Conference napalm::commusic_v1

Your system sounds very nice.  I agree that it is worth perhaps $10,000, 
which is beyond the limits of my budget.  Would it be possible to 
simplify it, without sacrificing too much?  You mentioned two items 
which I'm not very familiar with, and therefore don't see the need for.
Why do you need a drum machine?  Couldn't a good synthesizer do what you 
need?  Perhaps the Korg 8 can't make sounds like a drum machine, but you 
might be able to find a synthesizer that can.  Also, given a good 
computer-based sequencer, why do you need the SMPTE-compatible tape?  
Can't you do all of your editing directly on the synthesizer, then 
transfer the sounds from the synthesizer directly to the studio's tape?
Even better, of course, would be to have a digital tap on the 
synthesizer, so you could produce digital data for a CD directly.
 
I suspect I am missing the boat here because of my lack of familiarity 
with the virtues of drum machines and SMPTE tapes.  Could you spread a 
few words on these subjects?
    John Sauter

Your ideal system is pretty straight forward.  I already use similar
system myself:

		Roland JX-3P / Midi
		Roland SH-101 / Midi
		Roland Micro-composer for SH 101
		MXR Drum COmputer
		Tascam 34
		Dr. Click Sequencer

This system is fine for typical use.  The system that I build is intended
for high end, performance oriented professional musicians.

One thing that I feel very strongly about is a basic system that has
all of the necessary hardware.  The system you describe has continual
increments in hardware.  My own system is self contained and will cost
around $ 15,000 base price.  Except for sampling and the guitar synth
everything else is just software costs.  That makes it relatively
inexpensive for the musician to tailor the system.

My point is not to market my system here, as I know that it is not
within the scope of most ametuer and semi-pro musicians.  I think
though that many people assume that a true digital synthesizer is
frivolous.  All the machines you mentioned are in fact analog types
that give you some wiz-bang microprocessor controlled functions.

This differs greatly from a true digital system that computes waveform
data and presents it to an A/D converter.  I personally think the
Korg machines sound abismle, for which there is no excuse, regardless
of cost.  A true digital synth is open-ended in that it can sound
like anything.  And don't tell me an analog machine can, because
it's simply limited by the number of oscillators, filters, etc.

For those people who can afford such systems and who choose not
to waste their money on $ 800 square wave mosters, so be it.

Brian Markey

	When the Fairlight first came out, I came VERY close to
buying it. Don't underestimate the 'amateur' market. I would gladly
go into debt to own a system that did everything I want/need.

I can think of a simple way to describe what such a system would
be like - 

	You should be able to TYPE in the score of say, the Rite of
Spring. This is to say, if you can't enter complex, traditional music
(with complex rhythms, meter-changes, tempo changes, etc.), then it's
too limiting. A hi-tech music system should be AT LEAST as advanced
as music, itself is.

And of course, if you're dealing with something as complex as a modern
orchestral score, you'll want a VERY GOOD editor.

That and the ability to both mimic traditional instruments AND create
your own original sounds, would be the ideal system for me.

An interesting point - I've been playing piano since I was 5. I see no
need for a good computer music system to have a (musical) keyboard. It
should be optional, I'm not especially interested in live performance.

						- Karl

   I am just starting to get very interested in music.  Any kind of music, but
especially keyboard type music, ie. synthesizers and their spawn.  For a long
time, I've seen/heard references to the Fairlight and the Synclavier and others
of that 'high-end' type as well as others that can actually be bought without
wiping your budget out.  I'd like to know where I could get specific informationon devices like the Fairlight, Synclavier, Korg's, Yamaha's, etc.  Addresses
and references to other sources would be greatly appreciated.  Thanx.

 Joe
 -=-

re: 21.1

I don't own a "real" drum machine, but I've played with them.  I was
very impressed by the Roland Drumatix.  It has 16 buttons on the front
that represent 16th notes or four measures of quarter notes, depending
on the speed.  With a rotary switch, you first select one of the 6 or 8
sounds it had, like kick, snare, cymbal (no crash), hi-hat open & closed


,hi & low toms and accent snare.  I guess that's 8.  Then you just press
the buttons that correspond to the beats on which you want to hear that
sound.  Or you can just tap out the rythm on another button.  Then you
can change the position of the rotary switch and add another sound.  This
continues until you're happy with that measure, which it will play over
and over again until you stop it.  Then you can store some number of
measures in memory and then compose "songs", which are a sequence of measures
that it can store and play back on commmand.  It has a sync input and output,
which I believe is compatible with one of the MIDI signals.  I know it's the
same connector.   

This is a $300 machine.

The high end is up in the $3000 range with the Linn Drum being the one
that everyone else compares theirs to.  It uses a different method of
programming that I'm not familiar with.  I believe that it also has the
capability of playing a little behind the beat when you want it to.  The
Drumatix is always right on the beat, which can sound a little "square"
sometimes.  You can get some very hip rythms going though.  The Fairlight
music production system is great for this.  I recall Rick OCasek saying in
an interview that they moved the parts for "Heartbeat City" around in 
literally milliseconds until they felt right.

I don't have a tape syncronizer yet either, but I'm considering buying
the PAIA master synchronizer, which can read and output a click track
and split the output into whole, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, ... 1/64 note pulses
with all the outputs being available simultaneously.  This isn't SMPTE,
it's just a click track you write on one track of you mult-track tape
deck so you can syncronize later drum & sequencer tracks & digital delays
to the music already on the tape.

SMPTE is different.  It digitally records a time code on the tape so that
the computer can instantly know how far it is into the tape with 1/100 
second precision.  This lets you do neat things like the following:
You want to do a punch-in edit of a clam in a guitar solo, so you listen
to the recorded track and press a button to mark the beginning and end
of the part of the piece you want to edit.  The you go into rehearsal mode,
where you just play it back and it indicates when you would have been punched
in and out.  When you're satisfied you are ready to do it you go into edit
mode and it automatically punches you in just for the two or three bad notes.
Pretty neat huh ?  I'd like to see it work.  It controls the tape deck by 
just plugging into the remote-control jack.  It doesn't need a tach output
from the tape deck because as soon as the tape moves it hears the time code
and knows instantly where it is. 

re: 21.2

I agree, Roland really has their act together.

Would anyone care to compare/contrast the sound and/or internal architecture
of the KORG Poly-800 vs. the Roland Juno ?

I have heard that the Yamaha FM digital synth's sounds all had a sheen to
to them, I guess because they were very rich in high overtones.  Sometimes
this wouldn't be desirable.  I guess that's just a software problem though,
right ?

					- Jeff Dickens

re: 21.5--Thanks for the information.  I've heard a lot of references to a 
"drum machine", but yours is the first description.  It seems to me that a 
computer based synthesizer could, in theory, do all that a drum machine 
could do.  You'd need a very flexible synthesizer, of course, but you'd 
probably want the best synthesizer you could afford anyway, and not having 
to buy a separate drum machine would let you spend more on the synthesizer. 
On the SMPTE tape, from your description it sounds like a computer could 
substitute for it provided you produced music the way I do, by carefully 
crafting each phrase rather than actually "playing" in real time.
 
re: 21.6--Although I have listened to the Yamaha DX7, my musical taste is 
not well enough developed to recognize "sheen".  I have been studying the 
theory behind FM synthesis, and it appears that the amplitude of the 
overtones (partials) is under fairly direct control of the instrument 
definer.  However, the theoretical information I have is 7 to 10 years old, 
and it is obvious (from looking at the console of the DX7) that progress 
has been made since then, so I'm not sure.  I intend to keep researching FM 
synthesis--Yamaha hasn't answered my letter, but there is a chance I can 
make contact with John Chowning, the original inventor of FM synthesis.
    John Sauter

The SMPL machine that Synchronous Technologies sells is actually a 
Commodore 64 with a modified keyboard.

What I meant by "sheen" is that they all had very noticable high
frequency overtones, sort of silvery-sounding if you know what I mean.
Just the fact that the harmonics are so easily controlled by the programmer
could be why this is so.  I think what the reviewer I was talking about
was trying to get across was that it didn't have enough sounds that sounded
like older synthesizers, for what that's worth.

I recently bought a DX-7 and don't agree with the "sheen" comment. They have a
lot of sounds whose bass notes are real knock outs without any hint (that I can
hear) of unwanted high frequencies, and even in the high range, I only hear what
I think should be there.

In regards to the comment about not having "enough sounds that sounded like
older synthesizers", I agree that there aren't many, but the ones that are
there are REAL good simulations of existing 'standard' synth voices. I have an
old string/clavier synth called the Elka Rhapsody.  The DX-7 has two string
voices (of the built-in 32; there are more on a plug-in rom), the first of which
sounds to me to be an almost exact duplicate of one of the Elka's string sounds
(while the DX-7's second string voice immediately blows it away, great sound).
There is only one (well, sort of) clavier voice, but it's SO good, there is no
comparison.  Oh yes, the Elka also has a piano voice that the DX also imitates
almost exactly (which doesn't sound REAL good, but if you want it, it's there).
The point here is that the Yamaha folks took the time to imitate 'not-so-good'
voices, probably because they thought folks would want them anyway.

The real 'killer' piano voice is the one that sounds EXACTLY (I mean it,
EXACTLY) like a Fender Roades.  It fooled me so much the first time I played
it, I thought I could actually feel the old Fender action.  One of the plug-in
roms has a set of these voices for different variations on the Fender piano
sound.  Each one of them is a universe unto itself. 

As a bit of history, the Elka cost me $1600 in 1975 and had 4 voices - two
strings, clavier, and piano.  You had to stretch your imagination pretty hard
to believe some of the simulations.  The DX-7 costs $2000 and has 96 available
voices (64 of which can be changed by plugging in a different rom), and as I
said, some of their simulations are REAL good.  Not to mention the fact that
the DX-7 keyboard is velocity sensitive and also has after touch and lots more
goodies if you're a real keyboard live performance freak ... and it's
programmable and ...

Needless to say, the DX-7 impresses me for what it does.  It certainly IS NOT a
Fairlight or Kurzweil (or CompSync?), but for what it does right out of the
box, and what it can do through its MIDI interface, I think it's worth the
investment. (No, I haven't actually used the MIDI interface yet; I'm waiting
for an interface card and a new CPU before I can tackle that.)

-jim

I would like to lessen my disagreement about "sheen" and the DX-7.
Over the weekend I played the DX-7 throught a pair of good headphones
and noticed two interesting 'effects':

    1) The high frequency hiss I had been hearing through my
       speakers (and that I had thought was attributable to them)
       was still there.  Well, it turned out to be a problem I have
       always had with keyboards; the volume was up to about 7 out of
       10 and anywhere higher than that produced an audible (though
       not large amount of) hiss from the final output stage.  I wouldn't
       really call that "sheen", just good ol' hiss from a not-perfect
       output stage driving a rather high level.

    2) When I was playing instruments that had what I call 'breath effects',
       simulations such as the brass horns, there was a low volume high
       frequency component that lasted into the steady state.  This is due,
       I think, to the large amount of FM feedback used to create the breath
       effect.  So in the case of those instruments with breath effects, I
       would agree that the DX-7 does produce a "sheen" and that it is due
       to the 'algorithm' used to simulate the instrument.  'Algorithm' is
       in quotes becuase it is really the parameters of the algorithm, that
       is, the values of the various parameters, not the actual algorithm,
       which is producing the "sheen".  The final caveat is that this "sheen"
       is not present on instruments without breath effects, like the clavier
       and the Fender Roades.

Like I said, it's merely a software problem.