KVR Audio

wonshu · Post by **wonshu** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 9:30 am

A couple of people here in Berlin started to build these a while ago and they're now starting a kickstarter campaign to go into production.

I've seen these machines in action a couple of month ago. It's wonderful stuff and I'm sure there are many people here who like these sort of tinkertools.

Other than knowing one of the guys there I have no involvement in this project (I wish I did, then I didn't have to wait for my set to arrive...)

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/14 ... r-everyone

PS: Please check shipping locations. I don't think they ship worldwide.

Best
Hans

masterhiggins · Post by **masterhiggins** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:00 am

Just to play devil's advocate, if a machine is playing and hitting the same spot, you're not really getting a human performance out of it. So wouldn't it make better sense just to multisample the instrument and sequence them that way? Or is there something I'm missing?

wonshu · Post by **wonshu** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:05 am

You can turn all kinds of objects into instruments or create your own and trigger them with a sequencer.

I find it incredibly inspiring and fun.

skipscada · Post by **skipscada** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 10:57 am

masterhiggins wrote:Just to play devil's advocate, if a machine is playing and hitting the same spot, you're not really getting a human performance out of it. So wouldn't it make better sense just to multisample the instrument and sequence them that way? Or is there something I'm missing?

Yes, you're missing something: the entire point.

Engaging with physical objects and moving air in a space.

whyterabbyt · Post by **whyterabbyt** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:53 am

masterhiggins wrote:Just to play devil's advocate, if a machine is playing and hitting the same spot, you're not really getting a human performance out of it. So wouldn't it make better sense just to multisample the instrument and sequence them that way? Or is there something I'm missing?

Yes. The response of a physical object to being struck is not set by that impact, it is modified by that impact; an object which is already resonating when struck behaves differently from the case where it is struck 'cold'. The behaviour becomes cumulatively more complex as it is struck further.

The environment the struck object is contained in will also affect its behaviour.

Samples cannot completely reflect these real-world interactions and that complexity.

GaryG · Post by **GaryG** » Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:00 pm

That looks awesome, so many possibilities. And blurb'ed by people from Lali Puna and the Notwist... Sold!

masterhiggins wrote:Just to play devil's advocate, if a machine is playing and hitting the same spot, you're not really getting a human performance out of it. So wouldn't it make better sense just to multisample the instrument and sequence them that way? Or is there something I'm missing?

As he says in the video, part of it is to get away from screens and to do something 'hands on'. It's not about getting a human performance per se. I guess it's down to your working methods/preferences. You may prefer staying in the box and handling multi-samples, micro-editing your midi to humanise the performance etc. Others prefer a more organic approach, let random events/fluctuations help shape the performance. You'd have to do a lot of sample manipulation to come close to a recording of physical objects being struck like this. Horses for courses.

Dada machines - awesome tools / toys