Trance Forum | Stats | Register | Search | Parties | Advertise | Login

There are 0 trance users currently browsing this page
Trance Forum ŧ ŧ Forum  Trance - X-Dream Live 1997 in Paris
← Prev Page
1 2 3 4 5 Next Page →
First Page Last Page
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on StumbleUpon
Author

X-Dream Live 1997 in Paris

Nectarios
Martian Arts

Started Topics :  187
Posts :  5292
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 18:31
Filteria, I totally get where you're coming from. I used to be just like that when I put together the first modules on my Doepfer/analogue Systems modular.
There is no end to the "analogueness" of things. Most synths mentioned here are chip based...you get your standard 3340 VCO chips, Transistor Ladder, SEM, 3320 filter chips, Roland IR filter chips.
I used to be in the hunt of Version 4 Roland MKS-80 cause they were discrete circuit synths like the Jupiter 8 and not chip based analogue synths like the Version 5 MKS-80. People in the late '90s early 2000 thought the chip based synths lacked a lot from the descrete circuit synts, to them people the chip based synths where not the real deal...there's no end to how anal producers can get.
And speaking about X-Dream's real analog sound...does the Korg Prophecy ring any bells?

I do agree that there is a lot to gain from wiring in an analogue synth to a desk and using whatever ADC people had available...things could get so different by simply changing the gain structure and use of their input preamps, whereas today people just open the same synth inside logic/cubase/ableton.
But as you already wisely stated, this has a lot more to do with the new breed of producers, than the equipment it self.
You're right about full on producers tho, cloning the [enter israeli producer here] that was "trendy" at the time...

Anyhow, I wish any new aspiring producer should watch this clip before opening the sequencer, not because they should be making the same music, but to get a feel of the real vibe of a trance party.

Peace out.
          
http://soundcloud.com/martianarts
goaren
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  60
Posts :  1151
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 19:26
well put dh... tho i said it first
Wizack Twizack
Wizack Twizack

Started Topics :  239
Posts :  3486
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 19:37
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 18:00, PoM wrote:
what i find funny is cause of everyone sounding the same now many procuders are wondering what they are doing wrong when they sound different.it make things even more worst ,pushing always more into cloning.



I think it has to do with the labels also who ain't accept diffrent stuff couse nobody will buy their cds and they will loose money, and producers who want to release their music on lables (not all tho) has to follow some kind of red line in their making of the tracks to fit what is beeing wanted and thats an evil circle who has poisoned the hole thing. So new producers find it easyer getting recognision by doing what the lables are after and by getting bookings they have pretty much reached their goals and have no intention to change that.

          For Contact & Bookings:
Wizack_Booking@hotmail.com
www.soundcloud.com/wizack_Twizack
New Album Out: Wizack Twizack - IV (Ovnimoon Records 2011) http://www.beatport.com/#release/wizack-twizack-iv/387698
Beat Agency
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  53
Posts :  1752
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 19:40
It's absolutely nonsense to claim that Hardware setup's equal better music production quality. With a proper sound-card, top quality monitors and technical as well as decent production experience, not to forget TALENT, you can make just a good production with software bases equipment.

And at the end of the day it's all about taste really.

And I've heard lots of very bad produce music from hardware and amazing produced music from software in my 30 years as a producer with experience from the smallest setup to multi-million studios.

Back on topic. X-Dream was great.           www.beatagency.dk
Wizack Twizack
Wizack Twizack

Started Topics :  239
Posts :  3486
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 19:49
i dont think they talked about just quality but about uniqe and diffrent sound compared to software preset music. imo with software u'r getting a more sharp and plastic crystal clear production almost then with hardware but the more u learn about music the more u dont want that in the end =) pure dirty analog meety sounds ftw.

cheers!
          For Contact & Bookings:
Wizack_Booking@hotmail.com
www.soundcloud.com/wizack_Twizack
New Album Out: Wizack Twizack - IV (Ovnimoon Records 2011) http://www.beatport.com/#release/wizack-twizack-iv/387698
Beat Agency
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  53
Posts :  1752
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 20:06
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 19:49, Wizack Twizack wrote:
i dont think they talked about just quality but about uniqe and diffrent sound compared to software preset music. imo with software u'r getting a more sharp and plastic crystal clear production almost then with hardware but the more u learn about music the more u dont want that in the end =) pure dirty analog meety sounds ftw.

cheers!




You can easily (if you got the skills - no different from hardware) program your own sounds on software synths

And in the "good old days" lots of artists sounded the same. Just take a listen to the artist from UK using the Butterfly studios, Flying Rhino studios etc. There was a period where a lot of them sounded very similar. It's not the hardware or software's fault. Its the artists trying to sound like those they like

I dont buy into the argument that software make artists sound the same. If you got the skills and experience you can stand out with your own sound.

And again it's absolutely nonsense that you get a more plastic sound with software. If you got the experience, talent and skills as well as proper studio monitors, sound-card etc. you are able to make the sound very warm!

I get the feeling those who have very purist views on the whole hardware/software debate never really took the time to learn how to use software the proper way           www.beatagency.dk
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  162
Posts :  8087
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 20:18
so you mean 90% of the scene lack experience? i wonder if it s you who dont have the experience to really hear what going on with some hardware box or maybe you just dont care about it, in the end it s all about taste but if you re going for the hardware sound of some specific gears you won t get it with plugs,even their emulation..i was listening nebula desk... even a mackie sound better than their trident or neve desk .
Beat Agency
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  53
Posts :  1752
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 20:44
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 20:18, PoM wrote:
so you mean 90% of the scene lack experience? i wonder if it s you who dont have the experience to really hear what going on with some hardware box or maybe you just dont care about it, in the end it s all about taste but if you re going for the hardware sound of some specific gears you won t get it with plugs,even their emulation..i was listening nebula desk... even a mackie sound better than their trident or neve desk .



No not 90% (your figure not mine) but there are a lot of artists who could benefit from more time playing around in their studios before even thinking about releasing their music

And I do believe I got a very good ear and a lot of experience if 30 years count in your book (where almost 20 years of the 30 years has been as a artist releasing music)?

Is such a endless boring debate hardware versus software. Why not just make some good music and give it a rest?
          www.beatagency.dk
Filteria
Filteria

Started Topics :  7
Posts :  100
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 20:50
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 20:06, Beat Agency wrote:
Just take a listen to the artist from UK using the Butterfly studios, Flying Rhino studios etc. There was a period where a lot of them sounded very similar. It's not the hardware or software's fault. Its the artists trying to sound like those they like



What do you expect if they sit in the same studio, with the same equipment and the same technician?

Quote:

I dont buy into the argument that software make artists sound the same. If you got the skills and experience you can stand out with your own sound.



Maybe so, but somehow everything started to be very homogen in all the electronic subgenres when the software revolution started.

Quote:

I get the feeling those who have very purist views on the whole hardware/software debate never really took the time to learn how to use software the proper way



Well your "feeling" is wrong. I have tried and tweaked a few of them. Its not inspiring for me to sit with a mouse and stare @ a computer screen all day. However, I liked the imposcar and the Sylenth1. But that's about it. Most of them sounded plastic to me and as soon as you start pushing resonances, just plain ugly. Maybe I don't know how to make the software sound "alive and unique". But then again, I am not this 30 years experienced producer like you are...
Beat Agency
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  53
Posts :  1752
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 20:59
@ Filteria

I think I made my point clear and do not want to debate this issue to dead as most debaters end up in absolutely nothing. Those who have purist ideas about what they do is the best can not be moved in their believes whatsoever. Just take the Mac vs. PC debate

You got your fixed idea about how music should sound and in your opinion Hardware is better than software and software is the cause why artists sound the same.

I got another idea why artists sound the same and do not agree with you as I have used both hardware and software and still stand on the belief that with proper sound-card, monitors and some very important experience/skills you can't really hear the difference.
For me the fact is it's damn fun to play around with old vintage gear but I am very happy with my software setup and would never go back to Hardware. And I have used and made music with almost every synth out there and worked in studios some of you could only dream of - over the years

C'est la vie           www.beatagency.dk
PoM
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics :  162
Posts :  8087
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 21:32
no need to argue with all that and everyone made good points... my experience was that i was all hardware (mostly low end stuff) , then all software and now i m going to use more and more both.i think both have some pro and cons and for me it s the way i m satisfied with my sound ,in the end it s what really matter for me

but i think the evolution of the psytrance sound we can hear from the past to today is related to the gears used and today sound is the reflect of the all in the computer production to me, do you agree?
Nectarios
Martian Arts

Started Topics :  187
Posts :  5292
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 21:35
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 19:26, goaren wrote:
well put dh... tho i said it first


          
http://soundcloud.com/martianarts
Nectarios
Martian Arts

Started Topics :  187
Posts :  5292
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 21:36
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 19:37, Wizack Twizack wrote:
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 18:00, PoM wrote:
what i find funny is cause of everyone sounding the same now many procuders are wondering what they are doing wrong when they sound different.it make things even more worst ,pushing always more into cloning.



I think it has to do with the labels also who ain't accept diffrent stuff couse nobody will buy their cds and they will loose money, and producers who want to release their music on lables (not all tho) has to follow some kind of red line in their making of the tracks to fit what is beeing wanted and thats an evil circle who has poisoned the hole thing. So new producers find it easyer getting recognision by doing what the lables are after and by getting bookings they have pretty much reached their goals and have no intention to change that.




This^^           
http://soundcloud.com/martianarts
Filteria
Filteria

Started Topics :  7
Posts :  100
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 21:47
Quote:

On 2010-10-25 18:31, disco hooligans wrote:
Filteria, I totally get where you're coming from. I used to be just like that when I put together the first modules on my Doepfer/analogue Systems modular.
There is no end to the "analogueness" of things. Most synths mentioned here are chip based...you get your standard 3340 VCO chips, Transistor Ladder, SEM, 3320 filter chips, Roland IR filter chips.
I used to be in the hunt of Version 4 Roland MKS-80 cause they were discrete circuit synths like the Jupiter 8 and not chip based analogue synths like the Version 5 MKS-80. People in the late '90s early 2000 thought the chip based synths lacked a lot from the descrete circuit synts, to them people the chip based synths where not the real deal...there's no end to how anal producers can get.
And speaking about X-Dream's real analog sound...does the Korg Prophecy ring any bells?

I do agree that there is a lot to gain from wiring in an analogue synth to a desk and using whatever ADC people had available...things could get so different by simply changing the gain structure and use of their input preamps, whereas today people just open the same synth inside logic/cubase/ableton.
But as you already wisely stated, this has a lot more to do with the new breed of producers, than the equipment it self.
You're right about full on producers tho, cloning the [enter israeli producer here] that was "trendy" at the time...

Anyhow, I wish any new aspiring producer should watch this clip before opening the sequencer, not because they should be making the same music, but to get a feel of the real vibe of a trance party.

Peace out.




Oh come on, the prophecy rocks Analog or not, few other synths have so much charachter To be honest I never heard a single sound from the Prophecy in X-Dreams music (I mean the Prophecy sound is very easy to identify. Or they tweaked the shit out of it). Maybe it was just there on stage? X-Dream is for me Xpander sounds all the way along with Pro-1, Waldorf Microwave and SH101. Thats atleast what I recognize the most.

And sorry for hijacking the thread about equipment issues. X-Dream will always rock and be ahead of their time
Procs
Procs

Started Topics :  4
Posts :  220
Posted : Oct 25, 2010 23:12
@Filteria.. for sure the hardware is super to have and it all have itīs unique sound. I donīt think anybody can argue with that. I am just saying there is actually ways to use software to make it sound unique, if you put the effort in it. And for sure, itīs nicer to be acytually be doing things live and record it, it can sound much more alive and so on...

I donīt think itīs as simple to say the scene got fucked by the software, its much deeper than that and lets talk about that some day in another thread or maybe in real life (Where its not offtopic).... altough, it probvably has something to do with it, but its just to easy to say that its all about the gear....

          www.procs.se
www.myspace.com/procstrance
www.myspace.com/stellarinkpony
Trance Forum ŧ ŧ Forum  Trance - X-Dream Live 1997 in Paris
← Prev Page
1 2 3 4 5 Next Page →
First Page Last Page
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on StumbleUpon


Copyright © 1997-2024 IsraTrance