Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Ekstasis

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 45
341
What is this: "the universal consciousness" ??

cosmic consciousness maybe is a better word.  When it feels you your consciousness  comes one with the cosmic consciousness or the cosmic i general,  your mind drift way into new dimensions you float through waters and the void and beyond into a vortex a black hole into the paradise new beautiful world, yeah the music really takes you where ever your imagination is taking you.

It is without doubt his most "focused "album of immense beauty, and perfection.

But as most of his music I find them best in headphones in bed, before you sleep, it is great meditation creates visions of lucid dreaming.

I hope steve roach will release more albums of similiar quality but my main problem is his latest albums  have a lot worse sound quality... The drones in destination beyond if you exclude everything else I think was some "next level" stuff, really good analuge sounding drones on that album, but after that I think his albums sounds a lot worse, I am eager to know what part of his chain that is responsible for that, he obviously still use the oberheims, maybe he now use another reverb, it doues not sound like the PCM 91 anymore.

342
good news. I still haven't tried Win8 yet.

Yes good initiative by Microsoft, I think it will take away 99% of the windows 8 haters.

But it is still a mystery why they did not do it earlier..
but I speculate if they would release it with the start menu people would complain too much that windows 8 was too similar to windows 7.  Well almost all people agree that it was a stupid choice to not make an option to activate the windows 7 start menu.

343
If you ask me nothing of recent years comes even close to Mystic Chords & Sacred Spaces. That's the standard he has to beat. If he can top that, it would raise the bar for the entire ambient genre. The real masterpieces come maybe once a decade. But there's still plenty of good stuff from 2003-2013. I absolutely love Dream Tracker for example, or Road Eternal. And Journey of One (yes from an older concert, but still...amazing). Arc of Passion, Soul Tones.

Yes... Mystic chords is his album that come most close to the universal consciousness.


344
alcohol can be a good combination with ambient... it makes it easier sometimes to get inside these ambient worlds

345
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 11, 2013, 01:50:58 PM »
That OTO Biscuit device is pretty interesting. My first response was "ehhh, bit rate reduction... seen it before, heard it before," but the way it was set up with tweakable controls changed my mind. This could be a really useful device to add to the arsenal, especially for those of us who do a lot of improvising or live performance.

sounds exactely like the D16 stuff.

346
Good news Windows start menu will be back in windows 8.2 as a optional choice.

Well..they should had done it under the 1 year beta period .

347
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 10, 2013, 04:22:47 PM »
Hi Immersion - my initial post was considering the lack of any 'new' kind of effect not whether old or new versions are better or not than each other.

I think I am surprised that no one has come up with something really new in the 20 years or so I was out of the loop - unless of course, as I said, people can direct me to effects I've not heard of yet.

Granular synthesis is one thing I had heard of, but not found anything recommended to start exploring with on a novice basis - any recommendations welcome people....

Anyone here building phaser effects units, pm me please.....


Granular synthesis, Eventide Has those for sure, those classic "crystals" sounds I guess use this method combined with pitch shifting.

Granular Guitar - The Moog Guitar meets csGrain


btw the moog guitar is quite cool..but way too overpriced but the sustaining technology is great..
kind of like an ebow.

348
Roach's newer stuff seems to be "low level listening" music, more for background than deep focus.  It has a place, IMO, but it's not why I like Roach.

The more active 'tribal' stuff from 10-15 years ago is more engaging to my ears.

I think he have done big changes in his signal/effect/processing chain.  Maybe he did sold a lot of stuff when he got the new studio or changed something in the studio, when I look at the spectrum analyzer I see the high end is often totally missing, he have put the low pass filter way too extreme it seem, I miss the high end, they are very very low, if I eq them up in my EQ the overal music sounds much better. but My speakers and spectrum analyzer do not lie, the high end must up a lot higher...

As I said earlier I fear maybe in his studio the high end sounds a lot more in his speaker and system.
In my old hi fi speakers which does exaggerate the high end treble,  steve roach music did in some regards sound better (besides detail level) in his newer releases, but with my new HG3 speakers which are more flat It sounds not as good as it could, first I thought it was my speakers ,but then I did listen and did study the spectrum analyzer and I saw..it should be like that.. Same thing with My DT880 pro headphones which also have a flat response...

If he just did add the Dangerous BAX eq and did up the treble more I am sure it would make a dramitc difference it does when I eq them in my mediaplayer..  it makes the reverb sounds more "open" and less cut off.. I think there is nothing worse then reverb that in this style of music that is not open but cutted in some frequency, it is just my opinion.. if you cut it, the reveverb sounds like a cheap reverb, it is the difference between expensive and cheap reverbs the expensive reverb sounds more open across the whole frequency spectrum.

349
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 10, 2013, 03:00:57 PM »
I'd like to tease a theme out of the middle of another thread.....

....after almost 20 years of neither listening to recorded music, nor recording music I was very surprised when I started dipping my toes back in to the river again.

In some ways I was positively amazed - the things digital synths and DAWs can now do would have taken a building the size of Rockfield recording studios in the 70's and 80's (when I was recording) to achieve.

In other ways I was negatively amazed - despite all the advancements, effects units appeared to be basically the same, more complicated, more powerful, but still focussed around the same set of processes that had been around for years - reverb, phase, flange, echo, filters, ring mod etc.

I know I may not have looked hard enough or in the right place, but I am surprised about this - I would be very happy to be corrected and guided to interesting effects or other sound processing

Please discuss:

Well in many ways I have to agree with you, you are actually right..

For effects still many of the old effects are still the best, such as phaser, flanger ,wah-wah, etc Eventide do a good job emulating the analog versions. When it comes to reverb,  Lexicon reverbs have been in the existence a long time... Some still use the PCM 70 with good results.. they have since then been slightly improvements, PCM 91 is up to todays standards, for sure.. and it was released a long time ago. Bricasti M7 and Eventide H8000FW have been giving good contribution to the effect world also.. but otherwise still many of the old 70s analog effects is still considering the best, and in many cases considered better then their digital emulations.  The difference is nowdays everything is more clean and more controllable, also mastering tools is the real revolution which also brings the effects to a new level in the end of the chain..

I am also little bit disappointed with development, should be more...in year 2013, I think you shouldn't have to rob a bank to by the H8000FW to get good effects, but unfortunately you do, but I wish there where tons of products with similar quality .  Same goes with reverb, it is surpring there is not more competion in this market, Lexicon have pretty much been dominting the reverb market for a very long time, it have changed a bit now because of all software reverbs. But lexicon reverbs sill considering to have a unique character which can come close with with others reverb but with a slightly different taste.... but it has been taking a long time,

Ever since Lexicon announced they would release a plugin the market did suddenly put out a lot of reverb quality plugins. 

I feel pitty for SSL, who released the X-VERB, if they only had done it one year earlier, it would had been a great success, but instead it did come into the total shadow.. I guess a very few people use it. 



350
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 10, 2013, 02:49:15 PM »
I think this is a very good point and I tend to share your 'negative amazement', Seren !



An example of re-inventing the wheel is all those emulations of tube style overdrive / distortion - a technology that is pretty ancient in itself. As regards FX in general, I think thats a more interesting area these days.



I agree, tube emulations can bring a lot of living magic into the mix... more useful then many effects..

Tube emulations is not FX though.



351
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 10, 2013, 02:46:04 PM »


One possibility opened up by all this processing power we have now is the use of complex multi-effects configurations built by the user. You can build all kinds of crazy sound processing machinery using systems designed for this purpose like Max or Pure Data, or systems designed to be synthesizers with audio input options, such as Reaktor or the Nord Modular.



Yes extensive effect chains is a art form in itself...

352
Music Gearheads Tech Talk / Re: effects - old and new
« on: December 10, 2013, 02:44:49 PM »
I think there's some truth to this -- processing power has increased greatly, but effects processors have not changed conceptually in a long time.


How about Bricasti M7, I think that should be added to the list, it is one of a kind reverb.

353
Any synth you can name that "sounds bad," a talented person can use to create something that sounds beautiful and amazing. This is true of ancient modulars, early analog mono synths, digital synths, samplers, ROMplers, soft synths or anything else.

Much of Eno's important work was made with pretty much nothing but a DX7 and a few basic effects.

I agree with you, but I would add "within" limits.  You can come very close... But there is a reason why Steve Roach refuse to abandon his oberheim synths.. in all honesty for the sound he makes it would be hard to find a replacement synth..  and if you did, you would have to do quite extensive processing... it is not impossible.. for sure..but not the most easy job.. if you want to have the same magic. 

354
So Far Immersion if I can sum up for you regarding the possible future of synthesis......classic vintage gear other than Moog sounds bad.  Current analog synths like the Prophet 12 sounds like bad soft synths and soft synths in general also sound bad except the one or two you use though they don't  really sound that good either according to you.  So actually the future is in processing.  The source is of no importance because its the processing that will make these dead synths come alive.  This is what I have come away with so far from your comments.

If you feel there is no future say so.....then say why you think so.....oh, you have already done that then why not offer some possible direction you hope it might go.

You sum it up wrong man. There is many synths I like with a distinct character and interesting harmonics.
Unfortunately all these have in common that they are expensive and also in many cases hard to get... The new Prophet 12 have an analog signal path but is ruined because of it's digital osc's,  besides the flexible use and a lot of great knobs and general design it sounds very average.

There is more then two soft synths I like.

Regarding the future is processing, not if I could decide the future, I did write, that you should begin in the right end, not make up bad osc's and filter with it's internal effects.  That is for me cheating and also trying to fool people.

The source does matter,  even with processing it is hard to beat a true analog synth, especially for pad sounds it is hard thing to do, but not impossible.  Tubes helps. atleast for me.

I did not say there is no future,  I am just talking about the trends, what the majority of the synth manufactures are working on, and because of digital processing these days shift has focus on refining the basic elements in the synth, instead they polish the "turd"  with effects to make it sound fat and whatever..of course these internal effects never sounds like external professional effects...

About my hope for the future, I am not alone in this, but I want more hybrid synths to be released with both analog and digital, that is what I want, but it is more expensive to produce and is more of an challenge to do so, business as usual.  There will always be a few however that will go against the stream and release anlog products or companies that will take the virtual analog code to the next level, virtual analog have a promising future, but todays cpus are not built for it,  but as processing power increases the limits of virtual analog will be taken to a new level, intel is the only threshold right now, if there was more processing power to use I would be a more bigger believer in plugins etc, right now to mimics all this advanced analog sound you require a lot of cpu power, all this extra magic you get with analog I simply miss in most digital synths and I know I am not alone.

With that said analog and digital synths can produce where different kind of sounds, there is certain type of sounds a analog sounds cannot not do and sounds that not a digital can do on the same level..so ultimately I want a hybrid synth with best of both worlds.  Andromeda A6 is a good example, but it is not a perfect synth, and not the most user friendly synth, and I doubt there will ever be a A
7. 

355
Now Playing / Re: Currently listening, part 1
« on: December 10, 2013, 05:21:01 AM »
Meshuggah - Electric Red

356
Am I misunderstanding you? You would prefer that the output of a synth be pre-processed?

I'd want any synth (digital or otherwise) to be as clean as possible, without any colouring or processing. That's the whole point of outboard effects: to shape the sound exactly how the musician wants it. If the output of the synth is already processed, you lose a lot of flexibility.

I am not talking about effects talking about the synth without effects.
like the Moog for instance... it has a certain unique character and sound, and have interesting harmonics.
What do you mean with as clean as possible ? you mean without effects ?
Without colour the synth is colourless, of course you can add with sophisticated methods  such adding extern tube character, I think the color should be in the synth, again I am not talking about the effects. 

When I mean that it sounds "dead" I mean it has not interesting harmonics,  you can add those with tubes later on though..

so you can still make almost any synth sound good. The discussion here is that I complain that synth sounds good, and I bad and that every one is so fascinated and impressed with synths when you have to process it to give tone and character, again I am not talking about effects. I think any good synth should have a tone and unique character.

Digital synths today with digital OSCs sounds mostly lifeless no interesting harmonics to work with (again I generalize there is exceptions especially VA stuff) .  As long that synths sound lifeless and have no unique charchter I have all right in the world to have a negative opinion about synths.  As I said, the latest trend is to not pay attention to filters and OSCs at all, all focus is to compensate it with better effect section..I think in a good synth the good sound should be produced in the right end not in the end.. atleast that is not where the tone and charterer should shaped....if the sound is good at the beginning it makes so much easier to make a better sound even with external effects to improve it further..while if it is shit in the beginning it makes it harder to work with.

357
Quote from: Immersion
I am just against this hyping and this total "facination" of medicore sound, I use alchemy mostly for ambient, does it sound good ? no it sound total shit, but with my processing I have no problem to make it shine and sound good.

OK, lets make a practical test instead of talking too much  :)

During the next days I will upload for you a 1 minute track on my server. I will try my best to make it sound like total shit….please download the file, process it with all your gear and make it shiny and good sounding as you mentioned. After that, please upload it on a file sharing site so anyone can download and hear the result.

I´m sure you won´t have any problems to do that!

I will provide you the file (link) soon - please be a bit patient as I have to prepare it first!

yes sure sounds like a fun idea :)
Use some pad sound,  hold in two notes for some time both a low end and a high end tone.

EDIT: also make sure to use no effects please.

358
I am believing to think that steve has a pair of speakers that exaggerates the high end a lot, cause when I put my EQ up in the hign end it sounds much better..but still the Frequency analyzer does not like these frequencies are way too low in the mix in many cases..make sound little bit "dead" and boring.


359
sound wise I think the "Destination Beyond" album sound very good but the album after Dynamic Stillness   sounds radically different, sounds like a different reverb was used maybe, maybe different converters it lacks of the smooth high end, if you look at an analyze spectrum you see that if you ask me he cut of the high end way to radically...  when he do that.. when he add percussion.. then usually the whole frequency spectrum is used.

360
Immersion said to Paul:  "I find this quest for mediocrity fascinating by the way, you must really like to swim in these waters... "

As you would say, Immersion, this sort of personal attack is "crap" and doesn't belong in this forum.  I've learned from my practice as a lawyer that people only resort to ad hominem attacks when they can't hold up the substantive end of their argument.

Julio, what I've love to see is in the future is more of an integration of treatment of real-time acoustic sound sources (not just loops) with synthesizers within the same box.  I guess Live does some of this, but I'd like to see some hardware synths take this on.

Forrest


I take back the "you must like to swim in this waters. But people do not understand my sarcasm sometimes...it was not meant in away to put him down. Anyway I will try to not use as much unnecessary sarcasm that people might not understand in the right way. 

My arguments where in the rest of the post, I stand by what I say. for months synths I use more then 60% rely on processing tools,  so the question is should I be facinated over how good these synths sound ? I am not talking about reverb or delay or effects, but plugins like SPL twintube, tube saturator, fg-x things that gives a life to a dead synth sound with no interesting harmonics or details . People where complaining cause I have a negative opinion and that I think most synth sounds not good enough... well this is the reason... Not enough interesting analogue like harmonics just totally dead and boring sound. 

If they put a real tube amp in every hardware digital synth maybe it would sound more organic and life like..
Tubes can really bring a lot of magic in to the sound.

As it is now you can't create the sound you want from scratch directly in the synth, you rely heavily on other processing, a synth should not be like that and not talking about the internal effects now,

so you should be fascinated with the synths when 60-70% of the final sound is external sound processing ?
I am not, but do I still consider synths useful, YES! but only 40-30% of the honor goes to the synth the rest goes my processing tools .

Most synths especially soft synths today follow the "polish a turd principle"

Mythbusters Polishing a Turd


   

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 45