BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

I couldn't agree more. Well done!

I agree about the RMI sitar sound though

Yes the RMI has too much "sand" in the sound, but an 110% replica of the RMI sound is hard to make, the flanger or chorus effect could be the reason. This cover is so close to the original.

Btw. do you have recordings of the ARP part of the horlead, or does it sound the same as the one LeoDaV posted?

Synthesist wrote:Btw. do you have recordings of the ARP part of the horlead, or does it sound the same as the one LeoDaV posted?

Actually, it's almost the same the real thing it the Eminent. It gives the real deepness to the sound

radek tymecki wrote:

Synthesist wrote:Btw. do you have recordings of the ARP part of the horlead, or does it sound the same as the one LeoDaV posted?

Actually, it's almost the same the real thing it the Eminent. It gives the real deepness to the sound

Yes I didn't figure that out before some months ago.

radek tymecki wrote:

Synthesist wrote:Btw. do you have recordings of the ARP part of the horlead, or does it sound the same as the one LeoDaV posted?

Actually, it's almost the same the real thing it the Eminent. It gives the real deepness to the sound

I take it you mean the overlay of the ARP sound with the 310 string right? or else I'm intrested in what you used to _replace_ the 2600 sound... if that replacement = 310 then I'm really qurious....

J.

radek tymecki wrote:

Synthesist wrote: Nice!!, damn I like the hornlead.

it's 2600 + 310u

GeeJee wrote:

radek tymecki wrote:

Synthesist wrote: Nice!!, damn I like the hornlead.

it's 2600 + 310u

OK...anyone seen my glasses ???

J.

You left them here last time you visited me

LeoDaV wrote:

Synthesist wrote:Pretty nice done!

One thing I noticed (looking on it as a replica) was the bass. It doesn't break through enough. Not a matter of volume.

I was surprised by the RMI chorus. Not perfect, but I have never heard any perfect replicas of this, but this is well done and a step closer to the authentic JMJ RMI sound.

Is this not close enough? I know it's not perfect but that's due to the fact my Mistress is still broken... mabye someone can put this through a Mistress and post the result here... I'm too tired and disabled to do that on this moment...

J.

As my body regenerated and my mistress fixed I was finally able to put the plain RMI sound through the mistress.. I had a quick listen to the original to compair and set the mistress...it probably can be finetuned since the mistress holds many possibillities...

This is the result

I won't give up untill I have 99% equality

Some argue there should not be bass in the sound but my wife thinks there should be some bass... and she's usually right.

Specific mistress settings YOU think where used -> post them.
Any other remark -> post them.

The more ears agree the better the sound...

I have the 1980 model (version 2).

More updates will probably follow...

J.

disable the upper octave... or one octave down for this upper tone and a bit detune?

radek tymecki wrote:disable the upper octave... or one octave down for this upper tone and a bit detune?

Hmmmm... there is no upper octave used. The sound comes from one generator. I could drop everything one octave... Detune is only possible with 2 generators...

Thanks I'll have another go at the 16 sliders...

J.

Try a phaser behind Electric Mistress.

LeoDaV wrote:

LeoDaV wrote:

Synthesist wrote:Pretty nice done!

One thing I noticed (looking on it as a replica) was the bass. It doesn't break through enough. Not a matter of volume.

I was surprised by the RMI chorus. Not perfect, but I have never heard any perfect replicas of this, but this is well done and a step closer to the authentic JMJ RMI sound.

Is this not close enough? I know it's not perfect but that's due to the fact my Mistress is still broken... mabye someone can put this through a Mistress and post the result here... I'm too tired and disabled to do that on this moment...

J.

As my body regenerated and my mistress fixed I was finally able to put the plain RMI sound through the mistress.. I had a quick listen to the original to compair and set the mistress...it probably can be finetuned since the mistress holds many possibillities...

This is the result

I won't give up untill I have 99% equality

Some argue there should not be bass in the sound but my wife thinks there should be some bass... and she's usually right.

Specific mistress settings YOU think where used -> post them.
Any other remark -> post them.

The more ears agree the better the sound...

I have the 1980 model (version 2).

More updates will probably follow...

J.

It's still not prickly enough!

You need more in the higher registers!

Also REVERB!