Closest thing to a fairlight CMI Series III emulation.

[carrieres]

Recreating a CMI, be it a Series I, II or III, as a plug in is currently not technically possible. This is not my personal opinion but that of Peter Vogel, co-inventor of the Fairlight.

Some years ago, this discussion was had over in the Fairlight Yahoo group and Peter was part of that discussion. To faithfully recreate a Fairlight CMI in software, right down to the last fuse, resistor and chip, would require far more processing power than a regular computer and off the shelf audio interface could manage. Ironically, however, the present day Fairlight company that grew out of the ashes of the original organisation, had recently released a dedicated DSP and audio IO system based around their Crystal Core DSP chips.

i just can not believe this !
just read about Moore's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

We're not talking about hardware performance increasing exponentially, we're talking about recreating antique hardware in software as a plug in. Therefore, Moore's Law is irrelevant here.

If you wish to dispute this with Peter Vogel, feel free

i don't want to argue but this is not antique hardware but fairly standard cpu :
http://www.vintagesynth.com/misc/fairlight_cmi.php

Original Fairlight models used two standard 8 bit 6800 processors, updated to the more powerful 16 bit 68000 chips in later versions (the IIx had updated 6809 processors, which is what designated it a IIx over a II)

[Failed Muso]

Recreating a CMI, be it a Series I, II or III, as a plug in is currently not technically possible. This is not my personal opinion but that of Peter Vogel, co-inventor of the Fairlight.

Some years ago, this discussion was had over in the Fairlight Yahoo group and Peter was part of that discussion. To faithfully recreate a Fairlight CMI in software, right down to the last fuse, resistor and chip, would require far more processing power than a regular computer and off the shelf audio interface could manage. Ironically, however, the present day Fairlight company that grew out of the ashes of the original organisation, had recently released a dedicated DSP and audio IO system based around their Crystal Core DSP chips.

i just can not believe this !
just read about Moore's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law

We're not talking about hardware performance increasing exponentially, we're talking about recreating antique hardware in software as a plug in. Therefore, Moore's Law is irrelevant here.

If you wish to dispute this with Peter Vogel, feel free

i don't want to argue but this is not antique hardware but fairly standard cpu :

Original Fairlight models used two standard 8 bit 6800 processors, updated to the more powerful 16 bit 68000 chips in later versions (the IIx had updated 6809 processors, which is what designated it a IIx over a II)

Ever seen inside a CMI mainframe?

Obviously not

[BertKoor]

The problem here is not emulating the Motorola 68xx chips, but all the other stuff around it.

Staple "orchestra hit" samples can be had, no problem. Modern samplers sweep the floor with this old machine, yet everybody still drools all over them. People who want this do it usually for the wrong reasons. Nostalgia plays a big role in it. If you had one and never worked with it, the workflow would pull you off for sure.

Even if you'd build a Fairlight CMI to the original specs with today's components (replace the cathode tube monitor with a flatpanel LCD) to the connaisseur who has worked with it it would certainly smell different and therefore be disqualified as an exact replica.

[BertKoor]

curious if there is a VSTi emulation that works in the same way the Waldorf PPG Wave 3.v does.

Yep, you (the OP) wrote "PPG Wave" in a CMI Fairlight thread. Why?

[whyterabbyt]

curious if there is a VSTi emulation that works in the same way the Waldorf PPG Wave 3.v does.

Yep, you (the OP) wrote "PPG Wave" in a CMI Fairlight thread. Why?

I'd assumed he was using the v3 PPG Wave plugin as a benchmark for the level of emulation he's talking about.

[Failed Muso]

The problem here is not emulating the Motorola 68xx chips, but all the other stuff around it.

Bingo! There are so many unique chips, circuits and boards with various unique tasks, it's pretty staggering. Every one of these cards are hand built from bespoke components. Simply recreating the main CPU's is just the beginning of what would be needed.

Staple "orchestra hit" samples can be had, no problem. Modern samplers sweep the floor with this old machine, yet everybody still drools all over them. People who want this do it usually for the wrong reasons. Nostalgia plays a big role in it. If you had one and never worked with it, the workflow would pull you off for sure.

Agreed. Using a CMI, even the new CMI 30AX, is not for the faint hearted. If you just want the sounds, use Bitley's stuff or UVI's Darklight or Steve's Hollow Sun mini package

Even if you'd build a Fairlight CMI to the original specs with today's components (replace the cathode tube monitor with a flatpanel LCD) to the connaisseur who has worked with it it would certainly smell different and therefore be disqualified as an exact replica.

We can currently use certain flat panel LCD's with original CMI's (I'm using one on my Series III) with custom built VGA output cards

Peter's CMI 30AX is the closest you'll come to an original CMI in today's world, made with modern, stable and upgradeable components. Those of us who love the original use them for way more than just the sounds. Personally, I use Bitley's stuff a lot!

[Numanoid]

So apparently there's finally a place to get some of the Series III library...in the iOS app. I'm more interested in the III library than the IIx at this point, but I still don't feel any burning desire to get an iPad.

Why not? It's looks to be a perfect match if you want those vintage sounds, just check the Music Radar review:

"A true emulation, for better or for worse. A rich source of excellent world-famous sounds, though."

http://www.musicradar.com/reviews/tech/ ... app-459387

[carrieres]

i remember seeing some photos from a restoration but what i want to point out is that the processing power need to recreate it, is available since many years now.
the transistor counts for a 1974 Motorola 6800 is 4,100
the transistor counts for a 1978 Motorola 6809 is 9,000
the transistor counts for a 1979 Motorola 68000 is 68,000
the transistor counts for a 2008 Core i7 (Quad) is 731,000,000
so yes the mess you can see inside a CMI mainframe is a LOT LESS than the mess created by 731,000,000 transistors inside a single processor !
between the 68000 and the i7 there is a factor of 10750
if someone think it's not enough he can use the CUDA technology
the transistor counts for a 2007 GeForce 8800 GT is 754,000,000
this graphic card is sold between 78€ and 122€
the processing power of recent cpu/gpu is just amazing and not so expensive

[whyterabbyt]

i remember seeing some photos from a restoration but what i want to point out is that the processing power need to recreate it, is available since many years now.
the transistor counts for a 1974 Motorola 6800 is 4,100
the transistor counts for a 1978 Motorola 6809 is 9,000
the transistor counts for a 1979 Motorola 68000 is 68,000
the transistor counts for a 2008 Core i7 (Quad) is 731,000,000
so yes the mess you can see inside a CMI mainframe is a LOT LESS than the mess created by 731,000,000 transistors inside a single processor !
between the 68000 and the i7 there is a factor of 10750
if someone think it's not enough he can use the CUDA technology
the transistor counts for a 2007 GeForce 8800 GT is 754,000,000
this graphic card is sold between 78€ and 122€
the processing power of recent cpu/gpu is just amazing and not so expensive

You realise it took until CPU transistor counts were in the tens of millions before they could reasonably do the same thing in realtime as a Moog ladder filter does in 15-20?

[jupiter8]

I seriously doubt it'll be that hard to emulate. A Minimoog should be by my reckoning orders of magnitude harder.

The more interesting question is why ?

[Failed Muso]

i remember seeing some photos from a restoration but what i want to point out is that the processing power need to recreate it, is available since many years now.
the transistor counts for a 1974 Motorola 6800 is 4,100
the transistor counts for a 1978 Motorola 6809 is 9,000
the transistor counts for a 1979 Motorola 68000 is 68,000
the transistor counts for a 2008 Core i7 (Quad) is 731,000,000
so yes the mess you can see inside a CMI mainframe is a LOT LESS than the mess created by 731,000,000 transistors inside a single processor !
between the 68000 and the i7 there is a factor of 10750
if someone think it's not enough he can use the CUDA technology
the transistor counts for a 2007 GeForce 8800 GT is 754,000,000
this graphic card is sold between 78€ and 122€
the processing power of recent cpu/gpu is just amazing and not so expensive

With all due respect, and not meaning in any way to be rude, you're completely missing the point

Yes, today's hardware is light years ahead of the CPU's of the late 70s and early 80s but this isn't what this is about. Yes, you can recreate a Fairlight in a PC but it requires a combination of powerful hardware and software. It's been done in the shape of the CMI 30AX. To accurately model the components, signal paths and circuitry in an original CMI takes some doing. That is a fact. And if the inventor of the CMI tells me that, then that is good enough for me. Want to prove him wrong? Go ahead. Good luck

Take a Ferrari engine and try to retro engineer it to perform exactly like the engine in a Ford Model T. That's what is happening here. To make a VSTi, or even a standalone app, that faithfully recreates the entire workings of a CMI, both its hardware and software elements, requires a great deal of computational power which is currently out of reach of most computers today. Your PC/Mac may have a lovely i7 processor, but that processor is doing a million other things to keep your computer working. I am sure that it won't be too long before an average home computer has the required power natively to do this, but not yet and not for some time, I reckon.

The insides of a CMI are, for its time, quite amazing, but each board has a huge amount of components on it. All eight voice cards, CPU cards, Memory cards, HDD and FDD controllers, synchronisation cards, debugging cards, and more, all fit into a central motherboard and on the other side of that you have an equal amount of cards for voice outputs, sampling inputs, video outs, mixer cards, MIDI, sync and more. Take a look at this post of mine that shows you what some of these cards contain and what would need to be modelled.

http://www.failedmuso.com/blog/?p=3735

I used to think that if they could model other synths in software, the Fairlight wouldn't be an issue. And then I began to learn about what goes on inside one, and all I can say is that it is far more complex than you make it out to be. I wish it weren't because I'd dearly love to have a software version of the CMI, if only to negate the size of the damned thing and the bloody noise it makes!!

You realise it took until CPU transistor counts were in the tens of millions before they could reasonably do the same thing in realtime as a Moog ladder filter does in 15-20?

Exactly!

I seriously doubt it'll be that hard to emulate. A Minimoog should be by my reckoning orders of magnitude harder.

The more interesting question is why ?

As I've said before, if Peter Vogel says it isn't currently possible, I know who I'm going to believe. And knowing Peter as I do, if anyone could do it, he would. The guy is a freaking genius. Your archetypal inventor with an undying devotion and focus on making stuff happen. Peter researched it, found a solution and delivered it in the form of the CMI 30AX. The iOS app, great as it is, is nothing more than an historical piece that plays back converted raw sample data and recreates, albeit it in a simple fashion, a fraction of the functionality of the real thing. It's useful and educational and that is exactly how Peter wanted it

If somebody came up with a plugin/standalone CMI app that ran on my Mac/PC without the need for powerful, expensive additional hardware, I'd be first to buy it

[UltraJv]

Of course Peter Vogel will say its not possible. He will say that because he dosnt want it to be possible. He will use all the might of copyright to make it impossible. For the same reason that Korg, Yamaha etc dosnt want their hardware to be copied. They dont want a $200 vsti being sold that makes their hardware redundant. I guarantee you that is IS possible though.

[crimsonwarlock]

Of course Peter Vogel will say its not possible. He will say that because he dosnt want it to be possible. He will use all the might of copyright to make it impossible. For the same reason that Korg, Yamaha etc dosnt want their hardware to be copied. I guarantee you that is IS possible though.

This!

[Failed Muso]

Of course Peter Vogel will say its not possible. He will say that because he dosnt want it to be possible. He will use all the might of copyright to make it impossible. For the same reason that Korg, Yamaha etc dosnt want their hardware to be copied. They dont want a $200 vsti being sold that makes their hardware redundant. I guarantee you that is IS possible though.

Of course Peter Vogel will say its not possible. He will say that because he dosnt want it to be possible. He will use all the might of copyright to make it impossible. For the same reason that Korg, Yamaha etc dosnt want their hardware to be copied. I guarantee you that is IS possible though.

This!

followed by

Ok, so prove me and him wrong. Show me how to do it. Show me how confident you are in your guarantee. I'll happily run your theories by Peter Vogel and Peter Wielk. Mr Wielk is the world's leading restorer of CMI's and knows them all inside out, seeing as he helped build them in the 80s and still services them to this day. They're both good friends of mine and I would be genuinely happy to pass on your ideas to them directly.

And equating Peter to companies like Korg (who recreated their M1, MS20, MonoPoly and Polysix in various software forms that sell for $50 each) is like comparing Wal-Mart with the guy who runs the corner shop at the bottom of the street.

You guys.... you kill me!

[martygras]

This seems like an Impulse Response could possibly capture that "sound" that is being spoken of. It seems also that a complex filter, or re-sampling algorithm could be used to recreate this effect on any new sound.