o00o Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 How do you know afx owns a GX-1? is it just word of mouth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Glass Plate Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 he bought it from me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelican Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 It's not just word of mouth. He bought it from gordon reid www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb00/articles/yamahagx1.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o00o Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share Posted June 13, 2007 It's not just word of mouth. He bought it from gordon reid www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb00/articles/yamahagx1.htm but there is no mention of aphex in this article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelican Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I know....they are friends and he bought it from him later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Caustic Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Bullshit thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
o00o Posted June 13, 2007 Author Share Posted June 13, 2007 I know....they are friends and he bought it from him later is that info from an interview? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelican Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 no, it is my firsthand knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not_vikur Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 ghostbusters will have the answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kaiser Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 "Next month, we'll cast nostalgia aside and take a detailed look at the GX1 itself. Maybe we'll even discover what all the Tuss is about.." they already knew it D: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perunamuusi Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 i only heard of a gx1 since all the divs on here started talking about it after tuss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCONES TO DIE FOR Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think it comes from the Analogue Heaven list user 'panflet,' who was revealed as Richard D. James, talking in great detail about the GX-1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Caustic Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think it comes from the Analogue Heaven list user 'panflet,' who was revealed as Richard D. James, talking in great detail about the GX-1. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 How do you know afx owns a GX-1? is it just word of mouth? its word of an ass worshiping fan boys mouth gone through a feedback loop of fanboyism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCONES TO DIE FOR Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think it comes from the Analogue Heaven list user 'panflet,' who was revealed as Richard D. James, talking in great detail about the GX-1. Link? Go here: http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/ Search for 'panflet.' Read the posts and see if you're convinced. Note that he signs off as Eric, but on one occasion slips with signing off as Richard when he wants to buy something from some one. I remember hearing that he'd bought a bunch of rare analog gear from members of that list around that time, which was right before the Analord series came out. I'm not the world's biggest afx fan (I do love SAW vol. 1), but I'm a fan of analog synths and saw this stuff happening in that community when it was going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think it comes from the Analogue Heaven list user 'panflet,' who was revealed as Richard D. James, talking in great detail about the GX-1. Link? Go here: http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/ Search for 'panflet.' Read the posts and see if you're convinced. Note that he signs off as Eric, but on one occasion slips with signing off as Richard when he wants to buy something from some one. I remember hearing that he'd bought a bunch of rare analog gear from members of that list around that time, which was right before the Analord series came out. I'm not the world's biggest afx fan (I do love SAW vol. 1), but I'm a fan of analog synths and saw this stuff happening in that community when it was going on. is it not possible that someone very very clever wanted to hoax people into thikning he is ricard? Doing a stunt like this to the analogue heaven community could potentially have a top down pyramidal hoaxing cascade effect, since most laymen trust the word of an analog synth nut when it comes to Aphex factoids over a random poster. Im not saying that you yourself are pulling a hoax right now, but i am saying you might have been victim to one. but really how do we know Tridact isn't panflet ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Caustic Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Go here: http://search.retrosynth.com/ah/ Search for 'panflet.' Read the posts and see if you're convinced. Note that he signs off as Eric, but on one occasion slips with signing off as Richard when he wants to buy something from some one. I remember hearing that he'd bought a bunch of rare analog gear from members of that list around that time, which was right before the Analord series came out. I'm not the world's biggest afx fan (I do love SAW vol. 1), but I'm a fan of analog synths and saw this stuff happening in that community when it was going on. Interesting read,this. Thanks. Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCONES TO DIE FOR Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I thought this was old news. Google search panflet and afx or aphex or analogue and see for yourself. It's already been on a lot of other message boards. I never thought posting that would cause some one to suggest that I was him. That's pretty funny. I don't know that much about synths. Could be a hoax, but it would be a good hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Could be a hoax, but it would be a good hoax. glad we're on the same page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elusive4 Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 the real question isn't about whether or not he has a gx-1....the real question is. .........does he have just 1 .... or 2 ... or those boxes to sequence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SRMG Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 I find it hard to imagine Richard sitting behind the GX-1, more suited to Stevie Wonder I think....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elusive4 Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 i wish i knew more about this type of equipment :-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perunamuusi Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 who cares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Moss Acid Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 here are soem of my favourites Me and my friends used to have a 303,606 linked up to the cassette adapter and drive around for live acid trax, These days though its dj on the laptop thru an [analog]fm transmitter to the car radio and anyone else in the near vicinity. Being lucky enough to have one I have to tell you that you are wrong twice,there is a sequencer on the gx1!! I haven't read about it anywhere else so now you know . And you can actually change the parameters really easily while the cartridges are plugged in! Just stick up a list of all the parameters against numbers by your gx1 Then just adjust each one as required with a screwdriver. If you select patch 10 on each of the synths then the cartridges at the front can be reached easily ,after awhile you learn the numbers easily like pwm is number 14 etc Then you are programming the presets directly and do not need the tone board or the programmer,decent. You can feed any of the drum instruments to trigger the solo synth! E.g every time the kick drum sounds or the Hihat etc the solo synth can be triggered which actually gives you untold pattern possibilities if you combine the drum pattern selectors. Then you can either manually play the key you want with it being triggered in sync. Or just let it trigger automatically. Also the same drum instrument pattern is fed into a s/h which in turn can randomly select the pitch of the solo synth and the cut off frequency of both filters, with varying amounts ,sliders for each. Instant acid and from the 70`s! if only keith emerson has used it this way! Instead of that fanfare for the common prick stuff. Dance music history would have been completely different **smile** [Gordon Reid says that the drum machine is crap,this is understandable for someone from his era [sorry Gordon] but let me tell you this is probably on e of the best analogue drum machines ever,the cymbal is so sexy and the snare can actually be very realistic for an analogue machine,I love it The kick is huge especially through the valve amps.] You can also feed this s/h output into the lower and upper synths simultaneously and set it to control randomly and in sync with the solo synth trigger and drum machine, pitch deviation,loudness and filter cutoffs So that's 6 filters it can be changing at once. But you cant trigger the notes or the pedal,shame,will be my first attempted mod which hopefully will allow different drum sounds from the solo synth to be selected for triggering.... Then at the flick of a few more switches you can set the lfo speed of the lower and upper manuals to come from the pitch of the solo synth,its pretty mental how complex this beast is,much more than I expected. And then don't forget the brilliant swing/humanise feature which will effect all of the above. Ideally you need 7 programmers for the gx1 to save unplugging and plugging them into the synth you want to change all the time. I have 2 which is brilliant because either the lower,upper,or pedals has actually 2 separate synths for each and being able to plug 2 programmers in simultaneously to work on your patch is so much better. Got the second one on ebay for a few hundred $ When you get good at programming the cartridges it takes a few minutes to translate it to 1 preset although muiltiply that by 7 for below What can sound indescribable is when you have all 7 synths set to the same sound,especially the pedals as they have an extra oscillator, Didn't mean this to go on so long but this machine is deep and I could go on for ages... A midi`d gx1 would really be an incredibly lush rich/full analogue setup As you could have 7 synths controlled individually. Anyone want to come and customise mine? es I have this and played speedcore to my money plant for 2 hours and its turned into a triffid Eric fortunately, techno has moved on since those days. i'm not a particluar rave-o-holic, but i can see how Drew's stuff would get a rave rocking. Detroit techno is now just a sub-genbre of techno, most of what's made today doesn't sound like Detroit 1989 at all. r./ (who hasn't made any techno since 1996..;-) Apart from electrocuting yourself what possible way could you kill yourself with an analog synth? Ive got a rack of modular behind my head and the shelf looks pretty sketchy ,id hate to die under a load of modules. Maybe you could make up an elaborate modular patch to die..killed by an envelope generator with a really long attack. my last girlfriend had great hardware but the user interface was a bit ropey and there was no possibility of a software upgrade. http://www.perkristian.net/images/Studio_E310-U_0.jpgBR> I have got an eminent f217 and it fucks up and does an impression of xenakis s.709 but through that chorus effect,it rules. Eric Ok I agree for dynamic and timbral complexity etc synths have a hard job matching an orchestra/real instrument etc But Orchestral instruments aren't as punchy as synths either and unless you have contact mikes on the instruments they don't sound as in your face either which Is one particular thing I like about electronic music. Also one lonely person without any friends [like most of the people on this list] [only joking] can control a bank of modules or synths. But we love the sound of synths so the best thing is to have both, Synths and and orchestra/real instruments Massive modular,multitrack and an orchestra,real reverbs,lush outboard There are loads of concrete,tape music records out there with both anyway and I like the combo a lot that's if I like the compositions...just a thought or 2 Eric anyone want to donate their korg ms20 legacy controller to me so i can gut it and put a real ms20 inside it? i like the idea of a 3/4 size ms20 that is 100% functional seth nice idea but be better if it was both then you could really do some good comparisons and it probably would sound pretty fab ,emulation on top of real. And you could say make the audio from the ms20 go up the usb cable to the computer and any sound from the computer inc the emulated ms20 back down the usb into the real ms20 for processing etc...hmmm eric on the mc-4 You can patch in any one or a combination of the output channels or any other interesting voltage into the tempo cv input for programmable swing or other mental voltage controlled tempo changes,lots of fun when you have loads of things running off it,especially when channels are different loop lengths. global tune is nice and so are the programmable triggers. This machine makes you work in a certain way,which you wouldnt get from a lot of other sequencers. Its a deep box when you get to know it,has loads of tricks up its sleeve.. Also when you are making trax on it ,it can make you think you are in a weird taxi journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 100M Posted June 14, 2007 Share Posted June 14, 2007 fortunately, techno has moved on since those days. i'm not a particluar rave-o-holic, but i can see how Drew's stuff would get a rave rocking. Detroit techno is now just a sub-genbre of techno, most of what's made today doesn't sound like Detroit 1989 at all. r./ (who hasn't made any techno since 1996..;-) The above quote wasn't richard... did u you meant this one: you should go and listen to some techno by the people who invented it early detroit techno like: derrick may, kevin`maser reese`saunderson model500, blake baxter because those demos are truly awful and give the word techno an even badder name,sorry to crush your vibe,i know you just started but do a bit of research and do us all a favour eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.