Fairlight-CMI

Hi Tobias,

Could you explain what you mean by "individual clock speed per voice card?"

When you say "high end system", do you mean high performance (as in
excellent sound quality) or large capacity (number of tracks) or something
else?

What in particular would appeal to you about a CMI-V?

Thanks for your input,

Peter

________________________________

	From: Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tobias Enhus
	Sent: Friday, 7 November 2008 7:06 PM
	To: Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com
	Subject: Re: [Fairlight-CMI] Re: Fairlight CMI series IV?
	
	

	I would like to chime in with Fabian on this. 
	Im using a combo of Kyma and Synclavier as my main
	Synthesis tools. 
	There simply is no high end system like a CMI-IV
	available today.
	
	I would be more than happy to pay $5k for a dedicated
	high end system like CMI IV. 
	
	Now, how would you solve something like individual
	clock speed per voice card? 
	
	Cheers!
	Tobias
	
	--- d_40q <retinalburn@ngi.de <mailto:retinalburn%40ngi.de> > wrote:
	
	> 
	> Hello Peter,
	> 
	> 
	> although I am not a Fairlight but a Synclavier user,
	> I follow this forum due to my 
	> appreceation of the original CMI's sound, concept
	> and design.
	> 
	> In my humble opinion your exiting proposal to create
	> a CMI-IV unsing today's technology 
	> could hit a market-gap, if it was executed with the
	> same strong conceptual foundation as 
	> the original CMIs.
	> 
	> At the moment there is no High-End Computer Musical
	> Instrument available, that would 
	> enable the creative musician to work intuively by
	> integrating deep performance, recording 
	> and sound design capabilities in one coherent
	> instrument.
	> Wich is what the Fairlight CMI and the NED
	> Synclavier achieved in their day.
	> 
	> Looking at what is available today:
	> 
	> 1. A system freely combining a standard PC/MAC, any
	> software, a controller keyboard and 
	> external AD/DA:
	> A standard System like this does not give you the
	> best possible sound quality, it is 
	> unstable, and due to its lack of integration it is
	> not verry intuitive.
	> The user interface arguably hinders the creative
	> process.
	> 
	> 2. A workstation keyboard like the Korg Oasis:
	> A pretty well integrated Instrument, but technically
	> and software-wise it does not 
	> represent the state of the art. In terms of sound
	> qualitiy it can't even compete with a 20 
	> years old CMI-3 or a Synclavier.
	> 
	> 3. DSP based Workstations like Kyma:
	> Great sound design tool, but not necessarily an
	> intuitive musical instrument.
	> 
	> 
	> Now if you compare the pricetags of the
	> aforementioned, I am pretty sure, customers 
	> (including myself) would be willing to pay more than
	> the proposed $US5,000.00 if the 
	> CMI-4 came with its own specialized keyboard
	> controller/user interface, that would match 
	> the CC-1's audio processing capabilities in terms of
	> Quality and Design.
	> 
	> 
	> Best regards,
	> Fabian
	> 
	> 
	> 
	> 
	> 
	> --- In Fairlight-CMI@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Fairlight-CMI%40yahoogroups.com> ,
	> <peter.vogel@...> wrote:
	> >
	> > 
	> > There have been discussions from time to time
	> about replicating the CMI
	> > using a software emulation. These efforts will
	> have limited success because
	> > the "Fairlight sound" relies on the peculiarities
	> of the hardware used in
	> > the original design.
	> > 
	> > In the days when I was the designing CMI hardware,
	> my greatest challenge was
	> > to minimise the distortions and artifacts that
	> were inherent aspects of the
	> > hardware available at that time. In effect, we
	> struggled to make the
	> > Fairlight sound less "Fairlight". So the intimate
	> details of what makes a
	> > Fairlight sound like a Fairlight are indelibly
	> etched in my brain.
	> > 
	> > When Fairlight brought out the Crystal Core Engine
	> last year, my imagination
	> > ran wild. Here was a tiny board with enormous
	> capabilities that could be
	> > configured to faithfully reproduce the CMI
	> hardware in its FPGA (Field
	> > Programmable Gate Array). Every bit of the 1980's
	> CMI hardware, the essence
	> > of its sound, could be reconstructed faithfully in
	> digital hardware form. 
	> > 
	> > To fully appreciate the astounding potential of
	> the CC-1, download the
	> > brochure here:
	> >
	>
	
http://www.fairlightau.com/downloads/public/Fairlight%20NEW%20CC-1%20Brochur
<http://www.fairlightau.com/downloads/public/Fairlight%20NEW%20CC-1%20Brochu
r> 
	> > e%20for%20WEB%20VIEW.pdf
	> > 
	> > I also recently discovered that ALL the IP
	> relating to the original
	> > Fairlight CMI including all of the hardware and
	> filter designs, sample
	> > libraries etc are still retained by Fairlight.au
	> in Sydney.
	> > 
	> > So I have been wondering if it would be worthwhile
	> to develop a faithful
	> > reproduction of the CMI on the "Virtual Hardware"
	> of the CC-1?
	> > 
	> > This would perform identically to the original CMI
	> series II or III, but run
	> > on a PC fitted with the Crystal Core card. The
	> MIDI input would come
	> > directly into the CC-1 so there would be no
	> problem of latency introduced by
	> > the PC.
	> > 
	> > At this stage I'd like to "feel out" the market to
	> assess the level of
	> > interest in this project and whether the
	> significant investment in R&D will
	> > be worthwhile.
	> > 
	> > The Fairlight Series IV (CC-1, I/O box and
	> software) might be sold for
	> > approximately $US5,000.00.
	> > 
	> > So my question is, what do you think of this idea?
	> How would a Fairlight CMI
	> > at this sort of price be received by the market?
	> Who would the buyers be and
	> > how would I tap into them?
	> > 
	> > What do you think?
	> > 
	> > Peter Vogel
	> >
	> 
	>