But even there, there’s room to do something cool:
MonoNeon & Julian "J3PO" Pollack... Play Zapp & Roger - YouTube
What I mean is why does it seem that musical aesthetics are held in contempt?
“The beat goes on, and I’m so wroooong”
1 Like
i still want the real thing but im definitely pro hybrid studio environment. vcv is the first software synth to win me over but i’ve used DAW’s since Ableton 5 and now Reaper/Renoise. sound quality and character aside there is just something about choosing a hardware modular build and learning its capabilities thoroughly, being able to physically plug in cables and turn knobs. that has to be one of the main reasons its so popular. i have some hardware modular systems and i dont have to ever worry about software updates and os compatibility or cpu limitations. plus i dont mind the limitation of only having a fixed amount of modules. limitations force creativity imo. on the flip side of that… having too many options can become overwhelming and with that many modules i often see users making patches that to me seem too busy.
back to character of the sound. it depends alot on your interface. vcv through a high end interface and good monitors sounds alot different than through a budget interface/monitor setup.
4 Likes
you are gonna be stoked when midi 2.0 drops this year.
Midi has a range of 12 octaves and a fifth, with 127 notes in between.
Midi 2.0 will have 36,000 notes that you can do what you want with(what your gear can do), including using them to split up 12 octaves or maybe even 1.
I figure you gotta have an IQ of about 135 to actually hear 96 notes in an octave; pretty impressive but we know Miles Davis and the kid who sang that tune in g half sharp minor could hear and sing them. but 3000 notes per octave?
Wow.
Can’t wait.
1 Like
I totally agree with Ahornsbergs comment. Using knobs and cables is much more creative than clicking around on a GUI. Also with a mouse you can just click at one position at once, with knobs you have at least two hands (some times very interesting). On the other you can test much easier with virtual moduls. My solution is the following: Once I have created a patch i want to play like an intrument I use a MIDI-controller (e.g. AKAI Midimix) where I assigne the important knobs of the patch. Then I only “play” MIDI-Controler. O.
4 Likes
In the picture above, I can see only 7 bits reserved for the note number. So MIDI 2.0 gives us the same 128 note numbers we already have since the 1980s.
MTS (MIDI Tuning Standard) was introduced in the early 1990s and offers a resultion about 190000 notes per octave, by fine-tuning each of the 128 different note numbers. Unfortunately MTS was an optional addition to the MIDI Standard, and because of this you will rarely find software or hardware supporting MTS.
I talked about 3000 available notes over the whole frequency range, not per octave. Some times ago I read about Wendy Carlos (renowned for her album The Well-Tempered Synthesizer). In the late 1980s she used 12-note-per-octave just-intonation tunings, each tuning starting on a different one of the 12 notes. That makes a total of 144 different pitches per octave. This was done on a Synclavier by utilizing the lowest octave on the keyboard to switch between the 12 tunings while playing.
Microtonalism is about using the ability to go beyond the 12-note standard western tuning. It is not about telling the difference by ear between about 100 pitches per octave. It’s about doing something different by exploring the vast noosphere of pitches. And it’s fun!
3 Likes
Since MTS is (as you say) so poorly supported, some instruments use MPE and send 14-bit channel pitch bends per note, meaning you get MIDI 1.0 microtonal polyphonic support (albiet limited to 15 notes) with any MPE-capable synthesizer. Unlike MTS support, MPE support is a growth area right now, and this is a nice side effect.
The classic use of per-note pitch bend in MPE is fluid pitch expressivity in a chord (think guitar chords with single-string bends) but for a non-pitch-expressive instrument like the Lumatone the right bend is calculated in advance and gets sent statically. 14 bits over the standard MPE pitch bend range of 48 semitones might not be as much as you want to get your microtuning in tune, so the usual practice is to lower the PBR.
I don’t think that many keyboards support this in hardware yet but the H-Pi Universal Tuning Editor can do it via loopback (I’m sure there are other programs but as far as I know the UTE is pretty much the standard).
Agree on both counts! For those who haven’t heard Ben Johnston, check out the Kepler Quartet stuff. Extremely microtonal (especially the 7th SQ) and extremely, for lack of a better word, listenable.
the sound will never be the same
1 Like
bold statement. not true of course, but definitely bold.
6 Likes
I’m delighted that this topic is being discussed over and over again. I hope it continues. For us newcomers it’s still a live issue. The tech is changing all the time.
I’ve bought some of the cheaper hardware both just out of curiosity and to build a hybrid setup for live work. For live, you need a bit of spectacle don’t you? Just like the guitarists with their marshall stacks with no insides, electronic artists should have something with a plate of colourful spaghetti hanging out the front.
2 Likes
It’s an opportunity for collaboration with someone to create visuals.
2 Likes
i am an in-the-box guy.
some years back i bought a microbrute as a way into semi-modular hardware, thinking to possibly slowly expand. i played with it a few times, then put it back in the box, where it has remained in the years since. (i also have a guitar that i haven’t touched in years…)
if i played live, i would probably look into using a hybrid setup, but i never got that far. i’m not aware of an experimental music scene in the city where i live, and i also suffer from bouts of “writer’s block”, lacking inspiration and drive. my day job takes a lot of energy from me and fortunately i really enjoy being a teacher. but yeah, my music is a side thing and sometimes i wish i could do more.
back to the topic, i really enjoy the wide scala of sonic possibilities that software offers, often for free and otherwise for cheaper than hardware. i don’t mind working with a computer, because i don’t sit behind a screen all day.
3 Likes
I agree, this thread is super interesting.
1 Like
I feel the hardware vs software debate is silly (as are the analog vs digital, tube amps vs modelers, les pauls vs. strats, etc), but that goes as far as sound - nobody is going to listen to a track and go, ahh, that was hardware (or analog, or tube, etc.) But live is definitely a thing unto itself, so to that, I offer a picture of me playing my guitar (through VCV) along with my modular rig. The keyboards in the background belong to someone else
(one exception - Les Pauls suck, there I said it)
9 Likes
Excellent look! That’s what I’m talking about 
To show there are two sides - in the talk by Thomas Dolby (recently posted in ‘what are you listening to?’) he revels in that fact that he used to have to lug a massive load of expensive kit around with him. Now he takes a laptop and mic.
I read through a lot of the points above, and I can see it. Apart from the sound quality aspect. Maybe I’ve not got the golden ears but I can’t really tell the difference.
The example of aliasing on Wiki - I can hear that! But then I thought - hmm that might be a useful sound for something. You know, nasty lofi metallic sound. And sorry @Squinky , what a philistine I am.
Oh, I got not problem with people using “nasty” sounds intentionally, or intentionally making nasty sounding modules. I think that’s cool. But it’s best if the plugin tells you it’s doing that, preferably on purpose.
5 Likes
I think that most people here appreciate the merits of both; that said, confirmation bias and other psychological foibles can be at play 
Those who have blown their savings on hardware need to convince themselves that they’ve done the right thing by singing its praises whilst those who have not (yet ??) done the same want to convince themselves that they are not missing out on anything
I managed quite happily for years as one of the latter …
2 Likes
Yes, I agree (of course!). I appreciate the nicely crafted modules, not just the sounds (of course the sounds) but the elegance of the maths and coding - anti-aliasing included. Also the visual design. I bet that’s the same thing with the hardware modules too. Seems to me there’s a lot of aesthetics going beyond it being a tool. That’s the same for all musical instruments I think. And bicycles.
1 Like
How easy or difficult is it to sell on hardware modular gear? VCV was my first experience of synths and I still don’t understand enough about synths or the potential benefits/costs to even consider buying any hardware at this point but if there was a good chance to sell stuff on it might make the decision to buy easier.
I’ve not sold any yet but there is a very healthy secondhand market and modules retain their value well but YMMV - old modules, rack rash, and your cat sleeping on the warmest place in the house (your rack) detract from value. If you buy recent modules, that are high on Modular Grid popularity list, you should have no problem selling them. Establishing trust by participating in the hardware modular communities is important for obvious reasons, for both buyers and sellers.
3 Likes