MSoundFactory concept & template round #3

[DarkStar]

Quick question: Where can I find the per-voice modulation sources "Note Sequence 1+2"? Are they not implemented yet?

They are not with the LFOs and Envelopes at the bottom. Rather you access them from any mod matrix. So first find a parameter you wish to modulate and if it is per voice there will be a box next to the parameter. Click that to open the mod matrix. Now click on an empty mod slot to bring up a list of mod sources. Note sequence 1 and 2 are here in this list.

Yep, that selects the Mod Source. But I could not find where the 2 Note Sequences, 2 Key Scales and 2 Velocity Scales are defined.

[elassi]

Key and Velo scales are at the bottom, too.

But there's no Note sequence to manipulate. One can select them like jmg8 described but... that's all.

[dmbaer]

I’m sure it would be possible to not release your instrument for preset making if you really wanted. The problem with everyone doing this is that there will likely be fewer, worse and possiblely duplicate sounds. If someone can use a device I made in a way I didn’t intend. I’d be happy and I’m sure end users would too. I doubt Vojtech would refuse a request to leave your device out of the preset making if you asked though.

Did Vojtech ever say that instruments would be released for others to developer factory presets for? If so, I missed that. But I would want at least veto power, irrespective of my name being on it or not.

I spent a great deal of time developing a preset for MTurboDelay - I won't mention which one. MTurboDelay presets were not attributed to an author. My submission got significantly edited in a way I did *not* care for at all, and I'm sorry I didn't just submit it as a free preset for MXXX instead. My point in saying this is that the "glory" of having some content included in MSF with my name on it is of little interest. I suspect I'm not alone in being motivated more by the challenge and the fun in instrument creation than anything else. But whether my name is there or not, there is pride of authorship and I would not wish to see somebody screw up my original intent. Maybe most others feel differently - but I'd actually be surprised if that's the case.

That said, I do think there is value in having the author included and having that as a searchable filter. For synths that have content by my favorite sound developers (Misters Hollo and/or Nubkata), I use this kind of search filter all the time. Nobody's likely to search for my content, but for A-list sound designers, that's a different matter.

I also assumed our names would be on the devices we make. On the bottom of super-saw it says Meldaproduction and I’m assuming that comes from the author parameter for devices. I’m sure you can choose to leave your name off though or use a pseudonym. The persets can also be labeled by the author, so there really won’t be any confusion over who made what.

Well, since we have no actual prototype instruments with presets as an example, who knows? I little clarification on this whole issue from Vojtech would be welcome.

[dmbaer]

I asked a question earlier and it got buried in a lot of other discussion - but I think it needs an answer.

I creating presets for MSF, is the sound designer allowed to make modifications on characteristics not exposed on the Easy screen? Or is the rule: only presets that can be created using the Easy screen are allowed?

Vojtech, what's your say on this?

[Chandlerhimself]

Did Vojtech ever say that instruments would be released for others to developer factory presets for? If so, I missed that. But I would want at least veto power, irrespective of my name being on it or not.

I spent a great deal of time developing a preset for MTurboDelay - I won't mention which one. MTurboDelay presets were not attributed to an author. My submission got significantly edited in a way I did *not* care for at all, and I'm sorry I didn't just submit it as a free preset for MXXX instead. My point in saying this is that the "glory" of having some content included in MSF with my name on it is of little interest. I suspect I'm not alone in being motivated more by the challenge and the fun in instrument creation than anything else. But whether my name is there or not, there is pride of authorship and I would not wish to see somebody screw up my original intent. Maybe most others feel differently - but I'd actually be surprised if that's the case.

That said, I do think there is value in having the author included and having that as a searchable filter. For synths that have content by my favorite sound developers (Misters Hollo and/or Nubkata), I use this kind of search filter all the time. Nobody's likely to search for my content, but for A-list sound designers, that's a different matter.

I also assumed our names would be on the devices we make. On the bottom of super-saw it says Meldaproduction and I’m assuming that comes from the author parameter for devices. I’m sure you can choose to leave your name off though or use a pseudonym. The persets can also be labeled by the author, so there really won’t be any confusion over who made what.

Well, since we have no actual prototype instruments with presets as an example, who knows? I little clarification on this whole issue from Vojtech would be welcome.

Vojtech hasn't said anything about it AFAIK, but if people can only make presets for their own devices there is no reason to do devices first and presets 2nd. However it would be natural to have other people make presets for devices, if for no other reason than to have more presets. I wasn't completely happy about how my MTurbodelay presets were changed, but I wasn't that upset. This wouldn't really be changing your work though it would just be a preset made using your device. Your original stuff would still be there.

I don't know how many people are making devices, but I'm assuming it isn't many. If everyone has to make their own presets that will take away time from making devices. I also imagine it will scare away good sound designers because they won't want to spend time making GUIs. Either that or we'll get a bunch of 3 knob generators. I could be wrong though. Perhaps I'm underestimating people. Also if MSF isn't going to be released for another year and a half to 2 years things should be fine, but I assumed it would be released towards the end of 2019 or early 2020.

The super-saw preset is a prototype instrument and there is a space for the author when you save the devices. For presets I assume people will just put their name in the preset notes like they do for every other melda plugin. If you don't want to do that you could just leave it blank.

[Chandlerhimself]

Looking from the outside in, with very little insight available at the moment, would it be possible for someone to make a flowchart showing how these instruments and presets relate to one another? I'm trying to follow along without being a beta tester and feel like i'm trapped halfway down the rabbit hole.

I'm also confused as to why anyone would spend time making yet another drawbar organ. Aren't there enough of them? Please help me to understand.

I don't know if I can make a flow chart, but I can try to explain. The devices/instruments use the easy screen to make something that is somewhere between a synth and macros. Something that is easier to use than the MSF matrix, but has enough controls that you can reasonably change the sound to suit your needs. With all these different controls you could come up with many variations. For example I made one with lots of controls that can do 95% of what a mini moog does. Someone might tweak it to make a lead sound. Of course then after making a sound using it you might want to save it. You save it as a preset. The presets are inside the devices/instruments , so you can quickly audition everything that device does or just get an idea of what it can do. Some devices might be simpler and only have a few presets. My understanding is

Matrix(edit screen) - For people who love to make their own sounds and tweak stuff

Devices/Instruments(easy screen) - For people who might feel overwhelmed by the edit screen, but still want control.

Presets - For people who just want sounds and don't care about tweaking at all.

As for the drawbar organ, although I'm not making one, many people use those types of sounds and its a good way to show off the capabilities of MSF. MSF can do all sorts of sounds, so I hope people actually use it to its full potential instead of focusing on 1 narrow type.

[MeldaProduction]

It will be hard by I'll try to respond to all of the questions

- Testing instrument with everything - that's actually the Super-saw. Except for the MIDI stuff, I'll add that to the next release!

- Categorization - the categorization system is already in place, so no need to worry about this.

- Separate instruments & presets design action - I actually started to think that this may not be the best option. I think the designer of each device should try to make the most of it. We can always add more later, but still... I don't see a problem with other people creating presets for an existing instrument, everyone has different taste after all, but the original creator will probably know the most about his creation.

- Preset ambiguity - good point, the preset system will need to include the device name. Anyways I'd start with the instruments and then take it from there, it may be possible that we won't even need the system that would access presets of all instruments. That would be quite ideal

- What are presets for instruments - these presets store ONLY easy screen controls. So it's the same as if you had no access to the easy screen. Added some info to the info page.

- People making similar instruments - I don't see a problem in that actually. MSoundFactory is already so powerful that making an identical thing is nearly impossible (unless it is only a very primitive creation ). And having multiple drawbar organs? Why the hell not! Each will be a bit different, with some unique touch from each creator.

- Designer name - yes, it will be there if the designer specifies it when saving the device.

- Why to make another drawbar organ? (or any other instrument for that matter) Because this could well be the "ultimate instrument", that does it all. That's the goal for people like me - have one instrument, not dozens of them with 80% overlap, just one that can do 10000% of the others .

- dmbaer: Disallow having others create presets for your instrument - I must say, I have no idea why would want that . But we can definitely do this - let everyone create presets for your instrument, but you'll have a last word and be able to delete any of those you don't like. Anyways as I said, I'd probably start mainly with instruments and your own presets, then we'll see how everything works.
As for the MTurboDelay device - next time we should probably discuss this ahead, as I didn't know you feel that way. To be honest, after you complained I took a look on both the original and the edited version, and I must say I was 100% for the edited version, I was completely lost in the original. It's of course a matter of taste and how each person's brain is wired . Anyways for MSoundFactory there's already a field containing author's info. It works the same way as MXXX and I believe you have some devices there too, right?

- Release date - I'd actually like to release some basic MSoundFactory version around july, with some basic preset content and we'll develop the whole thing on the road from that. If it will be possible, who knows, but I'm a believer

Ok, so since some people want to make mostly presets and others instruments, I'd start with instrument making action, but wouldn't specify the number of presets you need to make for your instrument. So if you want to make many, go for it, if not, feel free to go ahead to another instrument...

Anyways I'll think about all that and start the initial device making action soon! Hopefully even this week!

[Chandlerhimself]

- Separate instruments & presets design action - I actually started to think that this may not be the best option. I think the designer of each device should try to make the most of it. We can always add more later, but still... I don't see a problem with other people creating presets for an existing instrument, everyone has different taste after all, but the original creator will probably know the most about his creation.

I agree that designers should try to make presets for their own instruments, but to me its more of a time issue. Should I make more make more presets for a device or create a new device. I'm finding it takes a while to make an instrument that I find useful, but presets take much less time. However I assume you want more instruments.

- People making similar instruments - I don't see a problem in that actually. MSoundFactory is already so powerful that making an identical thing is nearly impossible (unless it is only a very primitive creation ). And having multiple drawbar organs? Why the hell not! Each will be a bit different, with some unique touch from each creator.

I don't think its a problem to have too much of something, but it seems more like there will be too little. Having 3 organ instruments, but no FM basses or only 1 pad instrument would be really strange. How many instruments should there be at launch?

- Release date - I'd actually like to release some basic MSoundFactory version around july, with some basic preset content and we'll develop the whole thing on the road from that. If it will be possible, who knows, but I'm a believer

Ok, so since some people want to make mostly presets and others instruments, I'd start with instrument making action, but wouldn't specify the number of presets you need to make for your instrument. So if you want to make many, go for it, if not, feel free to go ahead to another instrument...

Anyways I'll think about all that and start the initial device making action soon! Hopefully even this week!

July seems really soon, but if there are a lot of people working on instruments it could work. Maybe a July launch with minimal content would allow you to get a feel for what people want. MSF is so big I'm not sure who the audience will be. It could be producers who just want presets and don't care about synthesis at all. People who dabble in synthesis, but really just want new and interesting sounds. Or sound designers who just want the most powerful synth. I'm interested to see if people will compare this to

1). Nexus, Sampletank, Kontakt
2). Omnisphere, Avenger
3). Falcon, Reaktor

Anyway I'm happy to hear the device making will start soon. I think once things get started things will become clearer.

[Whywhy]

I miss understanding something:
A device, an instrument, is :
- A complete synth or a structure emulation of an existing synth
Or
- a sound category, with different presets ?

Example : a device could be an emulation of the roland jp8000 or a collection of supersaw presets ?

[MeldaProduction]

Chandler: Yes, initially we need instruments. But technically multiple instruments may have nearly identical layout, so even that is not a problem. Anyways yes, presets for these instruments is secondary. You cannot make presets for instruments that do not exist yet after all .
As for the number - no idea, I'd say, let's wait an see.
As for the release date - I think we need some basic set and then we can release it for potential other preset makers, experimentators etc. Of course until the basic dataset won't be big enough, it won't be useful for public, but that's ok. Plus if the licence model turns out well, there may be 3rd party content being created.

Whywhy: I don't really understand the question. There don't need to be emulations of anything. The whole point is that every instrument is some kind of sound. For instance, there may be an instrument "piano", which has various controls controlling the sound of the piano. Then there may be say "Dirty pad", which will somehow produce wide ranges of dirty pad sounds. And so on. The idea is to stop thinking in the existing terms, where you have dedicated instrument plugins and that's it, and start thinking in terms of "sounds" instead. I think the closest is Kontakt with its instruments, though that one is just a sampler, this one should become, well, everything

[dmbaer]

Anyways I'll think about all that and start the initial device making action soon! Hopefully even this week!

Let me just reemphasize something I mentioned before. I think it's fairly important that instrument/preset designers know the expectations regarding help information (both parameter level and instrument/preset level). I would expect a top-tier product to have a uniform quality in this regard. The instrument/preset level information should include (at least in most cases) information about what the CC mappings are. Preset names like "Mojo Lead (MW)" don't cut it, IMO.

Maybe I'll dig around in some other synths and post some examples of what I think satisfies this quality point.

[dmbaer]

- dmbaer: Disallow having others create presets for your instrument - I must say, I have no idea why would want that . But we can definitely do this - let everyone create presets for your instrument, but you'll have a last word and be able to delete any of those you don't like. Anyways as I said, I'd probably start mainly with instruments and your own presets, then we'll see how everything works.
As for the MTurboDelay device - next time we should probably discuss this ahead, as I didn't know you feel that way. To be honest, after you complained I took a look on both the original and the edited version, and I must say I was 100% for the edited version, I was completely lost in the original. It's of course a matter of taste and how each person's brain is wired .

he-he ... I don't want to make too big a thing about this MTurboReverb issue. As the principal editor of an online magazine, I surely know the need for editing. However, the very coolest feature of my preset, the Predelay capability (which I freely borrowed from AAS Objeq Delay) was hobbled. I would not have had a problem with some simplification, but that would have been the very last thing I would have been willing to sacrifice (plus, it was really a challenge to figure out how to make it work in the first place).

As to people creating presets for other peoples instruments, I have to wonder how many folks would really want to invest their time that way. There are way more instruments I'd like to tackle than I'll ever have time for. Doing presets for other peoples devices would only steal from the insufficient time I already have. In other words, maybe this is unnecessarily getting blown out of proportion ... I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[dmbaer]

Here are several examples of fairly good preset information. Three are from different u-he synths (Repro, Diva and Zebra). u-he seems to have a good handle on this. The fourth is from Synthmaster. Nice idea, but few of the sound developers pay any attention to this opportunity to make the users better appreciate their creations.

[Chandlerhimself]

Whywhy: I don't really understand the question. There don't need to be emulations of anything. The whole point is that every instrument is some kind of sound. For instance, there may be an instrument "piano", which has various controls controlling the sound of the piano. Then there may be say "Dirty pad", which will somehow produce wide ranges of dirty pad sounds. And so on. The idea is to stop thinking in the existing terms, where you have dedicated instrument plugins and that's it, and start thinking in terms of "sounds" instead. I think the closest is Kontakt with its instruments, though that one is just a sampler, this one should become, well, everything

I feel the same way as Whywhy. I don't quite understand the concept of what the instruments should or shouldn't be. Kontakt is easy to understand because its samples and you can't really change them much. However MSF is a synth and its much easier to manipulate things. In the super-saw instrument example there are a lot of controls and it can make a lot of sounds that aren't a supersaw. Kontakt usually doesn't have anything like that. I was thinking more in terms of concept than sound. For example "FM mixed with wavetable", "Analog MPE", or "PM string sounds". All of those could be basses, plucks, leads, pads, fx, etc. However this seems to be the opposite of what you're saying.

In other words should people be

1). Coming up with a concept, making a GUI and then making 15-20 presets using that concept.

2). Coming up with a concept and then splitting it into 3-8 different instruments based on categories like "lead, bass, pad" etc. Then making 2-5 presets for each instrument.

3). Making a preset and then putting macros on it so others can adjust it.

Should all of the instruments be things like "Super-saw maker", "808 maker", "Dark pad maker", "FM piano maker"? I did have some ideas that were specific like this, but many were more general concepts and not actual specific sounds. Another question I have is, who are these for? Are instruments for people who know how synths work, but aren't familiar with melda plugins or want to save time? Or are they for people that don't know anything about synthesis?

[MeldaProduction]

dmbaer: Got it. The information about each device CAN be saved, just click the Save device button and see . But you are right, Supersaw doesn't have that, so I'll finish this one before the action starts.

chandler: Understood and there are some good points. However I think introducing a thing like "concept" would be very confusing for end users. So to answer your primary question - what is an instrument. Well, anything! That's the thing, you can do what you described, but you can also be much more specific. Sure, the supersaw can be much more than just a supersaw, but I don't see a problem in that. If you introduce some "concept", you could make various sounds with it, true, but it would force you to make it generalized enough. But what if you simply wanted a nice distorted bass arp? You don't want to spend time with stuff that could be related to leads only. And this stuff would also require more controls, hence more complex "concepts".
But now there are simply instruments (or sounds). So let's say I make a nice distorted bass arp. There's absolutely no reason, which you couldn't take this instrument and change it just a little bit to come up with something different! After all the internal modules may be able to change such a bass to something very different just by touching a few parameters. You may argue that it wouldn't be a new instrument, but I argue that it would . Because you simply cannot cover everything with one set of settings. And the fact that you can just take one instrument and transform it easily to something completely different is imho quite beautiful.
Of course, maybe we should then add a requirement, that if your instrument is based on some other instrument, you need to mention that in the device info.


Btw. I came to conclusion that the 3rd party licence conditions may be even easier, literally free for both the designer and the end user in fact. Makes sense? Who knows, but I think it could be really cool. More here:
https://www.meldaproduction.com/doc/MSoundFactory