Analog Synths sound dated?

^ depends on what standards you set yourself for enjoying the music you listen too. I am fond of the analog sound but I still get there listening to digital too and don't sweat if the music is more compressed in nature. Besides all the comments around excellent prog sounding dated does not work for me. The classic prog albums of any era or decade do not sound dated. When I listen to DSOTM or the Lamb for example the datestamp of release date is irrelevant, classics will never age. So all this debate amounts to subjective opinions really especially when you can get a kick out Deadwing or Remain In Light regardless of media format.

I may be a bit ahead of the times.. but to me.. digital music sounds very dated.  Modern production values using pro tools and other techy "fix all" post recording software intervention sounds sterile and over produced.  Bands are ashamed to release material that sounds natural and organic.  The quest for perfection is now attainable for anyone with cubase in their apartment with a drum sampler, a keyboard with 8000 patches and one guitar and bass with endless amp modeling plugins. 

Staying on topic here.. the keyboard is the easiest thing to midi or attach a new sound to a key,or layers etc. 

The problem is that good art is about the imperfections as much as the perfection.  You need both.. you need a balance of skill but feel. Tight but open and able to breath.  Can one imagine a drummer not on a click track.  What a nightmare in post production not being able to quantize or sync to.

The older keyboards had problems.. but they often also had tubes in them and other unstable components like tape reels or analog oscillators.  Personality.. temperamental... things that also invoke human emotion... like frustration, anger, of the joy of "my gear is actually working tonight"

Analog tape machines are still a better way to record on many levels.  If not for the simple fact it's limitations keep the artist more honest.  "Do I really need to nail this live in the studio" "Really?  no way to fix my incompetence?  Am I really going to have to shed and learn my instrument?"

1975 answer... sorry .. but YES!

2012 answer.. that's fine.. no worries, we'll fix that up for you with no problem, just another 45 minutes of studio time.

Prog took a dive, not because Punk rock arrived.. but because Prog bands stopped making great albums.. and the ones that came along later like Marillion and Spock's Beard helped in a big way... but didn't "out prog" their forefathers.

Look what happened to the keyboard picture. 
How is "Love Beach" compared to "Tarkus"
"Tormato" compared to "Close to the Edge"
"Giant for a Day" compared to "Power and the Glory"
We can't Dance" compared to "Foxtrot"

While hindsight is everything.. it's more the keyboard sounds that caramelized the music than guitar, bass or drum sounds.. until of course the sampled drums arrived.

Just because you can do it ....doesn't mean you should.
This speaks for the digital revolution as well.

I love roots prog.. and I love early Black Sabbath.. but I don't like prog metal.  It lacks emotional dimension and the playing is far to robotic.  I should like it.. I like prog and Sabbath.  I like early Rush.  I could not be more ripe for a proper prog metal release.. but I don't like any of it.  I think a lot has to do with the keyboard sounds and how they are integrated.

Deep Purple had heavy sounding keys.. and Lord and Blackmore knew how to blend that into a special sonic tonic.
I don't feel that at all with Dream Theater.. but I should.. the playing is much more technically slick.. and it's prog type playing.. but what is the missing ingredient (s)? Why does it not move me?  Why was I yawning all through their set in San Francisco this last summer?  I shouldn't. 

I put a lot of effort getting my guitar to sound like an analog synth. I put zero effort into getting it to sound like an 80s digital synth.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Synths from the 80's sound dated.

Apologies if this point has been made already, but surely anyone recording music thinks merely in terms of not sounding dated at that time. 
They don't think "oh dear, this will sound very dated in thirty years time" or whatever.  Caruso didn't sound dated in 1904, he was the first ever million-selling act.  He didn't think about sounding dated thirty years later in 1934. And I'm sure the 1970s prog acts didn't think in terms of sounding dated thirty years later either. 

Josef_K wrote: I would like to blame the record companies mainly for the lack of experimentalism in 80s music. Preset synths can be very useful, like the ARP Pro Soloist for example. Tony Banks used it for some of the greatest lead sounds I've ever heard on the "Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" album, as well as many strange sounds in songs like "The Colony of Slippermen" and "The Waiting Room". Now sure, that instrument still has the analog warmth, but it IS a preset synthesizer.

Hi,

Edited by moshkito - October 03 2012 at 13:30

moshkito wrote: Hi,   This applies to MY EXPERIENCE in America ... I can not speak for England and the rest of Europe, although I can tell you that this could easily apply to Short Wave, but I can not speak for its quality.   America had FM radio ... and while it started in the 30's, it never became an important mover in music ... until the late 60's when the new FM radio stations became known and heard.   The issue?   (Mickey Mouse/Goofy description!!!!!!!!)   FM radio had two bands, instead of one, like the AM, or Short Wave radio.   The difference? ... the "stereo" music could be separated and played as such. Left channel on one side and right channel on the other side.   While in a stereo this is not a big deal, except when an instrument goes left or right ... or you hear the girl walk across your path and go into the room to say ... look at all these guitars ... in comparison to the AM radio, or shortwave, this is MASSIVE'ly more realistic and closer to our experience. And on occasion during inclement weather, you know that the bands would bend a little and distort the sound a bit ... the resulting effect is different ... and sometimes off sync ... which adds an effect to the music that makes it ... more interesting! WAYYYY more interesting ... so when Robert Plant would bend "loovvvvvvvvvveeee you ... " in those situations, it would sound WAYYYYYY better tnan any recording!   For me, a lot of this music sounded BETTER on the FM radio, than it really did on LP, or anything else, and I was lucky ... Guy Guden in Santa Barbara was a close friend (he's a duckless turkey these days and is too stuck up to say hello, or Merry Christmas!) and roomate (I paid the rent the first 4 years!!!), and the massive amount of music he played, and we enjoyed, was 2nd to none. By comparison, even today, many of the shows out there are all top ten, and not as diversified as Guy's show ever was ... and this is hard to say, because most folks have absolutely no idea whatsoever what I am saying ... I will a list of shows and the stuff played for a few select folks here ... for an idea.   Two important things here, that I just noticed, as I got me a nice Stanton turntable for my LP's ...   1. Turntables at KTYD and the LA stations are EASILY turned down and tuned to about 1 to 2% slower. The end result is that a lot of bass and lower sounds make a lot of rock bands sound "heavier".   2. The separation of the channels over the airwaves, to get put together again via your receiver changes the music a wee bit ... and it is VERY DIFFERENT. The best example I can give you is compare the US version of Sgt Peppers with the English version ... comes off much cleaner, deeper and more intense!   Now, I can not speak for AM radio as much since they are all about the small singles of old ... but it is not likely that as much manipulation went on that is perceptible ... you don't hear enough of the song to discuss it.   In my estimation, this helped a LOT of music sound WAY BETTER than it really is, in many cases ... and while the difference is minor, it made the radio preferable to your own listening ... UNLESS ... you had a massively good stereo system that made the music sound WAYYYYYYY better than most listeners have ever heard. For example, I had a pair of $750 dollar speakers (in 1978!!!) and a turntable and cartridge combo that cost ($500 dollars in 1978 as well) ... which was not top f the line (Bang and Olafson was!) but it was close. The result was very clean and reproduction that was massive and made a lot of this music sound very good, and the radio difference was not an issue ... it was really minor for me ... compared to most.   I just had a conversation with a friend that has over 3k LP's and knows his music really well, and one of the things I mentioned was this ... and his comment? ... no wonder some of this digital stuff sounded like crap! ... and he explained that it was not BAD ... jsut not that great, compared to what can be done out there. But I played him some of the same things on the tapes I have (now on mp3) and he was astounded ... he couldn't believe it ... like you all mostly won't either.   A lot of it ... has to do with the "medium" that the music came from ... Pink Floyd sounded excellent on the medium, even better than the records themselves in America (all 2nd class quality!) ... and so did Genesis, and ELP and many others ... and it helped sell a lot of this stuff!   Thus, as a joke, I like to state that radio ... was a lot more progressive than most of the music itself ... which is not a surprise since almost all of it, became just another commercial piece of music! And it's not getting better today because the fidelity is not important to prog ... the loudness is!   I sincerely believe that this helped the "analog" synthesizer sound very different and more interesting than it is today, because there were even more factors that made its sound even more interesting and important ... than it really is ... specially today when the "digital" side of this has pretty much made the sound come off as not as good as it used to be!   I just heard Acid Mother's Gong ... and I have to tell you that little moog is very digital, and completely "poor" in quality, by the time you compare its tones to Keith. Toni, Richard, Rick, Patrick, Vangelis ... and many others!

Edited by cstack3 - October 01 2012 at 19:03

Hi,

Edited by moshkito - October 03 2012 at 12:30

pitfall wrote: People say that a Clavinet = funk, but just listen to Kerry Minnear of Gentle Giant fame on this instrument! In the end it's the player that makes an instrument sound good, bad, dated or plain fantastic.