bottom@katadn.DEC (07/19/85)
Just a simple question for Doug Alan. What evidence would there be if Kate did use the sequencer? My understanding of the Fairlight is that it is a superior machine because of the flexability of the sequencer as opposed to some cheaper things like my roland. It is not my intention to reopen the dead or alive music questionm just to understand what clues would one find to indicate the use of a sequencer. dave "It is indeed a goddamn noisy box but you must call it a stereovision reciever"
nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (07/22/85)
> From: bottom@katadn.DEC > Just a simple question for Doug Alan. What evidence would there be if > Kate did use the sequencer? My understanding of the Fairlight is that > it is a superior machine because of the flexability of the sequencer > as opposed to some cheaper things like my roland. It is not my > intention to reopen the dead or alive music questionm just to > understand what clues would one find to indicate the use of a > sequencer. The Fairlight is superior to a lot of synthesizers for a lot more reasons than just the flexability of its sequencer. But that's certainly one of its advantages. Kate Bush might use the sequencer for rhythm tracks, because she sometimes uses drum machines (usually mixed with human drumming), and she might use the sequencer as a form of tape recorder, just to record things she's played, but I'm sure she doesn't use it to enter music into the Fairlight as musical notation and have it play it that way. I believe this for several reasons: (1) She doesn't read music well (2) She's big on velocity-sensitive keyboards, and much of that aspect would be lost (3) I'm sure I'd be able to hear the difference between music generated by a sequencer given notation and that played by a good human player on a velocity-sensitive keyboard. The other use for a sequencer would be to "record" a piece of Fairlight music played on the keyboard, and then have that repeated over and over again. I'm sure I'd notice that. I don't want anyone to think that I have anything against sequencers -- they're just not Kate Bush's style for things other than percussion (actually there's probably some sequencer at the end of "Saxophone Song", but that's pre-history, right?). Klaus Schulze does great things with sequencers! "I will come home again, but not until The sun and the moon meet on yon hill" Doug Alan nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (or ARPA)
rsk@pucc-k (Wombat) (07/25/85)
In article <4751@mit-eddie.UUCP> nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) writes: (while talking about Kate Bush's possible use of a Fairlight) >I believe this for several reasons: (1) She doesn't read music well (2) >She's big on velocity-sensitive keyboards, and much of that aspect would >be lost (3) I'm sure I'd be able to hear the difference between music >generated by a sequencer given notation and that played by a good human >player on a velocity-sensitive keyboard. > >The other use for a sequencer would be to "record" a piece of Fairlight >music played on the keyboard, and then have that repeated over and over >again. I'm sure I'd notice that. Uh, actually, that's not quite true, since the sequencer records the notes as you play them; thus you don't need to know how to read music to use it...and sequencers on velocity-sensitive keyboards are usually able to store the velocity information along with the pitch, so that the playback is quite indistinguishable from the original. The design goals of most sequencers include generating playback that approximates as closely as possible the human performance; in the case of the Fairlight, I'd say they achieved this quite nicely. You'd probably notice the repetition of a sequenced piece only if the phrase was short; but some sequencers can store thousands of notes, and that'd be hard to catch. (I don't know the capacity of the Fairlight synth, but I'd guess it to be large) The superiority of the Fairlight stems from its sampling abilities, and its broad polyphonicity, along with its extensive computing capabilities. Net readers wishing to donate to the "Buy the Wombat a Fairlight, a Synclavier, and a Kurzweil" fund may contact me at... -- Rich Kulawiec rsk@{pur-ee,purdue}.uucp, rsk@purdue-asc.csnet rsk@purdue-asc.arpa or rsk@asc.purdue.edu
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (08/01/85)
> (3) I'm sure I'd be able to hear the difference between music > generated by a sequencer given notation and that played by a good human > player on a velocity-sensitive keyboard. I don't think this is true. (For one thing, I don't believe the Fairlight CMI has a sequencer per se, in the sense that pre-digital synthesizers did (although you will note from some recent comments in here that many of the synthesizer "experts" out there have never used an analog synthesizer).) For example, if you listen to Yes's (oft-maligned) _Drama_ album, at the start of the song "White Car" there is a four-measure theme repeated four times. The last 2 times, Steve Howe plays an accoustic guitar (weakly) in accompaniment, but the first two times, everything in it is played by the CMI's `sequencer'. I observed Geoff Downes do this, firsthand, at their concert in Nashville. But unless you know this, it is unlikely you would suspect it from listening to the music. -- Shyy-Anzr: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Fvzcyvsl, fvzcyvsl." -- UQG