The synthesizer is absolutely a real instrument. Key bed triggers sounds just like a pipe organ but instead of moving air it's moving elements and electrons,especially with tube powered synthesizer.
@OwenAdamsMusic Thanks for the content ! Yeah I saw what you mean about UA-cam comments, they do what they do. Really l think most comments are bots. Any how cool synthesizer collection you have there !
The first Synth was the Telharmonium in 1897. The Theremin was invented in 1919 and the Ondes- Martenot was invented in 1928 and the Trautonium in 1930, all of which predate the Hammond organ and are much closer to later synths as they used analog oscilators. also Good Vibrations didnt use a theremin, it used a "stringer" or Slide Theremin, which sounds similar but is a different instrument all together. You also could have mentioned Buchla Synths that were invented around the same time as moog modular synths and are simular in some ways but sound very unique and have a rich history in experimental music. Also gotta mention that an original mini moog is way bigger than a microkorg. The DX7 is the 1980s not 1970s.
Yeah lol I definitely misspoke on the DX7 decade, whoops. But with the first prototype released in 1980, I think it's fair to assume Yamaha guys were indeed working on it in the 70s, especially since FM synthesis had been around since the 1960s. As far as your "Telharmonium was the first synthesizer" theory, I dunno if you can really call that a synthesizer dude. I mean, kinda? But I feel like it would be more appropriately called *the first electronic organ.* Or maybe *the first electromechanical instrument.* Synthesizers don't typically use tonewheels... Like, would you call a Hammond B3 a "synthesizer?" It's electronic, but that doesn't make it a synthesizer, at least in my opinion. Anyway I appreciate you politely adding some context, instead of calling me a "liar" or something rude, lol. It's tough to make this type of niche subject matter entertaining, so I'm counting on educated viewers like you to add technical specificity to the conversation.
@@OwenAdamsMusic For the record, Yamaha FM synths don't actually do FM. And yes, the telharmonium was much closer to a synthesizer than the hammond organ. Also, synthesizers are far from niche and there is A LOT you could have researched but did not.
@@bobcole2663 Sigh, another one of these boring troll comments, lol. Yamaha disagrees with you buddy. yamahablackboxes.com/collection/yamaha-dx7-synthesizer/ I'm looking forward to your response video containing your exhaustive list of corrections! Please email me the link at learnsomesocialskills@autism.net
@@OwenAdamsMusic Yamaha was selling products. They realized people were already familiar with the concept of FM in analog synthesizers and decided to market their Phase Modulation tech as Frequency Modulation. Also, please consider the posibility that the reason you see so many 'troll' posts (they are not troll posts, they are valid criticisms) is bacause this video is actually quite bad.
Queen did use synthesizers! The reason they wrote 'no synthesisers' (sic!) on e.g., 'A Night at the Opera' was that the sounds they made were so novel that casual listeners would guess they used synthesizers to produce them. Later in their career, Queen used the DX-7 (e.g., on 'Under Pressure'), and a guitar synthesizer (e.g., 'I Want to Break Free'; probably Brian May's guitar fed through the External Signal Processor of a Korg MS-20). By 1975, the synthesizer was so 'mainstream' in music that many of the best musicians and producers used synthesizers like they would use any other instrument. Examples include Stevie Wonder, ABBA, Toto, Ike & Tina Turner, Ekseption, Weather Report, and Meat Loaf. Synthesizers are just one more range of colours to the sonic palette.
my rule is a instrument is a instrument, anything that can make sound is a instrument if used right. your voice is a instrument, wind chimes is a instrument, water is a instrument.
Nice overview. The RCA Music Synthesizer was polyphonic while the Moog was monophonic, although he popularized it in a way RCA would not. The Hagley Museum has a letter from Moog asking RCA for help in design. My father, Herbert Belar, was the actual inventor; he worked in Olson’s lab.
Well it had SOME modern functions, but I wouldn't quite put it on the same level as a Prophet 5! Definitely better than that stupid sackbut, lol. If anyone wants to check it out, here: ua-cam.com/video/-tQQEChMq1A/v-deo.html&ab_channel=Trautonist Thanks for the comment dude :D
Great video introduction idea although you did wash over some key facts that people might really need to know like “what is an oscillator?” and “what is the difference between analogue and digital synthesizers?”. If you’re doing an introduction to the history of a subject, you can’t just assume people know all these words and know what they mean!
Thanks for watching! I covered all of that and more in the waveform synthesis demonstration: ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html This portion is only covering the history. I didn't want it to be too long lol
Great video!! An instrument is simply a tool to help you do a task. A musical instrument is no different. Whether a person plays a traditional acoustic instrument or uses a computer, its still an instrument to make music. Like your video showed, "haters gonna hate!" Its like saying original traditional instruments arent real because humans have voices and should just sing music. People take no issue with technology when it doesnt use electricity. Put a circuit board in it and suddenly its not "real music".
It's funny that you talk about Queen not using synths while showing Freddie Mercury dancing onstage during the era in which they fully embraced using synths.
You've got the theremin motions reversed. In actuality, horizontal closeness to the vertical omnipolar antenna controls pitch, while vertical closeness to the horizontal dipolar antenna on the other side controls loudness.
The DX 7 came out in the 80s, 83 maybe 82. . The first programmable digital Synth was 1979. The Casio VL tone . primitive but thats was the 1st. A lot of your info was incorrect. But I appreciate the try. No cassettes in the Mellotron either.
I was literally reading sources from all over the internet in a 2 hour presentation, you found 2 things that were still mostly correct that you had to nitpick over, who cares. Go make your own video, genius.
@@OwenAdamsMusic No I wasn’t nitpicking there was a lot of things in there that was in accurate but those were just the last two that I had on my mind like I say I appreciate your time you had in it but there were just a lot of things that were not not accurate. I live those years I know.
@@JohnBassarcticsoundstudios Ok dude, you can be the synth fact-checker lol. But don't imply that my whole show is mostly incorrect when it's not. I'm here to learn like everyone else, I'm a musician not a historian. Anyway the few things you said were wrong weren't even wrong, history is defined by the prominent, widely commercially available stuff, and I said that in the video. I covered half a century of information, wrote a 6 page script and also did a full demonstration on waveform synthesis, oscillators, filters, envelopes, PLUS 2 live musical performances to show off the timbral and expressive capabilities of analog synthesizers all in the same show. And yes, I used some colorful language and verbal flourishes to help non-musicians simplify complex concepts... but my last 20 years have been spent PLAYING synthesizers, not reading about them in books. ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html
@@OwenAdamsMusic I’m not a reader either I hate reading but I was 22 when the DX seven came out if you can’t take any constructive criticism then so be it it may be there again the DX seven to come out in the 70s lol have a good day. I just figured a lot of people would catch the DX seven part because it will go down in history probably is one of the most successful synthesizers of all time. I made my living recording and playing music since 1983 I do know a little bit about some things. Not much about anything else but music I do know about.
@@JohnBassarcticsoundstudios That's good, and I do appreciate *constructive* criticism. If you have additional information or context or a personal story about the topic I'd love to hear it, but I don't think you've corrected anything other than me skipping over the terrible Casio digital synth that nobody bought lol. Sorry if I came off harsh, I get a lot of rude comments and I'm the only one defending myself. Much respect to you and your music career and thanks for the comments :D
I think you mixed up aftertouch with velocity sensitivity. The latter generally means that the harder--and therefore faster--you hit a key, the louder the note plays. Aftertouch generally refers to holding a key down after you've hit it, and applying a bit more force to overcome a resistance in order to push the key down farther to modulate the sound in some other way that you've defined. The more force you use, the lower the key moves, and the modulation effect varies accordingly. Some keyboards have both features, some have neither, and others only have velocity sensitivity.
Nice video. Thanks for the research and uncovering very unique early synthesizers. It's curious to hear that Queen was resistant to synths, and in the end they ended up using it on their hit Radio Ga Ga song, where the Jupiter 8 made the arpeggiated bass lines, as well as use of vocoder. There's no question that synthesizers are instruments by their own merits. Granted: they won't ever sound like any acoustic instrument that whey were trying to mimic in the beginning, but in all honesty the true color and expression of a synthesizer really shows up when you leave the acoustic instruments behind and start exploring all the sonic possibilities that the synthesizer controls offer. Between subtractive synthesis, FM synthesis, additive and sample based synthesis, a whole new palette of sounds becomes possible, and you're right: There's a synth for each kind of music much as there are acoustic instruments as well. A musician who are rejecting a whole "kind" of instruments is really just choosing to paint with less colors in their palette. In the end is a matter of taste, choice, and affinity. Either way, synthesizers have earned their place as instruments of their own merit and expressiveness, not just as instruments that attempt to recreate acoustic sounds.
Awesome comment, great points and you are 100% correct! Yeah I think the anti-synth sentiments were prevalent before they broke through into the mainstream and became widely used. The funny thing is, there are still a ton of people who feel that way today! Mainly classical music snobs and University professors lol. But in the future I think synthesizers will be just as respected as any other classical instrument, especially once new technologies like the Roli Seaboard and Linnstrument become cheaper and more easily accessable to musicians. The expressive potential of these new controllers is already mindblowing!
Even though the synthesizer has not been around as long as other insruments, I believe that it is a real instrument. Each synthesizer that has been developed over the decades may have some limitations, but the music creativity has unlimited potential! The reason why I have the synthesizer as my favorite instrument, because there are a lot of styles of playing it. Not only that, these styles are impossible to duplicate! That's why I like it, the beauty of the synthesizer at its best! All because of different synthesizer players having different applications in their compositions! Also, the analog synthesizers of the past are making a comeback, both digitally and physically. The Moog Modular System 55 has been revamped, and is being sold again by Moog Music Inc. Same goes for the Minimoog! Now, younger generations will be able to enjoy the Moog products of the past! If they cannot afford the prices of Moog synthesizers and their competitors, I recommend the synthesizers made by Arturia. They are midi controller synthesizers that run on either standalone synth programs, or VSTs loaded in any DAW! They may be digital program versions of vintage synths, but Arturia has something for everyone! These Arturia products also sound like the real thing! You can also buy new sounds on Arturia's website! For those who can afford Moog products or any other vinatge synthesizer in physical form, I really don't envy you out of pure respect. I tip my hat to you! For those who cannot afford them, I highly recommend buying Arturia products from eBay. That is where I found my two Arturia synthesizers, and they pack quite the punch! The only spoilers that I can give you, is that (1) you are going to love the prices on eBay, and (2) you are going to love the programs available to them! Check them out at www.arturia.com to find the right synth and programs for it as well. Then, head to eBay to find you want for a lower price! I dare you! Good luck to those who take up my dare! The Arturia synthesizers and programs are that good!
Yeah dude I agree 100%! I also love the Arturia stuff, I think my first VST was the Moog Modular, never had the joy of pluggng hundreds of patch cables into the real thing but it sounds super close to those classic ELP records. VSTs are probably better nowadays too since in a studio setting most instruments are gonna be perfectly tuned - and those analog synths were NOT great at holding their tune! Thanks for watching and another thanks for the Arturia plug!
@@OwenAdamsMusic Thanks for the comment! I happen to have one of the past V Collections. I got it off of eBay for $30, and it is really worth the money! I’m going to wait to upgrade to V Collection 9, since it’s very expensive right now. For now, I have V Collection 8, and it’s really good! The only downside, is that it doesn’t have programs like Augmented Strings. Other than that, I really like it!
@@scurvyjoe269 Yeah those VSTs blew me away when I used em back in like 2009... I got some cracked version from warez . bb, and somehow jury-rigged the audio to record from the standalone program back into Cool Edit Pro, lol. My new go-to analog synth VST today is probably "The Legend" by Synapse Audio (Reason Plugin), but if I'm feeling more "handsy" I'll use my Nord Rack 2. I did a couple live jams with the Nord synth the same night I recorded Synth History if you're interested: 🟢 ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html 🟢 ua-cam.com/video/tikQzbB-hNM/v-deo.html
Okay, a question for the music purists. A person sits at a keyboard, downloads 15 hot pipe sets from across Europe, and plays, is he/she playing a synth (Moog) or the newest take on the Mellotron? When I was first learning about synthesizers my music teacher taught us sampling was a form of synthesis. I always thought synthesizers took a wave form and modulated it.
So, I'm no expert (you'd have to ask the other commenters below, lol) , but as far as I know, most keyboards & virtual instruments do a little bit of both. The analog purists would say anything digital is disqualified, but I think modulating VCO's and triggering samples are both examples of "synthesizing." At the end of the day, software can basically replicate the analog circuitry of the classic synths, but there's definitely something special about the detuned/saturated/gnarly quality of old school hardware analog synths.
Good Vibrations didn't use a Theremin. They used an instrument called an "Tannerin", invented in the 1950s by trombonist Paul Tanner and amateur inventor Bob Whitsell. It uses a horizontal slide to set the pitch and a volume knob operated by the left hand. Notes are gated by touching the slider. The Tannerin put out a pure sine wave so it out Theremined the Theremin in terms of space noises. Theremins have a waveshape more like a distorted triangle. Another note: Queen did indeed use synthesizers including an Oberheim OB-X, Yamaha DX-7, and a Jupiter 8. Look at Queen - Live At Wembley Stadium (12-7-1986) to watch Brian May pay the keyboard parts in Who Wants to Live Forever on a DX-7.
Actually, Queen "the band" never existed. All Queen albums were in fact written by Donald Marshall and stolen by the Illuminati in order to cover up for their massive underground human cloning operation.
@@Peter_S_ Lol, everything I said in the video is 100% true. I said "look up the Beach Boys song if you want to hear what it sounds like" since most normal people have no idea what it is or what it sounds like. It sounds exactly like a theremin to me and everyone else! Another correction for you, Queen WAS anti-synthesizer and made fun of synths with their album liner notes. Good job debunking things nobody ever said though, lol! Your criticism is completely pointless and factually inaccurate since I never said what you attributed to this video, plus you clearly don't even know about the clones, haha. Some synth expert you are. 🟢 Beach Boys Electro-Theremin - faroutmagazine.co.uk/how-the-beach-boys-created-good-vibrations/ 🟢 Queen published "Nobody Played Synthesizer" as a dig against synthesizers - rapidcityjournal.com/news/on-the-record-why-did-queen-put-nobody-played-synthesizer-on-their-albums/article_41fe8def-de8c-51f4-9bc6-25e9ca0c31b3.html
@@OwenAdamsMusic Wow, just wow. Theremins and Tannerins don't sound the same all all. See this video: ua-cam.com/video/-QgTF8p-284/v-deo.html Theremins have more more of a pulse/triangle waveform and sound more like bowed instruments. Theremins don't make sine waves. They don't sound like whistles. You've never owned one or built one I'm guessing? I'm VERY sure I know more Theremin makers than you. You've never played one I'm guessing? Ever looked at a Theremin's output on a scope? No. Theremins are highly expressive instruments. The Tannerin is an electronic slide whistle and it sounds like a whistle with a simple sine wave; not a bowed instrument or a Theremin. Where do you get the silly idea Queen was anti-synthesizer? (hint: Rolling Stone) You "guessed" they were purists? "Electric keyboards that's a big no-no right?" LOL, no. The Hammond on the debut album and Sheer Heart Attack was played by Freddie Mercury. On Queen II it was played by Brian May. John Deacon played electric piano on A Night at the Opera. They started using modern analog synthesizers in the late 70s when synth music got going and 3/4 of the band played synth on "The Game" which came out before Duran Duran's or Depeche Mode's first album. They were synth lovers and early adopters. Go back and watch your own video. It's fairly embarrassing how much you're trying to rewrite history here. The liner note came after reviews of Queen's debut including one by Chris Welsh in Melody Maker who said "Great use of synthesizers here!". It was a rebuttal to that comment and it only appeared on the 2nd-5th albums. Queen released an album with modern synths before Howard Jones, or the Thompson Twins, or the majority of synth pop and new wave bands did. The Human League didn't even release "Dare" until more than a year later. Synth expert? I would let my customers be the judge. I'm a synth designer and my DIY audio electronics forum has been going for over 20 years with well over 40K members and >1M posts in >100K threads. You can find a number of Theremin schematics there. 😉
@@Peter_S_ Dude no one has time to read all that, lol. It's like I said "I'm driving a car," and you're like "no way dude, that's a SUV. You lied" haha. You woulda timestamped the false claim by now if it existed, but you are arguing over nothing. Sorry, oooh I kind-of implied an electro-theremin sounded like a theremin, whoops. Call the synth police 🚨🚨😂 I always ask viewers to put in their 2 cents in the comments cause I'm not a synth expert like you. That means be nice and share your info with links to back up what you say. There's no secret agenda to promote "lies," just like there's no illuminati clones, get it? We're all here to learn and have fun, not hurl insults. Be polite and share your info or get off my channel. I'll read the rest of your psychotic essay later, I got art to create, peace.
A good effort and lots of good information but unfortunately there are lots of omissions, inaccuracies, and misinformation mixed in too. While nobody is perfect (and I know from experience because I think some of my own videos are downright terrible! 😅🤭) it was disappointing to see you often respond to commenters, who were gently providing additions and corrections, in such a defensive and rude manner.
So my policy is, I respond to all additions and corrections with the *same exact* level of politeness as they initiated with. I literally *asked* for corrections in the video, do you have any? But yeah, gentle comments get gentle replies, unreasonable insulters commenters get unreasonable insults. It's called the internet 🤓 Anyway, this video is unscripted - shot in one take - covering 100 years of music history, so please accept my sincerest apologies if I used some colorful language and reductionist explanations. I appreciate your critique, but my video is not misinformation. This video is us grabbing a beer and hanging out in the studio chatting about synth history. You don't like it, you can bounce. I get to defend my content against trolls, that's the rules. Cheers, and thanks for watching.
What do you mean, he made documentaries? I never knew! Thanks for watching, I just kinda wanted an excuse to show off this cool new analog synth I got at the time lol
Whoa!!!! Good until you jumped from Moog into the DX7, totally omitting one of the most important synths AND most important people in the industry, right up there with Bob Moog. Please do your research, this is a glaring omission!
Uh, I obviously covered 1 synth from each era to demonstrate the evolution of analog to digital. I jumped over WAY more than one synth, lol. How about *you* do some research and write a comment that adds some additional information or context instead of whining about me skipping one of the 5,000 synthesizers, it's embarrassing. Thanks for watching though!
Alright well you can go complain to the manufacturers of all the keyboards I talked about cause their websites are where the research came from. I guess I'm a liar, the synth companies are all liars, everyone's a liar except the great Bob Cole! Thanks for your necessary feedback my friend.
@@OwenAdamsMusic Dude, just delete this POS and start over. And consider using better sources than the advertorials found on manufacturers pages. Maybe pick up on some details like what is the difference between analog and digital etc.
Synths are the next step but there are still some roadblocks. Expressiveness is the main problem. There is huge potential but there is a disconnect between our brains and the interface. An acoustic instrument is so tactile, it has a much broad bandwidth for expression, every time you touch the instrument it produces a different sound, you can scratch, scrap, slap, pluck, whip, to get different tones and it is all really intuitive because you exploit the insanely complex motor skills of your hands and fingers. With synths you only use your hands for note on/off info and turn 1 knob at a time. The difference between plucking a string hard and muted is extremely minimal when it comes to motor skills, anybody can do that first try. But if you look at that from a sound design perspective the difference between a loud open string and a muted string are like 5 separate parameters, volume, timbre, pitch and the envelopes of them all. To alternate between them in 1 second is impossible on a synth while on a stringed instrument it is super easy. Let alone if you include bends, vibrato, accents and phrasing all at the same time. I believe that is where synths still fall short and why many people still find them to sound robotic and lifeless. Another big problem is that synths in essence don’t produce sounds. In essence a synth is just a control surface to play a speaker. The sound of a string, membrane or surface producing a tone still sounds so different from a speaker reproducing the same waveforms. The speaker isn’t really considered to be part of electronic instruments while essentially it is the main instrument. I think there is a lot of room for innovation and experimentation. Why should it always be a membrane that vibrates that produces the sound of a synth? The synth just sends voltage, and that voltage just needs to vibrate something in the physical world to produce a sound.
You make some good points! But by that logic, a piano also lacks expression since you can only hit 10 keys at a time (or 15 if you're Cory Henry). No vibrato or portamento or anything! I think with automation, MIDI routing, and new technologies like the Linnstrument, expressive capabilities of synthesizers today far outweigh acoustic instruments! I would also consider oscillator frequencies amplified by a speaker just as acoustic, in the physics sense, as a string's frequency amplified by a resonant chamber in a violin or guitar. Plus, unless you have 50 violin players playing the same part simultaneously, you'll need an amplifier for a single violin to be heard in any physical space larger than your bedroom. Thanks for the great comment, I would definitely recommend checking out the Linnstrument and playing one for yourself - if they ever allow stuff like the NAMM show again, lol. It's WAY cooler than the Roli Seaboard as far as expression goes!
@@LesterBrunt If you care about expressiveness, look up Hugh Le Caine that was his main concern. The information in this video was wrong about the Electronic Sackbut he invented. Also nice MS20!
The envelope control ADSR attack, decay, sustain, and release is quite the expressive filter. Wendy Carlos was a master user and knew exactly how to use it.
Very interesting. I don't think it's too surprising the the RCA Mark 2 used punch cards since that was basically the same technology that player pianos used at the time. It would've made for some interesting possibilities I think since it wouldn't be limited by the abilities of a human player, kind of like the "Black Midi' movement of the 2000s. XD RE Queen, I heard that when John Deacon wrote "You're my Best Friend" and wanted to use a synth keyboard that Freddie refused to play it, and he had to learn how to play it himself. Freddie still did the vocals though, so I don't think he could've been too upset over it.
This is just the history! The uncut version of this show was like over hours so I split it up into parts. 🟢 Synth control demonstration: ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html 🟢 Playing the Nord Lead synth in an original instrumental track: ua-cam.com/video/tikQzbB-hNM/v-deo.html
Analog synths are not basically a computer. They may have some computer functionality (storing presets or dco's, etc.) but it's peripheral not integral.
Actually they are. Before digital computers, like we have today, they had analog computers (google it). They basically looked like modular synthesizers, or rather it is modular synthesizers that look like analog computers, but instead of VCA, VCO, VCF, etc, the modules do addition, multiplication, integration, roots, differentiation, logarithm, and other matematical functions. It was used to solve dynamic mathematical problems, like stability of bridges, trajection of missiles, weather forecasts, and the like.
The synthesizer is absolutely a real instrument. Key bed triggers sounds just like a pipe organ but instead of moving air it's moving elements and electrons,especially with tube powered synthesizer.
Wow, finally a normal comment lol. Totally agree with you, thanks for tuning in.
@OwenAdamsMusic Thanks for the content !
Yeah I saw what you mean about UA-cam comments, they do what they do. Really l think most comments are bots. Any how cool synthesizer collection you have there !
The first Synth was the Telharmonium in 1897. The Theremin was invented in 1919 and the Ondes- Martenot was invented in 1928 and the Trautonium in 1930, all of which predate the Hammond organ and are much closer to later synths as they used analog oscilators. also Good Vibrations didnt use a theremin, it used a "stringer" or Slide Theremin, which sounds similar but is a different instrument all together. You also could have mentioned Buchla Synths that were invented around the same time as moog modular synths and are simular in some ways but sound very unique and have a rich history in experimental music. Also gotta mention that an original mini moog is way bigger than a microkorg. The DX7 is the 1980s not 1970s.
Yeah lol I definitely misspoke on the DX7 decade, whoops. But with the first prototype released in 1980, I think it's fair to assume Yamaha guys were indeed working on it in the 70s, especially since FM synthesis had been around since the 1960s.
As far as your "Telharmonium was the first synthesizer" theory, I dunno if you can really call that a synthesizer dude. I mean, kinda? But I feel like it would be more appropriately called *the first electronic organ.* Or maybe *the first electromechanical instrument.* Synthesizers don't typically use tonewheels... Like, would you call a Hammond B3 a "synthesizer?" It's electronic, but that doesn't make it a synthesizer, at least in my opinion.
Anyway I appreciate you politely adding some context, instead of calling me a "liar" or something rude, lol. It's tough to make this type of niche subject matter entertaining, so I'm counting on educated viewers like you to add technical specificity to the conversation.
@@OwenAdamsMusic For the record, Yamaha FM synths don't actually do FM. And yes, the telharmonium was much closer to a synthesizer than the hammond organ. Also, synthesizers are far from niche and there is A LOT you could have researched but did not.
@@bobcole2663 Sigh, another one of these boring troll comments, lol. Yamaha disagrees with you buddy. yamahablackboxes.com/collection/yamaha-dx7-synthesizer/ I'm looking forward to your response video containing your exhaustive list of corrections! Please email me the link at learnsomesocialskills@autism.net
@@OwenAdamsMusic Yamaha was selling products. They realized people were already familiar with the concept of FM in analog synthesizers and decided to market their Phase Modulation tech as Frequency Modulation. Also, please consider the posibility that the reason you see so many 'troll' posts (they are not troll posts, they are valid criticisms) is bacause this video is actually quite bad.
Jimmy Page used an actual Theremin in the song "Whole Lota Love" Led Zep 2
Queen did use synthesizers! The reason they wrote 'no synthesisers' (sic!) on e.g., 'A Night at the Opera' was that the sounds they made were so novel that casual listeners would guess they used synthesizers to produce them. Later in their career, Queen used the DX-7 (e.g., on 'Under Pressure'), and a guitar synthesizer (e.g., 'I Want to Break Free'; probably Brian May's guitar fed through the External Signal Processor of a Korg MS-20). By 1975, the synthesizer was so 'mainstream' in music that many of the best musicians and producers used synthesizers like they would use any other instrument. Examples include Stevie Wonder, ABBA, Toto, Ike & Tina Turner, Ekseption, Weather Report, and Meat Loaf. Synthesizers are just one more range of colours to the sonic palette.
They also used an OB-X (or an OB-XA, now I don't remember exactly wich model they used) in The Game, Flash Gordon and Hot Space
my rule is a instrument is a instrument, anything that can make sound is a instrument if used right. your voice is a instrument, wind chimes is a instrument, water is a instrument.
Nice overview. The RCA Music Synthesizer was polyphonic while the Moog was monophonic, although he popularized it in a way RCA would not. The Hagley Museum has a letter from Moog asking RCA for help in design. My father, Herbert Belar, was the actual inventor; he worked in Olson’s lab.
A mellotron does not play cassette tapes or the tape from a cassette, the tape is a totally different size!
You got me! Fact checked! I might as well delete the video, I compared two tape-playing devices that used different size tape 🙄
Analogic Synthesizers are real instruments! Oh Yes, they are!
What about the Trautonium? This synth had all those modern functions back in 1936
Well it had SOME modern functions, but I wouldn't quite put it on the same level as a Prophet 5! Definitely better than that stupid sackbut, lol. If anyone wants to check it out, here: ua-cam.com/video/-tQQEChMq1A/v-deo.html&ab_channel=Trautonist
Thanks for the comment dude :D
@@OwenAdamsMusic Correct. Thank you for your video and the link as well 🙏🏻✨
Great video introduction idea although you did wash over some key facts that people might really need to know like “what is an oscillator?” and “what is the difference between analogue and digital synthesizers?”. If you’re doing an introduction to the history of a subject, you can’t just assume people know all these words and know what they mean!
Thanks for watching! I covered all of that and more in the waveform synthesis demonstration: ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html This portion is only covering the history. I didn't want it to be too long lol
Great video!! An instrument is simply a tool to help you do a task. A musical instrument is no different. Whether a person plays a traditional acoustic instrument or uses a computer, its still an instrument to make music. Like your video showed, "haters gonna hate!" Its like saying original traditional instruments arent real because humans have voices and should just sing music. People take no issue with technology when it doesnt use electricity. Put a circuit board in it and suddenly its not "real music".
It's funny that you talk about Queen not using synths while showing Freddie Mercury dancing onstage during the era in which they fully embraced using synths.
Lol
Killer Queen, Amazing Rock Band and Electronic act!
You've got the theremin motions reversed. In actuality, horizontal closeness to the vertical omnipolar antenna controls pitch, while vertical closeness to the horizontal dipolar antenna on the other side controls loudness.
The DX 7 came out in the 80s, 83 maybe 82. . The first programmable digital Synth was 1979. The Casio VL tone . primitive but thats was the 1st. A lot of your info was incorrect. But I appreciate the try. No cassettes in the Mellotron either.
I was literally reading sources from all over the internet in a 2 hour presentation, you found 2 things that were still mostly correct that you had to nitpick over, who cares. Go make your own video, genius.
@@OwenAdamsMusic No I wasn’t nitpicking there was a lot of things in there that was in accurate but those were just the last two that I had on my mind like I say I appreciate your time you had in it but there were just a lot of things that were not not accurate. I live those years I know.
@@JohnBassarcticsoundstudios Ok dude, you can be the synth fact-checker lol. But don't imply that my whole show is mostly incorrect when it's not. I'm here to learn like everyone else, I'm a musician not a historian. Anyway the few things you said were wrong weren't even wrong, history is defined by the prominent, widely commercially available stuff, and I said that in the video.
I covered half a century of information, wrote a 6 page script and also did a full demonstration on waveform synthesis, oscillators, filters, envelopes, PLUS 2 live musical performances to show off the timbral and expressive capabilities of analog synthesizers all in the same show. And yes, I used some colorful language and verbal flourishes to help non-musicians simplify complex concepts... but my last 20 years have been spent PLAYING synthesizers, not reading about them in books.
ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html
@@OwenAdamsMusic I’m not a reader either I hate reading but I was 22 when the DX seven came out if you can’t take any constructive criticism then so be it it may be there again the DX seven to come out in the 70s lol have a good day. I just figured a lot of people would catch the DX seven part because it will go down in history probably is one of the most successful synthesizers of all time. I made my living recording and playing music since 1983 I do know a little bit about some things. Not much about anything else but music I do know about.
@@JohnBassarcticsoundstudios That's good, and I do appreciate *constructive* criticism. If you have additional information or context or a personal story about the topic I'd love to hear it, but I don't think you've corrected anything other than me skipping over the terrible Casio digital synth that nobody bought lol. Sorry if I came off harsh, I get a lot of rude comments and I'm the only one defending myself. Much respect to you and your music career and thanks for the comments :D
I think you mixed up aftertouch with velocity sensitivity. The latter generally means that the harder--and therefore faster--you hit a key, the louder the note plays. Aftertouch generally refers to holding a key down after you've hit it, and applying a bit more force to overcome a resistance in order to push the key down farther to modulate the sound in some other way that you've defined. The more force you use, the lower the key moves, and the modulation effect varies accordingly.
Some keyboards have both features, some have neither, and others only have velocity sensitivity.
I'd like to hear someone say they aren't real instruments and attempt to make complex growls and other dubstep noises from regular instruments.
Nice video. Thanks for the research and uncovering very unique early synthesizers. It's curious to hear that Queen was resistant to synths, and in the end they ended up using it on their hit Radio Ga Ga song, where the Jupiter 8 made the arpeggiated bass lines, as well as use of vocoder.
There's no question that synthesizers are instruments by their own merits. Granted: they won't ever sound like any acoustic instrument that whey were trying to mimic in the beginning, but in all honesty the true color and expression of a synthesizer really shows up when you leave the acoustic instruments behind and start exploring all the sonic possibilities that the synthesizer controls offer. Between subtractive synthesis, FM synthesis, additive and sample based synthesis, a whole new palette of sounds becomes possible, and you're right: There's a synth for each kind of music much as there are acoustic instruments as well. A musician who are rejecting a whole "kind" of instruments is really just choosing to paint with less colors in their palette. In the end is a matter of taste, choice, and affinity. Either way, synthesizers have earned their place as instruments of their own merit and expressiveness, not just as instruments that attempt to recreate acoustic sounds.
Awesome comment, great points and you are 100% correct! Yeah I think the anti-synth sentiments were prevalent before they broke through into the mainstream and became widely used. The funny thing is, there are still a ton of people who feel that way today! Mainly classical music snobs and University professors lol.
But in the future I think synthesizers will be just as respected as any other classical instrument, especially once new technologies like the Roli Seaboard and Linnstrument become cheaper and more easily accessable to musicians. The expressive potential of these new controllers is already mindblowing!
Even though the synthesizer has not been around as long as other insruments, I believe that it is a real instrument. Each synthesizer that has been developed over the decades may have some limitations, but the music creativity has unlimited potential! The reason why I have the synthesizer as my favorite instrument, because there are a lot of styles of playing it. Not only that, these styles are impossible to duplicate! That's why I like it, the beauty of the synthesizer at its best! All because of different synthesizer players having different applications in their compositions! Also, the analog synthesizers of the past are making a comeback, both digitally and physically. The Moog Modular System 55 has been revamped, and is being sold again by Moog Music Inc. Same goes for the Minimoog! Now, younger generations will be able to enjoy the Moog products of the past!
If they cannot afford the prices of Moog synthesizers and their competitors, I recommend the synthesizers made by Arturia. They are midi controller synthesizers that run on either standalone synth programs, or VSTs loaded in any DAW! They may be digital program versions of vintage synths, but Arturia has something for everyone! These Arturia products also sound like the real thing! You can also buy new sounds on Arturia's website! For those who can afford Moog products or any other vinatge synthesizer in physical form, I really don't envy you out of pure respect. I tip my hat to you! For those who cannot afford them, I highly recommend buying Arturia products from eBay. That is where I found my two Arturia synthesizers, and they pack quite the punch!
The only spoilers that I can give you, is that (1) you are going to love the prices on eBay, and (2) you are going to love the programs available to them! Check them out at www.arturia.com to find the right synth and programs for it as well. Then, head to eBay to find you want for a lower price! I dare you! Good luck to those who take up my dare! The Arturia synthesizers and programs are that good!
Yeah dude I agree 100%! I also love the Arturia stuff, I think my first VST was the Moog Modular, never had the joy of pluggng hundreds of patch cables into the real thing but it sounds super close to those classic ELP records. VSTs are probably better nowadays too since in a studio setting most instruments are gonna be perfectly tuned - and those analog synths were NOT great at holding their tune! Thanks for watching and another thanks for the Arturia plug!
@@OwenAdamsMusic Thanks for the comment! I happen to have one of the past V Collections. I got it off of eBay for $30, and it is really worth the money! I’m going to wait to upgrade to V Collection 9, since it’s very expensive right now. For now, I have V Collection 8, and it’s really good! The only downside, is that it doesn’t have programs like Augmented Strings. Other than that, I really like it!
@@scurvyjoe269 Yeah those VSTs blew me away when I used em back in like 2009... I got some cracked version from warez . bb, and somehow jury-rigged the audio to record from the standalone program back into Cool Edit Pro, lol.
My new go-to analog synth VST today is probably "The Legend" by Synapse Audio (Reason Plugin), but if I'm feeling more "handsy" I'll use my Nord Rack 2. I did a couple live jams with the Nord synth the same night I recorded Synth History if you're interested:
🟢 ua-cam.com/video/Felm0oR2FGw/v-deo.html
🟢 ua-cam.com/video/tikQzbB-hNM/v-deo.html
Okay, a question for the music purists. A person sits at a keyboard, downloads 15 hot pipe sets from across Europe, and plays, is he/she playing a synth (Moog) or the newest take on the Mellotron? When I was first learning about synthesizers my music teacher taught us sampling was a form of synthesis. I always thought synthesizers took a wave form and modulated it.
So, I'm no expert (you'd have to ask the other commenters below, lol) , but as far as I know, most keyboards & virtual instruments do a little bit of both. The analog purists would say anything digital is disqualified, but I think modulating VCO's and triggering samples are both examples of "synthesizing."
At the end of the day, software can basically replicate the analog circuitry of the classic synths, but there's definitely something special about the detuned/saturated/gnarly quality of old school hardware analog synths.
@@OwenAdamsMusic so true, and thanks. I like how some of the older analog synths sound. Some are just nasty, though.
beautiful , love it man!
Good Vibrations didn't use a Theremin. They used an instrument called an "Tannerin", invented in the 1950s by trombonist Paul Tanner and amateur inventor Bob Whitsell. It uses a horizontal slide to set the pitch and a volume knob operated by the left hand. Notes are gated by touching the slider. The Tannerin put out a pure sine wave so it out Theremined the Theremin in terms of space noises. Theremins have a waveshape more like a distorted triangle.
Another note: Queen did indeed use synthesizers including an Oberheim OB-X, Yamaha DX-7, and a Jupiter 8. Look at Queen - Live At Wembley Stadium (12-7-1986) to watch Brian May pay the keyboard parts in Who Wants to Live Forever on a DX-7.
Actually, Queen "the band" never existed. All Queen albums were in fact written by Donald Marshall and stolen by the Illuminati in order to cover up for their massive underground human cloning operation.
@@OwenAdamsMusic Pretty lame response. You blew it completely in your "research" and this is how your respond after spreading untruths?
@@Peter_S_ Lol, everything I said in the video is 100% true. I said "look up the Beach Boys song if you want to hear what it sounds like" since most normal people have no idea what it is or what it sounds like. It sounds exactly like a theremin to me and everyone else!
Another correction for you, Queen WAS anti-synthesizer and made fun of synths with their album liner notes. Good job debunking things nobody ever said though, lol! Your criticism is completely pointless and factually inaccurate since I never said what you attributed to this video, plus you clearly don't even know about the clones, haha. Some synth expert you are.
🟢 Beach Boys Electro-Theremin - faroutmagazine.co.uk/how-the-beach-boys-created-good-vibrations/
🟢 Queen published "Nobody Played Synthesizer" as a dig against synthesizers - rapidcityjournal.com/news/on-the-record-why-did-queen-put-nobody-played-synthesizer-on-their-albums/article_41fe8def-de8c-51f4-9bc6-25e9ca0c31b3.html
@@OwenAdamsMusic Wow, just wow. Theremins and Tannerins don't sound the same all all. See this video: ua-cam.com/video/-QgTF8p-284/v-deo.html Theremins have more more of a pulse/triangle waveform and sound more like bowed instruments. Theremins don't make sine waves. They don't sound like whistles. You've never owned one or built one I'm guessing? I'm VERY sure I know more Theremin makers than you. You've never played one I'm guessing? Ever looked at a Theremin's output on a scope? No. Theremins are highly expressive instruments. The Tannerin is an electronic slide whistle and it sounds like a whistle with a simple sine wave; not a bowed instrument or a Theremin.
Where do you get the silly idea Queen was anti-synthesizer? (hint: Rolling Stone) You "guessed" they were purists? "Electric keyboards that's a big no-no right?" LOL, no. The Hammond on the debut album and Sheer Heart Attack was played by Freddie Mercury. On Queen II it was played by Brian May. John Deacon played electric piano on A Night at the Opera. They started using modern analog synthesizers in the late 70s when synth music got going and 3/4 of the band played synth on "The Game" which came out before Duran Duran's or Depeche Mode's first album. They were synth lovers and early adopters.
Go back and watch your own video. It's fairly embarrassing how much you're trying to rewrite history here. The liner note came after reviews of Queen's debut including one by Chris Welsh in Melody Maker who said "Great use of synthesizers here!". It was a rebuttal to that comment and it only appeared on the 2nd-5th albums. Queen released an album with modern synths before Howard Jones, or the Thompson Twins, or the majority of synth pop and new wave bands did. The Human League didn't even release "Dare" until more than a year later.
Synth expert? I would let my customers be the judge. I'm a synth designer and my DIY audio electronics forum has been going for over 20 years with well over 40K members and >1M posts in >100K threads. You can find a number of Theremin schematics there. 😉
@@Peter_S_ Dude no one has time to read all that, lol. It's like I said "I'm driving a car," and you're like "no way dude, that's a SUV. You lied" haha. You woulda timestamped the false claim by now if it existed, but you are arguing over nothing. Sorry, oooh I kind-of implied an electro-theremin sounded like a theremin, whoops. Call the synth police 🚨🚨😂
I always ask viewers to put in their 2 cents in the comments cause I'm not a synth expert like you. That means be nice and share your info with links to back up what you say. There's no secret agenda to promote "lies," just like there's no illuminati clones, get it? We're all here to learn and have fun, not hurl insults. Be polite and share your info or get off my channel. I'll read the rest of your psychotic essay later, I got art to create, peace.
A good effort and lots of good information but unfortunately there are lots of omissions, inaccuracies, and misinformation mixed in too. While nobody is perfect (and I know from experience because I think some of my own videos are downright terrible! 😅🤭) it was disappointing to see you often respond to commenters, who were gently providing additions and corrections, in such a defensive and rude manner.
So my policy is, I respond to all additions and corrections with the *same exact* level of politeness as they initiated with. I literally *asked* for corrections in the video, do you have any? But yeah, gentle comments get gentle replies, unreasonable insulters commenters get unreasonable insults. It's called the internet 🤓
Anyway, this video is unscripted - shot in one take - covering 100 years of music history, so please accept my sincerest apologies if I used some colorful language and reductionist explanations.
I appreciate your critique, but my video is not misinformation. This video is us grabbing a beer and hanging out in the studio chatting about synth history. You don't like it, you can bounce. I get to defend my content against trolls, that's the rules. Cheers, and thanks for watching.
@@OwenAdamsMusic I see you've learned little during your time on UA-cam. Oh well.
@@JohnLRice Lol, I'm waiting for you to educate me, sensei.
nice! Paul Shaffer made these videos long before he got the Letterman gig. Thanks for posting them!
What do you mean, he made documentaries? I never knew! Thanks for watching, I just kinda wanted an excuse to show off this cool new analog synth I got at the time lol
The mellotron tape are not loops.
Yeah it's called a capstan, basically a mechanical wheel. You can see them in the video clip I included.
Whoa!!!! Good until you jumped from Moog into the DX7, totally omitting one of the most important synths AND most important people in the industry, right up there with Bob Moog. Please do your research, this is a glaring omission!
Uh, I obviously covered 1 synth from each era to demonstrate the evolution of analog to digital. I jumped over WAY more than one synth, lol. How about *you* do some research and write a comment that adds some additional information or context instead of whining about me skipping one of the 5,000 synthesizers, it's embarrassing. Thanks for watching though!
This is a horrible history lesson. Many inaccuracies and omissions. The only thing that is bizarre is the lack of research done to produce this muck.
Alright well you can go complain to the manufacturers of all the keyboards I talked about cause their websites are where the research came from. I guess I'm a liar, the synth companies are all liars, everyone's a liar except the great Bob Cole! Thanks for your necessary feedback my friend.
@@OwenAdamsMusic Dude, just delete this POS and start over. And consider using better sources than the advertorials found on manufacturers pages. Maybe pick up on some details like what is the difference between analog and digital etc.
Synths are the next step but there are still some roadblocks. Expressiveness is the main problem. There is huge potential but there is a disconnect between our brains and the interface. An acoustic instrument is so tactile, it has a much broad bandwidth for expression, every time you touch the instrument it produces a different sound, you can scratch, scrap, slap, pluck, whip, to get different tones and it is all really intuitive because you exploit the insanely complex motor skills of your hands and fingers. With synths you only use your hands for note on/off info and turn 1 knob at a time. The difference between plucking a string hard and muted is extremely minimal when it comes to motor skills, anybody can do that first try. But if you look at that from a sound design perspective the difference between a loud open string and a muted string are like 5 separate parameters, volume, timbre, pitch and the envelopes of them all. To alternate between them in 1 second is impossible on a synth while on a stringed instrument it is super easy. Let alone if you include bends, vibrato, accents and phrasing all at the same time.
I believe that is where synths still fall short and why many people still find them to sound robotic and lifeless.
Another big problem is that synths in essence don’t produce sounds. In essence a synth is just a control surface to play a speaker. The sound of a string, membrane or surface producing a tone still sounds so different from a speaker reproducing the same waveforms. The speaker isn’t really considered to be part of electronic instruments while essentially it is the main instrument. I think there is a lot of room for innovation and experimentation. Why should it always be a membrane that vibrates that produces the sound of a synth? The synth just sends voltage, and that voltage just needs to vibrate something in the physical world to produce a sound.
You make some good points! But by that logic, a piano also lacks expression since you can only hit 10 keys at a time (or 15 if you're Cory Henry). No vibrato or portamento or anything! I think with automation, MIDI routing, and new technologies like the Linnstrument, expressive capabilities of synthesizers today far outweigh acoustic instruments!
I would also consider oscillator frequencies amplified by a speaker just as acoustic, in the physics sense, as a string's frequency amplified by a resonant chamber in a violin or guitar. Plus, unless you have 50 violin players playing the same part simultaneously, you'll need an amplifier for a single violin to be heard in any physical space larger than your bedroom.
Thanks for the great comment, I would definitely recommend checking out the Linnstrument and playing one for yourself - if they ever allow stuff like the NAMM show again, lol. It's WAY cooler than the Roli Seaboard as far as expression goes!
@@myousickoflife Oh I own several analog synths, that is why my opinion is informed and not just random butthurt.
@@LesterBrunt If you care about expressiveness, look up Hugh Le Caine that was his main concern. The information in this video was wrong about the Electronic Sackbut he invented.
Also nice MS20!
Elon Musk is working on that...
The envelope control ADSR attack, decay, sustain, and release is quite the expressive filter. Wendy Carlos was a master user and knew exactly how to use it.
Very interesting. I don't think it's too surprising the the RCA Mark 2 used punch cards since that was basically the same technology that player pianos used at the time. It would've made for some interesting possibilities I think since it wouldn't be limited by the abilities of a human player, kind of like the "Black Midi' movement of the 2000s. XD
RE Queen, I heard that when John Deacon wrote "You're my Best Friend" and wanted to use a synth keyboard that Freddie refused to play it, and he had to learn how to play it himself. Freddie still did the vocals though, so I don't think he could've been too upset over it.
cool talk, but it's odd that you speak about instruments but there's no sound of them
This is just the history! The uncut version of this show was like over hours so I split it up into parts.
🟢 Synth control demonstration: ua-cam.com/video/MNEmEzkGaiY/v-deo.html
🟢 Playing the Nord Lead synth in an original instrumental track: ua-cam.com/video/tikQzbB-hNM/v-deo.html
Analog synths are not basically a computer. They may have some computer functionality (storing presets or dco's, etc.) but it's peripheral not integral.
Never said it was a computer! Thanks for the nitpick bro.
Actually they are. Before digital computers, like we have today, they had analog computers (google it). They basically looked like modular synthesizers, or rather it is modular synthesizers that look like analog computers, but instead of VCA, VCO, VCF, etc, the modules do addition, multiplication, integration, roots, differentiation, logarithm, and other matematical functions. It was used to solve dynamic mathematical problems, like stability of bridges, trajection of missiles, weather forecasts, and the like.
DX7 Beaty HEAVY? What?
What in the world are you trying to say? lol
Hopefully no one uses this video for teaching. So much wrong.
Lol yeah hopefully not.
FFS so much wrongness, so many mistakes and misconceptions. You just can't be bothered to research your topic properly.
Got an example instead of pis$y attitude, genius?