Home -> Magazines -> Issues -> Articles in this issue -> View
Article Group: | |
Roland GR-500 | |
Article from Sound International, December 1978 |
Steve Hackett and Paddy Kingsland set out to test the merits and demerits of the Roland GR-500 and ARP Avatar. Synthesise watches, lads.
What I wanted years and years ago was somebody to design a guitar whereby the sort of sound I could get with various devices on a single line could be obtained when playing chords — I'm a very chord-oriented player. I used to get a sound which was very violin-like, and I obtained this largely through eliminating the 'percussion' from the guitar by using the volume pedal. I would hit a note and then fade in afterwards which, of course, a lot of people did; but I used to use it in combination with a fuzzbox and echo-unit. If you were to play with that set-up quite fast you would get a very unguitar-like sound. In fact, I was always looking for areas that would put the guitar in an 'unguitar' bracket.
It struck me that there were enough guitarists playing to sound like guitars, so I'd try to work in other areas. A lot of criticism was aimed at me for this, people would say, 'You might as well have another keyboard player as have him doing that, you know'... I suppose if anything was definable it was due to the fact that I wasn't competing with the speed merchants.
So I ended up getting these different sounds. What I wanted ideally, as I said, was to be able to get that single line sound into chord form. It was impossible with that sort of set-up, you'd get intermodulation between the strings and the sound would be really muddy if you even tried chords. Unless you have a separate pickup, ie total isolation for each string, you were not going to be able to play chords in that style.
With all this in mind I spoke to a few friends about developing something like that, but nothing ever really got off the ground. So I'd given up on that idea, I just thought I'd have to get three guitarists to do it! I suppose I resigned myself to the fact that I could do it in the studio but never do it live.
Then one of my roadies mentioned that Roland had a guitar synthesiser on the market - it seemed right up my street. Eventually I got one in November 1977, just before I started work on my solo album, Please Don't Touch. The fact that I didn't have much time between getting the thing and recording the album was a bit of a drag, but I managed to get my head down with it for about four days prior to the start of the recording to see what sort of settings I'd like to use.
When I first tried the machine out I just started playing relatively simple first inversion chords at the bottom of the neck, but that seemed to blur quite a lot, probably because of the 'thickness' of the notes. When I started playing chords in the second inversion, however, the whole thing started to make a lot more sense. It was rather like a keyboard; if you're playing down at the bottom end of a piano or an organ you tend to get a lot of cloudy overtones which muddy the whole sound.
I think the advantage of this synthesiser over the other guitar synths that I've heard is the fact that the Roland is polyphonic - but it's obviously up to each individual musician to decide on his or her needs.
I've always thought that the quality which defines a guitar sound is the attack and decay configuration — the attack reflects the percussion aspect of hitting the note, the decay of the note fading away afterwards. With this machine you can eliminate and modify both of those, you can get a very squarewave sustain and the actual percussion doesn't need to be there. Plus you can play chords; so really you have the ability to modulate everything you ever tied into the guitar, in one machine.
On Hoping Love Will Last from the album I used the guitar synth to introduce the piece, a long note at the beginning, with the nylon-string guitar joining it after a short time. The effect is a bit like a combination of soprano sax and an oboe (maybe even smoother than oboe, like a cor anglais). Before Randy Crawford's voice comes in I use the synth, which sounds like an orchestra at that point. Then the track moves to the guitar synth by itself, and then we brought in real strings, the synth on a sort of string sound. The whole thing blended very well together, and we ended up with something like a 40-piece string section, part of it being the guitar synth's string sound marrying totally with the real strings.
Another device which I used on the record was the EBow, which you may be familiar with. As far as I'm concerned you can't get enough sustain - the nice thing about the EBow, and the Roland guitar synth for that matter, is that the sound you've got is there, it's not just one of those accidental processes like feedback, where the effect will just hit on certain notes and depend on where you're standing. On Icarus Ascending I use the EBow way behind Richie's voice, and if you listen to the notes they're totally continuous - it's all on one string with the guitar going through fuzz and echo.
Back to the guitar synth: obviously with anything there are always points you can criticise — mostly things that you would like to do, but which just take time. But there are a couple I'd point out: it would be nice, without having to have an external synthesiser, to be able to get a portamento effect, so that you could play those big chords and they'd swoop too. Also, a lot of the time you have to watch out for the input level of what you're doing, because the sound that comes off the thing is very powerful; I found that often I would have to halve volume settings everywhere in order for it not to distort. And the synth does sound a lot better when you're using things like echo - I was using a Roland amp which has their Chorus setting on it, giving you a kind of harmoniser or DDL type sound, putting the note slightly 'out of tune' with itself. It does complement the synth very well — I think without the Chorus and echo it is a bit bland.
More generally, though, provided you sort out a good repertoire of sounds before you start using it live or in the studio, you can't go far wrong - if you expect it to do the earth it won't. I think it's madness to go out and spend the money before it's something with which you're totally happy. But it doesn't fit into certain styles of guitar playing; for example I know that Mike Rutherford tried it out (this was after I'd left the band), and he said, 'Oh, I'm not that keen, I don't think they've really got it together.' And I said, 'Oh really?' I think it's all down to the taste of the individual player. If you are into gadgets — and there are very few guitarists who aren't, despite the way they may reject synthesisers — then you'll be interested. I've got no time for die-hard attitudes, people should be encouraged to develop things. It's a question of having an open enough mind to try it out and not going in with that: 'Not another one' cynicism. Because one in a hundred is really going to be very good.
rrp: £1,549.20/$2,595
Steve Hackett was guitarist with Genesis until June 1977, when he left to pursue a solo career. He has recorded two solo albums, Voyage Of The Acolyte and Please Don't Touch.
Guitar Synthesisers
Gear in this article:
Review by Steve Hackett
mu:zines is the result of thousands of hours of effort, and will require many thousands more going forward to reach our goals of getting all this content online.
If you value this resource, you can support this project - it really helps!
New issues that have been donated or scanned for us this month.
All donations and support are gratefully appreciated - thank you.
Do you have any of these magazine issues?
If so, and you can donate, lend or scan them to help complete our archive, please get in touch via the Contribute page - thanks!