|
Classic analog strings (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Trancelover03591 |
Lol. I already said I don't know much about it. I could have done an internet search and make myself look like I knew about it but there is no reason to do that. I don't try to act more knowledgeable than I am.
I appreciate the lesson, I really do. I am ignorant (though not blissfully, I don't revel in being ignorant of any topic) not only on the history of the Mellotron but on the history of synthesizers and audio engineering in general. |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
A lot of what you have down in your reply is one of the reasons I prefaced my post with the fact that I was being blunt. I definitely don't consider myself a historical expert on instruments, let alone much of an expert on anything most people find interesting and worthwhile. I've been corrected, myself. I try to avoid it but my experience is that there will always be someone who knows more about something I'm interested in than I do. My point is that your participation in the discussion relies on several assumptions concerning knowledge of musical instruments being discussed - in other words, a very basic but fundamental literacy. Without that literacy, your participation isn't very relevant.
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancelover03591
I could have done an internet search and make myself look like I knew about it but there is no reason to do that. |
You should have done an internet search, not to make yourself look like someone you're not, but simply because it would have helped put some fundamental information at your disposal (e.g. literacy). In writing my first reply, I used Google a few times to make sure that I had the facts straight and wouldn't be posting out-of-turn. I knew the Beetles used a Melotron but I wasn't sure which songs they used it on so I Googled to find out that information, as well. There's no shame in using Google to make sure you know what you're talking about or to shore up your confidence when speaking to certain points. |
|
|
| Teezdalien |
Nice to see you go into further details Eddie, I didn't really want to get too far in depth regarding the mellotron and its history here, as I would have hoped Trancelover would take the time to do his own rearching of this fascinating instrument and would also be getting quite off topic, but yes you raise some pretty important points regarding the mellotron that a lot of people would probably be unaware of. It had a very limiited sound as you say which lead it to be quite unrealistic. Another notable user of the mellotron would have been John Paul Jones in Led Zeppelin, found in quite a few of their songs including No Quarter and Kashmir .
To answer Cryo's original question though, I really haven't used much in the way of string sounds be it analogue or realistic within my music, although that could change down the track. Like Trancelover though I don't have any real analogue synths either and rely on software at the moment, so I'd probably look at using Diva or for this kind of sound. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
I've mostly used Omnisphere by combining various samples of early Roland synths (Jup's, Junos) with saws, but I like DUNE and Diva as well.
As for DCAM, one would think that Amber would be perfect, but that's the one synth in the suite that have a hard time getting anything useable out of, even though it's designed as a string synthesizer. |
|
|
| TranceLover007 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Teezdalien
..... as I would have hoped Trancelover would take the time to do his own rearching ...... |
What have I do wrong again ????? :D
Just kidding.
Darek |
|
|
| Normie |
Jupiter 8V factory string patches tweaked for attack/release, layered with a Zeta2 patch from the 'Trance Euphoria' set called 'Lush Strings'. That patch is a base and gets stripped/tweaked of the metric ton of FX they use.
The standard Jupe patches are pretty much the traditional 80s synth string sound on their own, but that's no fun ;)
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
Just curious to know what instruments are your favorite for getting that classic 80s/90s analog string sound. Software, hardware, synth, rompler, whatever. No specific reason, just wanna know. |
|
|
|
| TranceLover007 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Normie
Jupiter 8V factory string patches tweaked for attack/release, layered with a Zeta2 patch from the 'Trance Euphoria' set called 'Lush Strings'. That patch is a base and gets stripped/tweaked of the metric ton of FX they use.
The standard Jupe patches are pretty much the traditional 80s synth string sound on their own, but that's no fun ;) |
Damn man, nice to see you again, how was your vacation?
Darek |
|
|
| Normie |
Pretty good. Got some actual production done for a change. Amazing what I can get done when I'm not hanging out on TA and making an ass out of my self ;)
Actually playing with this very topic no less.
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceLover007
Damn man, nice to see you again, how was your vacation?
Darek |
|
|
|
| cryophonik |
Those are pretty cool and cheap! Why have I never noticed them before? |
|
|
| jsrobinson |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
As for DCAM, one would think that Amber would be perfect, but that's the one synth in the suite that have a hard time getting anything useable out of, even though it's designed as a string synthesizer. |
Can't stand the DCAM interface layout. The other instruments really worth that weird layout? |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| quote: | Originally posted by jsrobinson
Can't stand the DCAM interface layout. The other instruments really worth that weird layout? |
I love the DCAM interfaces and the TransMod system, so it's worth it to me, but I primarily just use Strobe, Cypher and occasionally Fusor. |
|
|
|
|
