Anukari 3D Physics Synthesizer: Beta Released

[anukari-music]

If you'd be so kind as to bring to my attention a current piece of marketing material that annoys you I'd be interested to improve it. Anukari builds on the shoulders of giants and I have no desire to downplay any of the amazing work that has come before. (But... it is still something very new, and I will reflect that in my writing!)

Well, I took a look at the MIDI.org page since it was posted here. Quoting from the pitch:

"This kind of 3D physics simulation for audio has been done academically in the past, with projects like GENESIS, mi-gen, Tao, and others, but it has always been very experimental and not a commercially available product." This pretty much omits anything that has been done in the past 10 years, academically or commercially.

"As far as I’m aware, there is no other commercially-available synthesizer out there that’s really anything like Anukari." See above.

Oh, that. I'm happy to stand by that. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Regarding the Baby Audio paper you linked, the author of the paper has been in my discord server for years, and I've quite enjoyed chit-chatting about this kind of synthesis with him. It's a small community and developers are quite supportive of one another. In fact I recall being one of the first to congratulate him on the release of Atoms.

I may be wrong, but it appears to me that you wish to whip up some kind of drama here. However, I don't think there is any drama. I sincerely appreciate that you wish to ensure that other small developers receive credit for their work -- I feel the same way. Maybe it would be fun to add a page to the Anukari website that showcases other synthesizers in the same space.

Anyway, I'm sorry that you do not enjoy Anukari as a synthesizer. I look forward to continuing to work to make it better.

[joradn]

I can't say I agree with the recent criticisms in this thread. Anukari has been very stable for me, and the circuit breaker is just a safety feature not much different from a limiter/clipper like a lot of plugins have on the output. I simply disabled the circuit breaker and have no issues. I'd much rather a plugin let me push its limits than dampen its functionality to convey an arbitrary sense of stability.

Nothing against Atoms, I respect the work and theory behind it, but I own both and prefer Anukari in every aspect. It's one of my favourite sounding synths out of the box. I'm not going to yap on, because I'm not being paid, but it's disappointing to see this forum act so pessimistic towards genuinely innovative software and plugins. I prefer supporting independent developers and offering constructive feedback when I can. Anyways... back to lurking.

[Funky40]

Anukari much likely needs some Eqing to keep the sound in balance. Can´t vouch, cause =>

JFYI:
to notes vs. my enthusiasm, it´s based on:
- that i load Anukari within GP (host)
- that i run a one-knob controlled EQ morph.
- that my cPU and GPU can stomach Anukari, haha ( M4Mac Studio-max) / no clue how much the GPU counts / the host runs single threaded ( just uses one core)

the longer: (hope it´s readable and understandable, my english)
- without that EQ morph i´m runnng is the soundexperience quite a different one.
- It´s in fact a gamechanger for me vs. the Anukari Synth (...and vs. several other Synths too). I nearly permanently play that slider. Which acts in return automaticly as a "sound/frequenzy balancer" vs. Anukari
- The morph explained in simple is a LP-BP-HP morph. Just, the control is absolutely not linear. And it has some more parameters inclouded. Plus i run a 2nd morph (on the same EQ) controlled with another slider. The 2nd morph is for an additional high-mids/highs rebalance, but affects the lows also at some settings. It´s overall quite complex. It took me two weeks to set that base of that morph up. That was 5 months ago in a Zebralette3 patch.
- ideally, that morph would be readjusted per the single sound preset, to create full 100% optimised jam-potential. But it is as is already above anything mere mortals would deal with (purchased products, but not only)

- Anukari wants to be combined with that type of stuff.
- It makes to me the difference between a sound that is "interesting" and a sound that you could go on stage with for a 20min solo live performance and you would/could *impress* the audience big.
It makes for the difference between a nice synth and a synth that has all of a sudden a "potential of expression" as real instruments have.
Funnily enough ARE things coming alive manipulating sounds in sync with your playing in that way.
Think: 303 and a jam with the LP-Cutoff......the sound is nolonger same.

I´d like to notes:
my EQ morph leads with Anukari to a much wider range of whats achiveable, comparing it with the other Synths (i´ve run the morph with). Anukari is just not same as other synths. It´s even ridicluous to make such comparisons. You exactly see it while playing with such "perfomance orientated" FX post the synth. Said baby audio "Atom" made me even not load the demo, or if i have, it has been deleted after 10-15 minutes. Don´t remember.

It´s funny how superficial some folks look at all his stuff.
These are Instruments ! And there´s a thing, this:
As a performer are you NOT looking for the best sounding Instrument, you look FOR the best performable Instrument. This will turn into the best sounding Instrument.
True, vs. "real acoustic Instruments", "best sounding" and "best performing" goes usually hand in hand.
With Synths it does NOT.
Not same

- Anukari is super interesting to make something with its base sounds.
What impresses me also is: how mch sound range i can get out just playing the ever same note. Low pitched notes as well as high pitched notes "can" have a frequenzy range, i´ve not had that bevore.
- point here IS: there seems to be an musking/unmaskng effect in place vs. running said EQ morph. You start to hear freqenzys when filtering the signal out, that were not exactly perceivable bevore. It´s NOT as if one would filter out an analog synth.
( to notes: you can´t just run a VCF with a LP-BP-HP morph to get same results as i do with my EQ morph. VCFs can´t do same ! ....and gaincompensation is required as part of the morph. Such morphs don´t work same without that. "common makro" functionality as seen in some plugins also DON´T work. Not same ! )



diving since 3hrs thru more presets. i had no clue there are now so many.
some are really really good !
with my morph, this thing IS a Film Music tool. Big times

cheers

[anukari-music]

Thanks, @Funky40, I agree that some nice built-in EQ-ing would be great. Also a simple convolution reverb and a couple other basic effects will be really nice. These things are on my (long) list to get to, and it may be a while, but I certainly plan to add them. It is particularly when using Anukari as a standalone app, since you can't make up for the lack of built-in effects by using other plugins like you can in a DAW.

The reason these relatively obvious things are missing is that I am a completely solo developer (and marketer, support agent, etc), so I can only move so fast. So I have to prioritize, and so far my priority has been working on the unique aspects of Anukari as much as possible. Once I'm extremely happy with the physics stuff, other things will come.

[joradn]

The latest update makes Anukari super usable with no need for a strong GPU. Highly recommend those who were unable to run it before give it a try now, my laptop can handle the heaviest presets with ease.

[tonycore]

Yes! Now playing with it on a 2015 iMac and having lotsa fun!

[Funky40]

dfifferent experience here. I´ve been on 0.9.17. Updated now to 0.9.21.
I´m on a M4Mac Studio-Max 16core/40core GPU / Sequoia 15.3



i have now (in relation) way higher Watt usage and higher temperatures.
I had to check again. Something like 10Watts more, and temps went up 10° and more.
I never seen such high Watt usage and temps on my M4studio bevore.
Temps were up to above 73°, usually at around 59°-63° => when using Anukari. With any other of my GP live-play patches i´m below 40°. Usually 35°-39° with high load patches.

Seems an interesting observation that my M4 studio went up in power draw.

What "is" a problem for me, sort of:
- With Anukari 0.9.17 / 0.9.21 is the GPU load very high. ===> This remains when not playing, AND it remains when i switch to another patch within GP that does NOT use Anukari. ( that´s a problem)
- this behave has not changed for me with 0.9.21
- assoon i load GP with Anukari patches inside goes the load, power consumption and temps of my M4studio significantly up.

- Anukari should give the ressources free, but does not somehow. ( can´t speak for any other system than my M4studio)

Anukari needs here vs. that imho a change

[anukari-music]

dfifferent experience here. I´ve been on 0.9.17. Updated now to 0.9.21.
I´m on a M4Mac Studio-Max 16core/40core GPU / Sequoia 15.3



i have now (in relation) way higher Watt usage and higher temperatures.
I had to check again. Something like 10Watts more, and temps went up 10° and more.
I never seen such high Watt usage and temps on my M4studio bevore.
Temps were up to above 73°, usually at around 59°-63° => when using Anukari. With any other of my GP live-play patches i´m below 40°. Usually 35°-39° with high load patches.

Seems an interesting observation that my M4 studio went up in power draw.

What "is" a problem for me, sort of:
- With Anukari 0.9.17 / 0.9.21 is the GPU load very high. ===> This remains when not playing, AND it remains when i switch to another patch within GP that does NOT use Anukari. ( that´s a problem)
- this behave has not changed for me with 0.9.21
- assoon i load GP with Anukari patches inside goes the load, power consumption and temps of my M4studio significantly up.

- Anukari should give the ressources free, but does not somehow. ( can´t speak for any other system than my M4studio)

Anukari needs here vs. that imho a change

Hey Funky40, thanks for the detailed info. This is pretty surprising! The 0.9.21 release does not use the GPU for audio processing any longer, so it's difficult to see why the GPU load would be so high. For most users it's been a huge performance improvement, so if anything temps should go down.

I don't have an M4Max, but I have an M4Pro and I can't seem to reproduce any of this running as a plugin in GigPerformer. GPU usage maxes out for me at ~30-40% when the GUI is open, and when I close the GUI it goes down to zero. Even for large presets the CPU usage is low and the laptop is saying in lower power mode with no fans. Also, loading an empty GP preset, everything drops to zero with no lingering usage.

So, something odd is happening -- I will DM you and see if maybe the developer logs can offer a clue to what's going on. I appreciate the feedback!

[Funky40]

So, something odd is happening --

I see !
yes, seems strange then.

What i can add here is: my Anukari Gig file is a GP project with quasi solely Anukari patches.
Only one Serum "rackspace" was placed in there.
Good you have GP !

I´ve had a M4mini-pro too. And still have a M4mini base. A M4pro is definitly running way hotter than a studio. I allready wondered how a M4pro would look. Thought it would cook now, haha

This is really strange. My M4studio runs fine with anything else. But one can not excloude -right now- the possibility that it is effectivly just my machine. We´ll sort this out.

i come back to you with the logs respectivly PM or mail tomorrow.

[Touch The Universe]

Wow - what a rare innovative concept - how realistic to physics is this? If i did the same experiments in reality, how similar would the sounds be?

[anukari-music]

This is really strange. My M4studio runs fine with anything else. But one can not excloude -right now- the possibility that it is effectivly just my machine. We´ll sort this out.

i come back to you with the logs respectivly PM or mail tomorrow.

I greatly appreciate your help here!

[anukari-music]

Wow - what a rare innovative concept - how realistic to physics is this? If i did the same experiments in reality, how similar would the sounds be?

This is a great question! I would describe Anukari's physics simulation as fairly simple; for example it's not explicitly modeling air, so there are things that are not possible (such as doppler shifts when mics move). But on the other hand, you can do things that aren't possible in reality, like modulate the mass of a body.

I'd say there are some cases where it can be quite realistic, and others where it's not at all. Mostly I've been focused so far on interesting sounds more than realistic sounds, but in the future I like the idea of making some of the modelling more realistic. For example, I have lots of ideas for making the bow and mallet more complex/realistic.

Could be worth trying the free demo! Don't even need an email address to try it so it's pretty low-friction to see if you find the sounds to your liking.

[Funky40]

Wow - what a rare innovative concept - how realistic to physics is this? If i did the same experiments in reality, how similar would the sounds be?

i´m not a physicist or a developer. But i was *heavily* into patching with modulars and sounddesign anyway. I´d say, no, don´t ask that.


i look at it this way: this approach gives access to handle many parameters in one go.
How to access very complex sound synthesis engines, all it´s parameters ? How to make things visually graspable, visible ?
How to create simple to handle GUIs while handling very complex sound tranformations and modulation concepts ?

I look at this approach as one possible way to make very complex things accessible in a very accesible way. The point should not be if it sounds like "real". The question is: how can we make things sound "alive" ? And "alive" is where "good" comes from. Right ?



everything i saw in my 23+ years beeing into sounddesign ( not as a pro gaining $$) is that the secret lies allways in how we can access given parameters.

we need to alter many parameters in one go in a synchronised way. Under the hood.
And I as a user, musician, wants to have "from outside access" to manipulate (read: play) the sound in real time.


it´s allways the same: move many parameters in one go, each parameter movement precisely tailored on it´s own. The good sounds come from there.
And even more so, even shitrty sounds can be turned into gold from there.
(That´s why i use GP as my host. It gives me better access -from outside of the pluigins- to given parameters)


said manipulation of the mass of a body in Anukari is a nice example.
Now phrase this out in terms of common sound synthesis parameters ! what is it effectivly doing ?
it´s a form of dampening (adding mass). But in my opinion on more than just one axis (vs. the sound event). This is the point.
What has turned into one parameter for the user requires under the hood a way more complex programming. It even has to be interactive.

The concept as donne with Anukari delivers all three:
- make it visually simple graspable
- make it simple accessible as a parameter
- but deliver the required complexity,....just under the hood, ....pre-programmed.
means: i deal with a one-axis parameter, but in real live under the hood has it more axis to it.....interactive.


sorry for long winded, doubling, etc. (i´m not native english to start it with)

[Touch The Universe]

Reality is more interesting - any beauty you tweak from it is doubly moreso - I look at this concept as a way to possible understand reality - from a sound physics perspective. Don't emulate old synths but emulate reality - haha. I'd love to insert some real physics into my works which actually correspond to reality.

I'm sure it atleast somewhat resembles reality - the key is how much. I'd posit the more to reality you can get it, the more interesting it can possibly be - that's the way things usually are in creation.

[Touch The Universe]

Wow - what a rare innovative concept - how realistic to physics is this? If i did the same experiments in reality, how similar would the sounds be?

But on the other hand, you can do things that aren't possible in reality, like modulate the mass of a body.

I'd say there are some cases where it can be quite realistic, and others where it's not at all. Mostly I've been focused so far on interesting sounds more than realistic sounds, but in the future I like the idea of making some of the modelling more realistic. For example, I have lots of ideas for making the bow and mallet more complex/realistic.

Could be worth trying the free demo! Don't even need an email address to try it so it's pretty low-friction to see if you find the sounds to your liking.

I can't tell you how interesting that concept of modulating mass - the concept itself if profound enough to even escape the bounds of music production - one could generally learn new physics this way, but one can only possibly do so if it somewhat reasonables real physics (at the ground level anyway). If you flick a spring with this much force at this angle or location, how many times will the spring move and the duration, etc. When you modulate mass how does it effect the sound wave acoustics - this might give glimpses in the wave mass duality but again - as long as the core physics are sound - i mean. While you can't do this in reality, is the physics underlining this prinicple atleast sound - that's what i'm interested in.

If you are manipulating mass you are manipulating gravity - maybe the insights from this can assist making ufo's or something one day

Nonetheless, this concept is quite refreshing to see - I'd personally love to see and encourage as close to reality if possible.

Will check out sometime when i get my new labtop.