MOTM

I'm one of the supporters of a more 'academic' chaos module, myself. My
reasons being (in no particular order):


1.	One could introduce true physical representations of real-world
turbulence dynamics into a synthesizer patch in _very controllable_ ways.
For instance, introducing a short 'blip' from a chaoscillator at the attack
of a percussive envelope would produce a unique, true-to-life chaotic
signature every time the envelope fires (try that with a sampler). I'm not
talking about a little noise chiff-I'm talking about an extremely short but
important interval when an otherwise physical body is set into motion (hit
with a mallet, a string plucked) and requires a short but finite time to
settle into its periodic motion. Not random envelopes-a very subtle
enhancement to envelopes.

2.	A true chaos generator is *not* random. It is never predictable,
never precisely repeatable, but has defined parameters that can be
controlled.

3.	It has "hey, look what I got" value. People throw the word "chaos"
around (like the 'Dark Star' module) thinking it means noise-it does not. To
be able to say that you have a true clinical chaos generator ought to get
one of us in Keyboard Magazine's "keyboard of the month" <bbg>.

4.	When I preach "chaos oscillators," I think people believe what I
want is to just let the thing sit there making squealing noises. That never
crossed my mind (well... maybe just a little :-) ). I imagine introducing
the chaotic voltages from the unit in subtle ways into a patch to influence
the dynamic processes of other modules.

5.	Imagine clocking effects like delay with a pair of chaos oscillators
(these things are not expensive circuits by the way). You wouldn't get
regular cyclic sound that we try to mask with detuned LFOs (I'm thinking of
the delay line in my old Stringz & Thingz as I write this).

6. Chaos oscillators can produce sophisticated 'filtered noise' sounds in
certain ranges without using filters that *can* be used for those 'chiff'
sounds.


(By way of explanation for the above epistle, I've been sending Paul some
materials on module ideas, and Wednesday's idea was a Chua-based
chaoscillator, so I feel partly responsible for this thread.)

 

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	hodad1@... [mailto:hodad1@...]

		Seems to me this would be a bit like playing the
slots--mostly nothing (or piddly crap) waiting for a big payoff. (Does that
sound a bit harsh?  Sorry.)

tkacswrites>
>
>1. One could introduce true physical representations of real-world
>turbulence dynamics into a synthesizer patch in _very controllable_ ways.
>For instance, introducing a short 'blip' from a chaoscillator at the attack
>of a percussive envelope would produce a unique, true-to-life chaotic
>signature every time the envelope fires (try that with a sampler). I'm not
>talking about a little noise chiff-I'm talking about an extremely short but
>important interval when an otherwise physical body is set into motion (hit
>with a mallet, a string plucked) and requires a short but finite time to
>settle into its periodic motion. Not random envelopes-a very subtle
>enhancement to envelopes.
>

Now it's starting to make sense.  This is the sort of thing I would use
constantly.

tomr

On Fri, 5 Nov 1999 hodad1@... wrote:
> From: hodad1@...
> tkacswrites>
> >1. One could introduce true physical representations of real-world
> >turbulence dynamics into a synthesizer patch in _very controllable_ ways.
> >For instance, introducing a short 'blip' from a chaoscillator at the attack
> >of a percussive envelope would produce a unique, true-to-life chaotic
> >signature every time the envelope fires (try that with a sampler). I'm not
> >talking about a little noise chiff-I'm talking about an extremely short but
> >important interval when an otherwise physical body is set into motion (hit
> >with a mallet, a string plucked) and requires a short but finite time to
> >settle into its periodic motion. Not random envelopes-a very subtle
> >enhancement to envelopes.

You're talking about nonharmonic components to a sound, right? They don't
HAVE to be short... take a look at string instruments, for example. There
are some timbres in there which are extremely difficult to
emulate/synthesize with any conventional means. A high quality sample set
is still the way to go for realistic acoustic sounds. 

Even additive synthesizers have a hard time with these... the Kawais use
PCM samples for nonharmonic elements. (such as noise and short initial
components like the mallet hits you mention) Of course I'm not suggesting
we have a module which is just a bank of PCM samples, how unexciting.. :/ 

Andrew

-| Andrew Schrock | aschrock@... |-

>From: "Tkacs, Ken" <Ken.Tkacs@...>
>
>
>I'm one of the supporters of a more 'academic' chaos module, myself. My
>reasons being (in no particular order):

ah, begins to all make sense now
at first i thought i was looking at an idea for a cool toy (forgive me i'm
stll new to this game)
now i (think i) get it - a kind of reality controller, real ergo
unpredictable - i'd love to be able to retrofit it to my Yamaha VL1m. any cv
to midi interfaces out there..?
cheerspaulb

In a message dated 99-11-05 12:08:38 EST, you write:

<< 
 (By way of explanation for the above epistle, I've been sending Paul some
 materials on module ideas, and Wednesday's idea was a Chua-based
 chaoscillator, so I feel partly responsible for this thread.)
  >>



re: reasons # 1 thru 6 - bravo!
best,
dave