[sdiy] Wakeman

[Neil Johnson]

Richard,

> I think more in music technology in general. A big driving force for synth
> design was imitative synthesis, and once sampling appeared there was no
> longer any need to keep pursuing that.

True...the genie is out of the bottle, and no-one's been able to put her
back.

There have been a _few_ innovative synths in recent years, examples being
the Kawai K5000 (additive), the Yamaha FS1R (formant filtering), Technics
WS1A (usable physical modelling).  But, as you say, everything else is
just more of the same in a newer box.

> The problem with analogue is that the old oscillator -> filter -> amp
> signal chain has been done to death.

*ssshhh*  Be careful saying that around here!!  See the hordes with the
flaming torches and pitch-forks......

> I also think very few people have the time, inclination and talent
> needed to reach a Tomita-level of fluency with the technology. So we get
> a lot of sounds that have been heard countless times before.

Summary: fewer people with the necessary talent.  Agreed.

> And I'm not sure the market isn't there for something *really* different.
> It will be interesting to see how the Neuron does...

Indeed.  I hope it does well, not only for listeners, but also to show
other manufacturers that innovative designs _sell_.  Then they might be
more prepared to invest in developing new technology, rather than flogging
the same old stuff, but in shiny new boxes with a few more buttons.

> If you look at some of the things that someone like Raymond Scott was
> doing in the 50s, they're way ahead of anything that's being done today.

A truly revolutionary talent indeed.

> There's also quite a bit of mileage in hybrid designs. But I'd best not say
> any more just in case I actually do build something sometime. :-)

*sigh* Yet another NDA to sign.... ;-)

> >devices, from all-valve synths to chaotic generators, from
> >laboratory-grade modulars to reborn PPGs with a twist.
>
> Those are still all kind of retrospective though, aren't they?

Yes, but is that bad?  You can do things with valves that you simply
can't do with semiconductors (ask Eric).  How many "modern" synths use
chaotic generators?  How many synths these days are designed so "clean"
that they have no personality, while the PPG (and Paul's Monowave) have
bite and character to them because they are *not* perfect text-book
designs?

> I'm sitting here thinking 'Wouldn't it be good if I could.... and then I
> could... and then the sound would morph into... and after that it would
> explode into this huge kind of...' And then I realise there isn't any gear
> around that can do things like that.

I think we should introduce a new saying:  "What would Raymond Scott do?"

> Then again I know someone with a Kyma system, which might be able to do it
> a bit more quickly.

Yeah, one very cool piece of kit.  A tad expensive though.  I know someone
who is starting here in October who has a Kyma system.  Be interesting to
see it in action.

Cheers,
Neil

--
Neil Johnson :: Computer Laboratory :: University of Cambridge ::
http://www.njohnson.co.uk          http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~nej22
----  IEE Cambridge Branch: http://www.iee-cambridge.org.uk  ----