| Author |
Message |
kebu
Member
Age: 36
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 27
|
 Posted:
Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:26 pm Demo song using only the Roland D50 |
  |
Here I am again!
I took some time to learn a bit more about programming my Roland D50, so I made a short tune using only the D50 and its built in effects:
http://www.youtube.com/user/kebunator
(featured video)
The song was programmed/performed and recorded using Cubase SL. Most of the patches used are my own programs or variations on presets. Each instrument was recorded individually by multitracking. No plugins were used except for mild EQ on some tracks and a single-band limiter on the master track. The reverbs, delays and choruses heard are all D50's own effects. The video was later compiled showing how the various parts were played.
This is probably the warmest sounding digital synth I've ever encountered!
_________________
http://kebu.fi
|
|
    |
|
VCO1
One of the Coolest Member
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 1584
|
|
Posted:
Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:47 pm (No subject) |
|
You made me smile. 
This yet another great example that it's not the instrument(s), but true musicianship that counts. Well done! 
|
|
| |
|
phaedra2008
One of the Coolest Member
Joined: 09 Aug 2009
Posts: 2723
Location: Western Oz
|
|
Posted:
Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:11 pm (No subject) |
|
That was cool, thank you.
_________________
Imagination is more important than knowledge
Albert Einstein
|
|
| |
|
betawave
Very Cool Member
Joined: 04 Jun 2007
Posts: 156
|
|
Posted:
Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:20 pm (No subject) |
|
Kudos to your example of what is possible when a creative mind sets to work.
Nice patches and surely better than what I have heard most people do with that synth. The pitch bend lever allows for much more expression than the mod wheel ever had esp when emulating Indian bansuri flute soloing!
Your quote on warm digital synth hits home I just released a cd "Soniq Variants" which for the most part was done on digital synths and to my ears the ESQ1 sounds very warm!
Thanks for sharing!
_________________
Harmonic Resonance Recordings
Music for Sonic Voyagers
http://www.hrresonance.blogspot.com
|
|
 |
|
kebu
Member
Age: 36
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 27
|
|
Posted:
Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:03 pm (No subject) |
|
Thanks!
I like the D-50 bender, but the modulation is hard to control, it is almost like a switch (on/off). I prefer the bender on the newer Roland synths, since the modulation on those is much easier to control.
_________________
http://kebu.fi
|
|
| |
|
bewoest
One of the Coolest Member
Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 524
|
|
Posted:
Mon Apr 11, 2011 8:38 pm (No subject) |
|
Kebu, you are a real nerd! Looking forward to your next videos!
|
|
| |
|
M@kz Delissen
Obscurist
Age: 46
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 581
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
|
|
Posted:
Mon Apr 11, 2011 9:14 pm (No subject) |
|
Yeah! Well done, this must be one of the best D50-only demo's I ever heard.
_________________
Billions can hear, but only few can listen
|
|
| |
|
Alvaro
One of the Coolest Member
Joined: 18 Mar 2008
Posts: 1430
|
|
Posted:
Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:23 am (No subject) |
|
Excellent! Roland should sign you 
_________________
"There are only two types of music: good music and bad music"
(Miles Davis)
|
|
| |
|
Sweep
Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Posts: 18
|
|
Posted:
Tue Jun 07, 2011 4:29 am (No subject) |
|
I'd like to echo the comments already made - this works very nicely.
It was especially interesting for me because I've found the D50 to be the most difficult synth I've ever encountered - or to be precise, the D50 emulation supplied with the V-Synth XT.
For quite a while every edit I made sounded worse to me than the patch I'd started with, which doesn't happen usually.
I still can't always get it to do what I want it to, but I finally made a breakthrough and got a load of sounds I was pleased with. `Morgan' on my website was done entirely with the V-Synth D-50 emulation. It seems to be well regarded by everyone who hears it, so I must have got it right at last. But it certainly didn't come easily.
|
|
| |
|
M@kz Delissen
Obscurist
Age: 46
Joined: 03 Feb 2007
Posts: 581
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands
|
|
Posted:
Tue Jun 07, 2011 8:06 am (No subject) |
|
The hardware version is a bitch to program also... I got rid of mine because of that...
The same goes for the 'legendary' Yamaha DX7. All I ever got was metallic, clangy bell-like sounds. Fortunately, I had the II-FD version with lots of nice sounds on lots on floppy's, but programming those synths was too mathematic and too abstract for me.
They both reflect the electronic developments of the late 70's and 80's. Manufacturers wanted to show off their abilities, and were bidding against each other in endless numbers of parameters in 10-layer sub-menu's. But all they really achieved was that they lost touch with their customers completely. Their customers being musicians, of course. All they did was to create a new sub-layer of technicians called synth-programmers. It's like selling a car that is so complicated to drive that you need a specially trained chauffeur. Not a very inspiring era imho...
So I'm a great fan of (virtual) analog 'one knob, one function' machines.
Still, this D50 demo is a very impressive job, and I repeat: very well done!
_________________
Billions can hear, but only few can listen
|
|
| |
|
Sweep
Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Posts: 18
|
|
Posted:
Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:43 pm (No subject) |
|
Yes, I agree about the design issue at the time - of course. But I must say I find the DX7 much more straightforward than the D50.
Actually I like Yamaha's FM instruments a lot, and I often play them in edit mode. `Llanfairfechan' on my website was done with the DX7 in edit mode, and `Early Evening Snowfall' with the TX81Z in edit mode. Both FM synths appear on a couple of other tracks on the site as well.
But of course both instruments would have been much better with accessible controls. I wonder what could be done with a DX7 with controls like an analogue synth. But they do excel at the kind of metallic clangy sounds you mentioned, so if that isn't the sound you want then they're probably not the best synth for you in any case. I find the other sounds they can do, including the basses, can be done better these days with other instruments. There are PCM keyboards from the nineties that are very cheap and sound excellent on non-analogue sounds.
|
|
| |
|
BruecknerAmbient
One of the Coolest Member
Age: 43
Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 2068
Location: Mainz
|
|
Posted:
Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:18 pm (No subject) |
|
Wonderful! Da Capo!
I especially admire people who can play parts with their hands for which I definitely would need a sequencer ("musicians", I think, they are usually called...)!
_________________
M I C H A E L B R Ü C K N E R
http://michaelbrueckner.bandcamp.com
|
|
| |
|
kebu
Member
Age: 36
Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Posts: 27
|
|
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:50 pm (No subject) |
|
Thanks!
M@kz and Sweep: I agree, the structure of the D50 is quite complicated. The PG1000 really helps programming, but still I had to study the manual thoroughly to understand how everything is connected. For instance, I had problems understanding how the internal routing of the LFO's, EQ's and choruses is set up, since the routing is not that logical. I agree that Yamaha's synths are more straight forward, but I was surprised to hear the you think the DX7 is more straightforward! I haven't tried programming a DX7, but it would be interesting to try, since it is supposed to be difficult to program.
_________________
http://kebu.fi
|
|
| |
|
Sweep
Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Posts: 18
|
|
Posted:
Fri Jun 17, 2011 11:00 pm (No subject) |
|
It may be possible that individual temperament is a factor - some people may be able to get their head around one design quicker than another.
But I suspect the DX7 got its reputation for difficulty because it was one of the first of its kind, and people weren't used to that sort of programming when it appeared. Indeed, synths in general were pretty new to many people at that time. Also, people weren't used to computers back then, so things that seem intuitive now would have been totally new when the DX7 first appeared.
So considering all of that, what's awkward now may well have been totally baffling back then. I remember the DX series at the time, but I couldn't afford one so I have no real impression of how it was fort me back then. When I bought one about four years ago or something like that, it was with the benefit of years of computers as well as synths, and that probably helped in ways I wasn't entirely aware of.
With the D50 the principles make perfect sense, but sometimes it just fails to do what I expect, especially with the envelopes, which somehow I just can't get my head round. It's probably the blend of samples and synthesis that confuses things, but certainly I try to do something and either nothing happens or else something happens that isn't what I would have expected.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
