<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>Interviews</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:interviews.sonikmatter.com,2008-11-27://5</id>
    <updated>2008-12-30T18:27:01Z</updated>
    
    <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type Pro 4.21-en</generator>

<entry>
    <title>The Zendrum Interview</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2008/the_zendrum_int.php" />
    <id>tag:interviews.sonikmatter.com,2008://5.748</id>

    <published>2008-06-01T14:34:13Z</published>
    <updated>2008-12-30T18:27:01Z</updated>

    <summary>


About 20 miles west of Atlanta, GA, in the bedroom community of Douglasville, is the Mecca of alternative, electronic percussion otherwise known as ... Zendrum. The modest, ranch-style house belies the fact that this is the headquarters of a company that, for some 16 years, has been producing one of the world&apos;s most unique MIDI percussion controllers.

Mark McGouirk and Jeff Barnett interview David Haney, the inventor of the ZENDRUM and take us back through the history of the product and some of its more interesting users.</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="zendrum" label="Zendrum" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Jeff Barnett and Mark McGouirk<br />
June 2008</p>


<p><i>About 20 miles west of Atlanta, GA, in the bedroom community of Douglasville, is the Mecca of alternative, electronic percussion otherwise known as ... Zendrum. The modest, ranch-style house belies the fact that this is the headquarters of a company that, for some 16 years, has been producing one of the world's most unique MIDI percussion controllers.</i></p>

<p>Mark McGouirk came here, for Sonikmatter, to interview David Haney - drummer, inventor and co-owner (with Kim Daniel) of Zendrum. Friends Bonnie Blackstock and Jeff Barnett agreed to come along to take pictures, record the interview and more importantly, get to try out these unusual instruments.</p>

<p>For years, we have seen these instruments played in various places like Disney World's Epcot, and in videos on YouTube and Zendrum's web site, but have never had the chance to actually put our hands on one. Here was our chance.</p>

<p>We came with many questions: How did Haney come up with this idea? What inspired him and fellow drummer, Kim Daniel, to manufacture them for others. How do they work? Who plays them? What has it been like to go from an average, working Joe drummer to a musical instrument manufacturer with some of the greatest names in contemporary music as customers. And, of course, what is it like to actually play a Zendrum?</p>

<p>Haney graciously welcomed us into his home and after chatting for a few minutes in the kitchen, invited us into his workshop/studio/museum.<br /></p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="8.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/images/zen/8.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Visiting Zendrum.</div>



<p>"I have one of each model hooked-up and ready to play. Feel free to touch anything you want," he said.</p>

<p>Oh, yeah! There is the flagship ZX, the LT laptop, and the newest model, the ZAP.</p>

<p>On one wall hang examples of the evolution of the Zendrum. They include the prototype and various production models like the Z1, Z2 and, the current model, the ZX. On other walls hang a dozen or more Zendrums previously owned and autographed by a Who's Who of drummers, percussionists and other musicians. In the middle of the room is Haney's recording studio. Across from that is the Shipping Department and, over in the corner, the Final Assembly area.</p>

<p>Inspector 109 as Haney is also known, is a big bald guy (his words) who loves to talk. We're here to listen, so that works well. He is passionate about Zendrum, all things music and is in awe of the musicians and instrument inventors that he has come to know over the years. He says things like, "Can you believe it? Billy f#cking Cobham!," when he talks about how amazed he is that his crazy, original idea has led him to meet many of his heroes.</p>

<p>As we listened, he walked and talked us around, pointing out various instruments and photos on the walls.</p>

<p>First up? The ORIGINAL Zendrum!</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="8.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/images/zen/DavidHaney_OriginalZendrum.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
David Haney with his original Zendrum.</div>

<p>David Haney: This is the first Zendrum I ever made. That was in '91.</p>

<p>Bonnie Blackstock: Wow! That looks different!</p>

<p>DH: It's basically a hollowed-out 2X10 piece of lumber and it had a big twist-on snake connector in the back of it that I was running into Alesis drum modules to do all of the triggering. This was just me on my own. The one down there on the end you see the shape starting to get a little more compound... taking the final shape. That's where my partner Kim got involved ... the woodworker.</p>

<p>In '93, I made a video of that one in this room with my band guys off camera with me just standing up and playing... what we used to call "White Boys on Green Beer" which was jam night. I sent the video off to Peter Gabriel and about a week later they were calling. "Can you come meet us in Chicago tomorrow?" And we were like, "No!" We finally caught them the last day they were here in Sacramento. We pooled money from friends and family and flew about five of us out there and met them. [Pointing at photos] This is actually that day and that was the first ... well it actually still had a big snake connector coming out of it. It didn't have a circuit board in it. That was Manu Katche, Gabriel's drummer, playing it. They couldn't have been any nicer or more encouraging. And the first question they asked was, "Can you make it wireless?" And Kim, my partner, having more balls than brains said, "Sure!"</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="6.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/6.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
David Haney with Manu Katche in 1993.</div>


<p>So, as soon as we got off the plane from California we started the company, went to the patent office and hired an engineer. The engineer came up with the first MIDI circuit board in about 3 months time.</p>

<p>I believe it was about January of '94 that we caught up to them [Gabriel] in Australia and they used it all over Asia. It was a big hit in that show. They had a song where Peter would go sit down and play the drums just so Manu could come out front and dance with everybody else because he's a real attractive guy and they wanted to get him out from behind the drums. After that, we were able to drop his name. Then, it was like Stevie Wonder and Fleetwood Mac and everybody else that came through town, would call us and say, can you come down to The Fox and show this thing? So, we'd go busting downtown and show it to them. That's when we started, you know, being able to drop a lot of names.</p>

<p>Then we met Billy Cobham who was filling in for Manu, when Peter came and did the WOMAD tour here [Atlanta, 1994].</p>

<p>Jeff Barnett: Yeah. I saw that.</p>

<p>DH: Down at Lakewood?</p>

<p>JB: Yeah. Great show!</p>

<p>DH: We were backstage showing this thing off. This is actually backstage [points at a photo], right here where Peter put the Zendrum on Billy for the first time and what's coming out of Billy's mouth right there is, "You guys are crazy!" He was the last person I would have thought of... because of the big drum set. He was my musical hero when I was eighteen. He was the scariest thing anybody had ever seen at that point, you know?</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="7.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/7.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Peter Gabriel puts a Zendrum on Billy Cobham in Atlanta.</div>



<p>So basically it went on from there. We started going to all the NAMM shows... doing the retail thing. My partner Kim was on a plane for about 3 years straight going to Frankfurt and Japan and Italy. We set up all this international distribution and basically got our brains beat out, financially, by the fact that it was $5,000 for one half-page ad in Modern Drummer magazine. So by '99 we were just like... we've gotta stop! This isn't going to work.</p>

<p>By that point the Internet had started coming of age and people were starting to understand that they could buy things through the Internet. That's really the only thing that kept it going at that point. We used to have an office right down on Peachtree St., just south of Buckhead, that Kim had gotten. It was an old record store that someone had driven a car through the front of and, being a contractor, he just kept pulling things together one stick at a time until we had a really nice office there.</p>

<p>The beauty of it was that we were right down the street from the Shepherd Spinal Center. They would bring patients down there in wheelchairs and I'd hold my Zendrum out and there'd be some guy with a mouth stick dragging it across the Zendrum triggers, though the doctors had told them they would never be able to play anything. That was sort of like, well... it's sort of a sin not to do something about it when you felt like you kind of had the magic beans. [Picking up an LT] So that's how this came out. This is the first prototype of a laptop Zendrum. For the patients, it's sort of like a motion amplifier. If you've got limited mobility, you know, you can't play a trap set. But you can certainly do this. As I said, there were even people without mobility from the neck down who were able to drag a stick across it.</p>

<p>We kept making different prototypes. Different embodiments of the triggers. But we realized we couldn't make a specific thing for each patient's range of mobility. So we put our heads together and came up with something that sort of resembled a Zendrum shape, had some art to it, and then put it out there. What I wasn't counting on, what Kim and I weren't counting on, were all the adaptations of this from playing drums to other things.</p>

<p>This year, we've developed the first prototype of a ZAP, the Zendrum Articulating Programmer. It's more to get into the MPC sort of market where everybody's been playing these gummy-rubber buttons for so long.</p>

<p>Here are the three different things. This is my old Zendrum from '96. You can't break it. You can beat the crap out of it, but you can't break anything. But it's still very sensitive. So see? It takes all of the work for me out of hauling the drums around and being a singing drummer... it removes the sweat equity. Being able to get out from the drum set and go singing on the front mic makes a lot more sense than, "Where's the singing coming from?"</p>

<p>So, these are basically the three different stages of this. Like I said, it all started in '91, but this [current ZX] is from '96, the LT is 2000, and then this year ['08], the ZAP. They're all different embodiments of the same stuff. We haven't changed anything at all with the electronics since '96. We gave it a few software features that were chip upgrades.</p>

<p>What we feel like we've been doing is waiting for everything else to catch up. It seems like this year, with the advent of the 8-core computer, and stuff like that, it's starting to get to where all of the other gear is getting to the point where it will keep up. I've got BFD in that Receptor over there, which is dead and I'm sending back.</p>

<p>JB: Oh really?</p>

<p>DH: Yeah, it's dead. Rolled it off the back of a truck...killed the drive in it. So all of this stuff is not really made for a working musician. It's meant to sit still and not be moved and "Don't touch it!" Where my thing is that I've been breaking stuff for 30 years. I mean, kind of a bull in a china shop that way.</p>

<p>As a drummer it's like you're the last person on the list. Even though all these cool programs are out there, they were designed to be triggered from a keyboard ... they were written on a keyboard. It's like the drummer got left out but now what's happening is, with all the hip hop and stuff, there's a whole lot more market for this. A lot more adaptations of this than I ever thought about.</p>

<p>This [ZAP] was designed from the ground up for us to be easier to produce. I've got 200 of these started right now. They're easy to store. I've got one of each wood ready to oil and finish. My goal this year is to sell about 500 units. It seems like it was such a hit at the NAMM show and got such good press. I'm getting all over the Internet. I just Googled Zendrum the other day and it's like they'd just taken my product catalog page and put it up everywhere. I said, "Cool!" That's a whole lot better than 5000 bucks for one month in Modern Drummer.</p>

<p>It's really more practical to make something with a lifetime warranty on it. I tell them it's warrantied for my lifetime ... not theirs. I give everybody my cell phone number. If they've got a problem in the middle of the night, all they've got to do is call up if they need to fuss at me.</p>

<p>Generally speaking, I mean, the things just don't break. I've not had one trigger break in all of the Zendrums that are out there.</p>

<p>Mark McGouirk: Wow!</p>

<p>DH: That part of it... it's a non-moving key.</p>

<p>JB: What can you tell us about the trigger itself?</p>

<p>DH: Well, that's the MacGyver part of this.</p>

<p>JB: It's really intriguing. I have a TrapKAT, which, of course, uses FSRs [Force Sensing Resistors].</p>

<p>DH: FSRs. We did experiments with Futureman [Roy Wooten of Bela Fleck and the Flecktones] with FSRs and piezos side by side and there's no way an FSR can be as fast in attack as a piezo. The problem is, you can break them... like when they stick them on the bottom of drum pads. I was just blowing them off the bottom with a stick. So, I got into fixing my own stuff.</p>

<p>The beauty of this is the simplicity. What I can't figure out is that everybody is so in love with the idea of aftertouch with the FSR. Kat and Roland and everybody else sort of went that way. But they're missing the impact of a hit. I'm not going to press down on a drum after I hit it anyway.</p>

<p>MM: Right.</p>

<p>JB: Just a minute ago... the first time I ever had my hands on one at all... I was absolutely astonished at how sensitive it is, too. The FSR doesn't even come close to that sensitivity.</p>

<p>DH: You know, piezos have actually been around since the '20's and they're sensitive enough that they actually use them on sonar to read differences in pressure in the water. When we were starting, we actually had Motorola engineers come and they went, "Wow! You've actually figured out the best way we've ever seen to mount this." And we said, "Well, thank you!"</p>
<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="jeff_zendrum_lt_sm.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/jeff_zendrum_lt_sm.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Jeff Barnett tests the Zendrum LT.</div>

<p>The bottom line with all of this is that we're trying to make a real instrument and not plastic. And it's easier for us to make something quality out of wood than it is to make something overseas, or whatever, and we go ahead and tell people that it's an instrument. It's supposed to last as long as you do. Everybody else seems to be running from anything other than mass-producing everything. I can't say 'forever'. I mean if the thing took off, you know, and we had to outgrow ourselves, then I'd rather just hire everybody I knew to keep up. Right now we have a basic group of about 6 or 7 people that do everything... help in the woodshop, in the paint room. I'm still doing all of the final assembly and testing myself, but I have people that do subassembly for me, build these triggers, operate the press, and all that sort of thing, and help as we get behind.</p>

<p>The beauty of this is that when we started and were going through the music store route, it was all about selling 500 in a month... which we never did. The music stores didn't know whether it went in the keyboard room or the drum room and they sure didn't know anything about MIDI. What I like is that I keep getting this wonderful feedback from people. That sort of tells me where it's going to go. We were cut off from that with the blind sale before. Just getting to know people like Moog before he died. He's the guy who told me, it's your name and your reputation and you have to test every single one of them. I was like, "God, thanks Bob!"</p>

<p>BB: Rest his soul.</p>

<p>DH: Yeah. He was a good man.</p>

<p>MM: Bonnie, you were just at Moog, recently.</p>

<p>BB: Yeah. I actually got to meet him at a NAMM show once.</p>

<p>DH: And you know, he was a remarkable person. Just like all the people he introduced us to. He brought 'em all into our trade show booth in '97. It was like, here's the guy from ARP, and here's the guy from Sequential Circuits, and here's the guy from Oberheim [synth pioneers Alan Pearlman, Dave Smith and Tom Oberheim]. You know, just to tell us that we weren't crazy and to keep going.</p>

<p>I was looking on the Sonikmatter site and saw an interview with Jennifer Hruska and we had worked with her in '96 or '97. Some of the first stuff she'd done when she'd launched her company was a collaboration where we had gotten a bunch of drum sets and cymbals together for her to sample and at that point I was using a Kurzweil 2500. She was cutting through all of the crap back then because people were not paying attention to making things sound real. It was all a numbers game where somebody had 500 sounds in a box. Then you had to have 1000 sounds next year. Then 1,500, Then 2,000 and I'm like, well... I need 10. I don't need 1000. I don't even want to do all of that programming. I just want to play something. What I'm excited about is that it looks like within a year there's going to be an iPod version of this... something I can plug and play with this. And it will be even more mobile and portable then it is now.</p>

<p>I just sold one [laptop] to Christopher Guest of Spinal Tap and the first question they asked me is if I can make an exploding Zendrum? And I said, "No, you can get your pyrotechnics guys to do that!" But I can picture this: he's got a laptop Zendrum for Christmas. I can picture him having it behind him and the drummer blows up and he whips it around and the band keeps going!</p>

<p>He just went out and bought an 8 core computer to keep up with BFD and to run these programs because the first thing you run into when you get a Zendrum is that everything wants to see key down, hold, key up. This is bad! I mean, [when it's triggered] it's over with... it's a note-off as soon as it's a note-on. What we added was a 1/4 inch jack and this [panel mounted] momentary sustain switch which reverses the polarity so that something will ring out. Because people were doing loops. Futureman was doing these long, spoken-word things behind what he was playing. He would reach up and hit one trigger and it would go on for 30 seconds.</p>

<p>We're trying to keep that in mind. What I'm finding out is that, for instance, if I put this and this into a MIDI combiner, I can bend notes on the Zendrum. I can modulate sounds. There are all sorts of things you could add into the system, but I just can't see us trying to be everything to everybody. We need to focus on what we do well and keep hitting the ball.</p>

<p>JB: Well, your market is percussionists.</p>

<p>DH: It is percussionists but then again, I've got all of these demos on the Zendrum site where people are playing piano on the thing and I'm like, why don't you just go buy a keyboard? It's 200 bucks.</p>

<p>JB: Maybe it's partly the showmanship side of it?</p>

<p>DH: It is the showmanship side of it, too. I've got a bunch of them down at Epcot now and I'm constantly getting emails from people that just got back from vacation. And, oh! They saw the Village Beatniks at Animal Kingdom.</p>

<p>BB: I saw them over Christmas. Really neat!</p>

<p>DH: You know, they are all playing Zendrums and all this stuff. And well, that's not really what it was intended to do... and lord! I don't want to have to tech support all of that! But that's OK.</p>

<p>BB: Ha!</p>

<p>JB: That has to be flattering, though.</p>

<p>MM: So many people have mentioned Disney with the Zendrum.</p>

<p>DH: It's very flattering. But, it's all a little confusing to me. I just go, it's a drum... see? Zen-drum... druuuumm. What we're doing is trying to continue to make something that nobody else will make, because everybody else is married to the FSR. For drumming, you've got to have that attack. That's the most important thing... that sensitivity under the pad.</p>

<p>MM: It's is so sensitive! It's amazing.</p>

<p>JB: It is remarkable.</p>

<p>DH: You can't do that on anything else.</p>

<p>JB: And, it seems virtually indestructible.</p>

<p>DH: It is ... literally. I sent this off to college with my son. He's dropped it several times. I had the strap up like this one day and it bounced on the concrete floor like a 2x4!</p>

<p>BB: Ouch!</p>

<p>DH: I said, "Oh my God! That had to have been what killed it!" I picked it up, pressed some caps back down, and took it to work. They're built like tanks.</p>

<p>JB: Wow.</p>

<p>DH: And if I had done that with any kind of plastic! And that's what the thing was. When I started, I was using a Roland Octapad with a Yamaha drum machine. This was '84. You know, it looked like I was beating on a TV dinner or something. But I was able to play on these little bitty stages with the band and not haul so much stuff.</p>

<p>But I kept breaking stuff. Everyday I would break something. So, I realized it wasn't rocket science on the inside. There's nothing in there that's going to shock you or hurt you in any kind of way. But I also knew better than to call Roland up..., "I broke my Octapad! Can you please help?" They'd tell me it was going to be 6 weeks and it was going to be $50 per element to replace. And I'm like, "No. I've gotta make a gig tonight." You know? It's gotta work. So I started going to RadioShack. That's what those things up there are [pointing to the prototype's triggers]... door buzzers.</p>

<p>JB: Really?</p>

<p>DH: Door buzzers with Velcro.</p>

<p>BB: Oh man.</p>

<p>DH: And the Velcro was the shock mount.</p>

<p>JB: I'll be damned.</p>

<p>DH: That's how it started. I was able to play that thing well enough to make that video to send to Peter Gabriel. That's what this evolved from. But, we realized, we've got to do something of our own... we can't do this. And Kim had this brainstorm. So, the triggers are shock-mounted and you can play one all day long without triggering the one right next to it.</p>

<p>JB: Earlier, you mentioned waiting for other gear to catch up. I'm assuming what you're referring to is MIDI latency. That's part of it?</p>

<p>DH: It's part of it.</p>

<p>JB: So you're finding that hardware today still responds quicker?</p>

<p>DH: Absolutely.</p>

<p>JB: A good, high-end computer maybe....</p>

<p>DH: A dedicated drum module will keep up all day long and never cough. The Receptor when I upgraded it where it had a 400 gig drive and 2 gig of memory ... I was able to play it with my band and never had it hiccup once. I carried it around for about 6 months... obviously didn't' take good care of it! But that's the nature of my business. Something dedicated like that will keep up. Futureman has been telling me since about 2004 that the computer was almost getting fast enough to keep up with what he could play.</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="Flecktones_Piedmont_Park_sm.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/Flecktones_Piedmont_Park_sm.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Futureman with his Drumitar at the 1991 Montreux-Atlanta Festival.</div>



<p>As far as I'm concerned, he's kind of like the Jimi Hendrix of drummers where we're going to be studying what that guy has done for another 50 years. He's come and lived with me at times while we were building crazy stuff for him. I can't figure out what he is doing! I can sit right in front of him and I can't figure out what he's doing. It's like a magician's trick. There's so much coming out and it's like, "You're not even moving your hands! I don't see any movement happening! How are you doing that!" And he's got all of this stuff developed where he's going across 2 or 3 triggers at once with different parts of the finger to get a cymbal, a crash and a snare all at the same time. It's like so little movement and you're hearing this Billy Cobham type stuff coming out. I mean... he's the guy. That's a picture from Piedmont Park in '91 with the Drumitar and that's when I came home and made that [prototype], because I wanted one for me. I wasn't thinking about a product. I wanted one for me. We went up to see him in '95. He takes my Zendrum, with my layout on it and flips it upside down and backwards like Jimi Hendrix and proceeds to sound like Elvin Jones! I'll never be that kind of virtuoso on the thing. I'm more like Ringo or Levon Helm or something.</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="David_Haney_and_Futureman_sm.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/David_Haney_and_Futureman_sm.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
David Haney with Roy 'Futureman' Wooten in 1995.</div>



<p>MM: So the Drumitar was some inspiration for the Zendrum?</p>

<p>DH: That was the inspiration. When I saw them [The Flecktones] the first time, I fell down laughing at them because it was so outrageous. They had the harmonica player and piano like McCoy Tyner, the banjo, and Victor Wooten, Roy's brother, on bass. All of them were mutants. I mean, you still can't categorize what they do. It defies description because they pull from so many kinds of things and it's all a high level of jazz but you hear the bluegrass in it, you hear middle-eastern influence and they've toured all over the world. They played in Mongolia! You hear all of that influence in their music.</p>

<p>The thing that blew my mind was hearing Jimi Hendrix when I was 11. That's when I decided I was going to be a musician for the rest of my life. I just went, "That's it!" And coming through all of that starting in '66, '67 and then having to get out and work. I started playing in bands professionally when I was 15 and I'm 50 now. So it's like the show must go on kind of thing.</p>

<p>I've always been my own roadie, I've always been the guy in the band who had to fix everything to keep it all running. It's was just a natural progression for me to sort of evolve into this. When I started this, my wife was a labor delivery nurse working 7 at night to 7 in the morning. We had 4 little kids and I was supposed to keep quiet all day long. I didn't have any place to set-up drums in the house. I was 2-finger typing on an Alesis drum machine with headphones on so that me and the boys could get together and jam.</p>

<p>That's when I saw Futureman the first time and I just thought, "That's ridiculous!" You know, this guy was playing this thing at such a high level. And at that point he was using Alesis drum machines. And, like he says, he was ducking and shading because the sounds really weren't that good yet in '91,or whenever, and that evolved into a rack this tall with samplers and this and that. Now he's finally got some super Mac computer and he's doing everything in Drumkit from Hell. The computer is finally able to keep up. Just barely.</p>

<p>JB: The high-end computers are just now able to.</p>

<p>DH: I'm talking about thousands of dollars worth of computer. And I'm thinking, you know... I'm going to take this into a bar? I don't think so. I wish someone would put those sounds in a dedicated module with no moving parts and no drives. I just saw where there's a 128 GB Toshiba flash chip now. That's enough to put a few drumsets on and have 'em really sound good. With the Receptor, it had gotten to the point where I'd always set-up an acoustic drum set - just to have a parachute... in case everything blows up... the power goes off. The best compliment I ever had was the guys in the band said they would have to turn around to look to see if I was playing acoustics or electrics and I said, "OK, now we're there!" It's not the drum module sounds anymore, it's like you really can't tell the difference. It really is real recordings of drums. It's not waveform stuff that somebody synthesized.</p>

<p>It's been a long and interesting road. It's definitely been a labor of love to stay in it this long. What I see now is that we've kind of treaded water long enough that there is a market now. Instead of one guy at a time seeing a UFO and giving up the drum set, now it's all the programmers and studio musicians and all the hip hop guys. The ZAP is the first time we've been able to break that $1,000 plateau. There's still 20 hours of labor in a ZX from a block of wood to a finished instrument. Where with the ZAPs, you rub some oil on them and they're finished.</p>

<p>It used to be like some these you see up here. Yamaha Piano did the finishes for us for a while. The problem with them was that they'd use us for guinea pigs and you'd get all the way to the end of it and put the last screw in and the thing would crack like glass. And that wasn't going to do for a drummer. I mean, come on! Don't give me a piece of glass! Everything we produced at first was outsourced... computer carved bodies, Yamaha paint finishes. Until we realized that nobody was going to care about it like us.</p>

<p>We were trying really hard, back then, because the first people we got them to were our musical heroes, you know? The story goes, we didn't have a Zendrum to send to Earth, Wind and Fire, even though they wanted one "right now!" So Kim, my partner, sends his. And we get the word back, "Well, the cap came off and went rolling across the stage in the middle of a song." And we were like, "Man! That can not happen!" So this was before everything was the way it is now. You don't want to be there with your pants down, you know? I mean, I still wake up with screaming fits out of deep sleep dreaming that something's wrong on stage.</p>

<p>BB: Oh wow!</p>

<p>DH: You know, I still do it every week. That's ingrained in me. It's always going to be something!</p>

<p>JB: Don't you know the CEO of Roland has the same problem?</p>

<p>DH: No! I don't think he does!</p>

<p>[Everyone laughs]</p>

<p>MM: [Pointing to the ZXs on the wall] What are all of these over here?</p>

<p>DH: That was one that was on tour with Janet Jackson. The one above it was Earth, Wind and Fire. The red and the white one were the first 2 we ever sold. One was Leon Russell. The second one was Roy Orbison's drummer. Ry Cooder, Prince, Elton John - any number of people that had the reason for it. They saw the benefit of it. The most impressive thing to me was the drummers that I used to worship. They are saying the same things that I'm saying which is, I don't want to have to haul the drum set, set it up, all the cartage and all the other stuff. Billy Cobham was actually the first person that told me, in 1994, that on trans-Atlantic flights, he had a laptop computer and a Zendrum and he was writing music into the computer and I was like... I don't even know what you're talking about! I'm thinking, "Bill Cobham! With the drum set that big!"</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="1.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/1.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Some of the autographed Zendrums used by famous musicians.</div>



<p>Here's one of the things we made for Futureman here. This is actually a baby grand piano shape with 400 inputs of circuitry in it with a combination of FSR and piezo triggers in it. That thing had 800 feet of trigger wire in it.</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="3.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/3.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Futureman's Zendrum custom-made"Roy El Piano".</div>



<p>JB: Good night!</p>

<p>DH: So I mean we've been doing some stuff over the years. That was about 5 years in the making. He's got these mathematicians working with him where they're able to micro-tune between all of the notes. Instead of the scale being based on A 440, it's based off the atomic weights of the elements. So, it's music you've never heard... it's sound you've never heard. Sometimes it sounds like angels singing, sometimes it sounds like a calliope burning down! It's like, boy that's dissonant because it's all blue notes. That's what I'm saying. That guy is Jimi Hendrix for drummers. He really is. He's a brilliant musician and one of the most dedicated dreamers I've ever seen.</p>

<p>MM: And that was just a custom piece you built for him.</p>

<p>DH: That was 1997.</p>

<p>MM: Never made another one.</p>

<p>DH: No. The thing about it is that I keep running into people who have tried to make their own stuff but they just can't get all of the mechanics of it. You know, there's a bunch of frustrated mad scientists out there.</p>

<p>MM: A lot of websites dedicated to it too.</p>

<p>DH: Yeah, but the point is that their creativity is trying to come through and they just don't have the means to put it together. Where what I think I bring to this is the practical aspect of, "Yeah, you can throw that on the ground and pick it up and play it." Everything else seems to have been over-designed to me. Peter Gabriel actually said it's all about having a simple series of choices where you let 'em in. If you can get them to play it then they'll want to learn more about it. But it's almost like you have to make it simple enough so they're not overwhelmed. I think that gets lost in the industry. It's a numbers game. They're all making just more and more and more... every year... every 6 months they have to come up with new product for the NAMM show. I just so glad to be out of that rat race.</p>

<p>MM: There seems to be a thing in the industry as far as instant gratification. It's like, if you can't just pull up a great sound immediately, then nobody wants to work at getting there.</p>

<p>DH: That's great if what you want to do is dissect something down to the atom to figure out how it all works and then recompile it to be your own thing. I say if somebody had something with 10 good drum sets in it, I'd buy it. Just 10 great drum sets is more than I'll ever use in a night's work.</p>

<p>JB: Well after all, as a traditional drummer, you only have one.</p>

<p>DH: You only have one. You might have 2 snare drums, but you have the same drums all night long.</p>

<p>JB: If you have a good drum kit and you can replicate that 9 more times then that's fantastic.</p>

<p>DH: Exactly. I also have to say that first one I made for me, everything else has been trying to please somebody else. What is their idea, what do they think, what's good, what's bad? Then just noticing what works and what doesn't work. What I think over all is that if somebody gets this flash drive idea together where you've got something you can slip in the gig bag pocket, you know? With some professional ins and outs on it? Man, I am a happy guy. I'm a real happy guy about that. I'm just not much of a gearhead. I've broken everything I've ever owned. There's that $3000 worth of Receptor sitting there right now which is proof of how expensive a paperweight can be and that's going off to them right now. And right next to it I've got a Zendrum I just rebuilt, put a new chip in it and it's going back out to Billy Cobham. It's been working since '96... not a problem.</p>

<p>JB: So before you broke the Receptor, were you pretty happy with it?</p>

<p>DH: I loved it! It was actually so good it made me completely start over again in how I played the Zendrum because there was so much nuance under every sound. There's so much going on under my hands. All of a sudden, instead of this Polaroid snapshot of a sound that's just softer or louder or with maybe a little filtering on it for the articulation, now I've got 127 different samples under one trigger. So, it's all the different things I can do with drum sticks.</p>

<p>And that's when it was like, oh! Now everything has caught up to the potential that the Zendrum has had for 15 years. The sonic part of this is finally real. That actually took John Emrich, my friend who designs sounds for BFD. Because he's a drummer, the sampling was done from his perspective on the seat where everything else is like looking through 2 panes of glass at the engineer, you know? It's the producer's idea of the drum sound. And I know that's really what it sounds like because in recorded music, the drums are usually larger than life. You can't play ghost notes if everything's going tub, tub on every hit. You've got to have that little stuff where you drop it and no one even hears it.</p>

<p>But that's where the music is for a drummer. It's all the ghost notes and inflections. One guy sitting down on the drum set and another guy sitting down on the drum set sound completely different because the sound is actually with the drummer, not with the drum. Somebody's been paying a lot of attention to everything you can get out of a drum now and that really was what was missing. It's the video version of the Polaroid snapshot. The most exciting part about this for me is that there's nothing holding it back now.</p>

<p>MM: You're talking about like BFD, Drumkit from Hell...</p>

<p>DH: BFD, Drumkit from Hell... any of those now. Especially BFD, because it's a memory hog of a thing which is why it's still choking computers. But every sound that I can play all the way around a head is in there and you never hear it make that machine gun sound. It's always running through the samples.</p>

<p>JB: It's got a round robin thing.</p>

<p>DH: A round robin thing, so you never hear the same sound twice, which is what happens with a drum. No matter how good of a drummer you are, every note is going to be a little different and that's where the music is to me. Not so much just having the control of it but being musical with it.</p>

<p>MM: Superior 2.0 looks like it's going to be awesome.</p>

<p>DH: And I can't wait to get my hands on it. But that means I've got to go out and buy some hog of a computer to run it, too. I still say the software is out-running the hardware. The libraries are better than the machines to play them on and until somebody thinks about it like Apple would and turns it into a Garageband version of that, it's going to be a niche thing. I just don't see how they can sell enough units to make it worth their while.</p>

<p>JB: Well, I suspect that because computers are constantly getting faster, cheaper, and everything else, that it's just a matter of time before catching up.</p>

<p>DH: A matter of time.</p>

<p>JB: And it's not so much a matter of new technologies, it more a matter of...</p>

<p>DH: A natural progression.</p>

<p>JB: Exactly.</p>

<p>DH: It's just like this Toshiba chip with 128 gig on it, you know? Somebody puts that together in a GameCube... something like a 3, 4 or 5 hundred dollar piece. Then you're going to have something that working people can afford. That's where it's all headed I think. I hope so. And I just hope that whoever is steering this keeps their eye on the ball about it, because what generally happens is that marketing departments seem to get in the way of engineers. Engineers want to give you everything you can possibly put in something and marketing departments want to create a big ad. I hope that the continuation of this is that, within a year or two, I'll have something that I can highly recommend. I have recommended the Receptor on our website forum. And at the time, it was a real breakthrough. It really was. It was like, I'm never going to play a drum module again. But what I missed about the drum module was the ease of use.</p>

<p>JB: Yeah, it's a great blend of the two because with most any synthesizer, drum module, or anything like that, you're pretty much locked into whatever those sounds are and that's the end of it. If they're great and they last you for years ... fantastic! But if not, you know, that's what you're stuck with. Whereas the Receptor, which is essentially a rack-mounted computer, allows you to put any software you want in there, update it constantly...</p>

<p>DH: But don't you agree that this is just the first such machine like that. It's kind of like the original room full of Moog just to play one note.</p>

<p>JB: Yes, I absolutely agree. I hope so.</p>

<p>DH: Well, it's gotta be.</p>

<p>JB: Well, the thing is, you're talking about performing musicians.</p>

<p>DH: Right.</p>

<p>JB: It's one thing in the studio, having a laptop or a desktop or something fragile. Who cares...</p>

<p>DH: If something glitches you rewind it and start again.</p>

<p>JB: Yeah. But as a performer, it's either using modules, where you're stuck with what you have, or it's going toward something like the Receptor.</p>

<p>DH: I find that most of the people who are out gigging live with Zendrums are still using stuff like Roland TD-20's and TD-12's just because of the simplicity of it. And if they broke it they could go to the music store to replace it and be working the next day. What's wrong with that is that they don't make a way to rack-mount it. And the sounds still sound like 1997 to me. It's yesterday's technology and Roland is scrambling to catch up. They're basically dissing all this VST stuff where anyone with ears knows that VST is heads above that. So I think the whole hardware industry is struggling to catch up to this new wave of technology.</p>

<p>JB: Almost like an identity crisis.</p>

<p>DH: It's the same thing that was happening in '97 when people were starting to do online catalogs and all the retailers were freaking out. It's like, "How do we control this?" Like the same thing that happened with the recording industry. How do you control it now that the genie is out of the bottle? And they're still trying to figure out how to manipulate it... and control it. Roland seems to want to put everybody out of business that's any kind of competition at all. I know some folks who've had cease and desist orders on the NAMM show floor because their pads were too close or whatever to the V-Drum stuff.</p>

<p>MM: I've seen a lot of copies of that pad.</p>

<p>DH: In '94 we debuted at the summer NAMM and the Roland engineers were standing in my booth taking notes because we had a packed booth constantly. You just had to push people out of the booth. We always had famous guys in there and they were wailing on Zendrums. In '97 Roland releases the HandSonic, which is everything the captains of industry told us we should turn the Zendrum into... plastic, sounds onboard, sequencing, D-beam controllers and all this stuff. You know, that's another reason we got out of going to NAMM shows, too. Not only were they incredibly expensive, I mean it was 30 grand to go to Frankfurt, 20 grand to go to LA, 10 grand to go to Nashville, but I just got tired of doing somebody else's R&amp;D for them.</p>

<p>I think if we had put sounds inside of the Zendrum it would have dated it that day. It would have come and gone and already been history. Whereas it's a controller that is open-ended, it allows for people to bring their creativity to the show. I've even heard stories about people at Georgia Tech controlling lasers with a Zendrum! Some experimental laser they've got there and I'm like, "I don't even know what that means! Hey, what are you doing?" We had a doctor show up who was one of the first guys to ever do remote heart surgery and he said these triggers are more sensitive than the device he has to do heart surgery with.</p>

<p>MM: Jesus!</p>

<p>DH: And I said, "Well that's disconcerting!"</p>

<p>And who knows where the golden application is going to come from. That's why I don't think we try to over-reach. We just keep doing what we do... different embodiments. I am stubborn as a mule when it comes to adding new features. People get absolutely beside themselves arguing with me about this stuff. But I'm like, look. All this other stuff exists in software... everything you want to do. If you want to extend the decay time so that Stylus RMX will work with this, because it's just not fast enough to keep up? Why do I want to slow a Zendrum down? You know? Go buy a keyboard... please! So, we are pretty much still a percussion controller. That's what it does better than anything else that's out there. I dare anyone out there to try to pass it... because they won't go to this. This is old technology. They love that FSR! Oh, it will do so much more.</p>

<p>MM: Back to the hardware industry. What's your opinion about some of the changes like Yamaha buying Steinberg, Roland seems like they bought Cakewalk, Apple buying Emagic?</p>

<p>DH: I think they are scrambling not to become obsolete. I think that's the way big corporations do things. Look at the infrastructure they have to support. They can't make changes in a hurry, so naturally they're behind the curve of the little guys who get out here and do like, one-off things. They can't respond. It's like waking up the KGB. Once they know about you, you're toast. They're not going to be where the new ideas come from. They may adopt them and turn them into mass-produced things, which is what I think they are trying to do. But I also think they're trying to figure out how to control it because if they don't, somehow, figure out how to get up to date on this stuff then they're done.</p>

<p>I think their day is almost done... the day of the static hardware box. When you have all of this flash around, why would you want a box of sounds you couldn't change? You can't be that in love with it. But the whole retail industry is based on a new box every year. Blow out prices on last year's box. New box this year. And that whole pattern of built-in obsolescence is almost gone.</p>

<p>What I would love to see is an open-ended box that you could go to a website, pay specifically for the "iTunes sounds" that you want to download and put 'em in your "iPod". You don't have any fluff. You've got only the stuff that you like and you pay for the stuff you like. But it's yours. It's the exact library that you need instead of there being 20 drum sounds in there that I like and the rest of it I'll never use. Why is all that memory there just to give you 100 snare drums? I mean, what's the point? What is the point?!</p>

<p>They're trying to be everything to everybody, every time, and you can't do that. You either have something that connects with people or you don't. This industry is such a mammoth thing. It's like government or something. It's all overkill and a million different salaries to pay. They have to keep doing this. They have to build in the obsolescence in order to have a product to sell next year.</p>

<p>Speaking as sort of an outsider, I guess I can't blame them. I don't think they have a choice.</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="2.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com//images/zen/2.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Hands-on craftsmanship.</div>


<p>-MM/JB</p>

<p>The authors' impressions of Zendrum:</p>

<p>Jeff Barnett: The first one I played was the LT (laptop). I was instantly amazed at the response and sensitivity of the 25 triggers and impressed with the ergonomics. Obviously, a well conceived, designed, and crafted instrument and very well suited for someone used to playing hand drums. It includes 2, 1/4" footswitch jacks... one for sustain and one for an extra trigger.</p>

<p>Second was the ZX. This is the "crazy guitar-looking" one most people are familiar with. It has the same trigger components (24 of them), electronics and quality, but requires a very different playing style. I could quickly learn to love playing this thing!</p>

<p>I then tried the ZAP. This (most compact) instrument requires an altogether different playing style. Its different trigger layout will be more familiar to MPC or HandSonic players. Again, it uses the same (though 19) triggers and electronics. However, in addition to the 1/4" sustain jack of the LT, the ZAP adds 3, 1/4" jacks for triggers.</p>

<p>Though Zendrums are built from substantial (and beautiful) hunks of wood, because they are hollowed out to accommodate the electronics and hardware, they are lighter than they appear. Nevertheless, they still have the heft of rock-solid instruments. I would never want to drop one, but only because it would damage the finish. One would be hard pressed to kill a Zendrum simply by dropping it.</p>

<p>MIDI implementation of Zendrums is perfect for drumming of all kinds. While not designed specifically for playing melodic instruments, Zendrums provide a sustain function (with reversible polarity) in the form of momentary switches and/or 1/4" jacks (depending on the model) to accommodate playing all kinds of sounds. David informs me that they are working on new circuitry, with flashable updates, that will allow them to add many more features, such as MIDI channel per trigger, note duration, gain, etc. Yes, it's a Zen-DRUM, but he recognizes that players want some of these features and he does listen to his customers.</p>

<p>Last, but by no means least, the wood grain and finish on these instruments is wonderful! The 15-16 coats of finish on the ZX and LT not only make them durable, but bring out the wood grain so well that I swear it actually looks etched... almost 3D. And the ZAP has a smooth, hand-oiled finish with a warm look and feel. These are true, hand-built instruments.</p>

<p>Everything about these practically indestructible instruments screams craftsmanship. From the wood and finish, the solid, responsive triggers, the mounted hardware, to the display with the cool Zendrum badge.</p>

<p>Although Zendrums are only available directly from the company, many of the enthusiastic Zendrum community are willing to demonstrate their instruments to interested buyers. Contact the forum to see if a player is in your area. You will likely find someone willing to let you try theirs. When you do get a chance to try one, your first impression may be, "Wow! That is a beautiful instrument!", but your second will be, "This thing plays like a dream!"</p>

<p>Mark McGouirk: We had a great time hanging out with David. He was a wonderful host and a very funny and intriguing guy. Jeff, Bonnie and I left Zendrum very excited and totally inspired.</p>

<p>The Zendrums are amazingly sensitive and feel absolutely wonderful to play. Many musicians like to play percussion with their fingers, be it a drum head, steering wheel, a table top or whatever. The Zendrum piezo triggers are the holy grail for playing in this manner. Couple this with the brave new world of software sounds and samples and you've just tapped into a universe of musical possibilities. The super fast and sensitive piezo trigger is the only way to go for triggering percussion sounds but I feel like there is much potential beyond percussion.</p>

<p>One thing I tested was a harp sample in Garageband which sounded nice but triggering it with one of the ZX models was a fascinating exploration of melodic possibility and new fingering techniques. I played a regular drum kit library with the LT and again, the sensitivity is just exquisite!</p>

<p>Jeff already mentioned the beauty and craftsmanship of these instruments and all I can say is that they are indeed gorgeous. Whatever your choice of graphics, favorite guitar finishes and more, the Zendrum Custom Shop has it covered.</p>

<p>Kudos to David Haney and Kim Daniel for such a unique and powerful contribution to the world of MIDI controllers. I believe it is a rarity to find a manufacturer with such a passion and with such pride in work as David and Kim have, especially in an age of mass production. Zendrum's strong commitment to it's users was very evident to us and it's a model approach for any business to follow.</p>

<p>Bonnie was in the UK and was not available to offer comments at the time of writing, but it's enough to say that she wrote a check for a ZX the day of the interview. Two days later, Jeff ordered a LT. Neither are drummers!</p>

<p>Zendrum currently offers 3 models of MIDI percussion controllers. Prices vary by model, woods, and finishes. Catalog, pricing, ordering, manuals, demo videos and forums can be found at <a href="http://www.zendrum.com/">www.Zendrum.com</a>. Please have a look for yourself!</p>

<hr>

<p><em>Jeff Barnett is a graphics specialist and electronic musician. Mark McGouirk is a business owner and guitarist. They have worked together and with Bonnie Blackstock on recording sessions over the years in Atlanta including original music for the Fernbank Planetarium. Jeff can be reached at badger55@bellsouth.net. Mark can be reached at markmcgouirk@bellsouth.net.</em></p>


<p>Zendrum Photo Archives provided by Gina Boger-Haney.<br />
Additional photos by Jeff Barnett and Bonnie Blackstock.</p>


<hr>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="Flame_Maple_LT_Honey_Jeff_sm.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/images/zen/Flame_Maple_LT_Honey_Jeff_sm.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Custom made flame maple honey Zendrum LT for Jeff Barnett.</div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240); text-align: center;" margin-bottom:="" 1em;=""><img alt="Flame_Maple_ZX_Vintage_Sun_sm.jpg" src="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/images/zen/Flame_Maple_ZX_Vintage_Sun_sm.jpg" class="mt-image-center" style="margin: 0pt; text-align: center; display: block;" width="100%" /><br />
Custom made flame maple vintage sunburst Zendrum ZX for Bonnie Blackstock.</div>



<p> <br />
</p><div><br /></div>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Martin Walker</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2004/martin_walker.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2004://5.205</id>

    <published>2004-06-18T19:03:01Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T03:56:16Z</updated>

    <summary>Sound on Sound author and reviewer Martin Walker has had experience is
designing audio gear, offering expert reviews on hundreds of music
technology products, and started his own record company. He offers
Sonikmatter readers his insight into the current state of synthesizers, the
music industry, game sound design, and more.</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Rick 'Brujo' Wishart with assistance from Brian 'Cowzar' Cowell.</p>
<img alt="Martin-Walker" src="/images/Martin-Walker-photo2.jpg" style="width:75%; border: 0px;"  />

<p><B>1. How did you become involved in the music industry?</B></p>

<p><br />
Although I'd played in various local bands for years, and recorded in various local studios, my first job was way above the audio spectrum - working between 1GHz and 10GHz as a radar engineer! It's ironic that the personal computers we all use today clock at similar frequencies. However, I was far more interested in audio, and soon moved across to the hi-fi industry, working in the R & D lab of Garrard (of record deck fame) as Chief Electronic Engineer. During this time I also did some work with acoustics, before being bitten by the Sinclair ZX81 computing bug.</p>

<p>This led to a couple of years working for Atari UK, where I ran training courses, programmed demos, and gave promotional talks about personal computers. However, I couldn't stop programming, and eventually became a self-employed software author writing in a variety of assembly languages, and had six original games published during the late 80's.</p>

<p>From here I became a computer musician, specialised in composing game soundtracks and sound effects, completing over a hundred projects for the Commodore 64, Atari, Amiga, PC, Super Nintendo, Gameboy, Megadrive, and Gamegear. I enjoyed the challenge of squeezing the last drop of potential out of fairly primitive soundchips. When my clients asked me for soundtracks for PC games, I bought my first PC around 1990, and thus began my long relationship with this platform, which continues to this day.</p>

<p>Alongside my musical and computing activities, I'd written columns and features for many years in computing and game magazines, but made the final jump to music technology in 1996, when I approached  Sound On Sound magazine here in the UK. I now write their regular PC Notes column, along with a mountain of software and hardware reviews (66 soundcards to date!) and workshops on a wide variety of topics, but am probably best known for my in-depth PC Musician features. I also write the regular PC Audio column for Audio Technology in Sydney, and have also contributed to other magazines including ComputerActive, Future Music, and The Mix. </p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>2. Who have been your musical influences?</b></p>

<p><br />
I had nine years of piano lessons, but eventually rebelled against taking all the exams and started dabbling in writing my own music from the age of sixteen onwards. I ended up building an electric guitar at school, and this coincided with an interest in electronics, so I started designing and building audio effects boxes, culminating in a primitive guitar synth with patchcords. This is partly why I'm now so interested in software like Reaktor and Tassman - it's wonderful to create your own sounds from scratch. However, I was never much of a guitarist, so while at university studying Physics I bought my first keyboard - a single manual Vox Jaguar organ for Â£50, followed by a Hohner Pianet, Crumar Stringman, Fender Rhodes Stage 73... </p>

<p>I've always had eclectic interests in music, ranging from the English eccentricities of early Genesis, Keith Emerson's keyboard playing in ELP, and the vision of Jon Anderson and Yes, through to jazzier things like Brand X, Chick Corea (particularly the wonderful Return to Forever), pianist Keith Jarrett, and the ensemble playing of Weather Report. I've always been fascinated by keyboard players who have a unique sound, such as Michael Nyman, the keyboard playing of Richard Barbieri in the group Japan, and particularly of Dave Stewart (the other one) of Egg and Bruford. Bill Bruford is also one of my favourite drummers for the same reason, and I loved his work in the more experimental period of King Crimson. Admired guitarists include Bob Fripp and Bill Nelson (BeBop Deluxe), once again each with their own unmistakable sound.</p>

<p>More recently I've enjoyed Bjork, Moby, Future Sound Of London, Orbital, and the Chemical Brothers, and love the rhythmic freedom of classical music by Debussy, Elgar, Holst, and Satie, plus modern composers like John Williams. Nowaday I'm also into more peaceful and ambient music - the direction my own has taken.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>3. Do you follow any sort of criteria when doing articles for magazines?</b></p>

<p><br />
Some magazines are very specific about how each article and review should look, right down to the number of screenshots, photographs, and extra boxes of text, and where they should be placed on the page, even before you write the first word. Thankfully I have very good ongoing relationships with Sound On Sound in the UK and Audio Technology in Australia, and they generally give their writers more freedom to explore their subject within the limits of whatever word count is available, which not only makes for more relaxed writing, but also provides a much greater opportunity for the writer's personality to come through.</p>

<p>With reviews, it's important to tell readers not only what features the product has, but also how they might benefit them in practice, and to report back on how easy they were to use. I'm lucky that having designed both electronics and software myself, and had experience of hardware production lines, I can often see both the designer's and the end-user's viewpoint, and can often explain why things have been done in a certain way.</p>

<p>I've also been writing for quite a few years now, so editors trust me to provide an honest, informative, technically correct, yet balanced viewpoint in a review, with the huge advantage that as I get to see a huge range of hardware and software I can place my views on each new product in context, and try to suggest a few alternatives that will help readers make up their mind. </p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>4. In your years of experience reviewing, do you find manufacturers receptive to constructive criticism and have you ever been asked to review something that you felt like declining due to the lack of quality ?</b></p>

<p> <br />
Most manufacturers do value the thoughts of those of us who have been in the industry for some years, since we get to see and use a huge range of products, and can quickly see where something new fits in to the market. It's sometimes difficult to be objective when you're too close to your own product, and already knowing it backwards makes it more difficult to write a user's manual suitable for a beginner!</p>

<p>A fresh viewpoint from an experienced musician and reviewer can sometimes also find strengths that the manufacturer hadn't thought of, and conversely can reveal weaknesses that they never considered. However, as long as the comments are fair and technically correct this should never cause any arguments. On the contrary, Sound On Sound's reputation has been largely made on telling it how it is, which is why its complementary reviews are so valued by manufacturers.</p>

<p>As for declining to review a sub-standard product, I've very rarely had to do this. Anything that doesn't impress the magazine staff and reviewers fairly quickly isn't likely to get serious consideration for a review anyway, since there are so many good products competing for review space in most magazines.</p>

<p>However, if I ever receive a product that's performs well below expectations, I always check first that it isn't a one-off faulty unit, but then the review goes into print regardless, with details of the faults found on the original and any improvements in the second sample. This is after all why users read reviews - to find out what happens in the real world, well removed from the occasionally 'inventive' claims of the manufacturer's marketing department.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>5. Whats your view of the raging "software versus hardware" debate?</b></p>

<p><br />
As a reviewer I probably get to try out as many of the latest software and hardware synths as anybody, but ultimately it always comes down to how good it sounds and how easy it is to use. I quickly learnt in my years as a game designer that you have to make it easy for users to get into the first level, however complex things become later on. If a synth produces amazing sounds but has an impenetrable user interface, people will try to create with it for so long and then give up and use the presets.</p>

<p>This is where hardware manufacturers are still at a disadvantage, since they have to design with production cost in mind - I've designed for a production line, and every penny counts. On the other hand, having a hundred virtual knobs on a software synth costs the same in development terms as half a dozen, so the interface possibilities are endless. However, this creates another problem area, because without limits developers may give us a huge unwieldy user interface simply because they can, and because the marketing people thinks it looks more impressive in advertising screenshots.</p>

<p>The best interfaces seem simple and intuitive, but this is because each control is often in charge of several interacting parameters - a graphic overlay if you like. It takes more time, effort, and lateral thinking to perfect designs like this, but they are ultimately far more rewarding, as each control feels 'organic'.</p>

<p>When it comes to the sounds themselves, I don't really think it matters whether we're talking about hardware or software - most modern designs are digital in nature, and there's absolutely no reason why DSP code should sound any different running inside a personal computer or in a dedicated rack unit. I suspect that we're heading for the best of both worlds, with even hardware synths having optional computer front-ends for detailed sound editing, while maintaining portability for gigging.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>6. What gear do you currently have in your studio Martin?</b></p>

<p><br />
As you might expect from someone who writes so much about PC music technology, my  Pentium 4 computer takes centre stage running a huge variety of music software. In the early days I was known to my friends as Martin 'six keyboards' Walker, and used to cart most of them around playing live, but over the years I've sold most of my music hardware, keeping just a few favourites. I'm not a hoarder, and if anything isn't earning its keep it gets sold. </p>

<p>Despite the huge advances in technology since its release, my favourite hardware synth is still Korg's Wavestation, for its unique evolving sounds. It's a classic example of the sounds being worth battling past the restrictions of a front panel interface. I also have a Roland JV1080 for quality bread and butter sounds, and still use my ancient Korg M1 as a master keyboard, and occasionally its sounds as well, as I created hundreds of my own programs and combinations over the years - there's nothing more rewarding than writing music with your own signature sounds.</p>

<p>Most of my more recent hardware acquisitions are PC-related. For instance, my trusty SW1000XG soundcard provides me with a Yamaha MU90 synth, but is hooked up to a Kenton Plugstation containing four PLG daughterboards covering FM synthesis, analogue physical modeling, pianos, and virtual acoustic physical modeling. These provide me with a wide range of expressive sounds along with huge polyphony, without straining my computer's processing power, which is then free for other duties.</p>

<p>When it comes to software, two synths in particular have also captured my imagination over the last few years - Reaktor for moving the goalposts of softsynth design, and Tassman for adding modeling of physical objects. I love their open-ended approach to sound design, although it can be intimidating for beginners. I also love Atmosphere for its superb-sounding pads, and Hypersonic for its versatile yet easy-to-use sound library.</p>

<p>However, GigaStudio has provided the most revolutionary change to my music making over the last few years, along with its wonderful range of streaming sample libraries from developers such as Dennis Burns (Bolder Sounds), Dan Dean, and Gary Garritan. </p>

<p>Now that software can produce sound of such high quality you just have to make sure the playback chain is as good as you can manage, and my ATC and AVI monitors help a great deal in this respect.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>7. What forms of synthesis do you think should be explored more, or least revisited again?</b></p>

<p><br />
Again, I think it all comes down to the sounds and the interface. Who would have thought that in 2002 we'd be getting so excited about a sample+synthesis instrument? But that's exactly what happened with Eric Persing's Atmosphere, due to its inspiring 3Gb library and easy-to-use interface.</p>

<p>Most of the hardware classics are already being revisited in software form, and Native Instruments' FM7 takes FM synthesis to new heights, again because it's much easier to use than the original. I missed out on FM synthesis the first time round, but met it at the deep end when programming a sound editor for Sega's Megadrive games console, which effectively contained a Yamaha TX81Z that I had to talk to at chip level. I fell in love with its unique timbres, especially the metallic and bell-like sounds, but the beauty of dealing with synthesis at a low level is that you can investigate anything that takes your fancy. I found adding a little randomness at various places to the algorithms gave FM a more living, breathing quality.</p>

<p>I still think there's a lot more to be squeezed out of wave sequencing in its various forms, particularly if someone can make it more accessible for editing with a decent computer-based front end like Korg have just done with the virtual Wavestation of their new Legacy Collection. Stringing together a sequence of sound snippets can produce some unique results, and once you reduce their size you're entering granular synthesis territory - again, another fertile breeding ground for new sounds, although in many cases rather unpredictable.</p>

<p>Physical modelling has also still got a lot more to offer, especially now computer-based interfaces can make it so much more approachable. However, there's often a fine dividing line between order and chaos in physical modelling, and hardware designs tend to restrict the available models to those that behave well. Software-based applications like Tassman let you push the boundaries rather more, and you can end up with some totally unique sounds if you're prepare to steer carefully.</p>

<p>However, I've always loved sounds that evolve and have a life of their own, and that you can adjust in real-time. I'm not just talking about wiggling a filter frequency knob either, but having enough control over the sound that it feels 'alive'. Acoustic instruments are rewarding because they allow each player to extract a huge range of sounds, depending on how you hit, pluck, or blow them. And once started, the notes carry on evolving harmonically, as well as (in polyphonic instruments) interacting with others over time. You can get the same 'organic' quality with some synths if you're prepared to put some effort into controlling them in real time, but although the breath controller is ideal for wind players, I'd like to see some more expressive keyboard-based controllers available.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>8. What are your thoughts on the "workstation" concept of today?</b></p>

<p><br />
I may be untypical, but I've never once used the integral sequencers in any of the keyboard instruments I've owned, apart from playing the demo songs. Personally I much prefer the graphic interface provided by a computer-based system - this gives you so much more freedom that I'm not sure nowadays how many musicians would be interested in a dedicated hardware workstation with a fixed spec. After all, now that we can run our choice of synthesisers, samplers, effects, MIDI sequencing, audio recording and playback all from one handy computer, many musicians only need to plug in a keyboard controller at one end, and amplifier and speakers at the other.</p>

<p>Where dedicated hardware scores is its reliability, and here computers still have some way to catch up, although a PC purpose-built for music using high quality components, emitting low acoustic noise, and properly set up for the special requirements of music, can be extremely stable, as can a Mac, which at least starts out with a specification known to each and every developer.</p>

<p>Computers go wrong precisely because we have so much freedom, and can install whatever new hardware and software we fancy, and tweak so many aspects of software and hardware performance - there are just too many ways to bring your computer to its knees if you don't know what you're doing. We're also partially victims of our own impatience, since most of us now expect to buy software once and get a lifetime of free support and upgrades. So, software developers are constantly developing new products to tempt us to part with our money. The result is that the contents of most musician's computers are never static for more than a week or two, which isn't the ideal recipe for long-term reliability.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>9. What sort of features do you think manufacturers are missing on synths these days? </b></p>

<p><br />
I'd like to see more performance controls, since you can get so much more expression out of most synths once you start waggling a few knobs. Novation's new Remote 25 is a good example of what I'm talking about, since this starts with a quality semi-weighted 25-note keyboard that responds to aftertouch, and then adds 24 buttons, 8 knobs, 8 encoders, and 8 sliders, plus (best of all) a programmable joystick and touchpad. If only someone would create five, six, and seven octave versions of this I'd buy the largest one immediately, whether it had any sounds in it or not.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>10. With groundbreaking products like Reaktor and a plethora of other music software 'plugins' of hugely varying quality presently available to musicians, what do you believe are the key programming achievements which are necessary that distinguish the innovative from the mediocre?</b></p>

<p> <br />
I'm not sure you can itemise a series of 'key programming achievements', particularly when it comes to softsynths and plugins. Sometimes innovative products take a huge amount of development time and resources, as for example the huge sample libraries involved in the excellent Spectrasonics softsynths, and in this case only larger companies can create them.</p>

<p>On the other hand, the beauty of products from smaller coding teams or even individuals is that without a lot of staff on their payroll they can code wherever their fancy takes them, and come up with genuinely different products that sometimes break new ground. I was particularly inspired recently by DelayDots' Spectral plugin suite for instance, since it let me create radical new effects in the frequency domain that I hadn't heard before. I ended up creating a bank of presets that's now bundled with the plugins, and even the designer was surprised by some of the sounds that his own code was capable of.</p>

<p>Then of course there's the middle ground, where smaller developers get taken on board by larger ones to further develop new ideas - a good example of this is NI's Absynth. This enables ambitious products to be funded for long enough to let them mature and become more commercial. Ultimately you just have to use your ears and decide for yourself what works and what doesn't, whether it's freeware, shareware, or a full commercial offering - the boundaries are quite blurred nowadays.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>11. Do you believe that the traditional hardware synth companies will survive in the longer term with their present business model ? How may they adapt ?</b></p>

<p><br />
There will always be a case for hardware synths, particularly for live use, since their polyphony and performance is guaranteed, with no glitches, clicks, or pops. Moreover, although most musicians are perfectly happy working with a computer front end, it's sometimes very satisfying to switch on a synth and just play, without having to think about memory, latency, and multi-tasking operating systems.</p>

<p>On the other hand, products like Spectrasonics' Atmosphere and Trilogy have proved to hardware manufacturers that if treated seriously, the softsynth can produce a range of sounds that go beyond the capabilities of most hardware boxes. Judging by the popularity yet cost-effectiveness of such products, I expect we will eventually see some from the 'big name' synth manufacturers, once they are convinced that it's profitable.</p>

<p>However, most hardware manufacturers are already dipping their corporate toes in the software waters, but they are understandably wary of piracy. A half-way house is to design software front-ends for existing hardware synths, to make them more accessible in a computer environment. I hope Yamaha's OPT (Open Plugin Technology) will eventually get much wider support in this area, since this open standard provides the glue between existing MIDI+Audio applications and external synth hardware, without getting involved with running multiple applications and working round the limitations of multi-tasking drivers. What we need is less barriers between hardware and software, so you can use them together more easily.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>12. How did you view the Creative purchase of Emu and Ensoniq ?</b></p>

<p><br />
It's always good when innovative designers get funding from a larger mainstream company, although sometimes their long-term goals may clash, and some of the more interesting products that might have emerged don't, because they don't fit into the larger consumer market. Creative's Audigy soundcards for instance provide a huge range of features, and are incredible value for money. However, the top-of-the-range Audigy models are very expensive for the typical consumer, are at almost entry-level prices for the musician, but end up confusing to musicians because they are awash with gaming and home theatre-based features that may not be used. Emu's APS soundcard used much of the same core technology, and was provided with software aimed more towards the more serious musician, but is sadly discontinued.</p>

<p>However, I think Emu have finally got it right with their new range of professional soundcard products, which have an excellent audio specification, the versatile EmulatorX softsampler complete with its massive 53 different filter types, and at prices that have caused quite a few jaws to drop. It's taken some years, but the Emu name is now back with a vengeance.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>13. With the recent acquisition of Emagic by Apple and Steinberg by Pinnacle how do you see these business changes influencing sequencer/product development and the longer term impact of the products on musicians ?</b></p>

<p>I hope it won't make too much difference, although I sympathise with anyone who's spent years getting up to speed with Emagic's Logic range on the PC, only to find the plug pulled for long-term support of their platform. I suspect that we'll see more entry-level products being launched, since this is often where the bulk of the revenue lies, but hopefully this will generate enough income to keep research and development going on the flagship products. Perhaps we'll also see more combined audio/video editing products being launched, since this is the next logical development for these companies, and if the audio code only ran if the associated video hardware was present this might solve the current software piracy problems at a stroke.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>14. What would be the most humorous thing you've seen/heard happen in the music industry?</b></p>

<p><br />
Having done it myself in the past, I'm always sympathetic to people demonstrating products at music shows, since things can (and often do) go wrong. I've witnessed my fair share of embarrassing moments, particularly when computers crash, and you can see the beads of sweat start to run down people's faces, although some masterful demonstrators can even turn this into a feature, by claiming that this is the first time the software's crashed in a week, which is amazingly reliable for a Beta version.</p>

<p>The most embarrassing demos are those with a dummy prototype out front (the product, not the demonstrator), while the real product, still in a vast casing with wires hanging out, and surrounded by a team of boffins, is being manipulated behind the scenes, since when something goes wrong the front man is completely floundering.</p>

<p>Shows and the unexpected go hand in hand. Once, in my early days working for Atari, I left their stand for a few minutes to visit the toilet, and when I came back I'd been volunteered to be interviewed live on radio thirty minutes later by 'Whispering' Bob Harris, who used to present the BBC's famous Old Grey Whistle Test music programme. Thankfully, he was quite charming, and I acquitted myself reasonably well.</p>

<p>Sometimes marketing claims get a little out of hand, and it's surprising how many people take them at face value without checking. Some years ago I reviewed a soundcard whose software claimed to play back up to 128 tracks mixed down to stereo using a unique 'rendering' algorithm similar to those used in 3D graphics programs, which made it possible to extract the constituent tracks at any time, despite only storing the final stereo mix on your hard drive. The UK distributors were really excited by this, but it only took me about half an hour of testing to disprove these claims, and by the time my review came out the retail price had dropped by 50%.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>15. Can you outline the process in designing, programming and publishing a computer game ?</b></p>

<p><br />
I'm sure the process is far more organised and streamlined than when I used to write them back in the 80's, but I can only comment on how I did it. My Commodore 64 games all started with an idea that was a twist on something that already existed. </p>

<p>For instance, 'Hunter's Moon' was a combination of a shoot 'em up and Spirograph - that children's game with the multiple wheels that you rolled around with a pen to create complex multi-coloured geometric drawings. This sparked off the idea of the worker cells that moved in similar ways, dropping bricks to create 2-dimensional cities in space. When you first entered a game level the city might be complete or partially constructed, but it was growing or regrowing the whole time you tried to find and capture the starcells to get to the next level.</p>

<p>'Citadel' was a combination of a shoot 'em up and a board game, where your opponents only saw you as a threat when you moved from one 'square' to another. So, you could either play it by racing around blasting everything in sight, or by stopping and carefully considering each move and its outcome before taking your next step.</p>

<p>Normally I approached a software publisher once I had one or two basic playable levels programmed, to sell the idea and get a contract and advance to keep me going until the game was completed and royalties hopefully starting rolling in. However, I was still essentially free to let my ideas develop at their own pace, and of course being the creator, programmer, graphic designer, and composer, I could just run with whatever ideas occurred during this process, with a visit from the software house every few weeks to see how everything was progressing.</p>

<p><b>16. What type of routines are used to simulate AI in computer games ?</b></p>

<p><br />
Very primitive ones in the case of most CBM64 games, since we only had 64 kilobytes of RAM to programme the entire thing. However, it was still possible to implement what seemed like intelligence, by programming a table of likely movement behaviour for the 'baddies' based on their relative position to you. Once you added a few random numbers to weight a few such strategies, your opponents could seem surprisingly intelligent!</p>

<p>Nowadays I suspect far more complex strategies are adopted, since so much more memory is available, but by giving each opponent a fixed route to patrol, or one of several randomly chosen ones, plus a few extra ploys chosen at random once you're within a certain proximity, it must still be surprisingly effective at giving the impression of intelligence.</p>

<p><b>17. In writing music for video games, how do you decide on what's the best style of music? What strengths/weaknesses did you encounter with the various platforms on which you programmed the music?</b></p>

<p><br />
In my experience you rarely had the opportunity to choose the style of music, since the software house that approached you nearly always had their own strong ideas on subject matter. If you were composing the soundtrack for an original game then you might get lucky enough to meet the programmer(s) and discuss it creatively with them, but most were happy to have the publishing company liaise, and in this case you could expect a request for some 'Terminator-style' music with alarming regularity, since so many games were set in the future.</p>

<p>Games set in a particular historical context were more interesting, and I did get to write some gungho orchestral music for 2nd World War games, medieval ensembles, military marching music for the American Civil War, as well as the odd string quartet or thrash metal track. However, often the most creative opportunities came with 'cartoon-style' games where you could really let your imagination run riot. I once wrote music for a game that took place in a kitchen freezer, where the instruments consisted of the sounds of food being eaten and drinks being opened and consumed, while on the next level, which took place in a roadworks, I used pneumatic drills, singing saws, hammers, and so on. That was fun.</p>

<p>Sometimes the most challenging commissions were conversions of tunes that had originally been written to suit other game formats, and I had an excellent reputation for squeezing the last drop out of conversions from multi-track orchestral sampled compositions that ended up transcribed for three channels of beeps on the Nintendo Gameboy!</p>

<p><b>18. When it came to doing the sound effects for games, how did you approach this task and what inspired your creativity?</b></p>

<p><br />
I created my own libraries of sound effects for each of the seven or eight game formats I worked on, since in those days only the Amiga could really use samples, and then only with whatever memory the programmer had left over. For these, in the absence of today's excellent commercial FX sample libraries, you either gleaned them from vinyl, audio cassette, film videos, or used lateral thinking. For instance, faced with the requirement of a large slab of stone being removed from a cave entrance, I created a very realistic one by scraping a small stone around the rim of a flowerpot, and then dropping it in pitch by a couple of octaves.</p>

<p>With the other game machines you got a few channels of square or pulse waves, plus hopefully some white noise, and from these primitive elements you had to extract the last drop of creativity. I worked at sound chip level, programming in assembly language, so that I could manipulate the chip registers every 1/50th of a second. Thus, chords could be created as very fast arpeggios to give the illusion of a bigger sound, while bass drums started with a tiny chiff of noise, followed by a decaying tone, and snare drums oscillated between noise and tone, again at 50 times per second. Sega's Megadrive was more fun, since this had the same Yamaha FM chip as the TX81Z, but I used similar techniques to manipulate the sounds, so that I could get sword clashes, gunshots, and even running water, by rapidly altering the parameters. And you tell the kids today...</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>19. What's your view on the development of the Atari and Amiga and the eventual demise of them both ?  For example, these platforms often opened gateways to programming for aspiring teenagers (some of whom now program on todayï¿½s consoles ) whereas today systems like the PS2 and XBox don't offer that opportunity ?</b></p>

<p><br />
The Atari's built-in MIDI ports made it the perfect computer for the musician, since programmers had access to them at a very basic level, and didn't have to run the gauntlet of a modern multi-tasking operating system. While today's computers can run multiple applications 'simultaneously', it's still done in exactly the same way as my sound chip programming - by rapidly swapping between tasks - but there are lots more of them to juggle, and therefore more possibilities for timing errors, especially when audio and MIDI are regarded as less important than the graphic bells and whistles. Both the Atari and the Amiga still have a small but dedicated following, although there are extremely few new applications appearing, and support is becoming more and more of a problem. </p>

<p>There are no doubt still plenty of opportunities for people to be employed as programmers, musicians, graphic designers and the like in today's game companies, but you're right - in the old days you could get far more hands-on experience to hone your talents while still living at home with your parents. Mind you, there's still a cult following for many of the older games machines and computers, and you can also find musicians who are now remixing elderly game soundtracks using modern synths - one of my 1980's CBM64 soundtracks was recently featured on an Audio remix CD!</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>20. Due to the power of modern consoles, video game production now requires such a huge team and development costs, but despite flashier graphics and sound is the gameplay improving as fast as the hardware? Is it possible for a lone programmer to publish a game these days ? What games in the last decade do you consider to be groundbreaking - either technically or in terms of gameplay?</b></p>

<p><br />
Who knows? Although it's easier to get lost in today's imaginary worlds, due to their much greater realism and depth, I still hanker after the almost meditational techniques you needed to master the old classics like Space Invaders, Galaxians, Defender, and the rest. I very much doubt that the lone programmer is still in existence, except perhaps as some sort of 'creative team leader' - it simply isn't possible for one person to do all the work needed for a modern game within the available timescale, and budgets are so much bigger that it would be commercial folly to let a loner develop products at their own rate. However, I'm sadly out of touch with games, since I haven't even seen one since 1996, when I moved over to being a writer and musician. After fourteen years in the game industry I was played out, so to speak.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>21. Do you think there will be a convergance between Hollywood Film Studio's and Games Producers/Publishers ?</b></p>

<p><br />
I think this is already happening. Even in my day the games companies were quick to tie in games with the latest film releases (I once had to create a CBM64 game from scratch based on the original 'Back To The Future' film in just nine weeks - that's pressure!) Nowadays many games seem to be being programmed in tandem with the film's editing, with much greater fraternisation between the two camps, and this can only be good for realism in the final product. This is perhaps hardly surprising, since merchandising is now such an important part of a film's revenue, so the more products available at the time of its launch, the more likely it is to break even at the box office or go into profit.</p>

<p><br />
<b>22. Given your education and experience have you ever thought of, or been inspired to return to software programming and publishing audio related software eg. a 'soft-synth' ?</b></p>

<p><br />
No, I suspect it's just as hard trying to earn a living creating softsynths as it was writing games, although at least nowadays you can take charge of your own publicity through the Internet, and not have to rely on others to do it well (or not as the case may be). Besides, I'm able to help those who do, by publicising their work in magazine reviews. Also, like many other users, I'm gratified that so many software authors are open to suggestions for improvements and new features, so that's an occasional outlet for my ideas.</p>

<p><br />
<b>23. What 10 albums in your collection would you consider to be the best?</b></p>

<p><br />
Like most people, what I listen to depends on my mood, and since there are so many ways to define 'best', I'll simply select some of the albums that I've particularly enjoyed , and that have influenced me over the years. Here they are in no particular order.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?artistId=95966"> Genesis</a> - "Foxtrot"<br />
Sprawling compositions featuring unusual time signatures, classic Mellotron chord sequences, and vocals full of English eccentricity.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?artistId=13670529">Japan</a> - "Tin Drum"<br />
A unique combination of oriental influences, inventive synth sounds, liquid bass, often tribal rhythms, and of course the voice of David Sylvian.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playListId=6751056">Bjork - "Homogenic"</a><br />
An inspiring combination of clean Icelandic string octet with distorted loops and synths, and that unmistakable voice.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?artistId=6851631">Future Sound Of London</a>  - "Lifeforms"<br />
I first heard this playing in a music shop, and just had to buy it for its unique soundscape treatments that take you somewhere you've never been before.</p>

<p><A HREF="http://www.timstory.com/disc/wheat.html">Tim Story - "Wheat and Rust"</A><br />
A self-taught pianist and synthesist whose finely crafted compositions have 'haunting elegance and meticulous compositional detail'. They take me to a still quiet place.</p>

<p><A HREF=ï¿½http://www.crystal-sanctuary.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Nigel_Shaw__Featured_Artist__5.htmlï¿½>Nigel Shaw</A> - "Requiem - Well Of Souls"<br />
Based on the classical form of Mass for the Dead, this is a haunting but uplifting album featuring whistles, flutes, keyboards, and voices, composed by a musician and flute-maker who lives in the middle of Dartmoor in the UK.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?artistId=5272005">Kevin Kendle</a> - "First Light"<br />
A reflective album of floating keyboard textures, bubbling synths, and soft melodies inspired by the stillness of the dawn in the UK countryside, full of early morning mists and tranquillity.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewArtist?artistId=724648">Orbital</a> - "Snivilisation"<br />
Another collection of eccentric and thought-provoking tracks from the brothers Hartnoll, featuring hypnotic rhythms, vocal snippets, and unusual instruments.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playListId=2002219">Moby - "Play"</a><br />
Yet another unusual combination, this time of vocals old and new, along with lots of modern sounds, bound together with a freshness and extremely human approach to song making.</p>

<p><a href="http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playListId=3728912">The Chemical Brothers - "Surrender"</a><br />
Yet more surreal soundscapes, this time with a harder edge, some infectious head-banging rhythms, and intriguing treatments.</p>

<p></p>

<p><br />
<b>24. What do you do outside of the music industry to keep yourself going Martin?</b></p>

<p><br />
Since I spend the majority of my working days with a headful of technology, I like to unwind by emptying my head a little while walking my dog in the country, with meditation and Tai Chi, a form of moving meditation. I've been doing the latter for several years now, and it's made a huge difference to the amount of peace in my life.</p>

<p>Of course I enjoy contributing to the Sound On Sound forums, but I can't really say I have a favourite web site, since when you spend so many hours researching features and reviews it's not exactly relaxing to surf for pleasure as well - you end up with square eyes and a headache.  However, I regularly visit hundreds of web sites, and admire the amount of time and dedication people put into so many of them.</p>

<p>For a complete break, my wife and I really love the rugged and mysterious coastline of Cornwall in the UK where we now live - it's full of stunning scenery, with rocky coves, windswept moors, tiny villages that seem almost lost in time, mysterious stone circles, and even the odd pirate's grave. This inspires my own instrumental music, which one review described as 'like a slowly turning kaleidoscope'. I've composed three solo albums to date, and am working on a fourth, all of which I market under my own Yew Tree Music label.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Michael Bearden</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2003/michael_bearden.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2003://5.165</id>

    <published>2003-07-25T01:45:57Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T03:55:46Z</updated>

    <summary>The Sonik crew has gotten a hold of the talented Michael Bearden. He has worked with a great number of artists including Stevie Wonder, Michael Jackson, Faith Evans, Whitney Houston, J-Lo, Madonna and many others. In the midst of balancing projects, Michael has found some time to talk with us...
</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:lporres@NOSPAM.sonikmatter.com">Larry Porres</a>.<br />
<img alt="Michael Bearden" src="/images/DSC_0349a.jpg"  style="width:25%; padding:1em;" align=right /></p>

<p><B>The Sonik crew has gotten a hold of the talented Michael Bearden, the creator of <i>Keys to the City</i> and the musical director of none other than J-Lo, among others. He has worked with a great number of artists including Stevie Wonder, Michael Jackson, Faith Evans, Whitney Houston, Madonna and many others, too many to mention. In the midst of balancing projects, Michael has found some time to talk with us.</B></p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Where did you obtain your formal musical training?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael Bearden:</b> Well, I started playing piano when I was around 5 years old. I've loved music for as long as I can remember but had no specific desire to play the piano. I was firmly persuaded to play the piano by my father. (laughs) The piano wasn't exactly what you would call a 'cool' instrument in my south side of Chicago neighborhood. However, after my first formal lesson, which was given to me by my godmother who had played in the church while growing up, I was instantly hooked!<br />
  <br />
We weren't rich when I was growing up so new sheet music of all of the latest songs on the radio was out of the question. My mother put the radio on the edge of the piano and said try to play what you hear. That is how I learned to play by ear.</p>

<p>In grade school I tried out to play drums in the school band and got the first chair spot. I also played drum set for all of the plays that my grade school put on. When my parents saw that I was serious about music, they started to put me in to more advanced piano classes and after school programs. My mom would try to kick me off of the piano on weekends because I would just stay there and play ALL DAY without going outside, barely stopping to eat. I still do that to this day. (laughs)</p>

<p>As I got older I attended conservatories and universities. However, I would say that my 'formal' musical training is more of a cumulative effect as opposed to a direct effect. I was heavily influenced by all of my band directors from grade school through college. As well as the radio, television, film, recordings, Chicago Symphony concerts, etc... And events that have nothing really directly to do with music such as a Muhammad Ali fight or The Art institute in Chicago. I was also lucky to have access and hands on experience from some early mentors like jazz great Ramsey Lewis.</p>

<p>For me, the ultimate teacher for any musician is more than just learning from some human being and practicing your lesson for 2 hours a day, it's about living and experiencing the world!</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>How did you get involved in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael: </b>My involvement in the music business began with my imagination when I was very young. I would pretend that I was on stage all of the time. Mostly to myself because I was extremely shy and quiet as a kid. Heavily influenced by the Jackson Five, me and all of my brothers would pretend to be them, even going so far as to cut out cardboard guitars and microphones. All kids aspired to be just like them, especially in Chicago because we are so close to Gary, Indiana, home of the Jackson's.</p>

<p>When I was around 10 years old, we had a band. When we became somewhat bearable to listen to (laughs) my mother hired us and actually paid us to play at a party for her and her friends. That was the start of my professional musical career! This eventually led to neighborhood parties, weddings, talent shows, intra-high school competitions, etc...</p>

<p>While attending college, in between studying and practicing for my courses, I played in one of the most popular local bands in the city at that time. We always had lines of people waiting to hear us play. We would always open shows for the big artists that flowed through town on their way to the next. However, I wasn't satisfied with just opening for all of the big named artists, I wanted to play WITH the big artists. Despite not knowing a soul in New York, I rented a U-Haul, packed up all of my belongings and moved to Brooklyn. I was living in one of the roughest areas in Brooklyn in a 3-story walkup, one-bedroom with no kitchen! It did not matter to me because I was in New York, the land of big dreams.</p>

<p>New York has an energy like no other city in the world. Anything that you want to do is possible in New York. I soon found out that you needed more than just dreams, talent and desire, you need some lucky breaks too. </p>

<p>My lucky break came when one of my friends, who played drums for Herbie Mann, introduced me to Herbie right at a time when he was looking to replace one of his band members. I was definitely in the right place at the right time. I was running out of money fast living in New York so while on my way out to yet another jam session to try and get noticed, my friend called and told me that they would be performing in town. I explained to him that I was broke and couldn't afford the cover price. He said don't worry about that and to the gig I went. After the gig, Herbie told me to learn as many of his songs as possible and he would give me an audition the following week. I rushed home and learned as much of the book as possible like the hungry keyboardist I was (laughs) and went into the audition fully prepared. After the audition, Herbie did not even look at me, he just went straight to his calendar and started calling out dates. I didn't even question if I got the gig or not, I just started writing the dates. (laughs) The rest as they say, well you know how that goes... :-)</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Michael Bearden is a truly versatile producer, mixer, scorer, programmer, arranger and musical director, to name just a few. Is there anything you cannot do? What is your philosophy?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> I can't dunk a basketball or consistently hit the ball straight off the tee! (laughs) Seriously, of course there are many things that I can't do. However, in order to survive in this industry you have to do as many things as you possibly can. My philosophy is to diversify yourself, much like a stock portfolio. Lets face it, today's music buying public is inundated with more choices than ever before. Video games, DVDs, high speed internet, digital cable, satellite television, computers, etc... and not to mention the old tried and true forms of  entertainment like movies, sporting events, and dance clubs. Buying a CD or going to a concert is very low on the priority list for a lot of people. So, if all you do is tour, you may be out of work for quite a while. And in my case, many of my bosses are successful in other areas like clothing, perfumes and movies. So while they're off being entrepreneurs or movie stars, the band has to look elsewhere for work. </p>

<p>I always say, if you can do more than one thing well in the music business, do it! Learn to read music if you don't know how, take voice lessons, song writing classes, engineering lessons, learn to operate all of the new gear and maybe hire yourself out to do that, etc... When one door is closed, another one will be open and you can keep your revenue stream flowing. I love music and I can't see myself doing anything else outside of the business. Moreover, I am looking to expand my portfolio even broader now. I just moved to Hollywood in the pursuit of scoring more films. I just recently completed my fifth feature film entitled "Dense", a Vanessa Williams directorial debut for the cable network Showtime. Film scoring is the thing that I'm most passionate about at the present time.</p>

<p>There is one thing I'd like to touch on briefly before answering the second part of your question. Along with all of the other aforementioned forms of music business dollar stealing activities, "file-sharing" or as I like to call it, unauthorized intellectual property stealing, is hurting the industry tremendously. Whatever side of the debate you agree with (CD prices are too high so it's justified or bootleggers should be publicly caned) the end result is that something has to be done soon! Right now it looks bleak because there is too much demand, like drugs. That's a harsh analogy but I feel it's an accurate one. The less the big companies make, the less WE make! Diversify yourself.</p>

<p>In order to keep so many diverse matters under control I use what is called the "sit on your ass and do nothing technique". (laughs) No really, sometimes reading a good book or renting a good movie, meditating or just hanging out with the nephews and nieces does wonders for your ability to deal with the madness that is the music industry. Young children have a way of letting you know what your priorities should REALLY be. As far as keeping my sanity, I make a living as a musician so I am probably not so sane to begin with. (laughs)</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Yes, the industry has had increased losses in the last couple of years and they seem to blame it all on file-sharing, however, there are proponents that claim the industry isn't doing anything to bring real quality to the table, that unlike yesteryear most of today's groups are low quality pretty-faced one-hit wonders.</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Firstly, I have never been or will ever be nostalgic. Although I love many ideals and attitudes of excellence from "yesteryear" as you put it, I will in no way endorse everything that came out of my era as some grand piece of art that stands as the benchmark from which all future art should be derived. The first thing that pops into my mind as an example of this is 'Disco Duck', 'Keep on Truckin', (a popular catch phrase of the day), 'Kung Fu Fighting' and many more songs like this. I try to live my musical life by this moniker: "Youth without wisdom is chaos but, wisdom without youth is stagnation."  I am not stagnant!  Moreover, I can't blame everything negative with today's music business on today's new artists. The problem, as I see it, is multi-faceted.</p>

<p>For example, some of today's music industry problems can be blamed directly on yesteryear's music industry practices. There are too many stories of artists recording and touring for years with nothing to show for it financially. I've played on a few Heritage Foundation award shows (award show traditionally after the Grammys where past artists are given a check by the foundation to try and help with the lack of royalties and other monies owed to the artist.) I wish that they would televise those shows so that everyone could hear some of the speeches given as the wronged artists and/or their surviving spouses come up to collect the checks. Extremely powerful to say the least! As a result of these shady practices of the past, a lot of younger artists are getting smarter in the deals that they sign. Many own their own masters, have distribution only deals or are circumventing traditional deals all together and putting the disks out themselves independently, either through the internet or out of the back of the trunk of their vehicles. Hey, whatever works. I even know some cats with industry standard shrink-wrap, printer, and silk screening machines.</p>

<p>Secondly, the world is totally different today. The industry is competing with a lot of new outlets. We have gaming, the internet, blockbuster, cable, movies, etc... all competing for the consumer dollar. Not to mention life! Some people are just trying to survive from day to day and don't have the extra money for a CD.</p>

<p>Now, having said all of that. I would have to agree wholeheartedly with those that have a problem with the quality in today's music business. I think that the bar is much lower than it ever has been in the past. This is one of the only businesses I know that you can be in and not know anything about it. You could never be a doctor and not know what a stethoscope is or an architect and not know what a T square is. However, we have many singers out here that don't know the very basics of their craft like breathing from the diaphram or the difference between a chest voice and a head voice. I am not necessarily a proponent of formal education as a pre-requisite for being in the music business. I've worked with many famous artists that can't read a note of music. And I don't think they have to. However, ignorance about what you do for a living is inexcusable to me. I especially have a problem with the 'deification' of an artist as "the next best thing" when they are clearly mediocre at best. Music is subjective, yes, but I know when something is horrendous and when it's good. </p>

<p>The biggest problem as I see it is <u>balance</u>. For every non-singing, pretty-faced, one-hit wonder out here in the market place, I can cite you at least two legitimately talented artists. We as consumers just don't get to see or hear them. You can blame consolidation of radio stations, payola, A&R ineptness, big corporate bottom line pressure, or lack of marketing but the truth is out here, we just have to demand it. Unfortunately, the bar is so low now that the regular music fan doesn't even know what to ask for. Also, add to the mix the sheer amount of product, good or bad, that is in the market place. If you stand at the entrance of any major music store and look around, there is so much to choose from, where do you start? We could also talk about the backwards thinking, poli-tricks of taking music and fine arts in general out of the public schools but my soap box is starting to cave in. (laughs)</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Could we say that many of the file-sharers are young people who are living in this "free music" era and take it for granted without realizing the amount of work involved? Do you see a solution to this?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Yes! We do live in a sort of microwave society. We want everything fast and immediately. I believe the problem of piracy is a complex one. There are two main arguments, in my opinion, and I'll try to get to both briefly.</p>

<p>If a person can get something they want for the least amount available or free, they will get it, period! Age has nothing to do with it. There is little or no concern for an artists right to be compensated for what she/he has created. This to me is the most dangerous thing about piracy, not necessarily that the product is being pirated because lets face it, you will never be able to stop it. But, the fact is that there is no concern for the sanctity of intellectual property. Can you imagine being able to download a Mercedes Benz for free, or how about a fine wine that took the maker years to grow, harvest, cultivate and age only to have it downloaded for free by some wine connoisseur in cyber space. There would be outrage if you could actually do this, yet music, movies, games, software etc... are being downloaded and bootlegged at alarming rates with little public outcry other than those of us that are in the business. I believe that part of it has to do with the way we experience product. Music is only tangible when it is fixed in some form such as CD, MP3, Cassette, DVD, etc... but once delivered, it becomes intangible again and is somehow viewed as 'less valuable' than a car or house or some other tangible product. But, let me ask you, is a CD that takes an artist sometimes years to create any less valuable than lets say, a building that takes an architect years to design and build? And then being compensated well for his/her creation? Not to that creative artist let me tell you!</p>

<p>The other point is more direct to the spirit of excellence in the product. Besides the fact that most people will always want 'something for nothing' and many people do not respect the rights of intellectual property, another big problem is content. I hear complaints from many people both in the business and out, that there are no more than one or two good songs on a CD. Most people, myself included, will not spend $15.99 on a CD with only one good cut on it. These arguments of high priced disks by the industry may have some validity. However, that does not give you the right to just take what you like without paying for it. One theft doesn't cancel the other.</p>

<p>The only solution as I see it has to be a multi-pronged attack. As I stated earlier, you will never be able to stop piracy, too much demand, like drugs. Just being real here. The only way to curb the problem is to aggressively pound the public with ad campaigns against downloading; lowering disk prices; record companies devising new and innovative ways of selling its product to the public; (take a lead from <a href="http://www.apple.com/" target="_blank" >Apple computers</a> on this) holding out for more excellence in the product by the music buying public; and my personal favorite, prosecution! If people start doing some real jail time for stealing, you'll see a huge drop in piracy. "What are you in for?" 'I robbed a bank!' 'What about you?' "I downloaded the new Coldplay CD!" (laughs)</p>

<p><img alt="Michael Bearden 'Hiding'" src="/images//DSC_0399a.jpg" width="196" height="300" border="0" align=right /><br />
<b>Sonik:</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your home studio? </u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Right now I'm right in the middle of renovating my studio. I endorse several companies (<a href="http://www.ilio.com/" target="_blank" >Ilio</a>, <a href="http://www.midiman.net/index.php" target="_blank" >Midiman</a>, <a href="http://www.emagic.de/home/news/index.php?lang=EN" target="_blank" >Emagic</a>, <a href="http://www.kawaius.com/" target="_blank" >Kawai</a> to name a few) and just started implementing all of them into my workspace. Some of my new favorite pieces include Emagic's Logic 6. What a powerful sequencer! The learning curve is a little high but once you set it up the way you like to work, wow! I love all of the virtual instruments, especially the EXS24mark II. I'm running <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/" target="_blank" >Digidesign's</a> Pro Tools 6, 24 mix plus on a dual processor Power Mac G4 1.42 GHz. I also have <a href="http://www.propellerheads.se/" target="_blank" >Propellerhead's</a> Reason 2.0, the virtual synth Maelstrom is amazing! Some of my keyboards include the <a href="http://www.yamahasynth.com/pro/motif/" target="_blank" >Yamaha Motif</a>, <a href="http://www.korg.com/" target="_blank" >Korg Triton </a>and Roland's new <a href="http://www.v-synth.net/en/index.asp" target="_blank" >V synth</a>. That's a great unique sounding keyboard. Trilogy from Spectrasonics is also another great virtual piece from that genius Eric Persing. (laughs) There's a nice <a href="http://www.spectrasonics.net/NAMM/NAMM.html" target="_blank" >picture</a> on the Spectrasonics website of Eric, Greg Phillanganes, Stevie Wonder and myself giving it a test drive at NAMM. We had a great time playing that one. </p>

<p>I have many other toys to play with. I'm a pack rat when it comes to keyboards. I don't throw anything away. I still have all of my old keyboards including a <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/sequ/seqpro60001.gif" target="_blank" >Prophet 600</a> (the first midi synth) and a <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/yamaha_dx7IIfd.jpg" target="_blank" >DX7 II</a>, old drum machines and plenty of pedals like the Mutron 3. A painter uses all of the colors available to him in order to create the image in his mind's eye. I view all of my keyboards and toys much in the same manner.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Do you go for the latest products or do you tend to stay with older gear?</u> </p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> As I said before, I don't throw anything away. I tend to go for the hybrid type of sound using the old with the new. I try not to date my sound so I'll tweak and re-shape all of my older keyboards to fit into the soundscape of what I'm trying to do at the moment. Some old things just work, period! As the old saying goes, if it 'ain't' broke... I also like to use live musicians on top of all of the virtual and computer generated instruments. YOU CAN NEVER BEAT THE REAL THING! so I never try. I use electronics for what they do and let the human beings do what they do. My own sort of "matrix" you could say. (laughs)</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>What is a *typical* day for Michael Bearden?</u> </p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> There is no such thing as a "typical" workday for me. My schedule is DEFINITELY too unusual for that. <i>(Ed. Note: we know! ;-))</i></p>

<p>To answer your question I need to break a day into two categories; touring days and non-touring days.</p>

<p>On a typical non-touring day, I usually wake up around 10 or 11 a.m., late in 9 to 5 standards (laughs). In my own defense I do stay up extremely late, often around 4 a.m. I prefer the late evening hours when the rest of the world is asleep for creating and working on my music, it just works for me and I get a lot done. I usually work out in the morning and juice before I start my day. I've been a devout vegetarian for about 16 years and it requires a lot of work and discipline. After that, I jump in to whatever's on the plate for that week. Fortunately, when I'm not on the road I still have a full schedule. I may be working on a recording, film score or a television special of some kind, or just trying to get better as a musician. I may be working on a recording, film score or a television special of some kind, or just trying to get better as a musician. Film and television is the main reason I moved out here to Hollywood. However, I still keep a place in New York. I can never completely leave the energy and vibe of New York, there is no other city like it in the world!</p>

<p>A typical touring day is the complete opposite, even though the hours are about the same (laughs). As musical director of a big tour, I'm responsible for executing the musical vision of the artist. This encompasses more than you may think. I'm responsible for everything musical that goes into the show. Every arrangement, tempo change, segue, re-mix etc... all comes from the musical director in some way. A lot of the ideas are discussed with the artist first, and then it's my responsibility to translate the ideas to the band and execute them as close to the original idea as possible. Often times during the course of rigorous rehearsals these ideas will change or have to be adjusted to what's happening on the stage. Choreography, lights, staging, props, cameras, etc... always change! This part of the job is always fun because I love to create and see the whole thing come together, especially when the band is good! Fortunately, I always insist on, and have, a good band! I also have the best computer programmer in the business, Mike McKnight. We've been touring together for about 12 years or so and we've been able to get through a variety of good and not so good things on the road. Power outages, crazy fans, egomaniac band members, demanding artists, etc... we've been through it all ;) I don't tour without him. We are a team, the dynamic duo!</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Being the versed multi-tasking person Michael is, what does he envision the music technology will be like in five or ten years?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Five years? What about five months? (laughs) The change that has occurred within the last 2 years is amazing so in 5 or 10 years I envision that we'll be able to implant a fiber optic light pipe at the base of our brains and just think the music into a computer. (laughs) Seriously, I suspect that in 5 years there will be more virtual instruments and processing tools. I believe that the new cutting-edge innovations will probably be more towards data storage. As computers get faster and faster, the products that are already out will become more efficient and we should be able to produce more, faster. I personally would love to see more universal   compatibility between all of the different products out here. This program doesn't work with that plug-in, you need an upgrade to make this work with that. Too much! Also, as a composer that often has to work with small music budgets for films, I'd love to have instruments that sound as close to the real thing as possible, just in case I can't afford to hire the real player. There are a lot of great sounding products out there but they could always get better in my opinion.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Do you program your own keyboards? What ideas are you looking for and how do you know when the result is appropriate?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> I very rarely program my own keyboards. Especially when I'm on the road, I never program them. I just don't have the time to do it. Being a musical director is so time-consuming I barely have enough time to practice my own parts. I'm fortunate enough to always have a personal programmer when I'm on the road. As for my home studio, I will always start with a factory sound and then twist and turn it into something else. You will very rarely hear a stock sound in one of my productions. I try to look for something that you've never heard before. A lot of times that can be accomplished by using a sound in a way that it was not intended to be used. For instance, you can do some cool things with a flute patch like using it as a mono sine wave type of sound or even brassy-like punches. Use your ear and see what you can come up with and try to be different, don't settle for the same old thing. The appropriate result is dictated by your ear, personal taste and the music.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>A lot of people seem get lost in a sea of audio samples. You mentioned earlier that you keep all your keyboards. Do you go back to them often? and how do you keep track of all the sounds you may need?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b>I don't go back to my older keyboards often because I've never left them. I have ways of combining old sounds with new ones to come up with something unique and fresh in my projects.  I have all of the sounds backed up on data disks and hard drives and keep regular maintenance and up-keep on my old synths. Those batteries will go out on you if you don't maintain your arsenal. As far as audio samples go, I say go for it. Samples are just one more color in the broad music-making palette. I've heard the same drum loop in many different productions all used differently. It's always amazing to me to hear all of the different ways in which creative people use the same material.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Lets talk briefly about Keys to the City. It has a vast array of sound loops that encompasses many different styles. Why did you find the need to create this product?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> The library is very cool if I do say so myself, and it is sold by Ilio Entertainments so you know the quality of the library is the best! There are many different "sound loops", as opposed to drum and percussion loops and I wanted to put my own spin on what was out in the market place, which was not much at the time. I think I was one of the first to have (keyboard only) loops out in the sample arena. There is something kind of cool about trying to create a new work from a motif that is already created. You can use my loops, license free, any way that you'd like. If you're creative, these loops can go a long way in any style of production. If you listen to any Dr. Dre, or Neptune's production, the same keyboard phrase or loop is often repeated. Therein lies the basic concept of the <a href="http://www.ilio.com/ilio/keyscity/index.html" target="_blank" ><i>Keys To The City</i></a> library. </p>

<p>The idea came to me early one morning, while driving home from an all night recording session in Manhattan, I reflected on the tracks I had just recorded. Although some electric keyboard parts were played, most of the session was done on piano. Everything went well and everyone was happy. When I came back to record the next day, the producer asked me if I could play a <a href="http://www.fenderrhodes.org/rhodes/supersite/pictures/suit1.jpg" target="_blank" >Rhodes</a> part just a few bars long with the intention of repeating it throughout the song so that it would have a sort of 'drum loop' feel. I did, and it worked great! After another long night of tracking, I was in my car, once again in a reflective mood. However, this time, I was thinking of the Rhodes part I had just created. I began to envision a collection of looped keyboard parts that could be used in conjunction with all of the drum, percussion, bass, and guitar loop libraries that currently exist on the market and I started to get really excited about the possibilities. Before I could say, 'This toll went up again?' <i>Keys To The City</i> was born. Many, many hours went in to composing, performing, and recording the <i>Keys To The City</i> library. It was designed for all musicians, even keyboardists, who use sampling as an expressive and creative tool. Each loop was recorded to a click with an emphasis on feel. No parts were sequenced except for parts created with an arpeggiator. </p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>When you find some quiet moments to yourself, what sort of music do you play for your own enjoyment?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> I recently signed a 3-year exclusive deal with K. Kawai to endorse their pianos. Now, I have a very nice 7-foot grand at my house in California. Because of this, I get no work done. (laughs) I still live in New York as well and never had the room for a real piano and now that I have one, I play it all of the time. When I get quiet moments to myself, I love to play classical pieces and work on different styles like latin, and gospel. I also like to dissect current radio songs that I like. I very rarely practice scales and those sorts of things. I prefer to work my technique through actual pieces. Bach is great for warming up and dexterity. If the mood strikes me, I'll compose something new either for myself, or another artist. The piano is my best friend.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>What is your view of the "software versus hardware" debate?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> In my opinion there is no debate. There will always be new software or 'virtual synths' and there will always be hardware. Who's to say they can't co-exist? I believe in the hybrid approach to creating so I love that all of the new things are out here, that doesn't mean I won't continue to use all of my old stuff. Having said that, I do love that virtual synths are getting better and better. I have not set up my original Rhodes in years, but I'm glad that I have it. I also love the portability of software based music production, especially since I live in both coasts. It would be crazy trying to fly all of my gear with me every time I travel back and forth. Computers and its software has made all of our lives easier and more efficient but my Korg Triton has never crashed. (laughs)</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>Now that the Apple G5 is about to come out, and being a Mac user yourself, do you envision this new computer being ahead of the game for musicians?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> With the release of the new Apple G5, I'm excited and pissed at the same time. Excited because musicians and other creative people (film editors, graphic artists, sound designers, film makers etc...) will be able to produce faster and more efficiently which is ultimately cheaper. Now, we don't have to spend a jillion dollars on our projects to make them sound and look professional. Powerful computers provide us with better tracking, mixing and mastering capabilities. This is a good thing. I'm not happy because I'm in the middle of updating my entire home studio and recently purchased the Apple G4 dual processor 1.42 GHZ less than 2 months ago. It's barely been used because my studio isn't finished yet. Apple should adopt a trade up policy on computers bought less than 2 months before the launch of a newer model.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>What have been some of the funniest/strange things Michael has seen in the industry?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> I've been in the business a long time and I've seen many strange and funny things. In terms of sex, drugs and rock and roll, the music industry is exactly what you might think it is and more. Unfortunately, I can't share any of those stories with your readers. Sorry! However, the stories I enjoy all have to do with the powerful effect that music has on people's lives, especially when they're hurting. A few of my good friends who've been singing with the great Luther Vandross for years told me a story of them singing to Luther around his hospital bed while he was in a coma. The miracle is that the singing played a part in helping him to come out of it. I have friends who are music therapists. There is always a great story of triumph with the work that they do with autistic children. I myself have witnessed two grown men, sentenced to life in prison, cry like newborn babies as I finished a long piano solo at a maximum security prison I was performing at with the late great violinist Noel Pointer. Either they were extremely moved or the piano solo was horrendous. (laughs) These are the real stories to me. Music is a powerful gift to the world and we should never forget that.	</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> <u>What interests do you have outside of your music career?</u></p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Music consumes me, but I'm trying to have a little more balance in my life. I try to hang out with family and friends more than I used to. I'll try to catch more movies and live concerts. But my biggest new thing is golf! My father bought me a set a clubs recently and now I'm addicted to the game. I'm not good at all, (laughs) but it's a great new outlet for me. Now, if I could only work on my late night musician time schedule, maybe I would wake up for those early tee times.</p>

<p><b>Sonik:</b> Thanks for taking some time off your busy schedule to answer our questions.</p>

<p><b>Michael:</b> Peace.</p>

<p><i>Additional links:</i></p>

<p>Michael Bearden's photographs by courtesy of <a href="http://www.tdphoto.com/" target="_blank" >Tony Donaldson</a>.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Didier Dambrin</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2003/didier_dambrin.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2003://5.139</id>

    <published>2003-04-25T15:52:06Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:18:34Z</updated>

    <summary>What&apos;s wrong with your loops ? Do they need a little Rock-Melon, a dash of Passion-Fruit, perhaps a Ba-Na-Na-Na or maybe some Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro ? Well, once again Sonikmatter&apos;s intrepid reporters have braved the electron storm of the Internet to track down Didier Dambrin, designer and programmer of FruityLoops, to discover not only the genesis of this funky program but also the Gorbachev connection...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="software" label="software" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interviewed by Rick "Brujo" Wishart</p>

<p><b>What's wrong with your loops? Do they need a little Rock-Melon, a dash of Passion-Fruit, perhaps a Ba-Na-Na-Na or maybe some Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro, Fig-aro? Well, once again Sonikmatter's intrepid reporters have braved the electron storm of the Internet to track down Didier Dambrin, designer and programmer of FruityLoops, to discover not only the genesis of this funky program but also the Gorbachev connection, 'Eat This', Saltwater and crayfish! Intrigued? Well, so were we! So, dear readers if you wish to unravel this puzzle and find out more then you know the score - follow the hyperlinks!</b></p>

<p><img alt="FruityLoopsInterview1.jpg" src="/images/FruityLoopsInterview1.jpg" width="150" height="200" border="0" align=right /><br />
<b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What's your background in music and programming?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Unfortunately I have no musical background. I started programming a long time ago, mainly on bad video games, to finally end up with satisfactory platform games. But as the game industry started to become too big (we made a commercial platform game that came out a couple of years too late), I tried the compromise between video games and technical tools: musical applications, as they were/are easier and almost as fun to work on as a video game.</p>

<p>I in fact made a classic music 'tracker' a long time before FruityLoops, an OPL3 (the musical FM chip in early SoundBlaster cards) tracker called 'ZIC', which probably no one ever saw or used. It was a poor old DOS tracker with a very Scream Tracker-like interface, supporting many formats and allowing control of the OPL chip in depth.</p>

<p>But that was years before FruityLoops, and when FruityLoops started I couldn't even remember how many semitones per octave there is, in other words, it didn't really help.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What games and platforms did you program?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> It all began with the Amstrad CPC but never went far - this was with a breakout game, removing the ball and replacing the racket by a little guy [the standard charset of the CPC had a couple of funny guys and a rocket in it] freely moving at the bottom of the screen got me stuck into programming. But it really started with the PC, for which I made a lot of crappy games, for example, like about every programmer, a tetris clone with the very original name of "T-Tris"!  This is hard to find now as I don't have a homepage anymore. Before the internet was popular, it was so hard learning how to program, as technical information or just a little piece of code wasn't easy to find. Now it's much easier to start programming, and 32-bit programming is also much easier than 16-bit used to be.</p>

<p>An ok game that can still be found is 'Space Bastards' (a small shooter game, nothing to do with another one called 'Robosaurs vs the Space Bastards'). Even works under Windows 3.1.</p>

<p>The last and better game was a platform game called 'Eat This', made by Image-Line, just before FruityLoops. You can try <a href="http://www.eatthis.com" target="_blank">www.eatthis.com</a>. Took too much time to finish, while the hardware didn't wait, so it was a little outdated, unfortunately. But it got sold.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What's your view of the game industry these days?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> It's so big - it's probably not as fun to work on a game anymore. But the results are worth it (for the gamer that is), games (well, not all of them) are so amazing. Technically that is, because only a few games are fun to play. And thank goodness for online games, even if they're partly the reason that PC games are selling a little less. If you've never played it, a very good game (though rather old now) I'd recommend is Rune. But you've got to like vikings.. and chopping heads.. and eating lizards... </p>

<p>Now I also like and play old arcade games, especially fighting ones, a lot. I miss 2D games!  </p>

<p>Today everything has to be 3D. 3D graphic chips roughly appeared at the same time as support for high-res screen resolutions and colors, so there never really was any good slick-looking 2D games, except Oddworld (which is now 3D on the XBox, and looks great, but definitely not as slick as the first episode). Classic 2D arcade games of the 90's, and I'm not talking about Pacman, but post-Double Dragon games, could have become something great with modern display resolution and color depth. There are of course a lot of 3D games with 2D gameplay, but they don't look as good - though it will probably change in the future.</p>

<p>2D games on the GameBoy Advance (though the GBA also suffers from the '3D everywhere' syndrome and has some poor fake-3D games) are cool. After the GBA (when pocket consoles will have a good 3D chip that is), 2D games will probably revive in cell phones, and will then die.. until graphic cards will be so powerful that gameplay will have as much value as display.</p>

<p>But this has nothing to do with music applications, and I haven't even commented on the musical games that seem so popular in japan!</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>When did the genesis of FruityLoops begin?</u><br />
 <br />
<b>Didier: </b> It was, if I trust the history file, in 1998. It didn't start seriously, because at that time there were only 2 interesting (read: fun to use) music apps, Rebirth 338 and the Hammerhead drum machine. I wanted to merge the coolness of both in a drum machine that wouldn't have their main limitation, that is a single row of 'steps' shared between all the drums. The first  FruityLoops was named 'FrootyLoops'. The splash screen already featured a fruit, with a worm in it and then I was told that the worm looked like a penis (although it had eyes, go figure), and so the worm was removed!</p>

<p>The difficulties were mainly in Windows programming, as my previous apps had all been made with the old Borland's Turbo Pascal, today known as Inprise's Delphi. I think the strength of FruityLoops is mainly in its interface. I guess that old trackers had such success because they looked appealing, while big sequencers had boring silver interfaces, and were showing all of their complex features at once, scaring most people.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What inspired and influenced the user interface design of FruityLoops?</u> </p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Graphically, probably old trackers, the fun ones, like the mighty FastTracker 2. As for the colors, a little of ReBirth 338 maybe, but that was for Fruity before version 3. As for the layout, it might be closer to a DOS app in a way, since it's made to work fast and has many keyboard shortcuts. It also doesn't really follow standard Windows rules, as many features aren't accessible from the keyboard, and the right mouse button is used a lot. But I find it easy and intuitive, and it's often said to be (as opposed to the famous sequencers), so it must be!</p>

<p><img alt="FLStudioScreenshot.gif" src="/images/FLStudioScreenshot.gif" width="350" height="246" border="0" align=center /></p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>Do end-users suggestions influence the ongoing development of FruityLoops?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> The delicate art here is to make the end-users believe they have influence, but not to follow their tips slavishly!</p>

<p>Honestly many users come up with either weird, or stupid ideas, or completely undoable things. When the requested features are good and doable, they're usually already being worked on, or sometimes even done already or in the planning stage.</p>

<p>There really are enough things on our to-do list not to need more stressing feature requests!</p>

<p>This might sound pretentious, however in my humble opinion it's more pretentious to think that no one else ever had our 'new wonderful idea'. Usually someone else had it, and  sometimes it's already materialized somewhere, if not, it's more because it's harder to achieve than to think of!</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>Do you do all the programming for FruityLoops?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> I do all the programming for the FruityLoops application. Several FruityLoops plugins, or the engines they use, are made by various people, who are usually the best at<br />
what they do. Frederic works on side things, like support for VSTi and DXi plugins, other apps like FruityTracks, etc. JM manages the web sites and the Image-Line company with Frank. Yes it takes a lot of time, so it's better not work on anything else. The next version of FruityLoops is always better, or should be!</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What made you choose the developers for the FruityLoops plugins?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Simply the fact they had made plugins already, or proved they could do it. For example, Ultrafunk had a very good, and cheap, DirectX reverb plugin. So we asked them to develop a version of it especially for FruityLoops. Good reverbs aren't that easy, all of the lame freeware, not that freeware means lame, reverb plugins are proving it. Another example is the Wasp plugin, developed by Richard Hoffmann who originally made the TS404 bassline synth in early versions of FruityLoops. That TS404 was itself a standalone product of him.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What features do you feel users don't fully utilise?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Automation, definitely. FruityLoops gives a lot of means to automate things, and about everything can be automated. But it's not used enough. Or it's used for fun - you can do complex things by linking knobs to internal controllers, there even is a 'formula controller' plugin - but not enough in song projects. Though now it's starting to be used more and more, as the users start to master the recent features.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>  <u>What's your view on Cubase, Logic and Sonar?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> They are classics. You know, like books, that you wished you had read, but don't want to read. They're the ones that are supposed be used, but are too scary because of their complexity, and you don't really 'want' to learn them. So if you don't actually have to learn them, it's hard to start, and I never dared to. That's my opinion for Sonar and Cubase, as I don't know Logic, which seems to have a worse learning curve. They're probably the best tools for what they're supposed to do, but they're certainly not applications you can use for fun or have fun whilst using.<br />
<pb/><br />
<b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>What's your viewpoint on the ongoing 'software' versus 'hardware' debate in synthesis? </u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> I'm not at all into hardware, so I don't really know that side. I think that the difference in easiness is undebatable, no one would say that a piece of hardware is easier to use than a piece of software, or better integrated in a sequencer. Some say they prefer to tweak real knobs, but you can control a piece of software using a hardware controller. A big advantage of hardware has always been the near-zero latency, but today's good soundcard drivers will give you a very small latency as well. So that leaves the main argument: the sound quality. Most of today's pieces of hardware apparently being based on software running on a dedicated processor, proves that a software can do what a piece of hardware does. The question is then not 'can software match hardware?', but 'can today's software match the quality of today's hardware?'. This implies both talent of programmers and speed of our CPU's. Both of them are improving with time!</p>

<p>All I've heard from hardware synthesizers never amazed me, except the Virus maybe. As for effects, I don't know enough to give an opinion. Maybe hardware reverbs sound better, I personally wouldn't notice the difference.</p>

<p>It's true that dedicated processors will obviously be faster, but also less flexible, at what they're made for than a general processor. But DSP chips in music hardware are also much slower in terms of clock speed than today's CPU's. The ideal is probably a dedicated sound processor in the soundcard itself, all controlled by a software UI (Creamware's Pulsar, etc.).</p>

<p>Globally it seems that for many people it's more a matter of 'magic and myths'. Give someone two exact same pieces of sound, tell that the second piece of sound benefits from some marketing bullshit name, and the second will sound 'better'. That's why I don't much like studio engineers (and I'm probably making new enemies by saying this), they seem to propagate those myths, and often someone claims that 'this' is the way to do things, simply because that's the way a studio engineer does it. "This must be good or all sound engineers wouldn't do it!". "This must be better or all the studios in the world wouldn't have one!". But often they just can't explain why. Sometimes there was a real reason behind those arguments, and sometimes that reason simply isn't worth anything anymore as it was related to limitations of past hardware. Take, for example, dithering. Of course dithering matters a lot in a 8-bit piece of sound, but everyone seems to be claiming that dithering to a (final - not to be post-processed) 16-bit piece of sound matters, while I never could get a proof of anything, and personally can't hear noise at above 15 bits of depth in a common piece of music. That's misleading for some new musicians who seem to think that the reason their piece of music doesn't sound like what they hear on radio is the lack of dithering, while they'd be better spending their time investigating equalization and compression, or in some cases, talent! But that won't prevent 24-bit 96Khz audio DVD's generating big money......!</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>Who are the other software developers you admire?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> The one that started it all was Rebirth 338 so of course I admire Propellerhead's products. Especially as their interfaces feel nice. I don't quite like their way of imitating hardware, including disadvantages of it, though. Orion is nice as another 'all-in-one' software studio. And finally I respect the old-school trackers, they were there before us after all.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>What do you enjoy doing in your spare time?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> You mean what would I do if I had spare time ? I'd be playing Return to Castle Wolfenstein, frying everyone's balls with my flamethrower, and finishing them with my knife!<br />
These days I'm really into remixes of old computer songs. Take old C64 SID tunes for instance which were mostly from games. The SID chip wasn't that great, so at that time they had to work on great melodies. Combined with today's possibilities, such remixes sometimes are jewels. I like all kinds of music, except lame pop, r&b, and French pop (today's French music - rap or electronic - is good, but a decade ago we suffered a lot from crappy French-speaking songs.......oh, wait.. it's back again!). As most people interested in electronic sounds, I of course can't forget J.M. Jarre and Vangelis. One of my favourite CDs is "Behind the Sun" by Chicane - really great, especially that 10 minute long 'Saltwater' song.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>So after a hard day's programming what's your favourite food?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> These days it's crayfish with aioli sauce. Until I'm tired of them.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>How did Gorbachev come to feature in some of your earlier promotional material?</u></p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Well it wasn't some Russian-Italian mafia connection given he appears to have a picture of Italy on his forehead! Actually it was because pictures of Gorbachev are some of the easiest pictures to find on the net. That was before Google's amazing image search-engine was available though.</p>

<p><b>Sonikmatter:</b>   <u>So after all this interesting conversation would you consider sharing a photograph of yourself with Sonikmatter?</u> </p>

<p><b>Didier: </b> Argh! I'm afraid not. I don't have any scanned, and in fact I don't have any recent ones except for the one on my ID card, and like everyone else I'd prefer to die rather than to show it!</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Athan Billias</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2002/athan_billias.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2002://5.65</id>

    <published>2002-10-10T02:06:19Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:18:53Z</updated>

    <summary>Over the years we see a lot of great products that come from the many music manufacturers. When you think of companies like KORG and YAMAHA, you know you are talking about companies that create many truly innovative products. From the M1 to the MOTIF, to the foundations of the Korg KARMA, there has been one key element in them all: Athan Billias...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="yamaha" label="Yamaha" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Brian Cowell</p>

<p>Over the years we see a lot of great products that come from the many music manufacturers. When you think of companies like KORG and YAMAHA, you know you are talking about companies that create many truly innovative products. From the M1 to the MOTIF, to the foundations of the Korg KARMA, there has been one key element in them all: Athan Billias. From his early days as a Product Specialist at KORG, to being currently Director of Marketing for Technology Products at YAMAHA and a board member of the MMA, Athan Billias has had a long and creative history in the music industry.</p>

<p>Sonikmatter had a chance to catch up with Athan (commonly known on the MOTIFATOR website as "Yamaha USA", and got a rundown of what he does on a day to day basis.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>How did you get involved in the music industry?</u></i></p>

<p><img alt="AthanBillias1.jpg" src="/images/AthanBillias1.jpg" width="250" height="333" border="0" align=right /></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I've been playing piano since I was a little kid and been in professional bands since age 13. I was really lucky in that the university I went to (Wesleyan University in Middletown, Conn.) had an unbelievable world music program. I was able to study African ensemble drumming, Jazz composition, South Indian music theory and Electronic music all in the same place. </p>

<p>After college I was a professional musician for ten years playing different bands all over the US including the Source with Jerry Martini from <a href="http://www.slystone.com/" target="_blank">Sly and the Family Stone</a>. Playing live was great, but the lifestyle can get to you. I had been on the road for about three years straight constantly living in hotels. I woke up in the middle of the night and had no idea what town or state I was in. So I went downstairs to the front desk and said to the night auditor behind the counter: &quot;Sorry, I play in a traveling band and I can't get back to sleep without knowing what state I'm in&quot;. Without blinking an eye he said 'Hell son, that's easy&#133; You're in a state of total confusion.&quot; So I decided then and there to get off the road. </p>

<p>I went back to my hometown and worked at a retail store (E. U. Wurlitzer's in Boston) for several years as the keyboard department manager and then the sales manager. Then I became a partner in a 24 track-recording studio. This gave me a chance to develop some recording and mixing skills. But we were putting all our money into the studio, working 70 hours a week and barely making any money. So when a job working at <a href="http://www.korg.com/" target="_blank">Korg</a> as a product specialist came up I jumped at the chance.</p>

<p>Even then I had no idea how much my life would change in the next year. Within six months of joining Korg USA, I went to Korg Inc. in Japan. It was supposed to be a three-month stay to work on the PCM waves for the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_m1.jpg" target="_blank">M1</a>. Going to Japan completely changed my life. I don't know what it was about it, but I felt at home immediately and started studying the language. I stayed another three months working for Korg USA because we were still in the middle of the M1 development. Then at the end of the six months, Korg Inc. offered me the job of product planning/sound design manager for Korg Inc. I believe that I am the only foreigner to ever hold a management level position in product planning in any Japanese music company. </p>

<p>So I moved to Japan and lived there for the next six years. We worked on the T series, <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_01wfd.jpg" target="_blank">01/W</a>, <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/wavestation.jpg" target="_blank">Wavestation</a>, <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/i3.gif" target="_blank">i3</a> and <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/x3.gif" target="_blank">X3</a> during the time I was there (as well as others) and I got to work with and manage some of the best sound designers around (Jack Hotop, <a href="/interviews/john_lehmkuhl.php" target="_blank">John &quot;Skippy&quot; Lehmkuhl</a>, <a href="/images/john_bowen.php" target="_blank">John Bowen</a>, Michele Pacuilli, Steve McNally, Michael Geisel). I was actually the guy who first hired <a href="http://www.karma-lab.com/People/SKay.html" target="_blank">Stephen Kay</a> (Karma developer) at Korg for the 01/w project and when we were working on the i3 sent him a copy of Max that eventually lead him down the road to developing Karma. Lots of great memories of working on those synths. </p>

<p>But after 6 years it was time to head back to the US, so I took a job with <a href="http://www.cybersound.com/" target="_blank">Invision Interactive</a>. Steve O'Connell (now president of <a href="http://www.bitheadz.com/" target="_blank">Bitheadz</a>) and I worked together on the Invision soft synth and on the voicing for the <a href="http://www.alesis.com/products/a6/index.html" target="_blank">Alesis 6.1</a> and Q cards. </p>

<p>After a year at Invision (which was already starting to have financial problems and went out of business later) I got a call from Phil Scott at IVL. We had developed the iH harmonizer together when I was at Korg. IVL had just started getting into the Tsushin Karaoke industry. There is a huge industry in Japan based entirely on <a href="http://www.midi.org/" target="_blank">MIDI</a>. These are the largest most sophisticated ISDN networks in the world that are used for downloading MIDI files to the Karaoke boxes all over Japan. Within a year of joining IVL as the VP of Sales for the multimedia division we had licensed IVL harmony technology to 9 of the 13 companies doing network karaoke, including <a href="http://www.sega.com/index.jhtml" target="_blank">Sega</a>,<a href="http://www.jvc.com/" target="_blank"> JVC</a>, <a href="http://www.brother.com/" target="_blank">Brother</a>, <a href="http://www.ricoh.com/" target="_blank">Ricoh</a>, and <a href="http://www.yamaha.com/" target="_blank">Yamaha</a> who does the designs for the largest karaoke maker in Japan- Dai Ichi Kosho. It sounds like a very weird thing, but it was a great job for me as I got to live in Victoria, British Columbia, but go to Japan almost every month. One of the other things that I licensed for IVL was a version of Karma for karaoke.</p>

<p>When Yamaha started looking for a marketing manager here at Buena Park I couldn't resist getting back into my first love synthesizers. So here I am. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>What do you do at Yamaha on a typical day, and what is your job title Athan?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I currently have three jobs at Yamaha:<br />
 - Director of Marketing, Technology Products. This includes Pro Audio, Portable Keyboards, Digital Pianos and Synths for the Pro Audio and Combo division.</p>

<p>- I also took over management of the Digital Content Design Center just before we started development on Motif. DCDC provides the US voicing for synth patches, PCM waves, song demos and styles for all Yamaha Synths, PSR and Clavinova products. </p>

<p>- Last year we started a Digital Products Support group consisting of 6 products specialists and 20 trainer/merchandisers around the US who focus on making sure the Yamaha digital music products like AW digital recorders (as well as the Synths. Pianos and portable keyboards) are well displayed in stores. We also provide training to in-store personnel and do end-user clinics. </p>

<p>So I stay pretty busy. Here is typical day. Get up around 5:30 and log on to <a href="http://www.motifator.com" target="_blank">www.motifator.com</a>. I am the guy who posts as &quot;Yamaha US&quot; and if I don't get to some posts early in the morning, I will never get to them at all because it gets busy in the office. </p>

<p>Leave for work around 7 am and make a couple of phone calls to the east coast on the way in. </p>

<p>From 8 am-9 am we usually have a business meeting. As the marketing manager, you have responsibility for projecting sales, ordering the product, and making sure that the department makes its monthly sales budget.</p>

<p>9-10 am or later is answering emails, I get about 100-125 emails a day and about half of them require some action on my part. Most of those are Yamaha related, but I'm also on the executive board of the MIDI Manufacturers Association and as the liaison to the <a href="http://www.amei.or.jp/index.html" target="_blank">AMEI</a> (<i>Ed. Note: link with Japanese characters</i>)-- the Japanese body that controls MIDI in Japan -- I have to stay on top of all the technical discussions as well.</p>

<p>1 am -12 pm, I will have a meeting or two - either with an outside sound designer who is working on a project or someone inside Yamaha who is working on a marketing project. We typically have about 10 different DCDC projects going on simultaneously. Plus marketing managers have to come up with the ad campaigns and marketing programs which takes a good deal of time. At lunchtime, I usually eat at my desk while surfing the net and answering Motifator posts.</p>

<p>From 1-5 is the main part of the day when I need to get as much done as I possibly can. At around 5 pm, I usually will spend an hour communicating with Yamaha Japan. As I speak Japanese, it's a major advantage being able to call on the phone and speak in the native language. In fact from about 4:30 PM on I often answer the phone in Japanese as it is almost always either my wife (who's from Fukuoka) or somebody from Hamamatsu.</p>

<p>I usually get home around 7 pm - eat and relax for a couple of hours, then from about 9 PM to 11 PM either work on new sounds/patterns/songs or post answers to questions on Motifator. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>Can you tell us about the naming of the MOTIF synthesiser?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> The code name for <a href="http://www.yamahasynth.com/pro/motif/" target="_blank">Motif</a> was originally Kangaroo, don't ask me why - I think all the keyboard code names started with K that year. When we started looking for a name, I knew it would probably be up to me. I had thought of the name Motif back when I was working at IVL.</p>

<p>In 1997, when the Korean and Japanese economies took a real downturn, I came up with a plan for an IVL branded line of M1 products. The line was going to be called Motif and the first three products in the plan were <a href="http://www.electrixpro.com/products/warpfactory.html" target="_blank">Warpfactory</a> (pretty much what it came out as later), <a href="http://www.analoguesystems.co.uk/pichtmls/sorcererbig.htm" target="_blank">Sorcerer</a> (a &quot;Karma&quot; based product that was just a MIDI processor with no tone generator) and one other product. At that time IVL decided they didn't want to do their own product line so I left and went to Yamaha. About a year and half later <a href="http://www.electrixpro.com/" target="_blank">Electrix</a> hit the market with some of the ideas from my original plan, but a different name. Motif just seemed to really fit the concept of the keyboard we were working on- different musical pieces in the form of MIDI phrases, Arps and audio samples could be easily put together to create works of music. These &quot;Motifs&quot; were the central core of the idea.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>Do you think that the FS1R would have done better as keyboard model?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> No, that was not the problem. The biggest problem is that unfortunately there is only a limited market for truly unique pure synthesis products.</p>

<p>Look at the truly unique products (Wavestation, Oasys card, FS1R, VL70M, etc.) and you will see limited sales. Partly this is because they are unique, they are also a little more difficult for the average user to understand. Yamaha has done more than any other manufacturer to develop and bring to market new synthesis technologies (Formant synthesis, VL, FM and we were also one of the first companies to develop physically-modelled analog synthesis).</p>

<p>Now take a look at all the supposedly cool software synths and what are they? - copies of 20 year-old technology and really nothing new. Sure they look cool and have nice UIs, but they are not that innovative. The ones that are innovative like <a href="http://www.native-instruments.de/index.php?absynth_us" target="_blank">Absynth</a> and <a href="http://www.arturia.com/en/storm2.lasso" target="_blank">Storm</a> have smaller sales. So the market votes with its pocket book. Next time there is a unique product introduced go out a buy it. Then companies will be more willing to take risks and develop new technologies.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>How different is the American market to the European one?</u></i> </p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> The market is different for a number of reasons. In the US we really like 88-note weighted-action keyboards. We are very pianocentric here. Also the impact and effect of the worship market in the US can't possibly be underestimated. The other difference is the use of software synthesizers.</p>

<p>The European market has embraced these to a much greater degree, especially on the non-professional side. But in the end a good sound in New York is a good sound in Hamburg or Paris. The fundamental needs of people all over the world are pretty similar and it is in the content and marketing that products get localized. If you look at popular music around the world and the billboard charts, there is not really that great a difference in the top 10 records worldwide.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>What forms of synthesis do you think need to be explored more?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I think that physical modeling still has potential and so does Formant Synthesis. There are some interesting things left to do with the synthesis and the human voice. There are a lot interesting programs around that allow you to design your synth. But what is really frustrating is that people complain that there is no progress and everything is just PCM playback. Then when we come out with something like the FS1r, which was totally unique and made totally different sounds, it doesn't sell well and has to be blown out.</p>

<p>Look at the <a href="http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm" target="_blank">Korg Oasys</a> card. Great innovative product, and it ended up getting blown out. What is successful?</p>

<p>Some of the things people seem to think are innovative are really just imitations of really old synths and instruments. For example, the <a href="http://www.clavia.se/" target="_blank">Nord</a> and <a href="http://www.novationuk.com/" target="_blank">Novation</a> lines, <a href="http://www.propellerheads.se/" target="_blank">Reason</a> (a Roland Tr series imitation essentially), <a href="http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.php?b4_us" target="_blank">B4</a>  (Hammond imitation), <a href="http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.php?pro53_us" target="_blank">Pro 5</a> (a Prophet 5 imitation), and lately <a href="http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.php?fm7_us" target="_blank">FM7</a> (a DX 7 imitation) do not have anything new as far as synthesis is concerned.</p>

<p>Truly new synth technologies have not been commercially successful and that makes it very hard to make the case for truly innovative products. Fortunately Yamaha is a very technology-driven company so we are still doing very core research in a number of synth areas and will continue to try and push the envelope when possible.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>Is there any funny things that you've seen happen in the music industry?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> There was one <a href="http://www.namm.com/" target="_blank">NAMM</a> show in Chicago in 1984 or 1985. It had all these weird high-end Synths that never came to market like the $80,000 <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/kin/prism01a.jpg" target="_blank">Prism</a> featuring bubble memory. Anyway there was a huge booth to promote the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/asi/asisynthiabro.jpg" target="_blank">Synthia</a>. This was a prototype of a huge additive synth developed by Dupont. Some engineer at Dupont had convinced the company to invest a huge amount of money in developing the &quot;next big thing&quot;. So here was this really geeky engineer guy and two accountants from Dupont with this weird-looking keyboard attached to a PC. I was the buyer for E. U. Wurlitzer's at the time so I politely asked how much it was and what it sounded like. The guy replied that it was $100,000 and it didn't actually have any presets except for one badly programmed accordion. Dupont thought that if they came to the NAMM show there would be lots of musicians who would make nice sounds for them for free. That's when I realized that it is the software content (i.e. sounds) that drives the sales of musical instruments, not the hardware.</p>

<p>Anyway the funny thing is that one of the Ash family was standing behind me and in a really loud voice with a thick New York accent screamed across the NAMM floor &quot;Hey Richie, you gotta see this, Dupont has a $100,000 dollar synth that sounds just like a $99 dollar Casio!&quot; Dupont never showed the prototype again at a show and never entered the synth market.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>The MIDI protocol hasn't really changed much since the 1980s, and XMIDI never saw the light of day; Where do you see MIDI in the future?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I am on the executive board of the <a href="http://www.midi.org/about-mma/abtmma.htm" target="_blank">MMA</a> so this is a very important subject to me. First, there have been some pretty significant additions to the protocol since the 1980s. MIDI Machine Control, Standard MIDI Files, the protocols for <a href="http://www.midi.org/about-mma/mfr_info.htm#DLS" target="_blank">DLS 1 and 2 Logo</a>, and most recently the two specifications for using MIDI in cell phones. But a lot of these additions allowed MIDI to move into different markets.</p>

<p>Recently we have made it clear that MIDI is not the 5 Pin DIN cable. MIDI is protocol and can run on a number of different physical transport layers including Firewire (mlan), USB, and serial host connectors. Having said that we really need to start working on a <a href="http://www.midi.org/about-midi/gm/gm2spec.htm" target="_blank">MIDI 2.0</a>.</p>

<p>We are starting a project called &quot;20 to 2.0&quot;. MIDI will be twenty years old in 2003. We need to work to get funding to develop a protocol that will take us through the next 20 years. I believe that this Musical Instrument Digital Interface needs to take into account both audio and something like current MIDI; it needs to be bi-directional, define a higher level of connectivity and be much easier to use. </p>

<p>Some of the ideas we have talked about are instrument-specific messages. MIDI 1.0 works okay for keyboards, but not as well for describing the attributes of something like a saxophone or guitar. I think you could have a protocol that would have specific messages to virtually describe different real instruments. In any case, until we solve the problem of funding nothing will get done, and as a member of the exec board that's the first challenge. Everyone has used and abused MIDI 1.0 for 20 years without ever paying money and for the most part without companies or end users contributing anything back.</p>

<p>We are thinking of some simple ideas to raise money even if it's just a T-shirt that says, &quot;I'm a Certified MIDIOT&quot; or something. AMEI, the Japanese organization for MIDI has certification tests that they give to end users and charge a fee for certification. I also think that we should open the MMA to educational institutions and get universities involved in the research and development of the next level of specs.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>What products did you work on at KORG?</u></i></p>

<p>ATHAN :</b> I was the head of both product planning and sound design for professional products at Korg from 1988-1992 . Then we split the Sound Design group off into a separate department. So I worked on every product that Korg made during that time. Of course, highlights were the M1, the 01/W and the i3. </p>

<p>We worked on the M1 when I was first in Japan and first working for Korg so it was really exciting. The 01/w was a huge challenge because we knew we had to follow up on the M1. The 01/w was the first Korg project that Stephen Kay worked on. I had arranged to license a library of Fairlight sounds that Stephen had worked on.</p>

<p>Then the i3 was interesting because Stephen, a Japanese engineer named Igoshi -san and myself got to design Korg's auto accompaniment system. It was a pretty interesting project from a technical point of view. I had asked Stephen to work on the project, but at first he said, &quot;No way, I'm not interested in auto accompaniment&quot;.</p>

<p>So I sent a copy of Max to Stephen with the world's simplest Max patch in it. Then I didn't hear from him for about two months. He had gotten totally absorbed in Max and duplicated the entire i3 system as a Max patch. It was out of his work on the i3 that he began thinking about the things that would eventually become Karma.</p>

<p>But the i3 also has some sad memories for me. There were 5 people who were really involved with the i3. Stephen, Igoshi-san, Micheal Filigreabe, the head of marketing for Music Meyer in Germany and a young guy in the Korg planning department named Hashida-san. I left Korg in 1994 soon after the release of the i3.</p>

<p>Within a year three of the five people in the i3 team would pass away. Micheal Filigreabe was killed in a car accident; Hashida-san fell down a flight of steps at product release and hit his head and never regained consciousness; Igoshi-san worked on the <a href="http://www.korg.com/gear/info.asp?A_PROD_NO=EXBMOSS" target="_blank">MOSS board</a> and then discovered he had stomach cancer. He passed away about 6 months later. It was almost spooky that all those people from that project passed away so young (none of them was 40) and so close together (all within 18 months). </p>

<p>But most of my memories are happy and it was great experience working with the MIDI Patch Boys (Michele Pacuilli, Michel Geisle, Steve McNally, Jack Hotop, John Lemhkuhl, Ben Dowling, John Bowen). Plus there were some great people I worked with in Japan. One of the nice things about our industry is that although we are competitive, we can also get together and hang out.</p>

<p>Especially sound designers have tremendous respect for each other's work and will often check out a new piece of gear, recognize a really great sound and seek out the person who created it to compliment them.</p>

<p>Now I get a chance to work with Scott Plunkett, Dave Polich, Arnie Schulze, Manny Fernandez, Ray Legnini, <a href="/images/scott_peer.php" target="_blank">Scott Peer</a> and even sometimes some weird guy from Australia named Brian (Cowell). It's still challenging, creative, a lot of work and a lot of fun.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>What is your view of the &quot;software vs. hardware&quot; debate?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I don't think there is a &quot;software vs. hardware&quot; issue. Here is why&#133; there is no such thing as a software-only product. Does a VST &quot;Soft&quot; synth PLG run only on software? No, that's impossible. The VST soft synth is a software program that runs on a certain hardware platform. That hardware happens to be a widely adopted platform that is a multi purpose multimedia computer running on an Intel (or better Athlon) processor. It runs on a certain OS (Windows or Mac). And you need to get audio and MIDI control signals in and out of your computer to do anything with this &quot;Software only&quot; solution. So there are lots of hardware issues with software applications.</p>

<p>Look at all the emphasis lately on hardware for software - name some of the cool, new products at the NAMM show and you will come up with the <a href="http://www.emagic.de/english/products/logic/control.html" target="_blank">Logic Controller</a>, <a href="http://www.midiman.net/products/midiman/oxygen8.php" target="_blank">Oxygen</a> and <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/products/hd/" target="_blank">Pro Tools HE</a>. All hardware for software. Oh yes! and VST system link which is so you can connect more hardware to a system to be able to play more &quot;software only&quot; synths! All software solutions have a large hardware component and all hardware solutions are mostly software (or they will go the way of the Synthia from Dupont!) What has driven the success of every synthesizer keyboard I ever worked on was the software (sounds and user interface) not the color or the type of metal used in the case. </p>

<p>I am reminded of something Chariman Kato from Korg once said in Japanese - &quot;Anybody can build a machine (Kikkai), but we have to build musical instruments (Gakki).&quot;</p>

<p>Software applications are great tools, but I think there are still major advantages to having an integrated keyboard and sounds if you are trying to build a true musical instrument. If you are just doing loops and synths sounds with no velocity it doesn't matter as much, but when you start sound designing for pianos and you have no idea of what keyboard controller will be used to play the sound, it gets very hard to get the level of expressiveness and nuances people have come to expect.</p>

<p>&quot;Mlan&quot; is another good example of how Yamaha is trying to push the integration of hardware and software. Also there will be a major announcement from Yamaha at <a href="http://www1.musikmesse.de/musik_ffm0103/?MIval=framesets&page_id=1&language=gb" target="_blank">Messe</a> (March 2002) regarding a new open-industry standard that we will be promoting to further seamless integration between software applications and hardware devices. So it's not us against them, it has to be us and them providing the best and most transparent solutions possible to our customers.</p>

<p>So the issue is not &quot;hardware vs. software&quot;, the issue is how to best integrate software and hardware together into a studio that functions smoothly. Motif is a pretty good example. It is software that runs on a very specific hardware platform. It has certain advantages in that the hardware (keyboard, buttons and sounds) are integrated into one package. Yet we understand that people want to use computer tools so it interfaces directly with <a href="http://www.steinberg.net/en/?sid=0" target="_blank">Cubase</a>, <a href="http://www.cakewalk.com/" target="_blank">Cakewalk</a>, <a href="http://www.emagic.de/" target="_blank">Logic</a> and <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/" target="_blank">Pro Tools</a> to act as remote hardware controllers for these software solutions.</p>

<p>In the long run, I believe that the days of the all-purpose, stand-alone PCs are just as much at risk as the all-purpose stand-alone keyboard workstations. Eventually we will see distributed computing where you will have a digital furnace (a source of raw computing power) somewhere in your home and then application-specific devices (digital musical instruments of various kinds and digital recorders) that take advantage of a number of open standards to utilize the shared CPU power and memory storage that is used for your refrigerator, taxes, and tv/cellphone/internet book thingy. Each digital appliance will have specific functionality for that application.</p>

<p>Currently your home computer is just about as appropriate for making music as your synth workstation is for doing word processing. We need to use specific tools for specific tasks and the best tool for making music is a well-designed musical instrument. The piano interface has stood up pretty well for the last 300 hundred years and probably will for a few hundred more.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>Who have been your musical influences?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I really like a broad range of music so the influences are really diverse. You never know what you'll find if your riding in my car. It could be Southern all stars (a Japanese Pop band), John Coltrane or Fat Boy Slim. So it really depends on what project I'm working on at the moment. As head of the Digital Content Design Center we work on style data and sounds, so we spend a lot of time listening to references for different musical styles. Currently we are working on some styles where I'm listening to a lot of Snoop Dog and West Coast hip hop, a lot of 70s funk (Parliament, Bootsy Collins) and Los Tigres Del Norte because we are working on Norte&ntilde;o styles. But that changes all the time.</p>

<p>I'm also a sucker for any good pop tune. I mean I really like Lenny Kravitz, Janet Jackson and Ricky Martin records. I think a lot of people in the music instrument business have this elitist attitude that something has to be obscure and esoteric to be good. Not me, I think there is actually a reason why those records get to be number one. They're well recorded and tunes are really well written.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>What instruments do you have in your own personal studio at home, Athan?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> When I had a recording studio I never had a stereo system in my house. After listening to mixes for 10 hours the last thing you want to do is listen to more music. So even though I have worked on a huge number of synths, I don't have a personal studio or collection of synths in my house. I try to leave that stuff at work. I usually have the latest prototype for the new product we are working on. I try to keep it simple at my house, otherwise I'll just work all weekend. Lately I keep a MOTIF at my house so I can answer questions on the weekend on Motifator.com.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>Which would be the 10 favourite CDs you own?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b></p>

<ul>
      <li>Miles Davis - Bitches Brew (Greatest keyboard lineup of all time.)</li>
      <li>Sly and the Family Stone - Dance to the music (I used to work with Jerry 
        Martini, the sax player in the Family Stone. He played me a tape of the 
        original demo Sly took to the record company. Absolutely unbelievable, 
        very ahead of its time, almost fusion-like. The record company didn't 
        like it so Sly came home right after the meeting, sat down and in about 
        15 minutes wrote &quot;Sing a Simple Song&quot;. Sly was a genius.)</li>
      <li>Steely Dan - A decade of Steely Dan (Great tunes, great production value).</li>
      <li>Rolling Stones - Exile on Main Street.</li>
      <li>Prince - Soundtrack to Purple Rain.</li>
      <li>The Jackson Five - ABC (The best pop song ever.)</li>
      <li>Stevie Wonder - At the close of a century (It's got every Stevie tune 
        you could want on it.)</li>
      <li>Aretha Franklin - Lady Soul.</li>
      <li>The Band - Rock of Ages.</li>
    </ul>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <i><u>And in closing, what do you get to in your spare time, Athan?</u></i></p>

<p><b>ATHAN :</b> I jog, play basketball and try to exercise a lot, I read Japanese novels (Murakami is my favorite) and play as much music as I can. I also cook when my wife Keiko gives me the chance. Mostly I try to pace myself, I tend to like working 16 hours a day so I have to really discipline myself to chill out and take the time to relax.</p>

<p><b>SONIKMATTER : October 2002</b></p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Joe Bryan</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2002/joe_bryan.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2002://5.103</id>

    <published>2002-03-15T19:52:52Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:19:45Z</updated>

    <summary>From Ensoniq to KORG to Universal Audio, Hardware Engineer Joe Bryan has become renowned for being a key component in some of the music industry&apos;s most legendary products. From his idea of an &quot;analog to digital&quot; input on the Korg Wavestation rack, to his work on the legendary unreleased keyboard seen at NAMM (1993) known as the OASys, Sonikmatter found Joe hard at work producing more &quot;cutting edge&quot; technology...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="ensoniq" label="Ensoniq" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="korg" label="Korg" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="universalaudio" label="Universal Audio" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Brian Cowell.</p>

<p>From Ensoniq to KORG to Universal Audio, Hardware Engineer Joe Bryan has become renowned for being a key component in some of the music industry's most legendary products. From his idea of an "analog to digital" input on the Korg Wavestation rack, to his work on the legendary unreleased keyboard seen at NAMM (1993) known as the OASys, Sonikmatter found Joe hard at work producing more "cutting edge" technology.</p>

<p>Located in Santa Cruz in California, Joe Bryan is now Vice President of Engineering at <a href="http://www.uadio.com" target="_blank">Universal Audio</a>. Sonikmatter caught up with Joe before WINTER NAMM 2002, this is what he had to say:</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you end up becoming employed in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><img alt="Joe Bryan thinking 'now, this is the one I pulled out of that UFO near Roswell, New Mexico'." src="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/JoeBryan1.jpg" width="221" height="200" border="0" align=right /></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I was crawling around my mom's piano one night while she was playing Moonlight Sonata, and managed to electrocute myself by sticking my soggy fingers into an uncovered power outlet. That pretty much sealed my fate. I think the adult language translation would be something like, "Holy fucking shit! What the fuck was that?!" I'm sure there's some matted tangle of nerve cells nestled deep in my brain that's still ringing from the combined sound.</p>

<p>I had the usual pile-o-wire in my playroom as a kid, and every electrical device in the house was at my mercy. Fortunately for my dad, I could put everything back together. I made my first guitar in shop class, painted it black, and painted a bloody severed skeleton hand with a tarantula crawling over it on the back. It was too cool. Unfortunately, I used a type of marine boat paint from the garage that never dried, so every time you played it you ended up looking like a shoe-shine boy. I think that guitar was sacrificed in a fiery Hendrix-inspired ritual a few years later.</p>

<p>I studied electrical engineering and computer systems in school, and I had a few hardcore engineering jobs before I managed to land a job running the computer system at <a href="http://www.ensoniq.com" target="_blank">Ensoniq</a>. My brother Marc was a software engineer there, and he put in a good word for me. In addition to keeping their VAXCluster running, I designed some DSP algos (the Rotary Speaker on the VFX), fixed the clacky EPS keyboard, and designed the SQ-series user-interface.</p>

<p>My former boss at Ensoniq, Alex Limberis, formed <a href="http://www.korg.com" target="_blank">Korg's</a> R&D group in California out of the ashes of Sequential. After making a short trip to CA to see the place, I basically said, "Send for my stuff, I'm staying." The next 6 years at Korg R&D formed the main part of my MI career.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who have been your musical influences?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I heard Wendy Carlos' "Switched-On Bach" when I was 6, and it completely blew my mind (that happens a lot). I couldn't have been more surprised if I'd found a space ship in my morning cereal. I was totally fascinated.</p>

<p>Stevie Wonder filled my craving for more of that electronic synth sound, and introduced me to the idea that you could create an image of a place with melody and tone, and that yo' feets got to boogy with the rhythm!</p>

<p>I had a little transistor radio that could pick up WRKO out of Boston, and I was the proverbial empty vessel. I made "stereo" headphones out of a coat hanger and two little crappy speakers, and "Sunshine of your Love" happened to be playing when I tried them on. Bam! Got to get a guitar and make THAT SOUND. Electric guitar became my primary purpose in life.</p>

<p>Here are some of my influences in random order:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>1) Jimmy Page - He uses tone to create new places, he's really a sculptor who uses sound. Great clanging pieces of steel under fingertip control. Awesome!</p>

<p>2) Miles Davis - He introduced the use of space as sonic element, and used it to create new emotions. He also had balls bigger than Jupiter's moons. One of the true pioneers of music.</p>

<p>3) Allan Holdsworth - He took a Strat and a Marshal stack and made them sound like a violin and a saxophone. No one else has ever managed to fundamentally change the very physics of the guitar's envelope, and Holdsworth added an embouchure.</p>

<p>4) Brian Eno - Space, emotion and environment. He created ambient music, and for that we can't forgive him! His work with Robert Frip was especially influential.</p>

<p>5) Bill Evans - There's a trend here. Space and emotion have never been so beautifully enunciated with such fluidity and grace. His compositions formed in front of you, out of the space around you, and all in real time with no overdubs.</p>

<p>6) David Gilmour - Fat fingers and fat tone. Not too many notes, just the right ones.</p>

<p>7) Jon Anderson - And the rest of Yes created new worlds in acoustic space. Their live shows were transcendent. One of my first live concerts was trip to Boston Garden. Listening to Relayer performed live was a very liquid experience. Whoa!</p>

<p>8) Frank Zappa - Another true pioneer, visionary band leader, and personal hero. He told the idiots of Tipper Gore's PMRC to go to hell, and got an "explicit lyrics" warning sticker on an all instrumental album to show for it! Talk about performance art.</p>

<p>9) Joni Mitchel - She's another great musical sculptor. Her voicings are simultaneously original, beautiful, and highly personal.</p>

<p>10) Billy Corgan (Smashing Pumkins) - One of the most interesting of the recent crop of artists. He also wears his Jimmy Page influence on his sleeve. Check out the extended ending of "Drown", it's a feedback solo worthy of Jimmy Hendrix and Robert Frip.</p>

<p>11) John Lydon (aka Jonny Rotten) - After a certain incredibly obscene and hysterically funny act at a P.I.L. concert I can't possibly describe without offending everyone, he will remain rock-and-roll incarnate for me.</p>

<p>12) n'Sync - Ha ha, just kidding!</p>

</blockquote>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What kind of music do you like to play?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> When I get a rare change to play these days, I like to play eclectic improvisational music. I've playing in traditional rock and blues bands, but there are a few guys I've played with for years who simply don't fit into any categories. We like to stretch out when we play. One guy has a <a href="http://www.stick.com" target="_blank">Chapman Stick</a> with a MIDI pickup that he likes to play with a slide. Let me know when you come up with a name for that.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us about the "OASys" that was originally previewed in 1993 at NAMM?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> That was quite a beast. Unlike the <a href="http://www.korg.com/oasyspci.htm" target="_blank">OASys PCI</a> card released several years later, the original <a href="http://www.vanille.de/oasys.htm" target="_blank">OASys</a> was an actual standalone keyboard, and the story is quite involved.</p>

<p>The OAsys project was a continuation of the work Steve O'Connell had started with his SynthKit program back in 1989. It was very powerful, but it was Mac software based, and users needed some DSP theory to use it. It was primarily a research tool. Even though Physical Modeling synthesis was the main topic in the research community, no one had access to real-time rendering systems, and some simulations would take hours or days to generate their sounds. Because of this inability to interact with them, most of the algorithms didn't sound very good. SynthKit changed that by making algorithm development an interactive, real-time process, and one that advanced voicing guys could be trained to work with.</p>

<p>Andy Leary, Charlie Bright, <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/john_bowen.php" target="_blank">John Bowen</a>, Ben Dowling, and a few others spent most of their time developing algorithms with SynthKit. The interesting thing about it was they threw out nearly 99% of their work. That was what made their results so good: they could audition and refine their algos quickly.</p>

<p>As good as SynthKit was, it wasn't practical as a musical instrument. We needed a system that could play the algos polyphonically and in real-time, just like any other synth. The challenges of this simple concept essentially meant we had to develop a full-blown general-purpose computer system from scratch. The founder of Korg, Katoh-san Sr., was impressed with our <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_wavestation.gif" target="_blank">Wavestation</a> work, so he basically gave us carte blanc with the OAsys.</p>

<p>My responsibilities included designing the hardware and software system architecture, and developing the technology that let the algorithms be ported from SynthKit and loaded and played in real-time. I expanded the real-time dynamic resource allocation and modulation techniques I'd started using on the Wavestation, and in the process, developed file systems, user-interface design tools, modular cross platform techniques, and object-based compilers. I wrote a paper describing it for the AES, which our VP Alex Limberis presented, and we got a few patents in the process.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, the project took on a life of its own, as each group tried to out-do the other with features. The user interface started out relatively simple, but ballooned into the mothership of midi controllers. We out-did ourselves making it flexible, and because of the very long rope we had, in the end we succeeded in making mostly a big noose out of it. Ultimately, we realized the custom component costs Japan was paying wouldn't justify the required sales price, and what started as a $3000 synth became a $15000 boat anchor, So Katoh-san was reluctantly forced to cancel his pet project.</p>

<p>Despite the eventual realities that doomed the original, Korg eventually came out with OAsys/SynthKit based products like the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_wavedrum.gif" target="_blank">WaveDrum</a>, the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_prophecy.jpg" target="_blank">Prophecy</a>  and <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_z1.jpg" target="_blank">Z-1</a>, and finally the OAsys PCI. The closest thing to the original OAsys keyboard is the Trinity. It uses the same case David Goldstein designed for the OAsys, has the same touch-sensitive controllers and touch screen with the bright-blue LCD, and even some of the same signal routing structures developed for the OAsys keyboard. Korg's best stuff was developed as a result of Korg Japan and Korg R&D engineers listening to the MPB team.</p>

<p>The first time anyone heard the OAsys was at NAMM in a private suite in the Hilton Hotel (they showed it again the next year on the floor). I remember holding the door for Keith Emerson and Bob Moog on their way in to hear it. One of the coolest moments was observing a jaded LA session pro hear the OAsys for the first time. I overheard him telling someone how tired he was of all the look-alike, sound-alike synths out there, and how it was starting to become a chore checking everything out. After listening to the OAsys, he started jumping up and down like a kid saying, "Let me play it, let me play it!" It was great to see him regain his excitement for something that had become a chore.</p>

<p>I think keeping that flame alive is the ultimate goal for all of us in this industry.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think that an OASys type of keyboard will be possible in the future sometime?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> An OASys style keyboard is still a dream, although it'll take a serious commitment to pull it off correctly. I wouldn't be surprised if Korg was busy working on one right now. If they limited the scope of the project to just playing killer sounds instead of being the end-all be-all synth/MIDI controller it started out as, the OASys could be a reality today.</p>

<p>Unfortunately for the rest of the MI community, there's a barrier to wide spread adoption of physical modeling (PM) synths. Anyone who wants to develop one has to pay Yamaha/Stanford for the <a href="http://corporate.stanford.edu/research/otlsondius.html" target="_blank">Sondius</a> license and co-brand their work with it. If you haven't read the Sondius agreement, it's pretty interesting. Suffice to say no one's rushing out to develop PM synths anymore, and those that have, have all been forced to pay the fee. Even Korg was forced to pay, and I'd say they're clearly the group with the best sounding algos.</p>

<p>Despite all that, there are workarounds. The larger problem is the processor requirements for algorithmic synthesis are quite high, and currently there's little need for anything that powerful in the consumer space to make them affordable (yet). PM chips will either have to use custom DSPs, or off-the-shelf DSPs, both of which are expensive and limited. A PM synth would either be limited in its algorithms, or limited in its polyphony. Unless of course you've found something useful that's popped out of a crashed UFO or something.</p>

<p>Right now, the algorithmic synthesis field is at a similar point as the DSP effects field: retro emulations. There's a lot to be learned from the old gear because it sounds great. The real-world shmutz that gets into the process provides the secrets. Two of my favorite examples are the type of spruce Stradivarius used in his violins, and UA's <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/LA-2A.html" target="_blank">LA-2A's El-Op</a> device. Stradivarius used spruce that was unlike any other because of a bacterium that lived in the water where the logs were transported. He just used what was available, and it just happened to be extraordinary. The classic LA-2A compressor uses a simple nightlight and a type of photo resistor you can get at Radio Shack, but the combination is truly magical. It took a huge effort by our DSP team, including consultations with quantum device physicists, to figure out exactly how it works.</p>

<p>Simple stuff produces great results, but the reasons are profoundly complex. This same magic will continue to happen in the design of future of musical instruments. It's inevitable.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What happened to the OASys prototypes?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> As far as I know they're still at Korg R&D in Milpitas. There was one prototype encased in a blue version of what's now the Triton case, and there were a few others encased in steel boxes. The blue one was called the Blue Bomber, and the others were called the Perestroika Boxes. There were one or two others mounted on boards that were used in the lab for development. I suspect they're all gathering dust these days.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you come up with the idea of the WAVESTATION A/D?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> There's always a lull in activity after a product goes out and we scratch our heads asking, "What's next?" I had suggested we put analog inputs on a synth for a few months, but no one was very interested. My motivations were purely selfish. I'd just developed what I thought was a cool effects processor for the Wavestation, and I really just wanted to play my guitar though it.</p>

<p>I didn't want to spend a lot of time developing a converter circuit for a quick proof of concept piece, so I started rummaging around the lab for some existing converters. The lab at Korg R&D is pretty interesting. Besides an old Mac Classic used as a door stop, there's lots of old Sequential stuff piled up (things like rare 10-voice single rank <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/sci_prophet5.front.gif" target="_blank">Prophet 5's</a>, protos, etc.). I found a broken <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/sci/p2000.shtml" target="_blank">Prophet 2000</a> sampler board with some ADCs on it, and noticed something useful about its board layout. So one summer day while everyone was sort of kicking back, I started work on the first prototype <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_wavestation_a-d.jpg" target="_blank">Wavestation A/D</a>.</p>

<p>One minute there was relative quiet, and the next there was this loud screeching fingernails-on-a-blackboard noise out in the lab, and a few guys came in to see what was up. It must have looked pretty odd seeing me hacksawing away at a circuit board clamped in a bench vise, because there were the usual "What could you possibly be doing?" questions. It so happened that the A/D circuit was neatly arranged on the board so I could literally cut it out with a saw. Pretty soon we had the converters hooked into the voice engine, and then everyone started getting interested in putting them on the rack module. In the end we didn't use the same Sequential A/D circuit, but I thought it was a nice homage to the Sequential legacy that it influenced the Wavestation in several different ways.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Were there any features that were left off the Wavestation series that you would like to have implemented?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> Resonant filters. There wasn't a choice though, the voice chips available from Korg just didn't have them. I added some sweepable resonant filters to the effects (Distortion, Overdrive and Parametric EQ) that are usable for mono voices. You can select envelope, key number or any of the other controllers as the filter cutoff mod source.</p>

<p>I think the other big thing people miss is downloadable samples, but adding the RAM for that would have made it too expensive.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Did you use any more of the technology from the SEQUENTIAL gear (while you were at KORG)?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> We didn't look at specific designs or any design info, but we did use some of the concepts, since two ex-Sequential guys, John Bowen (voicing/concepts) and Scott Peterson (software development), were heavily involved at Korg R&D. Also, Dave Smith was involved in the concept development for the Wavestation.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us what you do at Universal Audio?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I shuffle about picking up scraps of paper saying, "That's not it." One of these days I'll find the right scrap of paper.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.uaudio.com" target="_blank">UA</a> bought out a company I formed in 1998 called <a href="http://www.hyperactive-audio.com" target="_blank">Hyperactive Audio Systems</a>, and I became UA's VP of Engineering. Hyperactive developed the DSP technology used in the <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/PPI/included.html#UAD-1" target="_blank">UAD-1</a>. That effort mainly involved scouring the desert near Roswell, NM for parts from downed UFOs, and negotiating with the Chinese military for their schematics.</p>

<p>I mainly write lots of code, and manage the development and technical support groups. I'll occasionally get to do a bit of hardware engineering for grins. UA's pretty small, so everyone has a lot of hats. We make both classic analog gear and modern DSP gear, so it's really interesting. There are some spectacularly talented people in our development teams, and everyone gets to learn from each other. It's great fun.</p>

<p>My primary goal is to create the right environment structure so the creative process is streamlined. There's no better waste of time than reinventing the wheel or getting bogged in the mundane.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What is the goal of Universal Audio?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> UA has a unique reputation in the audio industry. You can read all about it on-line at: <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/history/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.uaudio.com/history/index.html</a>.</p>

<p>Because of that legacy, we have a duty to meet the highest standards for everything we produce, and maintaining quality is the key. We try to make the best possible gear in a way that makes it affordable, and since most of us are musicians, we also try to make everything easy to use. We really want as many people as possible to enjoy making great music.</p>

<p>Besides the LA-2A and <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/1176LN.html" target="_blank">1176LN</a> reissues of the classic compressors, we're especially fond of our new <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/2-610.html" target="_blank">2-610</a> and <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/M610.html" target="_blank">M610</a> tube mic-pre's. We also just introduced a new transistor-based design called the <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/2108.html" target="_blank">2108</a> that will fill out our analog products line.</p>

<p>With UA's purchase of Kind of Loud Technologies (DSP algos) and Hyperactive Audio Systems (DSP hardware), we also have a killer digital products team, and we're launching a bunch of new products based on those technologies. We just signed a deal with Mackie Designs for distributing the UAD-1, and that will help us reach more of our customers than ever before. </p>

<p>It's really a great time to be a part of the new audio technology revolution. As advanced processing becomes cheaper, better, easier to use, and more reliable, more and more people are able to produce high quality music than ever before.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us about the group you founded at Universal Audio?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> The Wavestation was a big creative success for Korg, but it wasn't a big commercial success. It was a huge risk to make a keyboard that didn't have drums or piano at the time it came out, and sales suffered somewhat because of it. Back then, everyone wanted canned band-in-a-box stuff, so we recanted and added some drums and a piano for the EX version. Now, everyone's into electronica and trance, so there's more interest in new sounds. We were lucky Katoh-san, Sr. was interested in taking that risk. He's a rare breed.</p>

<p>It's very difficult to continue doing what we do. Sometimes it involves waiting for the market to come around to a new idea (like electronica), or woodshedding something that advances the state of the art (like the OASys and UAD-1). It takes a lot of determination to forge through the personal, professional, economic and technical obstacles to make it all worthwhile. Failure and risk are a very real part of the process.</p>

<p>I came up with the name "Stubborn Fuckers" for the group at UA that's persevered in the face of incredible challenges and risks to bring the UAD-1 out, but its membership is open to anyone who's persistent enough to try and make a vision become reality. Older guys like Tom Oberheim, Dave Smith, Roger Linn, and Bob Moog completely define this approach, so even though I might have coined the term, I can't possibly call myself a founder.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do any design "accidents" become features in you products?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> Engineering is the process of paying attention to extremely minute details with excruciating deliberation in order to realize a creative goal, it doesn't make a very good game of chance. Most accidents are either bugs or anomalies at the very least, but there are the occasional serendipitous mistakes. One that comes to mind is the FM-like ring mod effect caused by reversing the slow and fast rotor speeds in the Wavestation's Rotary Speaker effect. The QC guys thought it was weird, but the <a href="http://sonikmatter.com/interviews/lehmkuhl/" target="_blank">MPB guys</a> said, "No, it's interesting, it has to stay."</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What is your view of the "software versus hardware" debate?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I've never taken sides. I don't see the distinction really, since every piece of hardware has some form of software in it, and vice versa.</p>

<p>At all the MI companies I've worked, we made synths and effects processors known in engineering jargon as "embedded systems". Structurally, they're no different from a desktop PC: they both have power supplies, processors, storage devices, and human interface devices. They're computers with LCDs instead of CRTs, piano keys instead of typewriter keys, and buttons instead of a mouse. That they have connectors that output voltages that are converted into sound instead of characters on a printed page is a happy coincidence.</p>

<p>The real question is, "What's works for you personally?" Embedded systems are nice because they're reliable and built for a specific purpose. They're made from specific matched components that aren't usually upgradeable. That's also the problem with them. The components are expensive and obsolete before the product ships, their interfaces and operation are inconsistent with other devices, and they aren't very flexible. Computers are inexpensive and flexible, but they're too complicated and aren't reliable.</p>

<p>The challenge for any engineer is to optimize the system design so that the device meets its requirements as inexpensively as possible without sacrificing reliability or usability. Specifically, we try to provide maximum quality for minimum cost. For me, it's an economic problem, not an engineering one.</p>

<p>To paraphrase Frank Zappa, the appliance is your friend. We're already seeing more and more designs that blur the distinction between "software" and "hardware". The MI device of the future is a computing appliance, not unlike a video game player. It has the advantages of both hardware and software: purpose-built, reliable, flexible.</p>

<p>The bottom line is this: Whatever it is, you have to be able to use it when you're fucked up. Anything else gets in the way of the creative process. As Jack Hotop once said, "EQ, IQ, whatever it takes."</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would be the funniest thing you have seen happen in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> There are way too many stories, and most of them would either make you blush, or get someone indicted. So it's hard to pick a funniest one.</p>

<p>One of the more unusually experiences I had was riding the elevator at <a href="http://www.namm.com/" target="_blank">NAMM</a> with an Alice Cooper wannabe, the two barely dressed spandex-clad babes draping him, and a pair of horrified yet crisply pressed older ladies. They happened to be attending the National Evangelical Minister's Association convention that overlapped NAMM that year. I seriously doubt they made that same mistake twice, since there's never been another booking mishap quite like that at NAMM. Most folks have the good sense to get the hell out of town.</p>

<p>The juxtaposition of straight life and music industry life is always amusing to me, and few people augment that division better than the characters in Korg's MPB. They're like a barrel of monkeys on acid when they get together.</p>

<p>Since we spend a lot of time together during the intense phases of product development, we get somewhat immune to their antics, sort of like building up mental calluses.</p>

<p>One typical day at Korg R&D, a few of us software engineers were having a serious technical meeting with an outside vendor in the conference room. All of a sudden, there's this increasingly loud pounding and impassioned moaning and yelling coming from the sound room down the hall. Ben Dowling was doing yet another amusing impersonation, and this time it was his version of a slightly older Heidi enjoying a good shag. He's pounding away on a table with his hand, yelling in a German falsetto, "ya... Ya!... Ye-Ah!... Ye-AH!... Yee-aaaaaahhh!!" as Heidi reaches Nirvana with a loud yodel. We didn't even blink, and it didn't occur to us that anything particularly unusual was happening until one of the guys in suits asked us very concerned, "Exactly what the hell is going on back there?" We just managed to say "Oh, it's just Ben," before breaking up laughing. Like that was a valid explanation.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Looking back over all the products you have done; which one stands out the most?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> That's hard to answer. There's the smarmy, "I like all of my children!" answer, but in reality, little Jimmy's really a brat.</p>

<p>The one that had the most influence on me personally was the original OASys, but since that product was never actually released, it doesn't really count. Still, that project transformed everyone involved with it.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you ever put forward names for products?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> There's product names, and there's project names. Product names are often conservative compromises arrived at in committee meetings, but project names are usually fun. Sometime though, individuals will propose product names that stick. I usually get overruled, but I managed to get Nigel to be the name for UA's new guitar processor effects suite. <a href="http://www.danphillips.com/korg.htm" target="_blank">Dan Phillips</a> came up with the name OASys as an extension of a tradition started at Ensoniq. First there was the Mirage, then there was the OASys. Dave Smith called his second company <a href="http://www.seersystems.com" target="_blank">Seer Systems</a>, and you'll notice Seer follows Prophet under "Oracle" in Roget's Thesaurus. Let's hope his next product isn't called "Soothsayer".</p>

<p>Ensoniq had related names for everything. For instance, all their computers were named after dead musicians (mostly rock stars), and Korg R&D followed that tradition. The main server was Elvis (of course), and we even had a Keith Richards, since he's really an honorary dead rock star considering all the blood transfusions he's had.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What forms of synthesis do you think could be explored more?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> Like I was saying earlier, algorithmic synthesis is really where we're all headed. It sounds like a generic term, since all DSP based synthesis is algorithmic, but I use it to mean the integrated real-time control and processing model I described above, not just DSP versions of fixed algos. The OASys was one of the first real-time performance algorithmic synthesizers, but it's certainly not the last. There's a class of similar algorithms I loosely call Extended Karplus-Strong that combines filters in and around delay loops with commuted synthesis, that has a relatively rigid signal processing architecture that's well suited to efficient implementations. I'd like to see this explored more fully, because the sounds this class of algorithms is capable of making are very broad and self-interactive. Every plucked or hammered electric or acoustic string and percussion instrument falls in or near this class, so it provides a large bang for the processing buck.</p>

<p>I was working on the real-time modulation code for the OASys many years ago, and I was using a simple plucked string model someone had made to test the pitch controller and mod wheel. The keyboard was setup to retrigger existing voices, which adds signals into existing resonating strings, while the pitch controller was setup to give a dive-bomb whammy effect. As long as you held the sustain pedal, it essentially had "live" strings. One of the completely unexpected side effects was the mechanical feedback caused by the controller handle hitting the stop in the case. When you bottomed-out the pitch quickly, it would introduce a type of discontinuity into the signal that re-excited the existing string resonances. It was just like whacking a real whammy bar. It totally blew me away that an all-digital synth could get the same sound. Mechanical feedback? I thought, no way, but there it was.</p>

<p>We joked we should add a temperature sensor, a barometer, and vibration sensor to the OASys for more random influences. Those were included in an email I sent to some friends at Ensoniq that listed the features of the new secret project we were working on. I also said it had a laser for a head's-up display that would create holograms above the instrument for interacting with it. I also think I suggested we should target the Dub music community because they were more likely to have the necessary "particulates suspended in air" to make the laser more visible. Ha ha (cough)...</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think that the "workstation" concept is dying?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> If you define a workstation as a synth with effects and a sequencer, then I must admit I've never been a big fan of them. Most people use a computer for their sequencing, so why complicate the synth's UI and compromise its software reliability with all that extra stuff? I'd rather have a synth that's dedicated to making sounds. I realize there are plenty of people who need all-in-one synths, but I'm not one of them.</p>

<p>On the other hand, I think the trend towards dedicated music computers is great. The best of both worlds. Record all your tracks, mix and process them in one consistent environment with all your synthesized and sequenced material, done using the best components for the task. I like to blur the line between recorded, processed and synthesized music, and I want to be able to do everything easily in my intuitive creative mode, not my rational analytical mode. I don't care if it's a computer that gives me that experience or a dedicated "workstation". I think it's a combination of the two.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>If you were developing a synthesizer now Joe; What features would you insist be on it?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I still want to make a simple synth that provides the dynamic real-time interactive tones you get from algorithmic synthesis. The Korg team has done an incredible job of creating a lot of emulations of real instruments, but I'm more interested in new sounds. If I need a trumpet, I'd rather hear a real trumpet player than an approximation from a keyboard. Besides, the better the algorithm, the harder it is to play, and you end up almost needing to be a trumpet player to articulate it correctly.</p>

<p>I like integrating the effects into the actual voice. I've never made a big distinction between signal generators and signal processors, because even though one of them doesn't have audio inputs, they both take control input from the player and contribute to the final audio result. I also don't make much of a distinction between control processors and signal processors for the same reason. Most of the important advances these days are in the control processing side of things, but they usually require advances in audio processing to make them work correctly (like needing more DSP horsepower for smoothing the parameters).</p>

<p>I created the concept of voice effects and environmental effects in the original OASys to describe effects that were part of the voice itself, and those that were part of the environment surrounding the voice. Voice effects would duplicate themselves when you added voices, while environmental effects would merge. Track inserts and sends are the same concept in a mixing situation, so there's an aspect of self-similarity in the hierarchy of music production. Once you're familiar with that dimensional relationship, scaling it up or down should be easy.</p>

<p>To a guitarist, the pickups, amp, speaker, mic, etc. are the instrument for the tonal dimension of the sound, while each string is an instrument within the melodic dimension of the sound. To some guitarists, like Allan Holdsworth, there are many dimensions to his instrument. If you've ever seen him perform the tune Tokyo Dream live, you know what I mean. It's on an album called Road Games, and features a deep multilayered arrangement of what sounds like strings, breathy pads, bells, guitars, and other sounds. He plays everything at once on one guitar using hammer-ons, left- and right-handed tapping, harmonics, and other techniques, and just uses an analog ADA multitap delay processor. It's a complete trip.</p>

<p>Another thing I like is meta-controllers. Agents that process other parameters to create new dimensions of control. For example, UA's Nigel processor suite has a killer mod filter module that has a random LFO setting. Pure random is good for that old ARP-2600 sound, but we added a chromatic pitch quantizer and range controls to refine the effect and make it more melodic. For example, you can create a complex melodic counterpoint effect by adjusting one control in realtime. I'd like to extend that to include a transform sequencer for the filter cutoff, but it can already do that now since everything's MIDI controllable.</p>

<p>I think Korg's <a href="http://www.korg.com/gear/enlarge.asp?prid=KARMA" target="_blank">Karma</a> is an interesting idea. Steven Kay's been working on that for years, so it's cool to see his Sorcerer technology realized in a real synth. He gave me a demo many years ago, and I was impressed.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you think of the different products that the European keyboard manufacturers are doing, as against what the Asian/American countries are doing?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I don't really follow MI keyboards anymore, since I'm mostly involved in pro audio processors, but I did notice the emergence of the European synths. Nord has done a great job of reintroducing knobs, while the Italian MARS/ISIS group has done some impressive things with physical modeling. The <a href="http://www.creamware.de/en/Home/default.asp" target="_blank">Creamware</a> cards are OK, and I understand they have quite a following in the techno music community. However, I think John Bowen's <a href="http://www.zargmusic.com/" target="_blank">Zarg Music</a> synths are the best thing to happen to them.</p>

<p>The Asian companies are incredibly good at manufacturing reliable products, and very supportive of innovation. Many of them have formed teams of American and European designers to keep their designs fresh, and to provide the necessary broad perspectives in the design process. I think the northern Europeans are less interested in that approach, and sometimes their products reflect a certain arrogance of viewpoint. That can be great when the viewpoint is innovative and fresh, or it can be bad when it's overly restrictive, so it depends on the product and the customer who buys it.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What sorts of "effects" do you think need to be explored more for guitarist/keyboardist?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I think the two most useful effects would be an anti-suck filter and a free drink coupon copier. You'd need both, since the more free drinks you got, the more intense the suck filter would have to be set.</p>

<p>I've always liked multi-dimensional sounds where unusual elements are used to carry the melody and rhythm. One example is sending drums through a resonant filter and modulating the filter cutoff with a melodic note sequence. There are many dimensions within sounds that can be used like this.</p>

<p>UA's new Nigel effects suite for the UAD-1 has a lot of effects that provide this type of multi-dimensional control. One simple effect in Nigel is called Shimmer, which is basically tremolo with the intensity and speed controlled by an envelope triggered by the signal. You can control the delay time of a mod-delay with the same envelope, which lets you modulate the tone and pitch along with the amplitude. We also included the ability to morph one amp into another, not by crossfading, but by actually transforming them at the component level. The sound is simply stunning and must be heard to be believed. That's just a few of the many things we're doing in Nigel, which has 9 effects integrated into one ultra-high performance module. Right now, we can't even run the whole suite native on our fastest dual CPU systems, but we can run several instances on the UAD-1. It's opening up new worlds for us.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What DSP processors do you think look promising?</u> </p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> I think the Z80 still has some kick in it. I also like the old PDP-8's for their sheer warmth. I once convinced a Motorola salesman at a trade show that the big-endian byte order used in the 68K sounded better than the little-endian byte order used by Intel processors. He seemed relieved to learn one more thing to use in his sales pitch.</p>

<p>The key to UA's UAD-1 DSP card is a processor I discovered several years before we even started the UAD-1 project. No one else saw its potential, or they dismissed it outright as impossible. We've got more gems like the UAD-1, because we view the technology development process as a core technology in itself, and we've got contacts in Silicon Valley and the research community that keep us informed of the latest opportunities.</p>

<p>I'm sorry I'm being evasive, but if I told you what we were planning to use next, no one would benefit. The advantage we've gained with the UAD-1 provides us the leverage to take the next step, and to undermine that would prohibit us from having the freedom to develop the algorithms we're developing without spending all our energy competing in a commodity market. Commodity markets require high volumes, and the MI and pro-audio industries aren't big enough to support that.</p>

<p>I think the results of our strategy speak for themselves. The plug-ins on the UAD-1 are considered by many seasoned professionals to be the best software plug-ins available on any platform, regardless of price. We plan to continue that approach because it produces the highest quality results for the lowest possible cost.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Have you ever considered writing a book on DSP technology, Joe?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> No, I haven't even thought about it. I think my brain might explode if I tried it, and I just repainted my home office, so I wouldn't want to clean up the mess.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would you recommend for young Engineers becoming involved in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> Number one, learn the basics: Math, physics, analog and digital electronics, differential equations and linear algebra, software structures and operating system fundamentals. The details of specific technologies you learn become obsolete very quickly, so learning how to learn new things rapidly on your own is essential.</p>

<p>Number two, learn how to listen to other people. No one has a monopoly on the secret sauce. Sometimes the best ideas come when you're least expecting them, and your ears need to be open.</p>

<p>Number three, learn how to communicate your ideas. This is more important than anything else. If you can't explain why an idea is worthwhile, it's unlikely anyone will just take your word for it.</p>

<p>Number four: Play an instrument and join a band. Teamwork and waking up in your car with cold cheap greasy pizza stuck to your date's butt are valuable learning experiences.</p>

<p>As for what to expect, don't expect to make a pile of money in audio. If you want to be rich, sell MP3 players. One guy I interviewed was fresh out of school, with no experience and limited skills, but he demanded a $100K salary and a signing bonus. We politely declined him a job offer.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your own personal studio at home Joe?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> You have to ask. About a year ago, my wife and I moved into a new house and had a baby, so I doubt I'll be setting up a home studio for a while.</p>

<p>My office at work is another story. In addition to all the computers and digital I/Os I use for development and testing our UAD-1 system with various DAWs (<a href="http://www.nuendo.com/index2.html" target="_blank">Nuendo</a>, <a href="http://www.emagic.de/" target="_blank">Logic</a>, <a href="http://www.steinberg.net/" target="_blank">Cubase</a>), I have a homemade basswood body guitar running into a pile of homemade guitar effects, and a <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/korg_z3.jpg" target="_blank">Korg Z3</a> MIDI pickup that feeds a Wavestation A/D and a Wavestation SR. The guitar goes through the A/D (which is why I made it in the first place), and everything is fed into a small homemade mixer which feeds a stereo bi-amped guitar/bass rig. It's got way too many wires, but it's great for the out-there guitar sounds.</p>

<p>I don't try to get the synths to track the guitar too closely, because it's asking too much for the MIDI pickup, so I'll setup pads with a slow attack, and latch them while I play guitar on top. I like slide guitar, and I've got a connecting rod pin out of an old Triumph that makes a perfect slide. Sometimes I'll use it to get trippy middle eastern Kaval and Zurna sounds.</p>

<p>Most recently, I've been just playing the guitar straight through a UA 2-610 (the ultimate guitar DI), and into a DAW running the UAD-1. We have a plug-in suite called Nigel that basically does everything I've ever wanted for guitar. If there's something missing, we'll add it to the plug-ins.</p>

<p>There are several great guitar players at UA, so it gets pretty loud sometimes with the dog barking and the voicing guys doing their thing!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you do outside of work to keep your mind fresh?</u></p>

<p><b>JOE :</b> Fresh? I usually keep it in the fridge in the crisper drawer with the rest of the veggies. Sometimes I'll pat it down with some salt and baste it with a beer glaze to give it some flavor.</p>

<p>Actually, I'm lucky enough to live close to UA's building, which is located a few blocks from the ocean in Santa Cruz. So I usually ride my bike to work, and take a route that goes along the coast for a few miles. Depending on the season, there's plenty of birds, seals and otters; and in winter, dolphins and the occasional whale.</p>

<p>I used to spend clear nights observing the stars and planets with my telescope, but I've been too busy recently for that.</p>

<p>March 2002</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Steve Duda</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2002/steve_duda.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2002://5.102</id>

    <published>2002-03-03T19:49:59Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:20:22Z</updated>

    <summary>Sonikmatter recently caught up with Steve Duda, most widely known for programming / remixing for Nine Inch Nails, Methods of Mayhem, Rob Zombie, and most recently a single remix for the movie Zoolander. 

Finding some time between multiple musical projects, Steve enlightens us with his views on the use of the latest hardware and software gadgets, the future of music, the importance of finding the right sounds, and even shares a tip or two on Beatcreator, one of his favorite studio software...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="beatcreator" label="Beatcreator" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="nin" label="NIN" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:lporres@NOSPAM.sonikmatter.com">Larry Porres</a>.</p>

<p>Sonikmatter recently caught up with <a href="http://www.guntonmanagement.com/duda.htm" target="_blank">Steve Duda</a>, most widely known for programming / remixing for Nine Inch Nails, Methods of Mayhem, Rob Zombie, and most recently a single remix for the movie Zoolander. </p>

<p>Finding some time between multiple musical projects, Steve enlightens us with his views on the use of the latest hardware and software gadgets, the future of music, the importance of finding the right sounds, and even shares a tip or two on Beatcreator, one of his favorite studio software.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>There is a huge debate these days on "software versus hardware"; what are your thoughts on the matter, and how do you see things in the future?</u></p>

<p><img alt="steve.jpg" src="/images/steve.jpg" width="296" height="226" border="0"  align="right" style="padding:0 0 1em 1em;"  /></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> "Hardware vs. software" is an interesting controversy. I think the first thing many people don't realize is that many pieces of newer hardware are, at their core, software with dedicated DSP.</p>

<p>For instance, most new synths that are hardware contain software as their key element. For instance, the guts of a Waldorf <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/microwave2.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWin<br />
dow('http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/microwave2.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Microwave II</a> or Access <a href="http://www.access-music.de/img/Virusb_blowup.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWindow('http://www.access-music.de/img/Virusb_blowup.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Access Virus</a> is a DSP chip and a bunch of code in flash RAM that determines what instructions are fed to the DSP. In fact these two units use the same Motorola DSP chip, so in a general sense the two units are identical, short of their "software" (and of course the knobs / user interface). I've heard story directly from a reputable person who, with some serious hacking, flashed the Access Virus OS on to a Microwave II, and "presto" the Microwave II box became a Virus!</p>

<p>I think the main advantages of hardware are going fast. The main advantage to me is a slightly ironic one - hardware's greatest asset is the limitations which it imposes. For instance, on a <a href="http://www.uaudio.com/products/LA-2A.html" target="_blank">LA2A</a> comp/limiter, you have essentially two controls - "gain" and "peak reduction". No ratios, no release time, nothing. This makes it pretty simple to operate. Turn the "big knob on the right", and listen. Of course the LA2A has a unique sound based around its slew rate and arguably the components inside the device, whether or not all the specific qualities are desirable is debatable!</p>

<p>I think there is a psychological edge that hardware will have among the masses for a long time, recently a fellow who works at a recording studio was convinced he could hear a difference between audio played of his internal hard drive, and audio played off a Jaz drive. He is clearly missing the concept of digital audio, but this goes to show how people allow themselves to be "blinded" by hardware!</p>

<p>In my experience, the most talented producers and mix engineers are treating most devices like black boxes- they have only a vague comprehension of what is going on inside the instrument, but they know how it affects the sound. </p>

<p>Overall, they are using their ears more than their knowledge of what 3 kHz is, for instance. Using ears, what a concept!</p>

<p>The future is moving rapidly towards all-software, but of course software needs hardware to run. So obviously there will always both, and there will always be someone with more! Regardless, you can make amazing music with a laptop and a couple pieces of hundred-dollar shareware. At this point, the bottleneck of any relatively new computer is usually the operator! (most computers in the world at this moment are sitting 99% idle, just waiting for user input).</p>

<p>As for the "virtual studio", it is getting close. The technology is there, although the average desktop or laptop machine is not capable of 64-track mixdown with dedicated compression/EQ/effects for each channel. I have mixed a number of projects inside <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/" target="_blank">ProTools</a>. The advantages of total recall and parameter automation are a blessing. Unfortunately, for the projects I work on, I need the expensive ProTools hardware because I need 64 tracks and tons of inserts in order to get a good mix.</p>

<p>I've been editing and mixing with ProTools for many years; I call dedicated tactile controllers like <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/" target="_blank">Digidesign</a> <a href="http://www.digidesign.com/products/prd_overview.cfm?product_id=1026" target="_blank">ProControl</a> a "glorified mouse and screen". For me itï¿½s easier to ride volumes, automate parameters, etc. much faster with the mouse and keyboard.</p>

<p>Nonetheless traditional engineers find these control surfaces to be a nice crutch. Unfortunately it impresses clients as well, they feel more comfortable in a room with a bunch of motorized faders and blinking lights. They don't understand that this thing that looks like a mixing console doesn't actually make sound. It still boils down to your ears, paying attention and listening.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you get involved in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Itï¿½s probably fairly boring of a story, really. I grew up in a musical household with professional musicians on both sides of my family tree in each generation. In fact I've been told that my last name, "Duda" means "bagpipe player" in Czech! I studied violin, cello, and piano as a child. I remember one day when I was 13 I closed my eyes and tried to picture what would be the best possible thing to do. I decided wanted to make music, and at the time I was getting interested in synthesizers.</p>

<p>As a typical teenager I was not looking forward to a life of 9-5 work, being stuck in a job I didn't like. In fact it made me hate school, as I saw public school as a "tool from above" to manipulate me into a mindless submission of 40-plus years of remedial work (and taxes). I remember I was student "501362" in my high school, on the roster where they indicate how often you missed class. I was on that list a lot! I ended up dropping out of school, getting in to drugs, basically making bad choices and being a delinquent.</p>

<p>Things turned around thankfully- my savior was music. I got a job at a local music store, Draper's Music in Palo Alto, CA. Looking back, that was the best decision I have ever made. I started selling synths and keyboards. I had to learn all the technical specs and terminology of each synth. I'd borrow MIDI gear on the weekends and take it home to my bedroom studio, which was a MAC SE running Opcode Vision 1.1. I spent all my paychecks on gear, and that hasn't changed since! I had to tune walls of acoustic guitars, and from doing so I developed perfect pitch. I can still hear an folk E chord from playing one to check tuning after each guitar.</p>

<p>To this day, I gauge all other notes from the interval relative to that "E" I can always hear!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Which companies have you worked for, and what have you worked on?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> After going to college and getting a degree in music composition (with a focus in electronic music - I was the first person ever to submit an audio tape and screen captures as my music portfolio) I knew I had to try to find a way "in" to the industry. By this point I had spent my life savings on a Digidesign SoundTools II system (I remember spending $2200.00 on a 1 gigabyte hard drive!), and I was convinced that computers were going to be the centerpiece of every recording studio. I knew I'd have a good career if I could become known as an "expert" at ProTools. I got a job at a pro audio dealership in San Francisco called Cutting Edge Audio Group. It was a newly formed partnership from the music store manager I had worked at in High School, Sig Knapstad. I sent him an interactive resume I made in Director (pre-flash!).</p>

<p>They joked that they no longer would accept paper resumes, and hired me. I was responsible mostly for sales, installation, and training of ProTools systems. It was a great team to work for but SF didn't have a huge music scene, the majority of our clients were post-production and multimedia houses. I did get to operate ProTools for (Grateful Dead drummer) Mickey Hart on his Mystery Box album, which was my first hands-on experience in the studio! It was revelation of sorts.</p>

<p>Soon after, I took a job in Technical Support at Digidesign. I figured if I could handle all the problems that came to me there, I'd be ready for any problem in the studio. I didn't realize how much troubleshooting it would involve, but the troubleshooting was fun (if the customer wasn't yelling). I watched some techs try random guesses regarding a customer's problem (delete this, reinstall this, call me back), while I would usually have them perform quick tests to narrow down on the problem without wasting a lot of time for me and the user. Unfortunately my rebellious mindset did not work well with the corporate mentality, despite all the nice folk and friends at the company. I had a supervisor ask me to "take less phone calls because it makes the other techs look bad on the weekly charts". I didn't want to make anyone look bad, but I didn't want to get paid for being a slacker.</p>

<p>So after a year and a half, I got asked to move to New Orleans, to work on the <a href="http://www.nin.com/" target="_blank">Nine Inch Nails</a> record (The Fragile). I really liked what Trent was doing musically, especially his acceptance/experimentation utilizing the computer as an instrument/processor. The Downward Spiral was one of the few CD's that survived repeated listenings for me, I was excited to get to work on the follow-up to one of my favorite albums.</p>

<p>It was a unique experience which turned into a long 2 years, I went in excited to learn a bunch of tricks- although I did learn and grow a lot talking and working with everyone there, I was put in many situations where I had to create my own solutions. The best way to learn anything is hands-on!</p>

<p>After the record was completed, I decided to move to Los Angeles. My first project was <a href="http://www.methodsofmayhem.com/" target="_blank">Methods of Mayhem</a>. I was doing the synths and some of the beats, I felt uncomfortable at first making beats for one of the best Rock drummers, but Tommy (Lee) is one of the most warm and thoughtful people in the music industry I've met. I've worked for him a number of times since then (including recording programming on the road on his tour bus on the Ozzfest tour). Mixmaster Mike was p\ably the most eye-opening musician of the Methods project, he can play the turntables like they're a clavinet... he can get rhythms/melodies from a piece of vinyl that I didn't think was physically possible.</p>

<p>I did a remix for <a href="http://www.methodsofmayhem.com/" target="_blank">Rob Zombie</a> on his remix album "American Made Music to Strip By", and I've worked ProTools / Programming on several records (Pitchshifter, Innercorse, Big Wreck, Hotwire) for producer Dave Jerden (Alice in Chains, Offspring, etc). I did the programming / keyboards on the new Econoline Crush album. I've also done some remixes (under the name Razorface), which is a guitar player, Patrick Anding, and I.</p>

<p>Besides that I've produced some demos for some up and coming artists, and currently I'm working with the band <a href="http://www.powerman5000.com/start.php" target="_blank">Powerman 5000</a>. We did a single for the Ben Stiller movie "Zoolander", a cover of the song "relax" by the group Frankie goes to Hollywood. We took a dark-electronic approach to covering the song, which meant getting rid of the "best" bits of the song (the keyboards!). Danny Boy from the band House of Pain did a rap on the track and it turned out quite interesting! Everything but the vocals and guitars was done with <a href="http://hem.passagen.se/novelty/English/frames.html" target="_blank">BeatCreator</a>, assembled in <http://www.fruityloops.com/" target="_blank">Fruityloops</a>, then bounced over to <a href="http://www.protools.com/" target="_blank">ProTools</a> one element at a time.... Once Fruityloops gets multiple output support my life will be a breeze!</p>

<p>For supplementary income, I tune vocals for other major-label records. Of course I wouldn't mention any names.. =) but I must say that AutoTune (although genius in concept) ruins vocals. It doesn't tune in a natural fashion. WaveMechanics' PitchDoctor works decent on some singers, but leaves a couple different kinds of artifacts as well.</p>

<p>I have resorted to tuning by hand. I get a sine-tone up on the k2500 and I cut every note or syllable in to a region, and pitch-shift manually. This way there is no autocorrecting taking place - the notes don't get slammed to an exact pitch. It's amazing how much better the result is than trying to use autocorrection. Even with tons of automation on the autocorrection-type plug-ins, the result of manual tuning is much more natural. You'd never know it had been "tuned" (unless you know how bad the singer is!)</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your own studio?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> My PC has become my centerpiece- it's favorite piece of gear. I was a Mac fanatic for years, mostly because of ProTools and the worry-free UI, but so many cool products for the PC have made my Mac the "tape deck" so to speak.</p>

<p>I have a ProTools Mix-plus system on the Mac, and I use ProTools (and/or Logic depending on the project) as front-ends to the hardware. I link my Mac to my PC with 16 channels of ADAT optical, which allows for flying a lot of sound back-and-forth in real-time. I use a Creamware Pulsar II as my main soundcard on the PC, which is a great product. The Modular v2 is my favorite Pulsar device at the moment!</p>

<p>I use a ton of different PC programs for different tasks. I mentally separate things in to three different groups - Beats, Synths, and Textures- of course there is plenty of overlap between these three elements.</p>

<p>For beats, I've tried a lot of different things out, but my favorite "host" is <a href="http://www.fruityloops.com/" target="_blank">Fruityloops</a> and my favorite software tool is <a href="http://hem.passagen.se/novelty/bc.htm" target="_blank">BeatCreator</a>. I've been beta-testing and making suggestions for BeatCreator for about 2 years. It has really transformed in to an indispensable tool. I will use BeatCreator to autoslice folders of loops, in about 3 seconds I will have the result of what used to take days with ReCycle. There's a myriad of uses for BeatCreator, and I discover new ways to use it every week. I can't really talk about all of the power of BeatCreator as some of it is not publicly available yet, but it is a great product!</p>

<p>Fruityloops is an amazing software tool as well. Some people seem to dismiss it as a toy (mostly because of the name and the absurdly affordable price), but it has really transformed in to a pro product (with an affordable price tag). Fruityloops is amazing; Gol (the main programmer) is a complete genius (and a great musician too!). I enjoy being able to partake in the development of both BeatCreator and Fruityloops, to watch my suggestions get implemented is amazing. The fact that BeatCreator and Fruityloops can work together makes for some serious power that takes a lot of pilot-hours to comprehend.</p>

<p>For anyone without these two programs, do yourself a favor and purchase BeatCreator and Fruityloops (no I don't get royalties!). Trust me, you'll be glad you did.</p>

<p>The last program I would not go without is Native-Instruments' <a href="http://www.nativeinstruments.de/index.php?reaktor_us" target="_blank">REAKTOR</a>. It's a great product, there's so much power to be had. I've developed a ton of custom instruments and snapshots for it, usually starting by tearing instruments apart and re-combining / layering elements.</p>

<p>Next would be my Genelec 1031AP monitors and 1092A subwoofer. I know the way they sound, and I'd never be comfortable with any mix or master destined for a club-type environment without checking it on the Genelecs.</p>

<p>My main controller is a Kurzweil <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/k2500.html" target="_blank">Kurzweil K2500</a> (with ROM expansions and KDFX). I've had it for years and I've gotten pretty quick at making sounds on it. The live mode is the best thing ever. I love feeding drone-type sounds in to it from REAKTOR or a hardware synth and re-stretching them on the fly. It's great fun; I didn't turn the thing off for days when I first got the LiveMode update and KDFX.</p>

<p>I have a lot of odds-and-ends (<a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/clavia_nord2.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWindow('http://www.code404.com/synths/images/clavia_nord2.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Clavia Nordlead2</a>, <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/clavia_nordmod.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWindow('http://www.code404.com/synths/images/clavia_nordmod.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Clavia NordModular</a>, <a href="http://www.sidstation.com/" target="_blank">Elektron <br />
  SidStation</a>, <a href="http://www.tcelectronic.com/products.asp?page=intro&id=34&category=2" target="_blank">TC Fireworx</a>, <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/jd990.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWindow('http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/jd990.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Roland JD-990</a> with vintage synths Expansion) but I can replicate almost all of these in software, at least for getting ideas down. I've sampled the hell out of the synths. The Nordlead2 probably gets the most use of any of those, as I said earlier sometimes limitations are nice, and the Nordlead2 has such a simple architecture it's easy to get vanilla synth sounds out without too much fuss, and once in a while, I actually don't mind dedicated knobs for each function!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you program your own instruments?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> It really depends. I have 14 gigabytes of drum samples alone, and these are typically the source of the beats. Its a struggle just to know them all. My recent hobby has been sampling live drums, where I'll get single-samples out of different drum kits in big rooms, and the full range of velocities. Then I'll bounce them down from multitrack to stereo interleaved files. I made a kit recently that has 127 different samples for each drum, hi-hat, etc). It's amazing, it's the first time I've had something that *really* sounds like a real drummer. In my opinion you need at least 15 different kick samples, 30 snare samples, etc. to really convince (confuse) the listener into thinking that they are hearing a real drummer.</p>

<p>As for synth sounds I won't always make original stuff. I probably haven't even got through all the presets in REAKTOR or <a href="http://www.creamware.de/en/products/Pulsar/default.asp" target="_blank">PULSAR</a>, and whatï¿½s the point, after you listen to 1000 presets you arenï¿½t going to remember what "drone12" sounded like. I'll scroll through a list quickly on each new VSTi / Module etc, and try to get a more general sense of the device's capabilities rather than any one specific patch or sound.</p>

<p>I think there's too much focus on "is it original" when it comes to synth patches. If it is an "analog" type-sound, well nothing is *that* original, no matter where you set the cutoff or envelope, you still have a damn sawtooth wave. Itï¿½s more a question of whether or not you try to find the right sound. If you have 500 presets on a NordLead, chances are one of them is probably pretty close to what you are looking for. Nonetheless, if I hear a <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/M1.jpg" target="_blank" onMouseOver="MM_openBrWindow('http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/M1.jpg','','scrollbars=yes,width=200,height=200')">Korg M1</a> factory preset I want to puke! I guess thatï¿½s more a sense of being dated and overused, but sometimes its hard to forget that if you own a synth you start hearing it differently than someone who knows nothing about synthesizers. I try to get other people's opinions and perspective whenever possible. Collaborating is the best part in making music, and I think everyone should have a less ego-driven attitude, there are many benefits from sharing your sounds and ideas!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>With the appearance of KDFX effects for the K2500 and K2600 is there anything in particular from these algorithms that has "swept you off your feet"?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> KDFX has not come close to sweeping me off my feet. Live mode however was a pretty pleasant shock when I first fed a drone in to it. I like it; I don't use it enough come to think of it. Its just there's so many options in software these days. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Based on your experience and academic background: Electronic music, or Electronica? Where is it going from here?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I think stylistic barriers are breaking down and there is going to be a lot of hybrid electronic music. Synths and loops are going to be more prominently featured in many "rock" bands in the next decade.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Best electronic music group?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Is Kraftwerk a given or not? Ok, Kraftwerk.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>At the rate computer processing power is increasing, what do you envision will be the biggest breakthrough musically speaking in the next five to ten years?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> The increase computer speeds and the improving price-performance ratio for RAM and storage is tremendous. Recently at a friends house I was thumbing through a "Guinness book of world records" from 1979. It stated that "the worlds most powerful supercomputer, the Cray I, has a whopping 8 MEGABYTES of RAM". It's amazing that millions of people have handheld devices that are more powerful than computers which used to be the size of warehouses.</p>

<p>There are going to continue to be breakthroughs on many levels.</p>

<p>Five years ago when <a href="http://www.steinberg.net/" target="_blank">Steinberg</a> announced VST, I was excited. I knew that it was an indicator of the future, in the sense that I knew at the time a 300 Mhz processor was not going to be enough to handle my needs, and I was a Pro Tools TDM owner. But here we are five years later, with faster computers and bus speeds. I think its safe to say that an impressive amount of mixing and processing can take place in a host-based environment, even at 32-bit and 96k!</p>

<p>User-interface is going to be redefined in the next few years; I expect every major sequencer and audio editor will have a significant visual overhaul. Many musicians care about user interface and ease-of-use, which is why the Macintosh was the dominant music-making platform in the USA, and it continues to be in terms of the top-end of the market.</p>

<p>With the power of <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/view.asp?PAGE=geforce3" target="_blank">GeForce</a> cards and the like, itï¿½s a matter of time before someone actually makes use of it in the audio community for more than visualization. I could imagine constructing a song in a 3d environment, seeing the other musicians as 3d models, and they might live across the world!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who would you say has been the person who has inspired you in your musical style?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> My first major influence in anything electronic at all was when I was 12. I traveled through Europe with a walkman and only a couple tapes, one being Art of Noise. Thereï¿½s a certain mood I associate with it, and itï¿½s a feeling I never got from classical music, which was all I heard growing up. It invokes a futuristic/dreamy kind of feeling on me. I like making music that makes me think of the future. I'm being vague since hard to describe but music can "take you to a place" and there's this "cold, familiar, place" that some music takes me and I try to recreate it in new contexts. The most common technique for this to me is having a counterpoint created across instruments, where one element changes and another stays the same.</p>

<p>Also at one point in College I was in a Prince cover band. I became very familiar with all of Prince's songs and synth sounds, trying to recreate all these sounds, and it ended up having a big influence on me, in terms of both playing keyboards and patch programming. </p>

<p>Really I have fairly eclectic tastes, so much that I don't like to talk about them. I'd be worried about someone who put things as eclectic as "Skinny Puppy" and "Bartok" in the same list of influences. I like elements of a lot of different bands/musicians; when listening to appreciate I simply try to hear what I like and ignore what I don't which enables me to listen to most anything but opera.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Name for us a few titles from the stack of LP's that you are holding onto in that "box in the attic".</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> It might come as a surprise but I don't listen to music much these days. My girlfriend is a professional DJ so I am getting exposed to a ton of house / D'n'B and commercial stuff too. I rarely find the time to put on music. Often I'll spend 6-10 hours at a studio, and come home, and to unwind I'll make music! It's strange but making music is both a career and a hobby at this point. There's obviously something wrong with me.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What makes you tick outside of the music world, Steve?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Well the scary thing is I can work all day, say noon to 8 PM engineering/programming all day for someone else's record, then come home and to relax, I turn on my studio and make music! It's a sickness I have really.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are your favorite types of sounds?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Thatï¿½s a very difficult question!! I love everything from symphonic textures to small single sample white noise bursts really. I tend to prefer music that has some sort of unique element; I don't like music that sounds too completely retro unless it is.</p>

<p>I try to use a variety of synth and sample sources and trigger/process them. I've always liked to see the capabilities of programs well beyond what is provided or even intended. This has created a problem as I've spent way to long inside some programs like Reaktor, <a href="http://www.uisoftware.com/PAGES/acceuil_meta.html" target="_blank">MetaSynth</a>, and the Nord Modular. </p>

<p>But generally I try to find what I like from each program, synth, softsynth, plug-in, etc and use it when it seems like it might be an interesting direction to take. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What has been your worst experience in the studio?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I haven't had any major nightmares with any artists I've worked with. I've had some bad experiences outside of studios! Seriously, probably hard-disk problems or crashes are the biggest enemies; learning the system well and keeping it clean is the best way to go.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Even though you don't listen to much music these days I'm sure you have a group of all-time favorites. Which are your top ten favorite albums?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> That's tough! I can do top 5 in terms of having an impact on me.</p>

<ul>
      <li>Nirvana - Nevermind</li>
<li>Art of Noise - In Visible Silence</li>
<li>Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral</li>
<li>Squarepusher - Feed Me Weird Things</li>
<li>Michael Jackson - Thriller</li>

<p>    </ul></p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What have you been working on these last few months with Beatcreator and Fruityloops?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I have been working with a number of bands placing sounds and loops with Fruityloops.</p>

<p>I did the beats/synths/protools for Powerman 5000's "relax" for the Zoolander movie. We're working on some new material right now. I'm also working with an artist name Ashley Hamilton, which is a more rock/pop approach. I use Fruityloops/<a href="http://www.fxpansion.com/prod/dr008.html" target="_blank">FXPansion DR-008</a> to lay down guide beats. I've made custom samples of drumkits in studios, and mapped them out to 30-60 velocity layers per drum/cymbal in DR-008. It's the closest thing to a real drummer I've ever heard. Itï¿½s amazing I can load 100 megs of samples in a couple seconds. I tend to print things in to ProTools.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Could you share with us a tip that has helped you in the use of BeatCreator that cannot be found elsewhere?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> BeatCreator is an amazing Swiss-army knife for getting loops in various forms and formats to other programs.</p>

<p>One great trick is to take a multi-bar loop and slice it at quarter-notes instead of events mode. Then export slices (or soundfont etc) and reprogram the beat in another program. Using 16th-note instead of events mode, and you can retrigger the loop slices from step sequencers or arpeggiators!</p>

<p>Another way I often use BeatCreator is to pre-slice loops for export to K2500 or Reaktor. One technique is to set quantize to 16th note. Then I'll move nudge the slice positions to the start of each transient. This way you have separate slices for every 16th, and also have any "feel" or swing from the loop removed.</p>

<p>It's also fun for loop rearrangement is to use quarter or dotted quarter value. Doing this limits rearrangement options which is sometimes a good thing!</p>

<p>Of course with Fruityloops, the new FruitySlicer uses the "BeatCreator Slicing Engine" (Peter Segerdahls' code in a .dll) and provides autoslicing on the fly! This is amazing because if you can live with the shortcomings of Fruityloops as a host (which are disappearing quickly) you no longer have the interim process of tuning and slicing loops, exporting MIDI files, etc. Once you factor in VSTs, the power is scary. I have done countless sessions where people are laughing at "fruityloops" and griping about PC's in general. A couple hours later they are always asking what kind of PC they should purchase, and how they had no idea so much cool stuff existed for PC!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think that, with the availability of all these new software samplers, virtual studios and file-sharing "a-la" cubase.net there will be an increase in opportunities for "bedroom musicians" or will the music industry still be in control of what is to be heard and published? Do you think the sudden appearance of a new breed of musicians will saturate this seemingly budding market?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> The amount of power in say Fruityloops, not to mention with Reaktor on a powerful computer with a ASIO is astonishing. I was just thinking about the amount of power I had when I started years ago, the entire studio then is now inside the computer maybe minus the Fender Rhodes! I'm scared of what 15-year old kids can potentially do out there with their mouse, and jealous that the technology wasn't there for me 15 years ago! I'm just happy to have it now. </p>

<p>I don't think that the music "industry" *is* in control of what is being heard and published. It's really a free market, but most people don't approach the marketplace with marketable merchandise. They are the ones who complain about the industry. But it's really the public's taste that is the biggest issue and ultimately they are the ones who disgruntled musicians should despise! Sometimes an artist will step along like MasterP, with a marketable product and will go directly to distribution, and make millions. There are no roadblocks if you have the "talent", whatever that might be at that moment. </p>

<p>I hope people will be able to come together online and make cool music. It's a lot easier to be in the same room with people though!</p>

<p>Real studios will be around forever; it's just that they will be mostly about the room, speakers, and the operator. ProTools has really changed a lot of the studio operations. Producers can comp vocals and edit drums on their laptop at the beach or on a plane. Artists can record their ideas on tour, and have material for their next record before they are done with touring. I work on parts of records; people will send me drums to fix to a click, or vocals to tune on CD-ROMS, and I give them one back.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Last question: in your experience, what insight would you share with these future musicians?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Work at it! Don't be afraid to make things that aren't perfect. Don't overdo it. They'll get better. </p>

<p>I would probably say take what you like from whatever you like and ignore "styles" because they only classify what has existed in music and not what is going to happen. Make music that pleases you, ignore what other people might think.</p>

<p>March 2002</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Joerg Huettner</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2002/joerg_huettner.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2002://5.101</id>

    <published>2002-02-20T00:00:00Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:20:45Z</updated>

    <summary><![CDATA[Sonikmatter swam the River Rhein and traveled deep behind the walls of the Schloï¿½ Ahrenthal to find out more about Waldorf guru and wizard Joerg Huettner, a man of many talents and juggler of many hats. Musician, sound designer, A&amp;R of Waldorf Record's "Zeitlos" compilations and head of Product Support at Waldorf and TSi GmbH, Joerg is a man that some of you may already know from his varied work, and now Sonikmatter can cast more light on this cool and clever gentleman...]]></summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="waldorf" label="Waldorf" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Rick "Brujo" Wishart.</p>

<p>Sonikmatter swam the River Rhein and traveled deep behind the walls of the Schloï¿½ Ahrenthal to find out more about Waldorf guru and wizard Joerg Huettner, a man of many talents and juggler of many hats. Musician, sound designer, A&R of Waldorf Record's "Zeitlos" compilations and head of Product Support at Waldorf and TSi GmbH, Joerg is a man that some of you may already know from his varied work, and now Sonikmatter can cast more light on this cool and clever gentleman. From formal musical training to studio experience at Danse Macabre Studio in Bayreuth, of early personal influential artists to artists he now produces, from inspirational work with the legendary Wave through to sound design for the Waldorf Q and Alesis Andromeda A6, to a 'day in the life' at product support, Joerg covers these and a multitude of other fascinating topics.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Could you tell us about your musical background and how you came to work at product support for Waldorf and TSi GmbH?</u></p>

<p><img alt="Joerg Huettner playing 'a la' Depeche Mode" src="/imagesjoerg1.jpg" width="296" height="223" border="0"  align="right" style="padding:0 0 1em 1em;"  /></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  My first experiences in music came with classical piano lessons while I was a young boy. I played for about 6-7 years and at the age of 15 I bought my first synthesizer, a <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/roland_d10.jpg" target="_blank">Roland D10 </a>, and started creating my own music over the following years.</p>

<p>After finishing high school I learned all about mixing, recording and music production in a professional recording studio from 1993-1994. After that I worked for a professional studio equipment retailer for about 2 1/2 years and had already started building up my own studio. </p>

<p>At this time I got in contact with <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/wolfram_franke.php" target="_blank">Wolfram Franke</a>, my predecessor as product support, and Wolfgang Dï¿½ren, general manager of <a href="http://www.tsi-gmbh.de" target="_blank">TSi</a> and <a href="http://www.waldorf-gmbh.de/" target="_blank">Waldorf Electronics</a>, because I was a big fan of the Waldorf Wavetable Synths - I owned a <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/ppg/ppgwave01.jpg" target="_blank">PPG Wave 2.3</a> until 1995 and bought a <a href="http://www.waldorf.wavesynth.com/wave.htm" target="_blank">Waldorf Wave</a> back in 1996.</p>

<p>During the years I've also been involved in several records as sound designer and keyboard arranger for studio productions. From 1998 until end of 1999 I took private lessons in theory of harmony and composition, and as the years progressed I owned more and more Waldorf Synths and other TSi gear and kept constantly in contact with them. I worked for Waldorf and TSi during the Frankfurt Music Fair in 1998 and 1999 and did sound design for the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.de/q_keyb/photos/q_frontal.jpg" target="_blank">Waldorf Q </a> Synth.</p>

<p>Finally, in the summer of 1999 I got a call from Wolfram Franke: TSi was searching for a new product support guy. In September 1999 I started working for the distributor TSi GmbH as freelance product support for the companies Waldorf Electronics (international support), <a href="http://www.access-music.de/" target="_blank">Access</a> (international support), <a href="http://www.celemony.com/" target="_blank">Celemony</a> (international support), <a href="http://www.prosoniq.com/" target="_blank">Prosoniq </a> (international support) and <a href="http://www.novationmusic.com/" target="_blank">Novation</a> (support for Germany). Wolfram was aware of the classic piano lessons and private tuition in harmony and composition I'd had, but this wasn't a requirement of the job when it was offered to me, though what I think was the most important credential was my synth background and all the previous work I'd undertaken.</p>

<p>Additionally to my daily job for TSi and doing sound design for other Waldorf gear, I did a sound bank for the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/alesis_a6andromeda.jpg" target="_blank">Alesis Andromeda</a> in early 2001 and I'm also running my own studio with various music projects. Since the "<a href="http://www.waldorf-records.com/projects.html" target="_blank">Zeitlos</a>" compilation and the foundation of <a href="http://www.waldorf-records.com/" target="_blank">Waldorf Records</a>, I'm also taking care of artists and the repertoire of future CD releases.</p>

<p>Pictures of my studio as well as a discography can be seen at <a href="http://www.joerg-huettner.com" target="_blank"> http://www.joerg-huettner.com</a>. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do TSi and Waldorf both reside at the Schloï¿½ Ahrenthal?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Yes, both companies reside at the Schloï¿½ Ahrenthal, a castle near the river Rhein, and of course everybody knows each other. TSi is distributor not only for Waldorf Electronics but also for Access Music (Virus Synths), Celemony (Melodyne Software), <a href="http://www.propellerheads.se/index.php3" target="_blank" >Propellerheads</a> (Recycle, Reason), Prosoniq (SonicWORX Software, Orange Vocoder, etc.) and Novation (Nova, Supernova, etc.). Novation and Propellerheads are only represented by TSi in Germany while all other companies' international shipments, etc. are also administrated by TSi. This is the reason why I'm doing product support for all of these companies except Propellerheads (this is done by another TSi employee). </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who were your early musical influences and what styles did you produce with your Roland D-10?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  In the early 80's I had started to listen to electronic music, and I still was pretty young at that stage, and the initial track that made me curious about electronic music was "Leave In Silence" by Depeche Mode. My brother bought the single at that time, which I think was approximately 1983, and shortly after that I took my pocket money and bought the album "A Broken Frame" at the age of about 9 years. </p>

<p>Other bands I listened to at that time were Kajagoogoo, Jean-Michel Jarre and also Kiss - yes, those Rock guys with the black and white face paint and the sci-fi clothes...oh my god.....!!!!</p>

<p>When I got the D-10 in 1989 I just started with my own music or with band rehearsals, but nothing particularly special. At the beginning it was a real challenge to program that thing! At that time digital synths with small buttons, small displays and a horrible interface were the "latest" in synth development - no comfortable knob interfaces like today, but I persevered anyway. It took quite some time to get around the D-10 interface and due to the fact that I wasn't able to afford the <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/d20.jpg" target="_blank">D-20</a> with the internal sequencer, I didn't do too much with the D-10 until I bought the <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/MV30.jpg" target="_blank">MV-30</a>  hardware sequencer from Roland about one to two years later. Now this was the time when I started to writing my own music - a style of electronic pop with some New Wave influences. I had my first professional live gig back in 1992. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What music studio did you work at during 1993-94?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  I worked for the "<a href="http://www.dansemacabre.de/" target="_blank">Danse Macabre Studios</a>" in Bayreuth. Since I knew the owner of the studio already because he signed my band to his label I wasn't just the "apprentice" cooking coffee and cleaning up the studio! Of course I was doing this too, but he also showed me a lot of things from day one onwards including stationing microphones on amps, drums, doing recordings, mixing, using outboard gear, live mixing etc, etc. - all necessary knowledge for work in a studio and for any production. And I also improved my skills regarding synths, samplers and sequencing during the time in the studio.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you acquire your skills in sound design?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  I learned all skills about sound design and programming synths with the "learning-by-doing" approach! I always was interested in creating my own style and therefore also my own sounds. To do this it was necessary to know as much as possible about the machines I worked with. So either I read the manuals or simply played around with my gear for quite some time to know all about their features and possibilities. Of course the daily work in the studio and for band projects helped me a lot with this also.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Before working for Waldorf, what made their synthesizers so endearing to you?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Hmmmm - good question! Of course the sound was the major point for me personally as to why I liked the <a href="http://www.sonicstate.com/synth/_inc/picview.cfm?synthid=524" target="_blank">MicroWave</a> that much. Compared to the interfaces of the other gear we had in the studio, Oberheim <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/xpander.jpg" target="_blank">Xpander</a>, <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/roland_jupiter6.jpg" target="_blank">Jupiter 6</a>, <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/roland_juno106.jpg" target="_blank">Juno 106</a>, etc., the MicroWave was quite difficult to edit - in other words, it was a challenge and I *like* challenges!!</p>

<p>Sometime in 1994 I went to an equipment shop with the studio boss and saw the Waldorf Wave for the first time. I was quite impressed already, but I really was blown away by its sound when I plugged headphones into it and hit one key. In other words, it was love at first sight !!! It took some more time before I could afford one so I started with a used PPG Wave 2.3 at that time.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What synthesizer's do you consider to be classic and/or groundbreaking?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Of course the E-mu Systems <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/emulatorII.jpg" target="_blank">Emulator II</a> was groundbreaking. They were the first 'affordable' samplers in the early 80's with a price of around 30.000.- DM (around U.S.$14000). And there was the <a href="http://www.ghservices.com/gregh/fairligh/images/the_fairlight_cmi.jpg" target="_blank">Fairlight CMI 1</a> which started the whole sampling thing. To be honest I didn't follow the scene from the 70's as I was still a child then so I cannot tell from personal experience which of the old analogs was *THE* groundbreaking machine, though of course the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/moog_mini.gif" target="_blank">Minimoog</a> must be named here!</p>

<p>Furthermore the first PPG Wavetable Synths started a new era and age with loads of ensuing digital synths. Also its biggest competitor, the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/yamaha_dx7.jpg" target="_blank">DX7</a>, was another "groundbreaking" synth: FM and digital sounds for an affordable price.</p>

<p>Regarding design and sound of course I have to name the Waldorf Wave here. This beast simply rocks and looks so fantastic!! To this day a lot of people still simply stay in front of the unit for the first minutes when entering my studio. </p>

<p>But there are also a lot of synths that could be considered as "classic". I loved the sound of the "Xpander" during my time in the studio as well as the Jupiter 6. Of course the "classic" drum machines like <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/TR808.gif" target="_blank">TR-808</a> and <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/TR909.gif" target="_blank">909</a> and the <a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/vintage.images/TB303.gif" target="_blank">TB-303</a>  *BECAME* "classics" due to their enormous use in today's dance music. </p>

<p>Personally, all the modules I use in <a href="http://www.joerg-huettner.com/studio.html" target="_blank">my studio</a> are somehow "classics" for me since they are my favourite sound devices!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What patches did you program for the Waldorf Q and Alesis Andromeda A6?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Quite a lot of mine are in the Q's Factory Sets from 1999 onwards. In the latest 2001 set the following are also programmed by me: <br />
<ul><br />
      <li>A013 Visions of Q jh Arp</li><br />
<li>A020 Cleanline 303 jh Arp</li><br />
<li>A023 Vince Clark 3 jh Arp</li><br />
<li>A025 EyesWideOpen jh Arp</li><br />
<li>A041 Alphaville ?! Jh Lead</li><br />
<li>A075 Phazer PWM jh Pad</li><br />
<li>A084 HornsOfJerichojh Wave...etc, .etc.</li><br />
    </ul></p>

<p>In general, all sounds with my initials at the end of the patch name "jh" denote my programming authorship. As for the A6, I did a complete <a href="http://www.alesis.com/downloads/software/A6/index.html" target="_blank">Sound Bank</a>.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you come to do programming for the Alesis A6 and what's your impression of this synthesizer compared with the classic Oberheim and Moog synths?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  The product manager of the Alesis A6 was watching the Waldorf Demo Show I was doing at the Frankfurt Music Fair in 2000 and was quite impressed by the sounds and the music. He then asked me whether I'd be interested in doing sounds for the A6. So we stayed in contact for quite some time and I met him again at NAMM 2001. Since I was interested in the A6 myself I kept on asking about the offer and shortly after the NAMM show I started programming the set!</p>

<p>Now, for quite some time I had wanted to buy some classic analog synths like the Oberheim Xpander, Jupiter 6, etc. when I had some spare cash. After I did the sound bank for the A6 and worked considerably with this "monster" I wasn't interested in the used gear anymore! The A6 does a great job and sounds very good. It's analog and you simply hear it. Of course this synth is anything but cheap but it's worth every penny and it's definitely a good addition to all my other synths, especially the <a href="http://www.waldorf-gmbh.de/microwave_xt/photos/xt_frontal.jpg" target="_blank">XT</a> and Wave.</p>

<p>Now, as to comparing the A6 with classic analog synths, honestly this is not an easy question for me, since it is quite some time since I had some old analog synths in my hands. Well, if my memory serves me correctly the Multimode Filter of the A6 is a replication of the Oberheim SEM Filter and I've heard from Oberheim users that the A6 gets damn close, and the 2nd filter is a replication of a Moog Filter and this one also sounds very, very close.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you approach a sound design project?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  First I explore the new synth if I don't know it's architecture already, and even take a look at the manual and check its features and possibilities. Then I start to tweak the first sounds after I have found either the initial 'function' or 'sound' I'll use to start programming from scratch. I have most of the sounds in my mind when creating a sound bank. But of course there sometimes come up a few sounds "by mistake" which make it into the set after fine-tuning them. </p>

<p>Depending on any demands, like doing sounds for a special music style, I of course work different and keep an eye on the sounds really fulfilling any requirements. If I have to do sound design for music productions I do demos and 'layouts' with any rough mixes I get from the bands and after having a chat with them to see what they, or the producer, wants to get. Obviously this is a totally different kind of sound design.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What lead to the evolution of the Waldorf Records Company?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  In 2000 we released the 'Subout' Electronica Compilation together with a small label, since we still didn't have our own record company. Everything went fine but in the end we had several issues and problems and this lead to the final decision to found our own record company for any future compilation and demo CD releases. </p>

<p>With the production of the 'Zeitlos' Ambient & Chillout compilation, Waldorf Records was also born at the same time. With 'Zeitlos' we'd been searching for a good distributor to be able to publish the CD on the market. Finally a contract was signed with the German distributor Intergroove and the 'Zeitlos' was out in June 2001 and available worldwide in all good record stores. We're already working on the next projects and of course we'll present a new compilation CD called "Zeitlos II" which will be released in March 2002 and will be available worldwide.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What is a typical day's work in technical support? </u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  After switching on my computer in the morning I start to answer incoming emails (which can be up to 200-250 a day in busy times) and do organisational things for the various companies eg. answering letters and requests, etc. and take care of dealer requests in case they have any questions or gear to be serviced, etc, etc.</p>

<p>Later in the day I'm answering phone calls at the TSi Hotline and still go on with emails. I think nearly 80-90 % of all information "traffic" is done via email nowadays in my position. I think it wouldn't be possible to answer that many questions during the day if I had to write a formal letter for each support issue request!</p>

<p>After 5 pm our time the Hotline is closed and I'm then taking care again of preparing music fairs and promotional tours, CD compilations, keeping contact with the manufacturers we represent, and so on.</p>

<p>Depending on the work pending sometimes I also continue my product support role even into my own studio if I have to prepare a demo for any music fairs or do beta testing. Sometimes we have guests who want to get a short demonstration of our gear or software and so I undertake this also.</p>

<p>As you can see the job is very, very diversified. In other words it is nearly impossible to detail all the different work I have to do since it is not like operating a single handle in a factory!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are there any particularly humorous moments you recall from your role in technical support?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Just a while ago I had a Waldorf MicroQ customer on the line claiming his MicroQ was damaged: "I can hear a delay on nearly every sound, no matter what I'm doing.....!" I needed about 10 minutes to explain to him this "delay" was an E-ffect and not a DE-fect on his machine!!!!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are there any particular aspects of Waldorf equipment that you think users should explore more fully?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Many users just scratch the surface of the possibilities or do not even program their own sounds even if the user interface 'invites' you to use your creativity for your own patches. </p>

<p>I cannot focus this question on a particular feature, but for the Microwave II/XT Series often the Wavetable Synthesis possibilities aren't used extensively enough and perhaps also the FM functions in the Q.</p>

<p>What makes Waldorf synths outstanding are definitely their sound, filters and extraordinary features you cannot find in other gear (Wavetable technology, Comb Filters, free filter routing, etc, etc.) and of course the easy-to-program interfaces. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you feel are the fortes of Melodyne and Prosoniq's products?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Let's start with Melodyne. Peter Neubaecker, founder of Celemony software already started to think about audio algorithms some years ago and kept on working on his idea about being able to edit audio in a different way than was the case with most audio editors.</p>

<p>I will quote Peter Neubaecker himself from a statement about the development of Melodyne: </p>

<blockquote>

<p>"In fact, the basic principles of Melodyne and their first implementation existed quite a time before the idea of a "product" came up. I spend a lot of my time with the question: What IS sound?</p>

<p>The more common notion is that sound is everything that comes to our ears or to a microphone from audible events in outside reality. In this notion, sound is bound to its appearance in time. But in my opinion, we already have a representation of sound if we, for example, have notated music, maybe along with lyrics. We can imagine the sound, and the singer imagines the sound before it really sounds. This representation is independent of time, even independent of absolute pitch. But as soon as a song is recorded, the idea of sound is frozen in time, and is converted to the representation described first. </p>

<p>All audio recording applications so far are based on this first notion, because they are descendants of the tape recorder and MIDI applications are closer to the second notion.</p>

<p>Usually, a recording is understood as a registration of real time events with a 1:1 relation of event time and sound. But we could also understand a recording as a registration of a sequence of local sound states, where the external time only indicates at what "location in time" which sound can be found. Thus we could stay at a certain location in time and listen to that sound there for an arbitrary duration in "external time", or we could run through the given sequence of sound states in an arbitrary way. </p>

<p>As soon as sound and external time become independent of each other, the sound necessarily becomes independent of pitch, too.</p>

<p>The method and algorithm I developed is based on that notion of sound. In other methods, the "frozen stream" of recorded audio material has to be "manipulated" in some way to be brought to a different pitch or time behaviour. In the Melodyne method, the recorded audio material is regarded as a resource of sound that can be played with any pitch and time course, just by reading out the material in the way the "Local Sound Synthesis" technique provides. So far, this applies only to monophonic sources.</p>

<p>After some time of working with the application that was built around that notion of sound, we felt that it could open a completely new experience for musicians not to work with recorded audio as "frozen" material, but with a material that inherently can be reshaped at any time of the composition and production process. </p>

<p>So we dared to found Celemony Software and to make Melodyne a product. In fact, a Melodyne-like application existed for about three years, and it took the last two years to bring it to a stage that we considered a 'product'". <br />
</blockquote></p>

<p>As for Prosoniq Software, their products also have a very high quality and are really professional. Starting already at favourable prices with their Plug-Ins, like the awesome sounding "<a href="http://www.harmony-central.com/Software/Mac/Articles/Orange_Vocoder/fmaj7.gif" target="_blank">Orange Vocoder</a>" and their Pitch- and Time-Stretch-Software "<a href="http://www.harmony-central.com/Newp/107AES/Prosoniq/Time-Factory-Released.html" target="_blank">TimeFactory</a>", their products always are easy to handle and provide perfect algorithms and features. The "<a href="http://www.plugin-shop.com/" target="_blank">SonicWORX Powerbundle</a>" Software is the perfect tool for sound design as well as mastering (since the Powerbundle combines SonicWORX Artist and Studio) with real-time as well as offline Plug-Ins. If you're running a MAC, this software is highly recommended.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Which artists or tracks do you admire for their innovative use of Waldorf or Access synths?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  There are quite a lot of artists and thus it would be too 'narrowed' to only talk about some of their special songs / compositions!</p>

<p>Of course there's Nine Inch Nails. I really like their sound, their great productions as well as their sounds and fx they're creating. Trent is a fan of the Virus and Charlie Closer (keyboarder) of the Waldorf gear. Of course they are using gear of both companies in their productions.</p>

<p>O.k. - from industrial to film scores: Hans Zimmer is a great composer and also using Waldorf and Access synths. I think I don't need to add any further comments on his work. He's simply great.</p>

<p>Then there's Leftfield. They are more into Dance, but they're still not doing 'normal' and 'charts' stuff. They have a very good combination of hard and spacey sounds throughout their records and I think they're innovative at the same time. I remember their video for "Original" which included shots of the Wave.</p>

<p>Tori Amos. Yes, there are also women out there using synths, though unfortunately there are only a few. On her "To Venus And Back" record you clearly can hear Wavetable-Sounds. If I'm correct I think she used a Wave on this record and she did the programming herself.</p>

<p>And there are far more out there working with Access and Waldorf gear and doing a great job....!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What artists do you consider have had a significant influence on your musical styles? </u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Well, of course Depeche Mode was one of my fundamental influences in the early years. Or, more precisely, they made me interested in electronic music and synthesizers in general. </p>

<p>Years later I got influences by a lot of different industrial bands like Skinny Puppy for instance. With the years of working for the music industry and making my own music my taste in general got far beyond one specific style. Today I'm listening to a very wide range of music starting with BigBeat, TripHop, good Pop records, R'n'B, Ambient, loads of film scores, NuMetal, etc.etc. - It simply has to be good and well produced. Also classic and Jazz records are finding their way into my CD-Player!!</p>

<p>Just to give you an overview: the last CDs I bought have been: Bjï¿½rk, Kosheen, Kruder & Dorfmeister, Depeche Mode, Aaliyah, Linkin Park, and many more.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What 10 CD's would you choose to take if you went for an extended stay on a 'Desert Island'?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Only 10? That doesn't seem fair!</p>

<p>In alphabetical order: </p>

<ul>
      <li>Aaliyah - "Aaliyah" - great R'n'B album - unfortunately she's not alive anymore.</li>
<li>Barber, Samuel - "Adagio For Strings" - this is just one track and it can be found on several compilations and recordings of Barber's work. This is one of the best classic tracks from the 20th century. Some may know it from the O.S.T. "Apocalypse Now".</li>
<li>Bjï¿½rk - "Verspertine" - little, crazy girl and a great new album. She's great.</li>
<li>Depeche Mode - "Exciter" - their music made my interest in electronic music and synths, so... ...and I like the new CD.</li>
<li>Depeche Mode - "Violator" - a classic.</li>
<li>Hans Zimmer - O.S.T. "Thin Red Line" - he got an Oscar nomination for this score - fantastic.</li>
<li>Linkin Park - "Hybrid Theory" - great "new metal" album - I like the songs, the songwriting, the voice....in short: the whole CD is great!</li>
<li>Massive Attack - "Mezzanine" - triphop/downbeat at its best. The CD has a great mood and an innovative sound.</li>
<li>Nine Inch Nails - "The Fragile" - fabulous production, great sounds and you're forced to listen to it several times to get used to it - that's what I like on good CDs.</li>
<li>Waldorf Records - "Zeitlos" Compilation - this was obvious wasn't it?? All included artists did a great job on this record.</li>
    </ul>

<p>Are you sure I really cannot take more with me???!!!!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you see as the defining characteristics of today's various electronic music genres?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  The synths of course! </p>

<p>Well, a lot of electronic genres get mixed up these days. So you can find elements of various genres nearly in all professional recordings. There's drum'n'bass mixed with pop (kosheen), pop spiced with industrial elements, ebm mixed with dance, etc, etc.</p>

<p>In *good* electronic music these days you will find 'crossover' productions of different genres and the combination of new and unheard sounds as well as a well done assortment of sounds and fx. </p>

<p>Synths are there for being creative and not just making a copy of the latest no.1 hit and the sounds used in there.</p>

<p>Also more and more bands are combining real instruments with electronic stuff. That's what I think is the most interesting development these days.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>In your own studio what are your favourite programs and VST/DX plug-ins?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  All the music and productions I'm working on now, and I did in the past, were done with Steinberg's <a href="http://www.steinberg.net/" target="_blank">Cubase</a>. Right now I'm using Cubase 5.1 VST/32 and I like to do song writing with the program. </p>

<p>Since I'm also working a lot with vocal and other real recordings I'm thinking about getting a more professional audio editing software. I will probably get <a href="http://www.nuendo.com/" target="_blank">Nuendo</a> since I can import my Cubase songs into it.</p>

<p>My most favourite Plug-Ins to process audio files are the <a href="http://www.waves.com/" target="_blank">Waves 3.0 Bundle</a>, which I use extensively for recordings. They are of excellent quality when talking about compressors, de-essers, etc, etc., and of course their effect Plug-Ins are great, too. </p>

<p>For weird audio processing I prefer the D-Pole. It's not only great for filtering but also for really getting LoFi out of HiFi! </p>

<p>I'm not working much with instrument Plug-Ins yet since I need nearly all the CPU Power of my G4 for processing vocals, etc. but the Waldorf Attack is a great tool when you need electronic drums and want to tweak them on your own.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What music are you producing at the moment?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  Presently I'm producing a german hip-hop band, "Die Besucher" (which means 'the visitors'), and I think we can start searching for a label pretty soon. </p>

<p>We just did another studio session for recording vocals at the weekend and another session will be pretty soon. </p>

<p>I'm doing all the recordings with a tube mic into my 03D desk and via an <a href="http://www.rme-audio.com/english/index.htm" target="_blank">RME Hammerfall</a> card and Cubase VST32 5.1 into my G4 computer. For this project I'm doing the whole production, sound design and the music. But the band comes up with all the lyrics (which is a very important part in hip-hop) and basic rhythm ideas.</p>

<p>I'm also working on the sound effects for a stop motion movie right now. It is just a couple of minutes, but still there is a lot of work to do for only 7 minutes of film.</p>

<p>My next project will be the new album of "<a href="http://www.waldorf-records.com/projects.html#Anchor-saro-55543" target="_blank">Saros</a>" (the latest track was released on the Waldorf Records "Zeitlos" compilation), my own ambient /chillout project.</p>

<p>I'm also producer for a German industrial project ("Skorbut" = scurvy), and I have my own BigBeat/DownBeat/Progressive Electronic project ("Boon").</p>

<p>Furthermore, I do music for promotional ads (throughout all musical styles) and also did some techno/goa stuff before. Basically I'm not limited to a certain music style, but of course there are some styles I don't like at all, like country or "Volksmusik" as it is called in German, for instance. </p>

<p>Once a year I also do sound design and keyboard arrangements for a Metal group called "Ever Eve".</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What's your personal reaction when you hear your music played in a club or when you do a gig and the crowd responds positively?</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b>  This is an amazing feeling, especially if the people really like it and the dance floor or concert location is filled. It is a mixture of feeling good, proud and a relief at the same time for not getting tomatoes and beer bottles thrown at you...! </p>

<p>It is also a sort of "reward" for all the hard work you did to finish a production or album.</p>

<p>Playing in front of a large crowd is an especially amazing feeling. The largest gig I ever had was in front of 3,000 people as headliner of a festival in Germany back in 1998.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Thanks for your time and an interesting interview!</u></p>

<p><b>JOERG :</b> You're very welcome.</p>

<p>February 2002</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Hal Chamberlin</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2002/hal_chamberlin.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2002://5.100</id>

    <published>2002-01-30T19:45:36Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:21:13Z</updated>

    <summary>A book titled &quot;Musical Applications of Microprocessors&quot; became the companion for many Engineers designing musical instruments in the 20th century in 1980. By 1985, the book was expanded from its original 660 pages to a whooping big 800-odd pages. Till this day, the book (albeit outdated) is still seen as a source of learning for many students in this field. The man who wrote that book is Hal Chamberlin...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="kurzweil" label="Kurzweil" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:cowzar@NOSPAM.bigpond.com">Brian Cowell</a>.</p>

<p>Way back in 1980 a book titled "Musical Applications of Microprocessors" became the companion for many Engineers designing musical instruments in the 20th century. In 1985, the book was expanded from its original 660 pages to a whooping big 800-odd pages. Till this day, the book (albeit outdated) is still seen as a source of learning for many students in this field. The man who wrote that book is Hal Chamberlin.</p>

<p>For the last 16 years, Hal has been employed by Kurzweil (now known as Kurzweil Music Systems). There, he has been quietly working away on both hardware and software for the many products that Kurzweil make.</p>

<p>Sonikmatter caught up with Hal (at the Young Chang factory in Korea) while he was finishing up on his design of the "remote control" for the new Kurzweil KSP8 Effects Module. Here is what he had to say:</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What has been your employment history?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Employment history is as follows:</p>

<ul>
        <li>1990 - Now: Young Chang Research Institute (Kurzweil)<br>
          Senior Systems Engineer</li>
        <li>1986 - 1990: Kurzweil Music Systems<br>
          Senior Engineer</li>
        <li>1985 - 1986: Worked as an Independent Consultant for 
          Key Concepts, MTU, and Kurzweil</li>
        <li>1979 - 1985: Micro Technology Unlimited (MTU)<br>
          VP of Engineering. (Also owned 50% of the company)</li>
        <li>1976 - 1979: Hendrix Electronics<br>
          Design Engineer</li>
      </ul>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Where did you do your schooling, and what degree's did you achieve?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> North Carolina State University: 1973 - Master of Science:</p>

<blockquote> 1973 - Master of Science:
Major - Electrical Engineering (Communication) 
Minor - Computer Science
1970 - BS Electrical Engineering</blockquote>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you do at Kurzweil R&D on a "day to day" basis?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Before going to Korea full time about three years ago, I was listed as a "Senior Systems Engineer". At the time that title was assigned (somewhere around 1993). There was no standard list of titles and job descriptions so all of the senior people were just asked to suggest a title they felt was descriptive. </p>

<p>Basically I did product development - about 2/3 hardware and 1/3 software. </p>

<p>Analog hardware is my specialty but half of my board designs also include a microprocessor and digital circuitry. And if a micro is involved, I'm usually the one to program it. Often I'm called upon to help in systems integration and solve puzzling system problems. Perhaps the toughest such problems are the dreaded "spontaneous hard reset" which is memory loss at power-down or power-up, and audio hum. While the former usually has a "magic bullet" solution, the latter often is a tug-of-war with radio-frequency emission and safety regulations.</p>

<p>Around 1992 I began visiting the Young Chang piano factory in Inchon, South Korea. At first it was very short trips of up to 2 weeks to oversee manufacturing startup of a new product or to solve a specific problem.</p>

<p>Later, from about '95 - '98, it became a 3 months on 3 months off arrangement as they began to embrace computerized automatic testing of boards and complete units. </p>

<p>By February of '98, precisely on my 50th birthday, I left Waltham for a 2-year residency that was renewed last year. I still do product development, about half the time, but now must also maintain the test systems and program them for new products.</p>

<p>A typical day starts with a bike ride to the factory complex at 6:55AM, stopping at the company weight room (where all the piano movers train) for a 30-minute workout, then on to the Development Office where we are expected to be at our desks promptly at 8:00. After receiving e-mailed questions and issues for the day from Waltham (which has just finished its workday), I conduct an hour "class" for some new engineering recruits. </p>

<p>The remainder of the morning is spent chasing down answers to the e-mail and often solving manufacturing problems like a sudden increase in failures of a particular production test.</p>

<p>Lunch is at the factory cafeteria from 12:00-1:00 then the afternoon is, hopefully, free to work on whatever my current development project(s) is.</p>

<p>Presently that is the remote front panel for the <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/ksp8.html" target="_blank">KSP8</a> and up until a couple of weeks ago, the new "<a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/digital_pianos.htmlï¿½ <br />
target="_blank">V Series</a>" of grand pianos featuring a <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/pc2.html" target="_blank">PC2</a> sound engine.</p>

<p>Towards the end of the day I compose a sort of newsletter ("Factory Facts"), which contains answers and solutions to the morning's e-mail plus a list of questions and issues from the factory. It arrives in Waltham about the time people there start trickling in. I usually leave about 7:00PM but often much later for the 20-minute bike ride back to the apartment the factory has provided.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How have you found the food in Korea?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I'm basically an omnivorous person and so am willing to try most anything that's presented. Generally I find that the food is excellent and even the most humble of restaurants serve tasty meals. The food is definitely spicy and it's not unusual for a five-course meal to be completely red with red pepper. Kimche is really very good after a short acclimatization period.</p>

<p>Fish and mollusks of all kinds are the primary protein sources although chicken and more recently pork and beef are becoming common. Koreans really don't distinguish among breakfast, lunch and dinner - hot fish soup for breakfast is as likely as boiled barley might be for dinner. The food is largely fat-free and healthful if one steers clear of the 3-layer pork, fried chicken in bars, and American pizza chains that are invading the country. </p>

<p>Skim milk, however, is unheard of. Koreans are really into whole foods - whole fish in soup, a whole chicken boiled in your bowl, and whole shrimp inside a thick breading among others. </p>

<p>However I do miss some staples that are difficult or expensive to get here - peanut butter must be imported and honey, while domestic, is quite expensive. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>When you look at your career to date; what is it that you think stands out the most?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> For sure my 1980 "<a href="http://www.synthnut.demon.co.uk/hal_chamberlain.htm" target="_blank">Musical Applications of Microprocessors</a>" book is the most significant accomplishment and is directly responsible for where my career has headed since then. Actually the impetus to write it came from a friend whom I'd only met by mail. </p>

<p>He had written a couple of technical books himself and suggested I contact his publisher. At its peak it sold about 200 copies per month, which amounted to a nice end-of-year bonus for a while. It is long out of print now after being bounced among 3 different publishers so the rights have reverted back. I still get occasional e-mail requests for photocopies.</p>

<p>But even before that I believe I had a significant role in the development of East coast amateur computing in the 70's and especially musical applications of the same. This through <a href="http://www.mtu.com/basics/mtufounders.htm" target="_blank">(MTU)</a>, editing "The Computer Hobbyist" magazine/newsletter, writing numerous articles in other publications, and delivering quite a few lectures and demonstrations to amateur computer clubs.</p>

<p>More recently I hope that some of my more innovative product design efforts at Kurzweil like the <a href="http://www.chez.com/aquarella/htm/synthes/Kurweil/Midiboard.htm" target="_blank">MidiBoard</a>, and<a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/expmate.html" target="_blank"> ExpressionMate</a> and contributions to others have been a source of inspiration, or at least satisfaction to many. And I hope to expand that role in the future when my time is up here in Korea.</p>

<p>Of course there are some regrets and "might have beens" too. </p>

<p>What if I had opted to go full time with IBM instead of partnering with Dave Cox to form Technology Unlimited in 1971? </p>

<p>Or accepted that interview with Wayne Green for editor of a "new computer magazine" which turned out to be Byte? </p>

<p>I guess that's what makes life so interesting.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you become involved with the original Kurzweil Music Systems?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Actually that is a pretty interesting story. As you know, I had written "Musical Applications of Microprocessors" which really covered just about everything in the world of synthesis at that time. Included was a description of and plans for a velocity sensitive computer interfaceable music keyboard. </p>

<p>Meanwhile, a small group in Boston, called Key Concepts, had developed a keyboard instrument similar to a clavichord but with a mechanism in each key that would tighten or loosen its string as the key was slid forward or backward. It was an amplified acoustic instrument that worked pretty well but they knew that if the idea was to have any commercial future, it had to involve an electronic keyboard and be connected to a synthesizer.</p>

<p>Sometime in 1983, I believe, one of the team members happened to get a copy of my book and upon reading the chapter about keyboards was moved to contact me through the publisher. I was offered a free trip to Boston (I was then working at MTU, in North Carolina) to see if I might be interested in working on a "radically new kind of keyboard". I took the bait and was very intrigued with the concept and excited as well at the prospect of really getting away from computers per se' for awhile and into instrument design. </p>

<p>Anyway, in a little over a year of after-hours work, a 61-key prototype with sliding, polyphonic pressure sensitive keys was working quite well. It was attached to a Rhodes Chroma via its Apple-II interface. A slight software mod allowed the Chroma to respond to the poly-pitchbend, poly-pressure signals produced. Known as the "<a href="http://www.bikexprt.com/music/refine.htm" target="_blank">Notebender Keyboard</a>", it was shown publicly a couple of times and loaned to the Berklee School of Music for a while. <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/lyle_mays.php target="_blank">Lyle Mays</a> was invited to try it for an afternoon and did some amazing stuff.</p>

<p>The next step of course is arranging for productization, manufacturing, and marketing. After "scouring the world", Key Concepts quickly concluded that the Notebender was just a bit too radical for immediate market acceptance and besides, the Chroma seemed to be the only instrument that could use its signals. Then there was the problem of raising capital to pay for detailed design, tooling, beta prototypes, and so forth. </p>

<p>So the sliding keys were backburnered in favor of adapting the unique pressure sensor I'd developed to a traditional wood keyboard that was already tooled and readily available from Pratt-Read. Instead of the Apple-II synth interface, which nobody else had adopted, we tried out the new "Musical Instrument Digital Interface" (MIDI), which, if nothing else, was simple to implement. While it didn't have a Poly Pitchbend command, its Poly Pressure command seemed OK for the task at hand.</p>

<p>The result after a few more months was two "MIDIBoard" prototypes, which Key Concepts again shopped around to major synth manufacturers at the time (New England Digital, <a href="http://www.fairlightesp.com/index.htm" target="_blank">Fairlight</a>, [what a pain it was sending their unit to Australia], and <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/" target="_blank">Kurzweil</a>). All were interested this time but Kurzweil was right in town and was willing to sign a development contract with follow-on royalties. I soon found myself locked in a room at Kurzweil working frantically on the software to get a couple of units ready for the 1985 NAMM show. </p>

<p>Concurrent with all this I had separated from MTU and after about a year of "consulting" decided to apply for a position at Kurzweil. Following a "grueling" interview, which consisted mostly of lunch with the top engineers, I was accepted and soon moved to Waltham. Besides MIDIBoard manufacturing support, my first assignment was to write a sound editor, on an Apple-II computer, for the just released <a href="http://code404.com/synths/images/kurzweil_k150.jpg" target="_blank">K150</a> additive synth. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us about the "cheesy" advert you appeared in the mid 80's that had the caption like: "our product is so great because it was designed by Hal Chamberlin"?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Well, they say that 80% of advertising is getting people to remember the ad. So if you've remembered it for 16 years, I guess it was successful in that respect. On the other hand, you don't seem to remember the company or the product.</p>

<p>The ad in question was actually run by MTU, whom I mentioned previously as my former company before joining Kurzweil, after I had left. The product was DigiSound-16, one of the very first if not the first standard product audio A-to-D and D-to-A converters for use with mini- and personal computers. </p>

<p>Back in 1985 a major part of any serious software synthesis project was the conversion subsystem, especially if one wanted to stream data to or from the disk or other storage media. DS-16's universal (one would call it a "parallel port" nowadays) interface, and built-in 32K FIFO buffers are what set it apart. It was the last product I did at MTU and their business is still based on a long line of successor products and highly specialized software for the broadcasting industry.</p>

<p>Anyway, I participated in a long photo session for the manual cover and computer magazine advertising and quite a lot of film was shot. Naturally the terms of departure allowed MTU free use of all materials I had developed including those photos. Why my former partner chose that particular shot (which had exceptionally bad lighting) I don't know. As for the tagline, I disavow any involvement.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>At the time of writing your book, did you ever envisage where synths were going, and did they?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> For the first edition (1977-80) I was focusing almost completely on individual experimentation, having fun while learning, building your own synthesizer, etc. in the best <a href="http://electronotes.netfirms.com/" target="_blank">Electronotes Newsletter</a> tradition. I was not particularly aware of a synthesizer industry within the reach of poor students other than kits from companies like <a href="http://www.paia.com/" target="_blank">Paia</a> and <a href="http://www.emu.com/" target="_blank">Emu</a>. Essentially everything I saw that was being called a synthesizer was being sold to universities and professionals.</p>

<p>The landscape and my experience were much different in 1984-1985 when the second edition was being prepared. Emu had really grown and New England Digital, Ensoniq, and of course the Japanese companies had quite a variety of synthesizers, keyboard and otherwise, promoted and priced for average individuals. And of course there was my direct experience with Kurzweil doing the Midiboard project. Accordingly a new chapter was created just to cover some representative commercially available synthesizers. Some really low cost technology was coming out then as well, such as the original <a href="http://www.casio.com/musicalinstruments/" target="_blank">Casio</a> portables and the SID chip used in Commodore 64s so another new chapter about the cost-cutting tricks they used was added as well.</p>

<p>But to answer the question, the last added chapter dealt directly with technological progress and indeed made some "bold" 10-year predictions about electronic components and synthesizers. The component technology predictions were mostly correct except for the one about DRAMs larger than 4M having to be made aboard the space shuttle to get the defect rate down. I also pretty much missed the dramatic effect that on-chip cache memory would have on future microprocessor speed. </p>

<p>For synthesis, the prediction that sample-based instruments would be less than $1000 certainly held up as did the one that PC sound cards using sampling would become standard. I was a little off in predicting that pro level synths would separate into sound modules and controllers and that mainstream controllers would become a lot more sophisticated and expressive. Although quite a variety of alternate controllers have been introduced, we're still using piano keyboards with mono pressure (sometimes) and 2 wheels for the vast majority of instruments with no signs of that changing. </p>

<p>Another prediction that's fallen short was that MIDI would be replaced by a LAN type technology. A number of proposals have been offered and tried during the intervening 16 years but we're still far from any general replacement for MIDI. One accurate prediction though was that all-digital studios would become common.</p>

<p>For the next 10 years? Well, by 2012 MIDI will be replaced, synthesizers will become just virtual black boxes buried in the software architecture of the digital studio, and alternate controllers and multi-dimensional keyboards will become mainstream.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Will you be writing another book in the future Hal?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I really get asked that a lot. The short answer is probably no, not as long as I'm working at Young Chang/Kurzweil because its quite difficult to get enough quiet time to do any really thoughtful writing. </p>

<p>The first edition of MAM took about 2-1/2 years of 3 hours per night and 8-12 hours on weekends but then I was just a common engineer at a fairly large company designing high-resolution display monitors at the time. The update in 1985 took about a year while I was independent. The current schedule, which seems to keep getting tighter, just doesn't allow the necessary time to even contemplate another book.</p>

<p>However, if I hit the lottery and retired or began working for the government, I don't think I'd try a comprehensive book again -- the field has simply grown too big and diverse for that now. </p>

<p>Actually the most enduring interest over the years has been in the sections on musical controllers like keyboards and ribbons. Even more so, the non-mathematical treatment of fast Fourier transforms and digital signal processing continues to be popular. So perhaps a title like "Musical Applications of Sensors" or "Digital Signal Processing without the Mathaches" would be within my knowledge sphere and do well in today's market.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you find it now at Kurzweil as against working for the original Kurzweil Music Systems in the 80's?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> All companies must mature as they age and Kurzweil is no exception. I read somewhere that a large majority of Fortune 500 companies don't last beyond 20 years. Not that Kurzweil is a Fortune 500 company but we are just months away from that 20 year mark. </p>

<p>In the beginning the company was supported by venture capital money and the overriding concern was to develop the K250 to the highest level allowed by the technology of the time essentially regardless of cost and get it shown. Although I hadn't yet joined, the fuel to power 20-hour days leading up to the first NAMM showing came not from stock options but from the thrill of creating something both groundbreaking and far beyond what had been achieved by others at that point.</p>

<p>When I did join about 4 years later, it was time to get to work designing products that were profitable AND had a large enough market to make back the vast deficits rung up earlier. The Arnold chip and <a href="http://www.keyboardmuseum.org/ar/k/kurz/k1000.html" target="_blank">K1000</a> series contributed the most to this effort in the late 80s. I maintained a wall mural stock chart and it was thrilling to see the price creep up gradually before and just after the 1000PX was shown and began production. </p>

<p>Certainly the months surrounding the bankruptcy and sale to Young Chang in 1990 were a low point but soon afterward we were running on adrenaline again as the <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/kurzweil-k2000.jpeg" target="_blank">K2000</a> was coming together. That was many years ago though and I'll have to admit that things had gotten to be rather routine afterwards as we crunched out product after product to keep manufacturing busy and sales up. </p>

<p>Recently however the development, launch, and initial acclaim of the KSP8 is feeling like old times again even from halfway around the planet.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think the music consumer market failed to see the idea behind the Kurzweil EXPRESSIONMATE controller?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I have to give credit for the original ExpressionMate idea to <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/chris_martirano.php" target="_blank">Chris Martirano</a> of Kurzweil's marketing department. Shortly after the <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/k2500.html" target="_blank">K2500</a> reintroduced long ribbons to the synth market, he suggested I take that design and incorporate it into a standalone device that would let anyone add long ribbon functionality to their own synth setup. Add a few jacks for extra pedals and a breath controller and put in an arpeggiator and we'd have quick new product that could build on the ribbon technology I'd developed with our Korean membrane switch vendor.</p>

<p>Once I'd started programming the little 6502 derivative processor inside and discovered that it was possible to play notes right on the ribbon then bend or modulate them plus some other things the K2500 didn't do, the project took on a life of its own. Which made it late, but great. Now it's really a performance instrument it its own right with three arpeggiators and an extensive MIDI processing, routing, and merging section for its two MIDI ins and outs.</p>

<p>I think its best feature is the note playing capability. Either 1/3 or the whole length is virtually divided into 13, 37, or "scale length" little zones. Each zone is associated with a note, either along a straight ahead chromatic scale or 15 other standard scales or 8 user specified scales. </p>

<p>Notes latched in an arpeggiator is another option. When a zone is touched, the corresponding note-on is generated. If contact is maintained and the player's finger moves away from the initial contact point, a MIDI controller, like pitch bend or modulation, is activated to modify the note. A different mode continuously tracks finger movement through the virtual zones and plays their notes as it passes through thus producing a variety of strumming and arpeggiation effects. And one can have two or even three of these going on at once for those with 3 hands.</p>

<p>Likely the biggest problem is that the feature set outgrew the user interface. There are 135 general parameters and 16 arpeggiator parameters nearly all of which may have different values in the 3 layers. That plus 21 global parameters, most of which specify signal routing, is just too much to communicate via a 2x20 character display, a few LEDs, and 10 programming buttons. </p>

<p>A PC based editor would certainly help and the software "hooks" are there but Windows software development is something we're really lacking in. </p>

<p>As for marketing, I understand its failure to become a hit product. </p>

<p>Jeff Cordero did a great job programming the "factory" setups but of necessity they had to be generalized which means that a bit of programming is necessary for any particular store display configuration. And its a fact of life now that if a new instrument doesn't do great things, right out of the box with little initial skill required, then its going to miss 90% of the market right off the bat. Perhaps if it had a built-in synth too, like the Roland <a href="http://privat.schlund.de/o/officeandtown/stoffel/alt_controller/dbeam.html" target="_blank">D-Beam</a> and Alesis " <a href="http://www.alesis.com/products/airfx/index.html" target="_blank">&quot;air&quot; controllers</a>, it would have done better in stores. </p>

<p>Still I've some great ideas for V2!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What is the story with the Kurzweil MASS chip?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> The MASS chip (Multimedia Advanced Sample playback System I believe) was developed in 1994-95 primarily to address the developing high-end sound card market. It was marketed to other manufacturers for use in their own non-keyboard products. If you remember, at that time a mainstream PC had a 486 processor so software synthesis was just a glimmer in a few programmers' eyes. And the typical sound card had a <a href="http://www.yamaha.com/lsi/products/pcaudio.htm" target="_blank"> Yamaha FM chip</a> or if one was lucky, an <a href="http://www.ensoniq.com/" target="_blank">Ensoniq</a> "wavetable" chip with a half-meg General Midi ROM. Unfortunately MASS never made it into big time sound cards or got integrated into motherboards as was hoped but the few products that did incorporate it were highly regarded.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What standard DSP chips that are currently available, do you think would be worth looking at? (eg Motorola 56000, Coldfire etc.)</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I really haven't kept up with the general purpose DSP chip device offerings as much as I'd like. Not too long ago a garden variety DSP would cost upwards of $100 and to take advantage of its high-speed internal ROM, one had to commit to a mask and 1,000 chips using it. Now prices are comparable to ordinary microprocessors and on-chip Flash ROM, and significant RAM makes even low volume and single's usage practical.</p>

<p>The Motorola 56000 has always been a music industry favorite fixed-point architecture for high quality audio processing and its cost-performance has continued to be an industry leader. Its 24-bit data word length and 56-bit ALU is a perfect match to the increasingly common 24-bit audio formats. If one is comfortable programming fixed-point binary math, requires professional quality sound, and has cost constraints to deal with, it can't be beat.</p>

<p>Texas Instruments' 32XXX line is probably the industry's broadest. At the lower end of the line are low cost 16-bit fixed-point devices selling for just a few dollars. These are an excellent choice for speech processing, MP3 reconstruction, and other audio applications that need not be pro level. At the upper end are the 32-bit floating-point models that are capable of high quality and can be programmed effectively in C - but at a cost in money and power consumption.</p>

<p>The Motorola Coldfire is actually a general-purpose embedded microprocessor instead of a DSP chip. It is intended as a high performance upgrade for the 68000/20/40 architecture. Since it's almost completely compatible with that architecture at the assembly language level, it's a good processor that's a breath of fresh air in this era of "reduced instruction set" CPUs.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Did you do much work with VAST?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I really haven't been involved in the development or programming of VAST at all. I guess the closest I got was designing the logic of the data path portion of the Hobbes chip, which executes the VAST algorithms for all of the K2XXX instruments. I have been much more involved with the infrastructure of the instruments - keyboard and player control scanners, power supplies, power amplifiers (for the digital pianos) and CPU boards for some products.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Were you surprised at how successful the SP-series stage pianos have been?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Yes, quite a bit. The product idea actually originated in Korea by J.W.Chae, where he is a teacher, market researcher, and soundware engineer. </p>

<p>Initially there was very little marketing interest in the US though because they felt that it wouldn't sell. Nevertheless, the Korean management asked me to start development and when it was completed, sharpened their pencils to where US Marketing couldn't refuse. Actually the sales surge from the SP series came at a very good time when the market for higher-end instruments was down substantially.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>The KSP8 has turned out to be a lot more than "KDFX in a box"; what is it do you think that users will enjoy when using it?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> The KSP8 is one of those products that looks very different depending on one's approach and attitude toward it. </p>

<p>If you're a straight-laced recording engineer looking for a subtle, accurate ambience to complement a classical recording, you'll think the KSP8 engineers had read your mind when they designed the numerous finely crafted "clean" reverbs that are available. If you approach it as a tool for enhancing and mixing more contemporary material, you'll find a wealth of delays, gates, EQs, cabinet simulators, and distortions plus combinations of these, many of which are new. And, although its not my bag, I've heard that its ability to create a space in 5.1 surround sound and place an actor in it using the joystick of the remote is just astounding.</p>

<p>The way I approach it though is as a synthesizer. Not a music synthesizer with a keyboard but as a SOUND synthesizer. This is way beyond effects processing - its truly sound creation from source material that may be little more than random fluctuations. Many of the new algorithms, such as Degen-Regen, Super Shaper, Frequency Offset (like the old <a href="http://www.audities.org/images/moogmisc/bode_frequency_shifter.htm" target="_blank">Bode frequency shifter box</a>), Wacked Pitch LFO, Chaos and the new chaotic LFOs are reminiscent of how analog synthesis was before <a href="http://www.bigbriar.com/" target="_blank">Moog</a> and <a href="http://www.wendycarlos.com/" target="_blank"> Carlos</a> - just sound, marvelous sound, never before heard sound - without a keyboard in sight. Using the remote's 8 knobs and joystick to interactively control the parameters of some of these wild, feedback-based algorithms is loads of fun - just be sure your hard disk recorder is rolling.</p>

<p>Simply put, the KSP8 is probably the most versatile piece of gear you could buy right now.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Have you ever put forward names for any of the products?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Once an engineering project gets past a couple of pages and the back of an envelope, one has to name a folder to put the stuff into. Usually that changes later but sometimes the names stick. Probably the best known project that kept its initial name was the Midiboard - after all, what else would you call it, especially in 1985? - But there were others.</p>

<p>The most internally infamous name of mine was the "RG" series of low-cost digital pianos that came out after the <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/mark_5.html" target="_blank">Mark-5</a> and <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/mark_10.html" target="_blank">Mark-10</a> high-end units around 1993-94. I had just started spending significant time in Korea and my manager there presented a challenge to design the least expensive piano possible that had the same Kurzweil sound quality but dispensed with all of the expensive features. He probably had in mind, having an acoustic piano marketing background, something with a power cord and perhaps a power switch and that's all. After it was clear he was serious, I named my design folders "Rotgut Piano". This soon morphed into "RG Piano" in order to keep some sense of dignity when discussing the project. Later as the "<a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/rg100.html" target="_blank">100</a>" and "<a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/rg200.html" target="_blank">200</a>" models neared completion and entered Marketing's radar screen, they decided to just keep the names never asking what the "RG" stood for. Eventually though they needed an answer for that inevitable question and came up with "Real Grand".</p>

<p>One that didn't make it interestingly enough was "RibbonMate" which is what is still on all of the design folders and software source files. Seeing as how it grew from the original concept, Marketing decided that "ExpressionMate" was more suitable. There's another product name in the works which was arrived at much more systematically and for which I earned a bottle of Korea's finest traditional liquor, but I can't talk about it yet.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>I hear you still sell Kurzweil K150's?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Yes, but only around Christmas time when I'm in the 'States' for a few days.</p>

<p>- US$250 for an "old style" unit with switching power supply.<br />
- US$350 for a new style with linear power supply and green display.</p>

<p><i>Ed note:</i> You can email him at: <a href="mailto: hal_4096@yahoo.com "> Hal Chamberlin</a>.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Have you looked at some of the other keyboards/modules that used additive synthesis?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Besides the Kurzweil K150, the only other additive synthesis instrument I've actually used is the Kawai <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/kawai_k5m.gif" target="_blank">Kawai K5m</a>. It too is quite old and really doesn't do classical additive synthesis being that partials are locked together in 4 groups with a common amplitude envelope and must be harmonically related. </p>

<p>The later <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/kawai_k5000s.gif" target="_blank">K5000</a> was an incremental improvement but I haven't tried it.</p>

<p>I've also heard of, if not heard, several others including early New England Digital, <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/synergy/synergy01.jpg" target="_blank">Synergy</a>, the "GDS" (General Development System), and the Technos Axcel. The latter had what amounted to a very large, lighted, but coarse resolution touchscreen where one could "draw" spectra in real time or interact with analyzed spectra while a sound was playing.</p>

<p>I don't know of any recent hardware that uses primarily additive synthesis other than some Hammond B3 organ emulation modules by <a href="http://www.voceinc.com/%20" target="_blank">Voce'</a> and others. </p>

<p>Perhaps when the current retro analog craze runs out of steam and processing power cheapens even further we'll see a resurgence of interest in additive techniques.</p>

<p>Naturally there is a lot of software around that does additive synthesis and "resynthesis" using fast Fourier transforms but I have not tried any of it. Also a web search reveals that additive synthesis is still a popular thesis research topic, which bodes well for the future.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What forms of synthesis would you like to see being explored more?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I think that pure, or nearly so, additive synthesis needs to be revisited commercially. When the K150, K5, and other early models were designed, 256K RAM and 8MHz 286 processors were the norm in computers. Now that processors are 200+ times faster and memory is 500 to 1,000 times cheaper, one should be able to make an interesting and saleable additive instrument.</p>

<p>Physical modeling too has endless potential but mostly in directions different from what Yamaha was pursuing. Perhaps just "modeling" would be a better term because the most interesting models are likely not physical at all. What made FM synthesis, which after all is a model albeit a simple one, so interesting was the surprises one would encounter when working with it.</p>

<p>Additive, which is really modeling too, can sometimes be surprising as well, especially when dealing with it through meta controls rather than one partial at a time. No doubt there are other models with the surprise and richness of FM combined with the generality of additive just waiting to be discovered.</p>

<p>Nothing, however, is going to replace sampling for mass market instruments because, given cheap memory, it is simply the most cost-effective way to provide a lot of realistic instrument sounds.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What is your view of the "hardware versus software" debate?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Hmmm, that's a tough one because there are so many different ways to look at it. Of course at their heart, the digital computations, "hardware" and "software" techniques are identical. Any result achieved by one could, in theory, be achieved by the other. I'll try to touch on a few of the issues but after just 5 minutes of thinking about them, its clear that one could write a good sized book on the subject - that would be out of date in a year.</p>

<p>Anyway, consider the kind of PC or Mac software-based system common today.</p>

<p>One has a large number of essentially independent hardware subsystems like the CPU, main memory controller, cache controller, disk drive(s), A-to-D and D-to-A converters, perhaps a MIDI interface, and so on, all made by different manufacturers. Even more numerous are scores of software components, including those devoted to synthesis and sound processing, that were all written independently. The key is that each of these components, both hardware and software, takes a variable amount of time to do its task depending on circumstance and what other components are doing. There can be external influences too like interrupts from the network interface or mouse movements or something that triggers a window redraw. The operating system coordinates all this to produce an accurate final result but the path and time taken to do so can vary tremendously.</p>

<p>An analogy to the software system might be a construction site with individual workers, trucks and other equipment, and outside forces like deliveries and weather, all working independently. At the same time they are seriously interdependent for getting materials, sequencing tasks, and so forth. The time to finish the building is statistical with an average and (typically large) variance.</p>

<p>One way that software synthesis deals with the uncertainty is through the use of buffers between components. If an upstream component is held up, for example, it got interrupted for a screen redraw, the buffer following it can still supply data to the next component downstream. If that buffer should run out, then the next buffer in the chain keeps the data flowing. If all of the buffers run out, then one hears a click or program interruption. Larger buffers allow for greater variance in processing times before defects are heard but at the expense of a greater delay (latency) through the sequence of steps. </p>

<p>Another way to cut down on variance in a processing step is to utilize only a fraction of its theoretical power. A synthesis routine for example might have data structures defined for 100 voices. For all to be active simultaneously, it might need, say, 70% of available CPU cycles and 80% of available memory access bandwidth. Almost any event in the system would disrupt this for a time thus requiring the following buffer to take over and after the disruption, the buffer would refill slowly. However if only 50 were playing, larger disruptions could be tolerated and equally important, the buffer would more quickly refill afterward. </p>

<p>The performance of software-based systems can be improved most effectively by using an operating system specifically designed for audio processing instead of a general purpose one like Linux or Mac OS or Windows XXX. Since that's not an option at the moment, elimination of extraneous tasks (you don't really need a stock ticker running while playing do you?) is probably next most effective followed by using the fastest processor and largest memory one can afford. </p>

<p>Another issue in the debate regards hardware vs software sound quality.</p>

<p>Software synthesis still must take a lot of computational shortcuts in order to produce a reasonable number of voices on present PCs and this adversely affects sound quality. On the other hand, applications like recording or unaltered sample playback or mixing, which are really just data movement, won't suffer from computational shortcuts and so can sound excellent. Computers make wonderful recording systems!</p>

<p>I'm sure everybody has noticed that the number and rate of introduction of software synthesis products is many times that of hardware. Indeed it seems like hardware based development has slowed way down from, say, the late 80s and early 90s. Mostly this is due to the great and increasing capital resources needed to develop a new hardware-based synthesizer or signal processor. Custom VLSI, which has always been very costly to develop, is several-fold higher now than it was 10 years ago. Much of that is the far higher cost for .25 micron and under masks compared to 1.5 and 2.0 micron then. But a large part also is competing against cell phone, Internet equipment, and PC manufacturers for chip manufacture in the thousands when they are demanding it in the millions. Aside from chips, the regulatory burden is higher now and tooling costs for PC boards and enclosures are up. </p>

<p>Often the synth manufacturer is now forced to use components that are great for cell phones or PCs but are less than optimal for synths. So it's really tough and getting tougher to design and build keyboards, racks, signal processors and other hardware based gear.</p>

<p>Now consider the relative ease of developing software synthesis and signal processing applications running under a general purpose OS. Unless you're out to solve the world's problems, most all of the infrastructure - like sample reading and writing, buffering, A-to-D and D-to-A conversion, and GUI elements - is already there and adequately functional. One merely needs to dig up the documentation and start coding away on the core algorithms of interest. And even that is much easier now with high-speed floating-point hardware being a standard part of the processor. With floating-point arithmetic, programming in C becomes nearly as effective as assembly language. No longer is highly specialized knowledge of the mathematical properties of binary arithmetic necessary to get a good performing DSP algorithm running. </p>

<p>Producing software has always been much easier than hardware, and with the Internet, it is getting easier.</p>

<p>The net result is greatly increased accessibility and democratization. </p>

<p>With so many "brains" working on software synthesis and other DSP applications, a lot of good stuff (along with plenty of junk too) is coming out now. I am especially amazed at the progress heard at last year's NAMM show in real-time software-based time/pitch shifting. </p>

<p>The future? There will always be hardware and low-end mass-market synths and digital pianos will continue to use custom chips and small microcontrollers running highly optimized dedicated software. As one moves up, there will be increasing use of standard DSP chips in place of custom VLSI and general-purpose processors controlling them. The high-end "hardware" synth of 5-10 years from now may be little more than PC hardware plus a really good audio interface packaged in a typical keyboard enclosure. The casual user will never realize this however. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What activities do you do outside of work Hal?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Excluding personal electronics, programming, and musical activities after hours, I'd have to say that number one is definitely bicycling - especially long-distance touring. I'd been riding around town (in preference to driving) since the late 70's. But about 15 years ago John Teele at Kurzweil introduced me to self-contained bicycle touring and camping. Since then I've crossed the US West to East twice, in 1994 and again last summer. </p>

<p>One of the perks from spending time in Korea is accelerated vacation time accrual, which made these 3-month journeys possible. </p>

<p>In Korea, the traffic and other problems make bicycle touring less inviting but most all of the country is mountainous so day-long and occasionally overnight hiking and climbing trips with co-workers are eagerly participated in. And the Kurzweil Bowling Club, later replaced by the Kurzweil Racquet Club, are some other activities I enjoy, if not excel, in.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your own personal studio?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Sadly, I've been in Korea away from my primary setup in Waltham for a bit over 3 years now. Before putting most everything in storage, the music/computer room had the following:- </p>

<ul>
        <li><font size="2">Mac Performa, mongrel 486 PC, Atari-ST, Apple-IIe, 
          and MTU-140</li>
        <li>MIDIBoard</li>
        <li>One each of the K1000 rack units (PX, SX, HX, GX, 
          AX, and Pro-I)</li>
        <li>A rack of five K150FS additive synths</li>
        <li>Kawai K5</li>
        <li>Yamaha TX216 (and still looking for more modules to 
          make it an <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/yamaha_tx816.jpg" target="_blank">816</a>)</li>
        <li>Oberheim <a href="http://www.code404.com/synths/images/oberheim_xpander.jpg" target="_blank">Xpander</a> 
          </li>
        <li>Alesis <a href="http://www.emagic.de/english/products/studiotools/sd/alesis_midiverb_iii.html" target="_blank">MidiVerb-III</a> and <a href="http://www.alesis.com/products/meq230/index.html" target="_blank">MEQ230</a></li>
        <li>Cooper MSB Rev 2 MIDI router</li>
        <li>Homebrew bi-amped monitors</li>
      </ul>

<p>For the Korea apartment, I managed to haul along one of the K150FSs, the Apple-II, the Alesis items, and the MIDI router. To that has been added a K2500R, <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/sp_series.html" target="_blank">SP88X</a>, and dual ExpressionMates. I also bought a new PC and enjoy a 1Mbps DSL Internet connection. Since sound levels have to be kept low in the apartment, the "monitors" are basically the sound system from a Kurzweil <a href="http://www.kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/rg100.html" target="_blank">RG100</a>.</p>

<p>I think you can see that I have a special fondness for the K150FS and indeed true synthesis of all types. I really like to start from nothing when making a sound rather than modifying something existent. I mostly putter around and don't do much with sequencers; waiting for that large block of time necessary to undertake something serious.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who have been your musical influences?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I have always liked Bach fugues and classical organ music in general since being a little kid. I once got into trouble climbing around the pipe room at my church taking pictures and examining how the various parts worked. </p>

<p>I never really embraced pop music although there were a number of tunes from the 50's and 60's by the Beach Boys, Del Shannon, and similar groups I could relate to. After getting a BS in 1970 though I basically tuned out nearly all pop music, which had become too disordered and loud for my taste. There were exceptions though, like the Moody Blues and The Who.</p>

<p>I'm probably not alone in revealing that Switched On Bach by (then) Walter Carlos had a substantial influence. Before that one might say I used my rig primarily to scare the neighbors and amuse the cat, but afterward I saw that my hobby might actually have some career potential outside a B movie set. </p>

<p>More recently I'm into Vangelis, Toto, Yanni and a few other more obscure "new age" composers. </p>

<p>My all-time favorite album is probably the soundtrack for Dune. And some of the Korean classical and even pop I'm bathed in every day now isn't bad!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would be the funniest/strangest things that you have seen in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> The weirdest experience at Kurzweil I can recall happened late at night around 1993 when I was trying to find the source of a low, but audible in a totally quiet room, hum in a prototype Mark-10 piano. Another engineer and I had been swapping boards and cables and trying various grounding experiments most of the evening without a whole lot of luck. After making a small change to the MIDI I/O board, we turned the unit on and after about a minute it started playing itself!</p>

<p>What we heard was eerie but very musical and we sat listening for several minutes. After much speculation, we concluded there was a bug in the software (which is natural for hardware folks) that caused it to play portions of the demonstration songs at random. But on further listening that really didn't fit either. </p>

<p>Eventually we discovered that a wire in the MIDI in cable had opened and was "floating" thus feeding semi-random bits to the MIDI interface. I really wish I had a recording of what came out of that unit that evening.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>You have a unique perspective of intellectual property issues for musical digital signal processing, because your book predates the granting of many patents in the field which are considered by some to be controversial. In general, do you think the US Patent Office does a good job in granting musical digital signal processing patents?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> First, I am not a lawyer, certainly not a patent lawyer. That said, my opinion is that it is far too easy to get a patent. Patents should not be granted to practitioners who are merely doing their jobs unless that work product shows extraordinary insight or creativity.</p>

<p>Patents are routinely granted nowadays for the solutions to problems so obvious that students in an engineering course would be expected to arrive at a similar solution had the problem been posed as a homework assignment.</p>

<p>So much of what passes for innovation nowadays is just obvious applications of available technology. Ten or 20 years ago, before the enabling technology was common and cost-effective, those same ideas might have been innovative and worthy of a patent but not now. Remember, a patent grants one the right to prevent anyone else from arriving at the same solution and using it in their own work without permission or payment for 20 years. I think that a piece of work needs to be held to very high standards to enjoy such a degree of protection. Hopefully standards can be tightened in the future, but it would have to be a gradual process to be acceptable to those accustomed to routine granting of patents for routine work.</p>

<p>Probably more important than the book you mention (which I began writing in 1977 and was published in early 1980) was my Master's thesis at North Carolina State University. It was titled "Design and Simulation of a Digital Sound Synthesizer" and was placed in the NCSU library in the Spring of 1973. </p>

<p>It basically described how a modular analog emulation synthesizer of 16 oscillators/filters/amplifiers, effects, and routing array using memory IC's could be put together with existing technology in quite a bit of detail. I had planned to build the device but my thesis advisor suggested simulating it instead on the campus Ambilog-200 computer. Later, as the deadline approached and I was pulling all-nighters just getting the simulation working, I was thankful for the advice. I even got some actual music out of the thing; a reasonably listenable Bach "Toccata and Fugue in D-Minor" which now exists only as an analog recording and a roll of punched paper tape source code.</p>

<p>Anyway, that thesis, in conjunction with a lot of other materials, was instrumental in settling a recent patent suit against Kurzweil (which I cannot discuss) that might have spread to the entire sampler and wavetable sound card industry had it been lost.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Does the patent examiner's decision reflect a knowledge of prior art, and a good judgement of what is non-obvious to a skilled expert in the field, in your view?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> In my experience, the examiners are pretty good in going through existing patents and finding most if not all of the prior _patented_ inventions or solutions (called "art" in patentese). </p>

<p>They are generally poor at finding, or even searching for prior art in books, magazine articles, theses, conference proceedings, and so forth. This may be improving with the Internet making it easier to search such materials but there is still great reluctance to disallow a patent claim unless it is exactly the same as something done or published previously.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What advice would you pass onto Engineers looking to start a career in the music manufacturing industry?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> I guess you mean electronic musical instrument industry. One should probably start by obtaining a thorough background in musical acoustics - pitch, amplitude, timbre, waves, etc. then supplement that with some study of high fidelity sound - frequency response, distortion, hum & noise, something about loudspeakers, etc., and finally cap that with at least a course or two in music theory. </p>

<p>Some ear training and minimal skill in playing an instrument or two will be very helpful if your work will involve judgement of sound quality or instrument performance. I think these are fundamental for any "musical engineer".</p>

<p>Beyond that, if one is interested in synthesis engines, solid coursework in mathematics, linear systems theory, and of course computer architecture and some programming is a must. If the focus is toward controllers and player interfaces to instruments, I'd recommend substantial study in analog circuits, electronic instrumentation and measurement, and sensors. And a course or two in physics of materials wouldn't hurt either.</p>

<p>"Hobby work" is important too. </p>

<p>If one is not interested enough in instrument design to have spent and continue to spend free time on personal instrument projects, a good job may still be possible but long-term creative excellence is likely to be elusive.</p>

<p>Finally, unless you're going to work for one of the big 4 or 5 companies in this industry, its crucial to understand economics in general and business economics in particular. They may call economics "the dismal science" but that's only because if an entrepreneur doesn't understand it, the result will be dismal. At least one course in basic business principles and perhaps one in marketing may well be as important to one's success as all the previously mentioned stuff.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>If you were to move out of the music industry; What field would you like to work in?</u></p>

<p><b>HAL :</b> Robotics is intriguing and before moving from North Carolina in 1986 I was an active member of an <a href="http://kr4jb.net/tar/tar.cgi?history" target="_blank">amateur robotics club</a> there. Accurately and gracefully controlling motors and coordinating multiple movements is really a lot like sound and music synthesis. It's certainly a much bigger market and also more focussed on useful results instead of style which sort of fits my mindset.</p>

<p>Another area of interest is the whole field of energy generation, efficiency, and conservation. One of my contributions to the Kurzweil technology base has been higher efficiency linear power supplies that produce less heat without switching noise. Doing more with less - of any resource really - has always been an enjoyable challenge.</p>

<p>Yet another possibility I've given more than passing thought to is starting a small electronic gadget company, perhaps with initial emphasis on bicycle accessories. Over the years I've developed quite a laundry list of possible cool products that address specific problems but have never really been able to pursue any of them. Might be a good "retirement" pursuit.</p>

<p>Additional Links:</p>

<p><a href="http://mtu.com/basics/mtufounders.htm" target="_blank">Micro Technology Unlimited</a></p>

<p><a href="http://bikexprt.com/music/notebend1.htm" target="_blank">NoteBender Keyboard</a></p>

<p><a href="http://www.synthony.com/vintage/midiboard.html" target="_blank">Kurzweil MIDIBoard</a></p>

<p>Jan 2002<br />
</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Jim Aikin</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2001/jim_aikin.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2001://5.99</id>

    <published>2001-12-30T19:40:59Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:21:35Z</updated>

    <summary>Without a doubt, Jim Aikin has come to be known as the &quot;father of all reviewers&quot;.  From the mid 1970&apos;s till the present day, he has been one of the architects that built up one of the worlds leading keyboard based magazines KEYBOARD. 

Senior Editor at KEYBOARD magazine and a well known voice around musicplayer.com.
Sonikmatter had a chance to talk with him and get some fascinating insights into the man whose name is just as synonymous as some of the leading edge equipment he reviews...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="keyboardmag" label="KeyboardMag" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:cowzar@NOSPAM.bigpond.com">Brian Cowell</a>.</p>

<p>Without a doubt, Jim Aikin has come to be known as the "father of all reviewers".  From the mid 1970's till the present day, he has been one of the architects that built up one of the worlds leading keyboard based magazines KEYBOARD. </p>

<p>His job has been over the years has been a dream to many of us, review the latest equipment and point out the "pro's" and "con's" attributed with them.</p>

<p>Now he is Senior Editor at KEYBOARD magazine and a well known voice around <a href="http://www.musicplayer.com" target="_blank">musicplayer.com</a>. Sonikmatter had a chance to talk with him and get some fascinating insights into the man whose name is just as synonymous as some of the leading edge equipment he reviews.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you become a reviewer at KEYBOARD magazine Jim?</u></p>

<p><img alt="Jim Aikin" src="/images/JAamused.jpg" width="275" height="256" border="0"  align="right" style="padding:0 0 1em 1em;"  /></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> I started at KEYBOARD in December 1975. We didn't start doing product reviews until 1980, so I guess you could say I was grandfathered into it. For the first couple of years Dominic Milano wrote all of the KEYBOARD Reports. (We only published one per month in those days.) I don't remember exactly when I got involved, but it may have been when Dominic was ill.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who have been your musical influences?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> The question of actual influences on my composing is a bit different from the question of what music I enjoy listening to. Also, the influences have changed over the years. </p>

<p>If I tell you I was influenced by Jefferson Airplane, that will sound silly in 2001, but in 1971 it made sense. In 1968 I practically wore out Judy Collins's "In My Life" LP. (The arrangements on that were done by Joshua Rifkin.) </p>

<p>More recently, everyone from Haydn to Thelonious Monk has had an influence on me, directly or indirectly. My dad used to play a Bob Scobey LP a lot when I was in high school, and I'd have to say classic Dixieland is an influence of sorts.</p>

<p>I tend to like intelligently composed and cleanly recorded music. I pretty much lost interest in pop music during the punk era, but the birth of techno made my ears perk up.</p>

<p>I do write songs with lyrics from time to time. Early Bob Dylan was a big influence (again, we're talking 1968). In recent years, Laurie Anderson. </p>

<p>The common thread here is the idea that it's okay for songs to have lots of words, and to convey actual ideas. Expressing raw emotion doesn't interest me much: I don't feel I have anything to say in that area that's fresh, or that listeners are likely to relate to.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your own personal studio at home?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> You don't really want to know. All of the gear I own was purchased a number of years ago. I don't think there's a single hardware item in my studio that is still in production, except for a few pieces of loaner gear I've taken home from the office to explore further. </p>

<p>My master keyboard is an 88-note <a href="http://www.sonicstate.com/synth/_inc/picview.cfm?synthid=317" target="_blank">Korg 01/W ProX</a>.</p>

<p>I have two Yamaha <a href="http://www.yamaha.com/ycaservice/mp4model/TX802.htm" target="_blank">TX802</a> modules, which I wouldn't part with for any amount of money, both because I like the sound of FM and because they have halfway decent tuning tables. </p>

<p>A lot of my drum tracks come from an E-mu <a href="http://www.keyboardmuseum.com/pic/e/emu/procussion.jpg" target="_blank">Procussion</a> processed through an Ensoniq <a href="http://www.klangmaschine.de/ensoniq/dp4plus.htm" target="_blank">DP/4+</a>. That's a very versatile setup, because both units are highly programmable.</p>

<p>Lately I've been learning Csound. It's a terribly slow, difficult way to compose music, but it offers a number of advantages, including total control over tunings (are you sensing a theme here?) and many dimensions of control over timbre. My next equipment purchase will be a faster computer, both for Csound and so I can run realtime software synths.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What 10 CD's would you classify as your favorites in your collection Jim?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> You mean this week? Any answer I could give would leave out too many cool things. </p>

<p>The staples in my listening diet are Angela Hewitt's recordings of the Bach Partitas and French Suites, Murray Perahia's recordings of the English Suites, and Andras Schiff's recordings of Books 1 and 2 of the Well-Tempered Clavier. That's 10 CDs right there, so I guess I'm off the hook, right? </p>

<p>I love Bach on the piano, but scrupulously avoid harpsichord recordings. What I like about Bach's solo keyboard music is that it has a high degree of formal structure, and doesn't have much to do with emotion. Also the Goldberg Variations, but not Glenn Gould's recordings of them. He's too eccentric to really enjoy listening to. I forget whose recording of the Goldbergs I have. Charles Rosen? Could be.</p>

<p>In the electronic realm, there's Headland, by Echo System (great CD, totally obscure). I was listening to Meat Beat Manifesto for a while, and before that to Rob Mounsey and Kit Watkins. I know I'm leaving some people out. I'll have a look at my collection tonight and see if anything jumps out at me.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What forms of synthesis do you think should be explored more or be revisited again?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> If you're using Csound, just about any form of synthesis I know of is immediately available to you. For free. What you explore or revisit is entirely up to you as a musician. Reading between the lines, then, it appears this question is about synthesis in commercial products. And that's a marketing decision. As such, it's not very interesting.</p>

<p>Sample playback is pretty boring, I'll say that. I think FM has a lot of potential that's still unexplored. Using FM as a tone source and then doing a little waveshaping can give you some really interesting sounds.</p>

<p>The other half of the equation is, how much trouble do you want to go to in order to get your hands on those fresh, exotic sounds -- and how much money do you want to spend? </p>

<p>This is partly dependent on the genre of music you're into.</p>

<p>For some musicians, a decent General MIDI sound set is perfectly fine. You can put together very respectable pop arrangements and never have to get your hands dirty worrying about LFO waveforms or filter resonance.</p>

<p>I'd be curious to see a commercial synth with a flexible implementation of granular synthesis, but I'm not convinced musicians would flock to buy it.</p>

<p>Scanned synthesis looks to be interesting, but I haven't tried it yet. In any case, these techniques are more useful for experimental music than for mainstream pop (used in Csound).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would be the funniest thing you've seen happen in the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> The industry isn't exactly a barrel of laughs, in my experience. I got food poisoning once from eating lunch at the L.A. Convention Center, but that's only funny if you think barfing all night long in an expensive hotel room is a hoot.</p>

<p>Here's a mildly amusing anecdote for you:</p>

<p>Once upon a time there was a little tiny company trying to market a high-end digital synth that would compete with the <a href="http://www.obsolete.com/120_years/machines/fairlight/index.html" target="_blank">Fairlight</a> and the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/synclavier/synii01.jpg" target="_blank">Synclavier</a>. It was called the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/asi/asisynthiabro.jpg" target="_blank">Synthia</a>, and it had a sexy touch-screen interface. The developers brought their prototype around to our office. This was just after the release of the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/yamaha/yamdx701.jpg" target="_blank">DX7</a>, so it would have been 1984 or thereabouts. The Synthia used additive synthesis based on a bank of sine waves -- rather like a Hammond organ, but with no balls whatever.</p>

<p>Wondering desperately whether I could somehow contrive to get an interesting sound out of this cheesebox, I asked them how fast they could crank up the LFO. I was thinking, if the LFO would go up into the audio range, at least you'd have a primitive form of FM. They obligingly pushed it up to the top of its range, which was about 20Hz. I played a chord on the keyboard.</p>

<p>When I let up on the keys, the sound continued for several seconds rather than stopping. Eventually the notes halted, one by one. I tried another chord. Same deal. </p>

<p>What was going on, I deduced, was that the designers were using one microprocessor to both scan the keyboard (sensing what keys were pressed) and generate the LFO waveform. At a fast LFO rate, the poor processor was so busy it didn't have time to check the keyboard for new notes.</p>

<p>After that, we never heard anything more about the Synthia.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Where do you expect to see both hardware and software in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> As a science fiction writer, I try to avoid predicting the future. One inevitably gets it wrong. Hilariously so, more often than not.</p>

<p>Having said that, I do expect the trend toward computer-based music-making to continue. The cost of developing and releasing a visionary new synthesizer or effects processor in software is <u>so much</u> less than doing so in hardware. Hardware companies have to be conservative in order not to go broke. Conservatism leaves precious little room for innovation.</p>

<p>What I'd love to see (and this is my own idea, not anything I've heard rumors of) would be a dedicated music OS for the PC. Perhaps a streamlined variety of Linux. The reasons why people avoid computers have to do with their perceived complexity and unreliability, and the steepness of the learning curve. If a manufacturer were able to develop and support a dedicated OS that was stable, powerful, and easy to learn, it would offer musicians a lot of advantages, and probably attract a lot of adherents.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you have any criteria by which you judge musical instruments?</u></p>

<p><img alt="Steer clear of this card shark in the Casinos!" src="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/JAsuchadeal.jpg" width="250" height="334" border="0" align=right /></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> I try to look at a new instrument from as many angles as possible. That's my job. </p>

<p>First, do I like the sounds? <br />
Second, does the user interface make sense? <br />
Third, assuming we're looking at a synthesizer, is there a reasonable set of programming features I can use to create my own sounds? <br />
Fourth, is it a good value? How does it stack up to the competition at the same price point?<br />
Fifth, does it have a reasonable set of smooth-feeling realtime performance controllers?</p>

<p>In the case of other types of instruments, other criteria will come into play. With a digital piano, the question of keyboard feel becomes very important, as does the question of how well-matched the samples are. With a hardware sampler, sample editing becomes a big factor: How easy or difficult is it to do the half-dozen types of edits you'll most often want/need to do?</p>

<p>The things I can't evaluate in a product review -- I don't think any reviewer can -- are how well an instrument will hold up on the road, how good tech support is (when writing a review, I usually have a direct pipeline to a tech), and how well the manufacturer will support the instrument two years from now. </p>

<p>If the power supply turns the motherboard to toast, will they be able to supply you new parts? </p>

<p>Will they even answer your phone calls? I dunno. When -- if ever -- will the new OS be released with those long-promised features? Your guess is as good as mine.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What product were you reviewing when you made the famous quote:<br />
"They'll have to pry [the unit] from my cold, dead fingers"?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> I honestly don't remember. (Fortunately, my fingers are still doing just fine, thanks.) I seem to recall that it was a Lexicon processor of some sort. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you think of the many musicians who now use the phrase to point out that they are very happy with a particular product?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> It's fine with me if a phrase I use gains some currency. I'm in the phrase-making business, after all.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you like the trend with companies going back to naming their synthesizers?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> Yeah, the sex appeal of a model number has been way overblown. (Somebody should tell Akai.) Maybe model numbers are okay for microphones. I can't quite imagine a mic called "Pistol," "Mudsucker," or "Ultra-Breeze."</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What sort of "sci-fi" do you write, Jim?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> Most SF writers prefer not to use the term "sci-fi." It conjures up visions of a 1950s B movie with bug-eyed aliens. (To be fair, there was at least one good 1950s sci-fi movie -- "Forbidden Planet." The soundtrack was all-electronic, and the movie had other virtues as well.)</p>

<p>My first novel (Walk the Moons Road) was published in 1985, the second (The Wall at the Edge of the World) in 1992. Both are out of print, but I have friends who have managed to pick up copies on Amazon. I'm working on a new one at the moment, and I think it's going to be good. The exigencies of book publishing being what they are, I can't promise when it will be published.</p>

<p>I have complex opinions about science fiction as a genre, and about the process of writing fiction. This interview probably isn't a good venue in which to explore those subjects. Let's just say that musicians enjoy a tremendous advantage not afforded to novelists: Music doesn't have to make logical sense. If you like the way it sounds, that's a perfect and complete justification for whatever you choose to play or compose. A story-teller who tried to use the same rationale would have no hope of publication. Zero. The big challenge for a fiction writer, in my opinion, comes under the heading of plausibility: You try to figure out, in general, why people do things, and then to figure out what a particular set of characters can reasonably do that will actually make for interesting reading, and then to convey the characters' thoughts and feelings in a way that readers will agree is how people in those circumstances would actually think and feel. It's a craft at which my success is rather intermittent, I'm afraid.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Did you ever think that keyboards would be where they are today?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b> Well, the keyboard has a long and distinguished history, going back to before Bach. I think we felt from the beginning, here at the magazine, that the days of guitar-dominated rock were numbered, and that keyboards would move more to the fore as time went on. What none of us really envisaged -- at least, I didn't -- was the influence that computer technology would have on keyboards. But remember: In 1977 someone at IBM declared that there was no reason why ordinary people should ever need to have a computer in their home.</p>

<p>I try very hard to avoid making predictions about what the future holds for keyboards, or anything else. That may seem a strange position for a science fiction writer, but if you read any of the SF that was popular 20 or 30 or 50 years ago (and doing so is highly advisable if you're going to try to write the stuff) you quickly discover that most of the predictions made by the smartest minds in the field were not only wrong but horribly, laughably wrong.</p>

<p>Here's my favorite example: When Isaac Asimov started writing his famous Robot series, he gave the robots vacuum tubes for brains ("positronic" tubes, but tubes nonetheless), because the transistor hadn't yet been invented, much less the integrated circuit. Today we can build machines that will do millions or billions of calculations per second, but those machines still can't be trusted to mow your lawn without supervision. And of course Asimov's 21st Century men all wore hats and smoked cigarettes, and the women wore aprons and stayed in the kitchen. His social vision was as inadequate as his technological vision.</p>

<p>So trying to predict the future is a pointless exercise; all it does is reveal your own limitations. I do expect that digital technology will continue its inexorable march across the keyboard landscape, but what direction that march will turn is not something I feel qualified to speculate about. I'd love to see someone build a music laptop with velocity-sensitive keys and high-quality DACs, but that's today's technology, not tomorrow's. It's a marketing issue. And while I have opinions on marketing, I probably know at least as much about it as Asimov knew about robots.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What "non musical" sites do you like to visit on the internet?</u></p>

<p><b>JIM :</b>  I find the idea of "liking to visit sites" a little bizarre, actually. (But then, I don't own a television, so possibly I'm in the minority.)</p>

<p>I don't find the Internet a very persuasive or engaging entertainment medium, for a variety of reasons, including excessive download times, terrible organization, and dorky content. I use the Internet for tracking down information (or trying to). That's what it was originally intended for. When I've got the information I need, why would I ever to visit that site again? Life is full of meaningless distractions. I try to filter them out.</p>

<p>If you like, you can read this as part of a curmudgeonly editorial that I might write someday. If I wanted to rant about the Internet, I'd say something like this:</p>

<p>"Kids, if you've got a site, get rid of the damn gimmicks! The worst offenders are the people who insist that I have Shockwave or some crap like that to view their ultra-spiffy site. I bail immediately. Also on my shit list are people who code their site so nothing will display on the home page until about 50 gifs have loaded. You're not that important: Get over it."</p>

<p>Many thanks to the people at <a href="http://musicplayer.com/Keyboard.html" target="_blank">KEYBOARD MAGAZINE</a> and <a href="http://musicplayer.com/%20" target="_blank">MUSICPLAYER.COM</a> for allowing us to interview Jim Aikin. </p>

<p>DECEMBER 2001</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Steve Pavao</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2001/steve_pavao.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2001://5.98</id>

    <published>2001-11-30T19:34:17Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:21:49Z</updated>

    <summary>Kurzweil has always been able to release their operating systems over the years with very high quality and unsurpassed commitment to their users. Sonik recently had the chance to talk to Steve Pavao, one of the software engineers for Kurz products who implemented the K2600 Triple Modular Processing feature, and also worked on the software team for the brand spanking new KSP8...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="kurzweil" label="Kurzweil" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:cowzar@NOSPAM.bigpond.com">Brian Cowell</a>.</p>

<p>Kurzweil has always been able to release their operating systems over the years with very high quality and unsurpassed commitment to their users. Sonik recently had the chance to talk to Steve Pavao, one of the software engineers for Kurz products, to get some insight into the happenings at R&D.</p>

<p>Steve implemented the K2600 Triple Modular Processing feature, and also worked on the software team for the brand spanking new KSP8 (can you say ground breaking?). Read on and learn about his involvement in both projects!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How long have you been working at Young Chang R&D, and what have you worked on during that time?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I started just over 3ï¿½ years ago, at the end of March '98. I am part of the software group. Some of the main features I've added include ISO 9660 file system support for the K-series synths, Triple Modular Processing (TMP) for the <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/k2600.html" target="_blank">K2600</a>, an enhanced effects engine for the <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/ksp8.html" target="_blank">KSP8</a>, and, before I forgetï¿½I also ported the "pong" game to the KSP8 :).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What were you doing before working at Kurzweil R&D?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Believe it or not, I was working for database giant Oracle. Although my senior project in college was an 8-bit phrase sampler that interfaced to an IBM PC, I didn't end up getting hooked into the music industry until years later. Designing synths sure is much more fun than working on database products.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What areas of software do you specialise in?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> When you program embedded systems, you learn to specialize in everything. I've had my grubby little paws in way too many dark and dirty places ;). So, everything from designing and coding up UI screens to writing device drivers is in a day's work. We are always trying to eke out maximum efficiency from our hardware, so C and Assembly language often fit the bill when it comes to performance-oriented subsystems.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>You actually work on "many" projects at once?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I wouldn't say many, rather a few. There are always a few things going on at a time here. There are brand new products in the works that require lots of research and interdepartmental communication to keep things moving along. There are also options for existing products that need some measure of software support. There's also the need to keep learning new skills to apply to upcoming work.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who works in your team at Kurzweil R&D Steve?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Software teams:</p>

<p>K2600: V1.0: John Teele<br />
V2.0: Steve Pavao, Byron Jacquot (TMP, disk partitioning)<br />
V3.0: Marc LoCascio, John Teele (KDFX V2)</p>

<p>KSP8: V1.00 John Teele, Steve Pavao, Marc LoCascio, Byron Jacquot</p>

<p>There are also many other important players in the design and implementation of these and other Kurz products, which are in different groups at R&D.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us the story behind Triple Modular Processing that was implemented on the K2600 model?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Before I joined Young Chang R&D, I would say as far back as 1992, I would sometimes get bummed about how quickly I would run out of V.A.S.T. resources when programming a layer on my <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/k2000vp.html" target="_blank">K2000</a>. At the time, I was composing a lot of scrapey, electronic music, and was using V.A.S.T. to mutilate and transform my samples. Inevitably, I kept finding myself whining, "Wouldn't it be great if layers could be chained?". No one else with a K2000 has ever asked that, right? ;).</p>

<p>Six years passed, and I eventually ended up getting hired into the software group at Young Chang R&D. Several months after I started, <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/bob_chidlaw.php" target="_blank">Bob Chidlaw</a>, the Chief Scientist, released a memo that listed some possible enhancements to V.A.S.T. When I finished up my current task, I jumped all over that memo like a fly on sh** :). Heck, Bob was just happy to have someone read one of his memos for a change ;).</p>

<p>So, I spent a good amount of time programming up that feature. It now seems like destiny that I was supposed to implement the TMP feature, or maybe it was just payback for wanting it so bad and whining too much about it ;).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you have any tips for people using Triple Modular Processing?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> That's a bit like trying to tell someone how to use some new modules they bought for their modular synth. Where do you begin? </p>

<p>All I can say is experiment with the new processing possibilities, and start out simple. At first, I would stick to layer 2 algorithms that are "processing only" (#81 and higher), and I'd leave the 3rd layer empty in terms of DSP processing. Even with this simplified approach, there are many new things that are possible, like 2 PARAM SHAPER or hard sync algorithms prior to the larger filters like 4 POLE LOPASS. There are also more places to apply corrective EQ than ever before. </p>

<p>Don't forget to save off revisions of your patches as you go along, just in case you go overboard with any your edits and realize you liked the old version better.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Was the "re-engineered" K2600 developed with the TMP implementation in mind?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> No.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Ever programmed something Steve, and thought "Yikes ! That wasn't meant to happen.", but in the end it was musically useful?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I made the occasional mistake when implementing Triple Mode algorithms. The most that ever happened was huge amounts of shredding :). Unfortunately, nothing ever happened that could have been produced into something that was generally useful to the user.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What was it like working on the new KSP8 Effects module?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> It was intense and exhilarating. Actually, the product had been in the works for years before, but never seemed to get going. I started on the KSP8 the week after finishing the TMP feature, at the very end of May 2000.</p>

<p>In those early meetings, the KSP8 grew from being simply a beefed-up version of KDFX, to a product that also included 5.1 effects and panners; a remote that had a joystick and lots more knobs and could also control up to 7 KSP8's; and a UI that made tweaking the effects much more user friendly. It was a tall order to fill, despite the fact that the KSP8 shares some things with KDFX, it really was truly it's own "thing", and required quite a bit of loving care to get it done properly.</p>

<p>I felt that if we could hit the market with this box in a timely manner, at the price we were thinking, with all those features and excellent sound quality, that we would have a success story on our hands in a new product line to boot.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think that the KSP8 is "revolutionary" in what it does?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I do believe it's the only box of its kind right now....a rack mount signal processor with the ability to:</p>

<p>- Simultaneously chain and control effects on up to 8 effects buses,<br />
- Simultaneously run combinations of stereo, mono, and 5.1 effects,<br />
- Simultaneously run up to 16 high quality reverbs and/or other effects.</p>

<p>It could be the most flexible rack-mounted signal processor that has ever been offered. It couples that flexibility with massive DSP, world-class FX algorithms, and intuitive control. I have heard through the grapevine at YCRDI that the recent KSP8 studio tour was a resounding success, with many "golden ears" types left very impressed with the KSP8 and RSP8 remote.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are you working on now Steve?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Lately, it's been a combination of software to support the KSP8 I/O options, and doing work on future products.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your home studio?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I have mostly non-synth instruments right now: </p>

<p>- 2 Portuguese guitars<br />
- 1 mini-scale Strat copy<br />
- P-bass<br />
- Harmonium<br />
- Turkish spike fiddle<br />
- Wooden staved dumbek with fish skin head<br />
- Drum kit<br />
- Two cheap acoustic guitars - one 6 string, one twelve string. </p>

<p><br />
I do have a <a href="http://kurzweilmusicsystems.com/html/k2500.html" target="_blank">K2500</a> (actually, an original NAMM demo unit) in my studio, which I sometimes use when writing songs. I really haven't invested any money in hard or soft synths for my studio, although I have checked out many of the demos. My very first synth was a <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/korg/delta.shtml" target="_blank">Korg Delta</a> that I got in the early-mid 80's, although I sold it years ago. Nowadays, I usually borrow synthsï¿½an <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/oberheim/obexpand01.jpg" target="_blank">Xpander</a> here, a <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/oberheim/mat1000.shtml" target="_blank"> Matrix 1000</a> there, an <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/arp/arp2600bro.jpg" target="_blank">Arp 2600</a> there. I think I'm going to get a <a href="http://www.clavia.se/pictures/micro/MicroModular-large.JPG" target="_blank">Nord Micromodular</a>. I love the idea of a very portable synth that can take on a completely different personality depending on the patch. That would be a nice complement to my K2500. Unfortunately, I just bought a harmonium, so the Nord will have to wait 'til Christmas :(.</p>

<p>I have Digital Performer 2.7, and a 2408 interface, running on a PowerMac 8600/300 with an XLR8 400 MHz upgrade card. I am using a borrowed TL Audio input channel. It's got 2 decent preamps, each with a nice tube EQ section. I use various mics, mostly borrowed from gear-slut friends :).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Will we see any more future enhancements for the K2500 and K2600 line of synths in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> The K2500 OS is nearing it's maximum size. I don't know what new things we'll be able to squeeze into it. There is room for the K2600 OS to grow, so it is likely that there will be future revisions of that.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are your musical influences; and how does that affect your songwriting now?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I like:</p>

<ul>
      <li>Paul Weller - especially his Jam-era stuff, </li>
<li>Peter Gabriel - especially his "San Jacinto" era stuff, </li>
<li>Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan and Party and Qawwali music in general, </li>
<li>various gypsy music,</li>
<li>Tom Waits, </li>
<li>early-mid era R.E.M, and </li>
<li>Dead Can Dance. </li>
    </ul>
 
These probably have affected my recent songwriting the most. Earlier efforts were more electronic/industrial rock in nature (Fracture, circa 1995, Mercymore, circa 1996), or goth (One of Us, circa 1997), with the Fracture stuff being influenced more by Skinny Puppy, Einsturzende Neubaten, Ministry, early KMFDM, Nitzer Ebb, Front 242, etc. You know the drill. 

<p>The Fracture stuff actually got quite a few spins on college radio in the mid-nineties, with one song making it into an MTV show of some sort, which I never actually saw, but learned about via BMI. The CD is out-of-print now, but I'm doing at least one of those songs with my new band "<a href="http://www.etherdrops.com" target="_blank">Etherdrops</a>".</p>

<p>With Etherdrops, I've gotten back to a more immediate instrumentation and songwriting approach. Although I love what can be done with computers and synths to create sounds, I have been having a really satisfying time playing the Portuguese guitar and harmonium with my band. I'll do another more electronics-based project sometime in the future, for sure. There are some synth madmen here at R&D, and I'll be making mayhem with them at some point.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are some of your favourite CD's?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> In no particular order...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>- V/A Soundtrack - Latcho Drom.</p>

<p>This soundtrack is a cross-section of gypsy music from across Asia, the Middle East, and Europe. Very moving, and better appreciated if you can see or buy the Tony Gatlif documentary film, especially in your local "artsy" theater. I got my copy mail order thru Hear's Music in Tuscon, AZ.</p>

<p>- R.E.M. Eponymous.</p>

<p>I prefer most of what these guys did up till the late 80's. Of course, they do have occasional gems since then. I really like Stipe's early, mysterious approach, which manages to get the feeling across without the lyrics being too concrete. Songs like Driver 8, Fall On Me, Pretty Persuasion, are my favorites.</p>

<p>- Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan and Party - Intoxicated Spirit.</p>

<p>The piece Yeh Jo Halka Halka builds over 23 minutes of creative riffing on vocals, harmoniums, and hand drums. This got me interested in buying a harmonium. I don't really care for any of the crossover techno stuff that he did with British artists. I also recommend his "Supreme Collection", which has some amazing performances.</p>

<p>- The Jam - Snap (double LP compilation).</p>

<p>Since The Jam was more of a singles band, I list a compilation. I like Weller's intensely cutting lyricism. Too bad more people can't let it rip with the individualism and style of Mr. Weller.</p>

<p>- Charlie Parker - Live at Storyville.</p>

<p>Although this CD is recovered from 2 noisy gig tapes, and is from the early 50's when Bird was probably declining, songs like Moose the Mooch and Ornithology really have a shoot-from-the hip quality.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Although I have hundreds of CD's I like, somehow these manage to keep getting listens over the years. As you can see, my tastes are all over the place.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you get up to outside of Young Chang?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> I spend a lot of time with my wife Maura and our 2 boys Conor and Aidan. You can tell by the boy's Irish names that my wife won the naming contest. Actually, I gave up my portion of the naming rights in order to get money for more music gear. ;) Right now my boys love to listen to Tom Waits and old R.E.M. I hope they don't grow up to be sullen hobos, too ;).</p>

<p>My band, "Etherdrops", takes up a majority of the rest of the time - writing and recording songs, rehearsing, gigging, promoting, etc. Anyone out there with some clout looking for a respectable band to manage?</p>

<p>I've got an <a href="http://www.it.kth.se/%7Ee93_mda/synths/friends/stopp/" target="_blank">ASM-1</a> synth kit waiting to be stuffed (this is the Gene Stopp board), and a custom, fully patchable tube guitar amp project I'm doing with Bob Chidlaw. This thing is going to be the ultimate guitar-recording monster. Now if only I could find time to finish these 2 projects. Maybe this winter I can start on at least one of them.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you have planned for your band "Etherdrops" in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Our plan is to dominate the airwaves by first getting play on the Weather Channel during the Local Forecast ;). After all that is where they play some of the best music out there ;).</p>

<p>There are actually 2 gigs coming up:</p>

<p>Mon Dec 3 - CB's 313 Gallery (next door to CBGB), the Bowery, NYC, 10pm.<br />
Sun Dec 9 - T.T. the Bears, Cambridge, MA, 10pm.</p>

<p>Three of the four of us in the band have strong ties to Young Chang R&D. Wendy, our violinist, wrote the FPGA code that implements the KSP8 I/O selections. She is also the designer of the KSP8 I/O option cards. Marc, our bassist, who has since left YCRDI, wrote the Sends/EQ selection code for the KSP8. I wrote the enhanced effect linker for the KSP8. I just remembered - our soundman for the Cambridge, MA show will be Byron - he added the KSP8 SmartMedia support and support for the RSP8 remote, and also was the person who added the disk partitioning support to the K-series synths.</p>

<p>Come down to the shows and say "Hi" and tell us what sort of crazy sh** your doing with your Kurz.</p>

<p><br />
<b>SONIK :</b> <u>What sort of music (genre) would you say that your band "Etherdrops" plays?</u></p>

<p><b>STEVE :</b> Ugggh - that's tough. The best I can come up with is maybe "gypsy-tinged acoustic rock". But we are on the loud, jumpy, tribal side for an acoustic band.</p>

<p>November 2001</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Chris Meyer</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2001/chris_meyer.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2001://5.97</id>

    <published>2001-10-30T19:10:49Z</published>
    <updated>2008-11-28T04:22:48Z</updated>

    <summary>When you look at the career of Chris Meyer, you can see that he is a man who has forged his way to the top of all the fields he has worked in. From SEQUENTIAL to CYBERMOTION, Chris has carved a unique career in both audio and video (computer titling)...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="midi" label="MIDI" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="sequential" label="Sequential" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:cowzar@NOSPAM.bigpond.com">Brian Cowell</a>.</p>

<p>When you look at the career of Chris Meyer, you can see that he is a man who has forged his way to the top of all the fields he has worked in. From SEQUENTIAL to CYBERMOTION, Chris has carved a unique career in both audio and video (computer titling). </p>

<p>Sonikmatter caught up with Chris and got him talking on the industry today and the stuff of yesteryear. Like many of us at Sonikmatter, I have no doubt that you will walk away from this detailed and insightful interview with lots of answers, and probably with a few questions about the current state of the industry.</p>

<p>So without further delay, Sonikmatter is pleased to present you Chris Meyer - the father of vector synthesis.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What has been your employment history?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS : </b></p>

<p><LI>Sequential Circuits - 1984 to 1987.</LI><br />
<LI>Digidesign - 1987 to 1988. I worked for a year at Digidesign, primarily on Q Sheet (I was also into sound effects and sound design - that was the impetus behind creating MIDI Time Code), but also banging around ideas that ended up in TurboSynth.</LI><br />
<LI>Music Maker Publications - 1988 to 1989. Group Technical Editor in the US.</LI><br />
<LI>Marion Systems - 1989 to 1990.</LI><br />
<LI>Roland R&D - 1990 to 1997. Employee #2 and Chief Engineer of the now-defunct US R&D office they started in 1990. My last couple of years with them were spent primarily on researching trends (including the current wave of loop-driven music composition), and intellectual property issues. I was part of the legal team at Roland that established copyright protection for individual sound samples as sound recordings in their own right, for which I am still very proud.</LI><br />
<LI>Cyber Motion - 1997 to present.</LI></p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What did you do at SEQUENTIAL?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> My initial job was to fix bugs in older synths, and to specialize in MIDI. I updated the firmware of virtually every instrument Sequential made (I think the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/sequ/seqpro1001.jpg" target="_blank">Prophet 10</a> and the rack effects were the only older instruments I didn't update), adding MIDI features as I went. I also eventually became technical chairman of the MIDI Manufacturers Association, a position I held off and on for several years. The majority of the current MIDI spec was added on my watch (including numerous controllers, MIDI Machine Control, SMFs and General MIDI), including a fair bit from my own pen such as MIDI Time Code and the Sample Dump Standard.</p>

<p>Eventually, I started working on new instruments at Sequential. I wrote the MIDI section of the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/sequ/seqmulttommaxad.jpg" target="_blank">TOM</a> drum machine from scratch, adding such then-wild features as the ability to play the drums chromatically, trigger chords of drums, etc. When the lead engineer of the <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/sci/p2000.shtml" target="_blank">Prophet 2000</a> effort was let go during rough times, I took over as the product lead.</p>

<p>This was my introduction to sampling. Sampling was new to all of us then, and was an entirely new world! Although to many it may seem that sampling is the opposite of synthesis (capturing existing sounds vs. creating new ones), to those of us working on the instruments it was all the same - it was still about exploring sound. And we were interested in the people who were using sampling to create new forms, like Art of Noise, instead of just trying to place a Symphony in a box. (I consider most of the ROM-based products today to be songwriting tools, not "instruments").</p>

<p>I was always studying new ideas in synthesis, including FM, wavetable, Buchla's timbre modulation in his 400, etc. This eventually led to my design of the vector synthesis algorithm. A separate document I've given Sonikmatter goes over the history of the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/sequ/seqprovs04.jpg" target="_blank">Prophet VS</a>. My last instrument at Sequential was the <a href="http://www.sonicstate.com/synth/_inc/picview.cfm?synthid=484" target="_blank">Studio 440</a> sampling drum machine, which I designed.</p>

<p>Just as <a href="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/data/scott_peer.php" target="_blank">Scott Peer</a> described on the <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/sci/p3000.shtml" target="_blank">Prophet 3000</a>, working at Sequential during their last years required an insane schedule - 90 or more hours a week; the most extreme pressure you can imagine. The company almost went out of business just when the Prophet 2000 shipped, and we were in crisis mode from then until Yamaha turned it into an R&D lab.</p>

<p>On the 440, we simply worked as many hours as we could - we worked until we couldn't any more, slept, and as soon as we woke up, went back to work. I was on about a 25 or 26 cycle per day, creeping around the clock. No matter how much anyone plans, there are two things no engineer can ever predict: how long it will take to do something you haven't done before, and how long it will take to fix a bug that you don't know the cause of.</p>

<p>During my tenure at Sequential, I also worked on sound libraries for the Prophet 2000 and a drum expansion cart for the TOM, and helped voice the Prophet VS, including developing many of the waveforms that went in it. I damaged my hearing while working on drum sounds for the TOM - I became desensitized to loud sounds, and kept cranking up the monitoring system to insane levels. To this day, prolonged exposure to loud percussive sounds results in my ears "shutting down": transients are heard as a click, followed by brief muting. We have one touch-tone phone that triggers this response in me just by dialing it. Very annoying. I encourage everyone to monitor sanely. </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us what it was like to work for SEQUENTIAL?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Working at Sequential in the 80s was a very special time. The technology was moving from analog to wavetable to sampling to digital. Virtually the entire engineering staffs of Sequential and nearby Emu Systems consisted of passionate music-lovers who were groping their way through this new territory together. We worked, ate, partied, and hung out with each other. Yeah, there was also competition and tension, but it was great. I miss it. </p>

<p>I can't speak for other companies and engineers today, but I get the impression a lot of fun has gone out of the game - things are much more corporate now. You can't just fool around with circuits; you have to commit to very expensive custom chips, and hope you can program them to do what you want later. I think there are still some good environments out there; the folks at Korg US (including fellow interviewees Skippy and John Bowen) struck me as being a good crowd. </p>

<p>Lessons I learned from Sequential and other places I worked included not to pit marketing and engineering against each other, and not to place a glass wall or ceiling between the founders and the newer employees. Segregation only causes resentment and wasted effort.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us about the short time you worked for Tom Oberheim at MARION?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Tom interviewed me to consult for a few months on the user interface for a new product he was being hired to design. He couldn't tell me what it was, but I looked around his office and noticed:</p>

<p><LI>he had a brochure for every hard disk recorder being made at the time, and</LI><br />
<LI>he had a full line catalog for Roland - which didn't have a hard disk recorder at the time.</LI></p>

<p>It was pretty obvious what the project was going to be - Roland's first hard disk recorder.</p>

<p>I was very proud of the specification I created. This was over a decade ago, and it included features such as being able to create a tempo map from spotting the waveform of created audio, or being able to align audio snippets to a tempo map grid - things that just weren't being done back then. After writing the spec, I started working on algorithms and systems designs for various parts of the proposed recorder, including buffer and time management. Tom eventually promoted me from a consultant to his chief engineer.</p>

<p>When Tom and Roland decided to part ways, Roland offered me a job to be employee #2 at a new US R&D facility they were opening. The product I worked on for Tom eventually became the DM-80 hard disk recorder - although that instrument only implemented a portion of what I originally proposed. In their typical, successful fashion, Roland scaled the DM-80 back to a more conservative first effort, and then added features as they evolved the product line - and now they're quite successful. But I'm more of a typical American - I wanted to hit a home run the first time out :-).</p>

<p>While I was with Tom, I also worked on a sample library for his Akai S-950 sampler 16-bit hot-rod modification.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments did you work on at Roland?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I continued to consult on the DM-80, which was moved to Japan for development, and helped gather samples for the JD-800. A <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/roland/jd800.shtml" target="_blank">JD-800</a> is one of only two modern, polyphonic, MIDI-enabled synths I still own (a <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/sequ/seqpro501a.jpg" target="_blank">Prophet VS</a> is the other), partially because it has samples in it from some of my older analog instruments which I no longer own (like a rev. 2 Prophet 5 and an <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/oberheim/xpander.shtml" target="_blank">Oberheim Xpander</a>).</p>

<p>We had hoped that we would design or develop a synth at the US R&D office. But for a variety of reasons, it never happened. The Japanese office felt "we already have people who can design synths and create sound libraries; we need you to explore areas we currently don't have covered." So my main job became acting as an antenna and filter for new trends in both the music and video production areas. I even worked for a while on a big, networked, interactive music community/environment that some major US companies were exploring, but which never came to fruition.</p>

<p>Although I no longer worked in sound development, I saw the large amount of resources Roland was pouring into it. I eventually posed the question, "If someone stole our samples, do we have any way to protect it legally?" Roland hooked me up with a top-notch entertainment industry and intellectual property lawyer - Larry Iser of Greenberg Glusker in Los Angeles - and we started looking into this largely uncharted area.</p>

<p>As it turns out, a chip company indeed decided to appropriate Roland's Sound Canvas samples set for their own sample ROMs, thinking there was nothing illegal about their actions - so suddenly we had to put our theories about protecting samples as Sound Recordings into practice. We went to court, and won every step of the way until they finally decided to settle and legally license the sounds. Although a far cry from instrument design, I remain very proud of that achievement to this day - it creates a legal basis for all other sound developers to protect their legitimate work.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What was your role when they were creating the initial MIDI specification?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Contrary to some rumors, I was not involved in the initial creation of the MIDI specification. The initial spec was pretty much approved and put into use in late 1983. I joined Sequential in July 1984, and essentially took over the MIDI reigns reins from Dave Smith after its initial creation.</p>

<p>One of my main jobs was to be Sequential's representative to other manufacturers for MIDI. In this role, I took on the job as Technical Chairman, and wrote on overall numerous additions and clarifications to the initial specification. Frankly, I'm quite surprised at how little the MIDI spec has been extended since I stopped being involved in the mid 90s - I went poking around on the MMA's web site, and only found DLS2 (when I had worked on DLS1), and GM2 (when I worked on GM1) but very little new beyond that. But part of the reason I left the music industry was the lack of interest among other manufacturers in expanding the spec, even in the early 90s.</p>

<p><b>SONIK : </b><u>Where do you think the MIDI specification should be now?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I really wish MIDI had evolved more for the performing and recording musician.</p>

<p>When I was still actively involved in the MMA, I was pushing for more commands that would help a musician configure their studio without having to hand-enter the capabilities of each of their instruments, which could help synchronize instruments of the fly should a performer want to start a new drum pattern or arpeggiation after the MIDI clocks had started flowing, etc.</p>

<p>I did manage to oversea the addition of a lot of generalized performance controllers such as modifying the attack and decay of a sound without having to dive into its parameter menus, but the adoption rate of these has been really low.</p>

<p>In general, I think there has been a lack of interest, will, and resources to evolve the MIDI specification - we seem to have said for several years "okay, that's enough".</p>

<p>I use almost no MIDI in my own music today - usually just MIDI clocks, and maybe a program change. MIDI's strength remains in conveying musical gestures. I'm a poor instrumentalist (don't have the motor skills to make good gestures), and am short on conventional music theory to boot; I'm more interested in arranging, sound designing, and guiding an overall system. MIDI doesn't really give me that.</p>

<p>I recently had a chance to look at a list of topics that have been pending in front of the MMA over the past few years. A large number of them were "closed for lack of interest" or are being put off until a future MIDI spec is developed - which I can't see happening any time soon.</p>

<p>On the other hand, there are a lot of useful performance-oriented sound modification and effects controllers that are already part of the MIDI specification - many of which rode in on the back of the General MIDI extensions - that are seriously underused. But there isn't a mechanism in place for users to become aware of them, which in turn generates the demand needed for manufacturers to implement them or make them easy to get at.</p>

<p>Every new feature in MIDI should receive a round of press releases from the MMA, which the magazines should in turn shout from the rooftops, and run articles educating users on how to exploit the new possibilities they present. But there's just a sense of apathy surrounding the MIDI spec...</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us what the story was behind XMidi (Extended MIDI)?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS : </b>XMidi was yet another in a line of proposals to extend or replace the MIDI specification - in this case, replacing the binary math with trinary signals. </p>

<p>Like so many proposals, the fatal flaw was that it required a license of some sort from the creator; here, for the trinary communication chip. The concept of MIDI simply won't work if any one company holds too much power like that - the manufacturers are competitive enough as it is; there is no way they would stand for any one company being able to dictate prices or standards or availability to the rest of them.</p>

<p>I really wonder if we could ever do something like MIDI again. When Sequential made their first proposal for USI (Universal Synthesizer Interface), it collapsed under disagreements from just the number of American manufacturers that were around at the time. MIDI only exists because three longer-sighted Japanese manufacturers - Roland, Yamaha, and Korg - joined with Sequential and made it happen, borrowing liberally from an interface (DCB) Roland had already created. Four companies created MIDI, and then the rest signed on.</p>

<p>And just with four companies, everyone was burned out from the effort that was required to reach consensus. My job was created at Sequential because Dave Smith didn't want to deal with it any more after that (and no one inside Sequential stepped forward to fill the position, because they all realized how burned out Dave was!). And one of the top engineers at Roland told me how hard it was for them - they wouldn't want to do that again.</p>

<p>Today, there are probably too many interested parties to reach consensus on something that sweeping ever again. I really hope they prove me wrong - after all, I think it is in their best interest to set aside turf wars and evolve the industry for the benefit of all - but part of the reason it was easy for me to walk away was my frustration over the gridlock and apathy that existed in the development of MIDI at the time.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you think its disappointing that there is no audio sample standard for samplers?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I think it is very disappointing.</p>

<p>MIDI has proven that users are happier and manufacturers sell more instruments when they can all be freely interconnected, regardless of brand. Instead, an unnecessary burden is placed on sound developers either to support multiple formats, or to choose which formats to support and which to exclude.</p>

<p>This also makes users wary of buying new instruments - it's hard to switch when you have an investment in a particular format. This doesn't necessarily mean the user stays loyal to one brand; in many cases it means they make do with what they have. It's a destructive form of exclusionary marketing.</p>

<p>To some degree, the Akai format has emerged as a common denominator, through convenience. I had really hoped the DLS (Downloadable Sample) format the MMA pushed would have evolved to become a professional standard for sampling instruments, but it still seems to be concentrated in the realm of multimedia sound cards.</p>

<p>I was told DLS 2 was not getting any traction as a pro standard because the manufacturers were yet to see a need for it. But they're not the ones who have to divert resources from making new sample libraries to go propagate existing ones across too many specs, or the user having to buy multiples copies of the same library just because they dare consider buying a new instrument from a different manufacturer.</p>

<p>A unified sampler format would encourage the creation of more libraries, and users to upgrade their gear more often. It's shortsighted not to support it. Of course, manufacturers will want (and should have!) some way to differentiate their instruments - maybe they've found a new way to do velocity switching, for example, which leads to a more expressive instruments - but these could be additions on to a basic interchange spec.</p>

<p>The sample developers talked about starting a Sound Developers Association - I was even in discussions with them about helping put it together - but unfortunately, they went through the same things that hamper the MIDI manufacturers from working together: competition at the expense of expanding the market, and very few are ready to dedicate the extra time or money required to help support such an organization.</p>

<p>To me, it's a matter of priorities: You have to accept that by banding together and setting common standards and working practices, you will grow the market. The initial adoption of MIDI is the absolute clearest, irrefutable proof of that. Then go compete over slices of this larger pie. But instead, most are too busy fighting over slices of the current pie to put their knives down long enough to work together.</p>

<p>In my own music, I usually fall back to the absolute lowest common denominator: pasting together individual sound files and loops in a linear audio program, rather than using a sampler.</p>

<p>This winter I hope to spend some time getting more familiar with an <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/akai/mpc2000.shtml" target="_blank">Akai MPC2000</a> I bought to replace my Studio 440, and perhaps will get a software sample player, but that's not the space I've been in recently - it's mostly been loops. (And I have some things I wish loop-based composing tools made easier...)</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are your thoughts on the "workstation" concepts of today?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> First off, keep in mind that I don't keep up with the latest models and trends anymore - I don't currently design instruments, and as a musician I've personally evolved in a loopist and DJ direction, rather than keyboardist.</p>

<p>I see the evolution of the modern synthesizer as having gone in two directions: as a songwriting tool, or as a solo instrument. And let's face it: after New Wave, the New Romantics, and all of those other synthesizer-driven musical genres died and were replaced once again with guitar rock, there just wasn't much interest in the mainstream anymore in the synthesizer as a lead musical instrument.</p>

<p>A whole succession of really interesting synths have come and died on the vine, because that's not where mainstream pop is these days. Yes, dance music uses a lot of synthesizers as lead instruments, but the palette is often restricted too closely to the TB-303 range - it's hardly as innovative, in a pure sonic sense, as music was in the 70s and 80s.</p>

<p>It may sound like I'm completely ignoring important, expressive instruments like the Virus or Nord Modular - I'm not. But after so many years working for manufacturers like Sequential and Roland, I have to put my business hat on and say "yeah - but does it sell?".</p>

<p>The popular, successful instruments seem to be the massively multi-voiced, multi-timbral workstations that essentially exist as songwriting pads. I have nothing against these - they are obviously a boon to numerous songwriters and performers! But I wouldn't call them "instruments" in the sense a MiniMoog was.</p>

<p>I don't think this is the fault of the manufacturers - they are struggling to differentiate their products from each other. It's just a fact of mainstream use.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are your views of the "hardware versus software" debate?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I spent most of my career in the MI industry writing software - so I am certainly not an anti-software person!</p>

<p>However, my initial training was on analog synthesizers, where there was an unambiguous dedicated knob for every function, you could turn more than one of those knobs at once, get an instant response, and the instrument was fairly forgiving of "illegal" input - either you hit the end stop on a knob, or you overdrove a section a little bit. I'm just not comfortable mousing around, dealing with the response delay, and getting bitten too hard if I accidentally overcrank a parameter and get hit with full digital distortion in return. I like interacting with knobs.</p>

<p>I don't own any software synths. I still own several analog synths; most of them are patchable. I'm also admittedly an instant gratification kind of guy - when I'm making music, I want to pull up a complex sound in a hurry; I don't want to have to fight through a system of menus to painstakingly dredge it out of a machine, be it on a computer or through an LCD display on a rack. Even the famed Oberheim Xpander, which I owned for awhile, I found frustrating to program: It had a ton of power and subtlety, but I found it took me about 45 minutes to get a patch I liked from scratch - and I'm normally very fast at voicing a new sound.</p>

<p>In the signal processing realm, I like my "Mojo rack" which is essentially a collection of cheap signal processors (either massively preset multieffects with a couple free-agent editing knobs on their front panels, or analog gear like ring modulators and filter banks), cross-wired in a matrix through the good graces of a lots of effects sends and dedicated return channels which can then be sent back down the sends anew.</p>

<p>That said, I am very heartened by the approach of rewireable software synths. We're getting back to the age of modular synths, where you can play "what if?" games and try to come up with new sounds.</p>

<p>I also have more interest in the pursuit if new modules, new processing chains, and new sounds than reproducing previous instruments or sounds.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>You don't like the synthesizers of today Chris?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS : </b>Isn't it ironic that when most synths had just variations on sawtooth and a square wave, we were so passionate about their difference in sound? And today, when these workstations we discussed above have hundreds or thousands of waveform or samples, more people complain about how similar they all sound?</p>

<p>Some point to the JD800 as an example of a revival synth: lots of controls, lots of great samples. I own one. One of the most overlooked milestones of that instrument is that it raised the sample rate from the typical 32k of most digital synths at the time, to 44.1k - through good speakers, it sends tingles down your spine and makes the hair stand up on the back of your neck. But for all the sliders it has, the manual fails to provide a list of those wonderful waveforms, making them much harder to access in a quick manner when you're trying to be creative.</p>

<p>I'll still take a modular synth, thank you - at least I can see everything it can do, and get at it, all at once. Or a synth I can reconfigure quickly, with visual feedback. Beyond my JD-800 and Prophet VS, my other main instruments are an <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/eml/eml10101.jpg" target="_blank">EML-101</a>, <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/yamaha/cs30.shtml" target="_blank">Yamaha CS-30</a>, and <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/oberheim/obetvs01.jpg" target="_blank">Oberheim 2-voice</a> that I've modified to be completely patchable, with a complement of external modules to patch them into. I love the Oberheim and Yamaha because they give me two parallel voice paths, so I can craft two very different sonic components and then mix them together. I love the EML because virtually all of the controls - waveshapes, filter outputs, etc. - are continuously variable, and everything can modulate everything to create these complex, musky sounds. All allow me to mix in a bit of high pass filter along with the low pass, to create that bit of "air" or "breath" on top of a voice, which I personally enjoy.</p>

<p>One of the best modifications I ever made was adding a mixer with overdrive to the Oberheim - I can pull out the oscillators and massively overdrive the filters if I want. And they react in a complex way I can't imagine modeling - and I certainly don't get digital clipping, which I can't stand.</p>

<p>I know there is a lot of interest these days in configurable virtual synths. I haven't played with them - I can't imagine doing all that mousing around when I have real patchcords in the room :-).</p>

<p>It's not like I'm anti-computers - after editing tape with grease pencil and razor tape, and mixing many a band live with a large console, I can tell you there is no way I would go back to these after using digital audio workstations and being able to draw precisely the mix curves I want. But when I craft sounds, I want the clay in my hands.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What instruments do you have in your studio Chris?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> My own instrument collection? Relatively sparse.</p>

<p>I was a collector for a while, until I realized the chase had became an end unto itself. I've stripped my setup of anything that I feel can be duplicated by something else in the line-up, or which I simply don't use regularly. </p>

<p>My only polyphonics are a Prophet VS and Roland JD-800 (which I contributed some samples to).</p>

<p>Samplers include a Studio 440, Akai MPC-2000, and a seldom used Prophet 2002. (Okay, in the closet are also a <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/kawai/kawaik1.shtml" target="_blank">Kawai K1</a> - which I also did some patches for - and a <a href="http://www.vintagesynth.org/kawai/kawaik5.shtml" target="_blank">K5</a>).</p>

<p>Analogs include an EML-101, Oberheim Two-Voice (heavily modified to be patchable, and with an overdrive section that makes it less predictable if I want <grin>), 2 Dennis Electronics Control Voltage Processors, a custom cabinet of VCAs and CV mixers from Gentle Electric, and my wife's Yamaha CS-30 (her first synth).</p>

<p>A beheaded <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/moog/moosonic601.jpg" target="_blank">Moog Sonic Six</a> given to me by John Bowen is on extended loan to Gene Stopp (noted repairman and historian; he helped restore Emerson's modular Moog). My recording system is a Digi 001. And I have a lot of weird signal processing rack gear (including a custom DACS ColOSCil ring mod and MAM Warp 9 filterbank) and hand percussion toys. </p>

<p>I have a minimum of effects plug-ins, and don't use software synths or samplers yet, because I miss the interactivity of knobs and instant response. Again, the DJ/dub influence in my musical pursuits.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us more about your idea of "chaos theory" being applied to synthesizers?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> About the time I was working for Marion Systems and then Roland, a book that was getting a lot of attention was "Chaos: Making a New Science" by James Gleick. It would be tempting to assume "chaos theory" was all about randomness. In reality, it's about patterns you can't precisely predict, but which fall into on overall range which you can predict.</p>

<p>Take a faucet dripping: you know roughly when the next drip is coming, but for some reason there's a variation in time from drip to drip. Why is that? Or take water flowing faster and faster past an obstruction: it goes from smooth flow, to a regular pattern of waves, to churning chaos. What made it break out of its previous pattern at each step of that progression? Ever set a spinning top wobble as it slows down before it falls - what determines the pattern of those wobbles? Chaos theory is about understanding why these things happen, and the systems that surround them. You may not be able to define the exact path something is going to take, but you can predict what range of parameters it might output given certain conditions - for example, that the next drip is probably going to come within this range of times.</p>

<p>It struck me that chaos theory might provide the key to "human imperfections" in musical instruments and sound. The current rage was sound modeling: how you could precisely recreate a real instrument. But I wasn't interested in how to recreate one instrument, I wanted to divine basic, underlying truths that could then be applied to any sound.</p>

<p>I had several specific ideas I wanted to see implemented in keyboards. For example:</p>

<blockquote>
a) a "life" or "turbulence" oscillator, applied as LFO or wave scanner. What life or turbulence systems have in common is, as you increase the amount of "drive" into the system, their output follows this progression: a "DC" signal, which then breaks into an oscillation, and then a more complex oscillation, and then into noise. Imagine that under your fingers for aftertouch! The interesting thing about the "life" function is, inside the noise, you will suddenly find small areas that break back into clean oscillation for a given amount of drive. A little more drive or a little less, and it's back to noise. This is an interesting idea for potentially creating overblown harmonics.

<p>b) a "sproing" generator as a supplemental envelope. I was working on formulas that at low key velocities on input, the resulting envelope would be a simple attack/release. A little harder velocity, the decay cycle extends, and then starts to get some ripples and spikes in it. Harder, and now the envelope has multiple spikes - two or three peaks, like a horn blip. Harder, and it gets crazier, and lasts longer. And the progression is very organic. Imagine this as an additional envelope added to, say, filter cutoff or some other brightness control.<br />
</blockquote></p>

<p>The following two are not pure chaos, but spun out of these trains of thought:</p>

<blockquote>
c) Think of the typical mod wheel, aftertouch or foot pedal hooked up again to brightness or filter cutoff. You set it to a certain point or press a certain amount, and there's your cutoff - period. Now think of a guitarist trying to get feedback sustain: If they're too far away from their amp, or hold the guitar at an angle away from the amp, the feedback starts to die away - and continues to die until gone. Get closer, or rotate the guitar towards the amp, and the feedback starts to build - and keeps building until it hits some saturation point. Want a certain amount of feedback? Then the guitarist has to balance on a knife edge, constantly varying distance or angle. For some, this becomes an expressive, interactive game they play with their instrument.

<p>Why doesn't our footpedal or aftertouch work the way feedback does? </p>

<p>Well, it quite simply could! In technical terms, it's the difference between a "first order" and "second order" equation - whether the footpedal position <b>is</b> the cutoff amount, or if it's a multiplier, that decides how fast the cutoff value is growing or dying down. </p>

<p>d) I also have other ideas on creating intermodulation between the oscillators or voices in an instrument, akin to the way strings intermodulate through the bridge of a guitar. We all know the sympathetic vibrations of the other strings of a guitar or piano makes a single note so much richer, and creates new interactions for pairs of notes that cannot be duplicated by playing back two solo samples in isolation. It wouldn't take that much to create a system where voices in an instrument modulate each other when sounded, creating a rich feedback system.<br />
</blockquote></p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you believe that we will ever see Vector Synthesis again in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS : </b>Considering how we're seeing every prior analog instrument and module - good and bad - resurrected in either modular, rack mount or virtual form in the name of retro, I can't imagine we won't!</p>

<p>Remember that Vector Synthesis wasn't based on some holy grail of how to model sounds, as FM or additive synthesis were; it was just an exceedingly efficient way to produce dynamically varying sounds, when most instruments at the time had single wave cycle oscillators or were heinously difficult to program. I don't think we finished exploring everything that could be done with Vector Synthesis. Hats off to Korg for wavesequencing, which is a lot of fun. I was particularly disappointed with the Yamaha implementation with a 50-step envelope - who has time to program or understand such a beast?!? The idea behind the VS was supposed to be instant gratification.</p>

<p>Improvements we were thinking of even while we were working on the Prophet VS included: </p>

<ul>
      <li>Adding attack transients that preceded the looping waveforms. </li>
<li>Longer waveforms, so the individual seed sounds could have more evolution of their own. </li>
<li>A way of not placing the sounds in the very corners, but anywhere inside the grid, so you could design your own sonic "topography" to explore. </li>
<li>A three-dimensional vector field, instead of just the current 2D grid. </li>
<li>Also, the joystick ended up not being used as much as a performance controller as we hoped. Perhaps something like the new Tactex surface to mix waveforms would have gone over better. </li>

<p>    </ul></p>

<p>As fun as Vector Synthesis was, I think one of the strongest - and certainly most under-emulated - sections of the Prophet VS was its envelopes. I think the compromise we struck on of a few looping segments, with a start point on the attack segment which allowed various amounts of "instant on" transients, was a brilliant solution to creating dynamic sounds with a minimum of hair-pulling. (And a tip of the hat to Don Buchla, who had looping envelopes on his model 400 - that's the instrument that introduced me to the concept.)</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What forms of synthesis do you think should be explored more?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I think a lot can be done to extend Vector Synthesis. I'm also interested in seeing someone explore some of the Chaos Theory concepts discussed earlier. </p>

<p>Granular synthesis can create some great washes of sound - I'm probably more interested in it as a sound design technique than a specific synthesis algorithm. In fact, I used a simple granular synthesis program called <a href="http://www.audioease.com/Pages/Free/FreeMain.html" target="_blank">Thonk</a> on some of the voices that are woven throughout my recent album, Lucid Dreams. And I think there is a lot of promise in sound and instrument modeling for the performers out there; the performance interfaces may need to evolve further to really exploit the capabilities that could be exposed in this area for performers to get more of themselves into the sound while they're playing.</p>

<p>But for my own personal noodling, I wish the modular synthesizer would be evolved further. Synthesis used to be about the pure joy of conjuring up new sounds, and there was no better tool for that than a patchable modular synth.</p>

<p>Today, there are probably more modular synth manufacturers than ever before, but unfortunately for my tastes, although there are exceptions, too many of them are focusing on the past. I just can't get excited about a more stable VCO with more precise waveforms, a quieter VCA, an envelope generator with voltage controlled times, or a recreation of a filter out of an old synth that I might not even particularly have liked. </p>

<p>I still keep a binder of circuit designs from a great old newsletter called Electronotes. Each issue - and there were well over 100 of them - had circuits and ideas for completely new types of oscillators, filters, waveshapers, modulation generators, and other modules, designed to create sounds we hadn't heard before. I really wish more modular manufacturers would study those, rather than try to recreate yet another Korg filter. Add an oscillator module that allowed me to play back samples and feed it through this signal chain - in addition to normal electronic waveform oscillators - and I'd be personally very happy.</p>

<p>If nothing else, just bring all the internal trims out to the front panel! In my first modular (a PAiA), I added pots to the front panel for any waveform symmetry, envelope overshoot, or similar adjustment that I could find.</p>

<p>I know there are some virtual synthesis engines which I should check out more closely, which would get me closer to this goal. But I have resisted so far because I just don't like having a virtual interface between me and my sound creation. Real electronics can also be more forgiving when you make a "mistake", such as overloading a module. I can think of some ways my resistance could be overcome - such as higher resolution or floating point internal calculations, followed by a real-time limiter to save your speakers and ears; simple scaling/offset modules that can be patched inline with any virtual patchcord to make interfacing between different expectations of different modules easier; etc. I imagine some instruments already have these - but I just haven't had the time to seek them out and learn them.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>If you developed a synthesizer now - what features would you implement on it?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> If I were building a synth for my own use, it would be a large modular system, with as many unusual timbre-shaping modules as I could find or have built :-).</p>

<p>If I was designing a synth for commercial sale, I really want to explore some of the Chaos Theory concepts I described earlier. I want to build a synthesizer that is much more organic; that really responds to the way you play - not always in 100% predictable fashion, but still very controllable. I know some will say "well, that's a sound modeling synth", but I'm not interested in going down that strict of a religious path - I want to take the good old fashioned subtractive synthesis machine, and then extend it using chaos theory concepts to react and interact more like real instruments do. So it would be a sound composition and performance synth, like the Prophet VS, rather than a workstation.</p>

<p>In the land of sampling, I have several ideas as well. One is combining the best aspects of loop-based composition software, and real-time tempo-matched effects and analog-style processing, in a performance instrument. And for a keyboard-oriented instrument, we need a fast, good-sounding, cheap pitch shifting implementation, so we can separate pitch and playback speed once and for all for every note in live performance. It's simply not natural that the attack of an instrument speeds up or slows down by a factor of 2 for every octave; this needs to be an adjustable parameter. Roland is starting to look down these roads with their variphrase sampler.</p>

<p>And most important of all, it must be dead-easy to use. I really think the user interface needs to start from the point of view of "what is the most logical thing the user will want to do next? Okay, what would be the most intuitive way for them to do that?". Instead, too many instruments have one person saying "we're going to have this size of LCD, this many buttons, and this many sliders", and another person saying "these are the features and parameters this instrument will have", who are then trying to marry the two together later. It sounds like some kind of silly party trick; not a way to build an easy-to-use tool for creative people.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would be the strangest/funniest thing you have seen/heard the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> The stories are endless. As Scott Peer mentioned in his interview, Sequential was probably the most fun place to work, despite the immense pressure of working for a company that eventually went out of business. </p>

<p>There's the time I played racquetball with Sequential's president, Barb Fairhurst, and drew blood when I hit her with a racket (no, she didn't fire me). Or the April Fool's bulletin I issued of updates to the firmware in our instruments, with features that were almost believable - the European office in particular started telling customers about features that were quite impossible to implement, before they caught on.</p>

<p>My personal favorite at Sequential is so tiny, but it was such a jewel of a moment: A vendor sent us a new footswitch, made out of plastic, to consider packaging with our keyboards. It was less expensive, and one product manager in particular was interested. I snatched it from him, said "well, let's test it, then!" put it on the floor and stomped on it as hard as I could with the heel of my boot. It broke into pieces. He started getting quite upset with me, until I said "you don't think a customer is going to do that?!?".</p>

<p>Some of the strangest, funniest stories revolve around new products being displayed for the first time. For example, right before the AES show where the DM-80 was going to premiere, the engineers opened up a blueprint of a fader unit they had designed for its built-in mixer - called the FU-80. I tried to explain to them that there's no way that could be the final name (as it was shorthand for "Fuck You"), but low and behold - they had a prototype with them, with FU-80 in big letters on the front panel. And they displayed it at that show. People were offering large sums of money to buy that prototype unit...</p>

<p>I think users would be shocked if they knew how often demonstrations of new instruments were rigged or simulated. Trade shows create deadlines that don't always line up with whether a product is ready or not. As a result, sometimes you have things as ridiculous as a person behind a curtain playing a prototype while a demonstrator is pushing keys on a dummy instrument out front. Sometimes product development is actually delayed, while resources are devoted towards making a demonstration prototype for a trade show. </p>

<p>So let that be a word of warning: Don't believe what you see at shows; only believe what you can play and take home from a music store.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Can you tell us about your company CyberMotion?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Both my wife Trish and I worked for Music Maker Publications. She was a production manager and eventually an art director before deciding to strike out on her own. We called her business CyberType, based on my interest in the William Gibson/cyberpunk movement at the time.</p>

<p>She got bored with print, and we started looking at another field to move into. Around 1991, I started playing around with desktop video tools - QuickTime had just come out, and I could see this new way of working was going to eventually scale up from jerky, postage-stamp-sized movies on a computer to broadcast video and film. An exciting application called After Effects had just appeared, which was resolution independent, with image quality as good as or better than any of the pro hardware systems available. We decided to take her company in that direction, changing the name to CyberMedia and eventually <a href="http://www.cybmotion.com/" target="_blank">CyberMotion</a>.</p>

<p>Trish thought her initial jobs would be working on local cable ads. Instead, her first After Effects job was animating graphics for a nine-screen circlevision at the Korean Expo. A couple of years later, she animated one of the first major release motion picture title sequences ever done on the desktop: SFW for Propaganda Films.</p>

<p>I worked with Trish in my spare time, sliding over more and more until I left Roland - my last MI industry job - in 1997 and devoted all of my time to CyberMotion as well. Since then, we've worked on a wide variety of jobs, including titles for iWerks motion simulators, broadcast television, and major motion pictures (including Now and Then, Almost Heroes and The Talented Mr. Ripley), a couple of the animations for the four-block-long Fremont Street Experience canopy in Las Vegas, and graphics for a number of corporate videos and trade show events, with clients ranging from Apple to Xerox. We're also writing our second book on After Effects; our first one was adopted as the industry bible on the subject.</p>

<p>Interestingly, working with graphics got me back into making music. I played a bit when I was still at Sequential Circuits, but got out of the habit. Then I started composing bits of music for some of our visual jobs, including the opening title for a PBS special (Two Way TV). It's finally progressed to me releasing an album earlier this year (Alias Zone : Lucid Dreams); I'm about to sign with Valley Entertainment to get it wider exposure.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What aspects of video processing do you think would be well suited to processing audio?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I would like to have equalizers that had more of a pure harmonic spectrum user interface, where I could clearly say "restrict your bandwidth to this range" or "reduce this range overall by this amount". In visual tools, I can crop an image, re-position it in a frame, apply a curve to its luminance range. I visualize frequency spectrums of individual sounds and overall mixes; it's an intermediate step to translate these overall shapings into "okay - that means I need a high shelf EQ, cut about 4 to 5 dB, with a cutoff frequency about here in order to reach down to here...".</p>

<p>In the visual medium, one of the most important tools we have to combine images are called Transfer Modes. Rather than just mix the opacities of each layer (akin to setting levels of audio), which often results in a muddy, indistinct, tends-towards-grayish mix, transfer modes are more complex mathematical formulas that determine how pixels combine with those underneath. For example, Add mode says add the values of each color channel to the corresponding color channels underneath. Screen is a gentler version of Add, which has a result more akin to two different images being projected onto the same screen. Multiply says scale the intensity of a color channel underneath by your own corresponding color channel's strength. Overlay mode is like Screen for values higher than 50% luminance, and like Multiply for values under 50% - it really adds the contrast and saturation. Color Only mode says take the luminance value of the underlying image, but impose your own Hue on top of that. And this happens per pixel in an image. Think of moving this to frequency bands, so when you mix two sounds together, they enhance and interact with each other. It is like an extreme evolution of the vocoder (a regular tool in my own music, often used in unusual ways).</p>

<p>I still do most of my audio editing in video programs. Most of my work is based on aligning events between different soundfiles, rather than aligning each of them to a grid created by a tempo map. It feels more direct to me. And I don't have to build a tempo map to represent what is going on in a recording to be able to then relate other sounds to it (an intermediate step that slows me down when the creative juices are flowing).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Where do you see 3d animation heading in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Well, more and more photorealistic scenes - convincing sets and creatures that would be too difficult to create conventionally, which in turn widens the latitude of what stories can be told. There are obvious sensationalist stories that are essentially built around the technology - like Jurassic Park - but even more useful is the removal of restrictions on the imaginations of conventional filmmakers.</p>

<p>Actually, these are not the areas of 3D we use in our own work. We have a mantra of sorts: "no dinosaurs; no spaceships." We use 3D just to help us create additional graphical elements or environments for more abstract forms of art. The area of graphics we are into has more to do with conveying ideas or moods than explicit scenes, so 3D is just another chisel or crayon in our toolbox.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What would you recommend to people who would like to enter into the computer animation field?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Unless you work for a very large company, being a desktop graphic artist means you have to educate both the left and the right sides of your brain. Yes, you need to learn how to master your software, but you also really need to be aware of traditional skills such as the use of fonts, or lighting and framing a scene - this is what separates an "animator" from an "artist".</p>

<p>Perhaps the central hub program to desktop graphics is Adobe's After Effects. Whether you are compositing characters into a live action scene, creating pure graphics, or enhancing a 3D render, most projects will touch After Effects at one point or another. Our studio CyberMotion was one of the original development sites for this program, and our business is based around it.</p>

<p>We got so frustrated at the lack of good After Effects books available to others, that we took over half a year off an wrote our own: "Creating Motion Graphics with After Effects". It was near suicide financially to do so - writing books pays a _lot_ less than creating graphics - but our book has since become the industry bible, and has sold twice as many copies as anyone predicted. One of the reasons, we feel, is because it's not a manual, it's a relation of our experiences - if we don't use a feature, we skip it; if we do use a feature, we tell you why and where. We're working on a companion volume - After Effects in Production - which contains a number of artistic tutorials and case studies to help people further hone their skills, and see how others work.</p>

<p>Part of this left/right brain duality I mentioned earlier applies to the technical areas of video as well. You can be a great artist, and master your software, but if you don't know all the weird kinks involved in delivering a job in film or video format, all of your work will go for naught. And no one teaches you this outside-the-program information in their manuals. So we created a videotape called VideoSyncrasies that goes over all these "gotchas" - many of which caught us out, when we were starting!</p>

<p>The motion graphics community is great about sharing. When we started, we knew nothing; we learned because others shared with us. We're just trying to return the favor and keep the tradition going.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do you see computer animation becoming part of a musicians performance in the future?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> When I was younger, I used to listen to music really intently - and quite often, I saw imagery in my head as I listened. So I feel the tie between the two is important.</p>

<p>But more importantly, I think many creative people are artists first - they just have chosen a particular mode of expression for their ideas, such as playing a guitar or chiseling stone. I think if it was made easier for them to employ more modes of artistic expression, they will do so. If we can just create the tools that will make it easier, in the future we will expect musicians to also create visual content to enhance their music.</p>

<p>A life-changing experience for me was getting the video of U2's ZooTV tour. The massive banks of video monitors, with imagery that enhanced or contrasted with their music - it really opened the experience up to communicating through several channels at once. The opening of the video made from the tour still sends chills down my spine.</p>

<p>Aside from something that ambitious, more can be done to make the performance of electronic music more exciting, both for the performer and the audience. Obviously, areas such as the <a href="http://privat.schlund.de/o/officeandtown/stoffel/alt_controller/dbeam.html"  target="_blank">D-Beam</a> controller can make a performance more theatric. But even setting aside the audience, the instruments can be made more physical. For example, it's hard to throw your body into a performance when you have to make very precise movements of slider or footpedal to control your sound. Something as simple as the addition of a stiff spring into a footpedal controller - so you could really lean into a modulation change, rather than delicately control it - would make this music less frustrating to play.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What are the 10 best CD's in your collection?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Boy, that's a hard question to answer - I have several hundred CDs, LPs, and cassettes, and I listen to very wide range of music. So I'm going to give you a few "lists of 10" - the 10 synthesizer albums that had the biggest influence on me, 10 sampling albums, and then 10 I happen to be listening to a lot these days:</p>

<center><b>10 Influential Synthesizer Albums:</b></center>

<p>Synergy - "Electronic Realizations for Rock Orchestra".<br />
Amazingly thick, emotional orchestrations using just a MiniMoog, Oberheim SEM, and a Mellotron.</p>

<p>W. Carlos - "Clockwork Orange"<br />
Excellent crossbreeding of classical music with a new vocabulary for electronic music.</p>

<p>Klaus Schulze - "Mirage"<br />
Prototypical "Berlin Movement" album with sequencers, Moog bass and floating sounds.</p>

<p>Tangerine Dream - "Ricochet"<br />
A heady, earlier-period live mix of their typical synths with guitars, drums and Mellotron.</p>

<p>Edgar Froese - "Stuntman"<br />
A landmark wavetable synthesis album - bright, animated timbres we hadn't heard before (runner-up: Thomas Dolby's first).</p>

<p>Peter Baumann - "Romance '76"<br />
Minimalist electronics that predated IDM (Intelligent Dance Music); the second side is a seamless blend of chamber orchestra and synths.</p>

<p>Simm - "Welcome"<br />
A 20+ year later bookend to the Baumann album: a wonderfully brooding mix of IDM, minimalism, dark ambient, and stuttering rhythms.</p>

<p>Patrick O'Hearn - "Ancient Dreams"<br />
Prototypical ambient/world fusion album - lots of gorgeous spaces gave the timbres room to breath.</p>

<p>Hawkwind - "Space Ritual"<br />
Acid rock at its extreme; one of the synthesists even used electronic test signal generators!</p>

<p>Ultravox - "Rage in Eden"<br />
Few have cranked up synthesizers to the level of intensity and emotion as an electric guitar. Other candidates are Gary Numan's "Pleasure Principle" and Nine Inch Nails' "Pretty Hate Machine".</p>

<center><b>10 Influential Sampling Albums:</b></center>

<p>Art of Noise - "Who's Afraid Of"<br />
Has anyone ever done it better? This is the album that said samplers did not have to be about imitation.</p>

<p>Frankie Goes to Hollywood - "Welcome to the Pleasure Dome"<br />
What sounds like a swinging, over the top bar band is actually a Fairlight. Great programming.</p>

<p>Big Audio Dynamite - "Megatop Phoenix"<br />
Wonderfully crafted tunes from an ex-member of The Clash, interwoven with dirt-cheap grungy samplers and interesting interludes.</p>

<p>David Byrne - "Catherine Wheel"<br />
A fascinating Byrne and Eno collaboration that used samplers to mix new timbres and textures with normal rock instrumentation.</p>

<p>Keith LeBlanc - "Stranger Than Fiction"<br />
Monstrous drummer plays most of the parts from samples triggered by his drums. Vocal drops and linear found text keeps the interest.</p>

<p>Public Enemy - "Fear of a Black Planet"<br />
It's easy to dismiss hip-hop or rap, but this album is a furious production tour de force.</p>

<p>M/A/R/S - "Pump Up The Volume"<br />
This single is what put sample-based house music on the map for many Americans.</p>

<p>Coldcut - "What's That Noise"<br />
Prototypical modern dance music album - a catalog of styles, crafted by two of the best producers.</p>

<p>Karlheinz Stockhausen - "Hymnen"<br />
A rip-your-head-off avant-garde experience of disembodied voices and melodies.</p>

<p>Alias Zone - "Lucid Dreams"<br />
It may seem cheeky to plug my own album, but I wouldn't have released it if it didn't represent what I thought was a good use of the available technology, in a style that matched my current aesthetic.</p>

<center><b>10 Albums I'm Listening To Today (subject to change monthly):</b></center>

<p>Axiom Ambient - "Lost in the Translation"<br />
Bob Marley - "Dreams of Freedom"<br />
Bill Laswell - "Dub Chamber 3"<br />
Bill Laswell - "Lo.Def Pressure"<br />
Sacred System - "Nagual Site"<br />
Trance Planet (compilation, box set)<br />
Jon Hassell - "Power Spot"<br />
Jon Hassell - "The Surgeon of the Nightsky Restores Dead Things by the Power of Sound"<br />
Six Degrees Collection - "Asian Travels"<br />
James Johnson & Stephen Phillips - "Lost at Dunn's Lake"</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who have been your musical influences over the years, Chris?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> My tastes have continued to evolve over the years. I'm a roving sponge. I've made an effort to try to keep current with musical trends as well as explore other styles and ethnic musics - both back when I was designing instruments, and now that I'm releasing my own albums. I'm always looking to hear ideas that intrigue me, to assimilate into my own music.</p>

<p>Over time, though, a few specific artists continue to stand out as influences for me:</p>

<p><i>Miles Davis:</i> I'm not a huge fan of jazz, but I never cease to be intrigued by Miles. Most pop music, I can hum a couple of beats ahead; I know where the changes are and where it's going. With Miles, I could rarely predict - always a surprise. Another person who wasn't afraid to experiment with fusing different styles.</p>

<p><i>Jimi Hendrix:</i> Another musical innovator, willing to explore new styles and ideas. His guitar solos get most of the attention, but the way he could play in parallel with his singing - he and his guitar were two faces of the same head. Also a great explorer of what the studio could do.</p>

<p><i>John Hassell:</i> One of the first - and probably still the best - to combine first world and third world musics through the filter of modern electronics. Itï¿½s rare you hear someone come up with music this original.</p>

<p><i>Trent Reznor/Nine Inch Nails:</i> Although my own music is more in the ambient realm, I appreciate those who can channel so much raw power and aggression into a song. There's also a great wealth of ideas in the sounds and processing's he employs.</p>

<p><i>Karlheinz Stockhausen:</i> There's a book by Jonathon Cott called Stockhausen: Conversations with the Composer that will open up an endless stream of stunning ideas to you of how to explore sound and composition. Ironically, I personally don't like how Stockhausen translated many of those ideas into sound; the exception is his piece Hymnen (noted above) - especially the Fourth Region.</p>

<p><i>Bill Laswell:</i> My number one influence. He is the absolute master of combining different styles, ethnicities, and influences. And not just all-star bands; he creates new syntheses of these styles and comes up with something new, rather than the obvious. An entry point for a new listener would be his Sacred System projects.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What sonic direction do you think ALIAS ZONE will explore on their next CD?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> All of the pieces on the first <a href="http://www.cybmotion.com/music/index.html" target="_blank">Alias Zone</a> album started as live performances. My role in the band was to fire up sampled loops, and then process and layer them through analog synths and filterbanks, ring modulators, vocoders, etc. The limitation I was up against was the 440's 512k word sample memory, which effectively limited me to 16.7 seconds of monophonic samples. This left very little room for variation loops, additional layers to run in parallel, etc.</p>

<p>I've since acquired an Akai MPC2000, with 32 Meg of sample RAM, so I can have quite a few more variations and layers, in addition to higher fidelity and stereo. So one of the most obvious differences you will hear is a much more dense, polyrhythmic beat, with the ability to layer together a wider variety of percussion styles.</p>

<p>I think what you will hear will be a bit darker; a bit less "polite" in mood. In addition to my usual barrage of ethnic influences, I've also been bending more and more towards trip hop and illbient. It might even come to pass that there are two versions of the ensemble: Alias Zone, which will be ethnic, and Alias Noise, which will be darker and grungier.</p>

<p>Beyond that, the other instruments will probably be more varied in tonality, and some cases less recognizable. The plan is to write a substantial part of it jamming in Richard Bugg's new studio, rather than in front of an audience. This will allow more thought to go into the timbres employed. Richard has a large modular Moog/E-mu synth we really want to try out in the mix; the bassist Lucky Westfall is also exploring different approaches to bass synthesis. I'm really excited; I can't wait to get started! I just hope it doesn't take the 4+ years to become reality that the first album did.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What internet sites do you like to visit Chris?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> I spend less time on the internet than you might imagine. It's a fabulous resource - I started using the Web when it was possible to visit every single site that existed - but I just don't have the spare time.</p>

<p>That said:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/" target="_blank">amazon.com</a> - main search site for music and books. I especially like their system of suggesting related music, and then being able to hear audio samples of that music - this is how I discovered several acts I wouldn't have been familiar with, such as Simm, Scorn, and State of Bengal.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.djangos.com/" target="_blank">djangos.com</a> and <a href="http://www.half.com/" target="_blank">half.com</a> - to fill in my back catalog of CDs on the cheap.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.hyperreal.org/" target="_blank">hyperreal.org</a> - one of my original favorite destinations, for the dance culture and the electronic music archives.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.speedvision.com/" target="_blank">speedvision.com</a>, <a href="http://www.f1i.com/" target="_blank">f1i.com</a>, and <a href="http://rpm.espn.go.com/" target="_blank">rpm.espn.go.com</a> - because I'm a racing fanatic.</p>

<p>mgla.org - it's a graphics association I help run; I answer questions on the forums whenever I can.</p>

<p>modularsynth.com - I just learned about this site; we need good hubs like this for the analog synthesis community to go see what all is available.</p>

<p>And I've been hearing something about this site called SonikMatter.... :-)</p>

<p><br />
<b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you do to "get away from it all" and recharge yourself?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Music is actually an escape for me! I spend so much of my time creating graphics, that it's a real treat to go into the studio and fool around with sounds or music for a while.</p>

<p>Aside from that, we spend as much time outdoors as we can. We have put a lot of effort into converting the property around our house into a <a href="http://www.cybmotion.com/habitat" target="_blank" >wildlife habitat</a>.</p>

<p>If we're not out hiking or exploring a wild botanic garden, we're watching the birds we've attracted to our property - they're an endless source of amusement. And spending time around plants and wildlife is a great antidote for spending the rest of your life using computers.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Could you ever be enticed back into the development of synthesizers again Chris?</u></p>

<p><b>CHRIS :</b> Yes. When my career was diverted at Roland into non-synthesis areas, I don't think I was finished realizing the ideas buried in my head. Of course, such a move back into the MI industry would have to be practical from a career point of view - I co-own a graphics studio now, and really enjoy that life - but I can't get over that feeling of unfinished business. The 80s were a great time, but somehow we got diverted from making instruments to making workstations. Let's go back and finish - or at least, continu</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Bob Yannes</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2001/bob_yannes.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2001://5.115</id>

    <published>2001-09-03T22:37:13Z</published>
    <updated>2005-08-26T05:03:26Z</updated>

    <summary>This is an interview with the creator of the SID chip, namely Bob Yannes, who after working for Commodore, co-founded the well-known synthesizer company Ensoniq. In the latter part of the interview he gives us a very detailed description of the SID&apos;s technology...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by Andreas Varga</p>

<p>This is an interview with the creator of the SID chip, namely Bob Yannes, who after working for Commodore, co-founded the well-known synthesizer company Ensoniq. In the latter part of the interview he gives us a very detailed description of the SID's technology. The interview was done via e-mail in August 1996 by Andreas Varga. Some questions came from Linus Walleij. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Did you foresee that people would actually treat your little VLSI-chip like an instrument?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> Actually, I was an electronic music hobbyist before I started working for MOS Technology (one of Commodore's chip divisions at the time) and before I knew anything at all about VLSI chip design. One of the reasons I was hired was my knowledge of music synthesis was deemed valuable for future MOS/Commodore products. When I designed the SID chip, I was attempting to create a single-chip synthesizer voice, which hopefully would find it's way into polyphonic/polytimbral synthesizers. I never realized this however.</p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Are you aware of the existence of programs like SIDPLAY, PlaySID,... which emulate the SID chip up to the smallest click?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> I only recently became aware of them (through your website). I'm afraid I haven't thought much about SID in the last 15 years...I am constantly amazed and gratified at the number of people who have been positively affected by the SID chip and the Commodore 64 (which I also designed) and who continue to do productive things with them despite their "obsolescence". </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Have you heard the tunes by Rob Hubbard, Martin Galway, Tim Follin, Jeroen Tel, and all the other composers</u>?</p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> I'm afraid not, are recordings available in the US?</p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Did you believe this was possible to do with your chip?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> Since I haven't heard them I'm not sure what we are talking about. However, I did design the SID chip with enough resolution to produce high-quality music. I was never able to refine the Signal-to-noise ratio to the level I wanted, though.</p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>How much of the architecture in the SID inspired you when working with the Ensoniq synthesizers?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> The SID chip was my first attempt at a phase-accumulating oscillator, which is the heart of all wavetable synthesis systems. Due to time constraints, the oscillators in SID were not multiplexed, therefore they took up a lot of chip area, constraining the number of voices I could fit on a chip. All ENSONIQ sound chips use a multiplexed oscillator which allows us to produce at least 32 voices per chip. Aside from that, little else of SID is to be found in our designs, which more closely resemble the Mountain Computer sound card for the Apple II (the basis of the Alpha Syntauri system). The DOC I chip (used in the Mirage and ESQ-1) was modeled on this sound card. Our current designs, which include waveform interpolation, digital filters and digital effects are new designs that aren't really based on anything other than our imaginations.</p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>How big impact do you think the SID had on the synthesizer industry?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> Well, I don't think it had much impact on the synthesizer industry. I remember once at Commodore that Sequential Circuits was interested in buying the chip, but nothing ever came of it. My intention in designing the chip (since MOS Technology was a merchant semiconductor house at the time and sold chips to the outside world) was to be able to sell the SID chip to synthesizer manufacturers. SID chip production was completely consumed by the Commodore 64 and by the time chips were readily available, I had left Commodore and never had the opportunity to improve the fidelity of the chip.</p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>What would you have changed in the SIDs design, if you had a bigger budget from Commodore?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> The issue wasn't budget, it was development time and chip size constraints. The design/prototype/debug/production schedule of the SID chip, VIC II chip and Commodore 64 were incredibly tight (some would say impossibly tight)--we did things faster than Commodore had ever done before and were never able to repeat after! If I had had more time, I would have developed a proper MOS op-amp, which would have eliminated the signal leakage which occurred when the volume of the voice was supposed to be zero. This lead to poor signal-to-noise ratio, although it could be dealt with by stopping the oscillator. It would also have greatly improved the filter, particularly in achieving high resonance. I originally planned to have an exponential look-up table to provide a direct translation for the equal-tempered scale, but it took up too much silicon and it was easy enough to do in software anyway. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>The SID is very complex for its time. Why didn't you settle with an easier design?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> I thought the sound chips on the market (including those in the Atari computers) were primitive and obviously had been designed by people who knew nothing about music. As I said previously, I was attempting to create a synthesizer chip which could be used in professional synthesizers. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Do you still own a C64 (or another SID-equipped computers)?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> Sure, I have a couple of them (including the portable), but I honestly haven't turned them on in years. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Did Commodore ever plan to build an improved successor to the SID?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> I don't know. After I left I don't think there was anyone there who knew enough about music synthesis to do much more than improve the yield of the SID chip. I would have liked to have improved the SID chip before we had to release to production, but I doubt it would have made any difference to the success of the Commodore 64. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Can you give us a short overview of the SIDs internal architecture?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> It's pretty brute-force, I didn't have time to be elegant. Each "voice" consisted of an Oscillator, a Waveform Generator, a Waveform Selector, a Waveform D/A converter, a Multiplying D/A converter for amplitude control and an Envelope Generator for modulation. The analog output of each voice could be sent through a Multimode Analog Filter or bypass the filter and a final Multiplying D/A converter provided overall manual volume control. </p>

<p>As I recall, the Oscillator is a 24-bit phase-accumulating design of which the lower 16-bits are programmable for pitch control. The output of the accumulator goes directly to a D/A converter through a waveform selector. Normally, the output of a phase-accumulating oscillator would be used as an address into memory which contained a wavetable, but SID had to be entirely self-contained and there was no room at all for a wavetable on the chip. </p>

<p>The Sawtooth waveform was created by sending the upper 12-bits of the accumulator to the 12-bit Waveform D/A. </p>

<p>The Triangle waveform was created by using the MSB of the accumulator to invert the remaining upper 11 accumulator bits using EXOR gates. These 11 bits were then left-shifted (throwing away the MSB) and sent to the Waveform D/A (so the resolution of the triangle waveform was half that of the sawtooth, but the amplitude and frequency were the same). </p>

<p>The Pulse waveform was created by sending the upper 12-bits of the accumulator to a 12-bit digital comparator. The output of the comparator was either a one or a zero. This single output was then sent to all 12 bits of the Waveform D/A. </p>

<p>The Noise waveform was created using a 23-bit pseudo-random sequence generator (i.e., a shift register with specific outputs fed back to the input through combinatorial logic).The shift register was clocked by one of the intermediate bits of the accumulator to keep the frequency content of the noise waveform relatively the same as the pitched waveforms. The upper 12-bits of the shift register were sent to the Waveform D/A. </p>

<p>Since all of the waveforms were just digital bits, the Waveform Selector consisted of multiplexers that selected which waveform bits would be sent to the Waveform D/A. The multiplexers were single transistors and did not provide a "lock-out", allowing combinations of the waveforms to be selected. The combination was actually a logical ANDing of the bits of each waveform, which produced unpredictable results, so I didn't encourage this, especially since it could lock up the pseudo-random sequence generator by filling it with zeroes. </p>

<p>The output of the Waveform D/A (which was an analog voltage at this point) was fed into the reference input of an 8-bit multiplying D/A, creating a DCA (digitally-controlled-amplifier). The digital control word which modulated the amplitude of the waveform came from the Envelope Generator. </p>

<p>The Envelope Generator was simply an 8-bit up/down counter which, when triggered by the Gate bit, counted from 0 to 255 at the Attack rate, from 255 down to the programmed Sustain value at the Decay rate, remained at the Sustain value until the Gate bit was cleared then counted down from the Sustain value to 0 at the Release rate. </p>

<p>A programmable frequency divider was used to set the various rates (unfortunately I don't remember how many bits the divider was, either 12 or 16 bits). A small look-up table translated the 16 register-programmable values to the appropriate number to load into the frequency divider. Depending on what state the Envelope Generator was in (i.e. ADS or R), the appropriate register would be selected and that number would be translated and loaded into the divider. Obviously it would have been better to have individual bit control of the divider which would have provided great resolution for each rate, however I did not have enough silicon area for a lot of register bits. Using this approach, I was able to cram a wide range of rates into 4 bits, allowing the ADSR to be defined in two bytes instead of eight. The actual numbers in the look-up table were arrived at subjectively by setting up typical patches on a Sequential Circuits Pro-1 and measuring the envelope times by ear (which is why the available rates seem strange)! </p>

<p>In order to more closely model the exponential decay of sounds, another look-up table on the output of the Envelope Generator would sequentially divide the clock to the Envelope Generator by two at specific counts in the Decay and Release cycles. This created a piece-wise linear approximation of an exponential. I was particularly happy how well this worked considering the simplicity of the circuitry. The Attack, however, was linear, but this sounded fine. </p>

<p>A digital comparator was used for the Sustain function. The upper four bits of the Up/Down counter were compared to the programmed Sustain value and would stop the clock to the Envelope Generator when the counter counted down to the Sustain value. This created 16 linearly spaced sustain levels without having to go through a look-up table translation between the 4-bit register value and the 8-bit Envelope Generator output. It also meant that sustain levels were adjustable in steps of 16. Again, more register bits would have provided higher resolution. </p>

<p>When the Gate bit was cleared, the clock would again be enabled, allowing the counter to count down to zero. Like an analog envelope generator, the SID Envelope Generator would track the Sustain level if it was changed to a lower value during the Sustain portion of the envelope, however, it would not count UP if the Sustain level were set higher. </p>

<p>The 8-bit output of the Envelope Generator was then sent to the Multiplying D/A converter to modulate the amplitude of the selected Oscillator Waveform (to be technically accurate, actually the waveform was modulating the output of the Envelope Generator, but the result is the same). </p>

<p>Hard Sync was accomplished by clearing the accumulator of an Oscillator based on the accumulator MSB of the previous oscillator. </p>

<p>Ring Modulation was accomplished by substituting the accumulator MSB of an oscillator in the EXOR function of the triangle waveform generator with the accumulator MSB of the previous oscillator. That is why the triangle waveform must be selected to use Ring Modulation. </p>

<p>The Filter was a classic multi-mode (state variable) VCF design. There was no way to create a variable transconductance amplifier in our NMOS process, so I simply used FETs as voltage-controlled resistors to control the cutoff frequency. An 11-bit D/A converter generates the control voltage for the FETs (it's actually a 12-bit D/A, but the LSB had no audible affect so I disconnected it!).</p>

<p>Filter resonance was controlled by a 4-bit weighted resistor ladder. Each bit would turn on one of the weighted resistors and allow a portion of the output to feed back to the input. The state-variable design provided simultaneous low-pass, band-pass and high-pass outputs. Analog switches selected which combination of outputs were sent to the final amplifier (a notch filter was created by enabling both the high and low-pass outputs simultaneously).</p>

<p>The filter is the worst part of SID because I could not create high-gain op-amps in NMOS, which were essential to a resonant filter. In addition, the resistance of the FETs varied considerably with processing, so different lots of SID chips had different cutoff frequency characteristics. I knew it wouldn't work very well, but it was better than nothing and I didn't have time to make it better. </p>

<p>Analog switches were also used to either route an Oscillator output through or around the filter to the final amplifier. The final amp was a 4-bit multiplying D/A converter which allowed the volume of the output signal to be controlled. By stopping an Oscillator, it was possible to apply a DC voltage to this D/A. Audio could then be created by having the microprocessor write the Final Volume register in real-time. Game programs often used this method to synthesize speech or play "sampled" sounds. An external audio input could also be mixed in at the final amp or processed through the filter. </p>

<p>The Modulation registers were probably never used since they could easily be simulated in software without having to give up a voice. For novice programmers they provided a way to create vibrato or filter sweeps without having to write much code (just read the value from the modulation register and write it back to the frequency register). These registers just give microprocessor access to the upper 8 bits of the instantaneous value of the waveform and envelope of Voice 3. Since you probably wouldn't want to hear the modulation source in the audio output, an analog switch was provided to turn off the audio output of Voice 3. </p>

<p><b>ANDREAS :</b> <u>Any other interesting tidbits or anecdotes?</u></p>

<p><b>BOB YANNES :</b> The funniest thing I remember was getting in a whole bunch of C-64 video games which had been written in Japan. The Japanese are so obsessed with technical specifications that they had written their code according to a SID spec. sheet (which I had written before SID prototypes even existed). Needless to say, the specs were not accurate. Rather than correct the obvious errors in their code, they produced games with out of tune sounds and filter settings that produced only quiet, muffled sound at the output. As far as they were concerned, it didn't matter that their code sounded all wrong, they had written their code correctly according to the spec. and that was all that mattered!</p>

<p>This interview has been reproduced with the permission of Andreas Varga.</p>

<p>For questions or comments, Mr. Andreas Varga may be reached through his SID Homepage on the World Wide Web at - <a href="http://stud1.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426444/"  target="_blank" />http://stud1.tuwien.ac.at/~e9426444/ </a></p>

<p>September 2001</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Wolfram Franke</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/2001/wolfram_franke.php" />
    <id>tag:interview.sonikmatter.com,2001://5.87</id>

    <published>2001-08-18T21:38:30Z</published>
    <updated>2005-08-26T05:03:23Z</updated>

    <summary>Waldorf and their legendary range of synthesizers need no introduction. But who are the people who toil away at the Schloss Ahrenthal, surrounded by a large forest, to engineer these desirable and ultra-cool synthesizers? Have you ever wondered why Waldorf filters are superb, or about Wavetable Synthesis or how the classic PPG Wave was transmogrified into a software synthesizer for the delectation of today&apos;s generation of musicians? The answers to these and many other questions can now be revealed...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Sonikmatter dot com</name>
        <uri>http://sonikmatter.com</uri>
    </author>
    
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://interviews.sonikmatter.com/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Interview by <a href="mailto:brujo@NOSPAM.sonikmatter.com">Rick 'Brujo' Wishart</a>.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/" target="_blank">Waldorf</a> and their legendary range of synthesizers need no introduction. But who are the people who toil away at the Schloss Ahrenthal, surrounded by a large forest, to engineer these desirable and ultra-cool synthesizers? Have you ever wondered why Waldorf filters are superb, or about Wavetable Synthesis or how the classic PPG Wave was transmogrified into a software synthesizer for the delectation of today's generation of musicians? The answers to these and many other questions can now be revealed as SoniK proudly presents an extremely enlightening interview with the immensely talented Waldorf Programmer Wolfram Franke!</p>

<p><img alt="franke.jpg" src="http://interview.sonikmatter.com/franke.jpg" width="250" height="313" border="0" align=right /></p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you get into the music industry?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> I got my first synthesizer in 1986, a German one with awful preset sounds. So I had to start programming my own sounds on the very first day I got it. The architecture and the user interface of that synth were very complex and so I became quite skilled very soon. It was an additive synthesizer which helped me learn how overtones influence timbre.</p>

<p>Less than a year later I sold my first sound set to the manufacturer of that synthesizer and they brought out a ROM cartridge with these sounds. A little later I sold further sound sets to them and after I finished school I did an internship in their company.</p>

<p>I bought another synthesizer, (not easy when you don't earn lots of money), with subtractive synthesis and I got skilled on that one too, because it also only had awful presets.</p>

<p>Parallel to that, I knew a guy from a studio nearby where our band had recorded a demo tape. This guy was a sales manager of TSi/Waldorf. At a party, he asked a couple of other musicians: "who can program sounds" - and somehow they all pointed at me. Two days later he came to me with a prototype of the upcoming Waldorf <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/microwave/" target="_blank" >Microwave</a> under his arm and a week later I gave him a memory card with 32 sounds!</p>

<p>I still remember this Microwave; it had a hardware bug that prevented loading a new wavetable when you've selected a different sound. With this bug, I wasn't even sure if the Waldorf people would hear the sounds as I had programmed them (this prototype Microwave is still somewhere in our company!).</p>

<p>However, the Waldorf people seemed to like my sounds and this guy came to me with a better prototype asking me to make two full soundsets each consisting of 64 sounds. One soundset was splitted up into factories and the so-called "Soundset #2", and the other one was released as a so-called "Signature Series" soundset. I made further soundsets and in 1992 I was asked if I would like to work at TSi/Waldorf as a product specialist. I think I confirmed that! </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What was the German synthesizer you first started programming in 1986 which obviously led you on your successful path?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> It's from the German organ company Wersi and it is called MK1 (Series III). It was a 20 voice, 8 part multitimbral additive synth with up to 32 harmonics, an integrated chorus/ensemble effect and only one VCF, but that one was a copy of the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/moog/moomod01.jpg" target="_blank">Moog 24dB VCF</a> plus a good-sounding overdrive.</p>

<p>It had a lot of very interesting features that you won't find in any other synth like modular envelopes with 8 stages where each stage could hold a module that did something like generating random steps, vibrato, linear or exponential ramps or simply holding the level for a certain time.</p>

<p>If you ask why we didn't put something like this into our Waldorf synths, I can easily answer that I was probably the only person outside of Wersi who could program this thing!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>It seems to be a great synthesizer on which to master sound programming skills?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Oh, yes, it was. I still have it in both keyboard and rack version but both are partially broken. Two voices of the keyboard are broken and the rack doesn't boot.</p>

<p>It's price tag was DM 6000,- (US$ 3000) with 20 voices (you could order it from 12 to 20 voices) which was the same price as the Korg <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/korg/kordss101.html" target="_blank" >DSS-1</a> Sampler at that time.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Do any artists spring to mind who used the Wersi MK1 (Series III)?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> In fact, I know of one artist only! I've heard one of my sounds, a very typical and unique one, on a remix vinyl of an Erasure song. But I don't know if the remix was done by Erasure or someone else. But that sound increased the quality of the remix a lot.</p>

<p>This sound was so good that I re-programmed it later in our Waldorf <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/wave/" target="_blank">Wave</a>. You could find it there under the name "Kling Klang" or "Kling Klang Deluxe" respectively. I've heard it from the Wave on a number of records, e.g. on Madonna's "Ray Of Light" album.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>I don't know what synthesizers William Orbit owns but do I presume it was his Waldorf Wave that's used on that album?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> No, he doesn't own a Wave himself, as far as I know. It was Bjork's Wave that they had rented for that time. </p>

<p>And when you read interviews with William Orbit regarding this album production, you won't find any word about the Wave. Guess why? If he would say that around 60% of the album was done with the Wave, everyone would say that anyone could do such a production when he would have a Wave. And it's more dramatic to tell interview partners that a particular sound was made with a Korg <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/korg/korms2001.jpg" target="_blank">MS-20</a> routed through an MXR flanger and a distortion stomp pedal from the USSR than to say that this sound would have been programmed on a Wave without effects!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What synthesizers have you worked on at Waldorf?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Before I started programming signal processing code myself, I worked on the concepts of several Waldorf instruments.</p>

<p>When I came to Waldorf on a full-time basis, the big Wave was already in a late development stage. However, the developers sometimes asked me how I would like to access certain functions, mainly in the fully software-based wavetable editor.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/pulse/" target="_blank">Pulse</a> was the first synthesizer where I helped working on the basic concept, i.e. sound parameters, UI layout and overall sound character.</p>

<p>The concept of the Microwave II was done almost completely by me and half a year later, I started to write down the controls I would like to see on an extended version of the Microwave II. You know the result, it became the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/microwave_xt/" target="_blank">Microwave XT</a>!</p>

<p>In 1997, <a href="http://www.steinberg.net/" target="_blank">Steinberg</a> released the first version of the VST SDK and when I read it, I immediately wanted to do something "Waldorf-ish" with it. Stefan, our main DSP programmer, emailed me the code for the Waldorf filter and 55 minutes later, the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/d-pole/" target="_blank">D-Pole</a> was born. Okay, it only featured Cutoff and Resonance with the generic Cubase parameter editor but, hey, after 55 minutes! And I was not very good in C++ programming. It took me a couple of weeks and hundreds of crashes until I had finished the D-Pole, but it greatly helped me learning C++ (especially how to optimize code so that it uses as few processor cycles as possible) and I think the result is not that bad!</p>

<p>After that, I worked on the concept of the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/q_keyb/" target="_blank">Q</a> with the goal in mind to make the biggest and most powerful VA synth ever built.</p>

<p>In fall 1999 I switched my position at Waldorf to become a full-time programmer and I developed the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/ppg_wave/" target="_blank">PPG Wave 2.V</a> which I finished in April 2000.</p>

<p>In July 2000, Giuliano Orsini, a college student from Italy, did an internship at Waldorf and he started with a small and basic drum synthesizer which I continued after his internship was finished. And that one became the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/attack/" target="_blank">Waldorf Attack</a>.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>So you learnt how to program synthesizer DSP code on the job?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> In fact, I learnt programming DSP code in my spare time!</p>

<p>But, yes, I wrote my first "synthesizer" code during my job. But it wasn't that difficult because Stefan Stenzel, Research & Development Director, gave me hundreds of tips and info over the years. I knew how LFOs, envelopes and effects are built and I knew about basic oscillator interpolation techniques.</p>

<p>I started programming in BASIC back in 1983 and later learned PASCAL and so I could follow Stefan quite well when he explained how certain things are done in software.</p>

<p>The trickiest part of modern synthesizers is the voice stealing, especially on synthesizers with multi mode with dynamic voice allocation, mono mode, dual or unisono mode, portamento and other "cases" you have to take care of. This is much heavier stuff than programming an envelope or a LFO.</p>

<p>So, if someone plans to program his own synthesizer, maybe also under VST2, he might think about starting with a single-mode synth. This is already difficult enough, especially when the sustain pedal is recognized or unisono mode should be available in the feature set.</p>

<p>Another tricky thing is the filter. There are hundreds of books and documents floating around in the world, but no filter algorithm creates real self-oscillation with a good sound. Only a very small number of manufacturers, including us, have solved that problem while even most of the VAs don't feature filter self-oscillation at all - so, strike through the "A" of V.A.! </p>

<p>I would also like to add something. Recently, a number of freeware and shareware synthesizer plug-ins hit the market and a lot of people might ask why they should pay several 100s of dollars for a plug-in when they could have a similar thing for $29.95 or even free. </p>

<p>Here's why: I've seen almost no freeware or shareware synth that has the "minimum sound quality" of commercial synthesizers, no matter if plug-in or hardware. They mostly have very annoying aliasing which is introduced even with quite low notes or the waveforms become dull when playing very low notes. Also, their envelopes and LFOs are either too slow or the whole synth needs too much processor power.</p>

<p>But: if such a synthesizer plug-in has a feature you really like, use it anyway. I don't want to kill this market, I just would like you to listen carefully to the sound it produces and then decide if you can live with it or not.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How did you achieve filter self-oscillation with a good sound?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> I couldn't even start without disclosing secrets! </p>

<p>I can only say: we don't use an algorithm as most other companies do, we use an actual <i><b>model</b></i> of an analog filter. And that's no bullshit, it's really a model! </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What was your background education?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> You don't want to know that!</p>

<p>In fact, I left school after 10 years (after the last year before the "high school" would start) and had no further education. The only education I have is 10 years of piano lessons. Everything I need to know to program is self educated - which is probably the only way.</p>

<p><br />
<b>SONIK :</b> <u>What do you think makes Waldorf stand apart from other manufacturers?</u> </p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> The sound, the products, and the people I work with!!!</p>

<p>I think, Waldorf is a very special MI company. We are small enough to build synthesizers that are a little unusual - the kind of machines <b><i>we</i></b> want - but we are big enough to be heard! We made blue-colored synthesizers when everyone made black ones and we made orange and yellow synthesizers when everyone else thought blue would look cool on a synth. We made an 8-voice semi-analog synth when everyone else made sample-playing workstations with 32 voices and integrated effects and now we make semi-modular synths with comb filters, and plug-ins tributing classic hardware of the 80's!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who works on the team at Waldorf?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> It would be a little long to list everyone at Waldorf, but here are some:</p>

<p>Wolfgang Dueren - our boss and the boss of TSi, our distributor. He was also the boss of the PPG and Steinberg distribution in the 80's (and early 90's for Steinberg).</p>

<p>Stefan Stenzel - the Research & Development director. He's our DSP programmer and responsible for half of the Wave software, the Pulse, the Microwave II/XT/XTk, the 4-pole, and the Q series. He also helped me greatly diving into audio processing code. He did a lot on the PPG Wave 2.V and the Attack plug-in, mainly the oscillator interpolation and optimization to prevent aliasing and to have it running with low processor time consumption.</p>

<p>Tommy Kircher - our hardware developer. He developed the hardware for all Waldorf machines and before that, he developed the hardware of all Steinberg MIDI and Sync interfaces (and even the Steinberg Topaz).</p>

<p>Albert Huitsing - he made his exam at Waldorf a couple of years ago by projecting and developing the <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/gekko/" target="_blank">Gekko Arp</a>. After his university time he first went to Ericson and later to Philips to learn how working in big companies felt like. After two years he decided that Waldorf was the better company at which to work. He developed the X-Pole software and is now responsible for the administrative software (MIDI, patch storage, sound editing, all that stuff) in the Q series synths.</p>

<p>Wolfram Franke - oh, that's me... I think I wrote about me elsewhere in this interview!</p>

<p>Joerg Huettner - he's my successor as the Waldorf product specialist. Besides that he runs his own studio and makes a lot of music in industrial or EBM style.</p>

<p>Holger "Tsching" Steinbrink - he's the product manager of all newer Waldorf products. He's responsible for the manual, sound programming coordination and product-related marketing.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Does the castle, the Schloss Ahrenthal, where you work have a 'magical' forest?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> I've never been in the surrounding forest so I can't tell you if it is "magical"! But it's quite a big forest in the valley where the castle is located. </p>

<p>Furthermore, in Germany we have two kinds of "castles", one of the type "Schloss" and one of the type "Burg". A Burg is usually older and solidly built to act as defense against possible invaders, kind of like a fort or forest while a Schloss is more for representing a certain status. Just wanted to add that because I don't know how many people know the difference - I've heard that there are not many castles outside of Europe! </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you feel the PPG Wave 2.V compares to the original hardware and how did you manage the task of programming this 'virtual' synthesizer?</u> </p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> The 2.V matches the 2.3 by almost 100%. Even when directly comparing them you would have a hard time to tell which is which! </p>

<p>I tried to emulate every aspect of the machine, including the steppiness of the envelopes and the LFO, the raw wavetable sound and the sound of the filter, even with resonance cranked up fully. However, there were parts that I didn't emulate, e.g. the noise and the display hum, but I think everyone is happy with that!</p>

<p>So, how did I do it? I took the <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/ppg/ppgwave01.jpg" target="_blank">PPG Wave 2.3</a> from our mini in-house museum and made sure that it reflected the PPG Wave well by asking Achim Lenzgen to check it.</p>

<p>At home, I turned on my Microwave XT to see how close it comes to the PPG by setting up sounds in both machines with the same wavetables and same filter settings. Fortunately, the resonance sound of the 12dB low pass of the XT came quite close to the resonance sound of the PPG, only the steepness of the filter was different. This was a lucky coincidence because that meant that life would be easier!</p>

<p>The next step was to program the basic building blocks of the 2.V, oscillators, filter, envelopes, LFO etc. without taking care of the fine elements that make the PPG sound. </p>

<p>Then I started matching the oscillator and filter sound to the PPG by A/B-ing two identical wavetable sounds and viewing the results on oscilloscopes. The sound I used was programmed with a sweeping filter with high resonance and I made sure that the slight distortions that happened in the PPG during the filter sweep also happened at the same positions in the 2.V. Parallel to that I matched the sound character of the PPG VCA to the one of the 2.V because that one changes the overall sound of a synthesizer, too. After that, the real PPG and the plug-in sounded the same with any filter setting, even when the filter was set up to the 'thru' signal.</p>

<p>Then I started with the envelopes. I programmed a square sound on the PPG and recorded every single setting of the envelopes to my Mac. This means, I pressed record in an audio software and then set envelope 2 Attack to 0, played a note, Attack to 1, note, Attack to 2, note, and so on. Afterwards I did the same procedure with the Decay rate, the Sustain level and the Release rate.</p>

<p>The same was true for envelope 1, but this one is even trickier. Actually, envelope 1 is made of <i><b>two</b></i> envelopes, one analog exponential envelope to control the filter and another linear envelope to control the wave scanning. The tricky thing now is that the rates don't match, sometimes the exponential envelope is faster, sometimes the linear one is. So I had to do the record procedure twice, first by modulating the filter and second by modulating the waves.</p>

<p>Finally, I recorded the rates of the LFO by setting up a square LFO modulating the filter cutoff heavily so that I could see where the square is up and where it is down.</p>

<p>After I had these recordings, I counted the samples that were needed for each "event" and typed them into tables so that I got big lists of each rate of the Attack, Decay and Release phases, the Sustain levels and the LFO rates.</p>

<p>Furthermore, I changed the shape of the exponential envelopes in the 2.V to match the behaviour of the original envelopes.</p>

<p>During all this analysis, Michael Johnson, a composer living in L.A., converted all factory sounds of his PPG system to the plug-in and I had told him to report any differences in sound instead of choosing a different setting in the plug-in. He reported "<i>nothing at all</i>" and so I was sure that his PPG and my PPG both matched the sound of the plug-in! BTW: he converted around 400 sounds by reading out the respective value on the PPG and setting the same value with the mouse in the plug-in. I still wonder why he didn't go crazy!</p>

<p>I had two other beta testers that owned an original PPG Wave and they were also asked to check the similarity. Peter Kuhlmann, one of them, reported a difference in the resonance behavior in an early development stage but it was a matter of seconds to change that in the plug-in.</p>

<p>After all that was done I asked Frank Schneider from our production to get hold of the original PPG Wave 2.3 ROMs to read out the wavetable data with an EPROM reader and sending me the binary data. This was because our Microwave and Wave synthesizers are based on such a readout, too, but when Wolfgang Palm read the EPROMS out sometime in 1987 or so, he made a mistake and one wave was missing in one wavetable. Also, the saxophone and piano samples of the original 2.3 never found their way into our Microwave and Wave synthesizer but we certainly needed them for the PPG plug-in and so we just did the whole procedure with reading out the EPROMs again.</p>

<p>The last development stage consisted of implementing the steppiness of the envelopes and the LFO and matching the aliasing behaviour of the wavetable playback. All this can be selected at once by the user by activating the "TRUE PPG" mode found on the front panel of the plug-in.</p>

<p><br />
<b>SONIK :</b> <u>What inspired you initially to conceptualise the Waldorf Attack and how did you take the intern's project to fruition as a final project?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> My initial inspiration came from the fact that there were a number of analog drum machines in the past with very decent sounds. I didn't want to copy the circuitry of each and every drum sound of those but I wanted to have something which makes strong and interesting drum sounds and can be freely programmed. Something that is a counterpart to the standard way of playing back sampled sounds and that's also different (but not too different) from the sound character of the 808 and 909.</p>

<p>I'd already had the idea for a couple of years prior to Giuliano Orsini doing his internship but couldn't get free resources in our company. This was the "chance" for me because Giuliano was not a musician and we had to find something that fits to Waldorf but doesn't need too much knowledge about pitch and notes.</p>

<p>It took a while to finish the project because I rewrote it almost completely. And, due to the structure of the Attack with 24 sounds, complex controller handling and a quite sophisticated MIDI implementation, I had a hard time to implement every idea. The same is true for the freely adjustable envelope shapes and for the high-quality oscillators with FM.</p>

<p>One of the biggest problems was to make the envelope shapes. I didn't want to use lookup tables, which would have been the easiest way. I wanted to process the envelopes by an algorithm that takes care of the individual shapes because, when programmed correctly, this can be much faster than a table lookup which must read from RAM (slow slow slow :-)). I talked to Stefan how to solve that problem, we came to an initial idea, I worked out a formula that covered part of the shapes, forwarded it to him, he enhanced the formula to cover the rest of the shapes and finally I fine-tuned the formula so that it doesn't have rounding problems.</p>

<p>So, all in all, it took around half a year for me to do the Attack.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What makes you proud of the Waldorf Attack?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> The sound, the ease of use, and how far you can come with such a limited number of parameters. I mean, the Attack is not only a pure drum synthesizer, it is also a complete lead and bass synthesizer and you can even create pads with it (although this is limited because of the missing pitch LFO and other factors).</p>

<p>Sometimes I just listen to one sound, how it behaves in the different phases and how pleasant its timbre is. A good example of that are the sounds that I did for the "Drum Chaos.all" (or maybe it's called only "Chaos.all" track. The claps, the strange swish sounds, the chopped FM bells and the bass, they are all so unique that I cannot imagine any other synthesizer where I could re-program these sounds. That makes me proud of the work!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are you planning more VST plug-ins and virtual instruments or has piracy had an effect on your developments in this area?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Certainly do we have future plans. But you're right with piracy. It doesn't make fun to make plug-ins when you know that they are cracked within 4 weeks of their release date. It's horrible!!!!</p>

<p>Furthermore, although hardware synths are more expensive this also gives the companies more money to develop new and interesting machines and synthesis concepts. Everyone who wants to use such a synth has to buy it, because that's the only way to get it. There's no way to get a "cracked version" and the companies therefore earn the money needed to pay the research and development of new things.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are there other forms of synthesis you would like to more fully explore?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> There's not much I could say here as you can imagine. Basically, I'm interested in all synthesis methods, I even like physical modelling a lot but that one is patented by the Stanford University, Yamaha and others. </p>

<p>However, when you are a lucky Waldorf Q owner or have the chance to play one, you should check out the things you can do with its comb filters, because those are also the basic building blocks for physical modelling. I also like VA and FM and, certainly, wavetable synthesis!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How would you explain wavetable synthesis and its unique characteristics?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Wavetable synthesis was invented by PPG founder Wolfgang Palm in the late 70's when RAM or ROM was more expensive than a medium-sized car. </p>

<p>He wanted to overcome the static behaviour of typical analog oscillators with the goal to get rid of a post-routed filter. He came to the idea to store a number of similar-sounding single cycle waves in a list that could be scanned by modulation sources like envelopes to e.g. get the effect of a sweeping filter. This means that one wave is played back for a certain time, then the next or previous wave in the list is played back and so on. This list was called a "wavetable" and it contained up to 64 different waves.</p>

<p>To save memory, he just put pointers to waves into the wavetables to select one of a couple of hundreds waves out of a pool. This means that a sine wave was only stored once somewhere in ROM but several wavetables might have used this sine wave.</p>

<p>He found other ways to reduce the data size even further:</p>

<p>- He only stored half of each wave in ROM and 'copied' the missing half to the wave during playback. This means that such a wavetable could only play back point-symmetrical waves but according to Fourier's law, any periodic sound can be produced with that anyway, even if the wave would look unusual on an oscilloscope.</p>

<p>- Not every entry in a wavetable contains a real wave taken out of ROM. Those entries could also be empty, even a couple of entries in a row, resulting in proportional interpolations of the previous and following real wave. This means that if a sine wave would reside in entry #1 and a sawtooth wave in #5, entries #2-4 would be filled with proportional mixtures of a sine and a sawtooth wave. This resulted in smooth wave transitions well suited for simulating analog filters with resonance or so. For hard switches between waves, two adjacent entries have to be filled with completely different sounding waves.</p>

<p>- Some wavetables were generated algorithmically as soon as they were selected in a sound. E.g., a wavetable that simulates a pulse width modulation just contains pulse waves with different widths. There's no need to store those waves in ROM because with a simple program you can generate those waves on the fly, probably even faster than reading them out of memory and interpolating missing entries.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you feel the Micro Q compares with other VA synths?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> The <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/micro_q_keyb/" target="_blank">Micro Q</a> has a couple of features that you won't find in any other VA synth on the market (except in its big brother, the Q) or in a similar quality compared to it:</p>

<p>Comb Filters - those can create very dense sounds and can be used for quasi-physical-modelling sounds that you wouldn't expect from a VA synth.</p>

<p>FM - the FM possibilities are much more complex than in any other VA synth. You can frequency-modulate each oscillator with any other and you can FM the filters too.</p>

<p>Wavetables - though the Micro Q is not a wavetable synthesizer, it has two wavetables on board where you can sweep through without clicks or transition noises.</p>

<p>Modulation speed - the so-called "Fast Modulation" matrix and the pre-routed modulations allow modulations with a speed of up to 5000Hz. This results in extremely fast envelopes and ultra-fast LFOs that can run with a speed of up to 2500Hz.</p>

<p>Oscillators - those are real models of analog oscillators, resulting in a very fat bass sound even when you listen to them without filters or effects. They behave exactly like their analog counterparts and they were modelled after the analog oscillators of our Waldorf Pulse synthesizer.</p>

<p>Filters - those are also real models, not only algorithms as found in almost all other VAs. This means that they can self-oscillate and allow FM. They are modelled after something in-between the Curtis filters from the Microwave 1 and our discretely built Waldorf Pulse four-pole filter.</p>

<p>Arpeggiator - it's probably the most complex arpeggiator ever done in a synthesizer. It allows you to change lengths, accents, glides and note selection per step and you can even activate chords only on selected steps (not only on or off for all steps).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you approach programming your sounds?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> In almost 100% of my sounds I start from scratch with an initial patch. I ask myself what type of sound I want - a Pad, a Bass, a Sequencer sound or the like. Also, I think about what character it should have, weary, deep, hollow, brilliant, cheesy, and so on. </p>

<p>From there on, there's no real method, say, if I start with tuning the oscillators, changing the filters, applying LFOs or adjusting the envelopes. I just do all the things that lead me into the direction I want to go for that sound. When the basic structure is done, I start to fine-tune the sound by changing tunings, adjusting mixer levels, tweaking cutoff and resonance, applying modulations and adding effects. This process might last a single minute or half an hour, up to the point where I think that this is the sound to store. Often it is a different sound than I originally wanted, not because I couldn't do it better but because the final result is more interesting than the original idea.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Does serendipity ever play a part in your sound programming?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Yes, that happens quite often. I always start with an initial sound when programming and most of the time I have an idea what kind of sound I want to program. But during the programming I often notice that the original idea isn't as spectacular as I thought and I go on further to see what happens. And when I come to an interesting setting, I store the sound and fine-tune it afterwards. A lot of sounds are done in that way.</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>How do you feel when you hear your sound patches used by artists in their work?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Shortly after Waldorf released my first sounds, I was very proud to hear them in songs of that time. But during the years I've heard my sounds quite often so that it's not that surprising for me anymore. </p>

<p>But sometimes I'm still surprised when I hear a sound in a production where I wouldn't have thought that the band would use a Waldorf instrument. This happened recently when I saw a live concert by A-ha on TV that was filmed two months ago. They had a blue Q on stage and played the typical melodies on it from "Take On Me", "Sun Always Shines On TV" and "Hunting High And Low". I know that they used the PPG Wave for those melodies at that time but to take a Q nowadays instead of a <a href="http://www.waldorf-music.com/microwave_xtk/" target="_blank">Microwave XTk</a> (which still has all the PPG Wavetables on board) was a little strange to me. But I was proud that the Q was the main master keyboard of Mats, one of the A-ha members (they had an additional keyboard player who played some Yamaha keyboards, for the orchestral and sampled sounds).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are there any other works which feature your sound patches that come to mind?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Sure. Some well-known productions:</p>

<p>Annie Lennox "Why" - the synthetic choir sound that goes through the whole track, the preset is called "Vox Humanum" and is in the factory sets of the Microwave 1 and the Wave. The "Diva" album was produced by Stephen Lipson (you know, the second best producer in the world) who owns probably all Waldorf instruments. This production is from 1992, so he must have taken the sound from the Microwave I.</p>

<p>Annie Lennox' "Medusa" album was produced a couple of years later and you can hear hundreds of Waldorf Wave sounds throughout all tracks.</p>

<p>The Simple Minds album that followed the "Street Fighting Years" album. I don't know its name because I only had a tape of it at that time. It was also produced by Stephen Lipson and he used the Microwave a lot. Especially in one 6/8 track where he used the Microwave 1 sound "Hammer" as a bass sound.</p>

<p>Almost all "Seal" records. Especially the latest one which is full of Microwave XT sounds.</p>

<p>The latest "Art Of Noise" record "Seduction Of Claude Debussy". Contains a lot of Microwave XT sounds and a couple of presets I did.</p>

<p>Snap - the last album they released, I think in 1995. Shortly before they started this album they got two Waves and so the album is almost exclusively done with the Wave. They used a lot of presets including a resynthesis of a drum loop sample I originally did for demoing the sample-to-wavetable analysis feature. Also, here and in a lot of other recordings you can hear the Chorus2 wavetable sounds that found their way in the Wave, the Microwave II/XT and even the Q. I did the Chorus2 wavetable with only one choir sample from my Roland S-750 sampler where the original sample was pitched to F 1. The Wave analyzed it with formant shifting so that the resulting wavetable can be played on the whole keyboard without "Mickey Mouse effect".</p>

<p>Sven Väth recordings produced by Ralf Hildenbeutel. Ralf is a big fan of the Microwave I and he used a couple of presets from me besides his own sounds.</p>

<p>Hans Zimmer's soundtracks. Whenever he makes synthetic tracks, he uses the Wave or one of our later synths. I've heard a couple of presets I did but cannot remember where or which at the moment.</p>

<p>"Martial Law" series soundtrack. Don't know who does it but I can hear a lot of Microwave XT sounds including some of mine.</p>

<p>There are probably many others but I never kept track of them. I only grin when I hear a sound from me!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>I have all the Snap albums and the one prior to the album you mention has a note on the CD cover thanking Waldorf for 'the fattest bass money can buy'?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> Yes, the Snap guys are big fans and good friends of ours. They have all of our machines, I think at some point they even had up to 6 Waves in total. They are really nice guys!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Who have been your musical influences?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> I'm a child of the 80's. Propaganda, Frankie Goes To Hollywood, Art Of Noise and all the other stuff produced by the fabulous Trevor Horn influenced me most. I also love A-ha, Tears For Fears, Robert Palmer, Thomas Dolby, Nik Kershaw and all the other great musicians and bands from the 80's. I also like some good 70's bands like ABBA and ELO, or the 60's Beatles and Beach Boys.</p>

<p>But most of the music I listen to is from the 80's because it just sounded the most interesting - maybe because they all used the PPG!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>What CD's would we find in your collection?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> <br />
Frankie Goes To Hollywood - Welcome To The Pleasuredome, Liverpool,<br />
Propaganda - A Secret Wish, Wishful Thinking (remix CD of A Secret Wish),<br />
Art Of Noise - Daft, Who's Afraid Of...,<br />
Grace Jones - Slave To The Rhythm,<br />
Swing Out Sister - all albums,<br />
Thomas Dolby - Aliens Ate My Buick, Best Of Albums,<br />
Prefab Sprout - all albums,<br />
Tears For Fears - all albums,<br />
A-ha - Hunting High And Low, Scoundrel Days,<br />
The The - all albums,<br />
ABBA - all albums,<br />
ELO - Out Of The Blue, Time, Best Of Albums,<br />
Henry Mancini - as many records as I can get,<br />
James Bond title tracks,<br />
and many, many more...</p>

<p>Very interesting stuff:<br />
Autechre - all CDs,<br />
Oskar Sala - all CDs (the master of the Trautonium).</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are there any cultural reasons why your fellow countrymen have had a very significant influence on the evolution of 'electronic' music in both an artistic and engineering sense?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> You probably speak of Kraftwerk, Tangerine Dream, Klaus Schulze, and all the Techno music that was produced in Germany over the last 15 years.</p>

<p>Yes, there probably is a reason. Germans like to have things in order and with precision. We want to do things by 100% and we want to make it good. I think that's the biggest reason for this repetitive and strict music. Also, Germans like to invent and to create, and the best way is to do that by yourself without involving other people. Electronic music instruments provide that, or at least the illusion of it, because one person has full control over a lot of aspects of the music.</p>

<p>On the other hand Germans don't see themselves as "stars" and so it's hard to find "front men" for bands. And a big keyboard setup helps you hide yourself behind it!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Kraftwerk indeed had a significant influence on many musicians worldwide.</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> They also influenced me a lot. Not TD or Klaus Schulze, but definitely Kraftwerk! We've had a number of interesting electronic music artists here, especially in the so-called NDW era ("Neue Deutsche Welle") in the early 80's. But from this era you probably only know "Falco" and "Nena" who both were successful e.g. in the US and maybe 'Down Under' at that time? </p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Yes, Falco and Nena enjoyed popular success but there were probably other influential artists at that stage whose great work did not receive mainstream attention outside Europe?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> I still like "Spliff" a lot. They all were very good musicians and the resulting music is very complex. Herwig Mitteregger, who played the drums, was one of the best German drummers and he was a god on the Simmons <a href="http://www.sonicstate.com/synth/_inc/picview.cfm?synthid=587" target="_blank">SDS-5</a> drums. Reinhold Heil played the keyboards and he had a <a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/yamaha/yamcs101.jpg" target="_blank">Yamaha CS-1</a>, the first FM synthesizer. Furthermore, he's also responsible for the great keyboards and the whole production of Nena!!</p>

<p>Anete Humpe and her sister Inga Humpe did, and still do, a lot of good music. Anete founded the band "Ideal" making quite raw music with complex drum and guitar arrangements. Inga was one of the two main singers of the "Neon Babies" that were produced by Anete. Both later formed a duo called "Humpe Sisters". As far as I know, Inga doesn't make music anymore but Anete is still among the "most wanted" producers in Germany. She creates a very unique sound, wide and airy. The Humpe Sisters album "Swimming With Sharks" is a good example and worth buying. Anete and Inga used to sing the background choirs of most of their recordings together and their voices alone are worth listening to their music.</p>

<p>Michael Cretu did a lot of NDW productions, e.g. Hubert Kah, and you might know one later non-NDW production from him: Enigma. He's married with the German singer Sandra who he had produced at that time, too. This was also not NDW but shortly after that time.</p>

<p>All the above were mainstream productions. But there was a big avantgarde NDW scene, too, with bands experimenting with the first samplers (<a href="http://www.synthmuseum.com/ppg/ppgwterm01.jpg" target="_blank">PPG Waveterms</a>, for sure!) and modular synthesizers. One "hit single" which was not intended to sound popular was by "Zaza" called "Zauberstab". A production without any reverb effect, synthetic drums, ring modulation sounds, a one-note slap bass and a single violin playing strange melodies. This track was really psychedelic and I still like to listen to it. Although it is not easy to find on CD, I bought a 4 CD pack just to get this track!</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>So what music are you listening to at present?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> During the last week I listened to albums by Hall & Oates, Bauhaus, Propaganda, Frankie Goes To Hollywood, Swing Out Sister, Wham, Thomas Dolby, Annie Lennox (because of this interview), Lenny Kravitz, Pete Namlook, Nik Kershaw, Henry Mancini, New Order, Human League, 10cc and Prefab Sprout.</p>

<p>Furthermore I listened to a number of compilation CD's which contain tracks by Blancmange, Picnic At The Whitehouse, Kate Bush, Re-Flex (Politics Of Dancing, a great PPG track), Duran Duran, Gary Numan, Sandra, Chaka Khan, Godley & Creme, Kajagoogoo, Pat Benatar, Robbie Nevil, Scritti Politti, Talking Heads, Arcadia, Deborah Harry, Eighth Wonder, Bill Sharpe, Killing Joke, Nu Shooz, Psychedelic Furs, Roxy Music, Savage Progress (My Soul Unwraps Tonight, another great PPG track), Talk Talk, Climie Fisher, Dusty Springfield, Howard Jones, Princess, Robert Palmer, The Romantics, Yes, Mel & Kim, Siouxie and the Banshees and The Nits.</p>

<p>Even Aussies were on the CDs:<br />
Kylie Minogue & Jason Donovan<br />
Icehouse<br />
Flash & The Pan</p>

<p>Enough said?</p>

<p><b>SONIK :</b> <u>Are you a fan of Kylie and Jason or is it more a case of the Stock, Aitken and Waterman 'sound' of the eighties which you find appealing?</u></p>

<p><b>WOLFRAM :</b> In the 80's I found the S.A.&W. tracks quite boring because the sound was always the same. But Stock, Aitken and Waterman did a couple of songs that are really outstanding, also in the way they were mixed. </p>

<p>Songs which come to mind:</p>

<p>Princess "Say I'm Your Number One" - One of the greatest "Simmons SDS-5 Demo" track I know. Great music, great voice, great mixing and great sounds.</p>

<p>Samantha Fox "Nothing's Gonna Stop Me Now" - great harmonies and melodies, quite complex but very organic and pleasant to the ear.</p>

<p>Mel & Kim "Respectable" and "Showing Out" - Both tracks really show how detailed S, A & W could produce if they 