The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Synths for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Does anyone else here feel like synthesizers quit being interesting after about 1979? Keyboard Synthesizers
Old 20th April 2019
  #181
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treebase DMX View Post
Yeah a bunch of graphs and "science" ... Modern day pop music is garbage because it is selling sex rather than music and is often full of autotune.. Jazz music has nothing to do with pop and was hated in the past by white racists because it was played by black people who smoked dope... and could play so much better than them while running circles around rigid rules.

People who are seriously into music often grow out of their teenage lack of taste and diversify their listening. Musical appreciation isn't about demographics but about life experience and a certain innate sensitivity that some people just lack.

Back to topic. No, modern synths are not all boring, it's just that your taste is stuck in the 70s.
Well said. I’m always amazed at people who seem like they got stuck in whatever music they started listening to during the height of their hormone production. Once, an ex girlfriend from when I was in that phase of my life called me. I’d not heard from her in about 10 years. What struck me was how stratified she was. She was still listening to only what she was listening during the time we were together. 60s pop and 80s New Wave. It was like she’d been in a coma since 1987. My best friend from high school is like that too. The last time I saw him post about music is was that he was going to a Todd Rundgren concert. (not that I’ve not anything against Todd... but he’s not really done anything of note for a very long time.)

Anyway, I don’t know what it is about me, but I started playing music in a serious way when I heard I Am The Walrus. The Beatles had long gone as a band, but the sound of that song lit my brain on fire. It was like nothing I’d ever heard on the radio. Maybe that’s where I got stuck. Looking for things that don’t sound like anything that would get on the radio? Nah, I love a good pop song too. I still love the crazier stuff from the Beatles, Pink Floyd, King Crimson... but I’ve really been digging the latest from Billie Eilish. I don’t care about genre or period. I just want a song to be good.
Old 20th April 2019
  #182
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioloud View Post
It's certainly not the tools in my opinion.
I agree it is a taste thing. There are some interesting synth based stuff but it is rare, very rare. (IN MY OPINION IN MY OPINION IN MY OPINION).

Last time I had a "wow" moment was when Dubstep came out (10 years ago?) with every single note mangled and processed and stuff trying to be interesting and evolving.
I have goosebumps every time I hear that synth solo on "Welcome to the machine". Love Massive Attack, Boards of Canada, and enjoyed many DnBass/Jungle/Trance stuff in the past.
So I am not anti synth/electronica in principal.

I unfortunately get to hear a lot of synth stuff that sound all the same.... Really boring and mono-dimensional.

Here comes the drone on the excessively long intro, than the arpegiator comes in with the cut off and res slightly rising, then you got a couple of LFO mangled whines, then the kick comes in then the extremly annoying melody line played with the most shrill and brain drilling sound they could have thought of, then OMG! a break! The drone comes in again with some white noise modulated with a bit of delay on top and then incredible! the whole thing comes back but this time with the synths pumping, I never heard that before!

Even a good 'ol blues has a very very - very predictable way of developing but at least (when it's good) every single note is coming from somewhere human, fallable, interesting...
In my opinion in MOST synth-music the tech leads the human musically more then the other way around. While its sometimes nice to have a bit of inspiration from random stuff happening, when it's the main driving element, I don't find it fulfilling nor as a musician nor as a listener.
The thing with MOST electronica and its sub genres as well is it often pretends and poses as the most modern and cutting edge thing while it actually obeys to self imposed rules and end up sounding the same in most cases.

Maybe that is why the OP isn't attracted by synths since 1979...
For me synths are the new "old". They don't excite me any more then watching paint dry.
Every one with a laptop can open a preset. Even many guys with all those euroracks and walls of stuff will sound very similar between them...

Give me a nice not-autotuned voice sang on top of a well arranged string part or even 3 simple guitar chords any day....

Again this is my opinion and it referes to MOST recent "synth-music" and not generally to everything and not a truth-declaration of any sorts so don't get offended please!
That’s a good point. Maybe what the OP dislikes is the total adherence to using heavily quantized and produced music. I think a lot of music relies too much on that and misses the human touch. The touch that only an actual instrumentalist can provide. You won’t get that by inputting notes with a mouse.... well, you might, but it will take a lot of work.
Old 20th April 2019
  #183
Gear Addict
 

I see a lot of sarcastic "get off my loan" and "grumpy old man" comments.

While I agree there is a degree of extra grumpiness added to each one of us as we age, and some comments are funny indeed, I think considering ONLY this aspect is wrong and ageist and a bit too disrespectful. I don't agree with belitteling one's opinion just because of one's age - be it towards a younger person or the other way around.

As a pre-teen kid growing up in the Eighties i despised Madonna and M Jackson and all the mainstream people were listening to and preferred the Beatles and Zep and even classical music. I was a grumpy young kid or I just had different taste?
In the Nineties as a teen I wanted to puke when hearing the Spice girls and Take That and Ricky Martin (but at least there was some good alternative music in the charts to listen to). Was I a grumpy young teen?

HAHAHAH maybe I'm just a grumpy person now that I think about it
Anyhow I don't think I am the only one feeling like an outsider most of the time.

Also there is another interesting point: new isn't always better and actually could be much much worse.
A shiny example is the arts in the Middle Ages, known also as the dark ages. Look at any famous painting from that era and then look at the
amazing sculptures from Ancient Greece a 1000/2000 years earlier.
The difference is incredible and it seems there has been a funny swap in the timeline as the ancient stuff looks miles away better and more interesting and detailed.

(PS that's why Renaissance came by in the 14th century, as they discovered the classics again and thought:" This EDM stuff actually sounds really primitive now that I heard Beethoven")
Old 20th April 2019
  #184
vlz
Gear Maniac
 
vlz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
Good? Doesn't seem very good to me.
What arguments do you have?
The arguments in favour of this being a good question? Well, romplers seem
eminently designed to reproduce existing instruments and that is the function
that they seem to play in a lot of their applications. "Synths" (if we assume
the differentiation) tend to be designed for a wider sonic palette that is not
necessarily imitative. It doesn't mean that romplers cannot be used to play
non-imitative sounds, and it doesn't mean that "synths" cannot attempt to
do emulation.

The associated point is that romplers are not always explored in terms of
sound sculpting: their UIs are sometimes ill-suited for that, the sounds tend
to come "ready" in presets, and some have limited programmability (if we
take the rompler category as a whole, including simpler preset machines).

In general, romplers seem to have replaced the functionality of the old
divide-down organs in their most common applications. We generally don't
mix organs and synths, they are in different categories (well... almost,
string machines are probably an edge case that sits in between). So, also
for that reason, the question is legitimate.
Old 20th April 2019
  #185
Gear Maniac
 
chaocrator's Avatar
Quote:
whether most romplers can be placed in the "synth" category.
my answer is:
Does anyone else here feel like synthesizers quit being interesting after about 1979?-52956362_2209112222443994_6962441320266727424_n.jpg

and yes, synths became not so interesting after these were discontinued )
with a few exceptions, e.g. Blofeld.
Attached Thumbnails
Does anyone else here feel like synthesizers quit being interesting after about 1979?-52956362_2209112222443994_6962441320266727424_n.jpg  
Old 20th April 2019
  #186
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioloud View Post
I see a lot of sarcastic "get off my loan" and "grumpy old man" comments.

While I agree there is a degree of extra grumpiness added to each one of us as we age, and some comments are funny indeed, I think considering ONLY this aspect is wrong and ageist and a bit too disrespectful. I don't agree with belitteling one's opinion just because of one's age - be it towards a younger person or the other way around.

As a pre-teen kid growing up in the Eighties i despised Madonna and M Jackson and all the mainstream people were listening to and preferred the Beatles and Zep and even classical music. I was a grumpy young kid or I just had different taste?
In the Nineties as a teen I wanted to puke when hearing the Spice girls and Take That and Ricky Martin (but at least there was some good alternative music in the charts to listen to). Was I a grumpy young teen?

HAHAHAH maybe I'm just a grumpy person now that I think about it
Anyhow I don't think I am the only one feeling like an outsider most of the time.

Also there is another interesting point: new isn't always better and actually could be much much worse.
A shiny example is the arts in the Middle Ages, known also as the dark ages. Look at any famous painting from that era and then look at the
amazing sculptures from Ancient Greece a 1000/2000 years earlier.
The difference is incredible and it seems there has been a funny swap in the timeline as the ancient stuff looks miles away better and more interesting and detailed.

(PS that's why Renaissance came by in the 14th century, as they discovered the classics again and thought:" This EDM stuff actually sounds really primitive now that I heard Beethoven")
I think you are missing an important point. All the art that’s been made across all time has been the best art for the culture that made it. Maybe you don’t like the stick figures on a cave wall, compared to the Mona Lisa, but to the people who made those, they were just as important and who had the time for a detailed portrait when there was always some looming attack from a saber toothed tiger? Your opinion of past art movements comes from your position in the current social group that you are part of.

Similarly, synths and music, are all products of our society and what technology we have access to. Things evolve, but that doesn’t mean some sort of progression to something “better.” They evolve to better fit in the current culture.
Old 20th April 2019
  #187
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing View Post
I think you are missing an important point. All the art that’s been made across all time has been the best art for the culture that made it. Maybe you don’t like the stick figures on a cave wall, compared to the Mona Lisa, but to the people who made those, they were just as important and who had the time for a detailed portrait when there was always some looming attack from a saber toothed tiger? Your opinion of past art movements comes from your position in the current social group that you are part of.

Similarly, synths and music, are all products of our society and what technology we have access to. Things evolve, but that doesn’t mean some sort of progression to something “better.” They evolve to better fit in the current culture.
Sorry, whilst very interesting, I don't understand what you are trying to say.
On the contrary, I firmly believe the stick figures on cave walls have a huge historical and artistic significance.

Last edited by audioloud; 20th April 2019 at 07:25 PM.. Reason: clearer
Old 20th April 2019
  #188
Lives for gear
 
monomer's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlz View Post
The arguments in favour of this being a good question? Well, romplers seem
eminently designed to reproduce existing instruments and that is the function
that they seem to play in a lot of their applications. "Synths" (if we assume
the differentiation) tend to be designed for a wider sonic palette that is not
necessarily imitative. It doesn't mean that romplers cannot be used to play
non-imitative sounds, and it doesn't mean that "synths" cannot attempt to
do emulation.
I'd say that this is only appearance.
Romplers are (as we all know) pretty powerfull synthesizers.
True, they cater more to sampled sound sources, but are neither devoid of synthetic sounds nor will they prevent you from making such sounds yourself.
In fact, they often have synthesis facilities that are not present on other synths. For sure, all romplers contain the basic synthesizer waveforms like saw and square, and also less common ones like sine or more complex single cycle waves.
So in general i would say that romplers have a greater pallette of sounds than most 'normal' synths.

And don't forget that 'normal' synths were also thought up to do immitative sounds.
My sh-101 manual from the early 80s has diagrams with patches for 'piano, 'harp', 'trumpet' etc, etc. These machines were released to cater for expectations of immitation. It's just that romplers are infinitely more successfull at immitation. But does that make them non-synths?

It's also true that romplers lean heavy on presets but they still allow you to store more of your own sounds than any other category machies. Certainly more than any analog synths.

Quote:
The associated point is that romplers are not always explored in terms of
sound sculpting: their UIs are sometimes ill-suited for that, the sounds tend
to come "ready" in presets, and some have limited programmability (if we
take the rompler category as a whole, including simpler preset machines).
But the same can be said of some analog synths. This has more to do, i think, with the ammount of functions on offer and the fact that they are inherently digital. Sum up the parameters on an average rompler and you will see that making a 'one function per button' would make these machines unsellable.

Interestingly enough you see similarly spartan interfaces on some digitally controlled analog synths.

Quote:
In general, romplers seem to have replaced the functionality of the old
divide-down organs in their most common applications. We generally don't
mix organs and synths, they are in different categories (well... almost,
string machines are probably an edge case that sits in between). So, also
for that reason, the question is legitimate.
I think romplers are common in the 'organ scene' because they offer serious polyphony and generally for the breadth of sounds on offer.
I think it's only a testament to the versatility of romplers that they are used all over the place. They are probably the most sucessfull category of synthesizers.

So all in all i think it can only be seen a good question if one only looks on the surface.
If you look beyond that most likely you find a more than adequate synth engine with often unique features. True, a lot of them are hampered by their interface but they still offer extended sythesis options.

When someone asks whether romplers are syths or not one can safely say that that person hasn't looked into it very deelpy.
Old 20th April 2019
  #189
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlz View Post
We generally don't mix organs and synths...
Maybe for the kind of music you play/like, but prog/funk/jazz/soul/rock has a lot of synth and organ; has since the early 1970s.
Old 20th April 2019
  #190
vlz
Gear Maniac
 
vlz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpl. Punishment View Post
Maybe for the kind of music you play/like, but prog/funk/jazz/soul/rock has a lot of synth and organ; has since the early 1970s.
That is not what I said. I was talking about instrument categories. We don't say an organ is a synth or vice-versa. Of course many musicians used a combination of what was available. Prog used a huge variety of instruments.

Gigging musicians tended to have an organ-based rig and the rompler replaced the organ.
Old 20th April 2019
  #191
Gear Nut
 
NawSon's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing View Post
Similarly, synths and music, are all products of our society and what technology we have access to. Things evolve, but that doesn’t mean some sort of progression to something “better.” They evolve to better fit in the current culture.
Modern music definitely matches modern culture very well. Both are steaming piles of horse****.
Old 20th April 2019
  #192
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioloud View Post
Sorry, whilst very interesting, I don't understand what you are trying to say.
On the contrary, I firmly believe the stick figures on cave walls have a huge historical and artistic significance.
Aside from the fact they’re not “stick figures.”

If you’ve actually seen/studied art from back then, you’ll realize the artists of the time had, if anything, a better appreciation of beauty and creative representation than we do now.

Yes, kids, history can go backwards, and has done so for at least half a century now. And that trend is accelerating.

p.s. they also spelled and wrote better because they didn’t have to fight with a hard glass surface and crummy autocorrect AI every step of the way....
Old 20th April 2019
  #193
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monomer View Post
I'd say that this is only appearance.
Romplers are (as we all know) pretty powerfull synthesizers.
True, they cater more to sampled sound sources, but are neither devoid of synthetic sounds nor will they prevent you from making such sounds yourself.
In fact, they often have synthesis facilities that are not present on other synths. For sure, all romplers contain the basic synthesizer waveforms like saw and square, and also less common ones like sine or more complex single cycle waves.
So in general i would say that romplers have a greater pallette of sounds than most 'normal' synths.

And don't forget that 'normal' synths were also thought up to do immitative sounds.
My sh-101 manual from the early 80s has diagrams with patches for 'piano, 'harp', 'trumpet' etc, etc. These machines were released to cater for expectations of immitation. It's just that romplers are infinitely more successfull at immitation. But does that make them non-synths?

It's also true that romplers lean heavy on presets but they still allow you to store more of your own sounds than any other category machies. Certainly more than any analog synths.


But the same can be said of some analog synths. This has more to do, i think, with the ammount of functions on offer and the fact that they are inherently digital. Sum up the parameters on an average rompler and you will see that making a 'one function per button' would make these machines unsellable.

Interestingly enough you see similarly spartan interfaces on some digitally controlled analog synths.



I think romplers are common in the 'organ scene' because they offer serious polyphony and generally for the breadth of sounds on offer.
I think it's only a testament to the versatility of romplers that they are used all over the place. They are probably the most sucessfull category of synthesizers.

So all in all i think it can only be seen a good question if one only looks on the surface.
If you look beyond that most likely you find a more than adequate synth engine with often unique features. True, a lot of them are hampered by their interface but they still offer extended sythesis options.

When someone asks whether romplers are syths or not one can safely say that that person hasn't looked into it very deelpy.
And yet again someone makes me regret not getting a JP-80 when they were a steal towards end of life.

Please, Roland, make one to beat that!
Old 20th April 2019
  #194
Here for the gear
 

omg

did you watch Midnight in Paris? Great movie!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabberknobby View Post
I'm not trying to troll despite the flame-worthy title.
I may just be too old for these forums.
I'm 55 years old. The synth music I loved was the proggers, Switched on Bach, Tomita and Bernie Worrell.
The stuff that started coming out in the 80's totally alienated me musically. I didn't even like the sound of the Prophet.

When I heard it on the radio most of the British stuff didn't register with me as synth music.
then when the DX7 took over I was done. I thought that thing sounded hideous and still do.

I was excited to see the remakes of the classic gear coming out. I've got a Karp and a Behringer Model-D.

It was frustrating reading reviews on here trying to decide if I wanted the Odyssey. People kept referring to Ultravox as old-school. I listened to it and thought that sounds nothing like what I want a synth to sound like. Maybe I don't need a Karp after all? Finally rooting around Youtube i found examples that sounded more like what I thought an Arp could do.

Guess i'm just wondering if anyone else feels like this and how you have felt about people using terms like old-school and classic and vintage-sound for something to your ears is very modern?
Old 20th April 2019
  #195
Lives for gear
 

Tastes change. Until the mid-90's, in synths everything evolved from fuzzy and bass heavy to increasingly balanced and clear. Current synths, digital or analogue, with very few, mostly small craftsman instruments excluded, both continue to provide sound that takes advantage of both massively increased control bandwidth and ever more precise, reliable, long-lived components, and highly evolved circuit design.

Anyone who doesn't see this as progress is sitting in a dark room with the doors and blinds shut.

If anything, the musical options now are so vast that musicians are barely able to keep up, and thus suffer from creative ADD.

Find something and really stick with it and you'll single yourself out from the crowd the way kids did back in the day (assuming we are now in the dark ages again) when they had far fewer options.

Or just shop, that's fine, but don't expect to become the next Prince by doing so.
Old 20th April 2019
  #196
Lives for gear
 
Arglebargle's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Aside from the fact they’re not “stick figures.”

If you’ve actually seen/studied art from back then, you’ll realize the artists of the time had, if anything, a better appreciation of beauty and creative representation than we do now.

Yes, kids, history can go backwards, and has done so for at least half a century now. And that trend is accelerating.

p.s. they also spelled and wrote better because they didn’t have to fight with a hard glass surface and crummy autocorrect AI every step of the way....
Well, really, it varies. But I went through a big collection of cave art with a very advanced professional artist, and he was quite impressed with some of the technique of various cave painters. Others really did stick figures and hand patterns though. All of it still better than me....
Old 21st April 2019
  #197
Gear Nut
 

After 1985, absolutely...totally diminishing returns
Old 21st April 2019
  #198
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobTheDog View Post
Total madness, similar age here as well.

Synths have carried on getting better as the years fly past, Luddite tendencies are currently fashionable, it won't last long.
Hmm no....synths from the mid 70's to late 80's revolutionized music. They aren't doing it anymore. They will soon go the way of the guitar and rock music.....if they haven't already.
Old 21st April 2019
  #199
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by realtrance View Post
Aside from the fact they’re not “stick figures.”

.......

p.s. they also spelled and wrote better because they didn’t have to fight with a hard glass surface and crummy autocorrect AI every step of the way....
I love me some stick figures

Old 21st April 2019
  #200
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioloud View Post
Sorry, whilst very interesting, I don't understand what you are trying to say.
On the contrary, I firmly believe the stick figures on cave walls have a huge historical and artistic significance.
I’m saying that every society creates the best art for itself. There’s no progress or regression.
Old 21st April 2019
  #201
Gear Guru
 
zerocrossing's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock Landers View Post
Hmm no....synths from the mid 70's to late 80's revolutionized music. They aren't doing it anymore. They will soon go the way of the guitar and rock music.....if they haven't already.
Oh, they have. When you can buy what’s basically a Model D for $300 new, you know we’re at that point.
Old 21st April 2019
  #202
Gear Nut
 
becks bolero's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zerocrossing View Post
Oh, they have. When you can buy what’s basically a Model D for $300 new, you know we’re at that point.
I wish Behringer would start making cars

I'd love to get a '60's Ferrari GTO for under a grand
Old 21st April 2019
  #203
Lives for gear
 
Analog Rob Lowe's Avatar
1979 come on man
Old 21st April 2019
  #204
Lives for gear
 
BobTheDog's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock Landers View Post
Hmm no....synths from the mid 70's to late 80's revolutionized music. They aren't doing it anymore. They will soon go the way of the guitar and rock music.....if they haven't already.
Well I think we have to disagree on this one!
Old 21st April 2019
  #205
Quote:
Originally Posted by becks bolero View Post
I wish Behringer would start making cars

I'd love to get a '60's Ferrari GTO for under a grand
A Ferrari 250 GTO's appeal is entirely in its rarity/prestige. It's a racecar that would literally have trouble keeping pace with a showroom stock Ford Fiesta.

Most of the appeal of a Minimoog or a Pro One or an Odyssey or a Syntorchestra is its usefulness as a musical instrument. We want clones of this stuff so that we can play them, not to stick them on a shelf somewhere to show off to people.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #206
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by becks bolero View Post
after some reflection, I'd push the date forward a bit

Memorymoog: 1982
Oberheim OB-8: 1985
Roland Jupiter 8: 1981-85

however Uli Behringer is stepping up to the plate, to bring back some of those great instruments :D
Those were manufactured just before the world’s magic fairy dust mines became too depleted to be commercially viable. There was so much of it around in the 1960s and 1970s that manufacturers could use kilogrammes of the stuff in every instrument they made, but the price skyrocketed at the beginning of the 1980s, so synths from that period were lucky to get a couple of grammes.

New health regulations in the 1980s were enacted which mandated protective clothing for miners after a series of scandals about the secondary effects of mining it. These ranged from fairly benign ones such as growing wings, tails, or small horns to extremely socially problematic effects like developing a bull’s head or growing scales and breathing fire. This added a considerable extra cost to commercial fairy dust mining operations.

People who played instruments with high concentrations of fairy dust in them could also suffer from some symptoms, but they were much milder than the ones that afflicted miners who were exposed to extremely high concentrations on a day-to-day basis, and could usually be hidden from the public by clothing such as a cape and witch hat.

Last edited by Weedlekin; 4 weeks ago at 11:01 AM.. Reason: Clarity
Old 4 weeks ago
  #207
vlz
Gear Maniac
 
vlz's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weedlekin View Post
and could usually be hidden from the public by clothing such as a cape and witch hat.
What's wrong with wearing a cape?

Old 4 weeks ago
  #208
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by audioloud View Post
A shiny example is the arts in the Middle Ages, known also as the dark ages.

(PS that's why Renaissance came by in the 14th century
The Middle Ages are not known as the Dark Ages, because they are two different historical periods. The Dark Ages are between the fall of the Western Roman empire and the Middle Ages, and they are is dark because there few surviving literary European sources thst describe what was heppening. There are however plenty of written and pictorial sources for events in the Middle Ages.

Note also thst the 14th century (i.e the 1300s) is the late Middle Ages. The Rebaissance began in the 15th century because that was when Caxton’s movable type printing press made books available to anyone who could read. Prior to this, every book had to be hand copied by scribes, which meant that only the wealthiest people could afford to own one.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #209
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weedlekin View Post
The Middle Ages are not known as the Dark Ages, because they are two different historical periods. The Dark Ages are between the fall of the Western Roman empire and the Middle Ages, and they are is dark because there few surviving literary European sources thst describe what was heppening. There are however plenty of written and pictorial sources for events in the Middle Ages.

Note also thst the 14th century (i.e the 1300s) is the late Middle Ages. The Rebaissance began in the 15th century because that was when Caxton’s movable type printing press made books available to anyone who could read. Prior to this, every book had to be hand copied by scribes, which meant that only the wealthiest people could afford to own one.
Apologies, my history memory allocation is a bit rusty, thanks for that!


Having said that I think the concept I wanted to express is still valid.
Old 4 weeks ago
  #210
Lives for gear
 
breakmixer's Avatar
 

I switched onto Electronic music in 83/84, and most of those records had TR-808 on them along with analog synths from the 80's and 70's, so no I don't agree with the thread title. I'm also a fan of the mid-late 80s digital stuff from DX/TX to Ensoniq to CZ to D50 etc.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Reznik / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
1
Popbott / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
377
mdme_sadie / The Moan Zone
37

Forum Jump
Forum Jump