Wiardgroup

Grant wrote:

>People make nonsensical remarks about the graphics, because 
they are confusing the Wiard with other objects called "modular 
synthesizers". These were envisioned by their designers as 
functional objects, and are not in the same class as the Wiard.<

Konkuro here.  I'm the one who made the comments about the graphics.  
Now. lest anybody dismiss me as a troublemaker, please do note that 
I'm a member of this forum. Why?  Because I support Wiard, whether I 
like the graphics or not (even my pet synthesizer company--
Synthesizers.com--gets my negative comments as well as my positive 
ones).

Frankly, I thought Grant's post was rather beautiful, and I agree 
with it--to a point.

If the aesthetics are as important as we are to believe, then why do 
the jacks spill over onto the Celtic graphics?  Why wasn't more care 
taken to make things centered and balanced?
	
Mind you, I think that synthesizers should resemble test equipment.  
Names like "Wogglebug" "Moogerfooger" and "Psycho Shift Register" 
make me shudder, if not retch.  An instrument, by definition, is a 
means to an end. It is the *music* that matters.  Thus, well-laid-out 
modules and meaningful names are of paramount importance.  They are 
tools, not doilies.

As for the LEDs, I can't help but to question what information they 
convey.  How is it that every Wiard module just so happens to have a 
row of multicolored LEDS at the top?  Why must they be so closely 
spaced together? It is as though uniformity takes precedence over 
functionality in the Wiard World.  I recently watched a Wiard module 
in action and found the LEDs pretty, but not particularly 
informative.  Dudes, this is *equipment,* not an effing Christmas 
tree!  Superfluity has no place in the modular realm.  There is music 
to be made!  (An aside: How come nobody with a Wiard does classical?)

Is synthesis about blinky lights and Riverdance graphics or about 
sound?  I do not deny that Wiard equipment is worth buying (though a 
tad overpriced, in my opinion).  Indeed, I think it's quirkyness 
lends it a certain cachet, if that's how you spell it, that makes it 
an interesting investment.  But I also think that if Wiard is serious 
about the aesthetics, they not only need to justify them, but take 
more care in their execution.  Otherwise, the argument rings somewhat 
hollow.

johnm