where next with software instruments?

[Acrobat]

I think all of these things would be good in the short term but I'd like to see some more radical approaches.

If you think of a synth's sound world as a multidimensional space, with each parameter as an axis, and points in that space representing sweet spots, or interesting sounds, there are a lot of ways you can imagine exploring that space that don't involve manually manipulating each parameter one at a time. Current randomizers are a very crude way of jumping to random points in that space but you can imagine lots of other ways to move around in there.

Yes, I can imagine, but surely not for the monitors and mice we use nowadays.

[kuniklo]

So Bones wants to simultaneously argue that developments in technology have freed us from many requirements of technical ability *and* that no further such developments are possible.

[BONES]

Anything is possible, what I am suggesting is that it is unlikely to allow us to do anything we cannot already do fairly easily and most comprehensively. i.e. Any roadblocks you encounter are almost certainly in your head. The tools and workflows are already available to get from A to anywhere, its just a matter of finding the right approach to get there.
I don't feel there is any area of my work where I am constrained by my tools. I can do sound design, writing, arranging and production to best of my ability. I think if I want to improve my results any further, that improvement will come from me getting better, not the tools.
You'll hear it on our new album, the improvements in hardware have freed us to do a lot of things we maybe wouldn't have tackled before. We have some huge noise-scape pieces, orchestral type stuff going on and arrangements that I don't think I could have pulled off 5 years ago without either bringing my PC to its knees or ending up with an undifferentiated mess. I see 90% of it as being down to both of us getting better at what we do and the hardware improving to a point that it supports our vision much better. Whilst the other 10% might be the result of access to better tools, a lot of that has also been enabled by gruntier hardware allowing us to use tools that might not have been viable on an older machine. My synths are a good example - I've been able to ramp up the polyphony and unison to wherever it needs to be, rather than find a compromise between the perfect sound and the limits of my CPU.

[Perimeter Sound]

Nice thing about Bones, is he hasn't flip-flopped ha-ha, read his Q&A on our site from a year+ ago, he says dang near the same stuff. Ie = as computers get more powerful, the choices become many-ier, but it still comes down to workflow and finding your own *voice*.

[kuniklo]

Anything is possible, what I am suggesting is that it is unlikely to allow us to do anything we cannot already do fairly easily and most comprehensively. i.e. Any roadblocks you encounter are almost certainly in your head. The tools and workflows are already available to get from A to anywhere, its just a matter of finding the right approach to get there.

These things are always asymptotic though. Gains are easy when a technology is young and more incremental as it matures. I'm convinced there are still many ways in which tools could improve but it might take a new generation with fresh eyes to see them.

[skipkent]

I got a snare drum recently, just a cheap one but it sounds great. I record it with a mic while hitting it with sticks. It's totally velocity sensitive which is cool and has, like, ZERO latency. This is blowing my mind. I'm gonna try a hi-hat next.

[taijiguy]

I got a snare drum recently, just a cheap one but it sounds great. I record it with a mic while hitting it with sticks. It's totally velocity sensitive which is cool and has, like, ZERO latency. This is blowing my mind. I'm gonna try a hi-hat next.

How olde skool! Now you're gonna need musical skill to play it and your stage show is gonna suffer.

[pdxindy]

Anything is possible, what I am suggesting is that it is unlikely to allow us to do anything we cannot already do fairly easily and most comprehensively. i.e. Any roadblocks you encounter are almost certainly in your head. The tools and workflows are already available to get from A to anywhere, its just a matter of finding the right approach to get there.

These things are always asymptotic though. Gains are easy when a technology is young and more incremental as it matures. I'm convinced there are still many ways in which tools could improve but it might take a new generation with fresh eyes to see them.

there is certainly a whole lot of room for workflow improvements in midi, midi editing etc

[zerocrossing]

What it comes down to is that we've kind of hit a wall. This isn't a bad thing though. First, or technology, like one poster's snare drum, was about as good as it got. Make some group of materials resonate and/or vibrate in some sort of way and there it was. Sound.

Then we found that we could do it electronically and get those flowing electrons to move a magnet, which, in the end, made some group of materials vibrate. Instruments like the theramin augmented the more simple wave forms with novel and subtile UIs.

Now it seems that we've gotten to the point where we can nearly make anything we can imagine. There was another thread about "limitations vs. Platonic ideals." that dealt with this topic, but it seems to me now that we've got very little in the way of technology to go. Maybe some advances in physical modeling, but between acoustic instruments and modern synthesis, where the hell else could we go? Where would we want to go.

This is a good thing though because now we can explore and develop. Like finding an unexplored continent, we've mapped it and explored and studied all the geography, flora and fauna, and now it's time to settle and develop and kill off the indigenous people. Synths are no longer a gimmick you hear in songs like "Pop Corn." They're as valid as any acoustic instrument. It's up to us now.

Oh yeah, and when the technology comes down in price, things like the Jazz Mutant Lemur coupled with the next generation of Novation Automap style technology is going to be the next big step in UI.

[kuniklo]

Oh yeah, and when the technology comes down in price, things like the Jazz Mutant Lemur coupled with the next generation of Novation Automap style technology is going to be the next big step in UI.

Maybe, but I'm not very excited about that. Someone with a little more boldness and imagination is going to come up with interfaces that don't involve knobs and sliders and that make a computer feel like an instrument in the way a violin or guitar does, only with a much wider range of possible expression.

[BONES]

These things are always asymptotic though. Gains are easy when a technology is young and more incremental as it matures. I'm convinced there are still many ways in which tools could improve but it might take a new generation with fresh eyes to see them.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of it will simply be change for change's sake. I think I've used a motoring analogy here already but after 100 years, all the top selling models are pretty much the same as they ever were - piston-engines in the front driving two wheels. Look at sci-fi from the 50s and 60s - they had us all zipping about the skies in flying cars or hover-cars by the turn of the century but it hasn't happened . What has happened is that the same old formula has been refined to an incredible degree. Power to weight ratios that were the exclusive domain of supercars like Ferrari and Lamborghini in the 60s are the norm for a family car today [at least over here where we still prefer big 6-cylinder jobbies], yet they use less petrol than their 60's equivalents.
The revolution has already happened for us, probably when KORG brought out the M1, the impetus now is on refining it. If there were some big, obvious areas where we were too constrained, it might be a different story but if you want to do anything at all, its possible right now. People still pine for flying cars and that won't change either, but most of us will be more than happy to drive better and better internal combustion ground cars for the rest of our lives because they do what we need them to.

Maybe, but I'm not very excited about that. Someone with a little more boldness and imagination is going to come up with interfaces that don't involve knobs and sliders and that make a computer feel like an instrument in the way a violin or guitar does, only with a much wider range of possible expression.

That's been around for years, too. I was watching bands in the 80's who used guitar-synths and bass pedal-driven synths. No knobs, no keys. Yamaha had breath controllers and a digital wind instrument thing for their FM synths at the same time. its just that a piano keyboard works best, which is why Bob Moog chose it in the first place.
Here's a good example, using one of my instruments [not a knob or piano key in sight] -

[Dean Aka Nekro]

I agree with that BONES

I prefer refining than redefining most of the audio equipment i use for example all but one guitar i own are in 'stock' condition because i get in their and refine the components to suit my needs and amplifiers + pedals too which although rather less complex (IE a few tools and a soldering iron...etc) to me at least whom does not know jack about coding is not so far removed than you code optimising and enhancing your synthesizers in SynthEdit to suit your specific needs i imagine. Weight and efficiency are to me the most important aspects which need to be and are being addressed like power amplifier and speaker/headphone weight (drivers) for example.

Where next for software instruments? i have not got a clue and dont really care to be honest (still i remain a tiny bit curious...)

Dean

[zerocrossing]

Oh yeah, and when the technology comes down in price, things like the Jazz Mutant Lemur coupled with the next generation of Novation Automap style technology is going to be the next big step in UI.

Maybe, but I'm not very excited about that. Someone with a little more boldness and imagination is going to come up with interfaces that don't involve knobs and sliders and that make a computer feel like an instrument in the way a violin or guitar does, only with a much wider range of possible expression.

Who said it had to be "knobs and sliders." Once you have a display you could do anything you wanted. Naked woman. Caress the parts correctly and get a sweet sound... wrong... DISTORTION. (just think what pinching motions are possible with multitouch!) Maybe a volcano! Mix the lava! It's up to the imagination of the UI designer. Once you have a touch and pressure sensitive display the only thing you're missing is force feedback...

That said, they've been trying to find some other solutions for this stuff for a long damn time and most of it ends up being of limited use and novelties. Buchla anyone?

When I want to raise the volume, what's better than a knob or pedal? Trust me, I've got an AirFX, AirSynth, P5 Data glove, KAOSS pad, Roland D Beam... all cool for performance stuff but 99% of the time I want my real guitar, midi foot pedal and a keyboard with a few knobs and aftertouch.. even my Novation's XY pad is only used during ambient noodlings. Programming? Nothing will beat knobs and sliders. Too useful.

[jobromedia]

Next step: Mind controlled synthesis. Instead of having to tweak the controls we just as easily (in a few decades time) will program and perform with the help of brainpower. Unconcievable now, but as sampling seemed unconcievable before the melotron this will most likely be done in some way or another.

[djmadmanly]

well i dont know too much about this topic but there is a new breakthrough synth with the things that allot of you have been talking about, its called spectrasonics omnisphere and it has been released, find out more at www.spectrasonics.net