SergeModular

----- Original Message -----
From: "Les Mizzell" <lesmizz@...>
To: <SergeModular@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 5:04 PM
Subject: RE: [SergeModular] Re: Freq. Shifter...Serge future?


: > The only safe way for a manufacturer to make something new
: > is to stick his new "hoofly dong wobulator" feature on the output
: > of a Moog VCF etc, and even then "purists" will grumble that it's
: > "not like the old ones".
:
: So Grant is taking a big chance on the two new announced modules for the
: Wiard system then...
:
: I quoteth:
:
: The "WoggleBug" random voltage generator (based on the Buchla Model 265
: "Source of Uncertainty" module) will be available in Summer 2001. A source
: of fluctuating smooth, stepped and "woggled" random voltages and tones, it
: makes noises like a bug, if a bug were the size of a refrigerator. Sample
at
: http://www.wiard.com/samples/WogglebugDemo.mp3
:
: The "Weirding" module is a complete mono-synth in 300 module format. A
front
: panel control allows "circuit bending" the voice into a chaotic system
under
: voltage control. Sounds range from "phat" to "burning, melting and
dripping
: phat". Available Fall 2001
:
: I unquoteth:
:
: If you had enough modules, you could probably patch up what these do.
Right?
:
: So, I'll ask again myself...short of "well, I'd like a switch on this
module
: to turn this off" or "give me another input here"...somebody name a new
: module or function that's CAN'T CURRENTLY BE DONE at all on the Serge,
: regardless of how much stuff you patch up. There's only so many ways to
: vary a voltage, right?


Ok, everything is frequency... but what are you saying? Isn't this question
what analog modular design is all about? Modularity versus integration? Some
people think that, for example, lack of pulse waves was a heavy
disadvantage. Others prefer to have all the single components for pulse
derivation freely accessible, and they will actually *gain* sound generation
capability, in exchange for some programming rapidity. But the same person
might prefer the specialized circuitry of a Buchla Programmable Spectral
Processor to three panels of phasers/ EQs/ mixers/ whatever be required to
patch one of its functions up.

One should buy a Wiard if one wanted a reliable, stabile source for an
outrageous range of sounds, rapidly programmable (normalled and doubled
connections, integrated PWM, waveform storage; think of using a ROM Emulator
during a performance...) and in a small sturdy format (multifunctional,
uniform modules, 6.35mm jacks). One would be handicapped with a Wiard system
if one wanted the choice over all different methods of pulsewave derivation,
do complex visual synthesis (which easily leaves the frequency territories
of many modular systems), subtile external signal processing,
extensively interactive and highly sensitive "living", fluctuating programs,
or take advantage of more complex playing techniques than just linearly
activated envelopes; and today it seems to be common thinking that one would
buy a STS Serge then. The saying goes that it was the reliable and improved
heir of the supposedly noble, but somewhat impracticable Buchla 200 series.
But many users of the Buchla stuff claim the comparison is hybrid and if you
bother thoroughly investigating, you must agree. The 200 series' variety
of different levels of modularity and integration made it the theoretically
most versatile and intuitively operatable analog modular system up to today.

Why didn't these complex devices make it into the present? Since for example
the 281 Function Generator is so ultra-flexible, why don't the Universal
Slope Generator and the Envelator, 25 years later, include all of its
features? Why are arbitrary pulse outputs (stealing free access to a
comparator, inverter, flip-flop or what have you) more important than the
circuitry required for real quadrature interdependency?


[ Rambling on... Personally, my respect goes to technology design which
does more than serve my existing knowledge; which surprises me and makes me
wonder; which seems to "behave", like it was alive. I am aware that this is
sentimental and that the requirement for a machine to fascinate me and steal
my attention from my living environment is dependent on my currently
existing knowledge. And thinking of the limitations of culturally rooted
acoustic instruments and tonal scales as hindrances (essentially the
motivation behind synthesizers, right?) can quickly lead to ignoring that
limitations should by nature induce creativity, or to getting spoilt by the
wealth which enabled liberation from these. It is very hard to find your
personal balance in a machine realm. Why am I talking about balance anyway?
A creative process only takes place where something is out of balance? When
dealing with technology you are always a consumer at last. The complexity
and interdependence of the practical aspects which technical developments
are to change will always be integral to electronically (= *industrially*)
based arts.

In digital synthesis there have been a lot of development possibilities, but
it doesn't look like they have brought any significant creative
developments. Any laptop computer can theoretically do anything a PPG
Waveterm could, in less physical space and millions of colours, and without
the pro-analog argument of knobs vs. keys, and it CAN (quote) do the dishes
(unquote) (well, almost). But the wave editor programs of today DO not do
everything the Waveterms did, why? "VA" is a purely commercial thing; much
more interesting digital stuff happened long ago (GROOVE, Music Mouse;
Buchla too again) with supposedly less capable technology, but it is not
marketable. So (disregarding the discontent with the lack of standards for
computers) I wonder, is the same vintage cult going on on digital synthesist
discussion forums? "DSP and XYZ modelling and VA equipped laptops are neat,
but we want highly specialized Buchla 700s, room-filling Synclavier systems,
and clonking Waveterms"? ] Rambling off.


Concluding, I have a very clear and realistic notion (quote) as to what
would 'vasty improve' the land of modular, or even analog, synthesis
(unquote), but this land would be my personal dictatorship of course. I
cannot afford time and money to realize it. With the remaining
possibilities, I would buy anything Buchla (259, 296 etc) rather than a
Serge panel of signal processors; but I do buy Wiard Wavecities; not because
its functionality was out of competition, e.g. its waveshaping ability lacks
VC; but the combination of possible uses is attractive to me; and I choose
wether I call it a compromise, or a decision.

Kind regards
Sebastian Kuehnl





:
: In addition, you would also have to take into consideration the R&D time
to
: come up with stuff. If you're a very small company like Serge, doing R&D
: means that Rex is probably NOT filling somebody's panel order. (heh...)
:
:
:
: Les Mizzell
: -------------------------------------
: -------------------------------------
: "God don't make no mistakes -- that's
: how he got to be God."
: - Archie Bunker
: -------------------------------------
: -------------------------------------












_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com