Synth pop people.. what's your gear?

[Polarelch]

I think the most people in here or on other similar sites are mainly dedicated to electro, EDM, techno, dubstep, whatever...

I myself, I'm mostly doing Synth Pop, and I wonder if there are other people out there who are in the same boat.
What gear do you prefer to use, especially which sequencers are useful for synthpop?

I find it a bit difficult to build up a whole pop song with, for instance, Monomachine. Its Song Sequencer is somehow limited when you use complex song structures, many different harmonies, melodies, breaks etc. .. I reckon at least. Any opinions on Maschine for Synthpop?

However, I do love my NordLead 2x and my Mopho for the style I'm into!

[cdog]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

I think the most people in here or on other similar sites are mainly dedicated to electro, EDM, techno, dubstep, whatever...

I myself, I'm mostly doing Synth Pop, and I wonder if there are other people out there who are in the same boat.
What gear do you prefer to use, especially which sequencers are useful for synthpop?

I find it a bit difficult to build up a whole pop song with, for instance, Monomachine. Its Song Sequencer is somehow limited when you use complex song structures, many different harmonies, melodies, breaks etc. .. I reckon at least. Any opinions on Maschine for Synthpop?

However, I do love my NordLead 2x and my Mopho for the style I'm into!

Maschine is great but if you are talking about complex song structures, forget it. I think Ableton Live is the best sequencer out there right now, because its like a groovebox on steroids, you can just jam on it like an instrument, but really if you know how you want a track laid out any DAW will do. Logic is great, shame its Mac only though.

My one piece of advice of working ITB: just because everything is ITB, doesnt mean it has to be nailed to the grid, quantized, and autotuned. Dont be afraid to let a little sloppines, a little humanity, shine through.

[Night_Suit]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

I think the most people in here or on other similar sites are mainly dedicated to electro, EDM, techno, dubstep, whatever...

I myself, I'm mostly doing Synth Pop, and I wonder if there are other people out there who are in the same boat.
What gear do you prefer to use, especially which sequencers are useful for synthpop?

I find it a bit difficult to build up a whole pop song with, for instance, Monomachine. Its Song Sequencer is somehow limited when you use complex song structures, many different harmonies, melodies, breaks etc. .. I reckon at least. Any opinions on Maschine for Synthpop?

However, I do love my NordLead 2x and my Mopho for the style I'm into!

Your gearlist reads beautifully for that sort of music...

[bouzoukijoe1]

correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't need complex structures for synth pop. that's what makes it synth pop. of course there are a few exceptions, but the point of it is simplicity. if you want true complexity, you need live band members. otherwise I think you can get away with using typical midi sequencers like the rm1x, command station, p3/cirklon, mmt, or mpc, as long as it can sequence complete songs using about 4 different patterns that you can assemble into - intro, verse, chorus, bridge, chorus, verse, etc. that will run you about 32-48 bars per song (roughly). most of them can handle that.

you'll have fairly consistent tracks for drums, groove, and main melody, only alternating 2-3 times, and the time signature won't really change which makes it pretty simple. the only limit you might run into is the number of tracks if your style of music requires many subtle variations.

I'm kind of curious what limitations you mean specifically, as I don't have a monomachine.

[cdog]

Originally Posted by bouzoukijoe1

correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't need complex structures for synth pop. that's what makes it synth pop. of course there are a few exceptions, but the point of it is simplicity. if you want true complexity, you need live band members.

As a former member of a half dozen bands, I totally disagree with this.

I do think playing with other people can bring out a lot of creativity and new ideas that you wouldnt have thought of otherwise, but it certainly isnt a prerequisite for more complex compositions.

But I do agree complexity shouldnt be a goal in and of itself - particularly for pop music. The most complex music, which is also often played by the highest caliber musicians and recorded to the highest standards - Im talking about classical and jazz - is also some of the least listened to music.

You do the math.

[Franc]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

I think the most people in here or on other similar sites are mainly dedicated to electro, EDM, techno, dubstep, whatever...

I myself, I'm mostly doing Synth Pop, and I wonder if there are other people out there who are in the same boat.
What gear do you prefer to use, especially which sequencers are useful for synthpop?

However, I do love my NordLead 2x and my Mopho for the style I'm into!

I was doing it back in the day when it just started - even just pre-DMode.

Korg MS-10, Roland TR-606, Korg PolySix, Realistic Moog MG-1 and a Roland String synth SH-09. Those were the days.

[Polarelch]

Cool! With "Sequencer", I didn't mean a DAW, I myself am recording with Logic, but I rather mean, what hardware sequencers would suit the pop on stage?

[djugel]

Originally Posted by bouzoukijoe1

correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't need complex structures for synth pop. that's what makes it synth pop.

yeah true.. but you'd be surprised how much one simple "pickup note" can really halt your workflow.

Kawai Q80 is a great little sequencer... too bad they like to break for no good reason all the time... :(

[djugel]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

but I rather mean, what hardware sequencers would suit the pop on stage?

well.. if the music is written already then the sequencer doesn't really matter. You theoretically could use a MIDI Filer.

[djugel]

Originally Posted by cdog

As a former member of a half dozen bands, I totally disagree with this.

I do think playing with other people can bring out a lot of creativity and new ideas that you wouldnt have thought of otherwise, but it certainly isnt a prerequisite for more complex compositions.

VERY TRUE!!!
I love bouncing ideas off of people... but I find when I want to get more complex.. I'm better off alone than just having to explain it 3 or 4 times... and hope for the best..

[bouzoukijoe1]

Originally Posted by djugel

yeah true.. but you'd be surprised how much one simple "pickup note" can really halt your workflow.

Kawai Q80 is a great little sequencer... too bad they like to break for no good reason all the time... :(

pickup notes - totally. good point. pop music sometimes requires so much variations that it's a pain to program. sometimes it feels like you're better off just performing and recording each track and overdubbing or something.

I wonder how much live synth pop was ever done with sequencers to begin with? maybe not as much as one would think? I believe a lot of the more famous acts either used pre-recorded backing tracks, or had multiple band members play the different parts. there's probably less synth pop bands who actually used sequencers live. does anyone even know? Peaches w/ her 303 maybe? Fischerspooner? Ladytron? advanced hardware sequencers weren't developed until the mid to late 90's/early 2000 and by that time synth pop was pretty much dead.

[maisonvague]

Originally Posted by cdog

...
My one piece of advice of working ITB: just because everything is ITB, doesnt mean it has to be nailed to the grid, quantized, and autotuned. Dont be afraid to let a little sloppines, a little humanity, shine through.

This is stellar advice regarding both synthpop production and performance. In addition to simplicity and clarity of structure in song writing, I believe it is key to creating the vibe that those of us who appreciate classic synthpop cherish so much.

Regarding gear... my own approach towards modern synthpop production is a good example of where the gear is less important than the application of that gear. In my own productions I do like to use (mostly) vintage gear (old Rolands, Oberheims, Prophets, etc.) but that's really only my personal choice. I believe you can get great results from software only, modern analogs or VAs, whatever if (1) the song writing is strong and (2) you are very particular about which (modern) production techniques you choose to employ, and which you choose to save for another kind of production.

Real world advice/examples:

(1) delay. These days, just about every digital delay can sync to MIDI clock. I often choose not to do that, but adjust the delay by ear (or tap) which is less precise. Subtle "off-ness" goes a long way! The same can be applied to LFO syncing, etc. With so much control these days with modern gear, computers, etc., the temptation is to control/sync everything. Don't. The wonkiness of early hand-made synthpop and electro is part of the appeal (at least, for me).

(2) play your keyboards, not sequence them -- okay, easier said than done, but the more you can actually play your parts the more life you will breathe into your recordings/performances. If there is already a (steady) drum machine part going, an arpeggiator, or pre-programmed sequence, then playing along to it should be easier, right? The lack of precision in the played part can give you that all-elusive "human feel" that you hear even in the "robot music" of Kraftwerk.

(3) auto-tune. Never. Ever. Unless you're going for a specific (hopefully brief) effect. Can you imagine Gary Numan's voice auto-tuned?! Christ!

Regarding playing with other musicians vs. machines, etc. I believe it is a personal choice, not a criteria for making good synthpop (or any kind of music really). Even Vince Clarke himself -- an undisputed master of synthpop -- talks about the thrill of being able to "dispense" with his band mates using sequencers, etc. Again, it is how the technology is applied which makes the difference -- not the fact of using technology. Personally, however, I prefer the "band approach" for live synthpop: a group of musicians playing synths, triggering arpeggios, drum machines or sequencers live. So long as everything is not overly sync'd up, this rock band style of performance can... well, ROCK!

[Polarelch]

Very good ideas in there. I'll especially try to use more slightly unsynced delay etc.
I actually opened the topic for a general discussion and less about a certain personal background that I have, but now that we're at it:
I actually did plan to play 1-2 keyboards live (nordlead + maybe a rompler), then - until I formed up a whole band - would let a drumcomputer make the beat, and have bass and sequence/arpeggiator-sounds sequenced.

By complex song structure I rather mean that, hard to describe, maybe I have even a wrong impression...
for EDM, Techno, etc, the bass notes aren't changing a lot. With pop though..
One simple example (and a song that I love) Erasure's Always has this chorus where the last bar has 5 beats.
Another song that is very complex the way I mean it, is A-Ha's Hunting High And Low.
That's where I wonder, if Sequencers would make sense there, or if they are at their limit far too quickly.

Of course it doesnt *need* to be like this, I could have fun with a song that only consists of 2 notes and the same drum pattern all the way through.

[maisonvague]

I think I understand what you mean. Because classic synthpop often follows a more traditional song form (with verses, bridges, chorus, etc.) a bass line will usually need to be more complex than say a 16-step sequencer can manage. So you either have to have someone physically playing the bass part, or sequence it up using either a hardware or computer sequencer. Is this what you mean?

Depending on the groove, this sequenced bass line could be played in by hand… and left unquantized… or programmed by step… and then triggered "live" …. Certainly feasible and kosher in my book.

As an audience member, I can "forgive" a performer for triggering a pre-sequenced bass line as long as it's clear that's what's being done. It's like "Okay, so there's no bass player… or that part needs to be tight and robotic. That's cool." What I can't stand is not knowing what's being done live and what isn't. I can't stand hearing/watching a mammoth wall of sound coming out of a laptop from some dude with a single MIDI controller playing with only a finger or two. Call me a snob, if you must, but really I don't enjoy seeing such performances. I like to know just who or what is responsible for what I am hearing… where exactly the sound is coming from… pre-sequenced or not. This is one advantage to using a hardware sequencer on stage I believe. There is less stigma. Anyway… I think I'm a dying breed of electronic musician. Solo dudes with laptops and MIDI controllers are the future… so... well, there you have it.

I may cave in and start using Ableton Live on stage. It's a cool program, actually… and if pre-sequenced tracks are kept to a minimum, I still think it's possible to give an honest "live performance" without the feeling of being a charlatan.

[maisonvague]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

... I could have fun with a song that only consists of 2 notes and the same drum pattern all the way through.

Yeah, me, too! Lately I've been getting into Klaus Schulze style jams where I'll set up a simple one or two bar sequence and then drone on endlessly playing synth lines over it. Great fun.

[maisonvague]

By the way, I did kind of go off on technique as opposed to discussing actual gear, so in the spirit of the OP's original question here's a list of some of the gear I like to use for synthpop and why I use it:

(1) Jupiter-4 -- Has a natural old school sound and feel to it. This is also the instrument that was used on a lot of my favorite recordings by The Human League, Gary Numan, etc. The arpeggiator is wonderful -- especially with the HOLD button down -- you can get some wild FX going beyond the simple arpeggiation of standard chords, etc.

(2) Promars -- Similar to the JP-4, but more suitable for leads and bass lines / sequences. The second VCO really beefs up the sound. It can get very close to sounding like a Pro One, which I would consider the definitive synthpop monosynth. Well, that and the Minimoog.

(3) OB-Xa -- Phenomenal sound, rough and gritty. Very rock n roll feeling to this synth which I like.

(4) Prophet-5 -- This is the most capable analog poly I have. Never ceases to amaze me what this monster can produce. Not as warm as the Obie, but much more versatile... with a punch that can really cut through a mix. The Obie can cut through a mix as well... but I wouldn't really call it "cutting" ... more like "stomping" haha

(5) JP-8000 -- Favorite of the first generation VAs. Doesn't have the quality of sound like some of my other synths, but it's a very inspiring instrument to play. I appreciate it most for just that: how it inspires me to play... even when the actual part often ends up going to a better sounding synth.

(6) MKS-50 -- Synthpop dream synth. Bass is killer. I like mixing DCO synths with VCO synths. Those solid DCOs can provide some much needed grounding to certain less stable VCOs -- like, for instance, the ones on my Jupiter which are not exactly the most stable in the universe.

(7) MSQ-100 -- Obsolete digital MIDI sequencer. I really don't enjoy working with computers... so when I need to sequence a more complex part I will simply use this device (which has the added bonus of being able to sync with Roland DIN/SYNC gear e.g. TR-606)

(8) Pro Tools -- Okay, so I don't like working with computers. But I HATE working with tape. It may sound great, but maintenance is a pain... and splicing is, well, also a pain. Thank god for Pro Tools.

(9) Moogerfoogers -- Awesome sounding pieces of kit IMO -- especially the MF-103 Phaser and MF-104Z Analog Delay. I like to record "old school" with FX straight to tape. Well, hard disk. I usually MULT the inputs so I have a direct in without FX when needed (and it does get needed ;-)

(10) DMX -- Wish I had a real one. I love that sound. So I have to be content with samples. I use Battery for that, my favorite software for drum parts.

(11) XP-60 -- Again because I prefer to spend as little time as possible in front of a computer, I will use this to sketch out tracks, act as a drum machine, etc. I've got the Vintage Synth and Techno boards installed (the latter mostly for the drum sounds).

(12) SM-58 -- My voice doesn't really merit use of a better microphone. So, this is my mic of choice.

[JoaT]

I'd consider my own stuff as heavily eighties / seventies synth pop influenced moodern(ish) synth pop, and feel I qualify as someone giving my insight to this.

I do my sequencing in the box.
I feel some synths are more "pop" sounding in a traditional synth pop context. I have found Prophet 5 to be the most pop sounding synth for me. I also find myself using moog for bass more often than not. One quite good trick is to use multiple monosynths played with different sounds to form a chord structure comprised of three or four different melodies.. kind of similar to arranging for violins. A good instrument for adding a vintage sound that's familiar to nearly everyone is to use sid-based synth somewhere. There's good vstis for the purpose, and monomachine does this well too.
As for drums, I tend to avoid 909, but often use 808. The best drum machines for me have been Linn's and older Korg and Roland boxes, such as CR-78 and KPR-77. Also, preset rhytms of some old analog drum machine added to the programmed drums as effect adds nicely to the feel sometimes.
As someone said before, don't quantize everything, and adjust your delays by ear. I tend to use distortion or overdrive on a lot of things, but usually subtly. They are great tools in adding imperfection and realism to your mix when used right.
The last thing... Cherish the mistakes. Clean out what you must, but only after the song is "together". Those mistakes tend to lead you to the places you wouldn't normally go to.

[Yoozer]

Originally Posted by Polarelch

I find it a bit difficult to build up a whole pop song with, for instance, Monomachine. Its Song Sequencer is somehow limited when you use complex song structures

I'm doing a really stupid random guess here, because I've never used a Monomachine.

Isn't it similar to a groovebox in the sense that a full pattern does not have to have all parts to linked to it? E.g. you create two bassline patterns and two drum pattern, so you can have 4 combinations which should not "cost" 4 patterns but only 2 for each instrument type.

[oldgearguy]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

I'm doing a really stupid random guess here, because I've never used a Monomachine.

Isn't it similar to a groovebox in the sense that a full pattern does not have to have all parts to linked to it? E.g. you create two bassline patterns and two drum pattern, so you can have 4 combinations which should not "cost" 4 patterns but only 2 for each instrument type.

Actually, the Monomachine sequencer's Song Mode is fairly flexible. You arrange a sequence of patterns, you can set tempo, transpose, number of repeats for each pattern in the song, set up loops around groups of patterns, even change the offset and length of a pattern.

Where most (all?) hw sequencers fall down is that song mode is a different way of working than pattern/loop mode. It's reminiscent of patch versus multi in synthesizers. In the synthesizer world, the Waldorf Wave attempted to solve the problem by only having multi mode. Made creating and editing a single sound slightly slower, but in the end, the benefits are worth it.

What I'd like to see is a hw sequencer that is permanently in Song mode and you just happen to be editing/creating chunks of the song as a pattern or series of patterns.

[bouzoukijoe1]

Originally Posted by Yoozer

I'm doing a really stupid random guess here, because I've never used a Monomachine.

Isn't it similar to a groovebox in the sense that a full pattern does not have to have all parts to linked to it? E.g. you create two bassline patterns and two drum pattern, so you can have 4 combinations which should not "cost" 4 patterns but only 2 for each instrument type.

on an rm1x I think you can create phrases, patterns, and songs. so for example I think it's possible to reuse/recombine 2 drum phrases and 2 basslines into 4 different patterns, then chain those into songs. but on other sequencers you only have patterns + songs. in theory you can avoid duplication and maybe save a pattern if you have that intermediate level, but not sure about the monomachine. doesn't it only have patterns + songs?

[we88]

Originally Posted by oldgearguy

Actually, the Monomachine sequencer's Song Mode is fairly flexible.

Totally agree. While we mostly use an MPC on stage because it's easier to move back and forward with a DAW the Monomachine can do it all with creative use of song mode. one major problem/limitation though is that when using looped and nested patterns it becomes impossible to rehearse properly because you never quite know where you are in the song - to be sure you have to reload the song and go to the line you want to know how many repeats of a pattern will occur. Another pain is the mental games you have to play to do unusual time signatures.

[Benedict]

Would machine work in this scenario?

[xingding]

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I make synthpop music and I was wondering ... would be at all "lame" in a live environment, as an indie artist, to just bring a laptop running a DAW, a midi controller for lead synth improv, and just run the vocals through a rigged track in the DAW for effects? How do you keep the audience interested with something so simple?

[gen6k]

Originally Posted by xingding

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I make synthpop music and I was wondering ... would be at all "lame" in a live environment, as an indie artist, to just bring a laptop running a DAW, a midi controller for lead synth improv, and just run the vocals through a rigged track in the DAW for effects? How do you keep the audience interested with something so simple?

Well for starters I would midi trigger the whole track so it plays on the instruments for more of a "live" vibe instead of a pressed track. Usually you have to find out how to also midi modulations on your instruments. Second of all, you should write music that is translatable to a band setting.

[Polarelch]

The song sequencer in the Monomachine seems buggy, at least in mine, when you use the Midi Track 7 to transpose the midi out tracks.
There are not enough patterns to program all the bass for all kind of songs.
Its too limited, at least the old Monomachine.

I contacted Elektron about the bug and expect a reply in the next days.