Members tdempsey Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 Hi gang - Any pointers about that sound?? I'm using Rolands JV-1080 and there are so many synth sounds - but I'm wondering if anyone has any specific detail about what gear was used. TIA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sinner6 Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 I dunno what they used, but the Evolver can do a pretty good emulation. listen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TDman Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 I dunno either, but here's a partial list of Dave Stewart's gear at the time:Sequential Six-TrakRoland SH-101Roland SH-09EDP Wasp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AvS Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 Hehe, thinking about that preset, sinner6? http://denonville.com/evolver.mp3 edit: had not seen you allready posted a clip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sinner6 Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 yep, i posted a clip too. But its at least an octave lower than yours. Now we need someone to post the original. edit: sure enough, my master transpose was at -12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the otter Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 I was able to get that sound on a Juno 60 (sold ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members synthlover Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 I'm pretty sure he used a Sequential Six Trak on that tune. I remember going to a music store when those were released, and they had a Sweet Dreams demo sequence programmed for prospective buyers. They had it nailed! I actually bought one a few years ago. Fun little synth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 Jupiter 8. At least, that's what I read when someone here posted the story of how they recorded it. Really interesting, shows what true musicianship is about. *edit* - memory screws up in case of the Jupe, but Google doesn't. Read and have fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sleazy E Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 For that demo, how did you play it, did you actually hit all the notes 16th notes, or did you hold the keys down and let the LFO (or arp) effect do the work? In many other 80s songs, I wonder of the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tdempsey Posted April 15, 2004 Author Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 for the info, fun - if difficult - reading! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Yoozer Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 A Sequential Six-Trak has a *drum roll* six-track sequencer. You'd need only 2 to program it, and it has a 6-part multitimbrality. So all you had to do was hit "Start" or "Play" or whatever it's called Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sinner6 Posted April 15, 2004 Members Share Posted April 15, 2004 The Evolver demo I posted uses the four tracks of the evolvers 16 step sequencer. Hard to belive that is all coming from a "monosynth" in realtime, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tonyrome Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 The evolver does sound like it nails it... I was going to mention there was a patch on Waldorf's site for the uQ and Q that was supposed to come close (it was in the free patches they offered)... ..but, i think the evolver sounds like it hits it a little better (i am sure you could tweek the Q into it, though!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members U&I Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 Ummm excuse me BUT ...... The entire ,cello and string section was infact Emulator II or have we overlooked that fact. Seeing as it's a large portion of the track ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ski Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 Glad you guys like the "Sweet Dreams" emulation on the Evo. I programmed that one for the "Evolutionaries" sound set, which you can pick up (free) at EX5Tech if you haven't already done so. It's currently included in the presets of the Poly Evolver, too, though there's an outside chance that could change prior to the shipping date (expected to be next week). I was pretty impressed at what a good job the Evolver did in emulating that Eurythmics sequence. I probably missed a note or two in there (!), but it's reasonably close. I think the real key to making a great emulation of that sequence isn't so much the synth sound as it is getting the panning on each note right. The synth sound itself is pretty basic. I just used a couple of pulse waves on the Evolver. Following is a link to a GIF that shows all the program parameters of the "Sweet Dreams" Evolver program: SweetDreams.gif (93Kb) (Note: This is a fairly large screenshot. If you're using IE6 or another browser that automatically resizes images to fit the window, make SURE you pause your cursor over the image, then click the funky square button that appears in the lower right corner of your screen to view the image at 100% zoom. This is critical if you expect to actually read the text on the image. ) tdempsey - I know you don't have an Evolver, but this may help give you a good idea on how to get started with the sound programming. Note that oscillators 1 and 2, which provide the main sounds, are panned hard left and right. Oscillators 3 and 4 just make the big bass "boom" on the first note of each bar. The sequence data is also displayed, so that you'll get a head start on the notes, too! To help you decode the sequence pitch data, Evolver sequences, when used to control pitch, have two steps per semitone. So, with "0" being the base frequency, a value of "24" would be an octave up from base, "48" would be two octaves up, etc. Make sense? Good luck, and hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rasmus-DK Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 Originally posted by U&I Ummm excuse me BUT ...... The entire ,cello and string section was infact Emulator II or have we overlooked that fact. Seeing as it's a large portion of the track ........... I'm just wondering how they could have used an Emulator II as the track (afaik) was recorded in 1983 (the Emu II came out in '84) - and the strings sound somewhat more synthetic than a sample (even though I'm aware that the analog filters on early Emus probably could have "synthed" them up..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tdempsey Posted April 16, 2004 Author Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 tdempsey - I know you don't have an Evolver, but this may help give you a good idea on how to get started with the sound programming. Note that oscillators 1 and 2, which provide the main sounds, are panned hard left and right. Oscillators 3 and 4 just make the big bass "boom" on the first note of each bar. The sequence data is also displayed, so that you'll get a head start on the notes, too! To help you decode the sequence pitch data, Evolver sequences, when used to control pitch, have two steps per semitone. So, with "0" being the base frequency, a value of "24" would be an octave up from base, "48" would be two octaves up, etc. Make sense?Good luck, and hope this helps. Ski, thanks so much for taking the time. I will definitely try and translate this to my JV-1080... Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sinner6 Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 Thanks for popping in Ski! Did you export that program data via the Evolver Editor available via DSI? Very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ski Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 Sinner6 - To answer your question, no. That's my own librarian/viewer utility that was "this close" to being finished... right when OS2 was released! Argh! Talk about bad timing. It was especially aggravating because I'd built some custom stuff to allow for the storage of patch names in the SysEx files (without messing up the actual program data), which was a feature that OS1 didn't have, but OS2 added. I just haven't had the time to finish upgrading my utility to work with all the new OS2 features. When I do some day, I'll share it with everyone. I don't want to hijaak this thread, so if you're interested, there's a bit more info about it at EX5Tech at the following link: Evolver "Program Visualization Utility" tdempsey - Let us know how it goes with your "Sweet Dreams" programming efforts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Analog Kid Posted April 16, 2004 Members Share Posted April 16, 2004 that was a pretty good article on a great band it never exactly answered the question, though, or i missed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members emctrl Posted June 15, 2004 Members Share Posted June 15, 2004 Main bass line in Sweet Dreams is an SH2. Awesome synth. Much thicker than the rest of the Roland SH line. Highly underrated synth IMO. Best way to emulate it would be to get one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scottsleigh Posted August 29, 2008 Members Share Posted August 29, 2008 Hi tim you posted a message ages ago on a random discussion website, you wanted to know about the Eurythmics sweets dreams. The song was created (thanks to my dad who did work on dave stewarts home) that the sounds are split in pan (listen to the left speaker then the right) its two different sounds.... the punchy one on the left speaker is with a Roland SH-2 and the buzzy string sound is with the Roland Juno-60... my dad said that dave laughed because they had no money to buy better synths at the time. hope this helps scott seeyouintheeighties@hotmail.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 whoooooaa !Nice information. Thanks and welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members augerinn Posted August 29, 2008 Members Share Posted August 29, 2008 I remember reading about this when I was trying to emulate that sound. I ended up at an article that explained it. It was a rack mount, MIDI, analog synth, but I forget what. It was rather obscure. They used two of them. Also, listening to the original song, I really think it's just firing notes on the down beats. The synchpation sounds, top me at least, caused by a delay. This is all in relation to the intro, main theme of course, Not the strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members whitepapagold Posted August 29, 2008 Members Share Posted August 29, 2008 two different sounds.... the punchy one on the left speaker is with a Roland SH-2 and the buzzy string sound is with the Roland Juno-60... my dad said that dave laughed because they had no money to buy better synths at the time. seeyouintheeighties@hotmail.com Its funny. I just redid that song for a clients show and everyone went nuts for my version over the original sonically... The original, sonically, is TERRIBLE! But the magic of Annie and brilliance of Dave created one of the alltime greats! I really really enjoyed that one... especially considering some of the other songs were from high school musical for that client... A good song and performance will always shine brighter than anything else- the rest is just icing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.