Dr. Who wrote:computerhythm wrote:I also own a Yamaha CS80 (and -- would you believe?! -- I do even record music on it!).
Stephen
So you track with a "real" non-Auturia CS-80? Awesome; lucky you! How many times do you have to service it? I'm always curious with other people's vintage gear and their experiences. My MemoryMoog will drop voices if you look at it funny. If she's happy, 5 of 6 voices. Normally only 4 voices and that's a week after getting it calibrated! With the MemoryMoog though, even at 4 voices it blows the doors off of any soft synth I've used. Blessing and a curse; it cuts through a mix like a knife (not always good). My OBXa was a joy and no problems for years. But now it needs a good servicing. I've got other vintage analogs but have started to gravitate towards modern analog gear (A6, Voyager, Dave Smith) just to get away from the maintenance issues. Do you run into the same issues?
Regular service is of course important but I think the CS80 is a lot more reliable than many of its competitors. This is the downside of owning analogue synthesisers of a certain age, they need a bit of attention every now and then. But then again, they reward you with a sound which is unsurpassed by any other instrument, be it in hardware or software. A friend of mine owns a 1970 Dodge Challenger R/T, and it takes a little more attention than the usual car but there´s something about a Challenger even a Porsche can´t do. Same thing goes for real analogue instruments IMO.
I´ve thought about buying a P08 and an Andromeda in order to make the Prophet 5 and the CS80 obsolete, I compared them side-by-side, and -- even on a bad day -- the Prophet 5 was wiping the floor with its grandson. The only modern synthesiser reissue I really liked was the SEM by Tom Oberheim as I found it sounded 99% of the original so I think I will not buy a Four Voice which needs lots and lots of modifications first to be really useful for me.
Dr. Who wrote:Also if you don't mind, I'm also curious about the signal chain for tracking analog gear. Do you process with any effects or do you keep the sound pure only EQ'ing for color? For my set-up I only use DI boxes from analog synths to an outboard analog mixer with British EQ's and straight into protools via Rosetta AD convertors. I like to keep the original sound of the analog gear, they usually have so much wonderful character without drowning them out in effects. Just wondering if other people are set up in a similar fashion or not?
When recording I try not to use EQing as this would cause undesired effects when mixing. Suddenly there´s a whole lot of the spectrum missing, or too strongly emphasized. I only EQ when mixing from multitrack to stereo in order to make sounds match. Reverbs, delays, and modulation effects are part of the sound design so I usually record them directly as part of the stereo track (especially when it comes to recording instruments like the CS80, or the Mellotron). I might add some more effects like stereo phasing, a global reverb for all tracks (in order to smoothen the entire mix), or some flanging when mixing from multitrack to stereo but only if the music requires these embellishments.
I also try to avoid limiters or compressors when recording, I only use them sparingly when mixing or mastering. Applying EQs and compressors/limiters is something I do to final mixes. A friend of mine has a rack full of API, Cadac, Empirical Labs, and Neve outboard gear, and he processes the stereo mixes (and applies a bit of Waves L2 to them, if necessary).
After all it´s easy to spoil some great music by being too self-indulgent when it comes to using outboard gear.
Stephen
"If we have an enemy at all, the Control Process is that enemy. It is vital to short-circuit this Control Process." (Genesis P-Orridge)
. Alweer wat bijgeleerd... "gaat de paus in het bos schijten", of hoe is dat 
?