3 Electronic Maestros Interviewed 133
thesixthreplicant writes "New Scientist interviews 3 pioneers of electronic music: Bob Moog, the inventor of the first commercial synthesiser, the Moog; Australian Peter Vogel, creator of the first electronic sampler, the Fairlight (16 bit sampling in 1979!); and Dave Smith, the father of MIDI."
Re:Pioneers? (Score:5, Insightful)
Karftwerk are great, and indeed defined the style of the electronic music genre. Indeed, Kraftwerk's sound is still heard in modern electronic music, over 30 years later. Wendy (Walter) Carlos was also a key contributor to composing electronic music - but she relied on Robert Moog's technology to make her music. All decent electronic artists acknowledge the work of the engineers and scientists who built the equipment that bands like Kraftwerk used. After all, without these tools, research and instruments, how would the artists be able to make the music? Also, for a more modern example think of Robin Whittle - who modified synthesizers for tons of modern electronic artists - yet is not a musician or composer hmself.
I have owned several Moog synthesizers, and IMO, Moog is one of the people most responsible for bringing us the way we use electronic instruments in practice. The Moog is still an awesome synthesizer to use.
Re:Pioneers? (Score:1)
the thing about the Moog was that it was the first "modular" synth.. the first time people could easily really honestly create their own sounds from scratch with a minimum amount of fuss. this fact alone spawned endless creativity in the artists that used them. thank you Mr. Moog, for giving us such wonderful ideas.
Re:Pioneers? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Pioneers? (Score:1, Insightful)
The other artists you list were certainly also breaking new ground (with the exception of Duran Duran), but I really wouldn't credit any of them with pushing electronic sounds so far. E
Re:Pioneers? (Score:1)
Re:Pioneers? (Score:2)
The Fairlight wasn't 16-bit until 1985 (Score:5, Informative)
Early Fairlights were the true classics. (Score:4, Informative)
The classic Fairlight sound came from the Fairlight Series II (1982) and Series IIx (1983, with faster processor and factory-MIDI) defined the classsic "Fairlight" sound, not the Series III - so 16-bit is meaningless here. The Series II used variable speed playback, rather than skipping samples in a wavetable to speed up/slow down the sound. When combined with some fantastic analog filters, the sound was something special, with a great low-end. The other part of the magic was "Page R" -- the realtime 8-track (single note) sequencer that allowed you to work with the Series II's lightpen in a pseudo-graphical environment (ASCII characters in a music sequencing grid).
By the time the Series III came out, E-mu had released several samplers including the Emulator I and II (both 8 bit, although the II used companding A/D-D/A converters to give a higer signal to noise). The Series III lost the coloured magic of the Series II sound by using increasingly perfect 16-bit recording, and it wasn't long before companies like Akai started making $5000 16-bit samplers that put Fairlight out of business.
Re:Early Fairlights were the true classics. (Score:2)
By the time Series III reached the market which was around 1987, Akai already
Re:Early Fairlights were the true classics. (Score:1)
In The Art of Digital Music [artofdigitalmusic.com], Police drummer Stewart Copeland talks about scoring The Equalizer: "I had to turn over a show every week, and I did the first half of the first season with just the eight monophonic, 8-bit voices on that Fairlight. It was a chunky kind of sound, but it was one that most people hadn't heard before. So it registered as fresh.
"The Fairlight was very unfriendly for players. It was more something that you programmed. But that was perfect for me, because I'm not a keyboard player.
Re:The Synthesizer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Synthesizer (Score:2)
Re:The Synthesizer (Score:1)
Re:The Synthesizer (Score:2)
Re:The Synthesizer (Score:1)
What a troll.
Did you even bother looking up a dictionary before shooting off your stupid (and ignorant) mouth?
Just in case... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Just in case... (Score:1)
'gue' ? more like *horrible choking sound* (Score:4, Informative)
That 'g' is more like a horrible choking sound - I'd sound it out and put it on my site (I'm Dutch), but no thanks
Re:'gue' ? more like *horrible choking sound* (Score:2)
Hence why Moog [moogmusic.com] make products called Moogerfoogers [moogmusic.com].
Re:'gue' ? more like *horrible choking sound* (Score:1)
The Northern speakers have adopted the mentioned choking sound tending to pronounce each "g" as if it were a "ch". The Flemish have continued to use the "soft" g, which is the same ba
Re:Just in case... (Score:2)
Dr. Bob chats to our Nick [sonicstate.com]
Re:Luddites! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Luddites! (Score:1)
and this in a forum where every story no matter how diverse ends up being a discussion on the evils of microsoft.
stylophone (Score:4, Funny)
Oh Nooooooo!!! (Score:2)
The guy's gotta be 100 by now.
I loved the "Standards Body" (Score:1)
I have to admire this (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I have to admire this (Score:1)
Try looking up "computing" in the dictionary some time.
Re:I have to admire this (Score:2)
http://www.math.niu.edu/~rusin/papers/uses-math/m
Giorgio Moroder (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Giorgio Moroder (Score:2)
Re:Giorgio Moroder (Score:1)
more electronic heroes here (Score:2)
I'd rather pay Dave (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd rather pay Dave when I installed ringtones on my cell phone than pay the cell company.
mod parent UP! (Score:2)
Re:I'd rather pay Dave (Score:2)
Re:I'd rather pay Dave (Score:2)
No, I'd just rather have to pay him than others.
Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:5, Interesting)
Delia Derbyshire.
Hugely overlooked, very interesting music.
She created the Dr. Who theme and was a huge influence on the BBC radiophonic workshop. BBC Radio 4 did a very interesting afternoon play about her recently.
Re:Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:1)
To quote Jules Winfield from Pulp Fiction, writing an electronica theme song and creating the synthesizer that the composer uses "ain't the same ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport".
I'm not saying the Dr. Who theme song didn't have an influence, but....I think I've expressed myself properly in the last paragraph.
Re:Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:4, Insightful)
Derbyshire did a lot of really interesting (and yes, pioneering) studio work, involving manipulating taped sine waves and all sorts of weird stuff. Chill out. Almost everyone who was working on electronic music in those days was part of inventing the tools to do so. It's not like she sat down for 5 minutes with Reason.
Re:Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Delia Derbyshire - Dr. Who. (Score:2)
Moog ? Moogs ? (Score:2)
George: "Moops!!"
I guess the answer is 'Moogs' after all :)
test
Re:Moog ? Moogs ? (Score:2)
Guess I should have previewed it so I could at least link to the appropriate site for any info on the clueless.
http://www.tvtome.com/tvtome/servlet/GuidePageServ let/showid-112/epid-2287/ [tvtome.com]
Re:Moog ? Moogs ? (Score:2)
Re:Moog ? Moogs ? (Score:2)
Thanks for pointing that out anyways.
Re:Moog ? Moogs ? (Score:2)
Thanks.
Remember those .mod files? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Remember those .mod files? (Score:3, Informative)
Later similar file formats like S3M utilised more advanced sound hardware available for the PC, like the Gravis Ultrasound (or the alternative for those of us with less money, a lot of CPU time). Not being stuck with the limitations of the Amiga's sound hardware, these were capable of producing higher quality sound.
Re:Remember those .mod files? (Score:1)
Atari ST sound capabilities (Score:1)
No it didn't. The ST's had a 3-channel Yamaha YM2149 FM sound chip that didn't do native sample playback, which in itself was a hack. Sounded really bad too.
The STE's had 8-bit DAC's, but IIRC there were only two of them, so software mixing for MOD playback was still needed. That DSP you're thinking of was in the Falcon, the floppy ST sequel that finally passed the Ami
Re:Atari ST sound capabilities (Score:2)
Re:Remember those .mod files? (Score:3, Insightful)
As an old-time Amiga fan, I'll have to note that there were also trackers (as the
Re:Remember those .mod files? (Score:1)
See the Mod Archive [modarchive.com] for thousands of tracks. Their Top 10 lists [modarchive.com] have a good sampling.
the first commercial synthesiser ? (Score:1, Informative)
while Moog was a pioneer and respecty is due, he was not even close to the "first"
but dont take my word for it, go look it up [obsolete.com]
synthesisers have been around for 120 years !
Re:the first commercial synthesiser ? (Score:1)
120 Years Of Electronic Music (Score:2, Informative)
--------------------
120 Years Of Electronic Music
Origins:
The origins of electronic music can be traced back to the audio analytical work of Hermann Ludwig Ferdinand von Helmholtz (1821-1894) the German physicist, mathematician and author of the seminal work "SENSATIONS OF TONE: Psychological Basis for Theory of Music" (c1860). Helmholtz built an electronically controlled instrument t
Re:120 Years Of Electronic Music (Score:1)
Re:120 Years Of Electronic Music (Score:2)
Fairlight & Moog (Score:4, Interesting)
I got to meet Dr. Moog (rhymes with 'vogue') about ten years ago. Affable, intelligent guy. He's the Les Paul/Leo Fender of the synthesizer. His current company is Big Briar, which make very cool (albeit expensive) effects pedals.
Fairlight: The "original" OS9!
Re:Fairlight & Moog (Score:1)
Re:Fairlight & Moog (Score:3, Informative)
His company is now called Moog Music [moogmusic.com] -- previously there was somebody else who owned the rights to the name "Moog", but apparently he's won them back. I'm not sure if he's retired the name Big Briar or whether they simply exist in parallel.
Their signature product is a modern version of the classic Minimoog synthesizer, called the Minimoog Voyager [moogmusic.com] -- very, very cool (albeit expensive
Also check out Dave Smith's
Re:Fairlight & Moog (Score:2)
List is incomplete without Kurzweil (Score:2, Interesting)
What about John Chowning.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Appropriate (Score:5, Interesting)
I was just yesterday viewing a video from Teacher's TV of Jim and Caroline Corr and a sound engineer showing how they produced one of their songs.
I was struck by the fact that it starts from a few basic chords and by the time they get done with it, it takes 50 or 60 laid-down tracks to produce what you hear on the record - which is then "duplicated" on stage by six people and some instruments for the live performance...
What struck me is how a live performance sounds much (if not exactly) like the record with far fewer electronic efforts. Makes you wonder if the electronic effects are really worth it. Obviously it many cases, depending on the song, it is. Enya, for example, can hardly play her stuff live at all because of the production values in her records. But others, like the Corrs, have no problem.
Would it be more cost effective for many bands to drop the effects and play it "straight"? In some cases, maybe, in others, it might be a disaster.
I've noticed that Andrea Corr's voice is sometimes barely recognizable on the record - due to the fact that I have seen her sing live (on video) more often than I've heard the recorded songs. So I'm more used to her "real" voice than the processed and synthesized one. This effect only fades if I watch a video where the Corrs lip-sync to the record (which many TV shows appearances require).
I tend to prefer the "real" voice to the processed one. I wonder how many others prefer their favorite singer's "real" voice over the recorded versions? Or a "real" performance over a "produced" one?
simple (Score:1)
Re:Appropriate (Score:4, Insightful)
A lot of songs are actually written in the studio during the recording period
Bands on low budgets or who've never recorded before usually come in with whole songs, ready to go
When they've got a budget, a contract to make an album, or they're a band signed to a label which has affiliations with the studio, they usually don't come in with much at all
And what about Les Paul (Score:5, Informative)
1) Multitrack recording
2) Echo, and flange effects
3) Electric Guitar
4) Electronic Synth
I mean, come on people...
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:1)
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:1)
He hasn't made any claim to it, hell he doesn't even claim to have invented the pickup. http://www.jinxmagazine.com/les_paul.html [jinxmagazine.com]
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:1)
As far as the electric guitar goes, yes, Les started with ready-made telephone pickups, but quickly decided they were inadequate, and began building his own.
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:2)
Actually he started by jamming a phonograph's needle into the body of a regular guitar.
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:1)
Re:And what about Les Paul (Score:2)
" But, that wouldn't really be electric, would it?"
Of course, I was forgetting that he used one of the few steam-powered phonographs in existance.
Wendy Carlos -- Switched On Bach (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Wendy Carlos -- Switched On Bach (Score:1)
Great quote from Peter Vogel (Score:1)
[A]: I heard that Stanford University was doing some interesting work. I went over to visit them and they had rather large computers that churned away for 10 minutes and played one note."
film out (Score:2, Insightful)
I have a question for electronic-music hackers (Score:2)
Is there any equipment/software that plays chords using true small-number-ratio intervals (3:5, 5:6, etc.) rather than the nearly-correct ratios given by the 2^(n/12) intervals in the common tuning?
Better, is there something that can be programmed to do both in the same sequence? Or simultaneously as
Re:A little help please.... (Score:2, Informative)
Other common synths seen in 1980s music videos:
Re:A little help please.... (Score:2)
Re:A little help please.... (Score:1)
Re:A little help please.... (Score:1)
Re:A little help please.... (Score:2)
Re:A little help please.... (Score:2)
These were all basically MIDI (Thanks,
Re:Playing the Bones. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Yes, there were other, even commercial, pioneers (Score:5, Informative)
'Sampling' was first done in the analog domain, by an instrument named the Mellotron. It had an organ keyboard with a magnetic tape, tape head, and capstan mechanism under each key, and activated whem the key was pressed. The samples were factory-recorded (for new sounds you had to record a new tape for each key) and the machine was playback-only, but it fits the name sampler. It was used by the Beatles ("Strawberry Fields Forever"), King Crimson, and most of the Moody Blues albums of the '60's and '70's, among others. And yes, the Mellotron was a commercial product.
Re:Yes, there were other, even commercial, pioneer (Score:2)
Mellotron has its own character (Score:2)
That's a bit of an exaggeration; but it's definitely true that it sounds like a mellotron whenever you hear it.
And that's a good thing; the Melloton actually sounds *more* atmospheric than the thing it is playing back, and it doesn't sound at all like a digital sampler.
Radiohead used it to great effect on "OK Computer"; listen to "Exit Music from a Film
Re:Yes, there were other, even commercial, pioneer (Score:2)
Not true, see here [wikipedia.org].
the mellotron NEVER WAS a sampler. (Score:2)
it's very simple:
the mellotron did not record sound - therefor it was not a sampler.
a sampler records sounds, or at least allows the user to use his own samples.
the mellotron is not a sampler in the same sense as the korg M1, Roland D50 and all other rom based wave-table synths are not samplers.
arrgh!
Re:Yes, there were other, even commercial, pioneer (Score:1)
The Mellotron wasn't even the first tape playback instrument. That distinction goes to the Chamberlin. Please, next time you try to look smart, make sure that you actually are.