![]() ![]() I'd say a maximum effort in programming a complex wave sequence leads to minimum effort required when it comes to the number of notes this sound is played with. If you're using a very complex wave sequence - which doesn't have to resemble the clichéd pling plong rhythm pattern - few keys will do. I'm somewhat divided on the keyboard decision. Wave sequencing and blending different sounds was the method for shaping timbres, not any filter - the same goes for wavetable synthesis, which is why the first PPG had no (analog) filters at all. To me it was just one ingredient amongst others and I can't remember losing any sleep over it having no resonance (Dave Smith originally didn't want the VS to have a resonant filter either btw). I'm not sure I care so much for the added filter types, since I never regarded the filter to be as important on the original as on a classic subtractive synth. The Wavestate brings along some advantages, mostly by allowing for programming several lanes independent of each other and the introduction of a more hands-on UI. That's at least one of the challenges when it comes to the original that has been used in so many (bad) film scores: It can easily feel like an overplayed record with a massive time stamp. I always wanted to have another go at it to see if I can make use of its potential beyond the sonic character that can be perceived as an early 1990s cliché. The latter is mostly the reason why it's currently sitting in a box. I still own the Wavestation, although it could use some new buttons and especially a new display. The Wavestation EX was my very first synth or rather my introduction to synthesis, so Korg's announcement set some nostalgia in motion. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |