issue2

EMUSIC-L Digest                                    Volume 16, Number 2

   "Futurism and Dada Reviewed" Reviewed (3 messages)
   Administrivia - Whither EMUSIC?
   Amiga, Wavetables (3 messages)
   Questions about multitrack gear (4 messages)
   Apologies
   Basic needs
   D50 patches ---> D70 (4 messages)
   D50 stuff in Emusic archives (3 messages)
   Introductions (2 messages)
   good,bad...again
   Ground floor (3 messages)
   Inexpensive keyboards (4 messages)
   K4 fix
   Kitaro's Synth (was Re: Korg MS-10)
   Korg DW6000 (4 messages)
   Korg MS-10
   Librarian
   MIDI Data Filers (2 messages)
   MIDI specs
   Introduction (2 messages)
   program change
   Rhodes (2 messages)
   Roland W-30
   subject access issues (2 messages)
   SY22 (6 messages)
   Wavetable synth (2 messages)
   Why We Live In Fear (7 messages)

Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon .
You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with 
the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text.
 
The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the 
University of North Carolina.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 11:20:28 BST
From:         John McMillan 
Subject:      "Futurism and Dada Reviewed" Reviewed
Subject:"Futurism and Dada Reviewed" reviewed

Following on from the contributions on Theremins on this list a
few weeks ago, students of the pre-history and archaeology of
electronic music will undoubtedly be interested in a CD I recently
acquired.  Titled "Futurism and Dada Reviewed", it contains, among
other treats, a recording of Luigi Russolo's "The Awakening of a City",
written in 1914 for an ensemble of howlers, boomers, cracklers, scrapers,
exploders, gurglers and whistlers.  These were "intonarumori", electro-
accoustic noise machines of Russolo's own design.  There is a fantastic
picture of them in Jane Rye's "Futurism", Studio Vista, 1972.
The machines and the recording are recent reconstructions, however,
the original machines, together with a chamber orchestra, can be heard on
the CD in two pieces by his brother, Antonio Russolo, recorded in 1924.
They're a bit scratchy after all these years - but whats a bit of crackle
to a noise composer.
  Elsewhere on the record are poems and manifestos declaimed by Marinetti
Apollinaire and Wyndham Lewis and Jean Cocteau ranting his poetry over
a ratty hot dance band.  There's a recent Swedish performance of
Marcel Duchamp's "The bride stripped bare by her batchelors ..even"
in which small balls dropping into toy train trucks determine the
performance on pianos in which the normal mechanisms have been replaced
by electrically rotated discs moving against the strings. Very ethereal.
For me, the other highlight is a performance of part of what Morton
Feldman considered one of the six most important works of 20th century
music, the "Ursonate" by Kurt Schwitters.  Here its read by Kurt himself
in a recording which the sleeve says was made in 1932, though I suspect
its probably a decade later.  Its different in style from the Jaap Blonk
recording and certainly from the George Melly fragment.  Anyone out there
got a copy of Hans Hausdorfer performing it?

"Futurism and Dada Reviewed" SUBCD 012-19 price 800 BeF
Les Editions Sub Rosa, PO box 808, CM1000, Brussels, Belgium.

<< Disclaimer: I have no connection with Sub Rosa or Sphaera Ameris >>

John McMillan, Dept Physics, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
               phy6jem @ cms1.leeds.ac.uk

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 08:41:00 CST
From:         jeff beer 
Subject:      futurism and dada reviewed

I would be interested in that.  I have performed the Ursonate with
some performance artists.  I usually sit in the back and just improvise
on my horn and synthes, but we have always been able to get good crowds
and audience response to it.

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 16:24:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      The "Ursonate", for us hoi polloi

BTW, a reading of the "Ursonate" or "Ur Sonata" by Schwitters, is featured
as part of the dynamite tune "Kurt's Rejoinder" from Eno's BEFORE AND
AFTER SCIENCE....

metlay (a slave to pulp culture)

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 14:42:28 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Administrivia - Whither EMUSIC?

Of late, I've noted a less tolerant attitude toward beginners than
previously. One of the people signing off lately specifically pinpointed
this as a reason for his leaving. Please, let's all do our best to help,
even if the question seems too elementary. After all, we were all beginners
once.

 --- Joe M.

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 16:07:12 EDT
From:         Roger.Dannenberg@SPICE.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject:      Amiga, Wavetables


The last EMUSIC Digest had some misinformation on MIDI for the Amiga.
It is true that some MIDI software has used the SER: serial device
driver for MIDI, but there is a way to get lower-level access to the
hardware and bypass the relatively high overhead SER:.  As far as I
know, all commercial products do this.

The CAMD Midi Library, available from Carnegie Mellon University's Studio
for Creative Inquiry is fully integrated with the Amiga multitasking OS so
you can run several MIDI processes at once.  CAMD is currently written in,
and useable with, the Aztec C compiler, and Commodore has announced that an
upgraded CAMD will be incorporated into a future OS release.

Write me for details, or if the response is large, I'll post them here.

----

As for the question on wavetables, the main difference between table-lookup
synthesis and sampling synthesis has to do with changing sample rates.  For
typical sampled sounds, memory is at a premium, so the samples rates are
kept close to the minimum required by Mr. Nyquist.  It is known that
interpolating such samples to change the pitch introduces distortion, e.g.
even linear interpolation introduces artifacts roughly comparable to 8-bit
quantization noise.  As a result, most samplers use a variable sample rate
and do further processing in the analog domain.  Even the Synclavier synth
uses analog mixing due to variable sample rates.

Wavetable based synthesizers have, at least in the software synthesis
world, used highly oversampled tables, e.g. 2K or 4K samples for sine
waves.  In this case, you can change the pitch by stepping through the
table at different rates and just rounding to the nearest sample.

With VLSI, you can't compare approaches purely on the basis of computation
or memory.  E.g. the DX7 stores a sine table on-chip in ROM.  This is
very cheap compared to accessing off-chip RAM, so 6 FM operators might
be cheaper than one general table-lookup oscillator.  Roland's samplers
(at least some) use fixed sample rates and do relatively costly filtering
to change sample rates.  Apparently, the extra work in the digital domain
saves them a lot of analog circuitry.  Increasing speed in digital systems
is bluring the distinction between sampling and wavetables and leading to
many hybrid approaches.

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 10:58:02 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Amiga Stuff - An address clarification

To those who have written asking about the Amiga stuff posted the
other day: the person to whom you should be addressing the mail
should be roger.dannenberg@spice.cs.cmu.edu. I only forwarded the
mail from EMUSIC-D; I don't know beans about Amigas. Now, Macs are
a different subject :-).

 --- Joe M.

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 14:55:19 +0100
From:         White Rabbit 
Subject:      Re:   Amiga, Wavetables

>.....  As a result, most samplers use a variable sample rate
>and do further processing in the analog domain.  Even the Synclavier synth
>uses analog mixing due to variable sample rates.

     Any sampler with digital filters are likely to be using fixed-rate
sample rates.  Fixed rate with good interpolation also allows a greater
range of playback rates, with LESS noise than variable-rate, I believe.

>...Apparently, the extra work in the digital domain
>saves them a lot of analog circuitry.

    It also allows them to use digital filters, filters with multitimbrality
and polyphonic outs, and digital fx with no problems.


> Increasing speed in digital systems
>is bluring the distinction between sampling and wavetables and leading to
>many hybrid approaches.

   Sure is!



*******************************************************************************
White Rabbit : found in these burrows          *
                                               *
JANET      : sxa@uk.ac.dl.cxa                  *
Internet   : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk                  *   ...and the dormouse said
EARN/Bitnet: sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@UKACRL           *
UUCP       : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ukc.uucp         *       feed your head.
Ean        : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ean-relay.ac.uk  *
********************************************************************************

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 02:59:04 EDT
From:         PRESTON@MOREKYPR.BITNET
Subject:      Another novice asking silly questions about multitrack gear

     Well, it looks as if I'm about to run into a smattering of money,
  so  I've  started  turning  my thoughts towards the purchase of some
  home studio gear.  The only problem I'm having now is  deciding  how
  thinly  to  spread my smattering.  So, for those of you who have any
  experience or interest in such matters, I'm asking for your help.
     Since the bux aren't numerous enough to  get  into  more  than  a
  4-track  cassette recorder (unless I buy used gear, which is a whole
  other difficulty - this area isn't  particularly  known  for  having
  lots  of music stores that deal in used equipment of this nature), I
  want to get opinions on the following:

  * Buying an expensive, feature-laden machine vs. a cheap, basic unit.

     I have my eye on a Tascam 644 MIDIstudio that has *all* the bells
  and  whistles,  but  if  I  buy  that  one,  I'll have to add signal
  processing, etc., later as I  can  afford  them.   I  do  have  some
  friends  who  can  probably  loan  me  some  gear  (digital  delays,
  compressors, equalizers, synths, etc.), but probably only for  short
  periods  at  any  one  time.   What  seems  to be the best course of
  action?  Buying the loaded box and borrowing as I can, or buy the el
  cheapo and the processing gear at the same time?
     The best price I've seen on this Tascam was  in  a  package  deal
  that  included  a  pair  of  Audio-Technica  microphones,  a  set of
  Sennheiser headphones, and a few blank  cassettes  for  $1469.00  (+
  $20.00  shipping).   Has  anyone  else  seen  this in any mail-order
  catalogs  at  a  better  price?    Any   info   would   be   greatly
  appreciated...!!
     I realize that I've sent in questions similar to this  before  to
  the  list,  but  I  never got any direct replies back, so here it is
  again.  :) Sorry if it's getting old, but I've only recently  subbed
  to  the list in hopes that someone will be willing to post it to the
  list instead of mailing replies to me direct.


                       Many, many thanks in advance!


                              Jeff Preston

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 20:37:46 BST
From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
Subject:      Buying gear

>	  * Buying an expensive, feature-laden machine vs. a cheap, basic unit.
>	     I have my eye on a Tascam 644 MIDIstudio that has *all* the bells
>	  and  whistles,  but  if  I  buy  that  one,  I'll have to add signal

I say :
	Buy a simple, solidly built, good sounding unit, but not the Tascam.
	If you think that the Tascam will produce bells and whistles after
	you buy it, WRONG ! You will only get a good recording if :

	1.) The musician/source you are recording can play and sounds great.

	2.) You are actually more interested in your playing and composing
	    then something that 'Brings your creativity to new heights !!!'
	    or 'Gives you that cutting-edge over the average recordists !!!'
	    or ' ... [Put in the latest Japanese marketing slogans here]'.

	Does a 4-track recorder have bells and whistles ? Really ?

	No matter how good the 644 is, the medium it is based on is
	nevertheless a fine strip of tape which has many limitations:

	1.) Limited dynamic range.
	2.) Limited frequency response.
	3.) Drop-outs.
	4.) Compression effect.
	4.) Only 4-tracks means you have to do ping-pong at some stage
	    in your musical life as you develope, thus lose quality.

	As I have told many 4-track buyers before, a 4-track should
	always be a scratch-pad only, nothing more. You might knock
	up a very good tape for 'Magnetic Filings' say, but putting
	mega-bucks effects with a view to create a fantastic master
	recording on a cassette will be a waste of money.

	The fact is : you DON'T NEED a Tascam 644. You NEED a 4-track of
	some sort to put down ideas, and knock up demos. Demos are demos,
	not the tape you will send to produce CD copies from.

	There are many, many $500 machines out there, all of them have
	tape-head / transport that matches the 644, only without such a
	big mixer section. However most reverbs nowadays (like Alesis)
	have effect mix ratio built before the outputs, so you are doing
	just fine with them.

	Do yourself a favour: Get yourself a $500^700 tape deck, a
	few ESSENTIAL effects (like Reverb), and spent the rest on
	your instrument. If you are a guitarist, spend the money on
	the best axe there is; if you're a Sax player, buy a Selmar;
	if you are a keyboard player, get that WS/VFX/D-70 whatever.

>	  Sennheiser headphones, and a few blank  cassettes  for  $1469.00  (+

	Would you really splash out that kind of money for a tape recorder ?

	You are talking about the kind of money that would buy you a
	second-hand car, or a Macintosh computer, or a kitchen .....
	... no seriously, you would be better off with a reel-to-reel
	8-tracks machine of some sort that gives you better quality
	and more tracks to work with, if you are spending that money.

>	     I realize that I've sent in questions similar to this  before  to

	There is no need to worry about that ! Although some of us
	are pretty tired of these questions by now (myself included),
	I am still answering you in the hope that every now and then
	I might just save someone from spending nearly $1,500 on the
	latest Japanese marketing trick.

	I am only using a PortaOne, a MicroVerb, MicroLimiter (for
	compressing signals, esp. Saxophone), a 2*16 band graphic,
	and perhaps a QuadraVerb (for that Leslie sound) very soon.
	Yet I am producing quality demos falling just short of the
	absolute limit of what a cassette tape is capable of. I get
	that mainly due to :
	1.) The musicianship of the live players
	2.) Mega synth layering on the Macintosh (in sequenced stuff)

	but most importantly careful recording techniques to get the
	optimum levels and EQ for each take. The effects hardly ever
	matters, if a musician has great feel, his/her playing will
	come through as an emotion, more than just a nice sound.

>			       Many, many thanks in advance!

	You should really thank me if you are going to listen to this
	and put off the idea of splashing your $ 1,469.

	You should give it to me instead :-)

	What if you don't listen ?
	Don't post another stupid question ever again !

>				      Jeff Preston

							Patrick.

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 20:05:08 BST
From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
Subject:      Apologies

Dear Emusicians, and particularly Mr. Jeff Preston,

>	What if you don't listen ?
>	Don't post another stupid question ever again !

	I have noticed that at the end of an answer I posted
	recently I made *harsh* remarks to the questioner which
	could be offensive to other people in the list.

	I realise that I was once a beginner too and I still am
	one in many areas of Emusic, and really should not have
	posted that remark considering that my own questions are
	no less novice in the eye of many other senior members.

	Please accept my apology.

						yours sincerely,

							Patrick.

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 23:15:32 EDT
From:         PRESTON@MOREKYPR.BITNET
Subject:      Thanks, etc.  :)

>Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 20:37:46 BST
>Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List 
>Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List 
>From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
>Subject:      Buying gear

>    No matter how good the 644 is, the medium it is based on is
>    nevertheless a fine strip of tape which has many limitations:

>    1.) Limited dynamic range.
>    2.) Limited frequency response.
>    3.) Drop-outs.
>    4.) Compression effect.
>    5.) Only 4-tracks means you have to do ping-pong at some stage
        in your musical life as you develope, thus lose quality.


>    You are talking about the kind of money that would buy you a
>    second-hand car, or a Macintosh computer, or a kitchen .....
>    ... no seriously, you would be better off with a reel-to-reel
>    8-tracks machine of some sort that gives you better quality
>    and more tracks to work with, if you are spending that money.

     I agree that the cassette format is limited by its  very  nature,
  but  I didn't realize that there were any 8-track open reel machines
  in the $1200-$1500 price range...  if you know of any, please let me
  know, too!
     I thought the 644 was pricey,  but  being  a  guitar  player  who
  doesn't  have  any  experience  with  things  MIDI  in nature (what?
  another one?  :) ), I thought that the 644 might be  a  good  choice
  because  of  its MIDI capability and serial interface, i.e.:  future
  sequencing/synching/software control, etc.

>Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 20:05:08 BST
>Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List 
>Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List 
>From:         "Patrick C.K.Tsang" 
>Subject:      Apologies

>>   What if you don't listen ?
>>   Don't post another stupid question ever again !

>    Please accept my apology.

     No offense taken, Patrick.  I realize that I'm out of  my  league
  on  this  list...  that's why I came here with my questions:  to get
  the "voice of experience".  I again apologize for  wasting  anyone's
  time, but I'm glad that some are willing to help out...  I sincerely
  appreciate the suggestions I get from this  list,  because  I  don't
  have  the  time or money to waste on the wrong equipment...!  Thanks
  again!


                              Jeff Preston

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 13:54:20 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Basic needs

To everybody:
- We ought to come up with some basic recommendations as to some
  machines which are "better than most" in a given range. For
  instance, the K1 over the DPM-1, etc. Send me your preferences,
  and I'll try to make a coherent whole out of them. I want to
  hear about the good, the bad, and the ugly.

Specifically about basic needs:
  What do you have now? Do you have any equipment whatsoever, or are
  you starting at ground zero? Are you a composer, or a performer?
  Do you have any means of amplifying or recording your synth, once
  you get it? Do you want to multi-track, or use a sequencer and
  produce as many parts as possible at once? Do you want to design
  your own sounds, or are presets good enough? Most important, how
  much can you afford to spend? Are you willing to spend *all* of it?
  Are you more interested in the "workstation" concept, or would you
  prefer to start small with a master keyboard and a module or two,
  growing your system incrementally? What is your target music?
  Classical, rock/pop, or avant-garde? What is your name? What is
  your quest? What is your favorite color? :-)

  --- Joe M.

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

Date:         Tue, 08 May 90 10:59:00 MET
From:         Robert Belleman 
Subject:      Re: Kawai K-4

[...]
> To be fair: a lot of the patches I use on my D-50 are essentially
> heavily edited versions of patches I got from others, since there are
> tricks to the D-50 which it's hard to pick up otherwise (did you know
> the D-50 can do a wonderful AAAH choir sound purely by using sawtooth
> waves and clever chorus programming?). [...]

I've seen you say this before, Nick. Was that D-50 patch on any of the cards
you sent a while ago ? If not; I would very much like to have it, if that's
possible ... ;-)

>               Nick.

-- Rob

        Robert Belleman, co-system-manager
                         the Netherlands Cancer Institute Amsterdam.
        Tel.        : (31) 20-5122458
        Home number : (31) 2206-1789

        ROBBEL@VAXH.NKI.NL
        PSI%02041291011::ROBBEL

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 13:44:00 EDT
From:         Gee-off 
Subject:      D50 patches ---> D70

I'm a D50 owner and considering trading it for a D70.  Does anyone know if
D50 ROM cards (I have five of them) are compatable with the D70?  OR, are
there enough common parameters between the two that it would be possible to
re-program my favorite D50 patches onto the D70?  Thanks in advance.

-- Geoff

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 16:54:00 EDT
From:         "b.klassen" 
Subject:      RE: D50 patches ---> D70

>I'm a D50 owner and considering trading it for a D70.  Does anyone know if
>D50 ROM cards (I have five of them) are compatable with the D70?  OR, are
>there enough common parameters between the two that it would be possible to
>re-program my favorite D50 patches onto the D70?  Thanks in advance.

As Nick might say, yes the D70 can go CHIFF.  As far as porting patches, I
think it's a maybe/maybe not situation.  I played on a D70 again last weekend
and did some exploring of its "inards" to try to determine for myself whether
getting a 70 would be upgrading my 50 (ie: retaining my D50 sounds, and gaining
from the added functionality of the 70 ... filtering on PCM samples,
multitimbrality, etc) or if it would be just getting a D70 (ie:  I'd be losing
some of the sonic functionality of the D50).  Some of the D70's factory patches
are similar to some of the D50's, but I was not able to determine if the D70
had a superset of the D50 PCM stuff or an entirely different set (ran out of
time).  I think this will be a major factor to consider if you're wanting to
recreate patches.  So, really, I don't know.  I've got some patches I've
recently created that I can't imagine recreating on anything else, simply
because of the convoluted-uneducated-hit&miss methods I've used to get them ;-)
and they're a major part of what I'm doing right now.  I guess my D50's going
to be in my set-up until my friendly Roland dealer guarantees I can plug in my
D50 cards and play ...

 >-- Geoff

brian

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 12:31:45 EDT
From:         Dean Swan 
Subject:      Re:  D50 patches ---> D70

I have a D-70 at home right now, I haven't decided whether to buy it or not
yet, but it is a VERY differnt beast from the D-50.

About the only thing that remains the same is that 2 partials form a tone,
and 2 tones form a patch.  All the WG's are multi-sampled PCMs - no
"synthesizer" partials, and they all have a multi-mode TVF.

I don't think the D-70 is as powerful a synth as the D-50.  Here are the
major problems I have with it:

     - Only one LFO per partial, total of 4 per patch.
       The D-50 has 3 independent LFO's per tone which equals six per patch.

     - The pitch envelopes are of the ASR variety.  Much less flexible than
       the D-50.

     - No parametric EQ any more.  I thouhgt that this was one of the more
       hip features of the D-50.

     - No more "structures", and ring modulation is also gone.

In conclusion, the D-70 is basically a U-220 with some very nice filters.
It sounds good, and the long keyboard is wonderful (but I have an A-50, so
that doesn't really matter), and the user interface is superlative.  I love
the graphic envelope editing.

I don't know if I'd really call it an L/A machine though.  It's architecture
has more in common with the M-1 than the D-50.  Maybe I'll just pick up a
D-550 or two instead.

-Dean Swan
dean@sun.soe.clarkson.edu

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 11:42:00 EET
From:         "J. Riitala, University of Turku,
Subject:      D50 stuff in Emusic archives

Hi! Me again with (silly) questions.

Been trying to get the D50 banks in the archives (borrowed a D550 from a
friend). Listserv mails them well, they uuencode alright but uncompress
refuses to work. In our Unix system  uncompress yields a 1.2MB (!) file from
one bulk dump (oughta be around 35k) and the my disk quota control says
terminate. In our VAX system decompress (should be Unix compatible with
certain parameters) crashes!
I am not doing any binary transfers. Mail comes in ASCII and I haven't moved
the file after uuencode.

Probably (certainly) I am doing something wrong but I haven't got a clue what
it is. Somebody has received and opened these banks correctly, I guess
(holler if you have!).

How are they packed, Nick? Which compress? 16 bits?

                                        - Jari

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Jari Riitala                      !   snail mail:
                                             !          Kuusiharjunkatu
     JRIITALA@KONTU.UTU.FI                   !          20660 Littoinen
     still also T6M-RIIT@MAMMUTTI.UTU.FI     !          Finland
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 - There's nothing to fear but the fear itself (Neil Peart of Rush)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 14:04:00 MET
From:         Robert Belleman 
Subject:      Re: D50 stuff in Emusic archives

> Hi! Me again with (silly) questions.
>
> Been trying to get the D50 banks in the archives (borrowed a D550 from a
> friend). Listserv mails them well, they uuencode alright but uncompress
> refuses to work. In our Unix system  uncompress yields a 1.2MB (!) file from
> one bulk dump (oughta be around 35k) and the my disk quota control says
> terminate. In our VAX system decompress (should be Unix compatible with
> certain parameters) crashes!
> I am not doing any binary transfers. Mail comes in ASCII and I haven't moved
> the file after uuencode.

I have tried that as well, but did not succeed. I got them from Nick directly.
I suspect this is a problem with Nick's gateway; I have seen more of this
through the UK gate. Do you know of any of those problems Nick ?

[...]
>                                        - Jari

And what about that sawtooth 'Aaaah' D-50 sound, Nick. Was that on one of
those cards or are you hiding sounds from us ?!? ;-)
(This is one other problem with that gateway I think; I send you this question
directly but I didn't think it made it. Did it Nick ??)

-- Rob

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 10:11:50 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      D-50 stuff

>How are they packed, Nick? Which compress? 16 bits?

Unix compress, 16 bits.  It's possible that some braindead IBM machine
somewhere has corrupted the uuencoded files (doubtful, I know, but I
recall somebody else having similar problems). Each one should
uncompress to 34688 bytes long.

Nick.

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 16:53:00 EDT
From:         Danny Weiss 
Subject:      Introduction

    Hello EMUSICers.

    I've been reading this list for awhile now, (chiming in once in a
    while), but I've never introduced myself.... so here goes....

    My name is Danny Weiss.  I'm a musician, but I hack my living as a
    systems analyst at Stevens Institite of Technology (Hoboken, New
    Jersey).  My primary instrument is keyboards - which I started playing
    when I was 7.  I also have written some MIDI software for MS-DOS
    machines - you may have seen my classifieds in the back of Keyboard
    and/or Electronic Musician - (The "company" name is Synthetic
    Softworks, and the package is an editor/librarian for the Oberheim
    Matrix-6/Matrix-6R/Matrix-1000 synthesizers).

    Anyway, my first synthesizer was a CAT (Octave Plateau - now Voyetra),
    which I bought in 1978.  My first polyphonic synth, was the DX7, which
    I bought in 1984 - and have since sold.

    I've been in and out and in and out.... of various bands, and have done
    the club scene in New York City (yeeeccchhh!).  I'm kinda laying back
    now, doing a lot of composition and home recording - but with the
    arrival of spring weather, I'm starting to get "itchy" to play out in
    a band again.... sigh.

    My current setup consists of the following:

    80286 cpu - ms-dos                  Roland M-160 rack line mixer
    Music Quest MQX-32 MIDI interface   Yamaha SPX-90
    Yamaha KX-76 controller             Alesis Midiverb II
    Emu Systems Emax SE sampler         Roland Dimension-D chorus
    Yamaha TX-7                         Fostex F250 4 track cassette
    Oberheim Matrix-6R
    Oberheim Matrix-1000
    Kawai K5-m

    I primarily use Texture II as a sequencer - and I use SampleVision
    (Turtle Beach Systems) as a sample editor.

    I'm always open to questions, 'though I usually won't say much if I'm
    not 100% sure of what I'm talking about....

    I'm thinking about selling my Emax to get the new Emax II - anyone out
    there using this beastie?  Looks kinda cool....


    Danny Weiss
    WEISS_D@STEVENS.BITNET
    WEISS_D@VAXC.STEVENS-TECH.EDU
    Compuserve: 73357,1774

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

Date:         Tue, 08 May 90 09:15:19 ADT
From:         EDWR000 
Subject:      good,bad...again

Sounds like a great setup to me.  You should be happy with
both of those modules (for a while, until techno-lust set in),
although the keyboard version of one or the other will make
life much easier.  I have been using C-Lab Notator with a 2.5
Meg Atari for a year now, both live and with SMPTE in the studio,
and am immensely happy with it.  It does things that I had not even
dreamed that a sequencer could do.I used Dr T KCS and Copyist
for years, and abandoned them when I saw Notator. I have never
regretted it.
    I am pushing 45 MIDI channels (3 to spare ),and it has never
even hinted that it might slow down, and it can expand to 96.  It
is very intuitive and easy to use, especially the notation part.
My friend with a Mac and Finale comes over when he wants a score done
quickly, since his system is so abusive and slow.
     The problem with lack of feeling in step-time entry of scores
is dealt with in a number of ways in Notator, from Humanizing
algorithms, to real-time controller generation/recording, and being
able to take timing and velocities from other tracks.This last
feature means that you can put the right notes on one track, and
play it while recording another track of beating on any notes, to
give time and velocity information that can be used on the original
track.  This does not give you a true human feel, but if you can't
play at all, it gives you something musical.
     If you want to hear more... just ask

     Alan Edwards
     Physics Dept.
     University of New Brunswick
     Canada

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 11:34:16 EDT
From:         "James P. Goltz" 
Subject:      Ground floor

     Hello there!  

     Lately I've been looking to get in on the ground floor as far
as keyboards go.  A local music store is having their annual deep-
discount sale, including some of their synthesizer stock.  Being in
a position to have some extra income recently, I've been thinking...

     Unfortunately, it's been a while since I kept current with
the latest models, features, prices, etc.  Can anyone tell me
something about these names and what you'd pay for them (or why you'd
avoid them)?

     Casio CT-360, 390, 450 (I did say *ground* floor)
     Roland PRO-E
     Yamaha YS-200, B-200

     Any help (including pointing me in the direction of additional
information)(telling me where to go) would be appreciated.  Thanks
in advance...!

                                         --Jim

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 12:57:39 CST
From:         Jayson Tipp 
Subject:      Re: mail delivery error

Concerning good purchases, I could be of more help (others probably)
if I knew how much you are willing to spend, and what you want to do with
the equipment.  If you are limited and want sequencing you will receive
a recommendation different from that for a good sampler run from a Mac.

More Info????

................Buzz.

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 17:19:31 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      mail delivery error

"mail delivery error"?
Oh well...

>     Hello there!  



>     Casio CT-360, 390, 450 (I did say *ground* floor)
>     Roland PRO-E
>     Yamaha YS-200, B-200

I don't think any of these (with the possible exception of the YS) would
really count as a synthesiser. But, I'm not all that familiar with these
model numbers.

>Can anyone tell me
>something about these names and what you'd pay for them

Er, I wouldn't pay anything for one of these, but would hunt around for
what I might call a "real" synthesiser with a decent versatile
programmable voice architecture, and so on.

Depends what you want to do musically, of course.

Nick.

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 11:57:25 EDT
From:         "Nicholas J. Hengeveld IV" 
Subject:      Inexpensive keyboards

Greetings!

We (at Calvin College) have recently decided to expand our music
curriculum to include Macintosh computers with MIDI interfaces and
keyboards.  Does anyone out there have suggestions on what to use for
a keyboard?  They will be used for teaching theory, not composition,
so they don't have to be very high quality, but they do have to be
inexpensive.

Thanks in advance,

Nick Hengeveld
Microcomputer Specialist
Calvin College & Seminary
Internet: nickh@calvin.edu
AppleLink: U1202

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 11:57:25 EDT
From:         "Nicholas J. Hengeveld IV"
Subject:      Inexpensive keyboards

Greetings!

We (at Calvin College) have recently decided to expand our music
curriculum to include Macintosh computers with MIDI interfaces and
keyboards.  Does anyone out there have suggestions on what to use for
a keyboard?  They will be used for teaching theory, not composition,
so they don't have to be very high quality, but they do have to be
inexpensive.

Thanks in advance,

Nick Hengeveld
Microcomputer Specialist
Calvin College & Seminary
Internet: nickh@calvin.edu
AppleLink: U1202

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 13:11:50 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Music Theory & Synths - Question list

Let me just pose a few questions about the requirement for synths to be
used in a music theory class:

1) What is the intended audience? Are these keyboards to replace the old
   "500-Wurlitzers-and-a-switchbank", or are they meant to be used for an
   interoduction to synthesis? In other words, is a programmable, design-
   voices-from-the-ground-up machine useful, or would a limited-number-of-
   non-programmable-presets machine do?
2) How heavy is the usage intended to be? Will the class be on the small
   side or the large side (harder/easier to tell who really busted this one)
   and is the class a "weeder" class, intended to frustrate and cause
   students to fail (and take out their frustrations on the synths), or
   a "serious-students-only: " class, which can be depended upon to take
   good care of the instruments? That is, is the amount you may have to
   spend on repairs a big consideration?
3) Is this a basic synthesis class as part of a theory-comp major, or an
   added attraction for an existing theory class? If the former, a
   limited synth is almost worse than none at all.
4) Are the students primarily keyboard players, or primarily theorists? If
   the former, they will be harder to satisfy as far as the physical
   machine goes. If the latter, they will be worried more about the ability
   to fix their mistakes than about being able to perform on a familiar
   mechanism.

My own, admittedly biased opinions::
   If all you want is a multi-voice means of playing music which will be
   written out first, and the physical act of keyboarding is not the be-all
   and end-all of all of this, a cheap, non-programmable machine would
   probably serve adequately. As I recall, most theory classes require
   no more than 4 voices in chords, at least in the first few semesters.
   In fact, one of the cheap (relatively speaking) *internal* synthesis
   programs that provide four-voice harmony, and are programmed by
   dragging notes onto a staff, may be perfectly adequate (Deluxe
   Music Construction  Set or ConcertWare). Any of the cheap keyboards
   would probably be fine, though I'd recommend full-size keys.

   If this is headed toward a small, dedicated class which is primarily
   meant to be a fundamentals course for composers, you should provide a
   machine with as good a keyboard as you can afford. The actual synthesizer
   may not be so important, if the synthesis portion of the course is
   not to be played up. Recommendations here would be the Korg T-series,
   especially the T-1, or the A-80 or a similar master keyboard in
   concert with a good (but cheap) module (FB-01, TX81Z, M3R, etc).
   (yeah, I know -- buying 20 T-3's _is_ fantasyland)

   For a course in music theory _as applied to synthesizers_, the keyboard
   is less important than the synthesis means. Unless your musicians are
   very sophisticated, I would stay away from FM (I can hear the flames
   coming now - sigh), only because it is less intuitive than additive
   or subtractive synthesis.Recommendations: Old Moogs (pre MIDI); I'm
   sure someone will have a better recommendation than that, though.
   What would be great would be a MIDI-controlled, multitimbral machine
   with a lot of good modulation routings and an analogue or simulated
   analogue architecture (Xpander or VFX-like machine -- fantasyland again).

   I guess in general we need a general description of the typical
   student and the requirements of the students, both individually and
   as a class.

Other opinions are solicited -- what do I know, I have just the one VFX :-).

   --- Joe M.

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 17:35:33 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Inexpensive keyboards

>Does anyone out there have suggestions on what to use for
>a keyboard?

Does it have to make a noise?
If not, I'd recommend a look at the Cheetah stuff.

Nick.

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 21:41:20 CST
From:         Jason Keeler 
Subject:      K4 fix

    A friend of mine is considering buying a K4.  Personally, I think the
machine is OK.  He is planning on using it primarily for sequencing purposes.
The problem is that I recall reading a KEYBOARD mag review that stated that
the K4's input buffer had a tendency to get backed up and send out notes even
after you stop playing.  This obviously is a MAJOR problem for sequencing.
    Has anyone heard of a fix for this?  Does anyone have a K4 and if so have
you been experiencing this problem?
                                         ...Jason

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 15:22:01 EDT
From:         "Kurt A. Geisel" 
Subject:      Kitaro's Synth (was Re: Korg MS-10)

Speaking of old Korgs, does anyone know what on earth Kitaro's
favorite lead synth is, you know, the one that is dedicated to doing
that trademark simple pulse-wave like lead?  I >THINK< it's a Korg,
but I'm not sure.  From the barest glimpses I've seen of it in
pictures, it doesn't have that big front panel, so I really don't
think it's an MS-10/20.  It is very boxy and has a short keyboard.
I'm sure it has two oscillators, and it has that goofy portamento
behavior- if he depresses a second key while simultaneously holding
the sustaining one, it will hold the original note and the second
oscillator will glide to the second note.  One picture I've seen
suggests that it has a ring controller (a string "belt" which drives a
controller pot and has a finger ring attached- ala the Martenot),
although they may have been a custom add-on.

Any guesses?

- Kurt
Kurt Geisel                       SNAIL :
Carnegie Mellon University            65 Lambeth Dr.
ARPA : kg19+@andrew.cmu.edu           Pittsburgh, PA 15241
UUCP : uunet!nfsun!kgeisel  "We just need to short-circuit the continuum on a
BIX  : kgeisel               5 or 6 parsec level."  - Forbidden Planet

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 09:06:52 CDT
From:         "David M. Stowell (312) 509-9374" 
Subject:      Re: Korg DW6000

I bought a DW6000 about three months before the 8000 came out (ouch!).
I still own the instrument, and am happy with it, so it can't be too
bad. Here are the major differences between the two:

1) The DW8000 has a touch sensitive keyboard (velocity and pressure), which
   can affect the envelopes and such. The DW6000 does not (standard organ
   keys)

2) The DW8000 has 16 waves available in its 2 oscillators. The DW6000 has
   8 waves, but they are not a subset of the DW8000's waves. Good reason to
   have both :) .

3) The DW8000 has a rudimentary programmable digital delay on board, which
   is programmed as part of a patch. The DW6000 only has a Chorus On/Off,
   with no parameters.

There may be other differences, but I don't have a DW8000 to compare
against my DW6000.

I use my DW6000 both for its own sounds, as well as a second controller
for my Kawai K1 II. I'm happy with its sound, given the rather unusual
waves they've put into the oscillators and the filters Korg uses (quite
thick sounding). I find, however, that the keyboard's response is a little
touchy, but then I'm not easy on keyboards... :)

Three hundred dollars for one nowadays doesn't strike me as a bad price.
But I'm a terrible used equipment shopper. (shrug)

Let us know what you do.

|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| David M. Stowell                  | I'm the one that's doing this,    |
| University of Illinois at Chicago | Keep the enemy out of it;         |
| BITNET: U30422@UICVM              | I'm a child who's taking charge...|
| Internet: U30422@UICVM.UIC.EDU    |                                   |
| UNIX: lll-winken!ddsw1!dstowell   |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 09:16:00 EDT
From:         "John Young, Southern CT State Univ" 
Subject:      Speaking of older gear...

Does anyone out there know anything or have any specs on a Korg DW6000?
I have literature on the DW8000, but I don't know just how much less of
a synth the 6000 is.  I recently saw one in a local paper for $300 and I
want to know if it is even worth considering.

                                        thanks...
                                        john young

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 10:29:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Speaking of older gear...

The Korg DW6000 was the first easily affordable analog synth based on
digital oscillators with single-cycle waveforms, the papa of virtually
all of the non-FM gear on today's market. In typical Korg style, the
6000 was rushed onto the market to be first and to fire the public's
imagination; while PR was still hot, the 8000 was sent out as an improved
model, and the holes in the 6000's architecture were plugged. The
situation was analogous to that of the M1 and the T series, but given
the power and popularity of the M1 and Korg's commitment to it as of now,
that parallel shouldn't be pushed too far.

The 8000 had 16 waveforms available, the 6000 only 8. There are also, from
what I recall, differences in the MIDI implementation; the 8000 was Korg's
first "real" MIDI master controller, and I believe there were certain
types of data it shuttled (that we take for granted) that the 6000 didn't.

$300 isn't bad at all, though, though personally I'd pay the extra $150
and find a used 8000. Your best bet would be to find an old Korg brochure
and comparer the two instruments' spec sheets. I'd do it for you, but
today's my last day on EMUSIC-L for a while. Wedding, y'know. |->

metlay

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 09:55:00 EDT
From:         CHRIS@FANDMA.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Korg DW-6000

I, too, was bitten by the DW-6000 about two months before the DW-8000 came out
and rushed to my local store to buy it.  I was, and still am, very happy with
it.  My happiness was tarnished by the introduction of the DW-8000, because I
thought that now my brand-new synth was "obsolete", but I was wrong, wrong,
wrong.  I was (for a while) a great example of one-who-lives-in-fear.  Reality
has returned to me, and I can say in all honesty that the DW-6000 is a
versatile and great-sounding synth.  I think I would agree with Metlay that the
DW-8000 is a better buy at 150% of the price (mostly for the superior midi
implementation), but a DW-6000 ain't bad for 300 smackers.

-chris

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

Date:         Sun, 13 May 90 03:44:07 CDT
From:         "David M. Stowell (312) 509-9374" 
Subject:      Korg MS-10

Addressing Walther Beset primarily:

I actively use a Korg MS-10 that I bought new in 1979. I'm also aware of
the architecture of the MS-20. Any info or such you need? :)

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

Date:         Sat, 12 May 90 13:08:21 SST
From:         Gan Seum-Lim 
Subject:      Librarian

Is there a way to store SY-77 patches with Personal Composer System/2's
universal librarian ?
I have tried, but it just did  not work.

Anyway, what is the meaning of "Program Change" in MIDI ?

Seum-Lim

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 10:29:00 EDT
From:         "John Young, Southern CT State Univ" 
Subject:      MIDI Data Filers

Thanks to you all for helpful info on the DW6000.  Sounds like I should
continue to stalk for a while until a DW8000 shows up.  Besides... there
are too many other things on the wish list (I'm sure you all know what I
mean).

Best of luck with the wedding, metlay (if you are still on).  I did one of
those 15 years ago and believe it or not, it's held up better than any of
my older gear.

By the way, seeing as you folks were so helpful with info about the DW6000,
can I try to pump the list for info about MIDI data filers (e.g. the Alessis
data disk).  I believe Korg makes one also (at least it was listed in the
literature they sent me).  How reliable are they?  How fast (or slow) are
they?  Any other models that you know of?

                                        Thanks again,
                                        John Young

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 16:33:24 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      DW6000

>can I try to pump the list for info about MIDI data filers (e.g. the Alessis
>data disk).  I believe Korg makes one also (at least it was listed in the
>literature they sent me).  How reliable are they?  How fast (or slow) are
>they?

The Alesis datadisk strikes me as a waste of money since the Elka CR-99
comes in at 100 quid cheaper and you can use it as a sequencer as well
(the datadisk only saves SysEx messages).

Nick.

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 12:34:54 EDT
From:         John Carter 
Subject:      MIDI specs

[From John Carter (carter_jh@p2.lancsp.ac.uk):]

I've got a technical problem:

I am considering designing a MIDI 'box' that is microcroprocessor controlled
which will perform almost any MIDI function I want depending on how I program
the ROM. (e.g. simple sequencer, clock generator etc.) The problem is that I
have only a small, practical knowledge of MIDI, what I want is a full MIDI spec
(at all levels), Is there any good books anyone can recommend or any addresses
of organisations that could help me?

                                            Thanks in advance,
                                                              John.

p.s. Just played with the DR-550, smashing aren't they.

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

Date:         Sun, 13 May 90 01:54:00 N
From:         "WALTHER BESET, BITNET: P144WALT@HTIKUB5" 
Subject:      New kid in town...

Greetings,

i've 'listened' to the emusic-list for some time, and now's the time to
get active: i've finally got me a digital piano -for the touch- and a
yamaha fb01 (second-hand0 -for the sound and the programming.

i'm a sociology-student, dept. of statistics that is (uhm, actually studying
computers all the time...), and -as a hobby- am studying for two years at our
city music school: synthesizer (digital and analog), studio-work and piano.
Used to play flute (didn't everbody) for some six years as a child, but
for many years (didn't also everybody do...)

as a programmer (you're a freak if it cost YOU money, but you're a
professional when it costs other people money :-) ) i have an Atari 1040 at
home (cables all over the place, and lots of other computers at work, and
i like most of them. My atari is of course cabeled to the synthesizer.

And slowly (vhere did all my mooney go?) i'm accumulating equipment: next
on the list is a sound-effect module (perhaps a Digitech 64/128/128+)

i'm interested in all kinds of thing, and in this context: emusic general,
and more specific: 'old' synthesizers (korg ms10/20 anybody?),studiowork,
computers and music (gi'me C...), and of course, the stuff i have/will get/
can't-afford-but-would-like-to-have-but-i-have-to-eat-SOMEtimes.
And gossip of course.

Question:
does anybody have (technical) information about Keytec piano's, the yamaha
fb01, or info about (alternatives for) the digitech dsp 64/128,
all info is welcome, but info about how to program the things is VERY welcome.
Some manuals are satisfied when they tell you:
"it is possible to program (the fb01?), you can buy computerprograms at your
local dealer. Beware that the program fits your computer" (loosely quoted).

Greetings, Walther Beset

Bitnet   : P144walt@htikub5
Snailmail: Hoffmannlaan 593, 5011 WN Tilburg, The Netherlands.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Customer, our firm is proud to have one of the largest testing departments
in the world, and by buying our product, you automatically become a member!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 14:37:00 EDT
From:         Danny Weiss 
Subject:      re: program change

> Anyway, what is the meaning of "Program Change" in MIDI ?
>
> Seum-Lim

A MIDI "program change" is a command that will change the patch number (memory
location) or "program" on any MIDI device.  The range is 0-127.  Synths with
internal memories with greater than 127 locations usually have a sys-ex command
that sets the "bank" or some other parameter to access the additional memory
locations.

Danny Weiss

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 08:39:09 CST
From:         Jayson Tipp 
Subject:      Rhodes

I keep seeing adds in the mags for the NEW Rhodes MK80 (I think that's the
number), does anyone have any info on this board?

Relatedly, does anyone know of a midi retrofit (or something) for a standard
Rhodes?


Thanks,     Buzz...........

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 17:09:00 EDT
From:         "b.klassen" 
Subject:      RE: Rhodes

>I keep seeing adds in the mags for the NEW Rhodes MK80 (I think that's the
>number), does anyone have any info on this board?

Roland is marketing (building?) the new Rhodes stuff.  The pianos use the same
sonic engines as the RD series of pianos, but with more "Rhodes" style sounds.
You can edit some of the parameters of the sounds and store them, like with the
RD-1000 and it's module equivalent (MKS-something-or-other).

I own an RD-200 and I'm very happy with it.  The Epiano sound on it is not a
Rhodes, but it's very smooth and responsive and it's NOT a DX7.  I've produced
some very good results MIDI-ing the RD with a Rhodes sample on the S950, and
with a DX7 (when the guys can't get on without that FM Epiano sound).  The
Electric Grand is very punchy and cuts through in a live setting.  It's not the
best sounding piano, but I really haven't found anything better (when you
consider sound, expressiveness, feel ...).  In my opinion the Pianos on the
MK80 aren't as good as the RD-200's, but I haven't tried to mess with the stock
sounds at all.

>Relatedly, does anyone know of a midi retrofit (or something) for a standard
>Rhodes?

I remember ads in Keyboard for Rhodes kits awhile back.  If you want I'll look
through my back issues and see if I can dig up a company name.

>Thanks,     Buzz...........

brian

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 22:14:00 CDT
From:         ADAMLASNIK@NUACC.BITNET
Subject:      Roland W-30

        I purchased a Roland W-30 Workstation about 6 months ago, and I'm
now starting to regret my decision.  The samples are great, and the user
interface is OK, but the manual is TERRIBLE, and the memory limitations
are very musically inhibiting.
        Another thing has really been bothering me... Why don't I hear about
the W-30 at all?  Is it that bad?  Or does nobody know about it?  What's the
deal?!!!
        Has anyone heard of any rumors of possible memory expansion capabil-
ities for the W-30?  Or has anyone heard ANYTHING about the darn thing at all?
I'm dying to hear some response on this!
        Thanks.

                        Sincerely,
                        Adam Lasnik
                        '93 Northwestern Univ.

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 08:13:45 PDT
From:         San Francisco Public 
Subject:      subject access issues

Opening disclaimer: I'm not much of an E-Music person myself
(at least at present), what I am is a music librarian.
There is some interest in the Music Library Association
in improving access to contemporary types of music.
My query here has two parts:
   Do members of this list ever use libraries to find
   "contemporary" music, either scores or recordings?
   If so, do you find current subject access to be
   woefully inadequate?  What kinds of subject access
   terms would be more helpful?

   The Subject Access Subcommittee of the Music Library
   Association is planning a program session at our
   annual meeting on the issue of subject access to
   contemporary music.  We would like to find a speaker
   who is a person active in the field of contemporary
   and/or electronic music who has some views on
   subject access issues.  Is there a subscriber to
   this list who might fit that description, or know
   of someone who does?

You can respond directly to me at bm.x50@rlg.  Of course,
if you wish to engage in a lively discussion on access
to music on this list, by all means go right ahead!

Thanks.
Michael Colby
San Francisco Public Library
bm.x50@rlg

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 17:44:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: subject access issues

This is a potentially fascinating topic! (i'm sorry I won't be around to
enjoy most of the chitchat about it here.) From my own experiences, I find
that library access to music (sheet and recorded) can be of immense aid
in studying certain compositional approaches, preparing background material
for discussions or my own compositions, or just plain expanding one's
horizons. But I'd like to ask for a couple of clarifications:

1. What exactly do you mean by "contemporary"? Are you referring to modern
classical and electronic styles, or to the broader areas of jazz or even
pop and rock? The differences here are vital; pop music will have a much
higher interest level in the listening public than other styles, but will
also have a shorter span of vital interest and possibly problems of damage
and theft that are beyond what libraries may be used to handling. Imagine
a public library in 1984 trying to loan out copies of "Thriller"!

2. Are you restricting your discussion to free-access public libraries?
The advantages of university libraries for handling these materials are
manifold; smaller and more selective collections, a more knowledgeable
staff (generally since the music collection will be in the library of
the Music Department of a given school), and tighter security and control
of the materials themselves. Having worked in a public library, and done
research in a University music library, I have seen a number of fairly
stiff disadvantages in these areas with which public libraries must deal.

Anyway, I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts on these matters. I, for
one, am delighted with the prospect of falling CD prices, as they will be
a boon to libraries. Anyone remember the old (1962?) Peanuts cartoon with
Charlie Brown playing hoop-roll and Frisbee with a record, then getting into
a tug-of-war with Snoopy for it, and finally complaining, "These library
records always sound so scratchy!"

metlay

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

Date:         Sun, 13 May 90 14:53:22 CST
From:         Jason Keeler 
Subject:      SY22

Hey guys, what is this new Yamaha SY22 synth I've been hearing about??  Any
information??

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 14:59:48 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      SY22

>Hey guys, what is this new Yamaha SY22 synth I've been hearing about?? Any
>information??

It's a vector synthesis machine.

I've had a look at one.

In a shop window, that is.

Nick.

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 16:53:21 BST
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      Re: SY22

> >Hey guys, what is this new Yamaha SY22 synth I've been hearing about?? Any
> >information??
>
> It's a vector synthesis machine.
>
> I've had a look at one.
>
> In a shop window, that is.

Well, I can give you a quick paraphrase of a review I have in front of me:

The SY22 is described as a cross between the Prophet VS and the SY77, only
less. The predominant feature is a tracker ball in the left top corner -
this allows you to mix four sounds, 2 PCM and 2 FM sounds. The machine is
32 note polyphonic, 8 part multi-timbral, and has lost the sequencer found
on its bigger brothers. It does have 61 drum sounds and 16 digital fx.

It has 127 PCM samples and a 4-Op FM synth with only one algorithm (2 carriers
aeach with a modulator). For each voice you can record a sequence of 50 X/Y
movements of the tracker ball, either in real time or step time. You can
even set the ball to 2 midi controllers for even flashier changes.

The review claims that the machine is an ideal first machine, being very simple
to program, yet sufficiently interesting sonically to appeal to the big boys !

I had a chance to run my fingers over the presets, and I must admit I didn't
hear anything I hadn't heard before (who does nowadays) - it sounded a bit
too digital for me, but thats just my personal preference. The main plus point
is its price - 799 pounds in the UK, so it could be a replacement for my under
(re. never) used K1.


--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Tony J Jewell
  Systems Officer		City Of London Polytechnic
                                                           ___     .    ___
  JANET:          tonyj@uk.ac.clp.unixa                   /   \   /    /   \
  EARN/BitNet:    tonyj@unixa.clp.ac.uk                  /       /    /___ /
  EAN:            tonyj%clp.unixa@ean-relay.ac.uk       <____/  <___ /
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 17:08:21 +0100
From:         White Rabbit 
Subject:      SY22

>>Hey guys, what is this new Yamaha SY22 synth I've been hearing about?? Any
>>information??

>It's a vector synthesis machine.


  Vector Synthesis appears to have become a 'de facto' name for a
particular type of synthesis although it seems to me it was just a
techno sounding name when the VS was built... like Korg's AI synthesis,
and Peavey's DPM.  Other systems like FM, additive and subtractive
etc seem to be 'agreed upon' as to what they mean, eg by the academic community
but, for example Peavey's Digital Phase Modulation seems to be exactly the same
sort of system as Korg's AI, or the D220's R-PCM, but with a different nametag
that makes it sound hitech.  Anything with initials sounds flashy, but
there appear to be few NEW techniques of synthesis in these beasties...

  Leading up to the question HOW 'Vector Synthesis" is the SY22, or is
Yamaha borrowing the tag, but with a different ACTUAL algorithm behind it...

  And what's the difference between VS, or additive synthesis of a few
complex waveforms.  Overall it appears to be four or so waveforms
with control of each one's amplitude, ie a digital mixer on each wave of
the DCO... and could be called RAMCW by some company as the next new buzz-
acronym of synthesis (Realtime Amplitude Modulation of Complex Waveforms)

  When are we gonna stop getting this hype bullshit full of buzzwords and
numbers and get some reality back in the intrument business... after all, how
long can these companies continue bringing out products with only a six-month
lifespan?

  If as much effort went into finishing off these synths as goes into hyping
them, maybe someone might start delivering bug-free, useable machinery.  That
WOULD be unusual... imagine only ever needing revision 1.00A of the ROM's
(Would VFX owners be able to cope?)

  Yours, bitching about the industry


  WR HMS Rev 32.4Q

  (White Rabbit, Human Modelled Synthesis)


*******************************************************************************
White Rabbit : found in these burrows          *
                                               *
JANET      : sxa@uk.ac.dl.cxa                  *
Internet   : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk                  *   ...and the dormouse said
EARN/Bitnet: sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@UKACRL           *
UUCP       : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ukc.uucp         *       feed your head.
Ean        : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ean-relay.ac.uk  *
********************************************************************************

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 17:08:21 +0100
From:         White Rabbit 
Subject:      SY22

>>Hey guys, what is this new Yamaha SY22 synth I've been hearing about?? Any
>>information??

>It's a vector synthesis machine.


  Vector Synthesis appears to have become a 'de facto' name for a
particular type of synthesis although it seems to me it was just a
techno sounding name when the VS was built... like Korg's AI synthesis,
and Peavey's DPM.  Other systems like FM, additive and subtractive
etc seem to be 'agreed upon' as to what they mean, eg by the academic community
but, for example Peavey's Digital Phase Modulation seems to be exactly the same
sort of system as Korg's AI, or the D220's R-PCM, but with a different nametag
that makes it sound hitech.  Anything with initials sounds flashy, but
there appear to be few NEW techniques of synthesis in these beasties...

  Leading up to the question HOW 'Vector Synthesis" is the SY22, or is
Yamaha borrowing the tag, but with a different ACTUAL algorithm behind it...

  And what's the difference between VS, or additive synthesis of a few
complex waveforms.  Overall it appears to be four or so waveforms
with control of each one's amplitude, ie a digital mixer on each wave of
the DCO... and could be called RAMCW by some company as the next new buzz-
acronym of synthesis (Realtime Amplitude Modulation of Complex Waveforms)

  When are we gonna stop getting this hype bullshit full of buzzwords and
numbers and get some reality back in the intrument business... after all, how
long can these companies continue bringing out products with only a six-month
lifespan?

  If as much effort went into finishing off these synths as goes into hyping
them, maybe someone might start delivering bug-free, useable machinery.  That
WOULD be unusual... imagine only ever needing revision 1.00A of the ROM's
(Would VFX owners be able to cope?)

  Yours, bitching about the industry


  WR HMS Rev 32.4Q

  (White Rabbit, Human Modelled Synthesis)


*******************************************************************************
White Rabbit : found in these burrows          *
                                               *
JANET      : sxa@uk.ac.dl.cxa                  *
Internet   : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk                  *   ...and the dormouse said
EARN/Bitnet: sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@UKACRL           *
UUCP       : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ukc.uucp         *       feed your head.
Ean        : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ean-relay.ac.uk  *
********************************************************************************

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

Date:         Mon, 14 May 90 17:39:21 MDT
From:         schabtac@SPOT.COLORADO.EDU
Subject:      Vector Synthesis

White Rabbit writes:
>  And what's the difference between VS, or additive synthesis of a few
>complex waveforms.  Overall it appears to be four or so waveforms
>with control of each one's amplitude, ie a digital mixer on each wave of
>the DCO... and could be called RAMCW by some company as the next new buzz-
>acronym of synthesis (Realtime Amplitude Modulation of Complex Waveforms)

VS was a term coined by Sequential Circuits when they introduced the Prophet
VS. It is indeed additive synthesis with four complex waveforms; however,
the big innovation was how you controlled the relative amplitudes of each
wave. The VS has a joystick that you move around -- imagine one wave at each
corner of a square; as you move the joystick around in the square, you vary
the amplitude of the waves. Moving the joystick to any of the four corners
gives you just that corner's wave, moving it to the center gives you an
equal amount of each, etc. The real nifty thing is the microprocessor watches
what you do with the joystick, and sets up four envelope generators (which
feed the amplifiers controlling the amplitude of the four waves) to reproduce
your motions. It's a very fast and powerful way of producing interesting
sounds. After that comes a nice analog filter, which helps too, of course.

(Metlay could explain all that more lucidly than I; but he's off getting
married.)

How well either the SY22 or the Korg WS manage to reproduce this technique
of synthesis remains to be seen. Given what Roland is pandering as "Super
LA Synthesis", I'm not too optimistic about VS in the '90s, but hey, I'm
cynical about the industry in general.

>  When are we gonna stop getting this hype bullshit full of buzzwords and
>numbers and get some reality back in the intrument business... after all, how
>long can these companies continue bringing out products with only a six-month
>lifespan?

Just as long as folks keep forking over their money so they can take home
their very own new shiny keyboards, with the big buzzwords and numbers printed
right on the front panels. Supply and demand, don'tcha know (sorry, I've been
studying for an economics final).

--Adam

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

Date:         Tue, 08 May 90 09:30:21 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Wavetable synth

>As I understand it, a wavetable synth works by scanning an array
>table of a waveform in memory, is that right ?

Right.
>
>So what makes the P.P.G. so interesting ? Is there something it
>does that digital synths of today won't do ?

Yes. It has *excellent* analogue filters (with resonance and all that
good stuff), which give you the richness and movement of an analogue
synth coupled with the wavetable stuff.

>What I cannot understand is the difference between a wavetable
>synth and a digital additive synth. Both of them would need to
>scan through a waveform table of some sort, don't they ?

I don't know whether there's a practical difference between sweeping a
carefully constructed wavetable and just cross-fading (many)
single-cycle waves to different levels. I'm inclined to prefer the
former through my experience with the Waldorf and VFX; the partial
mixing and cross-fading I've done with my D-50 (rather limited, I
know) didn't seem much to write home about.

Nick.

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

Date:         Tue, 08 May 90 11:50:04 +0100
From:         White Rabbit 
Subject:      [ckt@UK.AC.UKC: Wavetable synth]

   Patrick:

>As I understand it, a wavetable synth works by scannig an array
>table of a waveform in memory, is that right ?

     Almost:  it scans through an array of waveformS, plural, which are usually
     stored contiguously, and which tend to be 'evolutionary' ie with a
     related but changing harmonic structure within a given table.

>So what makes the P.P.G. so interesting ? Is there something it
>does that digital synths of today won't do ?

     It was designed at a time when there were almost no other digital synths,
     and was unique in its use of wavetables.  Modern digital synths are just
     getting around to using this method again.  The PPG new machine (Waldorf)
     has analogue filters, unusual for a digital synth, and also allows
     modulation of the waveform in the wavetable currently being output. Im
     not sure if the earlier PPG's allowed this.  The PPG system also had the
     optional Waveterm computer which allowed the sampling of sounds and
     conversion of them into wavetables... an early attempt at resynthesis.
     Modern digital synths tend to be based around the readout of COMPLEX
     waveforms with INTRINSIC harmonic evolution ie samples, rather than
     tables of simple waveforms


>For months now a friend of mine has been designing a very fast
>DSP add-on board for the PC and I wish to write some DSP code
>for it to perform digital additive synthesis, using on-board
>memory for wavetables. The PC is mainly used for timbre design,
control and downloading.

>What I cannot understand is the difference between a wavetable
>synth and a digital additive synth. Both of them would need to
>scan through a waveform table of some sort, don't they ?


     Additive Synthesis is typically done with sine waves, one per harmonic,
and thus only a sine waveform needs to be stored.  It can also be performed
with Fourier algorithms, or 'brute force' ie multiple readouts of the sine
wave.  The harmonic structure is altered by varying tha amplitude, and less
often phase, of the individual harmonic sine waves.  About 64-128 sines are
needed to give a 'good' timbre accuarcy
      However using several, say 8-16 COMPLEX waves read out at once, in
a similar manner might also be described as additive synthesis.
      The change of timbre in wavetable synthesis is due to changing WHICH
waveform is being read out, and far fewer table reads are required...

      Try a wavetable synth on your DSP thingy; it uses less processing
power, is probably more 'intuitive' to develop sounds on...


 If you want more ideas/help feel free to mail me back via the list...
 I'm  not yet sure about being contacted via the net direct... dont know how
 good the links hold up...

          White Rabbit.

*******************************************************************************
White Rabbit : found in these burrows          *
                                               *
JANET      : sxa@uk.ac.dl.cxa                  *
Internet   : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk                  *   ...and the dormouse said
EARN/Bitnet: sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@UKACRL           *
UUCP       : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ukc.uucp         *       feed your head.
Ean        : sxa%cxa.dl.ac.uk@ean-relay.ac.uk  *
********************************************************************************

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

Date:         Wed, 09 May 90 13:40:40 BST
From:         Nick Rothwell 
Subject:      Why We Live In Fear

Where were you when the DX7 came out?

More importantly, what did you think of it? Cast your mind back, now,
to the first ever DX7 you heard. Wasn't it wonderful? Didn't it blow
everything else out of the water? All those exciting new sounds, unlike
anything anybody had ever heard before, changed the face of synthesised
music for ever.

I remember seeing my first DX7 in September 1983, being used by Steve
Jolliffe. I also saw one in a shop, and saw one in use on TV, playing
an electric piano piano patch with delayed vibrato. I thought it was
amazing.

This is not a posting about the DX7. It's a posting about being afraid.

Who out there purchased a synth in 1982, or early 83, just before the
DX7 hit the streets? What did you think when the DX7 came out? Did you
suddenly think your instrument was useless? Did you suddenly think that
you had to have one, no matter what? If so, why? Were you afraid that,
without a DX7, you were going to be left behind, while others could
use this revolutionary new instrument to make music better than yours?

There's that word again. "afraid."

I managed to scare myself a little last night by reading an old review
of the Prophet VS, having just put the my name down for a VFX. My god,
thought I, the VS could store user-built waveforms and mix between them,
storing the mixes as waveforms and so on. Will the WaveStation be able
to do that? Have I just made a serious mistake? If the WaveStation is
really that good, what chance have I got, having blown all my available
cash on a VFX, of keeping up with the new sounds which are suddenly going
to appear from nowhere? All these people will suddenly be making such
wonderful sounds.

We live in fear. It is of our own doing, and the marketing people are
happy to oblige us this little endulgence, since it means they sell
more units. Read quickly through the adverts in KEYBOARD. They all
come across with the "This is the machine to unlock that creativity
within you." routine. "More flexibility than ever before. Take your
music to new horizons." You see, as musicians, we're creative, and so
by definition, insecure. We seek security by buying ourselves the
newest equipment, so that we can be confident that nobody else has
some technological edge that we haven't got. And, we don't want our
music to suffer if we're missing that edge.  The marketing ploy is to
exploit that insecurity. And to make it worse, we've had the DX7. That
fear *has* been justified in the past, as suddenly any synthesised
sound which wasn't a DX7 was just boring. Do we think it might happen
again? Might the WaveStation be it?

[pause for artistic effect.]

There *is* such a thing as obsolescence. I bought a TX7 shortly before
the TX81Z came out. The '81Z would be much more useful to me. I *almost*
bought an ESQ-1, but got the D-50 instead, thank goodness, since I've
been able to do wonderful things with the D-50 that the ESQ-1 can't
touch. My musical associate almost bought an M1, but the VFX arrived
just in time to save him from death by PCM. Now I've bought a VFX,
with the WaveStation just round the corner. Machines become obselete
as our expectations and demands grow, that's natural. I wish my D-70
were multitimbral and could filter samples like the D-70. I wish my
TX7 were multitimbral and stereo. But, in balance to this, let me
pose ROTHWELL'S LAW:

	No musical instrument or device is made less useful or
	versatile by the announcement of a new product.

Do you believe it? I'm not sure it applies to the DX7's contemporaries
in late 1983, for example. Sure, you're going to think that, my god, this
such-and-such I've had for a while is "useless now the so-and-so has
come out". That's what Rothwell's Law disputes. If you think that, then
either (a) you're wrong, or (b) it had failings anyway that for some
reason (marketing, or maybe just honest lack of experience at the time)
you only see now. Rothwell's law is an attempt to counter that fear that
strikes at our creative souls.

This is why I stepped out of my front door this morning, walked past
Sound Control (who probably have a WaveStation sitting on a table
at this very moment), and went to buy a VFX. I *REFUSE* to be frightened
in this way, by you, by the marketing people, and least of all, by
MYSELF. I believe, as objectively as I know how, that the VFX is a fine
instrument, which I like programming and playing, which is ideal for
our live work, and which has exactly the features I want. Sure, I'd
like resonant filtering and some more wavetables, but I know I can
do a lot with the machine as it stands. That isn't going to be changed
by the WaveStation (apply Rothwell's Law).

A word to all you hot-shots after the latest gear and new sounds. You're
digging your own graves. You're just playing chicken with the marketing
people, by saying "go on, really SCARE ME!" If you don't really try to
evaluate these new instruments and find out what they can really do,
how you can stretch them, and what they do *for you*, you're setting
yourself up to be scared out of your pants (and out of a lot of money
into the process).

That's all I have to say, I think. Ah yes, one more thing:

Has anybody got any hot new VFX patches they'd like to share or
download for me? I need some sounds for my machine!?!?

*Oof*, *ouch*, *smash*, *tinkle*, it was a joke guys, lay off *ouch*
*tinkle* throwing those milk bottles will you, please, *splat*, *ouch*,
hey, Metlay, that was a full one! *crash* ...

		Nick.

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 08:20:16 CST
From:         Jayson Tipp 
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

I like Nick's comments.  I'm not sure why 'we' (don't want to offend anyone)
seek the latest and greatest.  I drooled over the M-1, and probably every
other hot keyboard to come out over the past two years.  Fortunately (I think),
blowing cash on a new board every six months is not a priority for me, much
less a possibility.

I bought an ESQ-1 after seeing it demo'd because I liked it.  I still like it.
The guy said (they all do) it's the only keyboard you'll ever have to buy.
It is the only keyboard I'll ever HAVE to buy.  Despite its limitations, it
is very useful.

My sound needs are humble.  I rely on pianos, organs, a good bass, and rarely
a decent synth patch or a flute or two.  I have all of these with the ESQ-1.
When I have an idea it is usually worked out on organ or piano.  It would be
great if I could get a 'real' leslie effect on the organ sometimes (I can get
pleasingly close now), but it wouldn't affect my creativity or chording, or
harmony, or..........  It would only affect that sound.

I remind myself that Jimmy Smith only had one organ, Wes Montgomery one guitar,
and Miles one trumpet.  I try to find a unit which will give the sounds I need
rather than those I want.  Since cost is a major factor it's hard to find one
unit which does both.  I recently got a good buy on a Korg Symphony.  I bought
it because of sounds that fulfill my needs, and always will (not all my needs
of course).  Right now I am planning to purchase a good electronic piano.  I
don't use CHIFF.

Oh Well...... Buzz..................

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 11:28:02 BST
From:         Tony Jewell 
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

Nick - Its all so true !!

Interestingly enough I have noticed a backlash against this, at least in
commercial popular music recently, with the advent of acid-house music etc.

Most of the music I tend to write is dance/pop orientated - when the DX7 first
hit these shores I was just starting out in the world of electronic music. At
the time I was (and still am!) on a very limited budget - the heady heights of
the DX7 were well beyond me. After much scrimping and saving I bought a simple
set up consisting of a Roland SH101, a TR808 drum machine and some other budget
second hand stuff. The Roland cost me about 300 pounds, as did the TR808, a lot
of money at the time. I remember sitting in my bedroom trying to emulate the
likes of Trevor Horn and the Art of Noise on my simple set up, and wishing
I had the sort of equipment they did. And of course, what I really wanted was
a DX7 to get all those wonderful digital bass sounds that I heard on the dance
music of the time.

Eventually I found my self with more money, and I decided to sell my old set up
and upgrade. I remember being told by the guy in my local music store that old
synths like the SH101 were useless and unwanted nowadays, and offered me 30
pounds to take the machine off my hands. I agreed - the machine bore no
resemblance to the wonderful gleaming digital synths and drum machines all
round his shop.

So, I got a sampler, an FM synth, a digital drum machine and all was okay. Then
what happened ? Out of Chicago and the north of England came this new, low
budget synth dance music. Machines like my old (and previously useless) TR808
and SH101 became the in thing - to produce dance music this is what you had to
have, not some super hi-tech synth. THe prices rocketed - an SH101 is worth
about 200 pounds now (and I sold it for 30 only a year before), and you can't
get a TR808 for love nor money.

Slowly I'm catching up .. I've eventually got hold of some old analogue gear
at appallingly high prices, and I've got a disk of TR808 samples for my
sampler. I thought it was time to sell the DX - the man in the music store
said it was useless and unwanted - he'd offer me something to take it off my
hands ......

I hate synthesizers

I should have taken up the guitar !
--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Tony J Jewell
  Systems Officer		City Of London Polytechnic
                                                           ___     .    ___
  JANET:          tonyj@uk.ac.clp.unixa                   /   \   /    /   \
  EARN/BitNet:    tonyj@unixa.clp.ac.uk                  /       /    /___ /
  EAN:            tonyj%clp.unixa@ean-relay.ac.uk       <____/  <___ /
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 16:29:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

I have an odd twist on this problem: I lust after OLD gear. The only
new synth to even cause an eyebrow twitch on my part in the last four
years was the return of the Vector: the Yamaha SY22 and Korg WS. I did
just fine with my old Korg DW8000 and Xpander for a long time, but then
I got my VS Rack, then I got rid of it a month later, and now there's
a road case that arrived yesterday and another one from the day before that
and a THIRD one showing up next week sometime....

*sigh* and I was so GOOD!

metlay

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

Date:         Thu, 10 May 90 16:36:39 EDT
From:         Joe McMahon 
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

Hmm? Did I read that right? You *got rid* of the VS? Eh? Sorry, there
must be some line noise between here and there. Else, the Ensoniq goon
squad has found out where Metlay lives now... :-). Seriously, why?

 --- Joe M.

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 10:39:05 EDT
From:         Patrick Robinson 
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

Ah, the lust for old synths ... This is the problem I've had, too...
And Metlay's just made it worse (what with all his Xpander talk ;-} ),
or should I say, more intense.
   I STILL have a burning itch to go find myself an old Minimoog, and
an old Oberheim 4-voice ... NO MATTER WHAT THE COST!  ---> no, wait...
settle down there, Pat.  HEY! ...and a couple of Mellotrons.
And what was the Model of that Big Moog which Emerson STILL seems
to 'get by' with (on occasion)?  He is *obviously* Not Hip, anymore.
   I Live-In-Fear that when I eventually DO get the $$$ together to
go out and BUY that Xpander, I won't be able to find one.
   Scarey.
-Patrick

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

Date:         Fri, 11 May 90 10:48:00 EDT
From:         METLAY@PITTVMS.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Why We Live In Fear

Yes, folx, I *did* sell my VS Rack. If you'll recall, I said in my review
of the beastie that the only way that I would ever sell it would be if I
had a shot at getting a VS Keyboard. Well, I did. There's an ad in the
Feb or Mar issue of KEYBOARD: "Wanted, VS Rack. URGENT!" (Many thanx to
Kurt Geisel for bringing it to my attention.) For the heck of it, I called
the guy, thinking that maybe I could get enough cash from him to buy a VS
from Wine Country. As it turns out, he and I have become good friends; his
name's Yves Frulla, and he's a musician from Montreal who's touring this
summer with Celine Noel (sort of a Canadian Whitney Houston, as I understand)
and needed to swap his VS Keyboard for a Rack unit. So we swapped, and I got
a keyboard and a road case for the cost of my Rack, plus a couple hundred
bucks for minor repairs and new ROMs: total cost still far, far less than
that of a VS straight from Wine Country. It sounds great (except for an
intermittent noise problem in the outs, that I have to have fixed), and now
all I need is a stand that can hold it without rocking up and down, sigh.

Speaking of which....

I am now the proud owner of a venerable old Prophet-T8, a finely crafted and
positively delighful instrument with a real front panel (!!) and a wooden
keyboard (!!!), complete with road case, manuals, and accessories, for what
I consider to be a very reasonable price. Where'd I get the money, you ask,
having literally beggared myself for the VS? Well, let's say that there's
another story on EMUSIC-L waiting to be told....

metlay

PS. Why does this have to do with the thread, or with EMUSIC-L at all? I
prefer to think about this set of transactions as a useful application
of my own vision to my studio. I know how I make music, and I know what
sorts of sounds excite me; since I can only seem to get what I need in old
gear that no one wants to sell for its true worth, then I see nothing
wrong with seizing opportunities as they arise. I know full well that it
will be quite some time before I am up to full speed on even ONE of these
two lovely old instruments... but that's okay. The VS certainly isn't
going anywhere (except, briefly, into the shop), and the T8 represents
either a worthwhile addition to my studio or a sound investment, and time
and effort will tell which. I suppose I'll get around to buying one of the
new vector synths, or something, one of these days... but for now, I'm
fulfilling my personal vision with beautiful old instruments, and loving it.

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

End of EMUSIC-L digest
******************************