posted 14 June 2003 13:55            

If so, is it possible to do this with Kyma or to create it in Kyma?

posted 28 June 2003 01:10            

Being a PPG user from 1986 (ahem......showing age), I can tell you that in combination with a WaveTerm A or B, the PPG Wave 2.3 was/is quite different than today's current samplers. Here's why:

1. You could sample a sound and send it to the Wave 2.3 for playback via an oscillator. Straightforward here. But the Wave 2.3 has two oscillators per voice, so when activated, the second oscillator will play the same sample that you could (pitch)detune, modulate, pan, etc.... against the first one. Very cool sounds, most noteably Frankie goes to Hollywood flanged gong intro's and other mid-eighties hits.

2. You could take the above sound and resample it back into the 2.3 and record it again. Then you could repeat the process above to get even richer effects: ie: flanging/chorus/delay/etc.....

3. The WaveTerm was also an additive synthesizer that you could make your own wavetables and save them to disk and download them to the Wave 2.3 for use. Many cool sounds came from this. Especially when you DID NOT correct the overloaded waveform you created by stumbling around the FM page. Very nasty harsh waveforms that sounded a lot like Depeche Mode and Gary Numan type Wavetable 13 bass synths. Ala Master & Servant and Your Fascination.

4. You could also analyze a sample and convert it into a WaveTable for playback via the Wave 2.3 for playback with filters/lfo's/etc.....

Yes, the PPG's were really great and after owning 3 QTY. Wave 2.3's and 2 QTY. WaveTerm B's I can honestly say they are very high on my list of great samplers/synthesizers.

I'm SURE that the powers that be at SSC could describe how to make all of these above mentioned tricks VERY easy with a Capybara!!

posted 02 July 2003 12:54            

That are some very interesting possibilities on the Waveterm. I have a Microwave 1 so I have a bit of a idea on the results from the PPG System.

posted 02 July 2003 14:35            

When you say "send it to the Wave 2.3 for playback via an oscillator" do you mean that the sample is cut up into single cycles so that the oscillator could repeat the same cycle over and over again or move on to the next or previous cycle at will , or was oscillator then name for sample player.

Hi armand.

What makes the synclavier special is nothing to do with features. it does have 4 partials per voice (sample players) but it doesn't have any control over the cut off frequency of the output filters. What makes it special is the user interface and the fact that the hard disc recorder and the sample player act as one in the same sequencer. If you rewind the sequencer back to a point that falls half way through a sample , it plays that sample from that half way point. This is not possible with a midi sequencer. The scrubbing is excellent and I don't know any other
system as good (apart from Kyma's spectrum editor, although they have a big advantage, the sound can be frozen) but the synclavier has very limited graphical waveform editing so you have to depend on the scrubbing. There are loads of little bits that make it ideal for the pro studio even today, but it does have a lot of the fun features missing compared to the newer systems.

this link has some of the points
http://www.500sound.com/uniquesync.html

posted 13 July 2003 15:20            

Thanks for the link of the Synclavier. If I listen to music that is recorded on the Synclavier System I'm always stunned by it's sound quality, especially the soundtrack from Terminator 2.