Arturia Forums
Hardware Instruments => MatrixBrute => MatrixBrute - General discussions => Topic started by: DrJustice on January 20, 2017, 03:06:14 am
-
It's a bit early seeing as I've not even received my MatrixBrute yet, but I'd be a customer for a polyphonic voice expander.
Imagine a black box with just MIDI (and possibly a USB host) power and an audio jack. It would contain just the voice electronics x N and a power supply, no fancy chassis, no controls, no matrix, no analogue FX, no extensive IO.
Hook up the MIDI (or USB) connection, and the expander would be synced with the main unit when a patch change is made, and when editing is done. The MB insert jack and the expander could be connected with a single stereo jack cable, the expander would mix in its voices on the return signal and the resulting polyphonic sound would then go through the FX in the main unit.
Let N equal 3 or 5 and sell it for at most EUR 999 or EUR 1499. Bundle an editor app that can run it in stand alone mode for those who do not own or want a MatrixBrute main unit. Watch the cash registers run hot ;D
-
Noooooooo!!!!! :o
Just get me my MB , do not spend any time on an expander, just give me an MB :-X
If you want a Poly get the Deep Mind ,
Just let Arturia deliver the MB 1st :'(
-
Hehe... Well, I do not want a DM12. But 4 or 6 voices of MB? Yes please! :)
The MB has been developed, only needing firmware maintenance from here, so the engineers could be free to quickly put together an expander.
-
Don't listen to him ,
Well, I don't want a poly MB ,
I just want an MB
The DM12 has already been developed and it doesn't even need any firmware maintenance, keep the engineers on making MBs give them double shifts
Bin the Poly MB suggestion
-
The engineers don't assemble the MBs, they develop products. Or... wait... is that the explanation for the scarcity of MBs :o :P
Edit: I just saw that the DM12 had another firmware update yesterday (https://forum.music-group.com/showthread.php?13647-UPDATE-Firmware-1-0-3-Released-for-DEEPMIND-12), fixing a number of bugs. The grass isn't always greener... and so forth.
-
Well don't get a DM 12 then ,
Just bin the MB poly idea ,
Focus on sense , fulfil the MB back log befor risking another problem
-
I will use my microbrute to get one extra voice. But that's when I ll get my MB!
-
Is there any software fix that would allow midi attachment of say, a Volca which would only sound when the internal polyphony of the MB has reached the available number of MB on board oscillators?
My idea relies on the MB keyboard having many note polyphony. The Novation Bass Station , though a monosynth has a polyphonic keyboard
So , from the MB key board
MB key 1 ---> MB osc1
MB key 2 ---> Mb osc2
MB key 3 ---> MB osc3
MB key 4 ---> midi send to external device eg Volca , MicroBrute etc
I have turned a Sub 37 into a 5 Osc per note synth by attaching a Volca , an MC 202 and a Prophet 1 to the Sub 37, but I have not got the knowledge to implement the above idea.
Each of the external devices allowed a unique envelope filter and cutoff/Q setting. The sounds were "interesting"
-
Is there any software fix that would allow midi attachment of say, a Volca which would only sound when the internal polyphony of the MB has reached the available number of MB on board oscillators?
My idea relies on the MB keyboard having many note polyphony. The Novation Bass Station , though a monosynth has a polyphonic keyboard
So , from the MB key board
MB key 1 ---> MB osc1
MB key 2 ---> Mb osc2
MB key 3 ---> MB osc3
MB key 4 ---> midi send to external device eg Volca , MicroBrute etc
I have turned a Sub 37 into a 5 Osc per note synth by attaching a Volca , an MC 202 and a Prophet 1 to the Sub 37, but I have not got the knowledge to implement the above idea.
Each of the external devices allowed a unique envelope filter and cutoff/Q setting. The sounds were "interesting"
Yes ....it can be done using M4L in Ableton. Max has an object that allows you to count the number of keys that you hold down on a keyboard. You can use the route object to send the note number/velocity of each voice to a different output. So the MAX patch could sent the fourth note held down to a volca on midi channel 2 and the fifth note to a korg wavestation on midi channel 3. This way you could turn your Matrixbrute keyboard into a polyphonic controller.
It's been a while since I used Max, (i should really go back to it) But i managed to quickly make a patch that demonstrates that this is possible
To explain what's happening:
I 'm holding down four keys on the MatrixBrute and M4L is reading this midi input:
the poly object splits the midi info, and the pack object packs this slit info into pairs.
The route object sends these pairs (what a finger does) to different destinations.
Now all you need is noteout objects to send these different notes to different midi channels (= instruments)
What makes this interesting is that the poly object has a switch to set the voice stealing mode..and the MatrixBrute as well using the note priority switch...
Thanks for inspiring me this way. :) I think i'll develop this idea further to be able to play my Supernova's this way using the MatrixBrute
See attachment for the patch and details.....
-
So you could use several mini or micro routes to give those extra Arturian oscillators?
No need waste time developing a poly expander ;D
-
So you could use several mini or micro routes to give those extra Arturian oscillators?
No need waste time developing a poly expander ;D
Yes, if someone where to develop a poly-expander in Max for Live you could use two or three micro or mini brutes to play the MatrixBbrute polyphonically.
But....
It would be the kind of polyphony DrAKS describes in is first post: the first two voices (osc1 and osc2) would come from the Matrixbrute and the third and up voice would come from the other connected synths. These voice would have a different timbre, could be very interesting and new.
I wonder what would happen if you would enable the arpeggiator and hold down a chord........
-
Very interesting idea!
-
Perhaps loop trigger the internal oscillators
-
While adding external oscillators and poly chaining with other synths is interesting, it's not really what this thread was about :)
Back to the thought experiment of an MB poly expander... Some more points, since the expander as outlined could function stand alone with a software editor:
- It could be made multi-timbral. That would cost a little bit more since there's quite a few CVs per voice, but great to have, particularly when used as a standalone synth
- It could have USB audio, allowing easy hook as an actual analog synth plugin.
Some would just gen an MB, some would be fine with the expander and some would want both - it would cover many user scenarios. This might be good utilization of the R&D already done for Arturia, and a very cool system solution for customers. Then again, could be Arturia already has a polysynth on the drawing board, who knows...
(And DrAKS, thinking about this won't stop our MBs from arriving, don't worry ;))
-
While adding external oscillators and poly chaining with other synths is interesting, it's not really what this thread was about :)
- It could be made multi-timbral. That would cost a little bit more since there's quite a few CVs per voice, but great to have, particularly when used as a standalone synth
Creating a voice expander would be a very complicated thing to do. It's not sufficient to double/triple/quadruple the oscillators, you would have to completely redesign the frontpanel. Take the Audio modulation section; now it's vco>vco2 etc. Having multiple osc would mean you have to create very different audio modulation routings.
Same with the Matrixboard; it's designed for routing all the modulators to two oscillators. If you want those modulators to modulate 6-8 oscillators you would have to have a 64 by 16 matrix. Or if you want to stick to the matrix create oscillator groups (osc1-4) and (osc5-8) and modulate the groups.
Same with the filters...you would have to create a completely different filter routing system or, similarly as above work with a grouping system (osc1-4) and (osc5-8) and route the groups through the filters.
A much cheaper option would be to create a hybrid machine, picture this:
There's a big sample button between the fine tune and the phones knobs. Pressing it will cause the Matrixbrute to sample the current sound, which can then be played polyphonically on the keyboard.
Dunno, I think the analogue purist would object to that solution
With a bit of creative thinking however this could evolve into something very special: you could have a row of 4 to 6 sample buttons:
You're working on your sound ....sample/store the current sound under button one/voice one, you make some small changes, store/sample the result under button two/voice two. and so on up-till voice six. This would allow you to create 6 variations of your basic sound. Playing that polyphonically would be very interesting. It's a much much cheaper solution, that can be implemented without making any changes to the current setup and frontpanel.
Come to think of it; the patterns/link/seqlenghth/seq/arpeggiator row could double as a row of six voice store buttons. Implemented thus it wouldn't require any changes! to the front panel. It would then be a matter of a software update only!! Et voilą a polyphonix Matrixbrute!
-
Agreed , thank you for your explanation.
I think would be a wasteful project which in the analogue arena is dominated by Dave Smiths Rev2 Prophets etc.
This idea is for the deep, deep, deep freeze
-
Creating a voice expander would be a very complicated thing to do. It's not sufficient to double/triple/quadruple the oscillators, you would have to completely redesign the frontpanel. Take the Audio modulation section; now it's vco>vco2 etc. Having multiple osc would mean you have to create very different audio modulation routings.
Same with the Matrixboard; it's designed for routing all the modulators to two oscillators. If you want those modulators to modulate 6-8 oscillators you would have to have a 64 by 16 matrix. Or if you want to stick to the matrix create oscillator groups (osc1-4) and (osc5-8) and modulate the groups.
Same with the filters...you would have to create a completely different filter routing system or, similarly as above work with a grouping system (osc1-4) and (osc5-8) and route the groups through the filters.
...
I'm not talking about adding oscillators, or in any way changing the voice. I'm talking about about separate voices/voice-boards to be played polyphonically. There would be zero changes to the voice electronics, no additional matrixes needed. It's actually not complicated; the MatrixBrute voice has been developed. A poly application "only" needs replicating the voice electronics N times (probably on separate board for manufacturability), and making a polyphonic control system (a tiny main board with a micro controller on it). When you have all the tech, as Arturia do, this is not huge project (we're talking a plain square box box with PCBs and minimal IO).
-
...
I think would be a wasteful project which in the analogue arena is dominated by Dave Smiths Rev2 Prophets etc.
...
That's exactly the sad thing. I don't want a DSI. I don't want all VCO analogues to be DSIs. They seem to be well engineered, but the DSI VCO based voices are to simplistic for my tastes. It's time for something far more exciting. More in the spirit of the Oberheim Matrix 12.
-
Brilliant idea, sample on the fly to get a poly brute. Hope it will implemented!
-
Taking a sample snapshot can never even begin to come close to have live running analogue voices. It would also require development of hardware and software which isn't in the Arturia tech portfolio. Neither is there anything in the MatrixBrute UI to support operating a sampler.
-
Taking a sample snapshot can never even begin to come close to have live running analogue voices. It would also require development of hardware and software which isn't in the Arturia tech portfolio. Neither is there anything in the MatrixBrute UI to support operating a sampler.
I strongly disagree. A voice sampled on the fly would be undistinguishable from the real thing. Even more so if it's sampled at several points on the keyboard; there may be filters and VCO3 key tracking. You would not need to operate a sampler as a user. The sampling process is completely hidden. The moment you press "assign to voice x", the sampling process starts and the current sound is assigned to one or more voices.
Also I suspect that Arturia has considerable knowledge in this field having developed so many brilliant software synths. I could mean upgrading and improving the Matrixbrute operating system. That will happen anyhow there's already a capacity problem: try changing sequencers steps (muting) when the sequencer is running. It's nearly impossible. Maybe that's a programming oversight , it could could also mean that the software is running at its limits.
-
I am not telling you to get any synth Dr.Justice.
I do not mind what you buy. I have no idea as to what you want or don't want so please stop assuming I am trying to tell you what to buy!
I am just countering your suggestion to develop a PolyBrute.
This would be very bad practice at a time when very few MBs have been delivered.
The delivery fiasco is causing a lot of anguish
Development of a PolyBrute is ill judged and will lead to Arturia being severely at risk of failure as a company
-
Taking a sample snapshot can never even begin to come close to have live running analogue voices. It would also require development of hardware and software which isn't in the Arturia tech portfolio. Neither is there anything in the MatrixBrute UI to support operating a sampler.
I strongly disagree. A voice sampled on the fly would be undistinguishable from the real thing. Even more so if it's sampled at several points on the keyboard; there may be filters and VCO3 key tracking. You would not need to operate a sampler as a user. The sampling process is completely hidden. The moment you press "assign to voice x", the sampling process starts and the current sound is assigned to one or more voices.
Also I suspect that Arturia has considerable knowledge in this field having developed so many brilliant software synths. I could mean upgrading and improving the Matrixbrute operating system. That will happen anyhow there's already a capacity problem: try changing sequencers steps (muting) when the sequencer is running. It's nearly impossible. Maybe that's a programming oversight , it could could also mean that the software is running at its limits.
Even if you would be happy with static samples, it remains a fact that there's nothing in the hardware to support sampling. No UI, no CODEC and in all probability no huge amounts of leftover CPU/DSP power.
With regard to the viability of a sampling solution, to not be super cheesy they'd have to be multi sampled across the keyboard, and doing that for 6-8 voices (as you suggest elsewhere) would need a sizeable chunk of hardware: CPU/DSP, CODECs, memory, storage, UI. I.e. an external box would be needed. For this you can use any already existing sampler to much better effect.
-
...
This would be very bad practice at a time when very few MBs have been delivered.
As said, the MatrixBrute has been developed. The R&D investments have been done. Arturia has a staff of engineers which is steadily growing. They are hiring 4 more as we speak. For the engineers to develop new products will have zero impact on the delivery of MatrixBrutes. Please stop assuming that the engineers are on the factory floor assembling MatrixBrutes. In my many years as an embedded systems engineer, I have first hand knowledge of both the technology and R&D and manufacturing processes of electronic products.
Leveraging the technology you have to create and new products is anything but bad practice; it's standard fare in engineering companies. As to whether Arturia would consider it risky or not, we don't know. It's only a point of discussion from my side, not even likely to happen. One thing is certain, their engineers are already working on other products - possibly a PolyBrute, it would be a natural progression especially with analogue polys being in high demand again.
So once more: do not fear, me speculating about a poly expander will not delay your MatrixBrute.
-
Hey DrJustice ,
I don't care any more!!!
My MatrixBrute is being delivered tomorrow :-*
-
I would be interested in a 5 voice rack expander for sure, but maybe Arturia will develop a dedicated polyphonic synth next with panel and hardware optimized for a poly. With MatrixBrute, they went to the top of mono synths already. The downside of sampling is that it will never catch the modulations properly. The sampling time could be increased, but all samples would still become the same, if not multi-sampling each key and that would make the feature too slow to use. The best thing of the MatrixBrute is exactly the modulations, because that is what moves the sound. A polyphonic version could be achieved only by duplicating the voices and giving each voice the same set of modulators, but different key inputs. Then, each voice could live its own life with modulations and be truly polyphonic. The DSI VCO synths are too simple, in practice giving you only 1 LFO + 1 OSC for modulation with fixed mod wheel routing, whereas the MatrixBrute gives multiple freely assignable controllers with dozens of parallel modulation routings at once, all with their own individual mod amounts, like 100x more powerful.
I have not even received my synth yet, but I am already thinking about the various mod routings that I will try... I will probably end up with nearly fully lit matrix for modulations, a little bit of this and that too... ;D
-
i was thinking this the first day they announced it would be a mono synth.
And yes, i hope this will become an option !!
-
here is something really simple that could be realized in the OS alone.
voices 1,2 and 3 go to the matrixbrute like they do now, for instance in paraphonic mode. voices (say) 4,5 and 6 when you hit these notes on the keyboard, are routed to 3 of the cv outs, for instance 3 of the 4 assignable routings in the matrix.
instad of arturia developing an expander, you develop your own in the form of a small eurorack. all you need is oscillators and maybe a small mixer. the oscillators are controlled via the overspilled cv from the matrix, and their audio can come back via the external input where they can get processed through the filter and vca just like the internal vco's. big plus is that as a user you can select your own sounds (a matrixbrute with wavetables) and that all Arturia has to do is create some extra code in the OS.