tranceaddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Classic analog strings
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Classic analog strings

Just curious to know what instruments are your favorite for getting that classic 80s/90s analog string sound. Software, hardware, synth, rompler, whatever. No specific reason, just wanna know.

I have a plugin that has a set of strings called 'mellotron'. They aren't completely mono but aren't very wide stereo. This near mono spectrum gives them a warm sound.

They have an aged sound to me overall.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I have a plugin that has a set of strings called 'mellotron'. They aren't completely mono but aren't very wide stereo. This near mono spectrum gives them a warm sound. They have an aged sound to me overall.

Do you know what a mellotron is?

i dont know alot about it

Well the mellotron could be considered one of the first commercially available samplers in a sense, it was driven by tape loops though, and has quite a distinct sound although I'm not sure if you would say it sounds analog. The history behind it is quite interesting especially if you're interested in electronic instruments. They were notorious for breaking down though and causing major headaches for musicians and studio engineers using them mostly due to tape tangles. I'd love to own a real one myself, but it's rare as rocking horse shit to find one that works these days.

as far as software goes for classic strings, the korg legacy collection is pretty cool.

DSI P08

Apart from the obvious 'use an analogue synth' answer, I've always found Minimonsta best the kind of sound I think you're after. Something else I do to try and emulate that sound in software is a subtle hi shelf cut to remove that crispy digital sheen that analog synths don't produce, and also some very subtle pitch modulation to either the synth itself, or perhaps any reverb you have acting on the synth.

ITB for me nearly any synth goed, Massive, DCAM, Retrologue

quote:

Originally posted by Teezdalien Well the mellotron could be considered one of the first commercially available samplers in a sense, it was driven by tape loops though, and has quite a distinct sound although I'm not sure if you would say it sounds analog. The history behind it is quite interesting especially if you're interested in electronic instruments. They were notorious for breaking down though and causing major headaches for musicians and studio engineers using them mostly due to tape tangles. I'd love to own a real one myself, but it's rare as rocking horse shit to find one that works these days.

Well, I don't have any kind of a budget for analog right now but I do hope to one day get some analog synths. The digital plugin synth I am using is not anything special and has lots of other synths on it. I think the Mellotron has several options including strings. Incidentally, my favorite preset.

for the short time i used it nexus had some great sounding strings

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 Well, I don't have any kind of a budget for analog right now but I do hope to one day get some analog synths. The digital plugin synth I am using is not anything special and has lots of other synths on it. I think the Mellotron has several options including strings. Incidentally, my favorite preset.

I'm not trying to be a dick but there is not much of a way to broach your ignorance without having to be a little blunt. You're kind of missing Teezdalien's point, here. In fact, you're missing a few of them.

The Mellotron can be heard in the beginning of the Beatle's "Strawberry Fields Forever." When Teezdalien said it is the first sampler, he is referring to the fact that the Mellotron is literally the first instrument that had the capacity to play back sound stored on tape. More accurately, the Mellotron may be referred to as a sample-playback device - since it couldn't actually sample and relied on engineers to record what would be played back on it, in a studio, for every single one of its keys. Even by the standards for early digital samplers, it was incredibly inefficient. It had a tape-head, over which a splice of tape would cross, for each and every key, and had no loop function, what-so-ever. Once the tape ran out, that was it. While, today, you have the ability to access sample libraries containing gigabytes worth of high-quality samples on your hard-drive with a couple of mouse-clicks, the Mellotron took a significant investment of time to trawl through a very limited variety of pre-recorded material for it.



In the loosest of definitions, the Mellotron would be considered "analogue." For the purposes of cryophonik's definition for "analogue strings," however, the Mellotron is completely divorced. It wouldn't be until polyphonic analogue synthesis came along that the sound of analogue strings (so named because the presets designated as such were intended to resemble violin strings) started being used in studios. One notable but ultimately cheesy example is heard in the beginning of Alphaville's "Forever Young."



Roland's Juno was one synth that was favored for its particular sound but there is a significant distinction, which you seem to be completely unaware of, regarding the Juno, Polymoog, and Prophet synthesizers responsible for the analogue string sound and the Mellotron. When you're telling Teezdalien that you don't have the budget for any kind of analogue synth, in the context of a side-discussion concerning an instrumental rarity (it's safe to say there are more Stradivarius Violins in circulation than Mellotrons), you seem to be blissfully unaware that, even if you were the winner of the latest Mega-Millions Jackpot, you still might not be able to afford a Mellotron.

Lol. I already said I don't know much about it. I could have done an internet search and make myself look like I knew about it but there is no reason to do that. I don't try to act more knowledgeable than I am.

I appreciate the lesson, I really do. I am ignorant (though not blissfully, I don't revel in being ignorant of any topic) not only on the history of the Mellotron but on the history of synthesizers and audio engineering in general.

A lot of what you have down in your reply is one of the reasons I prefaced my post with the fact that I was being blunt. I definitely don't consider myself a historical expert on instruments, let alone much of an expert on anything most people find interesting and worthwhile. I've been corrected, myself. I try to avoid it but my experience is that there will always be someone who knows more about something I'm interested in than I do. My point is that your participation in the discussion relies on several assumptions concerning knowledge of musical instruments being discussed - in other words, a very basic but fundamental literacy. Without that literacy, your participation isn't very relevant.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I could have done an internet search and make myself look like I knew about it but there is no reason to do that.

You should have done an internet search, not to make yourself look like someone you're not, but simply because it would have helped put some fundamental information at your disposal (e.g. literacy). In writing my first reply, I used Google a few times to make sure that I had the facts straight and wouldn't be posting out-of-turn. I knew the Beetles used a Melotron but I wasn't sure which songs they used it on so I Googled to find out that information, as well. There's no shame in using Google to make sure you know what you're talking about or to shore up your confidence when speaking to certain points.

Nice to see you go into further details Eddie, I didn't really want to get too far in depth regarding the mellotron and its history here, as I would have hoped Trancelover would take the time to do his own rearching of this fascinating instrument and would also be getting quite off topic, but yes you raise some pretty important points regarding the mellotron that a lot of people would probably be unaware of. It had a very limiited sound as you say which lead it to be quite unrealistic. Another notable user of the mellotron would have been John Paul Jones in Led Zeppelin, found in quite a few of their songs including No Quarter and Kashmir .

To answer Cryo's original question though, I really haven't used much in the way of string sounds be it analogue or realistic within my music, although that could change down the track. Like Trancelover though I don't have any real analogue synths either and rely on software at the moment, so I'd probably look at using Diva or for this kind of sound.

I've mostly used Omnisphere by combining various samples of early Roland synths (Jup's, Junos) with saws, but I like DUNE and Diva as well.

As for DCAM, one would think that Amber would be perfect, but that's the one synth in the suite that have a hard time getting anything useable out of, even though it's designed as a string synthesizer.

http://puremagnetik.com/index.php?o...id=54&Itemid=42

quote:

Originally posted by Teezdalien ..... as I would have hoped Trancelover would take the time to do his own rearching ......

What have I do wrong again ?????

Just kidding.

Darek

Re: Classic analog strings

Jupiter 8V factory string patches tweaked for attack/release, layered with a Zeta2 patch from the 'Trance Euphoria' set called 'Lush Strings'. That patch is a base and gets stripped/tweaked of the metric ton of FX they use.

The standard Jupe patches are pretty much the traditional 80s synth string sound on their own, but that's no fun

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik Just curious to know what instruments are your favorite for getting that classic 80s/90s analog string sound. Software, hardware, synth, rompler, whatever. No specific reason, just wanna know.

Re: Re: Classic analog strings

quote:

Originally posted by Normie Jupiter 8V factory string patches tweaked for attack/release, layered with a Zeta2 patch from the 'Trance Euphoria' set called 'Lush Strings'. That patch is a base and gets stripped/tweaked of the metric ton of FX they use. The standard Jupe patches are pretty much the traditional 80s synth string sound on their own, but that's no fun

Damn man, nice to see you again, how was your vacation?

Darek

Re: Re: Re: Classic analog strings

Pretty good. Got some actual production done for a change. Amazing what I can get done when I'm not hanging out on TA and making an ass out of my self

Actually playing with this very topic no less.

quote:

Originally posted by TranceLover007 Damn man, nice to see you again, how was your vacation? Darek

quote:

Originally posted by Looney4Clooney http://puremagnetik.com/index.php?o...id=54&Itemid=42

Those are pretty cool and cheap! Why have I never noticed them before?

quote:

Originally posted by cryophonik As for DCAM, one would think that Amber would be perfect, but that's the one synth in the suite that have a hard time getting anything useable out of, even though it's designed as a string synthesizer.

Can't stand the DCAM interface layout. The other instruments really worth that weird layout?

quote:

Originally posted by jsrobinson Can't stand the DCAM interface layout. The other instruments really worth that weird layout?

I love the DCAM interfaces and the TransMod system, so it's worth it to me, but I primarily just use Strobe, Cypher and occasionally Fusor.

Motif ES :/

I don't care what y'all say it sounds fuckin huge

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.