John Bowen Synth Design

That is a very cool idea and we'll probably see setups like this in the future.

Beautiful.

...but that could easily cost thirty grand. :?

This is the concept of inteface I would wish :


[img]http://perso.modulonet.fr/naneteuf/public/teuf/prototeuf-mk2/prototeufmk2f.jpg[/img]
[img]http://perso.modulonet.fr/naneteuf/public/teuf/prototeuf-mk2/prototeufmk2pers01.jpg[/img]



A wide touch screen with MoPot's (kind of potentiometers wich move on the screen and interact with it such a pen on a wacom tablet...)



[img]http://perso.numericable.fr/naneteuf/public/teuf/protointerface/mopots-show.jpg[/img]

Regards
Teuf

Very good, I love this kind of interface between "old school" (very useful, visual and handy) and "new technologies" with associate displays which are versatile/changable (I don't know the English word)

I much prefer use a minimax ASB interface than workstations interface to tweak sounds ...even if Triton's touch screen is quite interesting (but it has not enough knobs) and even if its parameters are more numerous.

In this way the Solaris interface seems to be amazing !! oh là là !!!

Thanks a lot John
Teuf

Hi John,

If the range of 'sound variation' is not too different in case of different parameters, then the normalized internal range is a good idea. On the other hand, using the original ranges is more straightforward and you can do the required transformation from 500 to 63, for example,, in the sub-routine. But, in some cases a different internal velocity curve may be required. This can be programmed later, in order to normalize the user experience, too.

... Now, it occurred to me, if I don't remember wrong, that pushing and rotating the 01X enconders, increased the speed a lot. Double function encoders like these can be quite useful in many other purposes, too. Sliders, on the other hand, are sometimes better, because they allow you to see and visually remember the settings. And, you can change 10+ parameters at the same time with your fingers, instead of rotating only two knobs at a time! I think that's why Korg selected them in their M3 keyboard instead of the knobs (not endless rotary) used in their earlier Karma keyboard.


A different kind of parameter control (just for 'brain storm'):
http://www.vintagesynth.com/roland/pgs.shtml#pg1000
With a PG-1000 you can change all the parameters of a D-50 keyboard as well as the D-550 rack module! The size of the PG-1000 controller is approximately 40cm x 30cm x 4cm. The sliders cannot ofcourse replace endless rotary encoders.
...

Recording parameter changes could be a useful function in order to make the sound more living and performances repeatable. Maybe this is something that can be done already, or, is better to leave to DAW.

Cheers,
Tiitu.

I checked with my coder about this, and here's what he had to say:

"I implemented an acceleration sensing for the knobs, however, I have an internal integer value for each parameter, some go from -1000 to 1000 and others from 0 to 127, etc...so now it's difficult to have a knob routine that's suitable for all. Once we have all parameter ranges fixed, we either try to make all parameters internally about the same range, or I can have different routines for different ranges. Now we have some parameters that are borrowed from MIDI, and others that display in their "natural" values. For example, the DADSR is in seconds, but the mod amount from -63 to 63, whatever that means...So after fixing all parameter types, I will adjust the knob accelerator."

john b.

Xpander encoders are fairly large, but for example 01x has got a row of smaller rotary encoders. They are located just under the display. Please, see the Yamaha 01X Demo by Bert Smorenburg at

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6bwiz2ta4s

Check especially the following positions:

2:06
2:22
2:59

A nice feature in 01X's encoders is that you can set the default value by just pushing on top of the encoder. Secondly, the encoders are speed-sensitive, i.e., the quicker you turn them the quicker will the values change in comparison to the linear speed. Third, pressing a shift button will allow the values change even more rapidly, or, to activate a second function.

Cheers,
Tiitu.

Please, let me refer to the Xpander discussion group at
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/xpantastic

Here are their information related to encoders:

> Hi! For the encoder you can try here:
> http://www.rs-components.com/
> There are many type of rotary encoders. Take a look at 265-2906 (RS
> code). This is a horizontal, endless rotary encoder with 30 stops/15
> impulses.
> I think it's quite the same of the Xpander

> I've found this rotary encoder: ALPS STEC16B02, a 16mm horizontal
> encoder,
> with 24 detents, 6mm axe...
> You can find it in the RS electronics or in the Distrelec catalog. I think
> they are the same of the original one

Hi John,

In sonicstate.com's Solaris video there are some sequences where you turn Solaris's knobs. At 8:24 it seems you have to turn the knob quite a lot to make a large parameter change. This leads me to wonder about the resolution of the rotary encoders. What is their "physical" resolution (i.e. how many impulses per 360 deg)?

How does Solaris handle the encoder impulses? Is there a constant relation between encoder movement and parameter range (e.g. 360 deg to cover the parameter's full range)?

In performance situations I think a static encoder response with 1 revolution coverering the full parameter range is preferable. OTOH, when programming the synth you want maximum parameter resolution. This can be accomplished by using not only the angular velocity but also the acceleration of the encoder when translating knob movement into parameter values. This scheme can be described as dynamic encoder response. Does Solaris use acceleration sensing for its encoders?

If the encoder response can be switched between static and dynamic, the user can optimize Solaris's front panel for performance use as well as sound design. Can this be done on Solaris?

ok it is a protoype yet. thanks for the answer.

One of the other things is, there is no hysteresis on the knobs at the moment, so just a little bump and you get a knob change. This is yet to be tweaked, but it's an important issue, obviously.

john b.

I saw in the video that you also by chance changed the value of the next knob when you were fiddling one of them (the display value changed).

will the distance between the knobs be big enough to allow exact tuning ?

That's cool John, it will probably be more ergonomic this way.
:)

The knobs beneath the graphic display are 5 x 5. They are too close together in the prototype, and we plan to adjust that. I did think about the "wavy" pattern idea, but I think these will work fine once they have a bit more spacing.

cheers,
john b.

[quote]I am really looking forward to not only a sonically superior sounding, but a superior built machine. [/quote]

I second that, all the little details will eventually make the difference. Good quality knobs and buttons, the keyboard, the LCD contrast, the illuminosity of the LEDs, and the quality of the chassis as a whole.

Btw, I am not sure about the 8 + 8 arrangement beneath the main display. Maybe it will be difficult to adjust something in the upper row, the Andromeda has a similar arrangement but it's very ergonomic because it's not so dense, arranged in this "wavy" pattern.