Been listening to quite a bit of 80's and 90's pop/soul and fusion (jazz/rock) recently. Interesting to note that no matter the artist or band certain keyboard sounds always pop up on the records e.g. Jupiter brass synths, DX7 piano, Rhodes, B3s, Hohner clav etc.

So listening to the stuff presently doing the rounds, it appears (IMHO) that the most common distinguishable sounds are pads of unknown origin and the ubiquitous layered saw sound (ala dance anthem); the rest, basically a mish-mash of everything...

Which brings me to the question; what woud be considered the 'classic sound' of now, my goodness what will future retro enthuasists and marketeers punt??

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Edited by C.LYDE (05/04/12 11:28 AM)

After a few years of tracks with great dynamic range, some idjit will get nostalgic for everything being crunched to death, it'll become a fashion, and the plugin companies will make another mint with emulations of the "vintage" Waves Ultramaximizer, Oxford Inflator, and the like...

There's been quite a bit of focus on dynamic range or rather the lack thereof.. ;-)

My focus for this discussion is rather the 'sounds' that have become the bread and meat of many great songs.. think
Supertramp without the wurlitzer, Stevie Wonder without the clav..

So okay we have Beyonce'... and what comes to mind (speaking of keys).. ay.ay...

And maybe that's the real shame of all our modern tech. - relatively few truly memorable sounds, simply too much variety. My theory is that 'retro' is tied to limitations.. (in all its guises) ..which is the exact opposite of everything we have access to these days..



--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Autotune.

Quote grab:

---

Autotune.

---

Ahhhhggghhh!
My ears!

--------------------
It wasn't me!
(Well, actually, it probably was)

Ahhhhggghhh!
My ears!

---

There's a reason they don't call him T-Feelsgood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noLrCDzAp5M

...and this is related to keyz...

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote A. AuCr:

---

Ahhhhggghhh!
My ears!

---

There's a reason they don't call him T-Feelsgood.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noLrCDzAp5M

---

------------------

Luv the rotary organ, Piano and non de-script Rolandesque lead synth....

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

I'm not sure "retro" is always linked to limitations. In some ways it certainly can be - that Amy Winehouse sound is consciously getting a less-accurate reproduction in order to sound like an old recording, except that the old recording was using the best technology at the time and it just wasn't as good as what's available for pennies now.

But I think more than that, it's about what you play on the instruments. Think orchestra. There weren't huge developments in symphony orchestra musical instruments between 1800 and 1900 (with the exception of the trumpet valve). What changed was the music you played on those instruments. "The Magic Flute" and "The Rite of Spring" use the same instruments, but in very different ways. Or think Kurt Cobain compared to Joe Walsh compared to Kirk Hammett compared to Allan Holdsworth, for guitar.

So back in the day, a specific synth may have given you the result you needed. These days though you can get similar sounds from any synth, and it's more about what you play with those sounds.

Quote grab:

---

I'm not sure "retro" is always linked to limitations. In some ways it certainly can be - that Amy Winehouse sound is consciously getting a less-accurate reproduction in order to sound like an old recording, except that the old recording was using the best technology at the time and it just wasn't as good as what's available for pennies now.

---

But the limitation was the technology of the time compared to now…?

Quote grab:

---

But I think more than that, it's about what you play on the instruments. Think orchestra. There weren't huge developments in symphony orchestra musical instruments between 1800 and 1900 (with the exception of the trumpet valve). What changed was the music you played on those instruments. "The Magic Flute" and "The Rite of Spring" use the same instruments, but in very different ways. Or think Kurt Cobain compared to Joe Walsh compared to Kirk Hammett compared to Allan Holdsworth, for guitar.

---

Kurt Cobain could only play a limited amount of guitar, his style of music flowed from that..?
Bach only had access to standard way of scribing for orchestra – no Cubase, hence no flamenco mash-ups mid sonata..?

Quote grab:

---

So back in the day, a specific synth may have given you the result you needed. These days though you can get similar sounds from any synth, and it's more about what you play with those sounds.

---

IMHO the limitation of the synth, meant a certain sound was kept throughout the record and even one’s career?? Now, no such limitation exists – , to digress -- we played Fender Strats because they were affordable… now a beginner can afford 10 different electric guitars of surprising high quality? End result is that a ‘familiar/recognisable’ sound is very difficult to achieve …

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

I was thinking the other day that the modern equivalent of the DX7 E Piano might be something like VSL or other string libraries. I'm not familiar with them, but I'm sure there are those who can spot them instantly.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/richie-royale
http://www.mixcrate.com/richieroyale

Yeah. Like Murry "bloody" Gold.

--------------------
~~~ A weasel hath not such a deal of spleen as you are tossed with! www.feline1.co.uk ~~~

Every time I hear DX-7 E-Piano I want to puke a little.
I thought it sounded terrible back then and I still think it sounds pants now, what's even more confusing is you can get a better rhodes sound out of it if you actually program it rather than just using the same tired ol' presets but no one seemed to..
DX-7, great synth but comes very high on the crimes committed against music list.

Edited by vinyl_junkie (20/04/12 12:20 PM)

I too dislike the DX e-piano and I think there are quite a few records that suffer because of it. It is quite easy to create a pastiche of a Rhodes using a sine and a triangle wave with an LFO to mod the amp.

--------------------
http://soundcloud.com/richie-royale
http://www.mixcrate.com/richieroyale

Quote Richie Royale:

---

I was thinking the other day that the modern equivalent of the DX7 E Piano might be something like VSL or other string libraries. I'm not familiar with them, but I'm sure there are those who can spot them instantly.

---

That's quite a reach...

For a fair comparison one should consider no. of units sold -- VSL is awfully expensive and not easily useable in band situation? From a orchestra in your pocket perspective, my money would be on the Garritan libraries, I personally own the Steinberg HSO and from a bang for the buck p.o.v. , its pretty decent.

The goal of a great string library would be to sound like ..well, a recorded string section - nothing unique, however the DX7 was a completely unique beast... (at the time that is)

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote vinyl_junkie:

---

Every time I hear DX-7 E-Piano I want to puke a little.
I thought it sounded terrible back then and I still think it sounds pants now, what's even more confusing is you can get a better rhodes sound out of it if you actually program it rather than just using the same tired ol' presets but no one seemed to..
DX-7, great synth but comes very high on the crimes committed against music list.

---

But the fact that you can mention "DX7" and every musician older than 30 will immediately know what you are referring to is testimony of a success story, yet to be repeated?


So what will be the next 'DX7' ? What electronic instrument right now commands a following that are willing to use one or two sounds on every song that is written or performed?

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote C.LYDE:

---

....So what will be the next 'DX7' ? What electronic instrument right now commands a following that are willing to use one or two sounds on every song that is written or performed?

---

There won't be one. The conditions were perfect for its' fame. Such conditions will never exist again.
You have to remember in 83 there were no digital synths yet and affordable sampling was still embryonic. The clangy sounds of the dx7 were unique and fresh, til they got played out .

Today there are so many technologies that there is nothing new recognizable or noteworthy. The next decade will consist of musicians doing the same old thing or constructing something original out of pre-existing sounds. But we'll never again widely recognize a sound as "new synth x y z".

That said, there are some amazing gtr pedals now, like the ehx Ravish. Maybe this generation will be noted for guitar sounds!

--------------------
Gear list: If you can't find it, grind it

The sound of Electronic instruments will never see a new dawn of DX type hype,everything is capable of reproducing sounds of yesteryear or cloning the classics,theres far too much overlap with synths and stuff that everything regardless of hardware or software is capable of doing the same tricks,just in a different way,its why the designers of such synths and stuff always try to keep some foot in the past with emulation,because people can relate to milestone instruments because the only thing that changes is the circuitry and the terminology,things become smaller and more portable but the methods of using and sculpting sounds still remains the same,we are brainwashed into thinking its revolutionary

What's interesting with the newer generation of electronic gadgetry and probably the future of Instruments is,the way in which we interact with them,if you look at some of the instruments which change your way of interacting and making or thinking of music,like Touchscreens and such,its gives you a new way of expressing music or connecting with the technology,things like the Korg Kaoss pads or Kaossilators are just the surface of what is being scratched in this respect,more and more you see the music being less about composition but more about interaction,everything is samey in terms of sounds but Instrument designers have to cook up new ideas of what makes it more unique to interact with,its probably why so many people have gone back to the physicality of the tactile approach to shaping sound on legendary Analog synths,because the Japanese blackbox synths that came along to replace them,changed the way in which we though about synthesizers,we were brainwashed into thinking about sound in a different way and what we considered expression of ourselves,but we are analog programmed animals and we need some physical emotion in expressing ourselves,like a middleman between our ideas and the instruments we use.

If you look at things like the kindle,literature is still literature whatever form its in,the gadget has just removed the need for many processes to make a book,and its also changes our perception on interacting with the physicality of books,and the ability to carry many novels in one form,much like the MP3 player removed the need to carry Cds,eventually Books will become fashionable again when people have grown tired of the little physicality we require as humans to interact with our environment,I'm sure classic novels in hardback form will become priceless and definelty collectors items


I see the day when technology would remove the need for the actual playing of music and interpret your thoughts and ideas through some kind of telepathy software that bridges the gap between the mind and the instrument and translate your ides in your head to Musical ideas,because all that changes over time is the way we interact with our chosen instrument,the sound will never be changed,because where else is there to go with sound form????there are so many choices with instruments these days that nothing is classic anymore!!!How many synths these days really stand out as a unique sound form!!!everythings mass produced,

the interface between the musician and the music is the limitation and the way things will change in the future the days of legendary sound machines are gone,because we have vast access to libraries of sounds,its like having a classic Sculpture,then a company comes along and makes reproduction,soon the original doesn't look so interesting except to a few people who appreciate it

the only thing instruments need to be revolutionary these days is to remove the frustrations of the user because we all have imagination,sound seems to be less important to many people these days because everything sounds the same that the end result is the same regarless of what you use,its only the audiophile person who cares,especially with the throwaway society in music biz these days

Having an interface that gives you the freedom of expression of your soul and remove the limitations and frustrations of many people who feel overwhelmed by the way in which manufacturers force you to work in a given way,physicality is the way forward with sound these days

I wouldn't be surprised when one of these days sombody invents a new revolutionary instrument that sounds so different that we cannot imagine it's sound in our wildest dreams ...

Quote MadManDan:

---

That said, there are some amazing gtr pedals now, like the ehx Ravish. Maybe this generation will be noted for guitar sounds!

---

..I doubt it, as the new generation guitar sounds are all about emulating synthesis sonic territory, whilst fun for the guitarist, from a listener point of view - no distinction between guitarist and the synth player?

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde

Quote Quaver:

---

What's interesting with the newer generation of electronic gadgetry and probably the future of Instruments is,the way in which we interact with them,

---

Agree - I'm waiting for the day, the next interface is to the human brain -- USB to Nerve 2.2

--------------------
C.LYDE
http://soundcloud.com/c-lyde