Why I like simple little synthesizers
What I believe is the first ever SA model of Casio synthesizer is the SA-1. The SA series have always had 100 sounds in them. Over the years there have been many SA models released of varying colors, shapes and sizes.
For Casio synth history buffs out there, the SA (originally released 1989) came after the PT (originally released 1985). The first PT was the PT-1. Monophonic, four sounds, 10 rhythms and the ability to record up to 100 notes. The fact the PT-1 can record 100 notes is actually a fairly advanced feature for an '85 ultra-low-budget synth.
My journey with synths has pretty much gone down the same route as with guitars. I started basic, then went "pro" level, then realized most of the "pro" stuff is junk, then back to basic again.
There are a few things I know to be true about synths.
Any synth can sound good with external effects applied to it
It is possible to get what's known as the "Vangelis sound" (as in the synth sounds from Blade Runner) out of a cheap Casio if you apply the right effects to one. No, it won't sound exactly like Vangelis, but the point is that with the right effects you can get fairly close to it.
The fact of the matter is that most synths, much like guitars, sound pretty crappy with no effects applied. And if a synth has internal effects, they're usually awful.
Take the absolute crappiest you know of (or said more correctly, what you think is the most crappiest), and then plug it into a DD-7. Listen to how awesome it gets just by adding that one effect. Night and day difference.
If you wanted a synth that has awesome internal effects, that would be the newer Korg SV-1, as that thing has a fantastic delay in it and a real-deal tube for natural overdrive (yes, really). But it'll cost you well over a grand to get it. Going with a DD7 for delay and a "warm"-style overdrive like the Dyna Drive is a much cheaper alternative.
Easy is good
A modern version (even though discontinued in 2010) of the absolute king-of-the-heap in the world of pro-grade analog synthesizers is the Alesis Andromeda A6. It's a beast. A very expensive beast. It is true analog in every sense of the term and can be tweaked to an insane level. You could call the A6 a "Moog killer" and be 100% correct...
...but good luck figuring one out because it's annoying to program. The A6 is one of those beasts that has every possible option you could think of because it's got some serious teeth. But it also has a seriously wide learning curve to it.
Let's compare this with a totally different (and digital) synth from 1985, the Korg DW-6000. The 6000 is really easy to figure out, and the addition of a BOSS RV-5 reverb pedal effect really helps this synth to get amazing sounds out of it.
So, which is more fun to use? The cheap DW-6000 or the ridiculously expensive A6? The answer is the DW-6000, because it's easy to learn.
My only complaint about the DW-6000 is its size. Small for what it is (and light), but still a bit bulky.
If size were not a consideration for me, I would seriously consider picking up one of those 1980s digital DW Korgs, because not only are they dirt cheap but also easy to repair. Usually, the only thing wrong with them is a few solder connections on the inside that get knocked loose. Easy fix.
What most guitar players want is a keyboard with good strings, waves and bass
There's a lot of guitar players who would like to put synth in their songs but hardly know anything about keyboards other than just the beginner-level basics. And they have an idea of what synth sounds they want but don't know what they're called.
Fortunately, this is really easy to figure out because it's four things. Strings, waves, bass, pads. And the pads are optional.
- Strings: The synth sound similar to what you'd hear in Van Halen's song Jump.
- Waves: Old-school "8-bit video game" like sounds.
- Bass: A keyboard sound that sounds like a bass guitar.
- Pads: Best described as "slow strings" that when played gradually fades up in volume.
Pad when talking about synth tones literally means "a padded sound", as in a sound "softened" on either end.
The little SA-46 I'll receive later this week I know for a fact has the first three listed above, and might even had a pad sound or two in its strings tones as it does have 10 of them.
In other words, guitar players usually want anything but a piano sound out of a synth. They want a synth that sounds, well, synthy. And when you add in an effect or two to that synth, hell yeah it sounds awesome.
A "no pro" attitude works for synths the same way it works for guitars
It's really easy for a synth guy to get caught up in all that "pro" gear snobby nonsense just like guitar guys do, and there's no need to do that.
Fortunately, it's like I said, any synth can sound better with the right effects applied. If you play guitar (and you most likely do if you read by blog), just take your exiting guitar effects and run a cheap synth through them instead of the guitar. You'll get a good sound out of it.
I've seen Casio and Yamaha keyboards on Craigslist for as little as 25 bucks. These things are everywhere, so go get one. I personally went new with the SA-46 because I like small keyboards and it's tough to find those on Craigslist (nobody ever really thinks to sell them there).
Go cheap, apply effects, play happy.
Going low-tech with synth (Casio SA-46)
I bought little cheap keyboard I bought that will arrive in about a week, the Casio SA-46. And if you're thinking of buying one after reading what I write about it here, it's absolutely required you also buy the proper AC adapter for it as it does not come with one (but it can run off batteries).
Why this particular little synth?
It's one of the very few priced well south of $100 that actually sounds good, is built right and is polyphonic (multiple notes can be played at the same time) instead of monophonic (only one note at a time).
Polyphony is only 8-note, and that's good enough for something this size.
The other thing that makes the SA-46 great is something that's very easy to miss. At top right you'll see it says "68-80 SYNTH SQUARE LEAD". What this means is that the SA-46 does in fact have old-style synth sounds in it, which most would characterize as "8-bit sound". It's not 8-bit (probably 16-bit or maybe even 32), but that's what people would describe it as because it's just a set of plain, honest-to-goodness square wave sounds.
In other words, the SA-46 has 12 old-style synth lead sounds. Really basic, no question, but that is exactly what a lot of synth players look for, myself included. These lead sounds can be made to sound huge very easily just by adding in an external reverb effect and maybe chorus to fatten it up slightly. No circuit bending required for this one because it is good enough out-of-the-box.
The other sound I bought it for is the strings, which again has that old-school flavor to it. I mean, what can I say, the SA-46 really has it where it counts and is truly a gem as far as a cheap synth goes.
Small is good
The SA-46 obviously does not have full-size keys, but rather little miniature keys made for kid-sized hands, as the unit is made for young players.
There is a bigger version of the SA-46, the SA-76 (easily spotted by the fact the bottom is orange instead of green); it's a larger synth that has what appear to be slightly larger keys, and a few more features. It's also the same price as the SA-46...
...and that's the part you may be confused by. Why would I purposely buy a synth with less keys and less features when I could get something bigger with more features in it for the same price?
Answer: Small form factor. I seriously like the SA-46's smaller size. In fact, you could call its size "just right" because while small, it's not too small. It's a piece of hardware that can easily be picked up with one hand (and even has a grip indentation in the back), yet still played easily when set down, and can be put away easily as well. Very convenient.
It is a "real synth", even if a very basic one
While true there's no MIDI and only a single headphone output jack, the SA-46 is perfect for home studio use because it's got those old-style synth sounds in it. And heck, you could even use it for bass parts too.
I listed to a few sound samples online of the SA-46 and yep, I was sold. Great little synth for backing tracks with proper old-style square waves and strings.
And like I said above, to find anything with an under-$100 price tag in a small form factor that's done right is difficult - except for the SA-46 which totally nails it.
If you're thinking, "Oh, come on... Yamaha must make something small that's comparable." Nope. There are no cheap new Yamaha keyboards that are small at the moment. The cheapest Yamaha synth right now is the YPT series, and the starting physical size is 61 full-size keys and no smaller.
I do wish Yamaha would start making small inexpensive synths again, because they really did make some great stuff back in the day. Alas, they do not.
Tough to find?
You can find the SA-76 easily in stores, but surprisingly you will not find the SA-46 anywhere as it seems to be an online-only thing.
I'll be happy to get mine, because I haven't touched the keys in a while and I've been really wanting to add some synth into some new stuff I'm writing.
1984 - the 1953 television version!
I had thought that I had seen every single screen adaptation of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. I was wrong. There was one more. It happens to be the first screen adaptation, and the oldest all the way back from 1953 (yes, that makes it 60 years old at the time I write this). And, wouldn't you know it, it's an American version that originally aired on CBS as part of what was called the Westinghouse Studio One series, available as the Studio One Anthology (which started off as radio-only and then was brought to television later).
Okay... so there are four screen versions of this story. The 1953 CBS version which is the one I'm going to talk about, the 1956 BBC television version on YouTube, the 1956 film version, and the made-in-1984 film.
Of the four, the BBC version is the most true to the book, which I have read. And in '56 when it originally aired, there were more than a few viewers at the time who called the program "perverse". If you consider what the standard of entertainment was in the mid-1950s (which was generally very cheery), and how dark and dystopic Nineteen Eighty-Four is, well, you can understand how that would ruffle the feathers of a few people.
But anyway, the '53 CBS version is without a doubt the absolute weirdest screen adaptation of the story I've seen.
First of all, it was written as a play. So if you can imagine what Nineteen Eighty-Four would be like if it were performed on stage live, that is exactly what the '53 version is, artsy-farsty version of Big Brother and all. I'll talk about that more in a moment.
Second, some of the same people who did the CBS program went on later to do the 1956 film. You can basically consider the '53 version a prototype of the later film because of that. And yeah, that does mean the storyline is perverted into a love story between Winston and Julia instead how it's supposed to be told (it's supposed to be the journey of Winston's enlightenment and his defeat).
Third, it is really short. About 50 minutes. This is probably because it was meant to fit into a one-hour television time slot, per 1950's television broadcast standards.
If you watched this without knowing the story first, you would have no clue what's going on. None at all. It just moves way too fast. Huge chunks of the story are left out, and like in the '56 film, the '53 version renames certain characters. For example, Goldstein is renamed to Cassandra. Yes, really.
Big Brother himself is this artsy-fartsy oil-painted like... thing. When you see it you're going to say, "What the frig is that?" Absolutely no resemblance to the way he's described in the book whatsoever. Not even a little.
Telescreens are simply shown as large panes with the best you could do in '53 for what could be considered a special effect. Just some washy-like screening and lighting of some kind.
I'd have to say the best part of the show is Cassandra during the Two Minutes Hate, because what he said was actually written very well.
Most of what he said:
Today you are at war with Eurasia. Tomorrow, perhaps with Eastasia; it doesn't matter. The primary game of modern warfare is to use up the products of the machine without raising the general standard of living. For if leisure and security and enjoyed by all alike, great masses of human beings who normally are stupefied by poverty would become literate and would learn to think for themselves! And once they have done this, they would sooner or later realize that the privileged minority have no function, and they would sweep it away.
That's just as true as it was said in '53 as it is today, if not more so; it is the highlight of the program just because of the good writing, and it's very true to the book.
The rest of the program however is just so unbelievably rushed. That combined with actors many times almost literally shouting as if they were performing a play for an audience just gets annoying.
I suppose I shouldn't knock the program too much because it was the first screen adaptation, and Nineteen Eighty-Four is a really tough story to tell visually.
Why did I watch it? Just to "complete the set", so to speak. I had seen the other three and thought that's all there were. So when I discovered this one, of course I had to watch it.
Ordinarily I do not like television from the 1950s, but with 1984 I make an exception because it's just interesting seeing different attempts at telling the same story because each has its own take on it.
Even though the story in the '53 version is told totally wrong in so many ways, I give it a thumbs-up anyway just because it's so weird and unique.
Obsolete guitar gear: Alesis Quadraverb GT
The Alesis Quadraverb GT effects processor is something I owned myself for a long time. I bought it new originally in the mid-1990s (1994 if I remember correctly) and the price tag was $500 for it. At the time, this was one of the best guitar effects units you could buy. It was also priced right because its nearest competition was the Rocktron Chameleon, which cost more than the Quadraverb GT did.
The main difference between the Quadraverb and the Quadraverb GT is that the GT model had basic amp modeling and distortion/overdrive effects whereas the non-GT version did not. In other words, the GT was the "guitar player's version" of the Quad.
The 1990s for the most part was an "anti-pedal" time for guitar players where everyone wanted all their effects in a rack unit with preset switching ability on the floor via a MIDI controller such as the ART X-15. While pedals were still available and always were, guitar stores had mountains of rack unit stuff available for everything you could possibly think of.
The Quad GT does reverb, delay, phaser and flanger very well. It has a crisp, clean sound to it and its digital processing, while primitive today, still holds up quite nicely. The only time the Quad "sounds old" is if you use really washy reverb. But other than that, the GT could still be used in stage or studio to this day.
Where the GT fails is with its overdrive and distortion as it is awful. All you hear is digital nastiness from that - even with cabinet simulation enabled.
The best way to use the GT as far as guitar is concerned is to not use the distortion or overdrive at all. The cabinet simulation is okay, but for dist/od effect you should use a distortion pedal for that directly in the signal. And what I mean by that is guitar to dist pedal to GT and not use the effects loop.
As far as hardware problems go with the GT, there are a few.
The 1/4-inch jacks on the back have plastic nuts holding them in, and they sometimes work their way loose; this inevitably leads to the jacks breaking their connections on the inside where the signal will cut right out. Using plastic instead of steel nuts was a poor decision by Alesis just to cut cost. If you are a GT owner, the first thing you should do is junk those plastic nuts, replace with steel, and use a socket wrench to get a good, snug connection.
The power button has a nasty habit of losing its connection as well after being used for years.
A very common problem is that the backlight on the LCD screen stops working completely, where you have to shine a flashlight on the display just to read it afterward. It's still functional, but with the backlight not working, the unit gets very annoying to use very quickly. Thankfully, replacement screens are available and easy to install.
The GT does not age well as far as its internal electronics are concerned. Being some units are now close to 20 years old, restoration may be needed.
The power supply for the Quad GT is exactly the same as the Alesis DataDisk. It's a 4-pin proprietary (yuck) adapter, and it is absolutely required that if you buy one you must get the AC adapter with it, because there is no universal adapter available that will power the unit.
Worth owning?
No, unless you want that 1990s "warp" style reverb, and that takes a bit of explanation.
Certain digital reverbs made by Alesis when modulated a certain way have a sound that can only be described as "warped". The Quad GT can do this, as can the Midiverb and Midiverb II. However, those units are only sought out mainly by synth guys and not guitar guys.
Anything BOSS makes for multi-effects (yes, anything) will sound much, MUCH better than the old Quadraverb.
Gear update for October 2013
Some fairly major changes have happened recently concerning the gear I own now.
2003 Schecter C-1 Classic: Gone.
Yep, sold. Been wanting to do this for years and finally got around to it. I didn't make much, but that's okay. The new owner is very happy with it.
2012 Fender Modern Player Stratocaster HSS: Gone.
This one was traded out. I just never took a liking to this guitar no matter how much I wanted to like it.
Small side note: While the Modern Player Strat HSS gets a "it's okay" review by most people, those who buy the Modern Player Telecaster Plus have nothing but wonderful things to say about it. For whatever reason, Fender is doing Telecasters a lot better than Stratocasters these days. I don't know why exactly, but the Teles always get the more favorable reviews over the Strats.
Officially, I now own 6 guitars, 4 of which are in good working order. The ones that work are my '89 Squier II, 2010 Bullet Strat, 2005 Yamaha RBX170 bass and 2012 Epi Les Paul. The ones that don't work are the '93 Fender USA Standard Stratocaster (the truss rod is busted in the neck), and the Squier Bullet HH which is in pieces that I'm parting out and selling on eBay.
Concerning the '93 USA Strat, eventually I will get a replacement USA neck for it. I just don't feel like spending the $400 to get one (especially since I really don't need it right now). Yeah, I could put a Mexican neck on it and save money that way, but it's a USA guitar, so I'd prefer to have a USA neck on it.
In other words, the '93 USA Strat is the "I'll get to it when I get to it" guitar. :) In addition to the new neck, a new pickup and control set would be going in as well. Around $500 or $600 worth of stuff all together. I'll get to it eventually.
Soon-to-be-gone: DigiTech GSP 1101, Tascam DP-008, BOSS DR-3 and Behringer Xenyx mixer
I bought something recently that for me replaces all of those things, a ZOOM R8.
Had I known what the R8 was capable of beforehand, I never would have bought the Tascam or the DR-3.
I will have a full review on the R8 soon, but what I can say about it now is that when you use one of those, you literally need nothing else. It has a full effects unit in it with amp modeling, distortion, overdrive, flanger, phaser, delay, wah, reverb, booster, noise reduction filter and more. It has its own drum machine in it. It has a looper. It has 6-band EQ. It is a sampler. There's a lot more to it, but WOW is this thing full of features.
The R8 is the first multi-track I've ever used where you can literally plug in a guitar dry and the unit has enough in it to make any guitar or bass sound great. And with XLR inputs, using a microphone is easy too.
I only have three complaints about the R8. It feels cheap and plasticy, the pad buttons feel weird and it is one of those "submenu hell" type of units (meaning it has a bit of learning curve). But other than that, the R8 does everything right. It is the ultimate sleeper when it comes to home recording.
I'll put it another way. Imagine for a moment if there was one unit you could use where it simply did everything where you need no effect external effect pedals, no mixer, had its own drum machine and all you had to do was plug in a guitar dry and start recording. That's the R8.
Oh, and bonus: No power supply needed. It's powered 100% by USB, which means a cable to the laptop or PC is all that's needed to power it up.
The R8 is not marketed as a multi-track recorder but rather more of an interface. Believe me, it is WAY more than an interface and can do the job on its own in fine style.
More to come on the R8 soon. Possibly with video.