Jump to content

Joe Gerardi

Members
  • Posts

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Savannah, GA, USA
  • Interests
    Flying, Reading, Tennis, Violin, Shooting.

Recent Profile Visitors

719 profile views

Joe Gerardi's Achievements

Explorer

Explorer (4/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

17

Reputation

  1. I would agree with this ONLY for a live solution. If you're using the keyboard for recording, then studio monitors are an absolute requirement, a decent set of headphone the absolute minimum. Two sets of monitors are best- one a good set that doesn't color the sound in any way, and then a cheap, crappy set to emulate what you would hear though iPods, MP3 players, computer speakers, earbuds, and the like. That way, when you do the mixdown you can tell what the true sound will be from a variety of sound sources. Powered speakers are going to color the sound, and the sound your mix will not necessarily be what you planned on. For live, powered are pretty good, but you'll need a mixer if you use more than one keyboard, or if you play anything more than small, semi-pro gigs: otherwise, how to you split the signal between your monitor and the FOH? Also, you need to have enough volume onstage for the guys on the other side of the drummer to hear you, so you have to get the sound over there as well. If the FOH is sending a monitor mix back, there can be some of you in the sidefills to handle that, but otherwise you're going to need enough oomph to fill the stage. Remember this guideline: SPL is far more important that wattage. My home studio has the Tapco S5 monitors. I was very hesitant to get these when Greg Mackie resurrected the Tapco name, because in the '70's we called Tapco "Crapco." That said, I was extremely surprised with how flat the response was and how uncolored the sound was out of them. Also, 120W/side (60W ea on the woofer and tweeter) means I can hear the music quite loud and still have enough headroom that the monitors won't clip. I've been extremely pleased with them for the 8 or 9 years I've had them and was very sorry that Mackie discontinued these. ..Joe
  2. Filtered choir and strings mixed, with a bias towards the choir will cover it easily. That intro was not used in the original recording, so you can eliminate it and still be true to the original sound. ..Joe
  3. No. It was a Wavetable synth that could be expanded with the Waveterm, EVU, and the PRK to make it a serious contender to the Fairlight and Synclavier with sampling and voice slicing and manipulation. It's more of a relative to the Waldorf Wave, the SCI Prophet VS, and the Korg Wavestation with its wavetable design. (And to a lesser extent, the Ensoniq ESQ1.) The basic concept was that the sound architecture was designed to switch waves over time. I got to mess with one (a Wave 2.3) for a bit in the mid-80's. It was indeed a powerful beast, but it fell to the tech explosion of the time, making other synths more powerful at a fraction of the cost, just like Fairlight, N.E.D., E-Mu, and a host of others. ..Joe
  4. 1- "CZ" means it's a wave from the CZ series of synths. Not sure of the others. 2- Release time in the amp envelope. But... Release time in the Filter env. could add some interesting aspects as well. 3- Dunno. Sorry. ..Joe
  5. Actually, the I-V-VI-IV was done better here: ..Joe
  6. DSP= Digital Signal Processing. The path from the beginning to the end of your sound. And there's nothing wrong with simple. Millions of million-sellers are a simple I-IV-V progression; the IIm-VI-IV similarly has been used forever. On a much higher lever, any one line of Mozart's String Quartets (for the most part) is quite easy to play on the the piano, and quite simple... It's what the musician does with the music, not the music. ..Joe
  7. And if you would, please ask him the name of the Mozart piece. I know it, but I'm having a CRS moment on the name. Thanks, ..Joe
  8. Actaully, now that I don't tour, I still use Windex. Yes, even on the Kronos and Kurzweil K2500. But to clarify a bit, I didn't clean the wood finishes with Windex, I used either Pledge or, if I was in a snarky mood, I'd use Old English Furniture Polish (the oily one) and watch the roadies slip and slide all over the Hammond C3 trying to find a handhold to move it. But... There's no chance of any getting in the 'boards- I'm not bathing them in Windex, I spray a little on the paper towels and wipe, never spray it on the synth itself. It's worked since my first synth - the Arp 2600 - and I see no reason to change at this late stage of life. ..Joe
  9. For 40 years, I've been using Windex and paper towels to clean my synths... Same for piano keys, except that's been for over 50 years... Same for organ keys. After a while gigging with them, I used to open them up and clean all sorts of bar scrock out of them. Beer, whisky, one even had an old French Fry in it. (Don't ask: I have no idea.) They're tools. They get dirty, then I clean them. ..Joe
  10. Excellent statement. However, even a broken clock is correct twice a day. Do you want to just sit around and wait for it to happen? Unfortunately, I haven't the time to listen that long, nor the inclination to be bothered, There's far too many people who will state the same thing without destroying their credibility beforehand with shoddy research, and far more quickly. ..Joe
  11. Had to stop after the first few paragraphs. Far too many incorrect statements to take the author seriously. The Casio CZ series came after the FM synthesis of Yamaha- the DX7 was 1983, the CZ-101 (which was the first Casio CZ synth, NOT the CZ-1000- another incorrect statement!) was 1984; Sampling was something Casio did very well with the FZ-1- a 16-bit samper with subtractive, wafeform-drawing, and additive synthesis, and the standalone synth side was covered very well with the Casio VZ-1 synth in 1987, far less than "30 years ago"; 25 in fact... Next, we have this statement: "Hex-Layer, which lets you build complex layered sounds from General MIDI tones" General MIDI" Really? That's where all the Hex layer sounds come from? What synth is the author playing, anyway? Sorry. When I read that much spurious information so quickly in an article, the author's credibility fades and I can't continue reading. People with shoddy research can't be taken seriously. ..Joe
  12. Hold down the Mixer/Effects button until you're in the Effects Edit. You can then adjust the gain for the distortion, which will get you started, (2 seems the best to me) but you'll get a lot more accomplished if you screw around with the EQ frequencies and their associated gains. Hammond is a far more mid-rangey and ballsy sound, so back off on the upper frequencies, boost their gain only a little, and take the gain of the low, low-mid, and high mid up to about 6. Keep the high in there only for a touch of treble. Once you have the amount of distortion you want, mess with the freqs to get the color you want. It ain't as good as my Kronos' BX-3 engine, but in a pinch it will do the job. ..Joe
  13. Can you assign a NRPN or MIDI CC# to it? ..Joe
  14. Not "just that darn xw-p1 manual." I'll agree that most of them suck, but it's usually because it's a direct translation from the Japanese original, and the difference is sentence grammar/structure/word meaning is enough to confuse anyone. However, you are right, the clinics are priceless. ..Joe
  15. When I started with synths (1972) i was lucky enough to get an Arp 2600. It was purchased new from Sam Ash on Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, and it came without any manual. It was spending days experimenting, trying stuff, screwing stuff up, and learning the hard way. Now, that can't be quite done today. The synths are far too complex. Think about it: once last night Mike had to change an answer because he realized that something might be doable through NRPNs, and once he had to check on the answer becasue he didn't know if the synths were capable of doing what was asked. Of those of us on this forum, who has spent more time delving into these sytnths than him, and even he isn't familiar with every single capability a year plus after their release. So whilst clinics are nice, informative, and enjoyable, there is still a necessary need for the documentation, and an absolute need for experimentation. I've had a Korg Kronos 88 for 8 months now, and if you want to see a deep synth, go there. I probably haven't explored 5% of its capabilities. ..Joe
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.