Wiardgroup

> A keyboard is essentially a voltage divider and consequently
> requires the oscillator to track accurately. With a sequencer,
> however, you adust the voltage of each stage or key individually.
> That's why even the cheapest oscillator can be used.
That works if you're using one oscillator only (which I rarely find myself
doing). If you use more than one oscillator, both have to track successfully
AND the sequencer has to spit out accurate voltages. In fact my Steiner
Parker Synthacon (with built in keyboard) is A LOT more problematic
tuning-wise than my Buchla.
The reason I don't use 'automatic control' with my Buchla is I sold all of
my analogue sequencers a couple of years ago because I just wasn't using
them enough.
>. I'm sure melodic, played-by-a-human stuff is
> out there, but I've yet to hear it.  Still waiting for Switched-On
> Buchla and The Well Tempered Wiard.   :-)  Could be a long wait.
I don't think you need to keep bringing up 'The Well Tempered..' or
'Switched On....', in my opinion they were the WORST thing that ever
happened to modular synthesisers. Although I agree, you should be able to
play melodic, western tunings on a Buchla or Moog, to concentrate on
mimicking classical instruments is to miss about 90% of the synthesisers
potential. 
When dance music is mentioned, the term 'Techno' most often rears it's head.
The Urban/Dance music genre has now splintered in a myriad of directions. I
know a few musicians personally in the genre who use Pro Tools (not known
for it's midi/sequencing features) and who play everything by hand, after
which they will cut and paste the phrases in a repetitive fashion (ala dance
music convention). The purely programmed element still exists in the drums
and percussion, but bands like Groove Armada, Jazzanova and Unkle actually
sound more like BANDS than a room full of synthesisers and sequencers
'untouched by human hands'.
> It would be nice 
> if more people worked that way (even nicer if they ditched
> electronic altogether), but schedules don't allow it in most cases.
I actually think budgets are MUCH the bigger issue.
In the 70's it was the norm to use groups of musicians (like orchestras).
When I first started 12 years ago, film directors and production companies
actually saw it as a mark of quality if the music score had an obvious live,
human sound to it. Nowadays, especially since 'reality tv' and the success
of pop music on Hollywood film soundtracks, budgeting for original music is
viewed almost as folly by many in the industry.
In the UK, tv companies can use pre-recorded music with very little
financial outlay and merely by signing a few release forms. I now find
myself not competing with Hans Zimmer or Elliot Gouldentahl, but Arvo Part,
Steve Reich and Miles Davis...............composers not only of genius, but
ones who had unlimited time and resources in which to produce their
recordings.
I liked Gary's comments.
It IS harder to justify spending a day building up an analogue soundscape
when I can dial one up almost instantly from 'Atmosphere' (Spectrasonics),
especially as I'm almost always working effectively for $200 a day. I do it
mostly out of personal pride, for my own satisfaction, but also as Gary, Les
and myself have already pointed out, it's what separates you out from the
crowd and is therefore good for business.
>> In fact, despite his enormous modular synth walls, I'm yet to hear
> a distinctive Hans Zimmer score.<
> 
> Window dressing.  But what about his Prince of Egypt score?  That is
> beautiful!
I was talking about 'distinctive', especially in terms of his VAST modular
synth collection. I actually like 'The Thin Red Line' (have I got that
right?), but there's nothing that distinguishes that from any other
Hollywood film score, other than some very good writing.
CW