Hi,
1) This is how I believe it to be. Maybe Peter Vogel can elaborate on this one? It is a breathy sample, probably a characteristic of her voice. Some voices are breathy by nature are and maybe only a portion of the recording was used, missing out the attack possibly? It was 8 bit and I believe this sample was on the original Fairlight CMI Series I Factory Discs which had a very small sampling bandwidth. I doubt this was recorded in studio / lab conditions and if she sung into it again, wouldn't quite be the same. Maybe a fluke which got captured and remembered forever.
2) The light pen was used to get you around the Fairlight function, as well as editing. It does more or less what a computer Mouse does now, just a lot more hi tech back in the day (not forgetting cool). Using this in real-time, you can edit parameters (along with the keyboard for data entry), but "pitch shifting" it this way would just be the same way as playing it on different notes on the music keyboard., i.e. playback rate... If you do a search on www.youtube.com for Fairlight, there are enough examples to show you what can be done using the Light Pen. Drawing waveforms, accessing pages, clicking on parameters, etc.
3) These could've been samples from factory libraries or original samples, but there's no real way of telling if the source is a Fairlight. Could be Emulator, Akai, Synclavier or any other sampler from around that time. Even some of the typically 'Fairlight' samples got sampled over to other samplers / libraries.
I don't think people experimented any more or less in them days than they do today. Things are a lot easier now and I think what separates the current geniuses from the average Joe Bloggs is their creativity, experimentation and lust for something different. Just about anyone can get setup in this day and age, with very little outlay. In those days, it was different, so people that got into it, yearned to do it and had the drive, talent and creativity to make it work. It also took a lot longer to produce a record in those days.
As to price, it's really hard to say. It all depends on spec, condition, history and how much the buyer is willing to pay. They're up on eBay from time to time. I used to search everyday and keep an eye out on what these things bring. What does it bring in terms of use? Authenticity, a way to work that is different and most importantly... superior sound quality. It sounds amazing and nothing really (dare I say Syncalavier) sounds like it.
I'm not sure if you're aware, but there are a few other variants of Fairlight. Series I, II, IIx and III. The III being the most technically advanced and way ahead of any technology at that time. There's also the MFX advancements of these too. I have a Series III (rev 9.34 machine), which uses a G-Pen instead of a Light Pen, is 16 bit, up to 100kHz sample rate, stereo sampling, 16 voices opposed to 8, etc, etc. Overall the differences are HUGE. Google the specs. There's a lot of info out there.
Hope this helps...
Kind regards,
Peter
--- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Connelly"
wrote:
>
> Hi and welcome to the group.
Thanks!
> 1) AFAIK this was recorded direct using a Fairlight employee, called
Sarah
> Cohen
So it's just Sarah singing "aaaaaah" into a mic? No manipulation,
editing or anything?
Is it the 8 bit sampling and the rest of the Fairlight circuitry
itself that changes the voice to become "airy" and "synthesized"?
> 2)
> on the example you supplied just sounds like a voice played at a low
pitch,
> with added Chorus or something.
I've heard similar voices on several recordings where I think the
musician has a Fairlight.
Using the light-pen and the edit functions, can sounds be pitch-shifted?
Excuse my ignorance (again), but can someone please explain to me what
the light-pen/edit functions on the Fairlight can do?
Is anything like that available on modern computer systems? All I've
ever edited when it comes to audio waveforms is cutting/splicing and
cropping.
> 3) Quite possibly Fairlight manipulated, but also quite possible
these drums
> came from their original source.
No, I was talking about the percussively-played "ahhh" voice, not the
drums from my example (drums1.mp3)
> The voice in example Voice3.mp3 sounds like
> the same breathy Fairlight voice but treat with effects. It's easy
to forget
> a lot of artists / producers sampled their own sounds and / or
manipulated
> factory samples with external effects, sometime beyond point of
recognition.
I have to start doing some serious experimenting when I get my gear
set up (no room here right now).
I believe people were much better at experimenting back in the days
when all of this technology was new (and much more expensive and out
of reach to most people than now), as opposed to today when people
seldom use samplers for anything else than playing back the
bog-standard instruments that others have made.
But back to the Fairlight; is there a library called "farrar" for it?
I've heard that some of the sounds in my examples may come from it,
but I don't know if it's a Fairlight library, Emulator II or what.
> First opportunity you can get one of these, go for it. They're
awesome and
> inspiring to work with.
How much do they go for these days?
Apart from the collector's appeal, what does a Fairlight have going
for itself these days? Should I see it more a "sampling synthesizer
workstation" than a sampler (where the latter is supposed to duplicate
as close to the original as possible, the sampled sound)?