Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Integration between hardware instrument and software...


Bachus

Recommended Posts

I have had a vision for many years now aboit integrating a hardware workstation with software VSTs and effects, and it keeps bogging me why we only see software producers moving towards hardware parts ( NI kontroll and maschine, Ableton Push, Akai VIP) but not the traditional hardware manufactorers towards integrating their hardware with software....

 

A good example is the new montage, while all the hardware interfacing is there (high speed audio and data over USB) they have removed the DAW controll mode... Which would have been an importantbpart for integration..

 

I certainly hope that soon one hardware manufactorer will combine a stand alone hardware workstation with all the tools sounds and controlls combined with an interface like VIP on the Akai keyboards, which allows you to use the sounds and effects from your VST's directly in your keyboards performances... In this case midi is old and needs to be replaced with a high speed connection both data as well as audio between hardware keyboard and software on MAC or PC.. Low latency.... And giving the musician the feeling that those VSTs are comming directly from the keyboard.... The keyboard being both a hardware synth/dp/workstation as well as a sound interface for the Computer...

 

(This would work way better then trying to put a high end computer inside the keyboard, as several companies have tried before)

 

In the end the keyboard would be the controller, with its very own content system.. (Like Karma or the ARPs of Yamaha) while being unlimmited expandable with VST's.. Combining the best of both worlds in one instrument... To me the power of a hardware instrument is its dedicated interface and tools of creativity combined with ballanced content.. For many many people content is as important as sound quallity because they are players and not creators...

 

 

Why does it feel to me, that almost noboddy shares this vision of integration, maybe i am more a tech savy and only part time musician, but to me this would be a huge step forward..

Korg Kronos 88, Yamaha Tyros5 (76), Integra 7, macbook pro/mainstage
Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 32
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I have had a vision for many years now aboit integrating a hardware workstation with software VSTs and effects, and it keeps bogging me why we only see software producers moving towards hardware parts ( NI kontroll and maschine, Ableton Push, Akai VIP) but not the traditional hardware manufactorers towards integrating their hardware with software....

 

The software developers are making custom hardware because it ads value, or is considered an "added value". People are only willing to pay so much for code/software - however if they sell a piece of hardware that works especially with their software there is opportunity for greater profit. In other words, since we are willing to pay more for a physical device than we are a software machine, software developers have chosen to make hardware.

 

A good example is the new montage, while all the hardware interfacing is there (high speed audio and data over USB) they have removed the DAW controll mode... Which would have been an importantbpart for integration..

 

Yamaha market research revealed that their user base was interested in a performance synthesizer along the lines of the Nord Stage 2 EX. Users wanted a large sample library, real synthesis, ease of use. Focus was placed on layers and splits, patch editing, patch recall, setlist creation, and modern evolving sounds. Yamaha already has many instruments in their line up that focus on studio use: DAW functionality, DAW control, etc.

 

I certainly hope that soon one hardware manufactorer will combine a stand alone hardware workstation with all the tools sounds and controlls combined with an interface like VIP on the Akai keyboards, which allows you to use the sounds and effects from your VST's directly in your keyboards performances... In this case midi is old and needs to be replaced with a high speed connection both data as well as audio between hardware keyboard and software on MAC or PC.. Low latency.... And giving the musician the feeling that those VSTs are comming directly from the keyboard.... The keyboard being both a hardware synth/dp/workstation as well as a sound interface for the Computer...

 

This is a tall order because it is not necessarily in developers' best interest. Software devs don't simply want to give their software away, and hardware devs fear obsolescence of their integrated custom DSP workstations + proprietary sound engines. You'll notice that the two do come together frequently with value added tie ins - for example, purchase this keyboard and it comes with light versions and/or demos of this or that VST. Each of these instances was negotiated between the hardware and software developer. The tie in was agreed upon to add value to the hardware purchase and the software dev either did it to reach a wider audience or a figure was agreed upon up front to develop the light version of their product for inclusion in the box.

 

Very low latencies are attainable on a modern computer with an audio card connected to the motherboard at a fast bus. For example, we were already getting ultra low latency performance on PCI before USB became the popular way to extend your computer's audio capabilities. Most recently we should be seeing an improvement in low buffer/low latency performance from Thunderbolt and USB3 audio interfaces. Although most giggers here will tell you, they are doing just fine with onboard audio and/or simple 2in/2out USB2 interfaces.

 

In the end the keyboard would be the controller, with its very own content system.. (Like Karma or the ARPs of Yamaha) while being unlimmited expandable with VST's.. Combining the best of both worlds in one instrument... To me the power of a hardware instrument is its dedicated interface and tools of creativity combined with ballanced content.. For many many people content is as important as sound quallity because they are players and not creators...

 

 

Why does it feel to me, that almost noboddy shares this vision of integration, maybe i am more a tech savy and only part time musician, but to me this would be a huge step forward..

 

Hopefully this all clarifies things a bit for you. Hugely beneficial deals for consumers are not crafted easily. A great example of that is the movie industry and which movies you can view/rent and when on iTunes/Apple TV, Amazon Prime, Hulu, Netflix, Verizon, TimeWarner, etc. The business is so complicated, there will never be one device or service where you can just watch anything and everything you like whenever you like. Although, the biggest players are always trying.

 

There have been attempts to build what you are interested in, but they haven't necessarily done well enough to stick around. For example, here is the Neko from Open Labs,

 

[video:youtube]

 

Or more recently, the KAMI

http://musiccomputing.com/production-stations/kami/

 

http://cdn6.bigcommerce.com/s-ozclh/products/302/images/1554/KAMI_hero_background__43753.1461147347.500.750.jpg

 

Here's a thread where a few forumites expressed their displeasure for gigging such an "instrument". https://forums.musicplayer.com/ubbthreads.php/topics/2774693/Re_Kami_would_you_gig_it#Post2774693

 

Alternatively, you could just pick up your choice of keyboard controller - perhaps something like the Studio Logic Numa - Stage or Compact. A MacBook Pro and MainStage. It takes all of a few minutes to assign all your controllers from the keyboard controller to MainStage with a simple graphical user interface. Click on the virtual controller and move the hardware controller.

 

http://images.apple.com/mainstage/images/keyboard_synth_large.jpg

 

MainStage comes with a plethora of wonderful sounding built-in instruments and supports installing third party instruments in the AU format (most developers provide VST and AU formats during the same install process).

 

http://www.apple.com/mainstage/

 

There is also a rumor that Apple will soon release touch screen Macs. In which case, great... it gets that much easier to use and perhaps you may not need to assign so many physical controllers.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MIDI may be old but it works just fine for many people.

 

USB MIDI was not a good solution. I've seen too many USB ports die on computers from devices other than USB MIDI. MIDI has a max cable length of 50ft vs USB max of 3 or 5 meters depending on transmission rate, without repeaters.

 

Yamaha's mLan was never adopted because Yamaha owned the protocol. From Yamaha's history of not playing nice with their FM patent, no one wanted to pony up the license fees to use mLan.

 

History has shown that competitors will not adopt a communication protocol that is owned solely by a company. That's why MIDI was successful - it was developed by a consortium neutral to the industry and it only charges fees for the documents not the protocol.

 

MIDI 2.0 had its false starts, not sure of the story there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You misunderstand the idea that certain hardware, even though it doesn't quite draw the amount of power from the grid like a PC, is more suited to create proper digital processing, than a PC (with O.S.). Hand held digital video cameras that record in full 1080 High Def existed already a decade ago, while a current PC might not even be able to encode 1080HD in realtime, as an example. Some digital processing doesn't run efficient on a PC, even if the PC has more MIPS/FLOPS power.

 

Just like the latency and the PC processor usage questions: latency in the PC software sense, including drivers, is a matter of organizing kernel tasks and process switch time, in conjunction with the raw processing power being used for music tasks. Most music software will not make a PC very hot, which is built in on purpose, but it indicates the PC powers aren't used much, and it it would get used more (so that the processor chip like the I7 would actually get hot) the computations wouldn't be at the level of a microprocessor doing MIDI and audio IO, but more in a supercomputer-like pipeline which can process samples and do filtering, too, but not necessarily very efficient.

 

T.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crumar did it with the Mojo. VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds.

 

The release of the Mojo was the :idea: moment that steered me down the path of controller plus VST's and then the switch to MainStage.

 

The major hardware MI's would collapse over night if they offered a sophisticated controller with access to 3rd party, mostly superior, VI's available from other vendors.

 

Built-in MOBOs etc. equal built-in obsolencense - see Muse for an example of where that leads. The Kronos is as close as it gets, they can keep selling Atom powered workstations years after the Atom's use by date.

 

Innovation is going to come from a disruptor, a fully featured controller that supports a tablet and a NUC that the user can upgrade.

A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a matter of cost. An off the shelf motherboard, processor, ram, and MIDI components etc. used to cost too much to be viable for mass production in an keyboard instrument. Crumar figured out a way to make it economical. What OS were they using on the Mojo? If Windows, were they actually in the Win/Intel PC business?

 

More currently, using Crumar as the example, custom DSP - although a little more involved to produce and program for, is cheaper, particularly in large quantities - hence the Gemini and Gemini based Mojo61 - and I am certain more profitable for Crumar. Also, eluding to Theo's comments, dedicated hardware likely does a better job at processing low latency-high-sample-rate-and-bit-depth audio since it doesn't have a desktop OS's overhead. Even so, there are plenty of people satisfied with the performance of a MacBook Pro live as well as products like the Muse Receptor or even an iPad.

 

-----

 

Back on topic though, it could be cool if a disruptive force entered the market and built an open platform keyboard (providing the silicon, case, action, controllers, etc.) and made software development tools readily available to third party virtual instrument developers. If the hardware had WiFi, they could also include a VST/AU store - and, like Apple, take a 33% cut (well, maybe less like apple, a 15% cut would be more attractive) from sales direct to the keyboard.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also a matter of cost. An off the shelf motherboard, processor, ram, and MIDI components etc. used to cost too much to be viable for mass production in an keyboard instrument. Crumar figured out a way to make it economical. What OS were they using on the Mojo? If Windows, were they actually in the Win/Intel PC business?

 

More currently, using Crumar as the example, custom DSP - although a little more involved to produce and program for, is cheaper, particularly in large quantities - hence the Gemini and Gemini based Mojo61 - and I am certain more profitable for Crumar. Also, eluding to Theo's comments, dedicated hardware likely does a better job at processing low latency-high-sample-rate-and-bit-depth audio since it doesn't have a desktop OS's overhead. Even so, there are plenty of people satisfied with the performance of a MacBook Pro live as well as products like the Muse Receptor or even an iPad.

 

-----

 

Back on topic though, it could be cool if a disruptive force entered the market and built an open platform keyboard (providing the silicon, case, action, controllers, etc.) and made software development tools readily available to third party virtual instrument developers. If the hardware had WiFi, they could also include a VST/AU store - and, like Apple, take a 33% cut (well, maybe less like apple, a 15% cut would be more attractive) from sales direct to the keyboard.

 

As aid in my orriginal post... Open platform keyboards ( we have seen a few) so far have all been doomed, because a random collection of tools and sounds does not make a great instrument..

 

For a huge success a workstation needs to come with a dedicated efficient workflow.. And lots of comtent... This is where all those open platforms so far have failed... They where nothing but a daw with glued on keys, sliders, buttons and knobs...

 

To create a performance instrument based on a pc you definately need to look at the hardware workstations and what makes them great... For example on my Kronos every sound comes with its own drum/rhytm.. Or every combo comes with its own Karma.. The whole philosofy is totally different from a DAW...

 

I dont think you understood what i meant in my orriginal post.... Must be me not speaking native English making it hard to get my pov over... Offcourse i understand you need to pay for VSTs, yet on current keyboards, you also pay money for soundexpansions if you cant create them yourself...

 

 

What i meant is a crossbreed between a Yamaha montage/korg kronos and a NI komplete controll/akai adavnce keyboard....

Korg Kronos 88, Yamaha Tyros5 (76), Integra 7, macbook pro/mainstage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A big, big problem is that VSTs are very Windows-specific and x86 specific. So they work great on PCs, and not so great elsewhere. In my humble opinion, we're never going to see a satisfying hardware instrument hosting universal VSTs, because at the end of the day, Windows-based x86 systems are not well suited for embedded systems which is what you (I) really want a hardware instrument to be, and it's well nigh impossible to fake a Windows runtime environment. VSTs just are not the right tool for this job.

 

The disruptive technology you're talking about would be a plugin like a VST, but much more simple, and much more universal. I think an ideal plugin system would be one capable of supporting a few processor architectures (x86, ARM, Blackfin, etc), and be distributed in a controlled ecosystem, akin to Apple's App Store and the Android Market, and like those ecosystems, have robust DRM / authentication mechanisms to keep the software vendors happy. Meanwhile the runtime environment's complexity must to be scaled down so that the hardware manufacturer's runtime kernel needs to support a much more restricted set of operating system services to minimally and reliably support soft synths. Something much simpler than the VST / .DLL spaghetti bowl. As operating systems go, there wouldn't need to be that much to it. The soft synth needs a way to allocate and manage and pass audio buffers, event handlers for realtime and non-realtime time slices, and a way to access a file system. The hardest part might be defining a minimal but somewhat extensible user interface API so you can control soft synths on a knobby synth interface, a rich workstation interface, a bare-bones rack interface, and also as a Windows or Mac plugin.

 

But at the end of the day, I think the VST model's inherent restrictions prevent it from ever working satisfyingly on a hardware based synth platform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have integrated hardware for years on the Scope Platform.

 

I dont even use Native FX, disable them 100% and apply TC Fireworx and DSP treats.

Makes Native sample apps sound like running an Korg M1 with disabled FX through a Lexicon PCM70.

 

My latest synth goes into Scope to be mixed with Satin Tape Flange since it's one of the few VST FX I use, then a TC Fireworx.

 

Love integration, can't stand around waiting for others so I do it myself.

 

http://s33.postimg.org/jpd8fq73j/00720002_2.jpg

upload gif from url

 

Magnus C350 + FMR RNP + Realistic Unisphere Mic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't see the need for an MI manufacturer to build an embedded x86 (or Mac) system into a hardware keyboard. Look at the NI "Komplete Kontrol" controller now imagine that paired with a powerful tablet instead of a laptop or desktop computer and there you go. I'm betting manufacturers are seeing that on the horizon so why whould they allocate r&d to design & build a custom-made keyboard. When the tech gets better, just replace the tablet. That makes more sense to me but what do I know. Right now I'm not that bugged bringing my laptop and setting it up in its SKB case at every gig, but that's because I remember the days of moving Rhodes and CP70s! It'll probably be a while before an iPad Pro can give me what I'm getting from my Bidule setup but I'm sure it will happen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crumar did it with the Mojo. VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds.

 

Actually, the Mojo is a bit more than "VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds". The Mojo is an hardware musical instrument with partly custom hardware (the control panel, the MIDI circuits and the sound card) and standard hardware (the motherboard) that runs a custom image of Windows XP Embedded which, in turn, runs a custom sound generation software called VB3CE2 (which has nothing to do with the VST technology). The only "generic" thing is the Mitac motherboard.

 

Sorry... I had to say this. :)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crumar did it with the Mojo. VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds.

 

Actually, the Mojo is a bit more than "VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds". The Mojo is an hardware musical instrument with partly custom hardware (the control panel, the MIDI circuits and the sound card) and standard hardware (the motherboard) that runs a custom image of Windows XP Embedded which, in turn, runs a custom sound generation software called VB3CE2 (which has nothing to do with the VST technology). The only "generic" thing is the Mitac motherboard.

 

Sorry... I had to say this. :)

 

Ha ha, of course! Regardless, it was quite an accomplishment to have found an economical way to use an x86 motherboard/intel desktop processor (or even mobile class if that's the case) in a keyboard instrument. Then tag on all the custom silicon and sourced parts - not the mention all the years you've spent studying programming of sound/synthesis engines. Then to transfer all that work and experience to an all new platform in the Gemini card... :thu:

 

A lot of people dream of building their custom instrument, and you did it - and successfully brought it to market. :2thu:

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't see the need for an MI manufacturer to build an embedded x86 (or Mac) system into a hardware keyboard. Look at the NI "Komplete Kontrol" controller now imagine that paired with a powerful tablet instead of a laptop or desktop computer and there you go. I'm betting manufacturers are seeing that on the horizon so why whould they allocate r&d to design & build a custom-made keyboard. When the tech gets better, just replace the tablet. That makes more sense to me but what do I know. Right now I'm not that bugged bringing my laptop and setting it up in its SKB case at every gig, but that's because I remember the days of moving Rhodes and CP70s! It'll probably be a while before an iPad Pro can give me what I'm getting from my Bidule setup but I'm sure it will happen.

 

I suppose the danger then is what is their motivation to build high quality controllers? Something they've been avoiding with the exception of perhaps the Kawai VPC-1. Maybe the new Studio Logic Numa Concert/Stage/Compact are good, I haven't tried one yet. Otherwise, the Arturia Keylab 88 looks the part, but it's based on the TP-100. A few forumites have picked these up recently, so I guess we'll hear over the course of the next year or two how they are holding up.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose the danger then is what is their motivation to build high quality controllers? Something they've been avoiding with the exception of perhaps the Kawai VPC-1. Maybe the new Studio Logic Numa Concert/Stage/Compact are good, I haven't tried one yet. Otherwise, the Arturia Keylab 88 looks the part, but it's based on the TP-100. A few forumites have picked these up recently, so I guess we'll here over the course of the next year or two how they are holding up.

I would think that people still want a good-feeling controller regardless of whether the sound-producing part is integrated or not. Actually, a controller with a "smart connector" to fit something like the new iPad Pro could be pretty cool using an iOS app that acted as a "bridge" between the keys and hardware controls, and whatever VIs were running on this mythical several-generations-ahead iPad Pro. Tap a button, change the velocity curve, zone, change the CC#s sent by the faders, etc... isn't some of this being done today? I'm pretty much out of the loop with what the "happening" soft & hardware is these days so sorry if this all sounds dumb!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuze guys nned to check out the Physis K4.

If you require heavy action for romantic love song dynamics its optional.

 

Also the Xeon E3 1585 is an embedded BGA with a tiny Captain Crunch sized NVMe M.2 SSD that is powerful as hell with 128mb L4 cache.

Micro$oft Surface Pro in late 2016 might be a reality.

 

I use an i7 5775C which is what this Xeon was designed from.

Mine is 3.3ghz and works as well as my i7 6700k @ 4ghz.

 

That dog will hunt and its 200mhz faster than my 5775C.

Magnus C350 + FMR RNP + Realistic Unisphere Mic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha. I was about to go back and add the K4. It's the only truly pro-feature-capable controller i know of being made at the moment... Maybe overkill depending on your needs? But it does come at a price in the US. Viscount dealers ask $1895 US for the K4 - $2640 for the EX which means there's other stuff to look at that are more than "good enough" controllers and are stand-alone instruments (even if the K4 is the best controller available). Like MOXF8, S90/70XS, MP7, CP4, RD-800, etc.

 

Side note: Intel just announced 10-core processors for the masses - 3ghz, up to 4 over clocked, but no one wants a water cooled desktop build for a gig rig. Not just for Xeons anymore either way.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must be in the minority; I gig out, use 2 keyboards and.....just play them.

No desire for me to be a psuedo dj sound generating unit., just a keyboard player playing mostly classic rock for people who like to socialize and dance a lot.

 

Must be a studio thing? BUT.....

I am learning so much from you all in my years on this forum.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here's the keyboard mag review on the K4

http://www.keyboardmag.com/gear/1183/is-the-physis-k-series-the-most-professional-midi-controller-now-made/52452

 

"Conclusions

The K4/K5 is a monster controller keyboard, and should be on the short list for anyone looking for a high-quality weighted action unit for more advanced needs. It costs pro dollars, but youre getting über-pro features. There are some very fine 88-key controllers from Akai, Arturia, and Roland that cost under $1,000, but they offer less in terms of zones, MIDI I/O, wheels, and pedal inputs. Only you can know whether you need the extra capabilities.

If you only need to work with a computer and plug-ins, the K4/K5 is surely overkilland some of the other products mentioned are more computer-centric, with advanced preset management and control of your software. But for the musician with a mix of hardware and software looking for more of everything, there has been a lack of well-specd, great-feeling, weighted-action master keyboards in the last decade. The Physis K4 and K5 are a welcome end to that drought. Im obviously less enthused about the $1,000 sound add-on given that there are excellent software instruments for much lessand again, anyone looking at the K4/K5 likely has a lot of hardware theyre looking to tame. I congratulate Viscount for coming this far and hope theyll continue development and voicing to bring their freshman effort further along in the coming years. The potential is there."

 

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Physis is overkill for most folks.

I only use 4 of MIDI Outs, and 5 x pedals.

But run Solaris MIDI Input 1 and an ancient Expressionmate Triple zone ribbon MIDI Input 2.

Still have 4 x MIDI Outputs 2 x USB 3.0 Ins and 4 x USB Outs.

It is the center of my live performance universe.

 

I can never go back.

Its made my gigs so much fun.

Before I had too many chores to think of per song other than playing.

Now I can play knowing my section swells drawbar swells parameter modulations are instantaneous and precise.

 

Knowing what I do now I would have paid 3k.

 

TC Fireworx and K4 Is sick.

Imagine a really fat square wave like ELP Lucky Man.

Play that into the dual pitch shift algo where you have the original square wave plus 2 more voices in unison.

Step down on an expression pedal, 2 of the unison signals ascend up an octave and down an octave leaving the original square plus two more octaves. Its so fat and ballsy.

 

Its like 3 bone players in unison gliding out to chosen pitches and returning.

 

Thats nust one fx option.

 

Sorry if I get a little excited, but live players need new territories to keep fresh.

Im fresh as baby shit these days

 

Magnus C350 + FMR RNP + Realistic Unisphere Mic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crumar did it with the Mojo. VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds.

 

Actually, the Mojo is a bit more than "VB3 running on Windows XP on a generic motherboard and soundcard connected to 2 Fatar keybeds". The Mojo is an hardware musical instrument with partly custom hardware (the control panel, the MIDI circuits and the sound card) and standard hardware (the motherboard) that runs a custom image of Windows XP Embedded which, in turn, runs a custom sound generation software called VB3CE2 (which has nothing to do with the VST technology). The only "generic" thing is the Mitac motherboard.

 

Sorry... I had to say this. :)

No worries Guido, good that you chose to contribute to the discussion.

 

In fact Crumar would probably win the award, if one existed, for the most innovative MI company in this decade.

 

Use of off the shelf hardware mixed with some custom components made it possible for Crumar to get into the hardware market with killer tonewheel software emulation at an affordable price point compared to the established competition.

 

Relevant to this discussion is the Crumar DMC plus optional Gemini which comes closest to the OP's concept than anything else currently out there.

 

The biggest barrier to a "best of both worlds" crossover instrument is the need for a common OS that would run both the on board sounds and act as a robust host for the wide range of VI's out there that are designed to run under Windows or OSX.

 

Just like any software field some newer VI's have a voracious appetite for CPU and RAM resources in addition to migrating to 64 bit.

 

I doubt that Yamaha or any other hardware manufacturer would wish to allocate the resources required to be constantly updating their software just so a customer could run VI's from other vendors on their boards.

 

 

A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt that Yamaha or any other hardware manufacturer would wish to allocate the resources required to be constantly updating their software just so a customer could run VI's from other vendors on their boards.

They might if they got a piece of the action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://s33.postimg.org/rhbcv26b3/pic2.jpg

image url upload

 

My Raspberry pi 3, running a sample engine to play my own sampled CFX piano (from Yamaha CVP609). All other sounds come from my Kurzweil PC3 and PC3K6.

Based on the SamplerBox software. Modified to also play backingtracks and added Freeverb. 4 channel output via Esi Maya 44 USB+ and mixed using Rolls PM351.

 

Small, stable and big improvement to the Kurzweil piano

Nord Piano 5-73, Nord Stage 3
Author of QSheets: The fastest lead sheet viewer in the world that also plays Audio Files and send Program Changes!
https://qsheets.eriknie.synology.me/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad more people are starting to use great little boards like the RPI for musical experiments, maybe one day using FPGA's and custum Open SOurce programs will be normal. That helps making computer hardware free from the "big few" software syndrome, so that computers can be fun to use human and environment friendly and generally not the domain of the wrong type of "IT" type of persons anymore.

 

I'm going to have a look at both the senor kit, the RPI version3 and the blog about the "musicbox" software, even though I don't find much joy in a purely sampled piano, but prefer the good use of VAST (possibly with some production tools).

 

Does it work good as a competitive instrument, or would you say it's a "fun project" ?

 

T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed these are cool projects. However, I fear the number of people that have dedicated as much time to learning the language of music as a viable computer programming language are in the minority. Certainly ones that could code for DSP or real synthesis - I mean the mathematics are not rudimentary for most peoples' grade school mathematics experience. I, just as example, am fascinated by the technical aspects of computing machines, but for languages, I've never gone beyond HTML, CSS, and some very rudimentary Javascript. But even so, I am much more comfortable playing the piano keyboard than programming for the hardware inside it. I am certain most on the forum feel the same. Conversely, of course you have those who have spent more of their lives learning to code or design hardware and kept playing music a hobby. And of course those that excel at both do exist. But again, I fear not that common.

Yamaha CP88, Casio PX-560

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am much more comfortable playing the piano keyboard than programming for the hardware inside it.

 

I took a computer programming class in the 1980's. Put me to sleep... :snax:

When an eel hits your eye like a big pizza pie, that's a Moray.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi folks --

 

Thought I would try Raspberry Pi 2 (quad-core ARM) as a soft synth engine. Cheap fun at $40 for the processor board! I wrote up a series of articles that amount to a "getting started with soft synths on Linux" tutorial. Here are the links:

 

Get started with Raspbian Jessie and Raspberry Pi 2

Get started: Linux ALSA and JACK

Raspberry Pi soft synthesizer: Get started

USB audio for Raspberry Pi

Qsynth and FluidSynth on Raspberry Pi: The basics

 

 

Eventually, I would like to turn the Raspberry Pi into a stand-alone soft synth host. Might scratch the itch for virtual analog and do it on the cheap!

 

All the best -- pj

sandsoftwaresound.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi folks --

 

Thought I would try Raspberry Pi 2 (quad-core ARM) as a soft synth engine. Cheap fun at $40 for the processor board! I wrote up a series of articles that amount to a "getting started with soft synths on Linux" tutorial. Here are the links:

 

Get started with Raspbian Jessie and Raspberry Pi 2

Get started: Linux ALSA and JACK

Raspberry Pi soft synthesizer: Get started

USB audio for Raspberry Pi

Qsynth and FluidSynth on Raspberry Pi: The basics

 

 

Eventually, I would like to turn the Raspberry Pi into a stand-alone soft synth host. Might scratch the itch for virtual analog and do it on the cheap!

 

All the best -- pj

sandsoftwaresound.net

 

"Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door"!!! Good luck with doing that and if you can do better than Receptor, V-Machine and the Musebox then I daresay you will have a keen market just waiting :D

There is no luck - luck is simply the confluence of circumstance and co-incidence...

 

Time is the final arbiter for all things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does everyone think that the PC hardware needs to be integrated in the leyboard?

 

Think of a crossbreed between the Kronos and the NI komplete controller.

Korg Kronos 88, Yamaha Tyros5 (76), Integra 7, macbook pro/mainstage
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does everyone think that the PC hardware needs to be integrated in the leyboard?

 

Think of a crossbreed between the Kronos and the NI komplete controller.

 

haha it already is Bachus - in the Kronos it is a intel chip, standard laptop hard drive, mini MOBO and standard PC ram - complete with noisy fan and a bespoke version of Linux :D

There is no luck - luck is simply the confluence of circumstance and co-incidence...

 

Time is the final arbiter for all things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the Kronos it is a intel chip, standard laptop hard drive, mini MOBO and standard PC ram - complete with noisy fan and a bespoke version of Linux :D

 

And I still maintain that this is a terrible architecture for a musical instrument. I don't know who this "everyone" is who wants to integrate PC hardware into a keyboard. Certainly isn't me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...