Archive of the former Yahoo!Groups mailing list: MOTM

previous by date index next by date
  topic list  

Subject: Breaking out of the synth cesspool [even longer]

From: "Paul Schreiber" <synth1@...>
Date: 2000-03-24

<<taking 1 last break before finishing up the '440 kitting! Then I have to
write the &$#! manual>>

I think it's safe to say that most MOTM users also have or had a synth in
the past. But one point
that I'd like to stress is that 99.9% of commercial synths eventually grow
tiresome because
of limited choices made in order to ship the product. ALSO: it is ∗very
important∗ to recall the
historical perspective. Not blaming the DX-7 for everything, think about:

∗ Moog's nemisis- Polymoog
∗ ARP's nemisis- Quadra and the "Electric Piano" thing
∗ Oberheim's nemisis- T8

All big poly-hogs.

Somebody said an orchestra is made up of monophonic instruments, playing in
unison. I think
that's how modulars should be viewed. Now, you can patch up 2 "identical"
voices, but on purpose
have different attacks, resonance, etc etc. The poly-hogs faithfully ganged
4/6/8 voices in identical
patches (not accounting for cheesy S/H muxes in some designs).
ZZZzzzzzz.......

Think about what Carlos, Tomita, Tangerine Dream, Klause Shultz, etc did
with their Moogs. I mean,
Moog ∗only made like 13 modules∗ (not counting the dippy 'accessory
panels'). Made 1 LPF, 1 HPF.
(and a wanky "bandpass" with the "coupler"). But then again, stepping back,
all of those records
encompass a certain "Moog palette". I think that's why Carlos switched to
Synergy. The constant drive to
wring out "something new" (remember, by the time Clockwork Orange was out,
there were over ∗300∗
crappy Moog records out. I have 200 of them). Luckily for us, ∗no one∗
has/had a stonger "modular
work ethic". I remember reading how she did the vocoder patch: she had 4
seperate footpedals to
control the formants, and she practiced something like 4 hours a day ∗for 6
weeks∗ before she tracked.

Tooting my own horn (and JHs and Scott's and Doug's) I think MOTM users have
a huge advantage
in 2 areas: the MOTM itself ∗and∗ cheap hard disk recording/effects
(Logic/CuBase on one end, ProTools
on the other). A lot of the early "work" was just the frustration factor of
those 741 op amps injecting
popcorn noise into the expo converters of the Moog VCOs, and the 64dB SNR of
the VCAs. AND
having "primitive" recorders not even as good as a used Alesis ADAT.
("Autolocator? Sir, that's a $12,000
option!")

I like wanking on the poly-hogs and getting finger cramps going through the
FS1R menus as well as the
next person. But what is exciting to me is that we/us have ∗so much more∗
than they had. They may have bought
"Moogs by the yard" (a la Hans Zimmer) but ∗only 13 different modules∗!.

I guess this is sounding like a modular pep rally!

Lastly: let's not get "stuck in the past" with the modules. I'm ∗just as
guilty∗, because I grew up in
Moog lust. Well, there are other interesting things out there, as well as
∗new stuff not thought up∗
like JH's Interpolating Scanner. So, as always: keep at me with new ideas.
∗DON'T WORRY∗ about
how it could be done. Just describe the function, leave the grunt work to
me.

Ok, enough of that!

Paul S.
only 648 resistors to go!