MOTM

I don't think that the modular synth market -- with at least a dozen
manufacturers -- is that small.  Nor do I think that any of those
manufacturers could have made a convincing business plan if they
wanted to borrow the money to start their companies.  It took courage
and vision.

Yet, ignoring that this device could be used with any instrument that
accepts triggers or control voltages, within the modular synth market
people often pay several hundred dollars for modules with little or
no musical utility.  This device would offer three huge advantages:

1) It's superior timing and and ability to generate continuous
voltages to control pitch makes it far more accurate and musicality
expressive -- in the traditional sense -- than a MIDI-to-CV
converter.

2)  With the right software, it could do a number of practical things
such as MIDI-synced LFO's or pitch-to-CV (that could properly track a
bass or slide guitar) that are currently impossible with anything on
the market.

3) With the right software, it could replace the use of modules such
as lag processors, envelope generators, LFO's, etc.  For example,
instead of generating the trigger and gate to control analogue
envelope generator, it could generate the envelope directly, but with
response to velocity or other data within the DAW.

Based on the private email I've received, people either think it's a
great idea or they don't seem to understand how this device would
work.

On 3/9/06, Adam Schabtach put forth:
>  > All it takes is one company willing to make a product.  No
>  > standard is needed.
>
>And for that you need a convincing market case, which may be the biggest
>stumbling block. The modular-synthesizer-using market is not a huge one.
>Subtract from that all of its users who are perfectly happy with MIDI-CV
>converters and you're left with a fairly small number of prospective buyers.
>Paul could certainly do the hardware engineering for such a device, and I
>(or rather Audio Damage) could certainly do the AU/VST plug-in, but it's not
>clear to me that we'd collectively sell enough of the package to even make
>back the R&D costs. I'm basing that on my company's sales volumes for
>plug-ins of much, much wider interest and some wild-ass guesses about Paul's
>volumes. Just my $0.02 worth, of course.