Finally i managed to write something in order to continue our discussion to the new forum!
I don't know if the LIVE SOUND is the right place,if you think that is better to move to another topic please tell.
As far as the Improvisor project, i look forward to hear news from Bill Marshall and to know more about the progress of the hardware version that is working by now.

Hi Arpmaniac,

Glad you made the transition. Here's a link to the excellent thread that you and the Zyklus designer Bill Marshall (and others) have been creating in the previous SOS Forum (Q&A) for those who are a little confused:

Zyklus MPS / new Improvisor original thread

The old forum will still be readable after we shut down posting on Monday 6th September, but I will try to export a backup of the entire thread to date and post it here, if it is technically possible to do so.

It's good that a product designer like Bill Marshall (Zyklus, Kunction Junction etc) is prepared to contribute to such a Forum in such an open-handed manner. We should all applaud and encourage this sort of degree of participation, even if the subject matter might not be one's cup of tea.

Ian Gilby

I agree to that all, again thank's for the help and for the hospitality on your excellent Forum of SOS magazine.

Hi Chaps

I eventually made it onto this forum. I didn't realise that you had to register first. Fair enough.

Another idea I would like to seek opinions on. The first is a spec on a Synthesiser Control Station that I was thinking of producing just prior to the Improvisor idea. It is a hardware product which does arpeggiation but not sequencing. I was thinking that it may be easier to get people interested in this rather than with Improvisor. Any thoughts? The spec is on my temporary download page at www.vyla.co.uk

The design of this is such that it is easily extended in stages to provide sequencing and all that stuff in future. In effect, it could easily become the hardware version of Improvisor. The design as it stands allows people to use it alongside an existing master keyboard(s), MIDI control box and so on, and to be able to use it with a computer sequencer. Try doing that when your computer has a single MIDI input and your keyboard is multi-zoned to different MIDI ports. The thing is, this project can be done at a much lower development cost than the full Improvisor project at the moment. I would appreciate any comments on this.

Hi Bill,

your spec of the "Synthesizer Control Station" is also an impressive one.
The master control facilities are certainly adequate, but the "midi generating stuff" is a step down from the original Improvisor. But you already stated that the SCS and I quote:

"The design of this is such that it is easily extended in stages to provide sequencing and all that stuff in future."

so I'm not too worried. But how does this upgrade process goes? Somekind of firmware update?

Another question: in the Improvisor spec there was mention of a possible "transposition" problem. How does that relate to the SCS? Or is there no problem because the SCS doesn't use sequences, but only arpeggiators?

So Bill, you already have one customer for this device.

Hi Bill,

I've been reading both the specs for Improvisor and the SCS with great interest. And I would prefer the SCS above the improvisor. First of all because this is hardware and I therefore don't need my mouse to change any settings. And it's up to the user which sequencer program he/she is using.

Perhaps it would be nice and flexible to add some extra 6,3 jack chassis to the SCS to attach some foot switches that replace when attached some (not all) of the assignable keys. When not connected the assignable key(s) should do the job, so it's up to the user. I know that this could end up with let's say 8 footpedals and a different approach to play music, but you still have your hands free to play.

I also like the idea of the solo procedure as written
in the specs. The concept looks simple but I don't think it has been done before, and according your explanation great thinks should be possible.

Well, I think you got a second custumor for this device.

I'm glad you like the idea of the hardware Synth COntrol Station. I have noted your comments. I think I will concentrate on doing this first since I just cannot get any commercial interest in Improvisor. The SCS may be a bit easier for people to understand, so I will try to get manufacturers interested in that. By providing a large amount of programmable keys, it can always be upgraded to provide sequencing like Improvisor in the future if I use a powerful enough processor.

Will keep you posted as to how I am progressing.

Finally i managed to read the specs of the Hardware synth control station and i understand that is basicaly a cut down version of the Improvisor.
I find the Control station extremely usefull for any keybordist and i wish only to have an open architecture in order someday to be a full version of Improvisor.
Personaly i find the Control Station VERY usefull, very practical, certainly it will help my music a lot.
My only complains is to the number of the foot controlers.
I think that they must be at least to the number of the controled synths, say 12.
So, an open architecture module and more foot controlers is my suggestions for the Control Station.
Finally, i have to say that i spread the news about the Improvisor to as many people as i can and the reaction that i receive is interest.
My only hope is that the Improvisor or at least the Control Station to be a reality soon.

Quote:

---

My only complains is to the number of the foot controlers.I think that they must be at least to the number of the controled synths, say 12.

---

For the record, do you mean continious controllers or footswitches? And 12 footcontrollers seems to me like overkill, but the suggested of 2 seems also not enough to me.

But now you mention controllers, I would like to see more rotary encoders, but then again that would be a cost issue.

And Bill, how are things going?

It's the way i perform.
Let's say that you want to adjust the volume of the synths, but you have ONLY one multitimbral module. How can you do it if you have only two foot controlers? It's about versatility.
As for more knobs and buttons, i think that there are many midi controlers in the market today with little cost.
One example ( i don't promote it!) is the M-Audio Keystation 88 Pro. It is a mother and controler in one with little money.
And many today synths has programmable front panel like the Yamaha Motif ES series for controling a number of apllications.
I only hope one of the two (the Improvisor or the HSCS) to launch soon.

As for the transposition problem in Improvisor, Bill said that Direct used some algorithms to make the results more musical.
Bear in mind that some advanced arranger keyboards in high price categories like the Korg Pa1X and the Yamaha Tyros, offers "inteligent" transpositions according to what is playing with both hands. Also offers harmonizing effects with counter melodies according to some styles that is preset (better say algorithms).
I don't know if you have some experience on this...

Edited by arpmaniac (20/09/04 06:09 AM)

I'm curious to know the progress of the Improvisor/HSCS project.
Bill, what's new?

After contacting quite a number of manufacturers of both hardware and software, I have received very little interest at all in either of these products. Nearly all companies haven't even bothered to reply. This is very discouraging and I am beginning to think that if I was to spend the time and money developing either the Improvisor or the hardware Control Station, am I going to find anyone to distribute it let alone manufacture it? Quite honestly, I just don't know what to do. Many of these companies that we think are small and responsive are actually part of some larger corporate machine that does not take kindly to outsiders 'advising' them of potentially new products. Some even find it insulting. After all, what do customers know about what they really want to buy!!!

Mention has been made of adding other controls to the hardware Control Station specs. However, the whole point of the product was so that you could use any of the dozens of other knob-boxes and such like. Things like the new M-Audio keyboard does indeed offer lots of controllers and so-called 'master' keyboard functionality. There are tons of gear out there that allows you to do zoning and all that sort of stuff, but look very, very hard at their specs and try to work out what you have to do to change things while playing live. What the Improvisor and Control Station offers is immediacy and compatibility SPECIFICALLY for live performance, not in a studio where time is of lesser importance.

Forgive me, but I think some people have not grasped the full implications of this or see the potential benefits. There lies another problem - if I am unable to present these ideas properly, can I really sell the concept? This is why I need the help of experienced manufacturers or distributers.

I am actually very very disappointed at the lack of response to these product outlines. Perhaps I have misjudged the market here, perhaps it is just a reflection on the way the whole industry is going. Even the pages of our industry standard reference magazine in the UK (Sound on Sound) is stuffed with endless and tiresome adverts and reviews of yet another microphone preamp,channel strip or some other means of recording what you have. The emphasis appears to be almost completely focused on the recording of music, not the means to create it. Of course, there are the odd new 'soft' synths coming out now and then but on the whole, there is precious little on the hardware synth front. MIDI is rarely mentioned. This situation has nothing to do with Sound on Sound of course since they can only review what new products there are.

So that is the situation at the moment. I am annoyed at the lack of progress and the indifference by most of those I have contacted (even a polite 'no-thanks' would have been nice).

I will give it another couple of weeks before deciding what to do. But I really do appreciate the comments and support from the people on this forum. Despite some of the remarks made above, this is valuable insight into what potential customers may require and I am very grateful. This is an unusual experiment I am trying where the customers get to see a spec before a device is built. Some cynics would say that this is simply getting free R&D. So what? By having customers spec a product you give them what they really want, not what the designers decide to give them. I just hope it has a happy ending...

Sorry to hear this, Bill. It seems that the music industry has forgotten what impact midi had over the last 20 years. You can see it for eg. in today's software sequencers. Tons of features/capabilities for audio but very little for the midi side of it. A shame indeed.

Allright, enough complaining, what can we do? Maybe we should bring this project more public, to interest as many people we can. Are the SOS people willing to write an article about this? Let's say an interview with Bill Marshall, the developer of midi related devices for Vangelis? That would be a nice article for start. I'm sure many people would like to read this.

And what about a poll on this forum (if that's possible) to see how many people like this concept?

Come on guys, spill your ideas. What can we do to help Bill?

Bill, I really appreciate your time and effort into this project. Thumbs up for a man with a vision, but yet unheard in the land of the established music industry.

I have been reading the dithyrambs in music magazines about Ableton 4 and i wonder if they had something like the Improvisor in their hands what it could be the score!
Because the Improvisor head to head with the Ableton offers more versatility, more seq manipulation and of course playability.
The Improvisor is more for the real player, not another loop factory for DJ's.
Of course i believe that some article in a music magazine like the SOS it could be great, because of the publicity.

In fact i believe that someone it will be in interest very soon for the Improvisor or the HSCS, what the hell, so we must have patient...

Bill,

It seems that a good portion, if not all, of the manufacturers in the music industry seem to choose to ignore the input of the end users which makes me sad.

Or perhaps it is just out of convenience that they choose to ignore the input of an engineer like yourself so that they can safely keep regurgitating the same-ish hardware into the world.

I can only hope that you get at least a few positive replies from at least 1 manufacturer.

Did you try Kenton (www.kenton.co.uk)?

Cheers,

Marcel

What happened finally with the Improvisor/HSCS project?
We have some news?
I only hope to be good...

But in case that manufactures don't care, we always can have a soft only version of improvisor...at least...

If a hardware solution is not possible, I also hope a soft version is coming. Bill, any luck sofar?

I think that the project doesn't goes the way we would like to go.
It seems that manufactures don't bother much for things like the Improvisor.
But the reality is that it's better than LIVE, better for live work from any other sequencer.

I don't want to give up.

So guys, keep the Improvisor alive...

I want to add some comments about the scene in music electronics today...
We have many-many features, many-many possibilities and very powerfull sound engines.

But we haven't the LIVE control of all that...

In the past, analog synths had knobs, buttons, sliders, in
order to manipulate the sound LIVE during the performance.
Today, we are far ahead in terms of sound processing and creation, polyphony, multitimbrality, BUT WE CAN'T CONTROL all these sounds and possibilities.
For me, it's useless to have a modern synth with 128 voices of polyphony, 16 or 32 parts multitimbrality, quality sounds and so on, if i can't CONTROL all that power in real time.
The manufacture says to me, take a decent sequencer and make music just like having a multitrack recorder. And nothing more...

It's frustating and annoying, i don't want to continue saying more about the useability of IMPROVISOR.
I just want to know from BILL if we have some news about it...

Bill

You say "Even the pages of our industry standard reference magazine in the UK (Sound on Sound) is stuffed with endless and tiresome adverts and reviews of yet another microphone preamp,channel strip or some other means of recording what you have."

I share your pain here, but it does say (at the top of the page you are reading now) "The World's Best Music Recording Magazine"! I, and doubtless many readers, make and record music with acoustic instruments and apart from a very occasional dabble with a soft-synth or two, I never touch the things. I dutifully keep buying SoS even though, like I guess many readers, possibly 75% of each issue is not for me - e.g. reviews of budget gear I would not let near my studio, "synth secrets" (you can keep 'em!), etc.

I'd love to see more on making music (perhaps a feature on atonal scales!) but the SoS guys are doing their best to play to what I guess is a very broad church here, and doing it pretty well.

Oh, and how much a month would you pay for a mag with no adverts? £10? £15? You don't have to read them....

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

First, my comments on the 'endless adverts for mic preamps and channel strips, etc'. This is not a comment about the quality of products and needs of people in the industry. Of course, adverts let readers know what is a fairly good indication of the state of the industry and the direction in which it is going. My disappointment is that there are not MORE adverts - ones which feature new and innovative products, preferably in the hardware line. This is the problem: there are very few such products available.

Incidentally, I would not buy a 'focused' magazine such as SOS if it did not have adverts. I also realise that SOS must cater for more than just synth based technology, but live control of stuff is usually directed in this area - not unless someone came up with a bolt-on device for guitars that played the chords for you or sequenced a series of strings!

I have basically drawn a blank with getting anyone interested in Improvisor or Control Station. However, someone from Ableton has been in touch and may be interested. I still have a few other people to contact but if Ableton want to take this further,then this may be the best option for everyone. I think they will be considering using some of the features in their Live product rather than developing brand new software but at least it would be a start. I will wait until they get back to me again before I contact the last few people on my list.

Many many thanks for your suggestions and input. I trust you understand that I simply cannot spend a minimum of six months of my own time developing this product if I have no distributor. Although I am not motivated by money, unfortunately I still have bills to pay and I don't think that shareware would fill the financial hole if I spent the time building Improvisor rather than doing 'proper' work. If Ableton take on board some of these features, this would surely give them the ultimate Live performance sequencer. They are pretty close already, in my opinion.

Perhaps you good people who believe in Improvisor/Control Station should make Ableton aware of your interest (hint,hint).

Bill,
do we have something new about Improvisor/HSCS?

It's obvious that i want this thread to remain hot until we have something positive from the Improvisor/HSCS project.

It's also obvious that Bill doesn't write often any more in this thread, possibly because he's very busy on something that's maybe good for us (i want to believe that he's working in something good out there).

But it's the responsibility that i feel to all of you, how shared with me the same dream about a LIVE SEQUENCER/CONTROLER all that time, so i don't want to leave you without some information about the progress...
That's why i want this thread to remain alive...
So, Bill, do we have something new about this project?

Good action, Arpmaniac. I still watch this space in the hope for good news, but it's very quiet... I'm not sure this is a
good or a bad thing. In the meantime I'm trying to make my own "Improvisor" wich is a combination of the Karma software and Logic's environment. There are hopefully results like "Auto Sustain" (play a chord, release keys but the sound remains, play a new chord, previous notes stop and new notes play etc), but the same principle of Auto Sustain in combination with Logic's arpeggiator objects is much more cumbersome. Those bloody note-off messages. Well, I got it working, sort of, but it's not ideal. So I do hope Bill has something to say.

I hope it too, because it's too pity this effort to turn into a disapointment...

Edited by arpmaniac (30/11/04 09:00 AM)

Maybe it's obvious that the feedback from this forum as far as the Improvisor project ended...
I want to say something about, but i can't...too pity...

Edited by arpmaniac (07/12/04 01:45 PM)

Me too, well life goes on, but I'm not happy...

Too bad, when the detailed specifications that Bill made arrived I was so excited, finally somethings happen, and a man who knows his things, so I really thought it was only a matter of time when the first Improvisor saw it's daylight.

But are there alternatives available? For example, I was thinking of a combination of a clever sequencer program, a few hardware arpeggiator boxes and a dedicated midicontrol box. What are other people opinions about this?

Friends,
hopefully the project is still alive.
Bill is waiting some replies from some companies including Ableton, but it seems that music industry has their own pace.
We must wait with patience until our dream becaume real.
It's not easy, Improvisor project goes the "other way round", so keep this thread alive!
The good news isn't that far...

Dear Colleagues -

Only in the last week did I stumble across this thread - from the old forum. I have not read the discussion on this forum yet. Having printed out the thirty or so pages of discussion from the old forum and reading quickly through it - I felt the compulsion to seek out this forum today. So I am coming at this from a fresh perspective.

The old forum read fabulously - the flow of ideas was breadth taking. Suffice it to say that it looks (from a quick scan) that the pace has slowed down - if not ground to a halt.

I do have some suggestions to make - perhaps you have thought of them but I felt it worth saying anyway. I too am a synthesist with a great number of synthesizers and a compulsion to play and compose 'live'. What is proposed here is a fantastic 'middle-tier' between keyboard playing and manually programming sequences, and is something I would greatly welcome.

By way of anecdote, my first electric keyboard was a casio CT1000P - a lovely keyboard with a curious programmable arpeggiator. There were ten buttons on the control surface numbered 0-9 and according to the order you selected (programmed!) buttons (128 steps), any notes held on the lower two octaves were played in that order. If you selected 1234 and held DEFG, the arpeggio was those four notes repeated. But if you held just a C, then (for example), C1, C2, C3, C4 were played. What this meant was that the pattern was rhythmically coherent while the sequence harmony was anything you decided - from rich to sparse. Curious 'rhythmic' variation could be conjured by selecting a high note on the lower two octaves where on of the sequence note would go out of range and not be heard, or by selecting one of the CT's 1000 sounds where its harmonics became distorted at high notes. Often the results of this innocent arpeggiator were very interesting, if unintentional ; and even though this little keyboard is now very outmoded, that feature has never quite appeared on any other instrument. It was fabulous - and you have reminded me of it and I'll use it again in some new pieces!

But your thread has also sharply reminded me of the excitement of why I became fascinated by electronic musical instruments - the added dimensions not possible by purely human note-per-note performance (although that's also unbounded), and the experimentation required for new music, that electronics is so suited to. These are reasons enough for the 'improviser' to be made.

In any case - here are some points I'd like to bring to the table - whether its too late to make a difference or not.

1. I own a Karma - and it appears that there's a fundamental difference to it and the ZYKLUS - the ZYKLUS contains raw material initiated by the musician, while the KARMA 'effectively' delivers its 'ideas' based in part by the performer. Hence the ZYKLUS paradigm is always going appeal to those who feel a motivation to create music - from scratch, rather than find a groove, no matter how interesting it is, from a Karma or whatever. This is a fundamentally important difference - striking at the core of motivation of writing any particular piece, and I would suggest immeasurably superior. It looks like the ZYKLUS is an accelerator for the composers ideas, whereas the KARMA is a part user-controlled musical/rhythmical phrase generator (I do fond the KARMA fascinating by the way, though i still don't know it very well due to time constraints). but the ZYKLUS approach is utterly valid, and I believe of universal appeal if designed and presented appropriately.

2. Regarding getting ideas into reality - I suggest that the concept be fully designed (I havent read the specs yet). Its important for posterity that these ideas are put out - in completion - because they can be (and arguably must be) If yo cannot see a commercial application, leave it to a future time, but don't leave having to re-invent this wheel to others if it can be done now. Don't worry about the commercialism - worry about getting it right in aspiration and design.

But - I suggest you contact an experimental lobby such as IRCAM or CCRMA - they may pay a grant for someone to code it, build a prototype, do a PhD on it - whatever. A more commercial approach might be to contact CYCLING74 (?). Might this be coded in MAX/MSP?

And - have you approached Yamaha or Roland - this looks like a good competitor to KARMA. Or - what about Korg and Karma Labs - would they consider sponsoring this project? Will Vangelis help? I read an article where he proposes spontaneity as central to (his) composition. Is he interested in nurturing this idea for the posterity (and perhaps survival of a genre of music that is on its knees). Have you asked him - repeatedly?-!! There is a substantial concept here - I'd argue, practical problems aside, that if its not being accepted then is not being sold properly.

On that note - are you sure only a minority of composers/song writers will want this? Could you not 'dress it up' (and I mean honestly and properly) so that the benefits to the multiple genres can be demonstrated/catered for? I have used KARMA for a documentary and TV snippets - because of convenience (though I never feel I have composed a piece of music - there's no 'essence from within me at the centre of the piece - the KARMA does too much and starts the idea, and it shows). I can truly envisage a new ZYKLUS (hardware or software) sitting between a keyboard and mainstream sequencer giving otherwise 'mainstream' music a kick in the rear end into all sorts of interesting permutations, but under the control of the musician, and from the outset . Isn't this the great point to this 'instrument'? I honestly think that this can be sold to virtually every genre - and better than KARMA because the user will feel in control.

In any case - I propose that the ideas be fully developed and presented at an IRCAM workshop, the BMF, NAMM or whatever - with a view to seeking some mode of full design and implementation, even if not initially commercial (many of Cycling74's 'pluggo' functions originated non-commercially at IRCAM).

cheers,
Kevin.

--------------------
Kevin Nolan,KNECT.
www.knect.ie

Hi Folks

The Improvisor or Control Station projects are certainly not dead. I'm just very very disappointed that not only are the companies I have contacted totally uninterested but in most cases just cannot understand why anyone would want to do such things with products like we are suggesting. In fact, potential manufacturers seem to be more in a rut than some musicians. Just count how many 25 note 'controller' keyboards there are compared with 'real' keyboards. This analogy just about sums up the industry at the moment and manufacturers tell me that this is what they want. Who 'they' are is never defined.

I have received quite a few suggestions about who to contact next and I will follow these up in due course. At present, I have just written to SOS to see if they would be interested in doing a retrospective article about Zyklus or even an 'interview' with me where I could hopefully fire the imagination of some people by talking about some of the more exciting projects from the past, including Vangelis stuff. If SOS do this, perhaps more interest can be generated in this entire improvisational/experimental thing and perhaps other designers may get inspiration.

So, this project has taken a long time so far and now seems to be stagnant. Please accept my apologies for this. Ableton said they were interested so I have been waiting for a reply but once again, nothing has came of this. I haven't contacted the large Japanese hardware manufacturers because frankly, I don't think my ideas are in that league and mainstream enough. Yet again, maybe I'm wrong. I see that Steven Kay's brilliant Karma concept has impressed enough for Korg to take the second generation version and incorporate it into their new Oasys keyboard. I also note that many people are comparing Improvisor to Karma but they are quite different things entirely. Maybe Korg are having similar trouble explaining what Karma does but could reveal all in a short demo. If so, then you will understand how it can be difficult to explain what Improvisor is, and how it could be useful to people.

I will keep plugging away at this project. I get the feeling that it may take some time but one day, you will see this functionality in a product even if I do end up doing it all myself.

Hi Bill, glad to hear projects are still alive. I hope SOS will write that article you suggest, so other people are hearing about this Zyklus machine and wondering why there was never a follow up of this truly amazing concept.

I'm quite happy that the project continues again with new ideas.
I think that an interview will be a definent point in order to fire up some reactions from other musicians about the project.
But Bill, i think that a prototype must be build, in order to demonstrate the fabulus potential of Improvisor-Direct.
Sure enough, it's more easy to see and hear the results that to imagine.
I know the problems about building a prototype...
The main is the money... (and the time...)
Hint:
What about a SMALL DONATION from all us, in order to help Bill creating a prototype?

A small donation is maybe a good idea to start things for Bill, so he can buy the materials for a prototype. I'm willing to pay 100 euro to start with.
(I know the timefactor costs much more)

Bill,

Have a look at this site GenoQs Octopus

They're based in Germany but it definately looks pretty interesting. Perhaps they'd be interested in implementing a good portion of Improvisor.

Cheers,

Marcel

Do we have something new about the project?
If it's difficult to gain some attraction from a company, what about a trial PC version of the Hardware Synth Control Station or the Improvisor? or at least a prototype in order Bill to perform a demonstration to the Music Mags or the Companies?

I,m just curious if this project is still alive in some form. Bill, any info maybe?

Hi, friends
It's a long time since we had some news about the project.
I hope once again the news to be good...
Someone knows if we have something?
BILL???

Hi there...
It's a long time since we have some news about the project.
I contact Bill and said to me that no one wants (from the companies) so far to involve or to contribute to this.
So, the choice is ours...
If we want this project to becoume a reality some day, we MUST keep this thread alive.
The synth companies lead people in a specific way in order to perform and compose. This is not necessary bad, but we want REAL and HUMAN integration with the machines and composition through improvisation.
This is very dificult with the current synths, that is very powerfull in other aspects.
In two words, we want REAl TIME CONTROL.
Bill Marshall with Direct, Zyklus, Improvisor offers what we need.
If no one from the companies want to involve, we must persuade Bill to build a prototype and if we are many people in here, even to organise a donation or a group buy, the possibilities are many to help Bill.
It's too pity this project to fail...
Please help to keep this thread alive!

Count me in, but you already know that, arpmaniac. A donation is ok with me, if that's what needed to get things started. A software only version is perhaps the most reasonable way to go. But I like hardware...