Brian Eno is selling lots of gear!

The question is, why is he selling off his historic musical relics? I certainly doubt it's a monetary issue. Just curious...
 

from the Eno article in last month's Sound on Sound:
"Despite his reservations about computer recording, Eno has now decided to go further into the computer only world and sell his studio... "
 

Native Instruments lists him as a user of FM-7, and he thanks them in the liner notes of his new cd, so he probably found it much easier to program than the DX-7.

I'd love to hear what he wrote in the personal notes he's writing to each buyer.
 

Great!.. a dx7 and a bunch of lameass sinewave patches with a little lfo..is he throwing in the h3000/4000 that made it actually sound cool?

what is this? 'stars dump their hardware finally month'?
 

what is that blue thing in the top left corner?
 

Thats the DX-7 programmer.
 

What the hell are you talking about? DX7 was, *and still is* a great instrument.
 

A friend just gave me a CX5M computer with tons of manuals, monitor, and keyboard. I know it's a 4 osc FM rather than 6 like a DX7. I haven't plugged it in yet. Are they any good? Is this like a "workstation" with a partial DX7 engine inside?
 

Well good for Eno. All I can say is you'll pry my VS from my cold dead fingers.

Now that a 59 Paul just sold for $150K I wish I would have bought them up in the 80's for $1K. Some synths are the same.
 

FWIW that Sound on Sound comment I posted is taken slightly out of context. If you READ the article, Eno shares some enlightening reasons as to why he want's to do this and it had nothing to do with the typical harware/software internet forum dialog nonsense. He's a smart guy.
 

Why isn't Brian Eno on the Music Thing hero's panel? He's practically the godfather of everything we do today with synths and looping.

Cheers,
Kevin
www.TheNettles.com
 

The CX5M was essentially a Z80-based home computer with a DX-9 engine built-in, which is, as you say, a 4 osc version of the DX-7's 6. Fewer "algorithms" (osc wiring combinations) as a result, and other simplifications. Also had MIDI in/out.

The computer runs "MSX", microsoft's early 80's attempt at a standardized home computer platform, with BASIC interpreter of course. Presumably you could run MSX software on any MSX machine (another was the SpectraVideo SV-328).

Cartridge-based software for it included a notation-based sequencer and a DX-7 voice editor. I used one during high school to sequence some stuff for the school musical. The software was so slow at redrawing the notes as they scrolled along, that during particularly note-heavy sections of music, the tempo would noticeably decrease.... you had to insert carefully tuned tempo change events into the song to compensate!
 

"Why isn't Brian Eno on the Music Thing hero's panel?"
Because I ain't got round to writing much about him!
 

Give a few years and he'll have just as many new boxes to play with... Everyone I know who gets rid of their kit for a computer set up soon has new boxes to play with.
 

xpander not expander
 

The oberheim expander is the only thing I would want its a 6 voice analog midi controlled synth, it also has the famous pipe organ patch used by Styx in all their songs.. It was released after oberheim determined there was no way to really sell synths given the popularity of digital synths. The big drawback to analog synths, you have to keep retuning them everytime you turn them on.. So if one lost power during a concert, tough luck. Analog synths these days have an auto-tune function. But I'm talking Moogs like the ones that Tomita used.
 

BTW, for every keyboard you get, there is two inputs on a mixer you need to support that keyboard, if you have 8 keyboards you needa 16 track mixer.. I'm sure there is a good reason for it.. Especially considering there are CPU's that can simulate mixdown synths . Until you've bought keyboards you won't realize this.. Also the midi standard is not fast enough to drive the keyboards in realtime (maybe its improved since I've last used it). MIDI is about 31250 bits per second, or roughly the speed of a modem. Its fast enough to play note data but not pitch bend data or other modulation data.. A CPU simulation has no such limitation.

I personally am amazed the synths have lasted this long consider the processors in the keyboards from the 80s ran on really slow processors.. A pentium is about a hundred times faster than a 486, and a 486 is about 10 times the speed of an 8086, and the Ensoniq Mirages for instance were based on something like a 6502 which are ten times slower than a 8086. The 6502 is the same processor that a Commodore 64 used. And C64's were used for cheap midi sequencers by some musicians in the 80s. You don't need much to control keyboards, but you do need mixers.
 

i have a VS (rack) and an Obie Xpander..

i wasn't suggesting the DX7 is crap..but really...anyone who thinks this is some kind of great collectible because the admittedly brilliant fingers of Eno has stroked it must be a little tragic..think of the *way* he used it..fx processing is a BIG part of his sounds..the DX7 is NOT a classic..important, yes, classic..NO

lest we forget the millions of putrid electric pianos it was used to punish us with...

try 4 operator..sounds much more interesting ;-)

or better still..TX802...
 

DX7 is too a classic, more of them were manufactured than any other synth ever (around 20,000) and they're good for more than e pianos or that chime sound. Deadly basses, organs, wierd percussion if you get into programming it. You don't need outboard gear to make it sound great, you just have to tweak sounds patiently. If you want 4 op FM check out the TX81z, 8 voice mult tibral, 8 waveforms for FM programming. You can find them real cheap, it's the poor mans xpander. SY77 is the best FM synth though, one of the best synths ever actualy.
 

the DX7 is a classic - especially if you were alive and kicking in the 80s, when it dominated music of all kinds across the board, and especially TV music

thats not to say its some kind of super powerful synth - its not, and FM synthesis can be had with infinitely greater possibilities today with software, much better sound quality too

why do think eno is selling the thing??

hes not selling an EMS Synthi, or a buchla modular
 

"hes not selling an EMS Synthi, or a buchla modular"

He sold his VCS3 through Vemia a few years ago. I may have imagined it, but I believe David Bowie bought it for £10k.
 

Wowza!
I'll never sell my SY-1. Shoot I never sell anything.
 

any electronic musician that sells their EMS gear needs to have their head examined
 

cap pugwash -
The reason the DX7 went for as much as it did is most likely for the Eno patches. If the buyer ends up sharing them w/ the DX-community, he/she gets many, many bonus points.
 

That must be one of the worst sites on the internet for usability and design etc...

Pity I like the content.
 

like me i have a vs prophet but have to sell need the money maybe he needs it too!`?rod coote
 

Hear hear on putting Brian Eno in the heroes panel! (Historically, he's more significant than Radiohead, for example.)
 

the dx7 is great. i love it. and for all the people bagging on it are probably just sound collectors rather than real musicians!
 

I wouldn't sell my AKS. no way, it's too cool, Derek from UK aka Dr Evell