CoreyW Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Hello all! I'm brand new to the forum and have seen many great ideas on here for sound creation. I bought an XW-P1 some time ago and have been gradually incorporating it into my rig by creating many of the sounds I need for the Classic Rock music the band plays. One song we do is The Cars - Moving In Stereo. I was using a really bad version of the ARP Omni Filter Sweep sound that Greg Hawkes uses throughout the song. From what I could tell, he uses the LFO to modulate the Cutoff or Resonance of the synth section filter in the Omni to create the sound. I haven't been able to find the right combination to reproduce this effect on the P1. Does anyone have any ideas how to accomplish this? Thanks in advance! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlenK Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Sounds like the lone resonant filter in the OMNI is being operated at maximum resonance close to self oscillation (or perhaps actually into it - don't know if the OMNI can do that) and Greg Hawkes is moving the OMNI's cutoff frequency slider up and down to affect the pitch change we hear. Nice and spooky. Unfortunately, the P1 solo synth's modeled filter isn't nearly as nice as the analog one in the OMNI. It definitely won't self oscillate and it squeals rather rudely if you set it too high (you might have noticed ). So I doubt you'd be able to emulate the sound in the same way. But off the top of my head (not being near a P1) I think you could get reasonably close with a simple triangle wave, using the pitch bend wheel to slide the pitch of it up and down (might have to increase the pitch bend range). No filter needed at all, really, unless a triangle wave doesn't get you there. That's about what I'd expect to hear if a sawtooth (or pulse if that was the original waveform - the OMNI does either) was passed through a low pass filter with very high resonance, aside from the way the OMNI's filter can be heard to lock onto successive harmonics at low frequencies, which I think would be a bitch to emulate (and wasn't necessarily what Hawkes wanted, it's just what happens). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyW Posted April 4, 2016 Author Share Posted April 4, 2016 Thanks for the response AlenK! I've tried a lot of combinations to try to get it working, but have been unsuccessful. I'm going to try what you suggested and see if can can get close. It doesn't have to be exact, but close enough to be realistic when performing the song live. I've even thought about sampling and looping the sound! The new MZ-X series has the sampling pads, so I've been really been thinking about getting one!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chas Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 On 4/4/2016 at 1:27 PM, CoreyW said: . I've even thought about sampling and looping the sound! The new MZ-X series has the sampling pads, so I've been really been thinking about getting one!!! Or look for an XW-G1? That will give you all the sampling features that you need, plus it will be a lot cheaper than an MZ-X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettM Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I agree with AlenK, it sounds like a sweeping self-oscillating filter. Self oscillation invariably produces a sine wave. Infact, that's how many of the old synths (especially Arps) produced sine waves. The XWs contain sine waves aplenty, so resorting to a new keyboard or sampling seems a bit drastic. The only hiccup that I can see is the range of the oscillation. It's probably wider than you can achieve using the pitch bend wheel, even set to +/- 2 octaves, and wider than the LFOs can produce using the standard routing. So set up a non-standard routing: i) In a new Solo Synth patch using the default synth1 oscilator sine wave, zero out the LFO1 Depth parameter. ii) In one of the Virtual Controller slots, set Source = LFO1, Depth = +127 and Destination = Synth1+Oscilator+Pitch iii) In LFO1, set your preferred Depth and Rate, probably around 2 or tempo synced to the song. A Depth of 127 will sweep the entire keyboard, which is way more than you need, so find a spot somewhat less than this. Also crank up the reverb in this case. I hope this helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrettM Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I just tried the above and it does create audible stepping as LFO1 moves between discrete values of Pitch. So a better method might be to combine LFO1 and LFO2 to drive the oscillator directly. Leave Synth1+Oscillator+LFO1 Depth at its default of +63 in step (i) above, and also set LFO2 Depth to +63. Then set LFO2 Sync to LFO1. Now the two LFO's are applying their combined depths to synth1's oscillator directly. The rate is determined by LFO1 and adjusting the depth of either or both LFOs alters the range of the pitch sweep. It doesn't have the full range of the above Virtual Controller technique, but there is no stepping. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyW Posted April 12, 2016 Author Share Posted April 12, 2016 8 hours ago, Chas said: Or look for an XW-G1? That will give you all the sampling features that you need, plus it will be a lot cheaper than an MZ-X. Too late LOL! I just bought the MZ-X500. My Yamaha PSR-S900 has some problems and until I can get it fixed, this was the better alternative. I haven't really gotten into the MZ-X yet, but what a nice keyboard! Casio really did themselves good on this one!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyW Posted April 12, 2016 Author Share Posted April 12, 2016 BRETTM: Wow! Thanks for the suggestions and advice. What a GREAT forum!!! I can't wait to try it and see the results. I'll have to see how bad the stepping is once I get the parameters setup. I'll be using this in a live situation, so maybe it won't be so noticeable. But, I'll try both your suggestions and let you know. Thanks so much!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Saucier Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Congrats on the new MZ-X500! Can't wait to hear more as you get into it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Display Name Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 Oh man - an MZ-500 already? Jealous! LOLOLOLOL Hey have fun and let us know how you like (or love) it! Don't be afraid to rub it in good! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreyW Posted May 25, 2016 Author Share Posted May 25, 2016 Hi Guys! I finally got to try the patch with the P1 ... It works perfect! It's exactly what I wanted!! Yes, there is stepping with the first method, but the range is WILD!! I tried both and using the first method in a live situation, is not really that bad. My hats off to you BRETTM!! Awesome!!! Thanks again! Corey PS: I haven't really played around with the MZ-X500 too much yet, but I'm planning on incorporating it into my live rig for use with the band. The pads will provide some definite plus's because of being able to sample sound bytes and use them live. The sounds are amazing!! Casio has definitely come along way. If there's one b*tch, it's the manner in which the storage on the USB is done. I wish they would've used a more traditional approach by using directories instead of just one directory (MUSICDAT). That takes some getting used to and reorganization. Other than that, WHAT AN AXE!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.