Applied Accoustic Systems has a modular now I guess

[SLiC]

I feel confident Multiphonics will continue to develop and grow into a beast beyond Tassman, which was a sweet instrument back then.

why? have they added more modules to it since it was released? i haven't been paying attention. it's been out a couple years right?

They've updated and I read news about upcoming modules. Mostly, I base my confidence in the fact that AAS is a solid company. I hope my optimism is proven correct.

AAS are a solid company with a good record for updating (although often paid updates). The problem really is that their modular is so far behind the competition that I just can’t ever think of a reason to open it over VCV or VM…it will take some very significant updates to catch up…I just don’t know why they bothered to launch something so unoriginal, limited and so far behind the current software Modular’s

[Michael L]

I just don’t know why they bothered to launch something so unoriginal, limited and so far behind the current software Modulars

They probably got unoriginal, limited and outdated module code for cheap.

[Shabdahbriah]

I just don’t know why they bothered to launch something so unoriginal, limited and so far behind the current software Modulars

They probably got unoriginal, limited and outdated module code for cheap.

Is that a thing? I couldn't wrap my head around it either. Particularly given their legacy with Tassman, it just seemed/seems really mediocre by comparison to VM and VCV, and that is self-evident.

[Michael L]

Is that a thing? I couldn't wrap my head around it either. Particularly given their legacy with Tassman, it just seemed/seems really mediocre by comparison to VM and VCV, and that is self-evident.

For example, there must be about a hundred synth modules as PureData objects, and they can all be compiled to C++. AAS makes money promoting the simple Multiphonics product with lots of *Designer* presets. It's their business model.

Remember, Tassman was developed by Stephan Tassart who left AAS long ago (at Blackmagic now). AAS should give Tassman to an open-source development team like Surge, who could update it in so many cool ways: 64-bit, better GUI, Play in Builder, update PM algos, etc

[Shabdahbriah]

For example, there must be about a hundred synth modules as PureData objects, and they can all be compiled to C++. AAS makes money promoting the simple Multiphonics product with lots of *Designer* presets. It's their business model.

Ah... of course.

Remember, Tassman was developed by Stephan Tassart who left AAS long ago (at Blackmagic now).

Yes, I remember him leaving. (had Tassman since forever).

AAS should give Tassman to an open-source development team like Surge, who could update it in so many cool ways: 64-bit, better GUI, Play in Builder, update PM algos, etc

That has been proposed by users/fans for ages, and would be a really cool move on their part, but they are apparently not convinced that the PR alone, would be beneficial. Surely, the resurrection 'buzz' that would create throughout the "industry" could not be a bad thing, given how many people loved Tassman, and have wanted an update for years.

[VariKusBrainZ]

Yet they still managed to help develop a physmod Eurorack module in recent history, so the fact the supposed original programmer left doesn’t appear to carry much weight with regard to the above hypothesis

[Michael L]

Yet they still managed to help develop a physmod Eurorack module in recent history,

Intellijel just programmed some of the Chromaphone algos into a eurorack module, Plonk.
Tassman is far more complex.
BUt if another group collaborated with AAS on a Tassman update, it might work.

[whyterabbyt]

Yet they still managed to help develop a physmod Eurorack module in recent history, so the fact the supposed original programmer left doesn’t appear to carry much weight with regard to the above hypothesis

Their product line hasnt really advanced beyond them recycling Tassman code, the module is no different.

EXCITER consists of a realistic mallet model and flexible noise source.
OBJECT models strings, beams, marimbas, drumheads, membranes, and plates

The Mallet module is used to simulate the force impact produced by a
mallet striking a structure. It is usually used in combination with acoustic
objects such as the Beam, Membrane, Plate and String modules in order to
play them.

Chromaphone is synthesizer built around the combination of acoustic resonators. The resulting instruments are played using a mallet or the signal from a noise source.
.
.
Available resonator types are: string, open and closed tube, plate, drumhead, membrane, bar,
marimba bar and a manual mode.

[CrystalWizard]

I feel confident Multiphonics will continue to develop and grow into a beast beyond Tassman, which was a sweet instrument back then.

Totally impossible, but very pleasant wishful thinking!
Tassman developer Stephane Tassart left AAS long ago to join Blackmagic.
Multiphonics has almost nothing in common with Tassman, it's entirely different.

Yeah, Michael, you make a good point. I don't expect Multiphonics to be like Tassman . . . that's gone, goodbye. But I do expect it to fill the modular hole swimmingly. I've liked it since it's v1.0 release, and I don't find it "vanilla" after I chocolate it up. I'm not claiming that this will be the desert island soft synth, but I'm happy to have it.

Current approximate price of vanilla beans is about $11 per ounce. Chocolate beans are closer to $3 per ounce.
Just sayin'

off topic:
Just sayn', almost nothing that you eat has real vanilla bean extract in it, it's almost all synthetic vanillin, much cheaper than $3/oz. ($3/30ml. for the sane world).

on topic: It's true Tassart left but they have access to some of that code (or similar) because they are using it in SS, EP, UA, etc. Tassart wasn't the only PM dev (did he take patents with him)? Surely they have the means to put out some very innovative modules (Objekt Delay, resonators in Chromo, Corpus?)-which is the very one and only reason i could see for them to even create MP CV-1. That kind of stuff would be saffron flavored and i would pay for that (which i admit is kinda crappy since i did pay for Tassman but that was so long ago that i can understand they want to earn more $, like if they had released some paid updates over the years). I'd be so happy if they released a MP 2.0 with a bunch of PM modules that i would buy it! Never mind the CPU hit, i'll gladly freeze trax, i do it all the time anyway, it helps me move forward, eventually it will not even be an issue.
I don't expect them to repackage a lot of PM code as modules and give them away~But, aside from that, i don't see any reason to get MP. I have Reaktor (my gold standard, one can actually do some great PM stuff, and most everything else, with it) and VCV Rack. I honestly like the sound of MP more than VCV sometimes but flexibility and module choice don't compare.
I, too, used to get excited by promises from AAS. I still really like their (rehashed) stuff but i don't expect much from them, experience so far is that nothing new is being developed for decades. They are friendly and helpful, i met one of them at NAMM, very cool person.

more blather:
people throw around words like hate and love a lot on KVRaudio, i rarely use the first word for anything but the second i do, just not often for the less animate parts of life like synthesizers. Reaktor and Tassman though, were two of my first software scores and years later i really love (to use) them. (Love my homebuilts.)
Lastly, i'm embarassed to post this but i'm not sure if i posted AAS directly after my last post in this thread. When i wake up later in the AM and I'll check.

[Michael L]

Continuing on the Tassman Tangent:
The AAS principals were involved in the very early development of PM at IRCAM, so they were real pioneers -- but its quite crude by today's standards (eg SWAM instruments).
When you turn off the effects in AAS presets you can hear how the sound lacks complexity-- resonances, harmonics etc -- but the AAS sound designers really do make the most of those synths!!
I also have great affection for Tassman, and the community effort that made gazillions of patches! But realistically, I think a Tassman upgrade to modern standards would be a major R&D effort, and require both outside investment and much time.

[dayjob]

I feel confident Multiphonics will continue to develop and grow into a beast beyond Tassman, which was a sweet instrument back then.

why? have they added more modules to it since it was released? i haven't been paying attention. it's been out a couple years right?

They've updated and I read news about upcoming modules. Mostly, I base my confidence in the fact that AAS is a solid company. I hope my optimism is proven correct.

i hope your optimism is proven correct as well.. but so far their modular is far behind the other options in what it offers for sound generation/processing/manipulation. it's a shame they haven't developed more modules for it. i don't expect it to be like tassman but the last i looked, other than the Object filter, it was basically a bread and butter type subtractive synth.. which is all well and good but is hardly in the same class as reaktor blocks, VCVrack, Drambo on iOS and even free platforms like BespokeSynth or the countless fixed architecture softsynths.

it's currently on sale for $50 which seems like a fair price but not when there's so much more out there with much more flexible synthesis options.

i can see how people would like a set limitation of modules to not get lost in the weeds... and multiphonics fits that bill perfectly so... the more the merrier. modular patching is fun and leads to interesting places even with a small set of modules.

[syntonica]

I was comparing the two last night. Tassman has 100+ modules, but the majority of them are ins, outs, logicals, modulators, etc. MultiP needs a few more effects (e.g. flanger, chorus, etc.), bp and notch filters, plus the aforementioned things to come close to comparing. The Objeq filter does really take care of most of the pm duties where Tassman had each combo broken out into its own module.

Basically, MultiP could be a contender if they let Tassman guide them a bit more. I don't think we need a clone, but something comparable.

(...okay, maybe we need a clone...)

[masterhiggins]

I always get the impression that their source code wasn’t documented well enough to be able to extract or reuse large portions of it for their new products. I think they’re also limited on what they can add to their existing stuff. Like what’s their last instrument synth algo that’s actually new? There aren’t any new parameters or oscillator types or filter updates. They’re only doing things like introducing layering and more output fx. Nothing internal has changed from ultra analog 20 years ago. Just “more” of it.

[Michael L]

Like what’s their last instrument synth algo that’s actually new? There aren’t any new parameters or oscillator types or filter updates. They’re only doing things like introducing layering and more output fx. Nothing internal has changed from ultra analog 20 years ago. Just “more” of it.

So true, AND physical modelling is not based on simple oscillator-filter algos, but on far more complex math models of the physical properties of the instrument. Wikipedia/Physical modelling synthesis has a good description:

"to model the sound of a drum, there would be a mathematical model of how striking the drumhead injects energy into a two-dimensional membrane. Incorporating this, a larger model would simulate the properties of the membrane (mass density, stiffness, etc.), its coupling with the resonance of the cylindrical body of the drum, and the conditions at its boundaries (a rigid termination to the drum's body), describing its movement over time and thus its generation of sound.

Similar stages to be modelled can be found in instruments such as a violin, though the energy excitation in this case is provided by the slip-stick behavior of the bow against the string, the width of the bow, the resonance and damping behavior of the strings, the transfer of string vibrations through the bridge, and finally, the resonance of the soundboard in response to those vibrations."

Clearly, updating a PM synth is more difficult than a subtractive synth, and AAS needs to update their 20-year-old physical models to improve quality, but apparently that R&D is too costly. So they can only add FX and get sound designers to 'make the best of it.'

[himalaya]

I also have great affection for Tassman

Same here. Tassman signifies a very special era for me.