I don't know about y'all but I'm holding out for the historically accurate fortepiano samples that's all I really need to get my Beethoven/Mozart cover band of the groundGambold wrote:Beethoven played a kickass harpischord too.

I don't know about y'all but I'm holding out for the historically accurate fortepiano samples that's all I really need to get my Beethoven/Mozart cover band of the groundGambold wrote:Beethoven played a kickass harpischord too.
analogika wrote:Gambold wrote:It's the artist who imparts legitimacy to an instrument, not the other way round.
Oh wow, that really is utterly awesome.Hlaalu wrote:analogika wrote:It's the artist who imparts legitimacy to an instrument, not the other way round.![]()
Reminds me of:
Go to 1:27:52, and the whole part from 1:12:13 is awesome. Not exactly the same concept but close to the issue here.
Exactly, I'm all for a cocktail. Except Gambold is right about the clav for mine. It's not one of the ubiquitous and flexible keyboards required for all music. Not like EP and AP; even in the synthy 80s Rhodes was everywhere. Clav's a classic, it was monumental in funk in the right hands, and it had a great 15 minutes. But who, not playing funk covers, honestly, has ever thought clav is the right sound for this song? Dragging out Stevie in any conversation about clav proves that point, rather than refutes it. My slapdown of Gambold's premise was the idea that keyboard development was done by the 70s. I'm guessing he plays covers for old people.JayDee wrote:I don't begrudge Gambold a contrarian view. If everyone agrees, gets boring quick. Once in awhile you need a molotov cocktail thrown into the conversation, It just so happens that I am stupefied at his premise
Steve Vai is a master, and now sharing his knowledge:analogika wrote:Oh wow, that really is utterly awesome.Hlaalu wrote:analogika wrote:It's the artist who imparts legitimacy to an instrument, not the other way round.![]()
Reminds me of:
Go to 1:27:52, and the whole part from 1:12:13 is awesome. Not exactly the same concept but close to the issue here.
I've never seen him talk before, but what an incredible guy.
Thank you so much, Hlaalu.
That was my first time too seeing him talking for so long! Also, if you consider he spent some 20 minutes replying to what many others could have considered a "random bloke"'s question on the Internet, and gave such a meaningful and most of all inspirational answer, is pretty incredible.analogika wrote: Oh wow, that really is utterly awesome.
I've never seen him talk before, but what an incredible guy.
Thank you so much, Hlaalu.
Check out Lachy Doley. Definitely the "right sound" for what he's doing. I've also got some (unreleased until I dare) original stuff with clav on it.CountFosco wrote:Exactly, I'm all for a cocktail. Except Gambold is right about the clav for mine. It's not one of the ubiquitous and flexible keyboards required for all music. Not like EP and AP; even in the synthy 80s Rhodes was everywhere. Clav's a classic, it was monumental in funk in the right hands, and it had a great 15 minutes. But who, not playing funk covers, honestly, has ever thought clav is the right sound for this song? Dragging out Stevie in any conversation about clav proves that point, rather than refutes it.JayDee wrote:I don't begrudge Gambold a contrarian view. If everyone agrees, gets boring quick. Once in awhile you need a molotov cocktail thrown into the conversation, It just so happens that I am stupefied at his premise
My slapdown of Gambold's premise was the idea that keyboard development was done by the 70s. I'm guessing he plays covers for old people.