IDM Mailing Archive

1996-05-06 15:34saugis@lifl.frHello, it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please email me t

From:: <saugis@lifl.fr>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:34:40 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject:: (idm) CZ101?

Hello, it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please email me the results? I've also got the opportunity to buy a CZ101... Opinions welcome. I fear the infamous lack of real-time control, and of velocity too (I don't want my synths to sound always the same, like samplers do ;)... I've also got very poor information about the multitimbral (4 x mono ???) mode. Is it possible to choose the 4 (if I'm not wrong) and mute the 4 midi channels separately? Thanks to you all synths freaks. Greg www.lifl.fr/~saugis/ZikTek/

1996-05-06 17:16Danny WolfersHello, >it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please >email me

From:: Danny Wolfers <danwolfe@xs4all.nl>
To:: <saugis@lifl.fr>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 19:16:22 +0200
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

Hello,

quoted 3 lines it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please

>it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please >email me the results? >I've also got the opportunity to buy a CZ101... Opinions welcome.

Its a f*ckin great little machine. 2xDCO's which consist each of 2 waveforms [which can be selected from 8 & 5 waveforms] & long EG's which give you a lot of soundcontrol. It sounds very moog-ey, especially in phat acidbass, GREAT portamento mono-synths. [Sort of like the one in Gescoms' "Sounds of Machines our parents used"]. Spooky strings which remind me of 70ies scifi film-tunes & chilly resonance sweeps.

1996-05-06 17:17Jon DrukmanAt 6:34 AM 5/6/96, saugis@lifl.fr wrote: >it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vo

From:: Jon Drukman <jsd@cyborganic.com>
To:: <saugis@lifl.fr>, <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 10:17:26 -0700
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

At 6:34 AM 5/6/96, saugis@lifl.fr wrote:

quoted 2 lines it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please

>it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please >email me the results?

the answer is "buy a k2000"

quoted 6 lines I've also got the opportunity to buy a CZ101... Opinions welcome.

>I've also got the opportunity to buy a CZ101... Opinions welcome. >I fear the infamous lack of real-time control, and of velocity too (I don't >want my synths to sound always the same, like samplers do ;)... >I've also got very poor information about the multitimbral (4 x mono ???) mode. >Is it possible to choose the 4 (if I'm not wrong) and mute the 4 midi channels >separately?

the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not particularly impressive for any kind of music. (unless you want that genuine cheesy house organ sound). i use it as a backup "swirly noise" box. it has no real-time control, and no velocity response. you can put it in 4xMono mode in which it responds to 4 different programs (monophonically) on 4 consecutively numbered midi channels. it's not particularly clean or quiet. if you can find one for us$100 or less, it may be worth checking out. -- Name: Jon Email: jsd@cyborganic.com Web: http://www.cyborganic.com/bass-kittens/

1996-05-06 21:56Kent WilliamsOn Mon, 6 May 1996, Jon Drukman wrote: Jon be dissin the CZ, so I'm duty bound to leap to

From:: Kent Williams <kent@inav.net>
To:: Jon Drukman <jsd@cyborganic.com>
Cc:: <saugis@lifl.fr>, <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 16:56:17 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?
Reply to:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

On Mon, 6 May 1996, Jon Drukman wrote: Jon be dissin the CZ, so I'm duty bound to leap to it's defence. I run the mailing list, after all.

quoted 2 lines the answer is "buy a k2000"

> > the answer is "buy a k2000"

The K2000 is the best jon drukman equipment. Others quibble with weak filter, overcomplicated programming interface, etc. If you spend a lot of time with one and really learn the ins and out of the K2K you can get a lot out of it. On the other hand, for what you pay for a K2000 with sampling RAM and a hard disk, you can get an Akai S2000 with analog filters, lots of memory and a hard disk, and still have money left over to buy an analog keyboard as well.

quoted 6 lines the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not

> > the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not > particularly impressive for any kind of music. (unless you want that > genuine cheesy house organ sound). i use it as a backup "swirly noise" > box. >

I and a lot of other people actually like how a CZ-101 sounds. Other people including many successful producers. CZ sound is all over popular House and Detroit techno. It's not the be-all and end all but I find myself starting tracks around CZ sounds, or finishing them by using the CZ to add that last little touch.

quoted 4 lines it has no real-time control, and no velocity response. you can put it in

> it has no real-time control, and no velocity response. you can put it in > 4xMono mode in which it responds to 4 different programs (monophonically) > on 4 consecutively numbered midi channels. >

I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks. I always program velocity response to some (one or more) aspect of the sound, and get a lot of motion in sounds. And maybe it's just me, I love the sounds, find it easy to edit yadda yadda. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Kent Williams kent@inav.net (319) 338 6053 (home) (319) 626 6700 x 219 (work) (319) 626 3489 (fax)

1996-05-06 20:29fEEdOn Mon, 6 May 1996 15:13:41 -0700, jsd@cyborganic.com wrote... >i doubt if any k2000 owner

From:: fEEd <feed@maroon.tc.umn.edu>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 20:29:16
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

On Mon, 6 May 1996 15:13:41 -0700, jsd@cyborganic.com wrote...

quoted 2 lines i doubt if any k2000 owner would actually voice those opinions. the whole

>i doubt if any k2000 owner would actually voice those opinions. the whole >thing from sonic quality to ui design is a model of amazingness.

Jon, I think you have to give other people's opinions a little more credit. I have known plenty of people who have used and\or bought k2000s and came away saying "ick". Me being one of them. I know you find this hard to believe, but alot of people think differently than you do. Now this does not mean that you are a moron for liking a k2000 or that my opinion is better than yours, I am just saying that the k2000 is not for everybody. Blanket statements rarely bear close scrutiny.

quoted 4 lines let's please

>let's please >look at it realistically, in the context of living in 1996 and all that... >it has very poor sound quality with a pretty blatant noise floor, the low >end is really sloppy,

Funny, you just described my EMS Synthi AKS. And that is considered one of the best synths ever made by many people. And my PPG2.3, prophet 5, memorymoog and Oberheim 2 voice. All considered to be some of the best ever by a large portion of the synth crowd. But i guess none of those stand up when "living in 1996 and all that".

quoted 1 line and it just plain Doesn't Do Much.

>and it just plain Doesn't Do Much.

Well i can name (tho i won't) quite a few successful producers (that everyone here would recognize) of electronic music that would totally disagree with you here. It might not do much for you, but for quite a few people it works quite nicely.

quoted 6 lines I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks.

>>I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks. >>I always program velocity response to some (one or more) aspect of the >>sound, and get a lot of motion in sounds. And maybe it's just me, I >>love the sounds, find it easy to edit yadda yadda. > >it's easy to edit because it doesn't do much.

Someone needs a lesson in FM (or phase modulation or whatever casio calls their flavor of it). A lesson in being open minded might help as well.

quoted 1 line i promise to take any future rounds of this to email...

>i promise to take any future rounds of this to email...

please do. It is great for people wanting to get into music to ask advice about what to get, but my advice is to take all the reccomendations you see on the net with a grain of salt. Alot of producers can be pretty closed minded about music and will try to make you think there is only 1 way to do things. that is simply not true. The only way to make music is to do it in a way that is comfortable to the producer, and only you can decide what that way is. Certainly take into account gear discussions but if at all possible try the various pieces of gear out yourself before you buy. What works for kent will not work for me and what works for me certainly does not work for jon. Find out what works for you through personal experience, not simply by listening to another producer's biases. Use advice as simply that: advice. not as law. Rob - excuse the typos, I am in a perpetual hurry http://www.umn.edu/nlhome/m211/feed/ (new songs, new pics, same old crap) "The patch in fig. 2-23 gives the sound of a cracking whip. (Why don't you try to synthesize some screams to go along with it?)" - Roland Model 104 Sequencer Manual

1996-05-06 22:13Jon DrukmanAt 2:56 PM 5/6/96, Kent Williams wrote: >The K2000 is the best jon drukman equipment. Othe

From:: Jon Drukman <jsd@cyborganic.com>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 6 May 1996 15:13:41 -0700
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

At 2:56 PM 5/6/96, Kent Williams wrote:

quoted 2 lines The K2000 is the best jon drukman equipment. Others quibble with weak

>The K2000 is the best jon drukman equipment. Others quibble with weak >filter, overcomplicated programming interface, etc.

i doubt if any k2000 owner would actually voice those opinions. the whole thing from sonic quality to ui design is a model of amazingness.

quoted 4 lines On the other hand, for what you pay for a K2000 with sampling RAM

>On the other hand, for what you pay for a K2000 with sampling RAM >and a hard disk, you can get an Akai S2000 with analog filters, lots of memory >and a hard disk, and still have money left over to buy an analog keyboard >as well.

yeah but still won't have a k2000... :) (wipes drool off keyboard)

quoted 5 lines I and a lot of other people actually like how a CZ-101 sounds. Other people

>I and a lot of other people actually like how a CZ-101 sounds. Other people >including many successful producers. CZ sound is all over popular >House and Detroit techno. It's not the be-all and end all but >I find myself starting tracks around CZ sounds, or finishing them by >using the CZ to add that last little touch.

i have one, have had it for years, used it extensively when i couldn't afford anything better, mine is actually still plugged in while some of my other analogue gear sits in the corner... it has its place but let's please look at it realistically, in the context of living in 1996 and all that... it has very poor sound quality with a pretty blatant noise floor, the low end is really sloppy, and it just plain Doesn't Do Much. it has one mono output for all 4 voices. i honestly feel that if someone with a small amount of money is starting out, they can spend their $100 much more productively.

quoted 4 lines I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks.

>I have the CZ-1 which corrects all of these limitations and I think it rocks. >I always program velocity response to some (one or more) aspect of the >sound, and get a lot of motion in sounds. And maybe it's just me, I >love the sounds, find it easy to edit yadda yadda.

it's easy to edit because it doesn't do much. anyway, how much does a Cz-1 cost in comparison to a 101? the 101 is far more prevalent and it lacks in some essential features. one thing i forgot to mention is that since it doesn't respond to midi volume or velocity, it's really hard to balance out the multitimbral mix... (not impossible, i used to spend hours sitting their fiddling with the amp envelopes to get the right volume, but what a waste of time.) i promise to take any future rounds of this to email... -- Name: Jon Email: jsd@cyborganic.com Web: http://www.cyborganic.com/bass-kittens/

1996-05-07 04:03GDfEEd wrote: [snip] > out yourself before you buy. What works for kent will not work for me

From:: GD <gd@interramp.com>
To:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Mon, 06 May 1996 23:03:38 -0500
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

fEEd wrote: [snip]

quoted 4 lines out yourself before you buy. What works for kent will not work for me and what

> out yourself before you buy. What works for kent will not work for me and what > works for me certainly does not work for jon. Find out what works for you > through personal experience, not simply by listening to another producer's > biases. Use advice as simply that: advice. not as law.

True, much of what gear one likes is personal preference, and that's why some people will like/dislike certain pieces of equipment. Jon gave very good reasons for dissing the CZ101 and Kent gave very good reasons for defending it - there's nothing wrong with a little bit of disagreement. Perhaps one of the indicators of this is the variety found in idm releases - compare the sounds Jonah Sharp likes with those Mark Clifford seems to prefer. If you ask me, the Korg Trinity beats both the K2000 and CZ101... GD

1996-05-07 04:56globalwm@gate.netOn Mon, 6 May 1996, GD wrote: > True, much of what gear one likes is personal preference,

From:: globalwm@gate.net <globalwm@gate.net>
To:: <analogue@hyperreal.com>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Tue, 7 May 1996 00:56:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject:: (idm) Re: CZ-101 = personal preference.
Reply to:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

On Mon, 6 May 1996, GD wrote:

quoted 2 lines True, much of what gear one likes is personal preference, and that's why some people

> True, much of what gear one likes is personal preference, and that's why some people > will like/dislike certain pieces of equipment.

- there's nothing wrong with

quoted 1 line a little bit of disagreement.

> a little bit of disagreement.

Sounds like the Ambient list to me. Peoples tastes vary. For every one person that *favorably* reviews something, there are allways people who *disliked* it as well. Nobody's wrong. I personally enjoy the views of both camps as well. - Anthony

1996-05-07 12:31Danny Wolfers>At 6:34 AM 5/6/96, saugis@lifl.fr wrote: >>it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment"

From:: Danny Wolfers <danwolfe@xs4all.nl>
To:: Jon Drukman <jsd@cyborganic.com>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Tue, 7 May 1996 12:31:06 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

quoted 4 lines At 6:34 AM 5/6/96, saugis@lifl.fr wrote:

>At 6:34 AM 5/6/96, saugis@lifl.fr wrote: >>it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please >>email me the results? >the answer is "buy a k2000"

Everyone would love to own one but the thing's a bit pricey ain't it?

quoted 4 lines the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not

>the big win on the cz101 is that its cheap. otherwise it's not >particularly impressive for any kind of music. (unless you want that >genuine cheesy house organ sound). i use it as a backup "swirly noise" >box.

Nah! Did you ever try to program the thing? It's THE IDM synth. The BIG WIN IS that is cheap. But the 2nd big win is that it REALLY sounds GREAT and very analog.

quoted 1 line it's not particularly clean or quiet.

>it's not particularly clean or quiet.

That simply adds atmosphere and gives it a raw edge! Bye. [Danwolfe@xs4all] ..."To advance sonic is the key"...

1996-05-07 12:31Danny Wolfers[For some reason unknown only half of this message appeared on IDM list] [Here's the full

From:: Danny Wolfers <danwolfe@xs4all.nl>
To:: <saugis@lifl.fr>
Cc:: <idm@hyperreal.com>
Date:: Tue, 7 May 1996 12:31:23 +0200 (MET DST)
Subject:: Re: (idm) CZ101?

[For some reason unknown only half of this message appeared on IDM list] [Here's the full original one:] Hello,

quoted 3 lines it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please

>it seems I've missed the "best IDM equipment" vote... Can someone please >email me the results? >I've also got the opportunity to buy a CZ101... Opinions welcome.

Its a f*cking great little machine. 2xDCO's which consist each of 2 waveforms [which can be selected from 8&5 waveforms] & long EG's which give you a lot of soundcontrol. It sounds very moog-ey, especially in phat acidbass, GREAT portamento mono-synths. [Sort of like the one in Gescoms' "Sounds of Machines our parents used"]. Spooky strings which remind me of 70ies scifi film tunes & chilly resonance sweeps. Even the 16 presets are nice in a way. [Especially the vibrophone sound & the plastic 80ies disco-electro bass].

quoted 1 line I fear the infamous lack of real-time control, and of velocity too (I don't

>I fear the infamous lack of real-time control, and of velocity too (I don't

Yep, that is not available. But the great sound makes up for that. There is an excellent pitch bend which affects the filter in a [very little] way. [and that is about the only real time control there is] You can control the filter by an envelope generator, thus allowing you to make filter sweeps.

quoted 2 lines want my synths to sound always the same, like samplers do ;)...

>want my synths to sound always the same, like samplers do ;)... >I've also got very poor information about the multitimbral (4 x mono ???) mode.

Yep. But 4 phat monosynths ain't bad.

quoted 2 lines Is it possible to choose the 4 (if I'm not wrong) and mute the 4 midi channels

>Is it possible to choose the 4 (if I'm not wrong) and mute the 4 midi channels >separately?

In polymode it's just 1 channel. [8 polyphonic when using 1 DCO, 4 when using 2] In Multi mode I guess that you select an empty "sound" for the other midi channels when you don't want to use them. Anyway, It's one of my favourite synths. Bye. [Danwolfe@xs4all.nl] ...Dear Casio, Can I have my money now?...

Re: (idm) CZ101?