Re: How to make that Patrick Cowley sound
Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:31 am
i actually would like to know how close the emulators are theese days...
many years ago we compared a real pro5 against the first version of NI´s emulations..
... we was laughing out loud rolling on the floor... was really funny the little ugly duckling plug with its queeeeek queeeekk..against the powerfull mayesty of a real pro 5..
was really a joke..
never did the test again.. we have 3 generations of NI emulations now.. and the aturia.. how close are they now?
are the voices individually tuned now? or is it still the same flat digiphon synthesis that just has identical sounding voices with some random flucuations?
what is actually a cheap way to simulate analog behaviour in the digital domain..
in reality the voices of an analog polyphon synth dont do anything random and even the temperature drift is minimal... but each voice is an individual synthesizer...with an individual sound...
Thats the main reason theese old analog poly synths sound so alive
but back to topic.. its true that the style of mr cowley is just his style while the sounds wouldnt do much without the associated sequencing and rhytmic melodic aproach...
but i defenetly wouldnt say that any plug can do them... he has a good sound design that rivals moroders wall of moog pretty well.
The recordings defenetly have more going on than just a pro 5... you hear the vocoder.. sequenced phasors !! echos..aso..
the prophet 5 dont has an inbuild sequencer..the pro one does.. but there was a stand alone sequencer from SCI.. similar to the one inside the prophet 10...
the seq&string stuff actually really sounds like prophet . 1,5 or 10 dont makes much difference..similar boards..only very old prophet 5´s had different filter chips.. actually better sounding ones..
At this time nobody was using syths without fx units... was the high times of delay units.. reverbs was the expensiv shit..but delays was all around...
and phasors.. no disco without stereo phasing
many years ago we compared a real pro5 against the first version of NI´s emulations..
... we was laughing out loud rolling on the floor... was really funny the little ugly duckling plug with its queeeeek queeeekk..against the powerfull mayesty of a real pro 5..
was really a joke..
never did the test again.. we have 3 generations of NI emulations now.. and the aturia.. how close are they now?
are the voices individually tuned now? or is it still the same flat digiphon synthesis that just has identical sounding voices with some random flucuations?
what is actually a cheap way to simulate analog behaviour in the digital domain..
in reality the voices of an analog polyphon synth dont do anything random and even the temperature drift is minimal... but each voice is an individual synthesizer...with an individual sound...
Thats the main reason theese old analog poly synths sound so alive
but back to topic.. its true that the style of mr cowley is just his style while the sounds wouldnt do much without the associated sequencing and rhytmic melodic aproach...
but i defenetly wouldnt say that any plug can do them... he has a good sound design that rivals moroders wall of moog pretty well.
The recordings defenetly have more going on than just a pro 5... you hear the vocoder.. sequenced phasors !! echos..aso..
the prophet 5 dont has an inbuild sequencer..the pro one does.. but there was a stand alone sequencer from SCI.. similar to the one inside the prophet 10...
the seq&string stuff actually really sounds like prophet . 1,5 or 10 dont makes much difference..similar boards..only very old prophet 5´s had different filter chips.. actually better sounding ones..
At this time nobody was using syths without fx units... was the high times of delay units.. reverbs was the expensiv shit..but delays was all around...
and phasors.. no disco without stereo phasing