Hi Stephen,
Although it is impossible not to agree what you say, I d like to add
two points:
You can not edit the sound of an acoustic instrument but instead,
inorder to get your sphesific sound out of it, you customize your
playing.
So, eventhough some fancy modulations are not present on the CS
series, the expression possibilites open up many musical possibilites.
I believe that the US and Yamaha approaches are two different
approaches so synthesizer music. Maybe I am too much addicted to
responsive synthesiers like the DX7 and the VL1. So, realtime
expression power means a lot to me.
I try to overcome the lack of autotune by altering the footage on my
CS80 when the tuning gets unpleasant. Not quite like the MKS-80 or P5
autotune but it helps up to a degree.
--- In
yamahacs80@yahoogroups.com, "Wavecomputer360"
<wavecomputer360@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mert,
>
> > Have you got any idea why the great CS60 was not popular ever?
With
> > it's monophonic aftertouch, initial velocity, lovely ribbon
> > controller , ring modulator and 8 polyphony, it should at least
be a
> > tough competitor against the Prophet 5.
>
> It never was, just because when compared with a P5 the CS60 sounds
extremely
> thin, and it reveals its appeal on second sight only. With all its
> idiosyncratic terminology on the envelopes, the rather under-
achieving
> filters, and its more "Japanese" sound it had no chance to woo
potential P5
> buyers who were accustomed to Mini Moogs and ARP Odysseys most of
the time.
> The P5 came up with that "American" sound which the CS60 just
couldn´t do.
> And you mustn´t forget that Yamaha had no real reputation for
building
> synthesisers at that time, people were rather suspicious of
something called
> "combo synthesiser", especially when their first encounters with
> synthesisers bearing a "Yamaha" tag were the SY-1 or SY-2 (which
are no bad
> instruments, but a little flimsy when compared with its competitors
from the
> USofA). Even the GX-1 was passed off as an Electone organ, and this
type of
> poor marketing coupled with initially not very convincing sounds
certainly
> added to the fact that Yamaha didn´t have much success with their
> synthesisers ∗before∗ they put out the CS80.
>
> >
> > I have owned a P5 for about 9 years and although it sounds
interesting
> > and powerful, the rough pitch and modulation wheels, rather poor
> > keyboard and lack of velocity and aftertouch makes the precise
> > controlling of musical expression quite impossible.
>
> That´s right, but at that time it was exactly what people needed.
Not to
> forget its biggest selling asset was its programmability. 40
patches versus
> one on the CS60? Apart from that, people were used to Moog-style
wheels, and
> like Richard Luebbing once put it "people like Chick Corea were
used to the
> Moog wheels, so off went the ribbon controller". That´s marketing.
Read the
> "Vintage Synthesizers" review of the CS80 in Mark Vail´s book, it´s
indeed
> very enlightening.
>
> And it's limited
> > polyphony makes the P5 a real looser against the CS60 at
sustaining
> > sounds. To me the P5 is not as musical compared to the CS60/80
>
> I would replace "musical" with "organic" and I´d subscribe to your
view.
> Curtis- or SSM-based synthesisers tend to have a less animated
sound because
> they are more stable and more "phase-locked" while the CS60 or CS80
benefit
> enormously from each oscillator card going its own way. Which might
lead to
> a minor reliability issue or two...
>
> >
> > The mighty CS80 makes the CS60 look a small limited synthesizer.
But if
> > we take the CS60 on it's own, it is an incredible synthesizer
still.
>
> Definitely. But we should bear in mind that both CS60 ∗and∗ CS80
are pretty
> limited when compared to a Prophet 5 or an Oberheim OB-Xa in terms
of
> modulation and such. No VCO sync, no PWM through the EGs, no
Polymodulation,
> no unison mode, no autotune, no RAM memories. The CSs excel at
expression,
> richness of tone, and performance power but not in timbral variety.
Like
> Brian Eno once put it, "the CS80 has just six sounds on it, but
these are
> gorgeous".
>
> >
> > I am a lucky owner of a CS80. The CS60 is going to be my next
purchase
> > with it's easier portability for my stage performance.
>
> Agreed, and the CS60 seems to be less temperamental when it comes
to tuning
> stability, probably because the internal cooling is more effective
as there
> are less components installed.
>
> >
> > BTW, I old my P5 last summer and never miss it.
>
> I´d miss it, I know that, as they are both like apples and
oranges :-). One
> can do tricks the other can´t do. And I for one would love to add a
Rev. 3
> P5 to my setup some day or other. Just like I´d love to add an
Oberheim Four
> Voice to it someday...
>
> Stephen.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________________
>
> "Ambition makes you look pretty ugly." (Thom Yorke/Radiohead --
"Paranoid
> Android")
>
>
> Now available: "Tektonik" and "Gronland", two new ambient music
albums by
> Stephen Parsick.
> Each album is limited to 25 copies and will come in a special
packing and is
> hand-numbered.
>
> It´s out: "doombient.two -- a declaration of war", the new [´ramp]
album,
> recorded live in 2003.
> Limited to 100 copies only so get it while you still can.
>
> For info and audio, please visit the official [´ramp] website at
> www.doombient.com
>