11 Oct
2022
11 Oct
'22
1:52 a.m.
Hello Music and Synth lovers,
every Synth Nerd has to do a "Switched-on" track at least once, I guess.
Since my sister married recently again, this was the perfect opportunity
for me to see what I could do with just one monophonic analog
synthesizer module from Behringer for my interpretation of Bach's famous
"Air" from BWV 1068.
Listen to or download the track from my Nextcloud instance:
* https://0x20.eu/nc/s/NjC7W9xp5Sk94Jj (FLAC)
* https://0x20.eu/nc/s/xEdXajYS5EBaDNW (Ogg Vorbis)
Listen on or download from Soundcloud:
*https://soundcloud.com/spotlightkid/synthetic-air-on-a-b-thing
(to download, click on "More" under the comment entry field and select
the download option)
I recorded this with Ardour 6 on Manjaro Linux, track by track, first as
MIDI and then replayed and recorded as audio, so I could ride the filter
cutoff or other parameters during recording. Then I exported the stems
of all audio tracks, re-imported them into a a new Ardour session and
mixed it there, using a 4-band EQ, a compressor and several reverb sends
on each track, chorus and low-/highpass filter on a few track, as well
as a multi-band compressor and EQ on the master bus.
Equipment used:
- Behringer Pro-One
- Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 Mk 1
- Tuxedo Laptop with AMD Ryzen 7
- AKG K240 Headphones
Software used:
- Ardour 6
- ACE Compressor
- Calf Multiband compressor
- EQ4N EQ
. Glame High-/Lowpass Filter
- LSP Impulse Reverb Stereo
- SamplicityM7 Impulse Response "Boston Hall A"
- CAP PlateX2 Reverb
- YK Chorus
- x42-dpl Limiter
Share & Enjoy
Chris aka "Spotlight Kyd"
11 Oct
11 Oct
2:57 a.m.
Hello Christopher!
Oct 10 2022, Christopher Arndt has written:
...
* https://0x20.eu/nc/s/NjC7W9xp5Sk94Jj (FLAC)
...
this is a beautiful rendition of the iece. You brought out a very lovely
side in that synth. Thanks for also listing all the equipment and
software used. I hope your sister enjoyed it.
Best wishes,
Jeanette
--
* Website: http://juliencoder.de - for summer is a state of sound
* Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMS4rfGrTwz8W7jhC1Jnv7g
* Audiobombs: https://www.audiobombs.com/users/jeanette_c
* GitHub: https://github.com/jeanette-c
All I need is time
A moment that is mine
While I'm in between <3
(Britney Spears)
3:12 a.m.
Christopher Arndt <chris(a)chrisarndt.de> writes:
Hello Music and Synth lovers,
every Synth Nerd has to do a "Switched-on" track at least once, I
guess. Since my sister married recently again, this was the perfect
opportunity for me to see what I could do with just one monophonic
analog synthesizer module from Behringer for my interpretation of
Bach's famous "Air" from BWV 1068.
Listen to or download the track from my Nextcloud instance:
* https://0x20.eu/nc/s/NjC7W9xp5Sk94Jj (FLAC)
* https://0x20.eu/nc/s/xEdXajYS5EBaDNW (Ogg Vorbis)
Listen on or download from Soundcloud:
*https://soundcloud.com/spotlightkid/synthetic-air-on-a-b-thing
(to download, click on "More" under the comment entry field and select
the download option)
I recorded this with Ardour 6 on Manjaro Linux, track by track, first
as MIDI and then replayed and recorded as audio, so I could ride the
filter cutoff or other parameters during recording. Then I exported
the stems of all audio tracks, re-imported them into a a new Ardour
session and mixed it there, using a 4-band EQ, a compressor and
several reverb sends on each track, chorus and low-/highpass filter on
a few track, as well as a multi-band compressor and EQ on the master
bus.
Equipment used:
- Behringer Pro-One
- Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 Mk 1
- Tuxedo Laptop with AMD Ryzen 7
- AKG K240 Headphones
Software used:
- Ardour 6
- ACE Compressor
- Calf Multiband compressor
- EQ4N EQ
. Glame High-/Lowpass Filter
- LSP Impulse Reverb Stereo
- SamplicityM7 Impulse Response "Boston Hall A"
- CAP PlateX2 Reverb
- YK Chorus
- x42-dpl Limiter
Ok, full disclosure: violin and accordion player
(<https://youtu.be/9kHxQTB59bQ>, looks like everyone's sister is wedded
to the same music). As accordionist, I may be suffering from glissando
envy, but as violin player I am not unaccustomed to it.
First, thanks for _not_ using the "Air on a G string" compaction to work
with in spite of your piece's title, but rather the original ensemble
setting of the Air (BTW, you gotta love the economic use of paper in the
autograph).
That being said, apart from the distraction of the wide glissando swings
itself, I find that their target pitch is quite hit and miss about
settling in a manner perceived convincingly as being on-beat (it would
probably take an inordinate amount of practice to get this just so).
For me, that distracts from the measured solemnity of the piece and
makes it swim about the bass part.
For this particular recording, I find that you have much too much of a
pause between first and second halves (a bit like "Must I?" "Please,
James." "Very well, Miss Sophie."). There is no full stop between the
two. Then there is some rather large slowdown in the first half of the
first repetition of the second half apparently originating from the bass
part that does not seem to serve any purpose.
Apropos: what happened to the second repetition of the second part? The
piece just ends after the first repetition.
Of course it is easy for me to complain when all it takes for me to redo
a piece is to record for 5 minutes and then curse and repeat for three
days. And that while missing out on the viola part.
All the best
--
David Kastrup
3:50 a.m.
Am 11.10.22 um 01:12 schrieb David Kastrup:
First, thanks for _not_ using the "Air on a G
string" compaction
I think magic of the piece is its fugue-ness, so it was a deliberate choice.
The title comes from the (probably silly) desire to include some kind of
pun on the Behringer name :)
For the rest you're hitting exactly on the points I'm also not 100%
pleased with.
For me, that distracts from the measured solemnity of
the piece and
makes it swim about the bass part.
The (maybe) over-use of portamento on most patches for the upper three
voices is due to the monophonic nature of the synth. It allows to play
it with a sort of legato feel, while still having a re-triggering
envelope, which is needed to give each note some shape and not have the
third, forth, etc. note in a legato line degrade into basically a
sine-wave, due to the filter being too closed. If the portamento time is
too short, the retriggering of the envelopes will be too obvious and it
will not sound like a string or woodwind instrument anymore, but like
some kind of keys instrument.
For this particular recording, I find that you have
much too much of a
pause between first and second halve
Yes, I'm conscious that this a rather long pause and I thought about
halving it, but then decided to leave it like that, because I like the
second half of the composition a lot better and wanted to have it "stand
on its own".
Then there is some rather large slowdown [...] that
does not seem to
serve any purpose.
That is the point were the build up to the crescendo begins, and to me
marks a definite division in the second part. Maybe it was done a bit
clumsily, I agree.
Apropos: what happened to the second repetition of the
second part?
I felt that the piece was already long enough and extending it to >5
minutes would wear out most casual listeners. If I had chosen a faster
tempo, I would have probably kept it. Also, it meant that I had to track
12 bars times 15 voices less and I was already late in finishing the
piece ;)
Of course it is easy for me to complain
And I'm aware that with these re-interpretations of famous pieces you
are always faced with one of the following:
- If you stick close to the original, as a I did, you will be measured
against beloved performances from the past and the perception that
people have how this piece "should" sound.
- If you radically change aspects of the piece (instrumentation, rhythm,
style etc.), you probably loose half of the audience from the start.
;-)
Chris
5:45 a.m.
Christopher Arndt <chris(a)chrisarndt.de> writes:
But it does not start with a starting harmony. It feels like starting a
chapter with "But".
Why would you slow down in a buildup?
Well, if you don't announce its end prematurely 3 times by a large
fermata, they might not be disappointed by its continuation...
Uh, you are pontificating to someone who has played this on accordion.
Soundwise your rendition is closer to strings than mine.
Am 11.10.22 um 01:12 schrieb David Kastrup:
Well, as I said: the main problem for me is not the portamento as such
(which is a style choice) but the perceived lack of consistency about
when it starts and particularly when it settles in this performance.
As an analogy, when watching Slow Fox competitions, it can be puzzling
to figure out the relation between the music and the dancers' movements
(it's not the start or end of a step that is on the beat but the moment
where the feet pass), but there is a relation and a feeling of
consistency even if you cannot put your finger on it, and you can lean
into that feeling. I don't get a dependent hang of such a relation from
this rendition.
First, thanks for _not_ using the "Air on a
G string" compaction
I think magic of the piece is its fugue-ness, so it was a deliberate choice.
The title comes from the (probably silly) desire to include some kind
of pun on the Behringer name :)
For the rest you're hitting exactly on the points I'm also not 100%
pleased with.
For me, that distracts from the measured
solemnity of the piece and
makes it swim about the bass part.
The (maybe) over-use of portamento on most patches for the upper three
voices is due to the monophonic nature of the synth. It allows to play
it with a sort of legato feel, while still having a re-triggering
envelope, which is needed to give each note some shape and not have
the third, forth, etc. note in a legato line degrade into basically a
sine-wave, due to the filter being too closed. If the portamento time
is too short, the retriggering of the envelopes will be too obvious
and it will not sound like a string or woodwind instrument anymore,
but like some kind of keys instrument. For this
particular recording, I find that you have much too much of a
pause between first and second halve
Yes, I'm conscious that this a rather long pause and I thought about
halving it, but then decided to leave it like that, because I like the
second half of the composition a lot better and wanted to have it
"stand on its own". Then there is
some rather large slowdown [...] that does not seem to
serve any purpose.
That is the point were the build up to the crescendo begins, and to me
marks a definite division in the second part. Maybe it was done a bit
clumsily, I agree. Apropos: what
happened to the second repetition of the second part?
I felt that the piece was already long enough and extending it to >5
minutes would wear out most casual listeners. If I had chosen a faster tempo, I would have probably
kept it.
I don't think that the basic underlying pace I picked with my sister's
wedding congregation was significantly faster. And it's one occasion
where few people dare to throw rotten tomatoes.
Also, it meant that I had to track 12 bars times 15
voices less and I
was already late in finishing the piece ;)
15 voices? How did you put them together from 4 in the score?
Of course it
is easy for me to complain
And I'm aware that with these re-interpretations of famous pieces you
are always faced with one of the following:
- If you stick close to the original, as a I did, you will be measured
against beloved performances from the past and the perception that
people have how this piece "should" sound. - If you radically change aspects of the piece
(instrumentation,
rhythm, style etc.), you probably loose half of the audience from
the start.
;-)
If you create something self-consistent and compelling, they'll stick
around.
Here is a rendition on glissando synth
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFaMyB_CZGw> I can get to better grips
with. Now I consider it likely that it's a mechanical performance or at
least done to a metronome click track due to the overconsistent speed
(it's almost cut off at the end). Still, overall it works for me and
doesn't have the same kind of feeling of the melody line swimming around
the bass.
--
David Kastrup
6:08 a.m.
Am 11.10.22 um 03:45 schrieb David Kastrup:
15 voices? How did you put them together from 4 in
the score?
Lots of unisono with different patches, e.g. 1st and 2nd voice played
with two different string/synth patches, flute and horn doubling the 1st
voice at different stretches, cello to doubling the 3rd voice and the
bass, and so on...
Here is a rendition on glissando synth I can get to
better grips
with. Now I consider it likely that it's a mechanical performance
Yeah, that is totally just a MIDI file rendered, I'm pretty sure.
Still, overall it works for me
I find it pretty boring, tbh.
Trying not to get too defensive, but I suspect that our aesthetics
differ here. I was definitely going for a "human feel", thatswhy I
played everything by hand and corrected only very glaring timing errors
in the MIDI later. It may well be, that this turned too sloppy for your
taste. I'm a synth nerd and song writer / producer first, not a great
player, so its totally possible that I did not reach a level of cohesion
some discerning listeners expect.
Chris
4:03 p.m.
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 01:50:30AM +0200, Christopher Arndt wrote:
The (maybe) over-use of portamento on most patches for
the upper three
voices is due to the monophonic nature of the synth. It allows to play it
with a sort of legato feel,
There is really no place for sliding notes here unless you want to
create a parody. Portamento and legato are different things, and even
the latter is not mandated all the time for this piece.
And surely even on a monophonic synth pitch and filter/gain modulation
can be controlled separately.
Ciao,
--
FA
775
days inactive
776
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Christopher Arndt -
David Kastrup -
Fons Adriaensen -
Jeanette C.