Synth Operating System Suggestion for Manufacturers

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Reading the other thread (Korg TR Trinity Rack Gripe) made me think of something. I've owned plenty of synths that have various modes - Program, Combination, Multi, different mfgrs call them different things, but they're basically the same.

 

I always found it a PITA to deal with these different modes.

 

So, why does there need to be different modes at all? Wouldn't it be simpler, easier, and better if there were only one mode? You wouldn't even need to come with a name for the mode, because there'd be only one. It would be non-issue for the user. The user would simply have to learn how the operating system works. They wouldn't have to learn three different versions of the os. In computer programming, this is called good user interface design. You're supposed to hide the inner workings of the computer from the user, and present the user with a simplified, logical o.s. user interface.

 

Yes, I know there are a couple of issues with this approach, but I believe they're solvable with some creative thinking, and that the end result would be better.

[program_insect]

Elektron synths do this.

[Prague]

The Ion works like this, I believe. It's always in a 4-preset multi/setup/whatever. You just choose which ones to turn off or on.

[mildbill]

ya, the ion threw me for a loop for a bit till i figured out what was going on. but as soon as i grasped it, it made perfect sense.

[Synthoid]

The ion threw me for a loop for a bit till i figured out what was going on.

Yeah, me too.....I like it now, but the ION (and the manual) are a bit confusing at first.

[Stephen Fortner]

In a sense, this is what Kurzweil was after with Quick Access Mode, as well as the Yamaha Motif with Master mode. Both can access either single-timbral programs or multi-timbral setups / performances. There's still some user homework... the idea is, you set up your song lists there and one button press gives you the next whatever-you-need.

[guestuserguestuser.com]

Originally posted by Stephen Fortner:

In a sense, this is what Kurzweil was after with Quick Access Mode, as well as the Yamaha Motif with Master mode. Both can access either single-timbral programs or multi-timbral setups / performances. There's still some user homework... the idea is, you set up your song lists there and one button press gives you the next whatever-you-need.

Hi, Stephen

 

Well, maybe so. But on the other hand, they also ended up increasing the number of modes from three to four!

[MikeT156]

The biggest thing that "some" manufacturers need to do is make their systems EASIER to use, AND have a good user's manual. One of the things that comes into play is the TIME it takes to learn a new OS, the different modes and the operation of each mode when you buy a new piece of equipment. If the documentation isn't up to snuff, you have to resort to trial and error and reading the screen, hoping to find what you're looking for. There needs to be a lot of step-by-step instructions on using various modes so you can get the hang of things quicker.

 

My Ensoniq TS10 wasn't only easy to use, but even the more complex things it could do were well documented. I was usually able to through it fairly quick, and get onto making music. Not so with "some" newer instruments, but I won't mention any names.

 

I spoke to another solo player the other night, and he's still using the workstation he bought over 12 years ago for his sequences. I asked him why he was still using it (I knew a lack of money wasn't the problem) and he told me he knows how to use what he has very well, and doesn't want to take the time to learn another workstation. He' rather spend his time learning new songs and sequencing them, as well as practicing on his instrument. Apparently, he looked into some of the newer workstations within the last year, and he felt they were "Harder to use than they have to be". So Manufacturers have incentive the keep things simple, more customers.

 

 

Mike T.