Synth-DIY Yahoo! Groups Archives

Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

2005-02-15 by Daniel J. Litwin

As I may have mentioned in an earlier post, I am curious if anyone knows of 
any appreciable sound differences between an Emax 1 and Emax 2.

For that matter, how do either of these compare to a real Emulator II unit?

I am still looking for an Emax I unit.  I recently have been scammed out of 
$$ on Ebay because I paid but got no Emax I sent.  Still working on that 
one....

I do see more Emax 2 units on Ebay, and the SCSI does interest me.  I don't 
care about the memory limitation - I'm looking for a low-fi "Depeche 
Mode"-type sound.  hence, the above part about the "real" Emulator II.  I 
know they used those quite a bit.

Any help would be most appreciated, as well as any offers for a synth.

-Dan

Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

2005-02-15 by John Silveria

I can say that in a recording studio enviroment the real difference in units is the filter. It 
really is noticeable. The filter on the Emax is a true analog filter, it has a definite warmth 
and punch that the Emax II does not have. The Emax II sounds a cleaner which means it 
sounds a little thinner.

the Emax was designed to primarily be an affordable solution to the Emulator II. I've 
never personally been able to play an Emulator II, but I think it's safe to assume that with 
the Emulator being made from primarily "off the shelf" parts as compared to the Emax 
using specific E-mu designed hardware the Emax would have some distinct sound and 
reliability advantages. 

Certainly most people say and Emulator II or Emax will give you that "Depeche Mode 
type sound" But the reality is there isn't a sampler that has the DM sound, they used just 
about every sampler out there while recording. From the big boys of the era the 
Synclavier and Fairlight to every E-mu and most Akai's as well, even rare samplers like 
the Prophet 2000. It's not really the sampler that makes the difference for DM, but rather 
what and how they sampled. Unlike a lot of artists at the time who thought samplers were 
great for recreating "real instruments" DM always saw a sampler as being a great way of 
incorporating "found sound" samples into their music. A technique that comes from 
"musique concrete" (been a long time hope I spelled that hope it's right). A song like 
"Master and Servant" has (if memory serves me) has over 100 different samples on it 
from water drops to jack hammers and cement mixers (and of course the notorious 
"martin getting spanked). DM would take recorders out into construction sites record 
interesting sounds, then run them through outboard processing like compression, delay, 
reverb... blah blah blah, record them to tape then sample the end result. It's fairly easy to 
get DM-type sounds out of any sampler, just focus on sampling metallic objects and 
percussive sounds. Of course, using those sounds in the same types of way DM did is a 
big part of it as well.

just my opinion :)

On 14 Feb 2005 at 20:29, Daniel J. Litwin spoke unto me:  

>  As I may have mentioned in an earlier post, I am curious if anyone knows of
> any appreciable sound differences between an Emax 1 and Emax 2. 
> 
> For that matter, how do either of these compare to a real Emulator II unit? 
> 
> I am still looking for an Emax I unit.  I recently have been scammed
> out of $$ on Ebay because I paid but got no Emax I sent.  Still
> working on that one....
> 
> I do see more Emax 2 units on Ebay, and the SCSI does interest me.  I
> don't care about the memory limitation - I'm looking for a low-fi
> "Depeche Mode"-type sound.  hence, the above part about the "real"
> Emulator II.  I know they used those quite a bit.
> 
> Any help would be most appreciated, as well as any offers for a synth.
> 
> -Dan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~--> In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own
> computers. At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/c9hWNA/3MnJAA/n1hLAA/QnLolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------~-
> > 
> 
> Emax and Emax II User's Group Website
> 
> http://www.silveriafamily.com 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 


-- 
                          John Silveria II
                   AIM & Yahoo! Messenger: EmaxJS
                        MSN: emaxjs@...
     The Silveria Family Website & Emax and Emax II User's Group
                    http://www.silveriafamily.com

Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

2005-02-17 by Daniel J. Litwin

Agreed.  I've read quite a bit on all bits of gear DM have used over the years, as well as the help from people like Dan Miller and Flood, etc.  I got a modest studio so far, but don't have any stuff from Emu yet.

I particularly like the vintage sound on early DM recordings and thought either the Emax or a real Emulator II would be a nice addition.  I've always heard good things about the Emu filters (at least on early kit), so the Emax is what I was leaning towards.  I think it would be great to have a true Emulator II, but they are hard to come by nowadays.

I do have an Akai S600 which I love, but it still sounds too "clean" for some things I'm doing lately in the studio.

I wish I had a good construction yard around me somewhere.  I love the clanks and klunks off DM's Some Great Reward era pieces.  Reminds me of Kraftwerk.

Thank,
Dan

Show quoted textHide quoted text

----- Original Message -----
From: John Silveria
To: emax@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

I can say that in a recording studio enviroment the real difference in units is the filter. It
really is noticeable. The filter on the Emax is a true analog filter, it has a definite warmth
and punch that the Emax II does not have. The Emax II sounds a cleaner which means it
sounds a little thinner.

the Emax was designed to primarily be an affordable solution to the Emulator II. I've
never personally been able to play an Emulator II, but I think it's safe to assume that with
the Emulator being made from primarily "off the shelf" parts as compared to the Emax
using specific E-mu designed hardware the Emax would have some distinct sound and
reliability advantages.

Certainly most people say and Emulator II or Emax will give you that "Depeche Mode
type sound" But the reality is there isn't a sampler that has the DM sound, they used just
about every sampler out there while recording. From the big boys of the era the
Synclavier and Fairlight to every E-mu and most Akai's as well, even rare samplers like
the Prophet 2000. It's not really the sampler that makes the difference for DM, but rather
what and how they sampled. Unlike a lot of artists at the time who thought samplers were
great for recreating "real instruments" DM always saw a sampler as being a great way of
incorporating "found sound" samples into their music. A technique that comes from
"musique concrete" (been a long time hope I spelled that hope it's right). A song like
"Master and Servant" has (if memory serves me) has over 100 different samples on it
from water drops to jack hammers and cement mixers (and of course the notorious
"martin getting spanked). DM would take recorders out into construction sites record
interesting sounds, then run them through outboard processing like compression, delay,
reverb... blah blah blah, record them to tape then sample the end result. It's fairly easy to
get DM-type sounds out of any sampler, just focus on sampling metallic objects and
percussive sounds. Of course, using those sounds in the same types of way DM did is a
big part of it as well.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

2005-02-17 by elmacaco

The emax sounds great.  even the aliasing is musical when you sample at a low rate and detune.

Show quoted textHide quoted text

----- Original Message -----
From: Daniel J. Litwin
To: emax@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

Agreed. I've read quite a bit on all bits of gear DM have used over the years, as well as the help from people like Dan Miller and Flood, etc. I got a modest studio so far, but don't have any stuff from Emu yet.

I particularly like the vintage sound on early DM recordings and thought either the Emax or a real Emulator II would be a nice addition. I've always heard good things about the Emu filters (at least on early kit), so the Emax is what I was leaning towards. I think it would be great to have a true Emulator II, but they are hard to come by nowadays.

I do have an Akai S600 which I love, but it still sounds too "clean" for some things I'm doing lately in the studio.

I wish I had a good construction yard around me somewhere. I love the clanks and klunks off DM's Some Great Reward era pieces. Reminds me of Kraftwerk.

Thank,
Dan

----- Original Message -----
From: John Silveria
To: emax@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [emax] Version 1 vs Version 2 sound differences

I can say that in a recording studio enviroment the real difference in units is the filter. It
really is noticeable. The filter on the Emax is a true analog filter, it has a definite warmth
and punch that the Emax II does not have. The Emax II sounds a cleaner which means it
sounds a little thinner.

the Emax was designed to primarily be an affordable solution to the Emulator II. I've
never personally been able to play an Emulator II, but I think it's safe to assume that with
the Emulator being made from primarily "off the shelf" parts as compared to the Emax
using specific E-mu designed hardware the Emax would have some distinct sound and
reliability advantages.

Certainly most people say and Emulator II or Emax will give you that "Depeche Mode
type sound" But the reality is there isn't a sampler that has the DM sound, they used just
about every sampler out there while recording. From the big boys of the era the
Synclavier and Fairlight to every E-mu and most Akai's as well, even rare samplers like
the Prophet 2000. It's not really the sampler that makes the difference for DM, but rather
what and how they sampled. Unlike a lot of artists at the time who thought samplers were
great for recreating "real instruments" DM always saw a sampler as being a great way of
incorporating "found sound" samples into their music. A technique that comes from
"musique concrete" (been a long time hope I spelled that hope it's right). A song like
"Master and Servant" has (if memory serves me) has over 100 different samples on it
from water drops to jack hammers and cement mixers (and of course the notorious
"martin getting spanked). DM would take recorders out into construction sites record
interesting sounds, then run them through outboard processing like compression, delay,
reverb... blah blah blah, record them to tape then sample the end result. It's fairly easy to
get DM-type sounds out of any sampler, just focus on sampling metallic objects and
percussive sounds. Of course, using those sounds in the same types of way DM did is a
big part of it as well.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Emax and Emax II User's Group Website

http://www.silveriafamily.com

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/emax/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
emax-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]