by galaxiesmerge » Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:30 pm
As John has written below, I am sold on these concepts. They are right on.
And, once I get my SOLARIS, I will *play* it and offer some video demos.
The real issue does not come down to how many algorithms you can pack into a box: algorithms are important, but, when you have, for example, 900000000000 algorithms and variations, I find that it is not an instrument approach but rather a library for a programmer. As a programmer of software, I like rich libraries. As as user of software I want a simple, elegant, well designed *experience* (I didn't say "interface", I said "experience").
The designed experience is a combination of tactile hardware, knob positions and screens, as well as algorithms and control.
The discipline today that is the most difficult, and most valuable, is called "Design Thinking" and this is the skill that I John has clearly demonstrated and that has gotten me into the SOLARIS. Some folks out there may never have heard of "Design Thinking" but this is the ability to come up with the experience that playing an instrument leaves you with *after* you have played it. It is also the experience you feel in anticipation of playing it because of look and feel.
This skill is not a commodity and never will be a commodity.
Every single piece of engineered product on planet Earth has been a combination of trade-offs, memory versus disk versus processor versus libraries in scope and quantities of numbers of algorithms, programmability and playability. I believe the SOLARIS walks that fine line of the best tradeoffs and it is done in a way that is unnoticable because of the high-quality and the high value of the design concepts in the instrument.
In reaching out to see if there are any coders, my intention would be to retain absolutely everything that has made the SOLARIS design attractive and to not deter from it --- and that includes the very high quality emulations which I actually look forward to, as well as the new sonic territory that may be made possible.
Well, I can promise this: I will look into it quite seriously and there may yet be interest (I have had communications with some other folks elsewhere, not on this list, and they may do it just for the fun of doing it as I would). We'll see. The major attraction I have for SOLARIS is design and here I think John scored big time --- but, I will wait till I get my unit to put out a review.
In terms of other synths, I did send a note to check in on the Schmidt 8-Voice polyphonic analog --- finally, I sat down with my 96-Knob Chroma Enabler and Chroma -
http://www.synthtopia.com/content/tag/chroma-enabler/
What you cannot see on the fine print of the controls in the picture is that the knobs have modes and step you through hundreds of parameters. I sat down and knob twiddled and decided that I already had a major analog polysynth with all the beef in sound I needed (and when hooked up to my polyphonic modular Modcan - you can see its picture on the Modcan website "When Size Matters") I realized that once the SOLARIS comes in, there is little else that I need to satisfy my gear lust and sound-design fetishes.
Maybe writing some code for SOLARIS would add that extra xing to life!!!
I mean, look at the Chroma community and see how well the entire community has been supporting that instrument.
It would be great to see SOLARIS supported in a similar way with talented coders.
Cheers!
John Bowen wrote:What he's talking about here is more or less an extension of my original plans for the Solaris hardware. I just didn't/don't know how practical it all might be.
What's interesting is to read pretty much the same 'new philosophy' written by Stephan Schmitt, who has left Native Instruments as president and started a new company called 'Nonlinear Labs'. See of any of this sounds familiar to Solaris owners (I'm thinking how I used the Scope DSP system for the process):
"Although our instruments are self-contained hardware units, the sound is defined and generated by software running on internal processors.
The synth engine is specially tailored to our hardware, but large parts of it can be developed and tested in the Reaktor application on standard computers (Mac OSX and Windows). This way we benefit from many years of experience creating Reaktor instruments, as well as the support from excellent Reaktor instrument builders."
------------------
This was our initial plan back in 2006 - to make it so that I could put together the synth I wanted, and use Scope to crank out a DSP image that could then be sold running on a single hardware platform. As it turned out, it was much smarter and better overall to optimize the specifics, and not deal with the overhead of such a system, however, it is still possible to be done, as 'galaxiesmerge' is suggesting.
Another quote from the Nonlinear Labs blog, regarding Goals:
"Goals for Nonlinear Labs Synthesizers:
In recent years, much of the musical instrument industry has moved away from manufacturing durable instruments that are made for practicing musicians. Instead, the market is flooded with pre-programmable sequence-based systems which often don’t require any performer at all, other than for pushing a “start” button, turning some knobs or selecting and triggering sample clips. Our aim at Nonlinear Labs is to give musicians an alternative to this “automated music” and to provide them with true, musically playable instruments. Our principal objectives are to create:
1) truly playable instruments: our central focus is on both musical expressivity and real-time playability, not pre-programmed “sequencing”
2) wide-ranging dynamic sonic palettes: we aim to make instruments capable of both dramatic changes and very fine nuances
3) organic character: instead of trying to imitate natural instruments, we aim to create nature-like qualities resulting from the complex behavior of synthesis structures
4) fresh and unique sounds: we are not interested in emulating vintage gear, but in moving the culture of sound forward
5) instruments with vast sound design potential: Nonlinear Labs synthesizers will not only be performance instruments, but also highly versatile and powerful sound design tools
6) products with longevity: we want our instruments to stay interesting and inspiring for many years to come
7) open systems: we value free exchange of knowledge and evolutionary development practices"
--------------
Aside from the comment about "emulating vintage gear" and the open system approach (at least currently), these goals pretty much match the Solaris as well. If, after all his years producing software products running on native platforms, this is how Stephan sees the future, I think we are seeing a reinforcement or embrace of the concepts that we have also had for the Solaris.
It's nice to see others endorsing this approach, and I'm sure whatever Stephan does will be of interest.
As John has written below, I am sold on these concepts. They are right on.
And, once I get my SOLARIS, I will *play* it and offer some video demos.
The real issue does not come down to how many algorithms you can pack into a box: algorithms are important, but, when you have, for example, 900000000000 algorithms and variations, I find that it is not an instrument approach but rather a library for a programmer. As a programmer of software, I like rich libraries. As as user of software I want a simple, elegant, well designed *experience* (I didn't say "interface", I said "experience").
The designed experience is a combination of tactile hardware, knob positions and screens, as well as algorithms and control.
The discipline today that is the most difficult, and most valuable, is called "Design Thinking" and this is the skill that I John has clearly demonstrated and that has gotten me into the SOLARIS. Some folks out there may never have heard of "Design Thinking" but this is the ability to come up with the experience that playing an instrument leaves you with *after* you have played it. It is also the experience you feel in anticipation of playing it because of look and feel.
This skill is not a commodity and never will be a commodity.
Every single piece of engineered product on planet Earth has been a combination of trade-offs, memory versus disk versus processor versus libraries in scope and quantities of numbers of algorithms, programmability and playability. I believe the SOLARIS walks that fine line of the best tradeoffs and it is done in a way that is unnoticable because of the high-quality and the high value of the design concepts in the instrument.
In reaching out to see if there are any coders, my intention would be to retain absolutely everything that has made the SOLARIS design attractive and to not deter from it --- and that includes the very high quality emulations which I actually look forward to, as well as the new sonic territory that may be made possible.
Well, I can promise this: I will look into it quite seriously and there may yet be interest (I have had communications with some other folks elsewhere, not on this list, and they may do it just for the fun of doing it as I would). We'll see. The major attraction I have for SOLARIS is design and here I think John scored big time --- but, I will wait till I get my unit to put out a review.
In terms of other synths, I did send a note to check in on the Schmidt 8-Voice polyphonic analog --- finally, I sat down with my 96-Knob Chroma Enabler and Chroma -
http://www.synthtopia.com/content/tag/chroma-enabler/
What you cannot see on the fine print of the controls in the picture is that the knobs have modes and step you through hundreds of parameters. I sat down and knob twiddled and decided that I already had a major analog polysynth with all the beef in sound I needed (and when hooked up to my polyphonic modular Modcan - you can see its picture on the Modcan website "When Size Matters") I realized that once the SOLARIS comes in, there is little else that I need to satisfy my gear lust and sound-design fetishes.
Maybe writing some code for SOLARIS would add that extra xing to life!!!
I mean, look at the Chroma community and see how well the entire community has been supporting that instrument.
It would be great to see SOLARIS supported in a similar way with talented coders.
Cheers!
[quote="John Bowen"]What he's talking about here is more or less an extension of my original plans for the Solaris hardware. I just didn't/don't know how practical it all might be.
What's interesting is to read pretty much the same 'new philosophy' written by Stephan Schmitt, who has left Native Instruments as president and started a new company called 'Nonlinear Labs'. See of any of this sounds familiar to Solaris owners (I'm thinking how I used the Scope DSP system for the process):
"Although our instruments are self-contained hardware units, the sound is defined and generated by software running on internal processors.
The synth engine is specially tailored to our hardware, but large parts of it can be developed and tested in the Reaktor application on standard computers (Mac OSX and Windows). This way we benefit from many years of experience creating Reaktor instruments, as well as the support from excellent Reaktor instrument builders."
------------------
This was our initial plan back in 2006 - to make it so that I could put together the synth I wanted, and use Scope to crank out a DSP image that could then be sold running on a single hardware platform. As it turned out, it was much smarter and better overall to optimize the specifics, and not deal with the overhead of such a system, however, it is still possible to be done, as 'galaxiesmerge' is suggesting.
Another quote from the Nonlinear Labs blog, regarding Goals:
"Goals for Nonlinear Labs Synthesizers:
In recent years, much of the musical instrument industry has moved away from manufacturing durable instruments that are made for practicing musicians. Instead, the market is flooded with pre-programmable sequence-based systems which often don’t require any performer at all, other than for pushing a “start” button, turning some knobs or selecting and triggering sample clips. Our aim at Nonlinear Labs is to give musicians an alternative to this “automated music” and to provide them with true, musically playable instruments. Our principal objectives are to create:
1) truly playable instruments: our central focus is on both musical expressivity and real-time playability, not pre-programmed “sequencing”
2) wide-ranging dynamic sonic palettes: we aim to make instruments capable of both dramatic changes and very fine nuances
3) organic character: instead of trying to imitate natural instruments, we aim to create nature-like qualities resulting from the complex behavior of synthesis structures
4) fresh and unique sounds: we are not interested in emulating vintage gear, but in moving the culture of sound forward
5) instruments with vast sound design potential: Nonlinear Labs synthesizers will not only be performance instruments, but also highly versatile and powerful sound design tools
6) products with longevity: we want our instruments to stay interesting and inspiring for many years to come
7) open systems: we value free exchange of knowledge and evolutionary development practices"
--------------
Aside from the comment about "emulating vintage gear" and the open system approach (at least currently), these goals pretty much match the Solaris as well. If, after all his years producing software products running on native platforms, this is how Stephan sees the future, I think we are seeing a reinforcement or embrace of the concepts that we have also had for the Solaris.
It's nice to see others endorsing this approach, and I'm sure whatever Stephan does will be of interest.[/quote]