BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Hello everyone,
I've wondered for quite a while about parts 5, 6 and 7 of Equinoxe and how they were composed/performed/recorded. Being in essence one long track, I think they may have been improvised. With the bass track sequenced as well as the drums, I wonder if Jarre put down the "backing" of these parts totally improvised with the tape rolling, and then went back and overdubbed the main parts. Whenever I listen to Equinoxe it always strikes me that that may be the case. Anyone else think so?
Cheers!
JK.

Interesting question.

Parts 5-6-7 have the same bass sequence that only changes part way into part 7. The other main sequences were played by and created on the Matrisequencer. This was designed for Jarre by collaborator Michel Geiss after Oxygene, though I doubt if it would have been done in one shot as I understand it had a maximum total note capacity. Also, if you listen very carefully to a slowed-down track, you can hear points where the sequences have been overdubbed.

The great thing about the Matrisequencer is it enabled the simultaneous playing of several sequences that had different time signatures than that of the tunes main 4/4. thus each bar was different ( most notable in Equinoxe 4 - 2nd lead part and Equinoxe 7. ) Further more, it could be programmed with transpose, glide, velocity and duration for each individual note creating complex sequences that never sounded repetative or static. As a result, This gave Equinoxe part of it's character.

Have a listen to my replica covers at www.mattsynth.co.uk equinoxe 4 and 7 ( 2 parts )

Yes, obviously the Matrisequencer would've played a large part in this if it was improvised. Interesting about the overdubbing though.

Anyone know the pattern length of the Matrisequencer? Looking at pictures I'm thinking about 64 steps?* Unless it's two channeled... mind those channels could still be chained together using counters and switches (i.e. how much modular gear was Jarre using at this time? )

*
This site says 50/100 steps (duophonic). That step length is quite odd for a sequencer... Quite odd electronically also, unless there's a lot of decade counter action going on behind that panel.

2x50 that's what I thought first of too...