Dave Smith Instruments SYNTHESIZERS

tell me if anyone else thinks this would be a good
idea:

additive generation of user waveforms on the Evolver. 

anybody remember the Kawai K3/K3m? I owned the latter
a while back, and it had the capability of allowing
the user to create waveforms by means of adjusting the
volume of individual harmonics... there was a
limitation of only being able to use 32 out of 128
available harmonics...

I was thinking... with those user waveform slots in
the digital oscs on the Evolver, so far, the only way
to get at them is through sys-ex. thing is, the
Evolver has actually been inspiring me to stay *away*
from the computer more. what would be very cool, IMO,
is if Dave were to implement another editing level
where-in the 8 rows x 8 knobs could be used to adjust
the levels of 64 individual harmonics (or 128 if the
shift function were used in this mode), to create
additive waveforms for the user slots... basically, a
way of generating user waveforms without the need for
a computer... 

might also be nice to add whole extra banks of digital
waveforms available for the digital oscs... don't get
me wrong, I love the VS waves, but Evolver could be
even cooler if it included some other samples or
waveforms as well...

anyway, just a thought or two toward expanding the
timbral capabilities of an already awesome machine...
I have no idea of how practical it would be to
implement any of this, mind you...

thoughts?

______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca

> 
> additive generation of user waveforms on the Evolver. 
> 
> 
> what would be very cool, IMO,
> is if Dave were to implement another editing level
> where-in the 8 rows x 8 knobs could be used to adjust
> the levels of 64 individual harmonics (or 128 if the
> shift function were used in this mode), to create
> additive waveforms for the user slots... basically, a
> way of generating user waveforms without the need for
> a computer... 
>

Great idea--though a nice additive editor for the computer would be 
a good idea for more complex stuff (or just if you don't want to 
scroll through all the knobs:)--similarly, a basic waveform editor 
for dumping new waveforms in would be good.  That said, it seems 
Dave is looking for others to do the waveform editor stuff, so I 
doubt the additive idea will get done except maybe as a computer-
based variation on new waveform creation.  

I really like your idea for using the knobs, though.  Less Kawai-
like to me than like the OSCar's use of the keyboard for editing 
it's additive oscilators.  I've always wanted an OSCar, and if you 
could implement this feature on the Evolver, it would be coming 
closer to that.  Still, I'm betting it's not going to happen on the 
box, but maybe as a computer add-on.  Oh well, can't have 
everything, even if it is a great idea.

Back to my Evolving...

OASRT, what do people think would be a cool follow-up to the Evolver 
from DSI?  I think a digital/analog hybrid multi-effects unit based 
on the same box might be cool.  Something with a sort of modular 
signal flow so that you could have the same LFO controlling Delay 
time and phaser sweep or such.  The Evolver can allready do a lot of 
this, but maybe a more dedicated unit could expand it even more--
analog phasers and ring-mods instead of oscilators, etc...But I'm 
not the most imaginitive guy, so what do others think?



J.R. "Bulldogge" Ross
& Snuffy, too:)

> 
> OASRT, what do people think would be a cool follow-up to the Evolver 
> from DSI?  I think a digital/analog hybrid multi-effects unit based 
> on the same box might be cool.  Something with a sort of modular 
> signal flow so that you could have the same LFO controlling Delay 
> time and phaser sweep or such.  The Evolver can allready do a lot of 
> this, but maybe a more dedicated unit could expand it even more--
> analog phasers and ring-mods instead of oscilators, etc...But I'm 
> not the most imaginitive guy, so what do others think?
> 
> 

I would love to see a larger Evolver unit maybe about the size of an
Access Virus, with a two row LCD display, Lots of knobs and buttons and
LED's, 8 voice polyphony, 4 part multitimbral. Now that would be cool
!!!

Don

> OASRT, what do people think would be a cool follow-up to the 
Evolver 
> from DSI?  


I'd like to see a phrase sampler/drum sampler, much like a Korg 
Electribe ES-1, but with analog filters and the other cool modulation 
capabilities that are in the Evolver.

On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 23:11:04 -0500, "Ravi Ivan Sharma"
<noision1@...> wrote:


>Not sure how the sequencer works with all that--not even sure how the sequencer works with 
>just two or more evolvers? Anyone have two care to comment?

I wish. Having used mine for a while now, there are a couple of little
tweaks I'd love to see to make the sequencers more useful generally.
The problem is the user interface, of course.

I'd like to see different clock divisions available for Seq2-4 other
than being tied to the main one. There's no reason they should be as
they only send control signals and don't control envelopes. 

I'd also like the row LED to update according to where in the sequence
the pattern currently is (if GT 8 steps long). OK, tiny thing that.

I'd REALLY like to step the sequencer from MIDI notes. Using an audio
trigger to do this is fine but you need to engineer a sound that will
trigger it reliably and I mostly want to do this to introduce subtle
tonal variations for solos. In this scenario I would want to be able
to route the four sequences so they control just sound parameters
(pulse width, filter etc.) and NOT notes. If you've used analogue step
sequencers, you probably know the effect I'm looking for. 

I'd probably also like a global option to make the sequencer's tuning
resolution semitones rather than quarter tones - for ease of
programming when no keyboard nearby.

But the thing I'd like most of all would be that Osc 3&4 waveforms
should be available as a mod destination. So, as per the Monowave for
example, you could control them directly via a MIDI control change or
velocity etc. Makes for some funky wavesequencing if using an external
sequencer.

One simple change to speed up access could be - instead of double
clicking the shift key to make shift "stick" - I'd introduce double
clicking of the relevant row button instead. Would be faster. 

I'd also like to be able to dial up a patch with the sequencer already
active and running. 

Finally, I'd like to be able to divorce sequencer note from sequencer
gates and direct gates to just the envelopes I want. I know this can
only be internal because of the nature of MIDI but it's a trick I
loved in the Nord Modular, for example. There may still be a way to do
this that I didn't find yet.

I've got some very sweet Moog-like solo voices so far and really enjoy
its use as a signal processor. It is my perception or is there a very
slight delay between hitting a key and the synth responding? We're
talking very subtle here but it doesn't feel as responsive as some
synths I have. Perhaps I need to examine the triggering - I wonder if
selecting "ALL" rather than MIDI triggering slows it down at all?

Have only had one "hang" so far where the synth stopped making any
noise. Powered off and on and all OK. Have not yet been able to
reproduce it.

Sorry this was rather long, I seem to be constantly thinking Evolver
thoughts these days <g>

Paul
---
Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

> But the thing I'd like most of all would be that Osc 3&4 
> waveforms should be available as a mod destination. So, as 
> per the Monowave for example, you could control them directly 
> via a MIDI control change or velocity etc. Makes for some 
> funky wavesequencing if using an external sequencer.

I would like this one as well. Although I'm not aure how smooth it would
be. I setup a sequence with divisions of about 6 each (ex. 6,12,18,24
...96) and used the Shape Seq parameter to try and simulate this and
noticed some clicking sound going one, Works fine if you use divisions
of 1 (ex 1,2,3,4...16)

> 
> One simple change to speed up access could be - instead of 
> double clicking the shift key to make shift "stick" - I'd 
> introduce double clicking of the relevant row button instead. 
> Would be faster. 

I would like this as well

> 
> I'd also like to be able to dial up a patch with the 
> sequencer already active and running. 

Not sure what you mean here, if you mean keep the same sequence running
while you change to a different patch, isnt that what the Lock Seq
paramemter does.

> 
> I've got some very sweet Moog-like solo voices so far and 
> really enjoy its use as a signal processor. It is my 
> perception or is there a very slight delay between hitting a 
> key and the synth responding? We're talking very subtle here 
> but it doesn't feel as responsive as some synths I have. 
> Perhaps I need to examine the triggering - I wonder if 
> selecting "ALL" rather than MIDI triggering slows it down at all?

This sounds like a problem I had when I first got mine, I emailed Dave
and he said to check the Poly Chain parameter, it was set to All, make
sure it is set to Off unless you have multiple evolvers. It will cause
Midi notes and such to do strange things and makes the synth feel very
sluggish otherwise.

 
> Have only had one "hang" so far where the synth stopped 
> making any noise. Powered off and on and all OK. Have not yet 
> been able to reproduce it.
> 
> Sorry this was rather long, I seem to be constantly thinking 
> Evolver thoughts these days <g>
> 
> Paul
> ---
> Paul Nagle - SoftRoom Music - www.softroom.co.uk

I received evolver #93 the other day and have been having a blast all
weekend.

Don

On Mon, 18 Nov 2002 10:38:03 -0600, "Don Gothard (dg)"
<gothard@...> wrote:

>Not sure what you mean here, if you mean keep the same sequence running
>while you change to a different patch, isnt that what the Lock Seq
>paramemter does.

I kinda mean I'd like to be able to save a patch with "start"
activated so when I call it up via program change, the sequence is
ready and rollin'....

>This sounds like a problem I had when I first got mine, I emailed Dave
>and he said to check the Poly Chain parameter, it was set to All, make
>sure it is set to Off unless you have multiple evolvers. It will cause
>Midi notes and such to do strange things and makes the synth feel very
>sluggish otherwise.

Interesting. Not touched that parameter but I'll check it out. Thanks
for the tip.

>I received evolver #93 the other day and have been having a blast all
>weekend.

It's a sweet little thing. The Kylie of synths... 8)

Paul

I suggested that at one point in time, others may have as well. It 
could be made into a 1/3 or 1/2 rackmount box with an optional 
chassis available. A 2 or 4 voice version would be cool as well. :)

I would assume it would feature everything the normal evolver does 
and would function as such except it would not be programmable except 
through sysex, so the sequencer would function however it does in 
poly-chain mode. It seems like a good idea if it could cut the cost 
down per unit significantly. The advantage is that it would probably 
be very easy for Dave to develop. 

--- In DSI_Evolver@y..., "Ravi Ivan Sharma" <noision1@h...> wrote:
> Someone else mentioned it here earlier, but I would like an add-on 
box, just square, not sloping with pass-through audio ins, midi 
connections and audio outs but with no controls whatsoever that 
simply acted as an expansion unit for the Evolver-instead of having 
to buy separate whole evolvers. Perhaps there could be  2 and 4 voice 
expansion versions, buy as many as you want for the polyphonic 
evolver of your dreams. Not sure how the sequencer works with all 
that--not even sure how the sequencer works with just two or more 
evolvers? Anyone have two care to comment?
> 
> Ravi