EMUSIC-L Digest Volume 63, Issue 06 This issue's topics: I saw and heard the VL-1 played properly (8 messages) Your EMUSIC-L Digest moderator is Joe McMahon . You may subscribe to EMUSIC-L by sending mail to listserv@american.edu with the line "SUB EMUSIC-L your name" as the text. The EMUSIC-L archive is a service of SunSite (sunsite.unc.edu) at the University of North Carolina. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 12:35:21 -0400 From: "Merrick L. Hard" Subject: Re: I saw and heard the VL-1 played properly I also saw the VL-1 at the SEAMUS conference at Middlebury. I play the Scottish highland pipes, and let me tell you, modeling synthesis has a (very) LONG way to go before it even comes close. Still, I think Yamaha has done pretty well with that sax sound (cue rebuttal from sax player). _____________________________________________ Merrick Hard Electronic Music Studio at UVM ============================================= Bagpiping for all occasions | You've got analog gear, or other neat stuff?| Want to sell it? | (analog adored, digital deplored) | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 Apr 1994 18:17:03 +0100 From: "Steven D. Bramson" Subject: I saw and heard VL1 played properly I was at the MIDI and Electronic Music show this weekend. A chap there called Simon Bates was demoing the VL1. He did the presentation on Tomorrow's World (a UK popular technology TV programme). He used either a breath controller (just measures pressure) or a wind controller (looks like a clarinet and determines pitch and breath pressure). The sax, clarinet and flute sounds were very impressive. The violin was less impressive and rather electronic sounding. The most surprising sound was an electric guitar which was absolutely incredible. He did an amazing Jimmy Hendrix number which he was actually asked to play again at the end of the seminar (ever heard a seminar with an encore?). An interesting parameter was the embrochure (spell?). He played a trumpet sound and just by varying this parameter could play a harmonic series. The price, a mere 4000 UK pounds, thats 1000 pounds per octave. Steven Bramson sdb@jet.uk ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 Apr 1994 10:40:11 -0500 From: hinkle-turner elizabeth Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly Re: Steven Bramson's UK VL-1 report I also saw the new machine demo'd at the SEAMUS conference in Middlebury, Vermont a couple of weeks ago. I disagree with the review of the "wind instruments" in general. The saxophone was terrific, but the flute, clarinet, oboe, bassoon, english horn et el were pretty "plastic" sounding. I, too, was amazed at the electric guitar sounds! Great for on a recording, I guess, but live - I would find Jimi Hendrix (or Eddie van Halen or Lennie Kravitz et el) MUCH more exciting than some guy puffing and blowing over a keyboard! Let me put in my own personal rave, however, for the BAGPIPE sample!!! I have always been a huge fan of those big, noisy windbags - and the demonstration brought tears to my eyes, it was so awesome! "Ah, you take the high road, and I'll take the low road . . ." Elizabeth Hinkle-Turner Univ. of Iowa Experimental Music Studios ehturner@umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 16:29:26 -0500 From: Brian Good Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly Elizabeth Hinkle-Turner writes: > Re: Steven Bramson's UK VL-1 report > > I also saw the new machine demo'd at the SEAMUS conference in > Middlebury, Vermont a couple of weeks ago. I disagree with the review of > the "wind instruments" in general. The saxophone was terrific, but the > flute, clarinet, oboe, bassoon, english horn et el were pretty "plastic" > sounding. I, too, was amazed at the electric guitar sounds! Great for > on a recording, I guess, but live - I would find Jimi Hendrix (or Eddie > van Halen or Lennie Kravitz et el) MUCH more exciting than some guy > puffing and blowing over a keyboard! Maybe not. The last Yamaha breath controller I saw looked small enough to swallow. Think of the performance art possibilities of attempting a self-applied Heimlich maneuver while playing your own accompaniment. Seriously, I suppose Yamaha feels compelled to demonstrate how well they can emulate acoustic instruments--they did the same thing when they brought out the WX-7. But for me the technology will be much more interesting for its non-emulative uses. Did they demonstrate much of this? >I have always been a huge fan of those big, noisy windbags - ...presumably that's why you read this list? :-) Brian Good NASA LeRC ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 23:54:31 -800 From: Mark Hartshorn Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly > Seriously, I suppose Yamaha feels compelled to demonstrate how well > they can emulate acoustic instruments--they did the same thing when > they brought out the WX-7. But for me the technology will be much > more interesting for its non-emulative uses. Did they demonstrate > much of this? I, as a performer on the Wx-7 and EWI, must say that non-emulative patches are definetly what work on these instruments. They give you the ability to be extreamly expressive in ways that that no acustic instrument can possibly come close to. I'm not saying it is better than acoustic instruments, because that is not true - just better at what it is ment to do, which in my opinion is to be a different instrument with new sounds. If you want a sax sound - hire a sax player! >> I have always been a huge fan of those big, noisy windbags - >...presumably that's why you read this list? :-) That is DEFINITLY why I like to read this list :) Mark H ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 08:47:58 -0500 From: Steve Hills Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly I saw the VL1 demonstrated in KC at Jenkins Music by Yamaha rep. Mike ?. It is a totally unique technology that really is best suited for unique applications, i.e. studio, some live performance, some recording. The wind player has an advantage with it. For those of us who have stuck with samples, fm, vector, synthesis, and etc. it's not an instrument we want because it doesn't use any of that. I thought some of the wind instruments, like the saxaphone were better on the SY99 than the VL1. However, the flute was magnificent. The violin was really great (as a soloist). The synthesizer was similar to everything heard except for more expression. I don't know, if you already play these instruments, i.e. saxaphone, and etc. you are probably better off sticking to that ($5,000.00 plus price tag). sh ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Apr 1994 09:10:13 -0500 From: Steve Hills Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly I've got to admit, unless you love the idea of playing with self-applied Heimlich maneuver while constantly telling/explaining to people that this is an instrument equivalent to the one that it is trying to emulate, FUN...., well, I'll stick to what has been developing with synthesis, samples, FM, vector, and etc. sh ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Apr 1994 13:02:10 -0500 From: Stephen David Beck Subject: Re: I saw and heard VL1 played properly Not only did I see and hear the VL1 at the SEAMUS National Conference, my local Yamaha distributer brought one in, and I got to play one. This is no ordinary synthesizer (I don't even like that word for it). It is a virtual instrument, one which addresses the most fundamental question in music synthesis; how do we create/synthesize sounds which are intrinsically musical? In my teaching, I have always put forth the notion that synthesis instruments must be "acoustically viable"; that is, they obey certain fundamental laws of acoustics (i.e. a loud sound is not just more amplitude, but brighter spectrum). If synthesized sounds are acoustically viable, then a composer or performer will be better able to express musical ideas because their instrument is more expressive. (WARNING! WARNING! DANGER! Flammable material present! NO SMOKING!) If you have ever wondered why sampling synthesizers never sound quite right, it is because the technology is inherently "acoustically non- viable." Transposing sound samples by sample-rate conversion completely ignores the changes in spectra due to frequency and resonance. The only way to make a sampler work is to have enough memory for three samples per note (one for low velocities, one for medium, one for high). If you use a 44k sample of 1 second, that translates into 3*88*44k = over 11MB of memory for ONE instrument. (Sorry, a sampling rant. Not really necessary here). The bottom line here is that the VL1 creates a paradigm shift away from older synthesis techniques, and that naturally has many people confused, dismissive and nonplused. The VL1 (and the yet to be released VP1) changes the way we think about making sounds and (more importantly) making MUSIC. It is an instrument that must be learned :-(, and practiced :-(). It is a performing instrument first and foremost. And frankly, its only limitation is that you cannot alter the instrument model. You can alter the way your performance affects the instrument, but I doubt there are many people who understand the technology well enough to change the instrument model without destroying it (the model, not the VL1). It was a gas to play. I don't care that the "bassoon" sound is better on a SY99 or a GSU2200 turbo or a KiwiABCD ultra chrome with remote control. I want a sound that is expressive on a human level, and this does that. Besides, the VL1 has a great Hendrix guitar sound, and I want to sample it!!! ;-). ========================== Stephen David Beck School of Music Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, LA 70803 ------------------------------ End of the EMUSIC-L Digest ******************************