Why '80s Music Sounds So Weirdly Synthetic (And the Gear That Did It) | Comuniq

This site requires Javascript to work properly. Please enable Javascript in your browser.

-->

/Music

Stay tuned for the latest music from around the world on platforms such as Spotify, Youtube, Apple Music, etc.

Members: 4 Join

Moderated by: mozzapp

Why '80s Music Sounds So Weirdly Synthetic (And the Gear That Did It)

mozzapp<br>1787250915<br>[Music]<br>1 comments

Put a 1978 track next to one from 1983 and something odd happens. They barely feel like they belong to the same decade, even when the genre is basically the same. That's not nostalgia talking. Between 1980 and 1986 a very specific pile-up of technology happened, drum machines, digital synthesis, a new syncing protocol, and one studio accident that somehow became an industry standard. And the result is instantly recognizable, even to people who couldn't tell you why.

Start with the most obvious one, the sound almost anyone can pick out without knowing its name. That giant snare "BOOM" that just stops, no natural tail, no decay. You hear it on Phil Collins' "In the Air Tonight" from 1981 and then everywhere after. It came out of an accident at Townhouse Studios in London. Engineers were using room mics in a space called the Music Room to capture natural ambience, and they ran that signal through a noise gate meant to clean things up. Instead the gate chopped the reverb off mid-decay, and you got this explosive hit that just... stops. Not reverb on its own. Reverb plus an aggressive cut. Later this got recreated digitally in boxes like the AMS RMX16, which literally shipped with a preset called "Nonlin," short for non-linear reverb. People who try to fake this today with a plugin reverb and no gate at all never quite get there, and honestly it's usually the first thing that gives a "vintage" mix away.

Then there's the drum question, which people tend to flatten into one story when it's really two. The Linn LM-1 from 1980 and the LinnDrum from 1982 used actual digital samples of real acoustic drums, not synthesized hits. That's where the uncanny feeling comes from, drums that sound almost human but not quite, same attack every single time, timing that's impossibly clean. Prince used it. Michael Jackson used it on parts of Thriller. Basically the entire MTV-era pop machine ran through a Linn at some point, partly because it was cheaper and more predictable than booking a session drummer for three days. The Roland TR-808, also from 1980, is a completely different animal. It got rejected early on for sounding "too fake," that deep synthetic kick, the cowbell everyone associates with it now. It went on to become the backbone of hip-hop and most electronic music after, precisely because it wasn't trying to imitate a real kit. It was building its own thing. That distinction, imitation versus invention, matters more than people give it credit for.

On the synth side the big one is the Yamaha DX7, released in 1983, over 200,000 units sold, which was an absurd number for a synthesizer at the time. Older analog synths used subtractive synthesis and had this warmer, slightly imprecise character. The DX7 used FM synthesis instead, which produces metallic bells, those synthetic slap basses, and the glassy electric piano tone you hear in nearly every power ballad from the era, "Take On Me" being the obvious one but it's really in hundreds of tracks. The catch, if you can call it that, is that it was too clean. None of the harmonic mess that analog circuits give you for free. Which is part of why it dates so hard now, it's almost too tidy for how ears have shifted since.

One piece that gets skipped a lot in these explanations is MIDI, standardized in 1983. Before that, syncing separate machines was a mess. After it, sequencers and drum machines could lock to each other within milliseconds, which wiped out most of the natural rubato you'd get from a human player. Every note lands exactly where it's supposed to. That's a big reason even well-played tracks from this window feel a little mechanical, not because the musicians were bad, just that the groove had way less micro-timing variation than a live band would ever produce naturally.

And then the flip side of all this, the part almost nobody mentions because it was simply out of reach for most people: the Fairlight CMI and the Synclavier. These ran somewhere between 25,000 and over 100,000 dollars, which today would be even more insane relative to what a home studio costs. Only artists backed by major labels, Peter Gabriel, Stevie Wonder, Kate Bush, actually had access. They were among the first commercial polyphonic digital samplers, letting someone sequence an entire orchestrated arrangement digitally. That's why there's an audible gap between a "premium" '80s production and a smaller band's track from the exact same year and genre. A lot of the time it just came down to who had budget for a Fairlight and who didn't.

Worth...