The fact is a lot of peeps complaining nowadays that their analog drum box does not sound as deep and swinging as the old boxes.Tetr4 sounds good but lacks character.Many complain that the new virus ect sounds just like sw.Samplers arnt as rich and sophisticated as they were.And the best virtual analogs were back in the 90 s/2000......Sure to be alive today is amazing,lots of new toys ectect.But the old gear was just more hardware than now for the $$.Materials have gone up and things are squashed into smaller chips/boards...
1. People can argue the Virus is just like software because it basically just IS software in a box.
2. Samplers are much more sophisticated today than in the past. That doesn't even make sense.
3. The best VA's back in the 90's/2000? What...are...you...talking...about?
Why are you all talking about gear? The real problem is that today's "musicians" have next to no training. How many forum threads do you see where someone mentions they've purchased $5000+ in new gear, and then they start a thread to determine what key their music is in and how to tell the difference between 3/4 and 4/4 time?
The problem is that people today like to wear their ignorance as a badge of honor and then use their gear as a scapegoat for their inability to actually write music. How many threads have you read where someone says "you don't need to learn that useless theory, just jam and be creative, be new" (where new is defined as incompetent meandering with simple diatonic harmony).
The problem isn't the drum machines, it's the empty heads of the people using them.
There is absolutely no problem. Neither with equipment, nor with the people using it. There have always been musical people making music, and not so musical people making music. If you don't like something someone is doing, just tune out, there are plenty of places for you to go to find quality music. You won't find it on the radio so much, depending on where you live, but there is absolutely no reason to complain or lament anything.
I hear you OP. Part of the appeal of older gear for me is
A) The physicality of it
B) The limitations
Agreed the sound of a CZ101 or LinnDrum has a grainy/gritty timbre to it thats just appealing to my ears. They are sounds you heard on countless classic hits too.
But I like new stuff too, I have a Blofeld, Ultranova, Korg M3. The power the newer machines offer is immense, especially drum machines. MFB, Jomox, DSI, Elektron and Vermona all make some great gear.
if you can't make a synth/drum machine (new or old) sound good or do the business then the problem isn't the machine.
and i'm not saying they're all created equal... just saying.. don't blame the gear. a machine drum can kill.. so can a 909.. it just depends who's hands it's in.
Ok, some of you guys mistaken me way too harshly. If you read my original post I said there are obvious EXCEPTIONS. It's just if I had to chose, in general, between 90's Synths and today's Synths or drum machines I would prefer the older stuff gathered what I've listened to purely from my newborn experience on the genre.
As with the 'presets' argument. I understand you can edit the oscillation, knobs, frequency rate, amplify to give a more 'crisp' sound, etc. But the sounds themselves imported in the older Synths just have a certain distinctive quality that I feel today's lacks in general. And someone on the thread said how 90s drum machines are the worst. I'm the complete, total opposite, IMO. I cater to 90s drum machines the most as to me they seem the most versatile. 80's drum machines sounded really scratchy as if the production wasn't really advanced yet. But 90s drum machines I felt were intermediate between the 'clear' sound quality of 00's beats and the rough sounding beats of the 80's. I feel that decade was right in between. Then again, you guys could easily beat me in an argument over this due to your way exceptional experience on the hardware/software so I'm not going to bother on that matter.
I'm not saying that ALL drum machines and synths are bad and I can't like them. That's flat-out nonsense. But the acoustics or sound texture of the older one's with their grainy, rich presets and atmoshperic sounds just appeals to my ear moreso than today's. I feel today's drum machines in particular are too "clear" sounding. I miss the rough, harsh abrasive sounds that don't sound too "pure" or "clear" to my ear. I liked the grainy sound of it all. As I said, I'm speaking purely in general.
Quote:
There is a world of difference between an Akai XR
You see, this is what I want from you all as well. give me more examples such as that and I will generalize less on today's production. now I have hope...
Ok, some of you guys mistaken me way too harshly. If you read my original post I said there are obvious EXCEPTIONS. It's just if I had to chose, in general, between 90's Synths and today's Synths or drum machines I would prefer the older stuff gathered what I've listened to purely from my newborn experience on the genre.
As with the 'presets' argument. I understand you can edit the oscillation, knobs, frequency rate, amplify to give a more 'crisp' sound, etc. But the sounds themselves imported in the older Synths just have a certain distinctive quality that I feel today's lacks in general. And someone on the thread said how 90s drum machines are the worst. I'm the complete, total opposite, IMO. I cater to 90s drum machines the most as to me they seem the most versatile. 80's drum machines sounded really scratchy as if the production wasn't really advanced yet. But 90s drum machines I felt were intermediate between the 'clear' sound quality of 00's beats and the rough sounding beats of the 80's. I feel that decade was right in between. Then again, you guys could easily beat me in an argument over this due to your way exceptional experience on the hardware/software so I'm not going to bother on that matter.
I'm not saying that ALL drum machines and synths are bad and I can't like them. That's flat-out nonsense. But the acoustics or sound texture of the older one's with their grainy, rich presets and atmoshperic sounds just appeals to my ear moreso than today's. I feel today's drum machines in particular are too "clear" sounding. I miss the rough, harsh abrasive sounds that don't sound too "pure" or "clear" to my ear. I liked the grainy sound of it all. As I said, I'm speaking purely in general.
You see, this is what I want from you all as well. give me more examples such as that and I will generalize less on today's production. now I have hope...
I still think you're mistaken production over instrument sound.
... But the acoustics or sound texture of the older one's with their grainy, rich presets and atmoshperic sounds just appeals to my ear moreso than today's. I feel today's drum machines in particular are too "clear" sounding. I miss the rough, harsh abrasive sounds that don't sound too "pure" or "clear" to my ear. I liked the grainy sound of it all.
Now that's a clearer explanation.
It's interesting to note that a lot of the current gear and software is still looking backwards to emulate and sound like older gear... but still not even getting it quite right. It comes very close sometimes, but never quite nails it.
There is also a lot of focus on effects and wilder sounds, which may or may not be that musically enticing to everyone.
As one extreme example, compare two things old and new like a DMX vs. Korg iElectribe. The iElectribe has crazy effects, way more sounds, all kinds of parameter locks and programming tricks, and yet... guess which one gets more peoples' heads nodding and cuts through a mix better? Probably the DMX. There's a raw, grainy simple funkiness going on that just works. And the iElectribe puts a fake vacuum tube on the screen to make it sound older/phatter but still pretty much fails.
Look at the era that those older instruments were made. If you look at the old ads and the products themselves, it seems fewer products were released but there was more emphasis on R&D, quality and musicality. The build was rock solid and made more for musicians, and the entry cost was higher than now. (I was too young then to really know, but it seemed that way; someone correct me if I'm wrong.)
Or, maybe they just got lucky... maybe the technology was less advanced, but it turns out that the sound produced that way actually sounds a bit better to the ear.
I still think you're mistaken production over instrument sound.
He seems to be including both aspects into his argument to some extent, but his main point (musicality and old vs. new products/production) still stands.
He seems to be including both aspects into his argument to some extent, but his main point (musicality and old vs. new products/production) still stands.
(I think?)
Unless you have golden ears or have played with a specific instrument very intently, most people won't or don't know the difference in machine a's sound vs machine b's sound on any album. Also "old school" music CAN be made with new gear. And most people can be fooled easily. Example being Ged who uses all VSTs for 80s inspired music and it sounds pretty damn good! And alternatively, vintage or high end modern analogue (& digital) gear can be used for modern production. Example being Deadmau5. It really truely is in the hands of the user. To think that you HAVE to have old gear to make the music of back then is just silly.
Personally I believe that things from the past while still work functionally. (IE a Television from 1990 will still work if it was kept in good condition. BUT, it's not widescreen, it's not HD, SURE, the STORY will be the same if you watch a particular program on a OLD TV an HDTV but functions and features are missing.
Technology should push creativity not stunt it. I like my old gear for some things and my new gear for others.
Unless you have golden ears or have played with a specific instrument very intently, most people won't or don't know the difference in machine a's sound vs machine b's sound on any album. Also "old school" music CAN be made with new gear. And most people can be fooled easily. Example being Ged who uses all VSTs for 80s inspired music and it sounds pretty damn good! And alternatively, vintage or high end modern analogue (& digital) gear can be used for modern production. Example being Deadmau5. It really truely is in the hands of the user. To think that you HAVE to have old gear to make the music of back then is just silly.
I guess I have golden ears then, because if you were to give me an example of a new production demo or song disguised as an old school track on youtube I can easily distinguish if it's actually old or not not even 3 seconds into the song. I'm just like that, always been.
As another user put it similarly, it's just the distinctive quality of the gear. I liked that it wasn't too 'clear' or overproduced sounding to the ear. I liked the harshness and 'grainy' aspect of it as I said before. Rooted right down to the default sound presets which can be edited/modified. I can easily let myself go with just someone doodling on a vintage Synth with no drum machine attached or vice-versa. But not with most gear or digital audio tech today, in general.
And another person says that I'm mistaking production over instrument sound. Not necessarily true. I'm speaking on behalf of both fronts and how they conjoin and play hand in hand together.
You guys are correct that the gear isn't what makes a good track - and this is totally reasonable. I agree. But my problem with my main, core argument is that I just don't think the acoustic sounds of the keyboards are really a match, in general, against the 80s and 90s Synths and drum machines. I understand that previous decades have 'inferior' technology compared to today. But I wouldn't call that a valid argument - some of the best club tracks I've heard were 15-20 years ago and produced one of the best, creative sound-effects and melodies I've ever heard. I don't think "inferior" technology dictates its use and ingenuity from its creator.
Also being said, I do enjoy the songwriting and harmonies and melodies used in earlier EDM songs as well. Which is also partially why I don't like today's EDM music in general, excluding the gear aspect of it. I liked the way they just composed the music, I felt it was better quality not just gear-wise but songwriting/musical form wise. With the build-ups, melodic hooks, atmospheric background sounds, etc. Combine solid songwriting approach with solid Synth and drum gear and to me, it's why old is better than the new. This is obviously my opinion though and I know I'm probably the only one. But I hope you get what I'm saying at least. And I wouldn't mind more examples of new stuff as well because I do have hope and open for other examples of good current digital or hardware synths and drum machines, as I said earlier. So I'm not trying to be fully black-and-white on this topic here.
I guess I have golden ears then, because if you were to give me an example of a new production demo or song disguised as an old school track on youtube I can easily distinguish if it's actually old or not not even 3 seconds into the song. I'm just like that, always been.
As another user put it similarly, it's just the distinctive quality of the gear. I liked that it wasn't too 'clear' or overproduced sounding to the ear. I liked the harshness and 'grainy' aspect of it as I said before. Rooted right down to the default sound presets which can be edited/modified. I can easily let myself go with just someone doodling on a vintage Synth with no drum machine attached or vice-versa. But not with most gear or digital audio tech today, in general.
And another person says that I'm mistaking production over instrument sound. Not necessarily true. I'm speaking on behalf of both fronts and how they conjoin and play hand in hand together.
You guys are correct that the gear isn't what makes a good track - and this is totally reasonable. I agree. But my problem with my main, core argument is that I just don't think the acoustic sounds of the keyboards are really a match, in general, against the 80s and 90s Synths and drum machines. I understand that previous decades have 'inferior' technology compared to today. But I wouldn't call that a valid argument - some of the best club tracks I've heard were 15-20 years ago and produced one of the best, creative sound-effects and melodies I've ever heard. I don't think "inferior" technology dictates its use and ingenuity from its creator.
Also being said, I do enjoy the songwriting and harmonies and melodies used in earlier EDM songs as well. Which is also partially why I don't like today's EDM music in general, excluding the gear aspect of it. I liked the way they just composed the music, I felt it was better quality not just gear-wise but songwriting/musical form wise. With the build-ups, melodic hooks, atmospheric background sounds, etc. Combine solid songwriting approach with solid Synth and drum gear and to me, it's why old is better than the new. This is obviously my opinion though and I know I'm probably the only one. But I hope you get what I'm saying at least. And I wouldn't mind more examples of new stuff as well because I do have hope and open for other examples of good current digital or hardware synths and drum machines, as I said earlier. So I'm not trying to be fully black-and-white on this topic here.
Sounds to me production techniques are your issue, not the gear. So why not emulate older techniques. I've owned most of the old "classics" and I'm telling you, there is a difference- but it's extremely slight in most cases. To the point of being totally negligible. These guys that are spending stupid money (and it is stupid unless you just have a lot of expendable money to throw) on vintage synths are suckers. Even 5-10 years ago when prices were half it was too much money. Now it's just idiotic. Hell, most don't even know what to do with them anyway. They aren't magic, and are much more limited than you think. Three words: composition....repeat. If you must have analog, get something newer used as a mono and one poly. Fill the rest in with VSTi's. When you become AIR or any other band/musician that is worth a crap, then buy whatever you want. Otherwise it is a complete waste of money IMO.
Sounds to me production techniques are your issue, not the gear. So why not emulate older techniques. I've owned most of the old "classics" and I'm telling you, there is a difference- but it's extremely slight in most cases. To the point of being totally negligible. These guys that are spending stupid money (and it is stupid unless you just have a lot of expendable money to throw) on vintage synths are suckers. Even 5-10 years ago when prices were half it was too much money. Now it's just idiotic. Hell, most don't even know what to do with them anyway. They aren't magic, and are much more limited than you think. Three words: composition....repeat. If you must have analog, get something newer used as a mono and one poly. Fill the rest in with VSTi's. When you become AIR or any other band/musician that is worth a crap, then buy whatever you want. Otherwise it is a complete waste of money IMO.
Well, as I said. I guess you could say I have a 'default' predisposition to favor vintage audio tech and its acoustic nature over today's. But add the fact that I also preferred the production methods/songwriting prowess from back in the day and put them together.
For instance and as I said in my OP, I could easily tap my foot and catch a rhythm to an old synth or drumline even if there's no real layered vocals, instrumentation yet. But with the new stuff I've skimmed on youtube, not so much. Reminds me too much of what I hear on the radio with that stupid, god-awful Dance-rap garbage that I totally DESPISE. Yet everyone else around me seems to love. I cannot get a rhythm out of that shit at all. But I digress my point.
So I think it's both a prospect of just the 'phase' that music went through along the years AND the gear/hardware/software. Which, fortunately for me, favored and went together hand and hand for me.
But I certainly would like more examples of some nice digital and hardware Synths or drum machines being made today. I am very open and eager to tilt my opinion and show that I shouldn't generalize.
Unless you have golden ears or have played with a specific instrument very intently, most people won't or don't know the difference in machine a's sound vs machine b's sound on any album. Also "old school" music CAN be made with new gear. And most people can be fooled easily. Example being Ged who uses all VSTs for 80s inspired music and it sounds pretty damn good! And alternatively, vintage or high end modern analogue (& digital) gear can be used for modern production. Example being Deadmau5. It really truely is in the hands of the user. To think that you HAVE to have old gear to make the music of back then is just silly.
I have no idea who Ged is, but being a disco enthusiast and owning tons of both old and new disco records, I can say that modern nu-disco productions, at least the ones I've heard, have almost never captured the sound of the late 70's and the 80's. There are some that are close, but still something's lacking in the sound department.
Not saying modern music can't sound good, just saying that even the retro stuff very rarely hits the mark.
I'd like to be wrong though, could you please post an example of, say, a disco/boogie/synth-funk tune that sounds like the 80's, made with VST's?
__________________
Would Schrödinger's cat sound better OTB?
I think two things could be responsible for the difference between the 80s/90s music and the music today.
First the people who are behind the machines and their compositions. The music today is dominated by rhythmic and less harmonic or melodic elements.
I miss for example such longer than 1 or 2 bars melodic or harmonic phrases compared to the 80s/90s. I cant understand the vocalists today why they have fear to sing a melody. They sing often just on one note and just double and double this one note in the hope the people will remark that it is the chorus now.... . Oh God. Many tracks today lack in melody and harmony, but I must also say that they have really a better drum backing than in the 80s. By the way I was never a big fan of the 80s drumsound, where a snare was sounded more like a shot of a rifle and those boring static hi-hats and thin kicks. But the beautiful melodies, clever arrangements and the awsome synth sounds made those songs to timeless hits.
The second thing has to do with the equippment. Those synths had a lot of unperfection in sound and technic and the musicians and producers tried to minimize that with some combinations of different synths with different sound character. Because every producer had his own favourites to do that the songs get an individual character in sound and frequency range. Because the possibilities had been limited the musicians and producers invested many time to programm an awsome sound for their song to sound unique instead of others. Even the companies like Roland, Yamaha and Korg tried to invest much work and money to fill their synths with unique presets. Think just on Roland D-50 and how many hits came from its presets. This you will not find today in that form. Ok it was another time and the musicians and music companies had been like pioneers. Or because of the lack of sample memory and low sample bit rates the companies tried to compensate this with expensive filters and analog compounds before and after the digital section in those synths. THink on emulator II or SCI Prophet 2002 etc.
Today most people install their NI Komplete and Spectrasonic Omnisphere and take only the first 25 presets of this synths (who wants to hear the rest of the other 1.800 leads, 5.000 basses, 1.990 closed Hihats etc.???) that goes threw their RME or AVID soundcards and so the sound is many times exactly the same.
We have like an inflation of sound maybe. It's too much sometimes and the people donT want to tweak an instrument compared to earlier times.
Another reason is that too many people are under too big pressure to be succesfull. We live in a time where people are judged by their success not by their individuality.
So unfortunately many musicians copy instead of creating new sound. They think...ok this song was a hit with this sounds, so my song should have the same sounds in it. I hate these songs today that sound more and more like TV- or Radio-Jingles - all with the same sounds and limited too much beacuse of the loudness war, which also destroy the sound in my opinion.
Last week I heard some dance and trance classics from the mid 90s and the sound quality of those tracks blowed me away. Today we have some songs in the charts they sound like a cheap demo compared to those tracks from the 90s.
Or some soul, rap and disco classic of the 80s and early 90s - wow, what depth and stereo image...they sound so expensive and it was the time of 16bit...
But I'm optimistic. Even today you can find well produced and beautiful arranged songs with nice synths if you search a bit. But you have to search.....That's true.
And you can find even today new and good sounding instruments like Roland V-Synth, Korg Kronos, Waldorf Blofeld, Virus etc....
I guess I have golden ears then, because if you were to give me an example of a new production demo or song disguised as an old school track on youtube I can easily distinguish if it's actually old or not not even 3 seconds into the song. I'm just like that, always been.
One thing that might make a difference is the use of a common clock. Some of the older Drum machines where still running on their own clocks. This means less perfect synchronization.
A lot of todays dace music oriented presets sync everything, including the LFOs to one Midiclock. This can sound monotonous and "dead".
Try taking LFOs off the Midiclock and occasionally record stuff without master clock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Handsome Trevor
As another user put it similarly, it's just the distinctive quality of the gear. I liked that it wasn't too 'clear' or overproduced sounding to the ear. I liked the harshness and 'grainy' aspect of it as I said before. Rooted right down to the default sound presets which can be edited/modified. I can easily let myself go with just someone doodling on a vintage Synth with no drum machine attached or vice-versa. But not with most gear or digital audio tech today, in general.
Some of the problem seems to be preset design, some "progress" and some "power".
Obviously this kind of depends, what instruments you tried. If you only tested instruments at a typical retailer and did not dive in very deep your impression seems reasonable.
The preset design: Let´s face it: The sounds that sell Synths to the general public change over time. Every synth manufacturer (at least the big ones) will try to have hip sounds on their keyboards. Sometimes they utterly fail...
Anyway: Often designing sounds from scratch or even modifying will yield very different results than the presets.
The progress: Higher Sample rate, more bits and (at least on workstations and most VAs) tons of effects. The presets tend to use a lot of FX, especially stuff like chorus and reverb which tends to reduce any kind of grittiness, that could be there. Some modern stuff also makes heavy use of layering and/or unison. This also makes sounds softer/mushier/less distinct.
FX and layering / unison can obviously be "fixed" by editing. If the bits and sample rate disturb you kind of depends. Most of the time it´s fixable by adding some other shaped noise.
The power: Most modern synths are very flexible. Romplers have 1000s of samples, VAs several different filter types, everything adds FX, VAs include samples or wavetables and so on.
In the end pretty much every modern synth has a huge scope of sounds, that it can do. This obviously makes the synths sound less distinct. Still, some synths push you in other directions than some other synths.
I think you will not reach the same fun and "intimacy" with a synth by tweaking presets. Basically you should at least program some sounds from scratch. Since modern Synths have a tendency to be complex this might take some time...
And with this we are back to the question: What synths and drummachines did you try?
I think presets from the big 3 (Yamaha, Korg and Roland) cover mostly the same territory. Of course there are some differences how they cover it and that comes down to taste, but they all do heavy sample layering and FX. Stuff like the Kronos can do very unique and distinct sounds, but this involves programming it by yourself.
Stuff that is more or less unique "out of the box":
- The no preset analogs (especially MFB (Dominion has presets, but might qualify), Microbrute)
- The Kurzweils: Not really electronic music ready, but more "retro" basic sound
- DSI stuff (especially Evolver, maybe Tempest for Drums)
- Accelerator (very smooth sounding, so maybe not what you are looking for)
- the strange DIY boxes (Shrunti is popular, forgot the others)
- If you tweak yourself maybe Blofeld.
- V-Synth
- you can always go modular...(obviously no polyphony, but we are talking dance music, right?)
Also tons of VSTs, but this is another topic.
There are tons of nice toys out, most are just slightly hidden...
1. People can argue the Virus is just like software because it basically just IS software in a box.
2. Samplers are much more sophisticated today than in the past. That doesn't even make sense.
3. The best VA's back in the 90's/2000? What...are...you...talking...about?
Wow...you misinterpreted what i said 3 times in a row.Must be a record.Maybe not tho.......
1.the 'NEW' virus is more sw sounding compared to the old versions apparently.
2.samplers in hardware form are certainly not more sophisticated nowadays.In fact there very rare.
3.yes.many people on this forum say the best va hardware synths have been made already.Production methods were certainly high when they created some of the early models.The Nordlead mk1 is the most reveared due to its raw gritty sound.
Just in case ill give myself a couple more due to the way this thread has gone already.
One thing that might make a difference is the use of a common clock. Some of the older Drum machines where still running on their own clocks. This means less perfect synchronization.
A lot of todays dace music oriented presets sync everything, including the LFOs to one Midiclock. This can sound monotonous and "dead".
Try taking LFOs off the Midiclock and occasionally record stuff without master clock.
Some of the problem seems to be preset design, some "progress" and some "power".
Obviously this kind of depends, what instruments you tried. If you only tested instruments at a typical retailer and did not dive in very deep your impression seems reasonable.
The preset design: Let´s face it: The sounds that sell Synths to the general public change over time. Every synth manufacturer (at least the big ones) will try to have hip sounds on their keyboards. Sometimes they utterly fail...
Anyway: Often designing sounds from scratch or even modifying will yield very different results than the presets.
The progress: Higher Sample rate, more bits and (at least on workstations and most VAs) tons of effects. The presets tend to use a lot of FX, especially stuff like chorus and reverb which tends to reduce any kind of grittiness, that could be there. Some modern stuff also makes heavy use of layering and/or unison. This also makes sounds softer/mushier/less distinct.
FX and layering / unison can obviously be "fixed" by editing. If the bits and sample rate disturb you kind of depends. Most of the time it´s fixable by adding some other shaped noise.
The power: Most modern synths are very flexible. Romplers have 1000s of samples, VAs several different filter types, everything adds FX, VAs include samples or wavetables and so on.
In the end pretty much every modern synth has a huge scope of sounds, that it can do. This obviously makes the synths sound less distinct. Still, some synths push you in other directions than some other synths.
I think you will not reach the same fun and "intimacy" with a synth by tweaking presets. Basically you should at least program some sounds from scratch. Since modern Synths have a tendency to be complex this might take some time...
And with this we are back to the question: What synths and drummachines did you try?
I think presets from the big 3 (Yamaha, Korg and Roland) cover mostly the same territory. Of course there are some differences how they cover it and that comes down to taste, but they all do heavy sample layering and FX. Stuff like the Kronos can do very unique and distinct sounds, but this involves programming it by yourself.
Stuff that is more or less unique "out of the box":
- The no preset analogs (especially MFB (Dominion has presets, but might qualify), Microbrute)
- The Kurzweils: Not really electronic music ready, but more "retro" basic sound
- DSI stuff (especially Evolver, maybe Tempest for Drums)
- Accelerator (very smooth sounding, so maybe not what you are looking for)
- the strange DIY boxes (Shrunti is popular, forgot the others)
- If you tweak yourself maybe Blofeld.
- V-Synth
- you can always go modular...(obviously no polyphony, but we are talking dance music, right?)
Also tons of VSTs, but this is another topic.
There are tons of nice toys out, most are just slightly hidden...
Hmm, very interesting. Maybe the common clock difference or asymmetry of the timing of the sequencing might be why I like the old stuff more. I don't know, really. Btw sorry to sound silly but can you tell me what the acronym of VST stands for exactly? I hear you guys use all these acronyms and I was wondering what they are or meant. Like VST, DSI, MIDI, etc.
And again, I'm hoping more people would give me some nice examples of some really good new synths and drum machines.
I have no idea who Ged is, but being a disco enthusiast and owning tons of both old and new disco records, I can say that modern nu-disco productions, at least the ones I've heard, have almost never captured the sound of the late 70's and the 80's. There are some that are close, but still something's lacking in the sound department.
Not saying modern music can't sound good, just saying that even the retro stuff very rarely hits the mark.
I'd like to be wrong though, could you please post an example of, say, a disco/boogie/synth-funk tune that sounds like the 80's, made with VST's?
Yet the Tempest costs $2000+ and the 505 costs around $100 today. Don't dis the 505 as it has that old school Roland vibe for ridiculously cheap. (Watches 505 prices skyrocket on ebay )
So you should take the Tempest + the 505. A hundred extra $ won't kill you.
Also, I tried out that newish Akai drum machine (the Alesis clone) it actually sounded pretty good and would be great for live DnB/breaks.
I blame this partly on cheap production methods. (Outsourcing up the wazoo)
There are a few good ones now though. Arturia Minibrute, some DSI synths. I still like the Access Virus. I feel that they are built well. Nords.
But most other ones suck in my opinion and there is too much focus on workstations and not synthesizers.
I never walk into a Guitar Center to buy a synth, only cables and accessories. Guitar pedals. Midi controllers are a cheap joke, none are worth more than 200 bucks in my opinion. It's an insult how bad they are made and what people are getting used to.
As for drum machine the Monotribe is pretty cool. DSI has a drum machine too. Arturia Spark sucks in my opinion due to licensing issues. I'm done with that and all softsynths. You can't pass a softsynth on to your son 15 years from now but you can with a Juno 60.
Big thumbs up on never walking into a guitar centre to purchase any gear except a pedal. True to licensing being a real pain in the butt, I am over software because of this very reason and not because I am to cool.
Seriously the amount of trouble to get software going, is it worth it? nope. I find the UAD2 card is easy though.
__________________ Techno sounds better on a step Sequencer.
His latest couple of tracks are all VST if I remember correctly. At least the first two.
Afaik Ged uses hw synths but mixes ITB, you may be right about his earlier productions though.
I'm really digging this guy's latest stuff atm, afaik all ITB. Ableton, Reason, Synth1 etc.
Anyway, I agree not all modern hw sucks, but most of it does. Having said that I guess it depends on your expectations, how high you set your standards, and what kind of music you're trying to make.
So I'm just going to cut straight to my somewhat rant. As the title says, am I the only one that finds todays Synthesizers, drum machines and audio tech crap compared to the 80's and 90s?
i am the same but if you use a word processor to make music ( the food of the soul ??????) then expect bland to follow...
New hardware? they got lost on high da specs , on pleasing share holders and using cheap components but they also got lost in this drive to sound more and more ' pre mastered' .If you listen to many new synths you notice they have compressed and limited the sound or gone for this synth that sounds ' premastered ' or already ' tight ' .Korg and roland are now way into this , you get this instant ' Sounds good at namm through cheap laptop speakers ' sound and pleases certain producers sucked into this super processed flat mix but if you into harmonics and richness you percieve it as dull and flat and ' sterile ' .
There is just to much focus on perfection whether its in designing the sound of a device these days to the final stages of mixing but we live in this age of super uniformity it seems .
I found this with alot of new music releases , they are over produced and to perfect and therefore come across as lifeless or bland or contrived and ' forced ' but this form of ' ocd mixing ' is very popular and you have an entire world of producers now who dont really listen to music but instead ' the production level ' .Their head took over ...i think the same goes for many software and hardware producers , they are not allowing flaw and not allowing what appeals to the heart and ear and just fixated on ' producing perfect ' and perfect = death .
So I'm just going to cut straight to my somewhat rant. As the title says, am I the only one that finds todays Synthesizers, drum machines and audio tech crap compared to the 80's and 90s?
i am the same but if you use a word processor to make music ( the food of the soul ??????) then expect bland to follow...
New hardware? they got lost on high da specs , on pleasing share holders and using cheap components but they also got lost in this drive to sound more and more ' pre mastered' .If you listen to many new synths you notice they have compressed and limited the sound or gone for this synth that sounds ' premastered ' or already ' tight ' .Korg and roland are now way into this , you get this instant ' Sounds good at namm through cheap laptop speakers ' sound and pleases certain producers sucked into this super processed flat mix but if you into harmonics and richness you percieve it as dull and flat and ' sterile ' .
There is just to much focus on perfection whether its in designing the sound of a device these days to the final stages of mixing but we live in this age of super uniformity it seems .
I found this with alot of new music releases , they are over produced and to perfect and therefore come across as lifeless or bland or contrived and ' forced ' but this form of ' ocd mixing ' is very popular and you have an entire world of producers now who dont really listen to music but instead ' the production level ' .Their head took over ...i think the same goes for many software and hardware producers , they are not allowing flaw and not allowing what appeals to the heart and ear and just fixated on ' producing perfect ' and perfect = death .
Again dude, your problem is not the instruments, it's the way music is being recorded and mixed, we live in a golden age of music instrument availability (there where lots of shity boxes being made back in the day too, it's only the good ones that get mentioned) therefore anynody can get exactly the sound you're after, but you have to at least try it before ranting about it.
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
. Oh God. Many tracks today lack in melody and harmony, but I must also say that they have really a better drum backing than in the 80s. By the way I was never a big fan of the 80s drumsound, where a snare was sounded more like a shot of a rifle and those boring static hi-hats and thin kicks. But the beautiful melodies, clever arrangements and the awsome synth sounds made those songs to timeless hits.
)
