Tranzistow/Diodow

[wagtunes]

I don't know. I can use it just fine. And you know how picky I am about interfaces.

[egbert101]

How can someone's opinion be flawed if they like a synth for what it is? Use cases and preferences and past experiences and comfort zones differ. This is an immense workhorse synthesis tool for those who are so inclined. And it's totally understandable some other people might not be so inclined.

Sure, for some types of people, they will love this. It ticks all the boxes for the elitist OCD. However for the vast majority, and people new to music production, it doesn't cut it as a practical or useable tool.

[wagtunes]

How can someone's opinion be flawed if they like a synth for what it is? Use cases and preferences and past experiences and comfort zones differ. This is an immense workhorse synthesis tool for those who are so inclined. And it's totally understandable some other people might not be so inclined.

Sure, for some types of people, they will love this. It ticks all the boxes for the elitist OCD. However for the vast majority, and people new to music production, it doesn't cut it as a practical or useable tool.

So I suppose Poly Ana isn't a usable tool either. Have you seen that train wreck of an interface?

[Guenon]

It ticks all the boxes for the elitist OCD. However for the vast majority, and people new to music production, it doesn't cut it as a practical or useable tool.

I remember when samplers were actual physical boxes, and the vast majority using them edited stuff on a 2-4 row LCD. Not an LCD like a computer display using that tech, but an LCD like on a TI-85 -like graphic calculator, only even crummier.

If it's an elitist OCD thing, it probably suits me. Most definitely an elitist in some ways over here (hellooo), and I do recognize shades of the OCD/perfectionist spectrum in my habits when going all-in doing synthesis / sound design

[wagtunes]

It ticks all the boxes for the elitist OCD. However for the vast majority, and people new to music production, it doesn't cut it as a practical or useable tool.

I remember when samplers were actual physical boxes, and the vast majority using them edited stuff on a 2-4 row LCD. Not an LCD like a computer display using that tech, but an LCD like on a TI-85 -like graphic calculator, only even crummier.

If it's an elitist OCD thing, it probably suits me. Most definitely an elitist in some ways over here (hellooo), and I do recognize shades of the OCD/perfectionist spectrum in my habits when going all-in doing synthesis / sound design

The problem is, these people are either too young to remember how things were or too spoiled to accept anything less than a graphic artist's masterpiece, which is sad. Because this thing sounds like no other synth I own.

But, whatever.

[EvilDragon]

However for the vast majority, and people new to music production, it doesn't cut it as a practical or useable tool.

It was not intended for the vast majority or especially people new to music production... If it were intended for the vast majority, it would have been a for sale product. But it isn't.

[egbert101]

So I suppose Poly Ana isn't a usable tool either. Have you seen that train wreck of an interface?

I don't know much about the history of Poly Ana, but I never liked the interface, but I thought it sounded pretty good.

[egbert101]

I remember when samplers were actual physical boxes, and the vast majority using them edited stuff on a 2-4 row LCD. Not an LCD like a computer display using that tech, but an LCD like on a TI-85 -like graphic calculator, only even crummier.

If it's an elitist OCD thing, it probably suits me. Most definitely an elitist in some ways over here (hellooo), and I do recognize shades of the OCD/perfectionist spectrum in my habits when going all-in doing synthesis / sound design

Well I actually had a sampler, back in the nineties and it didn't even have an LCD. Actually probably one of the reasons why I didn't use it, and gave up on music back then.

But yeah, some people love getting hugely technical, and I do too sometimes, but that other side of my brain, the creative side, wants something more playable and friendly, and even aesthetically pleasing (gosh).

[toonertik]

Go ahead and suggest a GUI that can easily convey over 3500 parameters without being overbearing or too slow to edit.

Those who are willing to crack this nut are going to be immensely rewarded. Others aren't important and Tranzistow is not intended for them.

Yup>> and it really makes one think and plan ahead to create the sounds...
A bit like "old skool" modular synths or writing code.
My guess is>> you either "get it" or "forget it"
Pretty GUI not always mean pretty sound...
This is a monster synth>>>
maybe best left for the big boys>>>

[egbert101]

Yup>> and it really makes one think and plan ahead to create the sounds...
A bit like "old skool" modular synths or writing code.
My guess is>> you either "get it" or "forget it"
Pretty GUI not always mean pretty sound...
This is a monster synth>>>
maybe best left for the big boys>>>

Or, maybe different people lean towards different things. For example, some people spend their lives playing the guitar, and scoff at keyboardists. Some people spend their life only using hardware, and swear it's better than software. It doesn't mean any particular group is special, they're just different.

Of course, GUI has no effect on sound, but it does have an affect, if you know the difference. Listening to music made by music engineers, rather than musicians, for example, maybe they are appreciated in different ways to different people. Neither are necessarily superior to another.

[toonertik]

Or, maybe different people lean towards different things. For example, some people spend their lives playing the guitar, and scoff at keyboardists.

Really? During the 1970's and 80's I was a live sound engineer, then studio engineer... I never once worked with a band where a guitarist would scoff at a keyboardist or visa_versa (unless it was a squabble over a girl or other personal thing)... ofc they might scoff at the "deaf and dummer" (drummer.. but that is a whole other issue.. )> So i am left wondering what kind of musicians you refer to. My experience also shows that quiet a few guitarists also compose on keyboards...

Some people spend their life only using hardware, and swear it's better than software. It doesn't mean any particular group is special, they're just different.


Of course, GUI has no effect on sound, but it does have an affect, if you know the difference. Listening to music made by music engineers, rather than musicians, for example, maybe they are appreciated in different ways to different people. Neither are necessarily superior to another.

I guess this was your response to my joking "best left for the big boys" quip/remark...
BUT on a serious note>> I have a few synths, all with different GUIs... I have not noticed the GUI affecting my sounds nor the way I work... after all, they (synths) are just tools.

[wagtunes]

I used to have one of these.



See that LCD? Yeah, I know...if you squint you miss it.

That's what I programmed this thing with.

We are SOOOOOO spoiled today.

[wagtunes]

Here's another gem from my past.



Try programming THIS thing. LMAO.

Yeah, SPOILED!!!!

[wagtunes]

Here's another gem from my past.



Talk about needing good eyes and the patience of a saint.

[justin3am]

Those are all easy, as the menu structures actually makes some kind of sense.
I tried programming a Cheetah MS800 not long ago and really struggled...

But somehow RDJ made an entire album with it. Different strokes for different folks.