Doug Rogers working on
Fab Four with Ken Scott
Steve Jobs said: "Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn't really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That's because they were able to connect experiences they've had and synthesize new things."
Creativity takes many forms and great software programming requires as much creativity as composing a piece of music, but the approach one takes in connecting the dots for a piece of music (literally and figuratively) is very different from the way that a software engineer strings together code or a GUI designer thinks about the way someone might use their application.
To start with, when a piece of music is done it's generally done. In contrast software applications like DAWs and audio plug-ins are never done. Between the maintenance necessary to remain compatible with of the underlying platform and responding to user needs and requests each software application takes on a life and distracts the programmer from the ability to create new products.
Apple and Microsoft don't add or subtract features or routines from the operating systems based on the needs of the music software industry. In fact changes to the kernel of the OS will often mess up threading services, which has a significant impact on real-time applications like DAWs. It often means that new features must often be delayed in favor of making the existing features continue to work when the OS or host changes.
It has often happened to companies that were at the 'golden master' stage and subsequently had to go back to the drawing board because 'service packs' and 'update releases' appeared from the OS companies. And software plug-ins, despite being smaller code bases, have the additional burden of needing to work inside a changing host.
I can say from experience that managing all this is not easy and hard to truly understand if you are coming from a musical background rather than an engineering background. It hard to plan development and can have serious financial impacts as well.
So, why would someone from a music recording background want to start a software development project?
Doug Rogers of East West was kind enough to discuss this. As many of the KVR community knows, EastWest founder and producer Doug Rogers started as a recording engineer and producer, created a successful business producing sample libraries and virtual (software) instruments and has been involved with the development of many of the technical innovations in use today; purchased and restored a famous Hollywood recording complex (used primarily for recording new products); and developed their own sample playback engine. Some of their history is outlined here.
Why did you decide to develop your own sound engine in the first place?
What's been the most difficult thing for you to learn, about moving from being a recording company to being a technical company?
And it doesn't end there because you need graphics people, and QA people, and a big tech support department. At the time we had a very small tech support department because we only had to support the libraries, rather than the software. Our infrastructure is now at least ten times what it was before.
As a contrast, what's involved in developing one of your sound libraries?
Do you ever have to go back to instruments that you've already created and change them again or are they done once they're done?
Basically, what happens more often than not is we make changes to the actual instrument programming. That's something that happens with almost every product. When you have a product that has over 800,000 samples, like Hollywood Strings, and you have a team of editors who deliver us content to program, something is going to get overlooked. Over the initial cycle of the product, usually within the first year of the products release, they report things that they think are odd or need to be improved and we have to go back and improve them. And that's an ongoing process, one that we try to get as right as possible from the outset, but just because of the sheer logistics involved, it's just not possible.
How did the Dark Side come about?
I decided that we didn't really have a cutting edge product that covered some of the latest music trends, including musically distorted and mangled sounds, so I made The Dark Side with David Fridmann, which is a collection of highly processed instruments intended for alternative rock, like Radiohead, Chemical Brothers, etc.
Some people think, "I can distort anything." But you can't really distort it in a musical way if you don't know what you're doing. Between David and myself we have some very unique equipment, particularly some old tube stuff that distorts instruments in a very musical way and we're very happy with the final result. We were somewhat surprised that The Dark Side won the MIPA Award in 2011, that is voted for by over 100 magazines, we really didn't expect that, in fact we expected the product to get trashed by reviewers. The Dark Side is actually great for film/tv/game development also, especially those looking for edgy atmospheric sounds.
Now that you have your own playback engine what's the biggest problem you have had to deal with?
We don't just have to operate in a changing operating system, we also have to operate within another piece of software that is operating within that changing operating system which is changing also. So we've got two levels that can break us at any point in time. And just because of the intense competition in the industry, it's very rare that we get a look at either before it's made public. So you're always in the situation of playing catch up. And as our users up the ante in what they expect out of each new product, it places more demands on us as producers, on both sides, in terms of the content and what the software needs to do.
We have to work in dozens of hosts, all of which are changing the whole time, and operating systems that are changing the whole time. And then there are things like moving from 32-bit to 64-bit and all that that entails. We're basically making the software so it can handle the ever-changing advances in sample technology. The kind of programming and scripting and sheer size of something like Hollywood Strings is something that would be unthinkable even five years ago. The technology is changing at a rapid pace, and staying ahead of that change is really the hardest task. Computers are getting more powerful, and as they do we can do more to add more realism to the instruments.
People often overlook the cost of support. How does that work for East West?
We're into about our seventh year of software development right now. It takes a really long time for this kind of software to really mature. So what you do initially is focus on making it work for a majority of popular hosts that most people use and then expand it from there. Now, going back to the pre-computer days, where we had samplers from Akai, Roland etc., it was a known environment. We knew that a user had this operating system and this amount of RAM and we could make it work with that. Now you have people, some of whom even build their own computers, trying to run this stuff, and you have thousands of combinations of hardware, software, RAM, hard drives, sound cards and everything else to deal with, all of which can contribute to something not working. Particularly when you're pushing the computers as hard as we are. So the difficult part is not making it work; it's making it work with all of those combinations of software and hardware that everyone uses.
Ed. Note: The extreme costs of supporting software are often overlooked and/or discounted in people's minds. I am pretty sure this is going to create problems for customers in the future because a company that creates a $.99 application is not going to want to answer the questions people are going to want to ask.
So what I think I hear you saying is "It doesn't matter if it was worth it, because we had to do it."
Any advice for those entering the world of virtual instruments?
Yes, invest the time to get enough knowledge to put together a good computer system, have realistic expectations of what you can do given your computer's resources, use popular and proven software that works reliably with our virtual instruments, and you will have a very powerful tool to explore your creativity and create some great sounding music.
A final Ed. Note: of advice from for all you creative musicians out there who enjoy using DAWs and plug-ins. A lot of work by other creative people goes into making them, and their job is never finished. Piracy makes it harder to make new products so please buy the software you use.
Read More Interviews @ KVR
Related news...
14 May 2013Innovation Driver: Interview with Marcus Ryle
29 Apr 2013Frankfurt Musikmesse 2013 - Where have all the software companies gone...?
07 Apr 2013Gerhard Behles – PUSHing Ableton into new territory
08 Mar 2013Testing the softsynth waters - Interview with Amir Vinci from Waves
11 Feb 20132013 NAMM Show Report
04 Jan 2013KVR Developer Challenge 2012 - Prize Update
17 Dec 2012Trevor Rabin - Harmony of mind and spirit, analog, and digital
07 Dec 2012KVR Developer Challenge 2012 - The Winner Is.
06 Nov 2012KVR Developer Challenge 2012 - 55 Free Downloads Available Now (Vote & Donate)
30 Oct 2012KVR Developer Challenge 2012 Closing Date Looms - Announcing a One Week Extension!
29 Oct 201210 Reasons we need commercial studios
25 Oct 2012Fun and technology at Austin City Limits (ACL)
05 Oct 2012Ken Jordan of The Crystal Method - The computer is a musical instrument
06 Sep 2012Steven Slate - Getting vertically integrated
10 Aug 2012Rob Papen - 9 products in 7 Years!
02 Aug 2012The KVR Audio Developer Challenge 2012 Begins!
26 Jul 2012David Mash - Looking at the past and future of technology learning
20 Jul 2012Hartley Peavey - Historian, Innovator, and Industry Driver - Part 2
06 Jul 2012Interview with Hartley Peavey - Historian, Innovator, and Industry Driver
07 Jun 2012Joe Satriani - Balancing Real-time with Non Real-time in the Real World






