Mellotronists

I'm pretty sure that I never suggested the DX was a bad instrument.  I only 
said that it was fated to be overcome by gear that was more accessible. 
There's no reason that a programming interface should be in Sanskrit, and 
that was the choice that Yamaha made, quite possibly in part to try to lock 
up their market share.  The learning curve is a good thing, but if it is so 
steep that it interferes with creating music, it doesn't get climbed by 
many.  FM is a powerful synthesis method indeed and I look forward to new 
implementations and instruments using it.  I am fortunate enough to be a 
skilled subtractive programmer, I got pretty handy with the Kawai K-5 method 
of additive synthesis, and I can make my Korgs sit up and do tricks, but my 
DX-11 and DX-100 were so frustrating to even play around with that I decided 
that I was better off staying with stuff in which I already had developed 
some expertise.  As far as musicians these days, I know ONE local keyboard 
player who programs, or at least tweaks his own sounds, the rest are just 
factory-program Johnnies, and their playing is as pathetic as their sounds. 
The modern keyboard player locally stands at his keyboards between songs 
toggling through sounds one at a time to find the "right" sound for each 
tune.  It's fucking embarrassing to watch.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Donald Tillman" <don@...>
To: "jonesalley" <jonesalley@...>
Cc: <Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Mellotronists] return of the clones


>   > From: "jonesalley" <jonesalley@...>
>   > Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>   >
>   > After reading with interest the points behind the clone debates
>   > over the last couple of days, what really strikes me is the
>   > comments about Memotrons and Mellotrons and DX-7's share a lot of
>   > ground. The problem with the DX-7 is the cryptic nature of the
>   > programming.
>
> Well, the DX-7 is a very special case.  Here we have a breakthrough
> design that solves a whole bunch of problems in a creative way and the
> result is a whole new canvas of voices.
>
> Yamaha wanted to make a digital polyphonic synth, but given 1982
> technology they couldn't implement digital filters because real-time
> digital multiply operations were just too expensive, and they couldn't
> do sampling because memory was too expensive.  So they put together a
> very clever implementation of Stanford CCRMA's FM synthesis that only
> uses real-time adds and table lookups.  This was brilliant, it broke
> all preconceptions and provided whole new ways to think about
> electronic music.
>
> On the negative side, yeah, programming FM is unbelievably arcane.
> It's like solving a Rubic's cube; really, you can be a move or two
> from your goal and you wouldn't know it.  And the primitive UI on the
> DX-7 makes it like solving the Rubic's Cube through a letterbox.
> Blindfolded.
>
> And yeah, it lacks warmth.  And that clangy electric piano sound was
> getting annoying after appearing on way too many really bad songs.
>
> But the thing about the DX-7 is that it wasn't trying to be something
> it wasn't.  FM synthesis does some things well, and there are many
> things it can't do at all, and that's okay, and there are some other
> things it does that nobody else can do, and that's great.  The DX-7
> didn't pretend to be another instrument, although FM synthesis could
> mimic some standard instruments (pianos, organs, flutes, etc.) better
> in some ways than most samplers.
>
>   > If an instrument requires that amount of effort to learn how to
>   > use and is actually counterintuitive to the already-established
>   > lexicon of sound generation, it eventually drives away users who
>   > will be attracted to something that provides similar sonic power
>   > with more ease of use.
>
> Certainly.  But every musical instrument has a learning curve.  Some
> learning curves are longer and more difficult than others, some have a
> steep beginning, some have a bigger payoff than others, some might
> give the player some encouraging sense of accomplishment along the
> way.
>
> Hey, at least with the DX-7 your fingers aren't left bleeding like
> with the learning curve on a string bass, eh?  Or your neighbors don't
> burn your house down like with the learning curve on bagpipes.
>
> Are you suggesting that modern keyboard players demand instant
> gratification and are not accepting of any learning curve?  That may
> be so.
>
>   > A lot of the qualities of the Mellotron that make it such a
>   > powerful instrument could also as easily be described as
>   > liabilities by people who didn't find that it satisfied their
>   > quest for the right vibration.
>
> Sure, but that's true of just about any musical instrument.  The road
> of pleasing everybody leads to mediocrity, eh?
>
>  -- Don
>
> -- 
> Don Tillman
> Palo Alto, California
> don@...
> http://www.till.com