One Synth Challenge #100: Lord of the Springs (Taron Wins!)

[JKF Flashico]

Voted!

[edwardsm]

I have voted.

This for me was on of the most challenging OSC , the synth in question was for me terrible sorry. Could not make a decent pad sound for shit. Im sorry i know a bit about DSP programming so know how hard it is. However, all those hi freq messes when you try to make a sound a no no.

Out of all the entries about 13-15 to me seemed good the rest pretty terrible. Why Vodka resonance? As I had choice go to pub get trashed or stay in master track. I went to pub doh and submitted with a major hangover....

[Taron]

Sorry you felt that way. LotS is not for everybody, that's apparently so. The fact that one CAN make a pad with it is something I added to it along with noise so that there's more for the OSC to work with. I must say, I have plenty of fun with it, but I know where I can take it and how. It's by nearly no means traditional, because it rides on very basic physical modeling, but it takes sense, understanding and desire to discover what magic it offers. If you just care about everyday DSP processes, a nice set of oscillators and filters, you're certainly at the wrong address.
So, yeah, I'm sorry it was terrible for you. ...but thanks for trying it anyway!

[generaldiomedes]

I have voted.

This for me was on of the most challenging OSC , the synth in question was for me terrible sorry. Could not make a decent pad sound for shit. Im sorry i know a bit about DSP programming so know how hard it is. However, all those hi freq messes when you try to make a sound a no no.

Out of all the entries about 13-15 to me seemed good the rest pretty terrible. Why Vodka resonance? As I had choice go to pub get trashed or stay in master track. I went to pub doh and submitted with a major hangover....

Hey now, have some respect for the hard work that went into this. I think LoTS fits perfectly well into its own little corner of the freeware VST garden. Not every synth needs to be a Sylenth clone, and the variety of tunes this month reflects that.

And I liked Vodka Resonance .. different strokes.

[Taron]

Thanks, generaldiomedes!
...I'm just glad he didn't suck the wind out of my sails while I was still in full swing. I've already fixed the noise filter sweeping for the next update, which will come shortly. Both frequency and resonance will be perfectly smooth now during automation!

My next big thing is a big delay improvement, which I can hopefully think up somewhat quickly.
But before then I'll add some more tutorials, including a help for people to understand how to deal with the frequencies. I can understand that it's hard for many to realize what's possible with it and how best to deal with it. Thus...I will try my best to help!

The saddest thing to me is that people want the world for free, something I can relate to and if I had that power, I'd wave my wand to make that happen, but we're not there, yet, and instead of gratitude for any daring innovation, one gets smacked over the head by them, who wouldn't dare pay, if they had to.
...I mean, even those, who liked it didn't consider hitting that donate button, except for 3 people, 2 of whom I consider old friends by now. I mean, I dedicate myself to it, because I feel that it has more purpose for others than the projects I used to do to earn money. But the reality is, you all show me how much it's worth it to you and I have to accept that realization... I'm failing you. But I intend on figuring it out and hopefully will make enough of you happy before my family starves or I have to quit dreaming.

[doctorbob]

... have a beer on me my friend ...

dB

[Taron]

Ah, jeeez... THANKS, BOB! That gets me pretty drunk, too... ...I'm a lightweight by now!
THANK YOU!

[doctorbob]

Ah, jeeez... THANKS, BOB! That gets me pretty drunk, too... ...I'm a lightweight by now!
THANK YOU!

My pleasure ... and thanks for LotS - looking forward to later versions - maybe a tremolo? - hehe!
dB

[wagtunes]

While I was unable to do anything with the synth, hearing the amazing sounds that people got out of it, the fault was clearly NOT with the synth but with ME. So if you had problems getting amazing sounds out of this thing, maybe you need to look in the mirror instead of blaming the synth.

Some of the tunes made this month prove that.

[] Peter:H []

The saddest thing to me is that people want the world for free, something I can relate to and if I had that power, I'd wave my wand to make that happen, but we're not there, yet, and instead of gratitude for any daring innovation, one gets smacked over the head by them, who wouldn't dare pay, if they had to.
...I mean, even those, who liked it didn't consider hitting that donate button, except for 3 people, 2 of whom I consider old friends by now. I mean, I dedicate myself to it, because I feel that it has more purpose for others than the projects I used to do to earn money. But the reality is, you all show me how much it's worth it to you and I have to accept that realization... I'm failing you. But I intend on figuring it out and hopefully will make enough of you happy before my family starves or I have to quit dreaming.

Don't want to sound too harsh, it's just my personal gut feeling about things
1.) feedback culture in OSC: I see alot of "greats!" and "tremendous!" comments around here. Sometimes I can share the authors opinion, sometimes I have a hard time to believe everything is so brilliant here, especially if I listen to pro sound these days...I know all this "positive feedback" stuff, took part in too many brain wash training on that topic, but I have decided for myself to do reliable honest feedback and if I listen to something I would describe as crap I rather don't give to positive feedback out of courtesy but rather say what in my eyes is wrong. Sorry, I did this on some tracks on soundcloud...

2.) Your synth - For one point of view, I just say one word "productivity". In todays world nobody has time and just very few people share the patience that is required to learn and adapt to completely new things. People adapt to completely new things only then when it's realy a disruptive new technology (like digcams was for kodak) but it takes time until you have persuaded the early adopters and reach into the early majority / pragmatist people...but remember the digicam...the break thru came when "normal" people where easily able to use it in their comfort zone and when the infrastructure was there, that they can get their usual photo copies of their digital pictures. See also Melda Plugins. Tremendously versatile but they have an acceptance problem GUI-wise, therefore Melda introduced the easy screens a while ago....that said I see some point for improvement (subjective / my point of view)
a.) lack of a comprehensible manual where the model / signal flow is decribed in detail (see for instance NI Massive, the model is even depicted in the synth itself). I hate to only have videos...I love to be able to look up things in manuals...call me old fashined...
b.) lack of intuitive gui...I was only able to go with the plain parameter view in cubase.
c.) lack of a clear unique selling proposition, because I have not heard any sound in this OSC, that I would say is not producible by a clever pro sound designer with the tools we have already, like VA, other PhyMo, Granular, Wavetable and that sort of stuff.
d.) Very versatile other PhyMod Stuff: https://www.physicalaudio.co.uk/presets.html

That said - I ask myself. Would I buy it? Or donate? Hm...what would you do? For me that OSC was nevertheless a good experiment, but currently I don't see I would use LotS again. That was just my struggle...

Please - this is sort of a provocation on intention, but I bet you - Taron - can get something out of that. And all other - excuse me for this provocation, but I think I've made myself clear that this is my very subjective view on the topic and that said I would love to suggest to not start a thread of arguments whether my subjective view is right or wrong if you don't share it, because your subjective view is completely different.

[Taron]

Oh, wag, and everybody else here at the OSC. I want to clarify real quick: My worries are in regards to the over 700 downloads I've had since I hooked up the donate button and the realization that there was only 1 donation, which I could not identify as a gift from a friend. When I say "you", I mean everyone, who gives LotS a try and don't meant to squeeze anything out of us here at the OSC. That's a horrible thought for me from every angle.
I do appreciate any support, of course, but I completely hate the very idea of soliciting in the first place and every place. It's dreadful and ugly to me.

Now, wag, I must not get much from what you've said, because it would completely discourage any move forward to innovation for me or anybody else.
I do completely understand the complaint about the lack of a manual and proper explanations. Thank you for the reminder!

May I be allowed to squeeze in a little outrage of my own? I'll just go for it, heck...
How many of your pro synths can do 88 voices without a hick-up or produce the kind of sounds you get out of LotS without twice the processing time or more. Beyond that, you can naturally and easily create sounds with LotS that may not at all be possible in other synths, because it has a very specific and unique process, carefully weighted for quality and speed. You may not quite understand it, but this should not encourage you to make wild claims like you did about how easily those sounds could be reproduced elsewhere. That kinda turns my stomach a little...not for LotS, but for you and those, who might believe what you're saying.

HOWEVER, I do get your points and there is a high risk of possibility that you are more right than I care to believe. I just don't want to submit to the opportunistic stagnation that keeps people from evolving, because it's more worth it to spoon feed them with the same stuff they "already know". Yet, I just have to find the right angle to make the new stuff more delicious to them right away!

Again, I apologize to all of us here at the OSC. I'm super happy about the music you've made with LotS and consider it a fantastic contribution. You can't possibly be as proud of them as I am and I am hoping some of you will allow me to integrate your tracks into a showcase playlist (with all desired credits, of course!).

One more thing to you wag: Thanks! I know you mean to help and you do, too. Every sight is an insight and yours is likely applicable to great many people. I wished it would be different, of course, wished it would be a little bit easier, too, but then where's the challenge in that! ...I have every intention to take it on!

[wagtunes]

All I'm saying is, it's not the synth alone that makes greatness. Talented people can do amazing things. The songs in this OSC proves that and you SHOULD be proud. That I was unable to do what these people did is more a reflection on me than the synth. I'm simply used to working with your typical "throw a sawtooth through a filter and go from there" synth. LotS was totally foreign ground to me as it should be. It's a unique synth. I don't do very well with physical modeling synths in general, even the most expensive ones. I don't really understand physical modeling. Not everybody does. That doesn't mean it's bad. It just means it's different.

Had you done a same old same old synth, you wouldn't have gotten the compliments you've gotten because most people would have been like "ho hum, another VA synth." You didn't go that route. You dared to be extremely different and I applaud you for that. Hell, I couldn't make a one oscillator synth with just a simple ADSR if my life depended on it, so I'm sure as hell not going to judge somebody else's creation.

Bottom Line: What people were able to get out of LotS proves that any problems others had with the synth was in themselves and NOT in LotS.

And with that, I've said my peace.

You rock Taron.

[mehum]

Don't want to sound too harsh, it's just my personal gut feeling about things
1.) feedback culture in OSC: I see alot of "greats!" and "tremendous!" comments around here. Sometimes I can share the authors opinion, sometimes I have a hard time to believe everything is so brilliant here, especially if I listen to pro sound these days...I know all this "positive feedback" stuff, took part in too many brain wash training on that topic, but I have decided for myself to do reliable honest feedback and if I listen to something I would describe as crap I rather don't give to positive feedback out of courtesy but rather say what in my eyes is wrong. Sorry, I did this on some tracks on soundcloud...

* I would bet all of us are amateurs with limited time and means to give to music production. Judging quality in relation to music recorded in professional studios or by seasoned pros is not really fair. Most of us work at least moderately hard on our compositions and I really think everyone does something that is creative and good whether it caters to my taste or not.

* Different people have different philosophies when it comes to judging. Some, like you (and me, I guess), want to give what you judge as valuable criticism. Others go after the principle "if you have nothing good to say, say nothing at all" or just don't have much input or want to impose their vision on other people's work. We all also listen for wildly different things, and judge from that perspective. I can agree the extremely positive attitude can seem as useless for feedback but it can be good for creating a welcoming environment. On the flip side I can sometimes find even the most well meaning and constructive criticism to be utterly useless since it can lead to composing-by-proxy... I certainly am guilty of this at times...

Bottom line: both positivism and criticism have value and everybody makes something worth commending, in my opinion.

[Taron]

There's so little left for me to add to whatever speech I was going to make at the end of all this... by now I should find a way to subtract in order to make a meaningful statement at the end.
Let me just say this (really triggered by wag's kindness):
All I can strive for is to repay all of you for the many and powerful things I am learning from all of you at the OSC. What you do and have done for me gives me the power to give all I can give to everybody and the desire to make that potential bigger and stronger with great love and happiness. I celebrate every frustration that goes along with it, for it means that I'm forging forward. Your understanding and dedication to what we are all trying to do here is the most powerful motivation anybody can hope for and with it you are changing my future and strengthen my faith in- what I like calling- universal logic.
Countless things I still have to learn, as we all do, naturally. But to see the path and feel the truly loving wish to walk it, even run it at times, is something utterly priceless. Thank you all!

I'm sure, I still won't shut up when the results are through.

[] Peter:H []

May I be allowed to squeeze in a little outrage of my own? I'll just go for it, heck...
How many of your pro synths can do 88 voices without a hick-up or produce the kind of sounds you get out of LotS without twice the processing time or more. Beyond that, you can naturally and easily create sounds with LotS that may not at all be possible in other synths, because it has a very specific and unique process, carefully weighted for quality and speed. You may not quite understand it, but this should not encourage you to make wild claims like you did about how easily those sounds could be reproduced elsewhere. That kinda turns my stomach a little...not for LotS, but for you and those, who might believe what you're saying.

I'm very clever, because I have forced you to think about your USP (unique selling proposition or call it elevator pitch) and write it down in a clear statement. There it is!

Now let's work together to sharpen it even more:
My question is, that I will answer - How can you make your product more attractive to your target audience and increase the conversion rate.

I doubt that you fully understand your target audience (sorry, I'm an IT guy for 20 years for implementing business informations systems and the lack of understanding of User eXperience amongst programmers is a source of steady confusion) because this USP must reflect into the GUI. The best function is worth nothing if Users don't feel an impulsive urge of using them instantaneous and by getting feedback understandig it intuitively.
I tell you what I think. A typical user of your synth (how do you describe your prototypical user? This approach is called user journey or user centered design) is looking for inspiration and new sound. That said things that you put into the center of your marketing, i.e. 88 voices and a resizeable GUI and small executable size due to resizable GUI is NOT what they are looking for or are interested in at all. 88 Voices - how counts voices anyway? I don't. Users jsut don't care if they're looking for inspirational new stuff. But "good" to know. Can you follow that reasoning, right?

A GUI in any sense must have some properties to be said to have high usability and accesibility:
* suitability for the task,
* suitability for learning (that includes intuitive feedback of the effect of user interactions),
* suitability for individualisation,
* conformity with user expectations,
* self descriptiveness,
* controllability, and
* error tolerance.
Heres the ISO for that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_9241#ISO_9241-110

Please - Work on the GUI and concentrat on the Usability part rather then technical properties (resizable) that your target audience is not interested in first place. Your GUI is your store sign, people tend to even say good looking plug-ins sound better and I bet they are willing to pay more.

And where in the GUI is your USP "physical modeling" reflected? Where can I have cool GUI elements that show me whats going on in the synth. Where are the springs springing? I give you examples: Tube Warmers have very often GUI elements that show a glowing tube. why? And by the way: Go over to Matt Tytel of Helm and go thru his blog on GUI design and take a look into his GUI - I bet you can see how he managed to cleverly fullfil many of the properties of user centered design, even the GUI-interaction-result-feedback part. And btw he has a brilliant flat design with all parameters on one single page...
Apropos: Feedback - You see this now in every of those new Wavetable synths, like Parawaves Rapid and Tone2 Icarus, they all have a wavetable 3D display which reflects back to the user of what she is doing.

Okay, I close now my "lecture" on User Centered Design and hope that this can serve as some sort of inspiration...I don't talk about a "free limited" and "buy unimited version" marketing like those guys over there at Tokyo Dawn Labs...oh and the website...sigh
Sorry, I don't want to be frustrating you, but Open Source is not just a fast-selling item without any UX or marketing centered actions. And it's now not the time to put the head into the sand.
Please - Make an action plan if you want to get paid and concentrat on the quick wins that help your users the most.
I'm willing to support with feedback, but let's then take it to some other communication channel.