KVR Audio

bftucker · Post by **bftucker** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 10:29 am

"Some people... some people like cupcakes
exclusively, while myself, I say,
there is naught nor ought there be nothing
so exalted on the face of god’s grey (great)
Earth as that prince of foods... the muffin!"

The modular mind is difficult for us ordinary people to understand.

firepile · Post by **firepile** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 10:34 am

recursive one wrote:After few days playing with the latest Bazille demo having stock presets I started to appreciate this synth. Core sound quality is really good, I’d say, on the Diva level if not better, some of the presets sound literally stunning.

However something still puts me off.

First, I don’t understand the GUI concept. Afaik, Bazille doesn’t emulate any existing hardware and actually introduces some very new synthesis concepts. If so, why this skeuomorphic interface with zillions of tiny knobs and spaghetti-like cable mess? IMO, a schematic functional GUI like Zebra or Fabfilters would work better. I start to understand why this thread is spawned by disturbing creepy noises and bleeps. When trying to set the signalflow in the way that seems to be more or less logical, I usually end up with sounds like these (this is why I initially wrote Bazille off as a “geek synth useful only for weird noise stuff”). But judging from the presets there is much more in it.

CPU usage is prohibitively high. I do understand that such a combination of sound quality and flexibility must come at a price, but still a real “draft” mode like in Diva, which would at least halve the CPU demand, would be very useful. At the same time, a possibility to engage the highest quality mode at rendering (again, like in Diva) would also be a great workflow enhancement.

Still, unlike some other recent releases, this synth really does something new and fresh. I’ll most probably buy it sooner or later.

With Multicore on and HQ off, the CPU usage really isn't that high.

firepile · Post by **firepile** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 10:37 am

basslinemaster wrote:Careful, recursive one, you'll be reported for 'trolling', apparently...

Somebody asked what music I do like? A huge range, Joy Division, New Order, Chicane, Deepest Blue, Sarah Brightman, I like hundreds and hundreds of artists. Brian Eno even. As I said, presumably you can make sounds that are as 'unpleasant' as many of the presets in Bazille, and many of the examples in this thread, with other synths, but nobody wants to. The defensive attitude of so many here speaks volumes. Half of the previous page was people moaning about my posts - because I had nothing 'constructive' to say - which I presume means, I dared to say that I didn't like Bazille...

Well, move on then.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:23 pm

recursive one wrote:First, I don’t understand the GUI concept. Afaik, Bazille doesn’t emulate any existing hardware and actually introduces some very new synthesis concepts. If so, why this skeuomorphic interface with zillions of tiny knobs and spaghetti-like cable mess? IMO, a schematic functional GUI like Zebra or Fabfilters would work better.

I think that is a fair suggestion, but am doubtful it would work better.

For example, the preset I am working on right now, there is an output from the sequencer, which goes to a multiple where it is multiplied by a looping envelope, then that goes to the quantizer and then through a lag generator. Bazille has some simple modules and they are connected in complex ways. I like that I can follow the cable to see that sort of chain including feedback loops. I think it would be harder to follow with menus.

Also, if all the modules had pull down menus to select the connections, it would take a more room than the current inputs/outputs do. It would be hard or perhaps not possible to put everything on one page as it is now (gearporn skin). Besides the presets and effects, Bazille is one page and no tabs which I consider a big advantage which offsets the disadvantages (imo).

I have tried to think of some way to arrange organize the cables better... maybe virtual twist ties

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:25 pm

Bazille... again...

http://draigathar.org/sounds/B66.mp3

recursive one · Post by **recursive one** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 9:40 pm

pdxindy wrote:
recursive one wrote:First, I don’t understand the GUI concept. Afaik, Bazille doesn’t emulate any existing hardware and actually introduces some very new synthesis concepts. If so, why this skeuomorphic interface with zillions of tiny knobs and spaghetti-like cable mess? IMO, a schematic functional GUI like Zebra or Fabfilters would work better.
I think that is a fair suggestion, but am doubtful it would work better.

For example, the preset I am working on right now, there is an output from the sequencer, which goes to a multiple where it is multiplied by a looping envelope, then that goes to the quantizer and then through a lag generator. Bazille has some simple modules and they are connected in complex ways. I like that I can follow the cable to see that sort of chain including feedback loops. I think it would be harder to follow with menus.

Also, if all the modules had pull down menus to select the connections, it would take a more room than the current inputs/outputs do. It would be hard or perhaps not possible to put everything on one page as it is now (gearporn skin). Besides the presets and effects, Bazille is one page and no tabs which I consider a big advantage which offsets the disadvantages (imo).

I have tried to think of some way to arrange organize the cables better... maybe virtual twist ties

Maybe it just takes time to get used to.

ghettosynth · Post by **ghettosynth** » Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:35 pm

recursive one wrote:
pdxindy wrote:
recursive one wrote:First, I don’t understand the GUI concept. Afaik, Bazille doesn’t emulate any existing hardware and actually introduces some very new synthesis concepts. If so, why this skeuomorphic interface with zillions of tiny knobs and spaghetti-like cable mess? IMO, a schematic functional GUI like Zebra or Fabfilters would work better.
I think that is a fair suggestion, but am doubtful it would work better.

For example, the preset I am working on right now, there is an output from the sequencer, which goes to a multiple where it is multiplied by a looping envelope, then that goes to the quantizer and then through a lag generator. Bazille has some simple modules and they are connected in complex ways. I like that I can follow the cable to see that sort of chain including feedback loops. I think it would be harder to follow with menus.

Also, if all the modules had pull down menus to select the connections, it would take a more room than the current inputs/outputs do. It would be hard or perhaps not possible to put everything on one page as it is now (gearporn skin). Besides the presets and effects, Bazille is one page and no tabs which I consider a big advantage which offsets the disadvantages (imo).

I have tried to think of some way to arrange organize the cables better... maybe virtual twist ties
Maybe it just takes time to get used to.

I think so. I started a response, but, that's the essence of it. I've been working with modulars, semi-modulars, and quasi-modulars ( e.g. very flexible synths like the M12), in both hardware and software for some time and I don't think that there's a universal solution. On the one hand, cables are messy and it is often annoying to try and figure out what's going on, on the other hand, Zebra type interfaces separate the module from the routing and that has cognitive effects. I remember thinking that the thing that the nord modular needed most was some way of encapsulating modules into self contained entities. Clavia gave up on the digital modular concept, but, I think that tools like Reaktor and Max have embraced this idea with reasonably good solutions.

That said, there's a cost for that kind of encapsulation, and that is, it takes time. This is not really any different than programming that arguably made the "spaghetti" metaphor common language. Encapsulation helps for reuse and for organizing and understanding larger structures, but sometimes hiding detail hurts quick exploration and the ability to create new code quickly. Given that even the most complex Bazille patch is a relatively simple program, I think that the connection is reasonable. For any larger project it makes sense to break a system up into modules, but for smaller simpler projects, it's often easier just to crank it out inline.

With fixed module synthesizers like Ace and Bazille, one develops something of an association of certain patterns after a while. This is harder to do with synths like the Nord because modules can be anywhere. You also develop a patching muscle memory so that patching becomes much faster as you become more comfortable with the modules. The long and short of it is that I don't think that there is a much better solution. I don't like menus to select inputs and outputs because, for me, it's much more time consuming to select from a long list than it is to just patch the cable where you want it to go. I also don't like schematics for this kind of synth because it separates the modules from the patching visually. That's why, as much as I like Reaktor, I don't see it as a modular synth, per se, it's a synth building environment.

For me, I don't really buy modular soft-synths for novel user interfaces or excessive generality. That's what Max and Reaktor are for. I am looking for high performance within a constrained environment. I think of them as musical instruments, not synth design platforms. I do agree that going too far with the skeuomorphic aspects is counterproductive, I think that Arturia's Moog Modular takes it too far. I find that Bazille and Diva, for the most part, hit the right combination of compromises. I want cables, but I don't need them to swing about, I like modules that look like hardware, but they don't need to look so close to some original hardware that they become difficult to use.

At any rate, I'm looking forward to the next installation in the Berlin Modular series and, at the risk of sounding like a fanboi, I think that Urs is doing a great job so far with finding that right balance with respect to the U/I, cpu usage, and solid synthesizer performance.

pdxindy · Post by **pdxindy** » Tue Nov 04, 2014 3:22 am

ghettosynth wrote:With fixed module synthesizers like Ace and Bazille, one develops something of an association of certain patterns after a while. This is harder to do with synths like the Nord because modules can be anywhere. You also develop a patching muscle memory so that patching becomes much faster as you become more comfortable with the modules. The long and short of it is that I don't think that there is a much better solution. I don't like menus to select inputs and outputs because, for me, it's much more time consuming to select from a long list than it is to just patch the cable where you want it to go. I also don't like schematics for this kind of synth because it separates the modules from the patching visually. That's why, as much as I like Reaktor, I don't see it as a modular synth, per se, it's a synth building environment.

Good point... Bazille has 56 outputs and 72 inputs... those menus would be very long and unwieldy.