The Holy Grail?

[brasso]

Phew, how to keep this short?

I am not a programmer and only a tiny bit of an electronics whiz but am quite experienced in coming up with hardware concepts and building them. I have a particular instrument in mind of which the separate elements already exist in other forms but which are not integrated into 1 solution yet.

Basically I have been looking / hoping for a system like Axoloti for some time. To me it seems the best of both worlds. Hardware based enough to be directly integrated into ergonomic hardware solutions, software based enough to be almost completely open ended, accessible enough to be usable to non-software-specialists like me.

What I basically have mind is building an instrument that can use normals sound, say WAV´s, and then ¨mangle¨ them in any way possible via a physical modeling environment. The shortest description would be to see it as a 3 step system.

1 – A driver section based on sample input and processing or treatment , preferably a full additive re-synthesis system but since that is difficult to implement (Only the Alchemy VST seems to go the whole route) a granular sample treatment will be a very reasonable alternative (and if I am correct I have already seen such an environment in Axoloti)

2 – A physical modeling resonator section to superimpose real time expression onto the drivers created in section 1.

3 – Not totally necessary but preferably still: A conventional subtractive section to further shape envelopes, add LFO modulations, do some filter finetuning, etc.

For a general impression of I what direction I am thinking see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiT117i6YnE&t=23s
The biggest disadvantage of Kaivo is however is that it is ¨just¨ a VST and I hate the lack of security, hassle and instability of general computer platforms. So basically what I am looking of is a sort of Hardware Kaivo. Other examples would be the Roland V-synth or the ultra rare Technos Acxel (but both then with physical modeling options added), or the Technics WSA1 (but with user sample input added).

I get the impression Axoloti could just be the ticket for me in this particular quest but also for many other ventures. I do however have some remaining questions at this moment.

• How many direct hardware controllers inputs does 1 Axoloti provide? 16?
  • 16 would be a bit too few for a really ergonomic user interface. Is there in tat case a solution to interconnect more then 1 Axoloti? Or is an input expander possible?
  • Which MIDI controllers are supported?
  • Very important for me personally: Can it process polyphonic aftertouch?
  • What are the present possibilities for physical (resonator) modeling?
  • If there aren´t any yet: Are there community members who would be prepared to develop the coding for such building blocks/ facilities? The above instrument concept is of course rather specific but I am sure that any such additions would also benefit many other users.

If most of my questions can be answered positive Axoloti is probably exactly the holy grail I have been waiting for.

This is all very exiting so I hope you guys like my idea's!

Marc Brassé
www.brassee.com

[Gavin]

I can provide a response to a couple of your questions, might help get you started..

◦Which MIDI controllers are supported? ,

Are you referring too "USB Midi Controllers" if so there is this post which discusses a lot of tested USB midi controllers and there performance, otherwise connected to the midi DIN I expect all devices are supported, however if what you want to control is more specific, might be best for some others to offer guidance here.

USB Midi Controllers

Overview This topic is intended to discuss USB midi controllers and their compatibility with Axoloti. Please post here if you use a controller that works and is not listed here, and we will keep this post up to date. if you find a controller that does NOT work, please raise a separate topic in this hardware category, so we can discuss the issue, and look for a resolution. USB Midi Device vs USB Midi Host Most hardware are either a midi device or a midi host, but Axoloti can be both, so i…

◦16 would be a bit too few for a really ergonomic user interface. Is there in tat case a solution to interconnect more then 1 Axoloti? Or is an input expander possible?

How many devices do you want to connect, and what sort are they ? Switches momentary or toggle, rotary encoders, All sorts of pots like sliders, ribbon, rotary etc. You may even have some sensors you want to consider adding. And there are ways you may want to reduce the count of controllers by accessing the parameters through banks. If you are after a very elaborate control system, you may need to do a lot of tweaking within the objects etc. to get the desired control. There is the other option of expanding the inputs, this post might give you some ideas..

[GPIO I/O] Example 4051 de/multiplexer reads 8 analog sources

Hi everyone, here is a short example for a 4051 de/multiplexer. The 4051 can be used for extra 8 analog outputs or inputs. The Y0-7 pins are choosen by HIGH/LOW state of the S0-2 pins. It's not the fastest way to expand the analog input or output, but the IC are very cheap and I own a lot of them sweat_smile It's good thing to decouple the analog inputs and VCC with a 100n capacitor. A MCP3008 or MCP3208 SPI is much faster and has an input protection build in. An examples for this IC will be …

Or you may want to use a separate micro controller like Arduino or Teensy for more controls by which you can communicate with the Axo. Or indeed you could get another Axo, but believe these would still need to be operated separately as two Axo's can't use the same patch, but if other users know differently maybe they can assist.

On a side note, have a go at the coding, coding in the Axo environment is rather easy to get started, small steps. Because the patch is broken down into objects, you only need code the part of the object that is relevant, rather than coding a whole patch etc., and some solutions may be available without any coding at all.

Good luck..

[thetechnobear]

@brasso , Axoloti is a lot of different things to a lot of different people

I do love your ideas, physically modelling is something I really enjoy !

you can get some ideas for what has already been done, is to take a look at the objects available in both the factory and community library.

my recommendation to anyone approach Axoloti, is to give it space to breath...
trying to replicate something else is more difficult that starting off my using what available, and then slowly over time (as you get more familiar) evolve it and create your own 'thing'.

controller...
basically not an issue, you need to decide if you want to go hardware or MIDI route, but both are well supported in Axo, scan the forum and you will see lots of interesting projects.
(checkout https://sebiik.github.io/community.axoloti.com.backup/c/your-music-projects, there are some there, which will I think really inspire you!)

physical modelling...
Im dont keep up with the community library, but I think there are something in there...
KS is simple to implement...
Granular is also not that difficult (and definitely some of these in the

in 1.0.12 , Ive added a few things the may interest you :
LMNTS - based on the MI Elements module , see here, Ive also exposed some of its component parts like Resonator, tube, string etc... and its an area Id like continue to explore.
CLDS - based on MI Clds (see MI site) , includes granular looping into a resonator/verb

I do hope to build on these in future Axo releases, though no promises

Id raise a couple of caveats here... perhaps to 'manage expectations'

personally, I think Axoloti is about personal discovery, you will find lots of helpful people here in the community, creating all sorts of wonderful objects - but I think the most fun is had by rolling up your sleeves - and this of course takes some time, depending on your skills and the time you have will dictate how far you get. as I said, lots of helpful people to here to help you on your journey.

Kaivo, ok, your PC/Mac has a lot of computing power... a things like the waveguide modelling of Kaivo can be computationally expensive. I have Kaivo, and its uses a lot of CPU even on my Mac.
Axo is very efficient, it does have its limits... so getting massive numbers of voices doing the same techniques is unlikely - on the flip side, axoloti is cheap, so you can get multiple boards and split the processing perhaps.

its these last two points, which drives my initial statement...
the most fun Ive had with Axoloti, is just diving it, exploring ideas, and seeing where it takes me, rather than having a particular idea where im going.

have fun
Mark

[brasso]

Hi Mark,

I totally get what you are saying. For me the main attraction of Axoloti is however exactly that it is the first open ended hardware /software hybrid platform I have found that is both affordable AND seems to fit my nature and expertise level (except probably, as already mentioned, the actual creation of objects). I have no doubt that I'll be experimenting with other concepts as well soon enough. Some are actually already popping up in my mind. This singleminded guy has however actually been looking for a platform on which he can customize this sort of "machine" himself.
Another way to put it: If such an instrument can be created in Axoloti it would actually be a reason for me to step over to this particular platform, for, to be honest, I have so many electronic playthings already I am never lost for musical inspiration and thus not looking for a new platform just for the sake of it (see http://www.brassee.com/instruments.html). It's just that I am constantly moving closer to actually building my own instruments.

Thanks for the other tips. I'l have a very close look at them.

Marc

[brasso]

PS. Just in case anyone gets the wrong impression: I am not trying to be smug or something. It's just that I am on a very specific mission.

[thetechnobear]

oh, Ive no doubt you have specific aims

the problem i see sometimes here, is its easy to underestimate a programming task, especially when building a fully fledged instrument (that is useable), an instrument is more than the sum of its parts.
e.g. you could emulate a volca fm, its only a sequencer + fm synth, both easy to do in axoloti, but to recreate it in axoloti, would be quite a task, if you want all the features...

also when I read your post two things rang alarm bells :

• Kaivo
  trying to emulate a PC/Mac plugin ... does it have the cpu (no), do you have the skills/knowledge to write this code

• "Are there community members who would be prepared to develop the coding for such building blocks/ facilities"
  sure, some building blocks might be available (as i detailed), but they may not do exactly as you wish... and then whilst the community might help you get to your goal, you might find it difficult to get someone to do it for you.
  (Im not sure if anyone is willing to code for $$$, this you would have to ask around for)
  the patching UI will get you a long way, but the chances that it will do exactly what you want 'out of the box' is hard to say.

dont get me wrong, axoloti is very powerful, and you dont need to be a programmer to do things, but for your above project, id probably say much the same if you wanted to do it in Max/Pd/Reaktor.

so basically, I wanted to balance my, "yes, you can do that, trying using x, y, z" with some practical perspective of whats involved, and an approach that will lead to enjoyment, rather than potential frustration.

anyway, overall, if you dont have programming skills, Id say download the software, and take a look thru the factory and community libraries, and see if it contains the objects you think you will need.

good luck, and hope you can join us patching

[brasso]

Again. Don't worry. I've been programming synth and coping with their limitations for donkey years. I was one of the few geeks that actually "letterbox"- programmed his own 128 patch preset batch when the original Yamaha DX7 FM synth came out and I've also gone through all the other major methods (analog, sampling, additive etc.) Nowadays I focus mostly on physical modeling because it is the best way to combine "real" instrument expression with electronic tonal freedom. In that respect the Technics WSA-1 is one of the best synths ever already. Others had more advanced models but it's unique combination of ROM sample pool drivers with modeled resonators has yet to be surpassed in practical flexibility.

The only step I would still like to take though is to get total freedom over the basic input material (which is the only thing the WSA cannot provide), be it in the form of a granular sample engine or a additive resynthesis system (although the latter will indeed be a step too far for Axoloti).

To cut a long story short. I already have a few schematic of what I would want to achieve lying around and I am sure I can come up wtih an instrument "design" in Axoloti that would already do most of these htings but there would probably still be a few blank spaces in the granular and modeling department I would not be able to fill in myself.

I do not want to use other platforms (like Max etc.) because they are to software dependant. Again: The reason for me to try Axiloti would actually be that it provides a good hybrid, even if I would have to accept some complexity / performance limitations. Certain limitations can actually be a good thing because they can help you to focus on actually getting some music done.

Marc

[thetechnobear]