power supply are not going to be of any beneficial influence to a creative process for me."

 

lol comparing broken analogue to not-broken digital hardware is not 100% fair now is it?

yeah fair enough, and while i know you can buy new analogue kit, a bit part of owning "real" instruments is that they can and do need servicing and repairs. sorry but if you're searching ebay for things like old rolands, korgs etc, the fact that they even function becomes a main selling point. All analogue stuff i have owned has had or needed money spent simply to get working properly.

"So you like hardware but can't afford."

the point is that imo it's fairly daft comparing the finer points of synths without actually having the chance of ever using them. If someone decided to explain to me all the functions and details that make a serge modular amazing, I'd be interested, but what relevance does it really have with my own music making?

"Unlikely."

Fraid not, you think there is only snobbery between digital and analogue heads, you're much mistaken. Sometimes i wonder if people feel the need to be snobbish about their kit simply to justify the price they paid for it. Sorry, but if you dont think people look down on cheep modular systems, why would people be happy to spend such vast ammounts of money on what can tend to be fairly generic modules?

"You want hardware but can't afford it, so you've settled with an inexpensive laptop and trying to say its way better than owning expensive hardware."

Yes, and it is. For the price i paid for my laptop, i could've bought only a 303 for example, which would allow be to play acid bass lines and very little else, that's cool n all, but not of much value to me. Sorry perhaps i didnt make the clear distinction between money value and usefullness.

"You want hardware you realize its way too expensive and so you've started to say its shit and it wont do anything for you."

I have hardware, and i love it, but it's luxury. And honestly, most hardware is far too expensive. The price of some things is obscene. Particularly the popular vintage stuff, like 303's 101's and so on. Really, someone spending £1000 on an acid box is mental, and pretty ironic all things considered.

  On 8/27/2010 at 12:26 AM, marf said:

ever play with a good analog synth? It sounds amazing. There is a difference.

Oh yeah, definitely - I've got a Moog. But if I was to claim I could tell the difference between an analogue synth and a well-produced emulation as part of a recorded composition (i.e. not just single hits and waves), with no other hints and clues, I'd be setting myself up for a fall just like a wine snob who puts on a blindfold and declares that a glass of Thunderbird has a delicate, complex bouquet. I think pretty much anyone would approach a 50% success rate the more recordings they listened to.

That doesn't bother me - I'm not about to sell my analogue kit because of it. It's lush! My 303 cost me less than some of my friends spend on video games and systems, or even booze, in a year and it's given me hours and hours of joy.

  On 8/27/2010 at 4:01 PM, TechDiff said:

Fraid not, you think there is only snobbery between digital and analogue heads, you're much mistaken. Sometimes i wonder if people feel the need to be snobbish about their kit simply to justify the price they paid for it. Sorry, but if you dont think people look down on cheep modular systems, why would people be happy to spend such vast ammounts of money on what can tend to be fairly generic modules?

Go check out Gearslutz.com and do you see people there saying look at how much better my kit is and yours is shitty, I don't know how you got this idea that people do this.

Also you don't have to try and track down a broken £5000 ancient modular when you can get a brand new system like this:

Also you're exaggerating hardware costs, if you don't have the money then don't talk shit and say getting a little laptop is way better.

yeah you prob cant tell maybe diff in sounds between any of the two but i bet you can tell a diff between the sounds

I get that impression because I have experienced it first hand, many times.

And yeah, you right, you can buy brand new modular systems, But still it's a huge outlay, dot com synths run for thousands, the one you linked is still probably 4 thousand quid or so. And in any regard, do you even own or have had sufficient experience with a dot com to really be able to offer it as a recommended purchase? This is what I mean, see people all the time lusting and praising certain synths, but most of the time they have absolutely no personal ground to do so, other than they heard it on a track and it sounded good, or someone they know said it's awesome.

I recently got myself a SH101 and I think it's great, but I was VERY lucky in how much I paid for mine, If someone asked me if they should spend £600 to get one from eBay, I'd say no, it ain't worth that much, and it isn't....

Sorry, but Im not exaggerating costs, and talking shit on hardware because I can't afford it. I know how much things cost out of experience of things I have bought, and things friends have bought. saw just recently a Roland system 100m setup go for about £4500 on bay. That's a whole lot of money for a so so synth, but people are paying over the top prices for something that is "old" "analogue" and "Roland"

I completely agree with you that you can get great new synths, Im lusting over a DS evolver at the moment, but it's a lot of cash to spend right now, so I don't think about it too much. Just spent quite a bit on new bits of kit, so I can't justify spending more to me, or my GF. =D

the thing Im really trying to put across,, which might seem silly to someone with infinite amounts of money to spend on gear such as yourself apparently. Is that for most people, it's more important to spend the money wisely on things that will allow you to make music, and not worry about the subtle difference in sound that you would get if you spend a bucket load more.

For example, someone who's just getting into making music, what is really the more sensible way to spend 1500 or so? A couple bits of great hardware, or a laptop sound card and monitors?

I work hard and save for every piece of kit I've bought, and I can assure you that Its not a case of not being able to afford it or whatever, But if you don't have shed loads of cash to throw at studio purchases, and have to save between buying each bit you want, then it's all about buying things that will give you the most bang for the least buck. Which for the majority of people doesn't mean analogue drum machines and modular synths.

Would just like to add, that I find it funny that electronic music appears to be the only genre of music in which it's acceptable to assume that buying better kit will help you make better music.

I used to be massively into playing guitar when I younger, full on addicted, and one thing which every seasoned guitarist will tell you is that a mediocre player with an amazing guitar will still sound like a mediocre player. An amazing player with a crappy guitar will still sound fantastic.

Quite why people can't apply this rule to production is really beyond me, put a bad producer in a room full of awesome kit, you really think they're gonna make amazing music? Or that it will even be well produced?

You must admit that people buy some bits of hardware because they heard that Aphex or whoever uses it, and perhaps hope that buy owning the same thing, they too will sound that great, but Im sure we agree, that his music sounds the way it does because he is a ridiculously talented producer, synthesist, and composer. Could make anything sound good, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's made tracks using some real shitty kit. Or a little laptop.

  On 8/28/2010 at 1:43 PM, TechDiff said:

And yeah, you right, you can buy brand new modular systems, But still it's a huge outlay, dot com synths run for thousands, the one you linked is still probably 4 thousand quid or so. And in any regard, do you even own or have had sufficient experience with a dot com to really be able to offer it as a recommended purchase? This is what I mean, see people all the time lusting and praising certain synths, but most of the time they have absolutely no personal ground to do so, other than they heard it on a track and it sounded good, or someone they know said it's awesome.

Well I haven't heard anyone being unhappy with their dot com purchase to be honest.

Also are you saying that the vintage equipment should be like $100 because its "old" or "analog"?

  On 8/28/2010 at 2:01 PM, TNT said:

  On 8/28/2010 at 1:43 PM, TechDiff said:

And yeah, you right, you can buy brand new modular systems, But still it's a huge outlay, dot com synths run for thousands, the one you linked is still probably 4 thousand quid or so. And in any regard, do you even own or have had sufficient experience with a dot com to really be able to offer it as a recommended purchase? This is what I mean, see people all the time lusting and praising certain synths, but most of the time they have absolutely no personal ground to do so, other than they heard it on a track and it sounded good, or someone they know said it's awesome.

 

Well I haven't heard anyone being unhappy with their dot com purchase to be honest.

Also take a look at this and tell me what you think of it:

collecting old gear is like collecting veteran cars. a new car is much more reliable and has 340934 features the old ones doesn't. it's safer and won't break down as much. so why do people still buy old cars then? I think you can all see where this metaphor is going.

if effectivity is everything when you're building a studio, sure you can "do almost anything" with a laptop running a DAW. but people are different, which is something I think some of you forget. not everyone find it fun to spend 10 hours in front of their computer tweaking VSTs. why do some people play the piano, and others the guitar? different gear, different sounds, different inspiration makes different music.

personally, I think I can make music with whatever tools I have at hand. it'll turn out very differently depending on what I was using, but music would still come out of it.

yeah Retape nailed it basically

  On 8/28/2010 at 3:31 PM, Retape said:

collecting old gear is like collecting veteran cars. a new car is much more reliable and has 340934 features the old ones doesn't. it's safer and won't break down as much. so why do people still buy old cars then? I think you can all see where this metaphor is going.

Nope. Because we are talking about musical instruments, if you could compare a musical instrument of today with a vintage one the vintage one might be better in terms of sound and character, so that doesn't mean people only get vintage equipment because its old and collectors item.

are we in an 808 bubble?

I think old muscle cars and analog synths have something in common. the raw simplistic growl, the history behind it, the way it LOOKS, it's got its own feel.

ok, so the metaphor doesn't 100% apply to musical instruments! it's only a metaphor. I think my point still gets across.

  On 8/28/2010 at 2:01 PM, TNT said:

  On 8/28/2010 at 1:43 PM, TechDiff said:

And yeah, you right, you can buy brand new modular systems, But still it's a huge outlay, dot com synths run for thousands, the one you linked is still probably 4 thousand quid or so. And in any regard, do you even own or have had sufficient experience with a dot com to really be able to offer it as a recommended purchase? This is what I mean, see people all the time lusting and praising certain synths, but most of the time they have absolutely no personal ground to do so, other than they heard it on a track and it sounded good, or someone they know said it's awesome.

 

Well I haven't heard anyone being unhappy with their dot com purchase to be honest.

Sorry, but that alone is not enough. This is my point, how can you recommend, and wax on about the superiority of something you've never used? I have a good friend who's exactly the same, reads every little piece of reviews on every production kit ever, but has never used any of it, the only opinion he can convey in regards to anything, is the one he's picked up from sound on sound or whatever.

I'm also not suggesting vintage kit should be cheep because it's old. But Id be surprised if anyone can honestly argue that the market for vintage equipment hasn't gone completely loopy in recent years. If I was planning on selling any of my kit, now would be the time Id do it, because people are buying up vintage kit after looking at it through someone elses rose tinted glasses. And spending a whole heap of cash on a trend..

actually, I don't know what we're discussing (if anything). we all have valid points, I think.

i'll totally agree, the market for vintage gear is completely bonkers at this point. a lot of it has to do with the fact that vintage synthesizer holds appeal to inherently unmusical and talentless fuckwits that fetishize the nature of analogue electronics without regard for their musical properties. just do a youtube search for 'analog synth jam' or whatever, and you'd do well to find even one video on there with any musical merit to it. people treat this sort of stuff as any old hobby, really, which is to the detriment of the few that want to do something more with it that flex their synthcocks on youtube. that's how the free market works, though.

  On 8/28/2010 at 4:31 PM, TechDiff said:

Sorry, but that alone is not enough. This is my point, how can you recommend, and wax on about the superiority of something you've never used? I have a good friend who's exactly the same, reads every little piece of reviews on every production kit ever, but has never used any of it, the only opinion he can convey in regards to anything, is the one he's picked up from sound on sound or whatever.

So you could actually find yourself be disappointed with a dot com system? Wow.

  On 8/28/2010 at 4:45 PM, noise said:

i'll totally agree, the market for vintage gear is completely bonkers at this point. a lot of it has to do with the fact that vintage synthesizer holds appeal to inherently unmusical and talentless fuckwits that fetishize the nature of analogue electronics without regard for their musical properties. just do a youtube search for 'analog synth jam' or whatever, and you'd do well to find even one video on there with any musical merit to it. people treat this sort of stuff as any old hobby, really, which is to the detriment of the few that want to do something more with it that flex their synthcocks on youtube. that's how the free market works, though.

True, also there are people that collect these things just for the fuck of it and don't use them for music.