Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    It's got sensors tht attach to my brain.
    
    Whatever I think, comes out.
    
    Edd

    What the world needs now is a composition workstation, with
    real-time synthesis, graphics, plotting, using any synthesis
    technique you like , because it has one or more very fast
    general purpose audio digital signal processors.  expandable
    numbers.  It could have s/w downloadable to do fm or
    aditive or subtractive or terrain synthesis, or fourier
    analysis of incoming, or phase distortion, or sampling
    (input lines and conversion), could be used as a real-time
    delay for your voice, reverb, echo, flangee, harmonize,
    modulate, vocode, all at once in any order.
    Could have different kinds of synthesis at the same time,
    sampling (with library), cross-capatible files (like down load
    a dx7 patch) and on and on.  100 voices 1000 channels.
    you think I'm kidding listen to orient occident by iannis
    xenakis, or 1 of 4 by pauline oliveros, or imagine the
    electronic version of the vocal pieces by joan la barbara
    for sheer density.  Quad or better audio output.
    Tom

	At first, I was going to suggest removing this note and pointing you
all to the one at the beginning of the conference under the same premise.
But then I thought, if I remember correctly, that one was very technical and
hard for me to follow due to its basis more in computer architecture than
the current concept of 'synthesizers'.  'Course I hadn't read that one for a 
couple of years and I've learned a ton since then, so it may have not been as
cryptic as I recall...

	But anyway, seeing as how the whole landscape of synthetic music has 
changed, it would be interesting to watch how we, today, would describe the 
'ideal' synthesizer.  So, lets keep the notes separate.  (I know, you were
going to, anyway...)

	To me, I have grown to love the way the market has progressed into 
modular units, that I'm not sure I'd describe ONE unit as the ideal.  I like
the idea of having rack mountable MIDI modules that can be flexibly configured
according to the whims of the user.

	If you were to ask me what kind of *setup* I consider ideal, that's a 
different story.  It would probably be as follows:

	Two touch-sensitive controllers (with at least one having 88 keys)
		(This would imply, of course, fully assignable control
		levers and pedals, splitting and layering, etc., and enough 
		memory to store each configuration.  I would additional ask 
		for a jack for a CV pedal that was able to bend notes, in case 
		my hands were too busy to handle a lead line *and* the pitch 
		wheel at the same time.)
	A sequencer with oodles of tracks (at least 8) and lots of memory 
		(I would want to be able to store a full evenings worth of
		music without having to worry about disk loading or tapes.
		A disk drive would be o.k., but I'd rather not be fiddling
		with one at a show, even at intermission.
		ALSO, it must either be rack-mountable, or BUILT INTO THE
		CONTROLLER (something I just thought of).  If built in, alot
		of the problems with MIDI thru's and such would be eliminated
		[you guys with the ESQ's hear me?].
	One MKS-20 (or its equal)
	One (or more) of every synthesis type sound module in a rack
		(This would mean at least one analog rack, one FM synthesis 
		rack, one Phase distortion rack, one sampling rack, one
		additive synthesis rack, ad infinitum...  Each of these
		module must have the voice assignment flexibility equal or
		better to the FB01/TX81Z or the ESQ [i.e., you can assign
		any number of voices to any channel without pre-configured
		limitation.  Voice stealing like what happens on an ESQ would
		be ideal.]  This, of course, implies multi-timbrality.)
	At least one MIDI-controlled Effects Unit rack
		(With multiple combinations of effects available, of course)
	At least one digital reverb rack
	A MIDI-controlled Mixer (rack, of course) with enough inputs and effects
		loops to handle all the aforementioned.
	At least one gorrilla roadie to carry it around for me 
	A MIDI controlled crowd of screaming fans

	I think that would about do it.

	Dan

RE < Note 990.3 by AKOV68::EATOND "Shut mah mouth wide open!" >

	One thing I forgot (I'm sure there will be others as I reflect on it)
is that in the sampler portion of my setup, I'd rather not have to load
disks.  Enough megatons of memory would be nice, so as to keep my favorite 
samples resident, leaving enough room to add anymore at whim.

    Internally, I figure somebody is going to take advantage of these
    new UV-eraseable gate arrays.  So far, whenever somebody has come
    out with a new way to make sound, they have had to change the hardware.
    With a programmable array, you could create a synth that is a sampler
    for a while, then an FM synth, then LA, then whatever.  The internals
    could be reconfigured via software.  It would make for a very flexible
    synth that could hold value.  Now, instead of having to buy a new
    module when a new form of synthesis becomes popular, the user can
    load a disk and have a new synth.  This could open up a market for
    somebody to sell the one synth with lots of hardware-configuring
    disks.  In addition, make this thing have 10-22kHz bandwidth, 16 bit 
    resolution, stereo out, on-board effects (with the same kind of
    hardware reconfigurability), MIDI in, out, and thru. Also, add stereo 
    in, so that now the thing is a cross between a synth and an effects
    box.  Make that two sets of stereo in, so you can do mixing.  It can
    be a synth or an effects box, or a hybrid that can diddle with
    real-time input to generate stereo output.  There should also be
    a bus connection so that several of these monsters can communicate
    with each other and share memory.  No need for memory expansion,
    either.  It would probably make more sense to ship it with max memory 
    (say 1 M byte) and let them cluster.  Might even be able to make it handle
    sequencer and special MIDI functions, but this would probably only
    be if it was easy.  The internals would be oriented toward sound
    generation.

    Gee, maybe I'll go ahead and design this thing!
        

    Steve

    I'll second Steve's idea.  It should have an audio input jack (or
    maybe four), and the inputs on those lines should be usable for
    anything that any internally generated signal is usable for.
    	
    It should be as much a user-programmed DSP as a straight synth.
     
    A keyboard and some controllers is nice- but we ought to be able
    to split the Dream Controller from the Dream Synthesizer from the
    Dream Sequencer.  
    
    RAM-based gate arrays exist... maybe we need a slightly smarter,
    bigger one, but the principle is there.
    
    How about this:
    	   
        Modulators ( Keyboard, CV, MIDI, sampling inputs)
    	
    			feed
    	
    	Sources (Oscillators, Wavetables, samples, sampling inputs,
    		    	envelope generators)
    	
    			feed (and feedback to sources)
    	                                             
    	Manipulators (function generators, multipliers, mixers, 
    			thresholds, filters, delays)
    
    			feed (and feedback to manipulators and sources)
    	
    	Multiple output channels  
    
    
    	Almost like a PPG Realizer but with multitambourality, and a
    user-programmable user interface.  The DSP hardware is always running
    full tilt- as the path, signals, and multitambourality increase
    in complexity, it just slows down the sample output rate. This really
    isn't much of a restriction, because if something gets too CPU
    intensive, you can create a new "source" which is a digital sample
    of the result, and then just use the sample, not the original
    computational chain.
    		                                                        
    
                                                               

Probably falls under the "stuff I'd like to see" category, but...

   Software loadable "patches" for the MIDIverb II & uVerb.

   A multi-channeled and multi-in/out MIDI card for the uVAX.

   A whole boatload of MIDI software for the uVAX.

   A Fairlight for $2.95.

&*}

    My personal feeling is that there is too much state in that rack
    of equipment, or in a DSP station which is not manipulable in real
    time.  It's great for studio stuff, but I always think in live terms
    since I am much too impatient to struggle with setting lots of things
    up (or at least I would like to be :^) ).
     
    My ideal synth would be incapable of producing noise.  One woman's
    noise is another's music, unfortuntely, so I can't forsee an
    implementation, yet, however, a few points:
    
    My ideal synth would have synthesis idiom which would allow complex
    variations in sound with simple controllable gestures.  That's pretty
    much the principle upon which many popular instruments (virtually
    all of the acoustic ones) are based, so that is nothing new.
    
    This is the reason why I prefer almost any synthesis technique to
    sampling (and most of this grizzly DSP stuff) is because they represent
    the focusing of many sonic parameters into a small number of controls.
    For example, varying the frequency of one operator in an FM synthesis
    idiom can have a profound and rich effect on the total sound.
    
    DSP and sampling certainly provides you with the horsepower to get
    an arbitrary sound, but...
    
    My ideal synth would have a (resonably) small number of expressive
    parameters, and ALL AVAILIBLE AT MY FINGERTIPS AT THE SAME TIME.
    Most modern synths succeed on the first point, and fail miserably
    on the last one.  FM synthesis does really well on the first one,
    and Yamaha's interface to it makes me want to barf.
    
    The synth manufacturers don't seem to realize that with all these
    rich digital synthesis techniques (FM, additive, etc.), an expressive
    interface is still required.  On analog it came free, so they gave
    it to you, but it's expensive for digital.
    
    Note that computer screens (such as most patch editors provide) aren't
    good enough for the controls. I have to be able to massage the
    parameters with simple gestures which provide me with feedback.
    Since olfactory, and taste feedback aren't really too refined in
    the human animal, sight and tactile are it!!! (Auditory is out because
    that is your ``main output channel''.
    
    
    Does this ring bells with anyone?
    
    (I'm also still looking for a more expressive and controllable
    	input device than a piano-style keyboard)
    
    Steph

    
    	I believe that the "way" things will go is toward the DSP based
    instrument. By adding some AI to the operating system, it could
    "learn" what you like (Say, if it went "$#^#$%($^%&^" - you could
    press the "dont ever do *that* again" button - and it wouldnt) and
    dont like.                      
    
    	This would operate on multiple sound transfer function mapps
    by which it would simply transform any given sound into any other
    one that was either provided or sampled. Of coures, the AI "nonsense"
    filter would eliminate the "garbage in garbage out" problems. You
    could simply sing, play yer guitar or speak into it's inputs and
    get any sound desired as output. Yes, it is a speech recognition,
    or any other sound recognition, processor. Input sound details (freq,
    spectral power density, harmonic decay envelope time, sibalance
    amplitude - you name it) to  be mapped are specify-able to any level 
    desired.
    
    	As it is my fantasy, were talking a 100 MIP machine with Gigs
    of memory - the size of a CZ101.
    
    	JJJ

    
    re: .-1
    
    You mean (perish the thought) KNOBS????? on a SYNTH???? Horrors!!!!
    
    After ploughing through all of the previous 8 replies, I didn't
    have much to add. However, the ideal synth should definitely have
    assignable "variable generic controls" - NOT a single A/D converter
    disguised as a slider or "alpha wheel" or whatever. 
    
    Being weaned on Moog 12's taught me that too many knobs can be as
    bad as too few knobs - however - being able to tweak a filter's
    cutoff during a performance was such a nice thing to be able to
    do. Maybe it's tougher to have to assign the controls, but it should
    be part of a patch assignment - so you set it up in advance that
    DCO's 1 to 3 output goes to knobs 1 to 3, and 4 gets the DCF cutoff
    freq, etc. Of course, those FM synthesis enthusiasts could get more
    tambral versatility if Yamaha put knobs on their equipment too.
    
    I always wondered what a submarine control room, nuclear reactor
    control room, power plant, or mixing console would look like with no
    knobs. 
    
    /pjh

    for a synth that would act as the Master Controller for all the
    other MIDIed toys whereby the MIDI clock would be controlled by
    my conducting motions.  I could stand in front of my elctronic array
    of toys with their LCDs/LEDs blinking at me, hook up the MIDI-Ictus
    interface electrodes to my arms and conduct my whole pre-stored
    sequence in truly live fashion.  
    
    Now, how do I point to my TR505-bass-drummer and tell him to quiet
    down during the ESQ-1 violin soli?
    

    Well, you could conduct with a set of airdrumsticks, and have a
    Kahler Human Clock turn the airdrum trigger outs into MIDI clock
    blips.  

    There was an article in Keyboard about a year ago about some guy
    who played a device he designed called "Hands". By rotating his
    hands, moving his arms apart at various speeds and directions he
    could control bank of TX816s...
    
    Edd
    
    P.S. He broke both arms trying to play Brubeck's Unsquare Dance...:^)
    
    

    I started working out what my dream synth would look like and I've sort
    of homed in on a digital Matrix-12-like machine.  The basic idea
    is that everything communicates by sending 8 or 16 bit numbers around.
    A "patch" or "program" is really a data flow diagram.  Most of it
    is pretty obvious given traditional modular synth technology, but
    there are a few cute things, like being able to drive the LFOs and
    EGs from the MIDI clock so you can sync attack times and LFO
    frequencies to the tempo.
    
    Maybe one of these days when I have some "spare time" I'll write
    it up (after I finish the note on "Drums and Drumming for Musically
    Literate NonDrummers" for the MUSIC conference)...
    
    len.
    

    Re:  ConductorSync input.
    
    You could stand in a room covered with a huge CCD array, and have
    small lasers attached to each of your hands, your chest and your
    head (this enforces the stylistic point of not being able to conduct
    with your hips or legs), and then the computer has the (relatively)
    simple job of interpreting the motions of the laser spots.  This
    just takes a little robot motion-style math and some adaptive
    time-warping.
    
    You could have the positions of the various instrumentalists chalked
    on the walls and floor, and you could even simulate that short cymbal
    player who can't see over the 'bones by littering the room with
    obstacles.
    
    You want to sink some venture capital into the development?
    
    
    Steph
    

    The front man comes out on stage, and steps into this cabana sized
    box with no windows, closes the doors, and the music begins.
    
    And some people thought Gary Wright's tour concept was a major
    mistake...
    
    Steph