Wiardgroup

>             Yeah i am still kinda excited about the envelooper. But i am afraid that due the lack of interest it will never be released. Cheers, Dennis On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM, frank death < maldoroar@yahoo. com > wrote: 
>             Hello All 
> im not sure if this is the best way to raise this subject & its kind of directed to everyone & if Grant wants to let us know whats being dreamed up then that would be great. 
>   Ive been reading up about the Wiard Envelooper & im wondering if that module is still going to happen? On paper it sounds like a fantastic idea & if i understand it correctly it would allow the user to draw in multi-staged/ multi-looping envelopes that with the push of a button trigger the envelope shapes to wherever they have been assigned in the synthesizer. I wonder also exactly how one draws in an envelope? Does it mean that you use the Wave256 software (as you would with the Waveform City)? 
>   Grant also mentions gestural synthesis which reminds me of how a conductor directs individual musicians within an orchestra & the sum of instruments play the music. To me the idea of the Envelooper & gestural synthesis modules (in theory)  bring the modular synthesizer under greater control of the user & the greater the control & the more refined the instrument- the greater its musical functionality. Of couse everyones idea of what music is varies a lot however the potential for modules with gestural functions sounds extremely interesting to me (and im sure many others too!). 
>    In fact something like an oscillator with gestural functions would also be very interesting. One starts to think of all kinds of inputs & outputs communicating with each other all at the touch of a button. Only problem is that at some point it begins to resemble sampling and many modern keyboard instruments do have buttons that provide multi-functions. However theres a massive distinction between a digital synthesizer & a 300 series module with its functionality! 
>   Also last year Grant invited ideas & discussion for potential functions for future modules and im wondering if people are still thinking about it? Id love to see a module with 2 to 4 different recording/looping ICs that the user could cross-mix audio to create multi-loops all under the ability to shift eachs frequency & duration. I actually want to experiment on this idea myself. But yeah- id like to see a Wiard Delay/Looper/ Frequency Shifter for sure. 
>  Anyway- just wanted to keep things ticking over & would like to hear any thoughts. Cheers 
>  -Matt 
>  -- Music at: http://robotdj. net/?dj=mono- poly http://www.twango. com/channel/ mono-poly. public 
>  http://www.myspace. com/zond3 http://www.myspace. com/bomono 
>

> >  http://www.myspace. com/zond3 http://www.myspace. com/bomono 
> >
>

On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 4:52 PM, Grant Richter <grichter@asapnet.net> wrote:
> I have a working Envelooper module with software.
>
> It is quite fascinating from an engineering perspective.
>
> I have been working for a year or so to try and find if it can do anything
> musical.
>
> It can in the sense of Subotnick's "player piano" technique (4 Butterflys).
> It excels at "bug"
> music, but I have yet to find a way to make it relevant to the tradition of
> western music.
>
> I do keep trying and experimenting. I have man-years invested in
> development, I can not
> simply "forget about it", but it would tank in the market as it is today.
> Fall like a rock,
> submarine anchor, you get the idea.
>
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com, frank death <maldoroar@...> wrote:
>>
>> I can only conceptualize the Envelooper, as i havent seen a mock-up front
>> panel for it.
> Im just really curious about its history, its applications, and also of
> course, its possible
> availability. I wonder if its vaguely related to other gestural synthesis
> technology that you
> see in stuff used by Stellarc, for example.
>> So my conceptual understanding of it may be wrong, i dont know. Its
>> interesting that
> many software synthesizers have multi-point envelopes, and these enable the
> user to
> program very weird, very musical & evolving patches. So imagine having say
> 10 or more
> multi-point (ie. not just an ADSR) envelope outputs that would allow you to
> shape 10 or
> more parameters (eg. oscillator frequency) in the synthesizer... But im also
> wondering if
> you could use a sequencer to achieve this?
>> Perhaps the Envelooper sits at the realm of digital functionality where it
>> serves only to
> bring real-time control to otherwise common digital synthesis functions. But
> again, in an
> analog environment (say, as part of a full 300 system), the Envelooper
> (conceptually)
> sounds like it would be very exciting.
>> -Matt
>>
>> Dennis Verschoor wrote:
>> > Yeah i am still kinda excited about the envelooper. But i am afraid that
>> > due the
> lack of interest it will never be released. Cheers, Dennis On Sat, Jul 5,
> 2008 at 11:51 AM,
> frank death < maldoroar@yahoo. com > wrote:
>> > Hello All
>> > im not sure if this is the best way to raise this subject & its kind of
>> > directed to
> everyone & if Grant wants to let us know whats being dreamed up then that
> would be
> great.
>> > Ive been reading up about the Wiard Envelooper & im wondering if that
>> > module is
> still going to happen? On paper it sounds like a fantastic idea & if i
> understand it correctly
> it would allow the user to draw in multi-staged/ multi-looping envelopes
> that with the
> push of a button trigger the envelope shapes to wherever they have been
> assigned in the
> synthesizer. I wonder also exactly how one draws in an envelope? Does it
> mean that you
> use the Wave256 software (as you would with the Waveform City)?
>> > Grant also mentions gestural synthesis which reminds me of how a
>> > conductor directs
> individual musicians within an orchestra & the sum of instruments play the
> music. To me
> the idea of the Envelooper & gestural synthesis modules (in theory) bring
> the modular
> synthesizer under greater control of the user & the greater the control &
> the more refined
> the instrument- the greater its musical functionality. Of couse everyones
> idea of what
> music is varies a lot however the potential for modules with gestural
> functions sounds
> extremely interesting to me (and im sure many others too!).
>> > In fact something like an oscillator with gestural functions would also
>> > be very
> interesting. One starts to think of all kinds of inputs & outputs
> communicating with each
> other all at the touch of a button. Only problem is that at some point it
> begins to resemble
> sampling and many modern keyboard instruments do have buttons that provide
> multi-
> functions. However theres a massive distinction between a digital
> synthesizer & a 300
> series module with its functionality!
>> > Also last year Grant invited ideas & discussion for potential functions
>> > for future
> modules and im wondering if people are still thinking about it? Id love to
> see a module
> with 2 to 4 different recording/looping ICs that the user could cross-mix
> audio to create
> multi-loops all under the ability to shift eachs frequency & duration. I
> actually want to
> experiment on this idea myself. But yeah- id like to see a Wiard
> Delay/Looper/ Frequency
> Shifter for sure.
>> > Anyway- just wanted to keep things ticking over & would like to hear any
>> > thoughts.
> Cheers
>> > -Matt
>> > -- Music at: http://robotdj. net/?dj=mono- poly http://www.twango.
>> > com/channel/
> mono-poly. public
>> > http://www.myspace. com/zond3 http://www.myspace. com/bomono
>> >
>>
>
>

>             I have a working Envelooper module with software. 
> It is quite fascinating from an engineering perspective. 
> I have been working for a year or so to try and find if it can do anything musical. 
> It can in the sense of Subotnick's "player piano" technique (4 Butterflys). It excels at "bug" 
> music, but I have yet to find a way to make it relevant to the tradition of western music. 
> I do keep trying and experimenting. I have man-years invested in development, I can not 
> simply "forget about it", but it would tank in the market as it is today. Fall like a rock, 
> submarine anchor, you get the idea. 
> --- In wiardgroup@yahoogro ups.com , frank death <maldoroar@. ..> wrote: 
>> 
>> I can only conceptualize the Envelooper, as i havent seen a mock-up front panel for it. 
> Im just really curious about its history, its applications, and also of course, its possible 
> availability. I wonder if its vaguely related to other gestural synthesis technology that you 
> see in stuff used by Stellarc, for example. 
>>   So my conceptual understanding of it may be wrong, i dont know. Its interesting that 
> many software synthesizers have multi-point envelopes, and these enable the user to 
> program very weird, very musical & evolving patches. So imagine having say 10 or more 
> multi-point (ie. not just an ADSR) envelope outputs that would allow you to shape 10 or 
> more parameters (eg. oscillator frequency) in the synthesizer. .. But im also wondering if 
> you could use a sequencer to achieve this? 
>>   Perhaps the Envelooper sits at the realm of digital functionality where it serves only to 
> bring real-time control to otherwise common digital synthesis functions. But again, in an 
> analog environment (say, as part of a full 300 system), the Envelooper (conceptually) 
> sounds like it would be very exciting. 
>>  -Matt 
>> 
>> Dennis Verschoor wrote: 
>> >             Yeah i am still kinda excited about the envelooper. But i am afraid that due the 
> lack of interest it will never be released. Cheers, Dennis On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:51 AM, 
> frank death < maldoroar@yahoo. com > wrote: 
>> >             Hello All 
>> > im not sure if this is the best way to raise this subject & its kind of directed to 
> everyone & if Grant wants to let us know whats being dreamed up then that would be 
> great. 
>> >   Ive been reading up about the Wiard Envelooper & im wondering if that module is 
> still going to happen? On paper it sounds like a fantastic idea & if i understand it correctly 
> it would allow the user to draw in multi-staged/ multi-looping envelopes that with the 
> push of a button trigger the envelope shapes to wherever they have been assigned in the 
> synthesizer. I wonder also exactly how one draws in an envelope? Does it mean that you 
> use the Wave256 software (as you would with the Waveform City)? 
>> >   Grant also mentions gestural synthesis which reminds me of how a conductor directs 
> individual musicians within an orchestra & the sum of instruments play the music. To me 
> the idea of the Envelooper & gestural synthesis modules (in theory)  bring the modular 
> synthesizer under greater control of the user & the greater the control & the more refined 
> the instrument- the greater its musical functionality. Of couse everyones idea of what 
> music is varies a lot however the potential for modules with gestural functions sounds 
> extremely interesting to me (and im sure many others too!). 
>> >    In fact something like an oscillator with gestural functions would also be very 
> interesting. One starts to think of all kinds of inputs & outputs communicating with each 
> other all at the touch of a button. Only problem is that at some point it begins to resemble 
> sampling and many modern keyboard instruments do have buttons that provide multi- 
> functions. However theres a massive distinction between a digital synthesizer & a 300 
> series module with its functionality! 
>> >   Also last year Grant invited ideas & discussion for potential functions for future 
> modules and im wondering if people are still thinking about it? Id love to see a module 
> with 2 to 4 different recording/looping ICs that the user could cross-mix audio to create 
> multi-loops all under the ability to shift eachs frequency & duration. I actually want to 
> experiment on this idea myself. But yeah- id like to see a Wiard Delay/Looper/ Frequency 
> Shifter for sure. 
>> >  Anyway- just wanted to keep things ticking over & would like to hear any thoughts. 
> Cheers 
>> >  -Matt 
>> >  -- Music at: http://robotdj. net/?dj=mono- poly http://www.twango. com/channel/ 
> mono-poly. public 
>> >  http://www.myspace. com/zond3 http://www.myspace. com/bomono 
>> > 
>> 
>

>             Hello Grant and fellow Wiardos... 
> Grant Richter wrote: 
>> I have a working Envelooper module with software. It is quite 
>> fascinating from an engineering perspective. I have been working for a 
>> year or so to try and find if it can do anything musical. 
> At the risk of displaying my considerable ignorance, I've been thinking 
> about this conundrum, how *would* you interact with the Envelooper do 
> something musical? I am reminded of Paul Perry's suggestion to all us DIY 
> types who think they have a product: first, design the user interface, and 
> write the manual :) 
> The Envelooper has two UIs, as I see it.  One is the physical module 
> itself, the other is the software used to create the shapes for each 
> section.  For the physical, well, as I recall, you'll have 4 outputs, 
> switches to select the mode, knobs to control stage time, some number of 
> per-stage gate/trigger inputs and outputs, and well I don't know what all 
> else.  It seems to me that all that is fairly straightforward, you patch 
> the outs to control VCOs, filters, VCAs, etc.  The one panel feature that 
> has a strong "IS it musical or not?" emphasis is the knob that selects the 
> timebase; the shorter the time, the more the bugmusic, right? 
> Grant, I think you mentioned that you had worked out a recorder function 
> to capture note, gate, and slope data from sequencers, joysticks, etc.? 
> That's more than half the battle right there, I think.  When recording 
> joysticks, for example, I assume the 256 capture points are distributed 
> evenly across the timebase set by the knob?  So one way to increase 
> musicality would be to allow CV or Clock control of the timebase function. 
> You could then send voltages (or variable clock) to play the gestures in 
> musically useful related time-bases.  Why, a Sequantizer would be ideal 
> here :) and maybe an Envelator to slew the output.  What other patching or 
> routing access to the stages is available from the panel? 
> The second UI, the software, seems like a *serious* opportunity to keep 
> things musically useful.  For the 3 people who are likely to use Wave256 
> and burn their own EEPROMS, that is :) Where I keep getting stuck is, 
> other than note data, how do you visualize 256 segments of a stage and 
> create musical elements out of them?  Will there be any way to dump or 
> load data other than burning a chip?  I wonder about the software UI, and 
> by extension, the concept of getting into the vast store of patterns and 
> gestures that the Envelooper could hold and building msic out of them. 
> * For instance: For VCA control, could the module or the software take 
> voltage/computer keyboard input to create a 10V gate pattern?  Any 
> Envelooper stage could take, say, spacebar (0 volts) for rests and enter 
> (5V) for gate, shift-enter (10V) to hold from previous step.  You'd want 
> copy and paste functions in the software and, ideally, some sort of 
> rudimentary grid layout.  Depending on where you set the timebase, each 
> "step" could be a micro-blip or a 25 second gate signal, and...have I got 
> this right, there is a mode where the 4 stages can start at the same time 
> and loop on different timebases? 
> * You could use one or two stages of the 'Looper to tweak the mod 
> inputs on an EnveLATOR, obviously.  But couldn't you also use a slow 
> timebase, and instead of sending a 10V pulse as above for a gate sequence, 
> have each wave hold an actual complete envelope shape of its own, to send 
> to a filter or VCA, etc.?  That is, instead of just punching through 
> static voltages and letting the Vactrols sort it out, slow the Envelooper 
> down and send a pattern of one-shot envelopes.  For this to work, I guess 
> the software ought to provide a small library of envelope shapes of 
> varying slope and depth, AR, AD, ADSR, that you could cut and paste into 
> each wave slot (or, rest, as above). 
> * am I getting too meta?  Also...working the software in this way would be 
> kind of tedious? 
> I dunno.  I begin to see why this is taking so long :) 
> Paul 
> -- 
> been avoiding work for too long now. 
>