Here’s a segment from a recording made at “Try This” a new series at the Slam Factory in Minneapolis curated by James Hungelmann of my trio DGK (Jon Davis on bass and bass clarinet, Tim Glenn on drums, and John Keston on Rhodes and Pro-One). This set was a pleasure to play. It was a great space with a great audience and amazing hosts. The recording was made by the house and it’s the best quality representation of our sound to date.
If you’d like to hear it live stop by Honey, 205 E Hennepin Ave., Minneapolis, Minnesota tonight at 10pm to hear two sets with special guest musicians and DJ’s including Martin Dosh, Andrew Broder, Scott Fultz, George Cartwright, Rajiah Johnson, Christopher Robin Cox, Kristoff Krane and more.
I created this plucky microtonal patch by using the cross modulation on the Roland MKS-80 to effectively put the instrument into an instable, out-of-tune state. I mentioned in my previous entry that cross modulation is a form of frequency modulation or FM synthesis made famous by the Yamaha DX-7. My curiosity about this technique led me to an article in Sound on Sound from 1994 titled Exploring Analogue (Part 2) by Steve Howell. In the article Howell states,
“…take the output of one oscillator (Osc A) and feed it into the control input of another (Osc B). As the modulation level at Osc B’s input is increased, so its tonal quality becomes progressively nastier. In fact, in the absence of a ring modulator, cross-modulation can be used very effectively to create clangorous bell sounds and the like. But be warned! Because the tuning stability on old analogue synths leaves much to be desired, the oscillators don’t track too well, and a sound that is perfectly tuned on C3 may well have disintegrated by the time you get up to F3.”
On the Roland MKS-80 the tuning stability is pretty good, but it does use VCOs (voltage controlled oscillators), so they won’t track as well as DCOs (digitally controlled oscillators). This imperfection is part of what many of us find attractive about analogue synthesis, and what made it possible for me to produce this bizarre, out of key, yet delightful sound.
Today is my fiftieth article so far in the One Synthesizer Sound Every Day series that I started on January 5, 2011. Throughout the process of presenting these sounds, I have been learning about new instruments, old instruments, and reflecting on my personal music technology background and philosophy. Today as musicians, we experience a vast wealth of sonic possibilities never before possible throughout history. How do artists that are fortunate enough to experience and participate in the invention and use of these instruments find a distinct voice?
This is something that I have pondered since my childhood exposure to synthesis in the 80s. My dad brought home Tomita records and a friend exposed me to Wendy Carlos, Jean Michel Jarre, and Laurie Anderson. This led me to my first synthesizer; a Moog Rogue monophonic with a broken key. Next, after disciplined savings, came a Korg Poly-800. Polyphony and MIDI implementation opened up a new realm of possibilities, but I missed the expression of tactile controls. Unfortunately, the replacement of costly knobs and sliders with cheap LED displays and a few buttons was an industry trend by the time I started performing regularly as a keyboardist.
By the early 90s, sampling overshadowed synthesis. Many chose, and still choose, to use samplers to play analog and acoustic sounds rather than lug the instruments themselves. These are often choices of convenience rather than an aesthetic decision. I became, as many of us did, frustrated by these “slabs”; featureless keyboards with hundreds of presets, but only programmable through a two inch wide LCD and minimal set of cold buttons. I largely rejected the “slabs” and looked backwards in time at Hammond organs, the Hohner clavinet, the Rhodes electric piano (my main axe to this day), and my favorite monosynth of all time, the Sequencial Circuits Pro-One. I used processing, such as delay, distortion, wah wah, and a Leslie cabinet to augment the sound of the Rhodes and Pro-One. These instruments are still a dominant voice in my work. Simplicity and expressiveness is what led me to this palette.
The key to finding this voice was limitations. I like that the Pro-One has no way to store presets, no MIDI, and needs to be tuned. I have learned to use it expressively and quickly dial in approximations of the sounds I’m after. The Rhodes is limited to one sound, but it’s mechanically velocity sensitive – much more dynamic than a mere 128 possible levels of loudness. We are easily lured into embracing magnificent technological devices that can do everything and more than the last thing, but is this what’s best for our musical psyches? Personally I aim to discover new ways of using my instruments. With the lack of sonic limitations that many new instruments achieve, every way you use them is new. New discoveries are a button press away. There’s no path to discovery, it’s just there at one’s fingertips. I need the path. Along the path we learn, experiment, develop, gain experience, and ultimately become better musical communicators.
The One Synthesizer Sound Every Day project has initiated a period of exploration for me. I have opened myself up to the possibilities offered by a new subset of instrumentation. While this is a fascinating time and I have already begun composing music with these textures, I understand that I will need to scale down the possibilities and create a new set of limitations in order to find a path to producing meaningful work.
Here’s a live recording of DGK from Monday, February 21, 2011. Jon Davis is on bass, and Tim Glenn is on drums. My instrumentation is Rhodes, and Pro-One through an Electro-Harmonix Memory Man delay.
This is part of the bass line from a synthesizer waltz that I’m composing. The sound was played on the Roland Juno-106, which I can’t seem get enough of these days. No processing was applied. All you hear is the chorus along with the LFO modulating the VCF for a long, slow filter sweep. Oh yeah, and I was manually tweaking the cutoff, and probably the envelope amount as well.
