Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

gearnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#81

Post by wvlia5 »

lostlogin wrote: post #79
wvlia5 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to make devices too. I have a few in my pipeline, but never sold any. 2 for music, 1 medical, 2 for house construction.

I can see why you wouldn’t post it, but I’d love to know what you’re thinking - medical in particular. I work in the field and clunky, shit software is the norm. In particular, radiology information systems (RIS) just kill me. How are they so crap?

I'm making a vape, just like nicotine vapes, but it has a computer that allows you to 1-select a specific dosage (say 5mg) or 2- select a target effect intensity, and deliver a sequence of doses to sustain the target, based on a pharmacodynamic curve. (not for nicotine)

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#82

Post by ofalkaed »

diggan wrote: post #43
ofalkaed wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The encoder issue was fixed with a firmware update, they switched encoders and did not quite account for how they would work once broken in. I had one of those Blofelds for awhile, bought a second because the deal was too good to pass up and it was pretty much new in box. I like the knobs, love the detentless encoders.

> The encoder issue was fixed with a firmware update, No joke? I was sure it was a hardware issue, but guess I should give that a look, still have my Blofeld around here somewhere, thanks for sharing the "news" :) > love the detentless encoders I have no issues with them being detentless, makes a lot of sense. What I do have issues with, is using the smoothest material they could find for the knobs instead of somethi…

I suppose it is possible you got one with 7 bad encoders but chances are updating the firmware will fix it. The contacts in the new encoders loosened up over time more than the old encoders and the debounce code could not keep up. Two things you can always rely on Waldorf for, topnotch hardware and buggy software, but they fix the bugs for the most part and the ones they don't fix probably are not actually bugs but limitations in the technology/design compromises; like aliasing in the Blofeld, they could "fix" it but leaving it gives it a lot more versatility within its intended range and is why it sounds so good in that range. The only real issue for me with the Blofeld is the noise gen, it is fairly limited in use because of the aliasing.

I get why you dislike the knobs, but they don't bother me. Many dislike them and I have seen various fixes like shrink tubing, tape and rubber bands as well as just replacing them. I just learned to pinch the knob a little tighter. Skipping their traditional coating on the knobs was probably one of the corners they cut to get the price down while keeping the same quality overall.

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#83

Post by olelele »

milesvp wrote: post #73

For more context, dsp chips historically were how you could get better better performance than was typical in the embedded space. At a time when you had sub 100Mhz typically in a chip that would be used in musical equipment dsp chips were super useful because they had many op codes that could be done in one cycle that might take many multiples of that in a general purpose chip. One prime example is add and accumulate…

There is an emulator for the Motorola chip in a whole generation of synthesizers that lets you load original firmware..

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#84

Post by rfl890 »

diggan wrote: post #41
rfl890 wrote: post #39

What is the point of making hardware synths on a Pi when you could just make a VST?

What's the point of giving constructive feedback when you can question people's motivation instead? Do you think that making a VST is a realistic alternative to the linked instruments in the submission article? I'm guessing they're building hardware because they want something physical, it's pretty self-evident isn't it?

Hardware synths have their own custom DSP circuit which separates them from VSTs as it gives each synth a unique sound. If you take out the DSP circuit and replace it with a general purpose CPU, then you basically have a fancy layer over what is essentially a VST plugin. Sure, the hardware aspect is convenient, but in terms of sound I think we should stick to custom circuits.

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#85

Post by lolive »

xdfgh1112 wrote: post #71
Juliate wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes! But, huge but, very huge but, you lose the affordance of the switches and the buttons and the knobs and the patch cables. And that is a terrible loss for fiddling and discovery.

You gain presets lol. And in the case of odyssei it has a ton of additional features including a sequencer and full effects bank! Experiences vary but sliding a slider on a screen is worth the benefits.

In the case of ODDYSEi, I am not sure whether the included 6-controls sequencer [i think that’s called P-lock] and/or the desunion on 8 « channels » [not sure of the wording] also exist somehow as hardware devices for the real ARP Oddysey

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#86

Post by 3036e4 »

I have an old MeeBlip synth. It is basically a box with some knobs and switches and a cheap 8-bit Atmel AVR inside, similar to the processor in some old Arduinos. Source code is available (I think this repo: https://github.com/MeeBlip/meeblip-synth) and they expose some pins to flash new code to it, but I never tried.

Any Raspberry Pi, even the Pico, must be orders of magnitude more powerful than that old AVR and easier to program too. A lofi groovebox made from a Pico with a few knobs and buttons attached sounds like a fun project someone probably already made.

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#87

Post by diggan »

rfl890 wrote: post #84
diggan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the point of giving constructive feedback when you can question people's motivation instead? Do you think that making a VST is a realistic alternative to the linked instruments in the submission article? I'm guessing they're building hardware because they want something physical, it's pretty self-evident isn't it?

Hardware synths have their own custom DSP circuit which separates them from VSTs as it gives each synth a unique sound. If you take out the DSP circuit and replace it with a general purpose CPU, then you basically have a fancy layer over what is essentially a VST plugin. Sure, the hardware aspect is convenient, but in terms of sound I think we should stick to custom circuits.

I was thinking more of the physical controls rather than the implementation details :) Most of the reasons I use hardware rather than software boils down to "feels great" and "is more fun" basically, because of the physical controls.

The precise and exact sound is less interesting, how you're able to conjure it at just the right moment and with precise controls tend to be more interesting for me personally.

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#88

Post by beAbU »

wvlia5 wrote: post #81
lostlogin wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see why you wouldn’t post it, but I’d love to know what you’re thinking - medical in particular. I work in the field and clunky, shit software is the norm. In particular, radiology information systems (RIS) just kill me. How are they so crap?

I'm making a vape, just like nicotine vapes, but it has a computer that allows you to 1-select a specific dosage (say 5mg) or 2- select a target effect intensity, and deliver a sequence of doses to sustain the target, based on a pharmacodynamic curve. (not for nicotine)

My sense (coming from a place of complete ignorance) is that the difficulty here is not going to be software/control side, but rather the hardware. It'll have to be capable of:

1. Accurately dose the required ingredients based on a setting selected.

2. Do so in a repeatable manner. 5mg is microscopic and likely well beyond the margin of error for a small dose pump. So you'll need to get creative in how you manage your product dosages. Perhaps a "reel" of pre-measured 1mg doses? You say it's not for Nicotine, so I assume it's for harder drugs. What will the risk of a double digit % overshoot be?

3. Be small enough to fit into a handheld vape module.

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#89

Post by beAbU »

lolive wrote: post #3

I discovered by pure chance the vast ecosystem of iOS synths apps. And I was absolutely blown away. 90+% of the synths of the past century are available for ~5-20€ each. Connect that to a basic KORG MicroKeys Air [extra cheap, but includes Bluetooth]. And you are the next Jean-Michel Jarre. [Note: and the amount of tutorial videos on YouTube is huge.]

I'm not sure what it's like on iOS, but on Android the latency renders attempting anything "serious" impossible. There is a noticeable delay between pressing an on-screen key and getting sound out. I don't even want to imagine what a Bluetooth keybed introduce in the latency chain!

Do iDevices not support hardware (USB) MIDI?

Re: Raspberry Pi Synthesizers – How the Pi is transforming synths

#90

Post by piltdownman »

usrusr wrote: post #34
ACCount37 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating music was never more accessible than it is now. Conversely, the likelihood of making it big just by making some good damn music was never lower than it is now. Makes for a fine hobby though.

How will that hobby fare against gen-AI prompt composing? Synths and samplers and sequencers were once removed from playing real instruments, softsynths and DAW twice removed and now there's genAI, thrice removed and arguably the biggest jump of them all. When softsyths appeared, real instruments weren't affected at all, but physical synths all but disappeared, just carried on by inertia, integration with real instru…

Not only are companies like Behringer completely redefining the cost of entry to the hardware synth market, while continuously launching affordable replicas of some of the most desireable and rare synths of all time, but traditional software-first companies like Arturia are now pivoting to release hardware hosting platforms for their V-Collection to bridge the soft/hard synth gap

https://www.arturia.com/products/hardware-synths/astrolab/as...

This is without even referencing the huge cross-pollination and massive influx of development in the Modular Synthesis scene spurred on by things like vcv rack and its EuroRack ports.

In short, it has never been a better time in history to be a hardware synth enthusiast, and it's mainly down to soft-synths popularising the unique sonic qualities of historic hardware synths.

Post reply on HN