MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

Rossum Panharmonium Resynthesizer
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Author Rossum Panharmonium Resynthesizer
desolationjones


"Panharmonium is a unique music and sound design tool that analyzes the spectral content of any audio signal and uses that analysis to drive a bank of from 1 to 33 oscillators. Depending on various control settings, Panharmonium can accurately reproduce the input spectrum in real time or modify it in a multitude of wildly creative ways. All with an interface whose immediacy encourages performance and interaction.

Panharmonium input can be anything from a single oscillator to an entire mix (including vocals). From dense, swirling pads and drones that evolve with the input’s changing spectrum, to clock-syncable spectral arpeggiation, to as-yet unnamed harmonic effects, Panharmonium opens up an entirely new world of sonic possibilities.

Additionally, Panharmonium can take a snapshot of an instantaneous spectrum and use that as a complex harmonic oscillator, which can then be modified and modulated by all of Panharmonium’s other controls.

Panharmonium accomplishes its magic though a combination of functional submodules:

Spectral Analyzer

The Spectral Analyzer provides tools for defining the analysis process.

    The Slice parameter sets the rate at which the incoming audio is transformed to spectral data. It can be set by the Slice and Multiplier controls, the Tap button, or by an external clock signal. Very short slice times result in real-time spectral data, while longer times can create rhythmic spectral patterns.

    The Center Freq and Bandwidth controls (and associated CV inputs and attenuverters) control the range of frequencies to be analyzed. The Bandwidth control allows the selection of narrow to wide pass bands on the left side of the pot and narrow to wide notches on the right side of the pot. The ability to sweep the frequency and modify the bandwidth under CV control opens up a wide range of sonic effects.

    The Freeze button lets you freeze the spectral integrator, sustaining the currently analyzed spectrum.


Spectral Modifiers

These controls allow the creative modification the analyzed spectra.

    The Voice parameter controls the number of oscillators (from 1 to 33) used to resynthesize the spectrum.

    The Blur parameter (and associated CV input) is a spectral lag processor that controls how quickly the spectrum can change.

    The Feedback control (and associated CV input) allows one to route the resynthesized audio back into the entire processing chain for subtle or dramatic feedback effects. At its max, the output becomes self-sustaining, even if the input is removed.


Oscillator Bank

The Oscillator Bank resynthesizes the analyzed spectra.

    The Waveform parameter selects the oscillators‘ waveform. In addition to the usual sine, triangle, sawtooth and pulse waveforms, two special crossfading sine and sawtooth waveforms are included.

    The Freq control tunes the oscillators over a +/-7 semitone range. The frequency is further controlled by the 1V/Oct input and the FM input and attenuverter.

    The Octave control, not surprisingly, shifts the pitch of the output by octaves.

    The Glide parameter sets the amount of polyphonic glide (i.e., each oscillator has its own glide circuit).

    The Mix control (and associated CV input) sets the balance between the original input audio and the resynthesized audio.


Optional Functions

A number of optional functions can be selected by using the Output Mode and Tap buttons.

    Holding the Output Mode button and adjusting the Slice control enables Drums Mode, which optimizes the spectral analysis for drums and other percussive inputs.

    Holding the Output Mode button and adjusting the Center Freq control allows one to instead set the lower frequency of the analysis range.

    Holding the Output Mode button and adjusting the Freq control enables Spectral Warping. In contrast to conventional frequency adjustment, where the harmonic relationships between the spectral elements are preserved, Spectral Warping shifts the harmonic elements individually, producing a variety of clangorous, swarming textures.

    Holding the Tap button and adjusting the Freq control quantizes the resulting frequency adjustments to semitones.


Spectra Memories and Presets

Panharmonium provides 12 user Spectra memories and 12 user Presets (in addition to 12 each factory memories).

    The Spectra memories let you store up to 12 frozen slices. When selected, a spectrum (up to 33 oscillators wide!) replaces any live input and can have its pitch controlled by the 1V/Oct input and FM controls.

    A Preset is a snapshot of all of the module settings, along with the value of any CVs present at the moment the preset is saved.


Panharmonium is 26HP wide and 25mm deep.

Power requirements (max): 140mA +12V, 30mA -12V. Reverse polarity protected.

Panharmonium will be available in early summer from Rossum Electro-Music dealers worldwide at a suggested retail price in the US of $499.00."
spinalbeatz
NEED DEMOS eek!
mdoudoroff
Cool. A super souped-up wave swarm-type thingy. In stereo.
cackland
spinalbeatz wrote:
NEED DEMOS eek!


+1
Dogma
Now THAT is interesting
Ras Thavas
You had me at "Mutating", Dave...
SweetNuthin
WOW It's peanut butter jelly time! nanners
pedalhead
Dayum, I'm hoping this will be up for demo at Synthplex this weekend.
The Junglechrist
Oh boy ! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana!
koyl
This could make my dream of synthesizing any external signal in real time come true.. Until now, granular synthesis was the answer but this is even better.

So yes: demos
And one question: When ?
Alexander Kuznetsov
koyl wrote:

And one question: When ?


June
https://www.ctrl-mod.com/products/panharmonium-pre-order
LSuveg1
Wow, can’t wait for a demo!
lisa
Sounds very interesting based on the description but I’ve been fooled before. meh

I’m very much looking forward to some demonstrations of it.
exper
Good grief that’s interesting. Can’t wait to hear it.
coolshirtdotjpg
Seems like a really souped up the version of the AD Spectre. I've always wanted a really powerful FFT module, this might be the one.
peripatitis
It looks very interesting, eager to hear more details about how it does the analysis, sound examples, etc.

But i guess the main question for me is it, why not morph between the presets? And what about noise?

p.s
I wouldn't be certain though that those "as yet unnamed harmonic effects" haven't already be given a name by trevor wishart or Roger Smalley..smile
koyl
Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
koyl wrote:

And one question: When ?


June
https://www.ctrl-mod.com/products/panharmonium-pre-order


Thanks !
That probably means we'll hear it in action soon.
Eurocat
So this is basically a MI Clouds on steroids?
_lampshade_
No, granular synthesis is different than spectral resynthesis, re synthesis i think is more akin to a vocoder or in this case I guess a bank of 33 oscillators controlled by pitch and amplitude tracking of a corresponding band of the input spectrum. any way sounds interesting.
emilng
koyl wrote:
Alexander Kuznetsov wrote:
koyl wrote:

And one question: When ?


June
https://www.ctrl-mod.com/products/panharmonium-pre-order


Thanks !
That probably means we'll hear it in action soon.


Probably at Synthplex tomorrow. Looks like Rossum is one of the exhibitors there.
Funky40
cheeesus, i read spectra and spectral even on repeat and my ears grew up in one second to the size of that rabbits ears. i look now kind of like



.......until i hear demos. Hope that will solve it
starthief
Wow! There have been a couple of VST synthesizers that can do this, but I'm really eager to hear this particular take on it.
Dcramer
Looks very interesting woah
Funch
This looks cool. Perfect Circuit is taking pre orders.
Bob Borries
[√] World class transient generator
[√] World class analog filter
[√] World class digital filter
[√] World class sampler
[√] World class Oscillator
[ ] WTF that was totally unexpected
onthelees
Not to get too...picky, as this seems potentially amazing, but I would rather have had a "Freeze" gate input, than a "Freeze" button, I mean this is Eurorack - why have a button when you can have voltage control?
wminor
Bob Borries wrote:
[√] World class transient generator
[√] World class analog filter
[√] World class digital filter
[√] World class sampler
[√] World class Oscillator
[ ] WTF that was totally unexpected


Which module are you referring to for "transient generator". Control forge?

Can not wait to see demos of this thing. I think I might be becoming a bit of a Rossum fan-boy at this point!
thetwlo
Bob Borries wrote:
[√] World class transient generator
[√] World class analog filter
[√] World class digital filter
[√] World class sampler
[√] World class Oscillator
[ ] WTF that was totally unexpected


thumbs up yup, don't need no stinking demos, it won't be how I use it anyway, just gimme a manual, price and ship date! EDIT: missed the date and price summer and $499!
SlayerBadger!

This might be a good case for a breakout module for CV/gate extracts of the input signal, since it's processing that info anyway.
anselmi
looks vocoder-ish for me...but with internal oscillator(s) as carrier and no input...also monophonic operation, right?
thetwlo
anselmi wrote:
looks vocoder-ish for me...but with internal oscillator(s) as carrier and no input...also monophonic operation, right?


stereo ins and outs on the panel
SarahB
Ooh! What a lovely thing! Want.
Misk
man i've been loving everything coming from RE lately and this is dope and all, but nothing has ever held a candle to Kyma when it comes to real-time spectral resynthesis.

It *does* have immediacy and ease-of-use in it's favor for sure, but Kyma's really spoiled me, and I've gotten good at picking out weird-ass resynthesis artifacts — so i'm def interested to hear how this sounds when processing a wide range of spectral content. Also Peripatitis knows, he owns Kyma (there are literally TENS of us!).

peripatitis wrote:

But i guess the main question for me is it, why not morph between the presets? And what about noise?


once you've analyzed the spectra, interpolation isn't *that* hard to toss in there is it? resynthesis is cool but interpolation is sexy!


peripatitis wrote:

p.s
I wouldn't be certain though that those "as yet unnamed harmonic effects" haven't already be given a name by trevor wishart or Roger Smalley..smile


CDP kills it too, if you're not worried about real-time!
ignatius
not sure why there's no gate input for the freeze button?

otherwise yeehaw. looks great. can't wait to hear it.
thetwlo
Misk wrote:
man i've been loving everything coming from RE lately and this is dope and all, but nothing has ever held a candle to Kyma when it comes to real-time spectral resynthesis.

Well, it will sound different. With different control possibilities. Weird comparison, Symbolic Sound doesn't offer modules.
ignatius
thetwlo wrote:
Misk wrote:
man i've been loving everything coming from RE lately and this is dope and all, but nothing has ever held a candle to Kyma when it comes to real-time spectral resynthesis.

Well, it will sound different. With different control possibilities. Weird comparison, Symbolic Sound doesn't offer modules.


"abandon logic all ye who enter here"
anselmi
thetwlo wrote:
anselmi wrote:
looks vocoder-ish for me...but with internal oscillator(s) as carrier and no input...also monophonic operation, right?


stereo ins and outs on the panel


I mean not polyphonic
AKaudio
starthief wrote:
Wow! There have been a couple of VST synthesizers that can do this, but I'm really eager to hear this particular take on it.


Would love to check these out, you have names?
bemushroomed
onthelees wrote:
I would rather have had a "Freeze" gate input, than a "Freeze" button


Yes, and i don't think its being picky, its just common sense to me.
thermisonic
I hope it doesn’t just sound like a modular Metasynth. Although I guess that would be cool too...
Portabella
I WANT IT
Jumbuktu
Grabbed my attention immediately. With this and Xaoc Odessa, looks like the year of spectral manipulation!
kay_k
I was wondering about that freeze gate too so I wrote them. I've received the reply that this is totally possible by sending 5V to blur will result in infinite blur which is exactly the same as freeze.

(btw. Marco replied in a couple of minutes to my question and immediately to my follow up mail, that is good support IMO)
starthief
AKaudio wrote:
starthief wrote:
Wow! There have been a couple of VST synthesizers that can do this, but I'm really eager to hear this particular take on it.


Would love to check these out, you have names?


Now that I'm fully awake, I feel I should point out that these aren't real time, but analyze a saved sample file and build spectral envelopes...

Camel Audio Alchemy, though unfortunately the developer went under and the plug-in was bought by Apple and is Mac-only (if it's even still available).

DiscoDSP Vertigo is the other one I can think of offhand.
peripatitis
Misk wrote:
man i've been loving everything coming from RE lately and this is dope and all, but nothing has ever held a candle to Kyma when it comes to real-time spectral resynthesis.

It *does* have immediacy and ease-of-use in it's favor for sure, but Kyma's really spoiled me, and I've gotten good at picking out weird-ass resynthesis artifacts — so i'm def interested to hear how this sounds when processing a wide range of spectral content. Also Peripatitis knows, he owns Kyma (there are literally TENS of us!).

peripatitis wrote:

But i guess the main question for me is it, why not morph between the presets? And what about noise?


once you've analyzed the spectra, interpolation isn't *that* hard to toss in there is it? resynthesis is cool but interpolation is sexy!


peripatitis wrote:

p.s
I wouldn't be certain though that those "as yet unnamed harmonic effects" haven't already be given a name by trevor wishart or Roger Smalley..smile


CDP kills it too, if you're not worried about real-time!

+ 1

There is no question kyma destroys everything in that frequency domain world. It might be tricky to get great results with the limited number of oscillators and lack of deviation controls, it is though definetely adventurous, brave and a bit out of the box considering eurorack modules generally "safer choices".
Btw they could make the waveform control cv-able..
dooj88
starthief wrote:

Now that I'm fully awake, I feel I should point out that these aren't real time, but analyze a saved sample file and build spectral envelopes...

Camel Audio Alchemy, though unfortunately the developer went under and the plug-in was bought by Apple and is Mac-only (if it's even still available).


damn, good call. i've got that still running on my first gen ipad. haven't messed with it for a few years, but i seem to remember it mostly sounding like morphing between various aspects of filter settings. i'll have to look at it again.
Dragonaut
Very exciting stuff. Nicely outside of the box. Rossum is stepping up his game.
bc3
Really hope they give use some well made demos on this and more than just a trade show video with lack luster sound quality. Looking at the specifications this has the potential to be something very unique cool
Zymos
At this point, I'm totally fine with lackluster trade show video!
bc3
I wonder if this concept of analyzing the spectral content of an audio signal and driving digital oscillators could also be used to produce control voltages? I do not mean in this module design but another module using the same spectral processing engine to analyze incoming audio and in turn produce varying voltages and even trigger or gates hmmm.....
moogah
oooooh damn.. my wallet really hopes this thing ends up being disappointing..
starthief
bc3 wrote:
I wonder if this concept of analyzing the spectral content of an audio signal and driving digital oscillators could also be used to produce control voltages? I do not mean in this module design but another module using the same spectral processing engine to analyze incoming audio and in turn produce varying voltages and even trigger or gates hmmm.....


That's the analysis portion of a vocoder. A bank of bandpass filters through envelope follower/slew limiters.

The Doepfer A-129 series had those, though it seemed kind of awkwardly implemented.
taylor12k
count me in as #11 kyma owner. have had a system for a long time. used the capybara in a lot of my early works, and now a paca for the past few years.. but sadly, i haven't even powered it up in about 2-3 years. not for disliking kyma, more for my waning interest of software synthesis/computer-y stuff.... as go the ebbs and flows of studio interests...

that being said, this Rossum module is extremely exciting for me for exactly the reason kyma is/was...

and now i feel like i need to dust off my Apogee Duet and see if kyma still works (and how i get a firewire connection into my usb3/thunderbolt macs)..


btw: is there any thread here about kyma use? i'm probably pretty behind the times now and SSC's own forum was always a little quiet...


Misk wrote:
Also Peripatitis knows, he owns Kyma (there are literally TENS of us!).
ignatius
kay_k wrote:
I was wondering about that freeze gate too so I wrote them. I've received the reply that this is totally possible by sending 5V to blur will result in infinite blur which is exactly the same as freeze.

(btw. Marco replied in a couple of minutes to my question and immediately to my follow up mail, that is good support IMO)


cool. thanks. applause nanners
damase
wow, looks so cool. cant wait to hear it in action although im quite sure i need this

stereo is awesome... i imagine its analyzing each side separately to maintain stereo images...? if so, very nice implementation there
Misk
bc3 wrote:
I wonder if this concept of analyzing the spectral content of an audio signal and driving digital oscillators could also be used to produce control voltages? I do not mean in this module design but another module using the same spectral processing engine to analyze incoming audio and in turn produce varying voltages and even trigger or gates hmmm.....


totally could. and it would be awesome. instead of oscillators it could be a bank of 32 envelope followers. I'd buy that for a ...lotta dollars.
brandonlogic
Having a hard time imaging what this might sound like..
any audio examples of those vst's mentioned doing similar things?
looking forward to hearing demos.
WisdomWriter
pretty interesting concept, so its like a "real time" sampler. takes the input and creates "wavetables".
desolationjones
Here's a good video of Benn The Flashbulb manually performing spectral decomposition then additive resynthesis ala Panharmonium. Unfortunately 33 operators will never sound "perfect" but it should be awesome for stealing the souls of other sounds grin
Funch
brandonlogic wrote:
Having a hard time imaging what this might sound like..
any audio examples of those vst's mentioned doing similar things?
looking forward to hearing demos.
there is a guitar pedal by Hologram called infinite Jets that does dsp resynthesis.


https://hologramelectronics.com/infinite-jets/

" Infinite Jets tracks the dynamics of your playing, samples individual notes and chords, and then reinterprets them as new sounds using two independent channels of infinite sustain. It offers 4 separate sampling effects in one: Blur, Synth, Glitch, and Swell."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube .com/watch%3Fv%3DD5rRhbeyeHo&ved=2ahUKEwj1xLiZuqXhAhVJsVQKHTfWAI0QwqsB MAN6BAgGEBU&usg=AOvVaw0Hqq0hlQROk0qd7p0lSDl8
starthief
desolationjones wrote:
Unfortunately 33 operators will never sound "perfect" but it should be awesome for stealing the souls of other sounds grin


As with many things, the imperfection is probably what makes it cool This is fun!
gummyboy
wonder how it will sounds...
Leverkusen
gummyboy wrote:
wonder how it will sounds...


...hm, somewhere between a cello and a melodica, I guess?
Funch
Misk wrote:
bc3 wrote:
I wonder if this concept of analyzing the spectral content of an audio signal and driving digital oscillators could also be used to produce control voltages? I do not mean in this module design but another module using the same spectral processing engine to analyze incoming audio and in turn produce varying voltages and even trigger or gates hmmm.....


totally could. and it would be awesome. instead of oscillators it could be a bank of 32 envelope followers. I'd buy that for a ...lotta dollars.
this is what the sonicsmith ACO (Audio Controlled Oscillator) does, Except the incoming audio triggers the internal analog osc (digital control freq analysis of the input fundamental audio pitch with the aid of a hpf then frequency-dependent auto adjusting low pass filter).

Then Outputs cv for the envelope follower, 1 volt per octave pitch and gate signals.
coolshirtdotjpg
WisdomWriter wrote:
pretty interesting concept, so its like a "real time" sampler. takes the input and creates "wavetables".


No, that would be something like the phonogene.

What this does, is an FFT analysis and resynthesis, which allows you to perform manipulations in the frequency domain. In essence, it analyses the dominant frequencies in a time window, and recreates them using waveforms of the same pitch.

Think of a vocoder with 33 bands, which can then be repitched up and down, moved closer together, or farther apart, etc. all in real time.

My telharfauxnium firmware for the radio music is a little like this, except that it doesn't perform the analysis portion, so you just have to manipulate the sine waves that I give you. Listen to demos of the audio damage spectre and the telharfauxnium, combine them, add control of the waveshapes and feedback, then imagine that done by someone who can actually code.
Misk
ignatius wrote:
thetwlo wrote:
Misk wrote:
man i've been loving everything coming from RE lately and this is dope and all, but nothing has ever held a candle to Kyma when it comes to real-time spectral resynthesis.

Well, it will sound different. With different control possibilities. Weird comparison, Symbolic Sound doesn't offer modules.


"abandon logic all ye who enter here"


Woah Woah Woah guys, I didn't know I had to be all "logical" up in here we're not worthy

not about symbolic sound making modules or not — i'm (fucking obviously) comparing it to one of very few similar tools that do the same thing. makes more sense to compare a cordless circular saw to a table saw than it does to compare it to a cordless drill...

There are plenty of spectral resynth tools, but lets be honest — most of them have sucked — so maybe it's "logical" for me to be a little wary of any product offering what has so often in the past been an empty promise.

Rossum has consistently killed it though so i'm sure this will be dope. Don't know how survived without my control forge.
Misk
FFT takes a snapshot of amplitude, frequency, and phase. 32 partials is enough to accurately re-create most spectra — especially when those partials can be more than just sine waves — as is the case here.

edit: failing at embedding a video but here's a good explanation:

Analyze That
starthief
Speculation on the Mutable forum is that it's not FFT, but a bank of bandpass filters.

That makes sense, given that the front panel has controls for the center frequency and bandwidth for the analyzer.
coolshirtdotjpg
starthief wrote:
Speculation on the Mutable forum is that it's not FFT, but a bank of bandpass filters.

That makes sense, given that the front panel has controls for the center frequency and bandwidth for the analyzer.


That would also make sense, either one could be made to function similarly, or not...

Could be a BP filter with adjustable q, before FFT, but it would make just as much to use a filter bank, depending on what they want to do. Would definitely make some sense for real time processing.
electricanada
dooj88 wrote:
starthief wrote:

Now that I'm fully awake, I feel I should point out that these aren't real time, but analyze a saved sample file and build spectral envelopes...

Camel Audio Alchemy, though unfortunately the developer went under and the plug-in was bought by Apple and is Mac-only (if it's even still available).


damn, good call. i've got that still running on my first gen ipad. haven't messed with it for a few years, but i seem to remember it mostly sounding like morphing between various aspects of filter settings. i'll have to look at it again.


Don't ever update your ios, or you'll lose the Camel forever.
JES
Check out timefreezer. I think it uses phase vocoding. Not sure 33 bands is enough for the Rossum to do it but I look forward to finding out.

starthief wrote:
AKaudio wrote:
starthief wrote:
Wow! There have been a couple of VST synthesizers that can do this, but I'm really eager to hear this particular take on it.


Would love to check these out, you have names?


Now that I'm fully awake, I feel I should point out that these aren't real time, but analyze a saved sample file and build spectral envelopes...

Camel Audio Alchemy, though unfortunately the developer went under and the plug-in was bought by Apple and is Mac-only (if it's even still available).

DiscoDSP Vertigo is the other one I can think of offhand.
Knowix
starthief wrote:


Camel Audio Alchemy, though unfortunately the developer went under and the plug-in was bought by Apple and is Mac-only (if it's even still available).


Went under - all the way to the bank. They were about to release Alchemy 2 when Apple made him an offer no sane person would refuse. And an NDA that made him practically disappear from the face of the earth. I have Alchemy 2 but it's never sparked joy in my hands (to misuse a current turn of phrase hihi ). Too clean sounding or something.
Cortega
brandonlogic wrote:
Having a hard time imaging what this might sound like..
any audio examples of those vst's mentioned doing similar things?
looking forward to hearing demos.


the VST VirSyn Cube does resynthese
3hands
Oh I’m very excited about this. Was considering Clouds, but will hold off for a few months and see what comes of this..
coolshirtdotjpg
3hands wrote:
Oh I’m very excited about this. Was considering Clouds, but will hold off for a few months and see what comes of this..


Why do people keep comparing this to clouds? It's like comparing a VCF to a VCA.
CaneMan
Seriously tempted to sell my Morpheus for this module when it comes out. I'm always looking for a new module to play my violin through.
RecycleYourPets
CaneMan wrote:
Seriously tempted to sell my Morpheus for this module when it comes out. I'm always looking for a new module to play my violin through.


I feel like this + morpheus might be a powerful combo! Im looking forward to pairing them anyway (Assuming this panharmonium actually sounds cool & worth the $)
Leverkusen
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
3hands wrote:
Oh I’m very excited about this. Was considering Clouds, but will hold off for a few months and see what comes of this..


Why do people keep comparing this to clouds? It's like comparing a VCF to a VCA.


Hm, both can process an input signal in a way that it sounds a bit artificial afterwards and somehow "more". Both can than freeze that sound and play it as an instrument with v/oct. An interesting/complex signal as an input might give the more interesting effects and the outcome will tend to be distinguishable as of 'that' module in most common uses. Both work in the area of frequency spectrum processing - Clouds has an extra reverb though.


BTW: What's wrong with comparing VCA's and VCF's? They are the yin & yang of an LPG. So pretty much the same - both attenuators, just with a different frequency response curve.

I am a bit torn with this one. Both, Morpheus and Control Forge did not gel with me very good in practical use. Mostly because of the complicated workflow. This one does not look very complicated though and the concept is great and unique. I just wish it will have something like individual swarm like modulation for every single of the 33 sines.In any case I was quite excited when I first saw this and am looking forward to see and hear more about it. There is just no space left in my case and I don't see anything go... waah
brandonlogic
So I hear this was showed at symthplex today. Interested to hear peoples first impressions that heard it!
coolshirtdotjpg
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
3hands wrote:
Oh I’m very excited about this. Was considering Clouds, but will hold off for a few months and see what comes of this..


Why do people keep comparing this to clouds? It's like comparing a VCF to a VCA.


Hm, both can process an input signal in a way that it sounds a bit artificial afterwards and somehow "more". Both can than freeze that sound and play it as an instrument with v/oct. An interesting/complex signal as an input might give the more interesting effects and the outcome will tend to be distinguishable as of 'that' module in most common uses. Both work in the area of frequency spectrum processing - Clouds has an extra reverb though.


BTW: What's wrong with comparing VCA's and VCF's? They are the yin & yang of an LPG. So pretty much the same - both attenuators, just with a different frequency response curve.

I am a bit torn with this one. Both, Morpheus and Control Forge did not gel with me very good in practical use. Mostly because of the complicated workflow. This one does not look very complicated though and the concept is great and unique. I just wish it will have something like individual swarm like modulation for every single of the 33 sines.In any case I was quite excited when I first saw this and am looking forward to see and hear more about it. There is just no space left in my case and I don't see anything go... waah


I guess one can compare apples to oranges, but since these are totally unrelated in function and very likely sound, it seems odd.
windspirit
Clouds has an alternate mode that does live fft based spectral reprocessing (the spectral madness mode). This one is purely dedicated to the job and the interface (plus Im guessing some of the hardware) reflects that but there is some logic to the comparison.

Goes to have to get my grubby hands on this at synthplex. My biggest question is how quickly things can be modulated, I know the assimil8tor has lots of audio rate inputs.
zoundsabar
I did get a demo and a listen to this at Synthplex today. It’s got some interesting sonic possibilities to be sure. Here’s a few quick observations.

There is a band pass filter before the analysis step. The left side is about tweaking the analysis and the right about the resynthesis. The analysis is windowed at from 27ms up to many seconds. Small windows with lots of resynthesis bands was able to reproduce the demo material they had surprisingly well. It reproduced transients better than I thought it would. It even has a drums mode for transient rich material. Large windows (slices) produce interesting complex sample and hold like material for resynthesis.

On the resynthesis side you can pick from one to 33 oscillators. The oscillators are assigned based on which partial is strongest in that slice. So if you have one oscillator it tracks the strongest harmonic, and each added oscillator tracks the next strongest partial. So they track the timbre slice by slice. There is s slew knob which controls whether each oscillator switches to the next pitch at window boundaries, or glides to the target pitch. There is a knob to spread out the partials or bring them together. Kind of reminiscent of the THX logo sound in its complex internal movements when turning that knob. There is an octave knob and a pitch knob to play the results. There is s blur knob which smooths out the variations in the sound until it is frozen. Since there is CV control of all these parameters and 1v/octave pitch control, you can play the real-time resynthesis output, the sampled and held sounds or the frozen outputs with any controllers.
Leverkusen
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:

I guess one can compare apples to oranges, but since these are totally unrelated in function and very likely sound, it seems odd.


I guess what triggers those associations with clouds is that both are more exotic sound processing/effects modules than the common ones as there are reverb, delay, phaser, distortion. So it's more like comparing mango to guava - exotic fruits which are basically the same and have viscid juice ;-)

Of course they are different in that one is connected to granular synthesis, while the other one does additive synthesis. It is the same with describing it as a kind of vocoder, which is apples and oranges again...

Funfact: in northern germany oranges are called Apfelsine, which literally means apple from china.

zoundsabar wrote:
I did get a demo and a listen to this at Synthplex today. It’s got some interesting sonic possibilities to be sure. Here’s a few quick observations.

There is a band pass filter before the analysis step. The left side is about tweaking the analysis and the right about the resynthesis. The analysis is windowed at from 27ms up to many seconds. Small windows with lots of resynthesis bands was able to reproduce the demo material they had surprisingly well. It reproduced transients better than I thought it would. It even has a drums mode for transient rich material. Large windows (slices) produce interesting complex sample and hold like material for resynthesis.

On the resynthesis side you can pick from one to 33 oscillators. The oscillators are assigned based on which partial is strongest in that slice. So if you have one oscillator it tracks the strongest harmonic, and each added oscillator tracks the next strongest partial. So they track the timbre slice by slice. There is s slew knob which controls whether each oscillator switches to the next pitch at window boundaries, or glides to the target pitch. There is a knob to spread out the partials or bring them together. Kind of reminiscent of the THX logo sound in its complex internal movements when turning that knob. There is an octave knob and a pitch knob to play the results. There is s blur knob which smooths out the variations in the sound until it is frozen. Since there is CV control of all these parameters and 1v/octave pitch control, you can play the real-time resynthesis output, the sampled and held sounds or the frozen outputs with any controllers.



Thanks for the field report. Sounds great and if it really sounds great sound wise hmmm..... I think I want and maybe even need one very much! The last module that got me that excited was the Hertz Donut MKIII and it was worth it - wait, how about resynthesizing its complex evolving sounds with the Sines of Panharmonium? zombie
peripatitis
thumbs up for the elaborate analysis @zoundsabar!

I am guessing you'll probably get the best results using recognizable sound sources (samples, etc) so combining it with the assimilator.
tiger001
what if you'd feed it the new analog Rossum Oscilator?
coolshirtdotjpg
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:

I guess one can compare apples to oranges, but since these are totally unrelated in function and very likely sound, it seems odd.


I guess what triggers those associations with clouds is that both are more exotic sound processing/effects modules than the common ones as there are reverb, delay, phaser, distortion. So it's more like comparing mango to guava - exotic fruits which are basically the same and have viscid juice ;-)

Of course they are different in that one is connected to granular synthesis, while the other one does additive synthesis. It is the same with describing it as a kind of vocoder, which is apples and oranges again...


Ummm, again, no, not at all. It is a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental etc. That means that it's sound generation process is quite similar to an additive synthesis (in fact it IS an additive synthesizer, that's the resynthesis portion). It is also, by definition a vocoder, if you have an understanding of the fundamental types of synthesis you are talking about, you will know why (regardless of whether it is FFT or filter bands). A granular synthesizer is something that takes small samples or grains, and uses them as the basis for synthesis. This device does not have any audible samples, since it, by definition, resynthesizes. A granular synthesizer is essentially a sampler with very small sample sizes (that can cycle at audio rate, and oftentimes overlap).

This isn't some pedantic thing like correcting someone who calls phase modulation FM, this is something that fundamentally sounds completely different. If someone buys this thinking it is going to sound anything like clouds, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

I'm sorry, but you're fundamentally misrepresenting what this is, and don't seem to understand the basics of what you're talking about.
peripatitis
well if we want to be accurate granular synthesis does not use samples, granulation does.
mattb
peripatitis wrote:
well if we want to be accurate granular synthesis does not use samples, granulation does.


actually Granular synthesis is based on the same principle as sampling, where the sampled sounds are being split into pieces (called grains).

Interesting to note how originally the technique pioneered by Xenakis involved Tape splicing.
brandonlogic
zoundsabar wrote:
I did get a demo and a listen to this at Synthplex today. It’s got some interesting sonic possibilities to be sure. Here’s a few quick observations.

There is a band pass filter before the analysis step. The left side is about tweaking the analysis and the right about the resynthesis. The analysis is windowed at from 27ms up to many seconds. Small windows with lots of resynthesis bands was able to reproduce the demo material they had surprisingly well. It reproduced transients better than I thought it would. It even has a drums mode for transient rich material. Large windows (slices) produce interesting complex sample and hold like material for resynthesis.

On the resynthesis side you can pick from one to 33 oscillators. The oscillators are assigned based on which partial is strongest in that slice. So if you have one oscillator it tracks the strongest harmonic, and each added oscillator tracks the next strongest partial. So they track the timbre slice by slice. There is s slew knob which controls whether each oscillator switches to the next pitch at window boundaries, or glides to the target pitch. There is a knob to spread out the partials or bring them together. Kind of reminiscent of the THX logo sound in its complex internal movements when turning that knob. There is an octave knob and a pitch knob to play the results. There is s blur knob which smooths out the variations in the sound until it is frozen. Since there is CV control of all these parameters and 1v/octave pitch control, you can play the real-time resynthesis output, the sampled and held sounds or the frozen outputs with any controllers.


thank you so much for sharing. How did you feel about how it actually sounds? do you think its something you might buy?


how about more posts like this in this thread. MY ASS IS BLEEDING

and less talk about clouds...... seriously, i just don't get it seriously, i just don't get it seriously, i just don't get it
3hands
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
3hands wrote:
Oh I’m very excited about this. Was considering Clouds, but will hold off for a few months and see what comes of this..


Why do people keep comparing this to clouds? It's like comparing a VCF to a VCA.


There was no comparison. Why do you suddenly think I’m comparing because I’m choosing one over the other? Clouds gives me an alternate sysnthesis option. This module suddenly gives me another option. Please stop assuming.
Orange
zoundsabar wrote:
Kind of reminiscent of the THX logo sound in its complex internal movements when turning that knob.




Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana! Rockin' Banana!
That’s what I had in my mind all the time. Looking forward to fatten things up!
underthebigtree
Here is a video on the Panharmonium that I shot at Synthplex 2019:

3hands
underthebigtree wrote:
Here is a video on the Panharmonium that I shot at Synthplex 2019:



Oh my that looks very interesting. Very excited to have this module in front of me!!
Dragonaut
The vocal resynthesis sounds amazing. I’d like to hear this thing fed with some weird complex sounds and see what it spits out.
brandonlogic
underthebigtree wrote:
Here is a video on the Panharmonium that I shot at Synthplex 2019:



ignatius
zoundsabar wrote:
I did get a demo and a listen to this at Synthplex today. It’s got some interesting sonic possibilities to be sure. Here’s a few quick observations.

There is a band pass filter before the analysis step. The left side is about tweaking the analysis and the right about the resynthesis. The analysis is windowed at from 27ms up to many seconds. Small windows with lots of resynthesis bands was able to reproduce the demo material they had surprisingly well. It reproduced transients better than I thought it would. It even has a drums mode for transient rich material. Large windows (slices) produce interesting complex sample and hold like material for resynthesis.

On the resynthesis side you can pick from one to 33 oscillators. The oscillators are assigned based on which partial is strongest in that slice. So if you have one oscillator it tracks the strongest harmonic, and each added oscillator tracks the next strongest partial. So they track the timbre slice by slice. There is s slew knob which controls whether each oscillator switches to the next pitch at window boundaries, or glides to the target pitch. There is a knob to spread out the partials or bring them together. Kind of reminiscent of the THX logo sound in its complex internal movements when turning that knob. There is an octave knob and a pitch knob to play the results. There is s blur knob which smooths out the variations in the sound until it is frozen. Since there is CV control of all these parameters and 1v/octave pitch control, you can play the real-time resynthesis output, the sampled and held sounds or the frozen outputs with any controllers.


hey thanks for sharing! nice to get some actual info and thoughts about the module.
starthief
The demo reminded me of a video I watched once and can't find now, where a spectrum analyzer fed a Yamaha Disklavier in an attempt to resynthesize human voices acoustically. It worked pretty well and was really eerie...

It's also reminding me a bit of the Unfiltered Audio SpecOps plugin.

http://starthief.net/stuff/playing_with_specops.mp3

(This isn't really an attempt to emulate the Parnharmonium, more "inspired by" hihi Unlike the other plugins I was thinking of, SpecOps is a real-time FFT based effect but is more about filtering, freezing, shifting etc. than resynthesis.)
3hands
starthief wrote:
The demo reminded me of a video I watched once and can't find now, where a spectrum analyzer fed a Yamaha Disklavier in an attempt to resynthesize human voices acoustically. It worked pretty well and was really eerie...

It's also reminding me a bit of the Unfiltered Audio SpecOps plugin.

http://starthief.net/stuff/playing_with_specops.mp3

(This isn't really an attempt to emulate the Parnharmonium, more "inspired by" hihi Unlike the other plugins I was thinking of, SpecOps is a real-time FFT based effect but is more about filtering, freezing, shifting etc. than resynthesis.)


Fabulous. I’ve not heard of SpecOps but my god what a sound. Thanks so much for sharing!!
starthief
3hands wrote:
Fabulous. I’ve not heard of SpecOps but my god what a sound. Thanks so much for sharing!!


It's a crazy-ass plugin, but it can do more subtle stuff than this, basic pitch or frequency shifting, noise filtering etc.

Anyway, I'm hoping to hear some clearer examples of Panharmonium, maybe the freeze stuff and how different waveform choices and settings affect it, etc. It's probably going to take an hour-long DivKid or James Cigler type demo to get through the basic possibilities... grin
Sinamsis
I believe someone here previously mentioned that this might be more interesting if it were a CV source instead of directed at manipulating/generating audio. At that time I didn't really understand the statement, but when I saw the video it's the first thing that popped into mind. I'm keeping my eye on this, and would like to hear some better audio, but I'm not sure if I would be able to use this in a musical way. I have been exploring the spectral analysis aspect of my Fumana, and I do wonder how this is different. From the sounds of it there are many more bands, of course these are digital vs analog (though I don't know that this makes a difference). Anyways, it's a very interesting module. Not sure if it will be for me but I'm watching. Something like this would be cool as modulation source to generate CV from audio, and I have explored using Fumana for this. It's fun, and definitely challenging.
j259
Sounds a bit like one of the crazier Eventide effects.
Leverkusen
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:


Ummm, again, no, not at all. It is a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental etc.

It is also, by definition a vocoder, if you have an understanding of the fundamental types of synthesis you are talking about, you will know why (regardless of whether it is FFT or filter bands).

This isn't some pedantic thing like correcting someone who calls phase modulation FM, this is something that fundamentally sounds completely different. If someone buys this thinking it is going to sound anything like clouds, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

I'm sorry, but you're fundamentally misrepresenting what this is, and don't seem to understand the basics of what you're talking about.


Hm, I don’t understand the need to get personal, especially when just paraphasing me. seriously, i just don't get it

You asked why people seem to compare the Panharm with Clouds and marked that as odd - I answered by sharing my thought that many people might classify sound processors into the four groups delay, reverb, modulation effects (phasing/flanging/chorus) and then somehow exotic ones (i.e. Clouds, but Rainmaker surly falls into that category too). Coming from there, I proposed that comparing both is good and helpful to see if and how they differ from each other. Which is, that Clouds is a take on granular synthesis while the Panharm is more on the additive synthesis side.

I would still argue that it is by definition not a vocoder, since a vocoder modulates a carrier signal with the spectral content of a modulator signal. While the Panharm resynthesizes an audio signal by adding a lot of single waves to recreate its spectral content. That's why it's called additive synthesis. This is quite a different concept and It will sound very different from vocoding in most cases - at least as different as it would probably sound close to Clouds when focus external modulation on the Slice, Blur and Feedback parameters.

Calling it a vocoder is misleading. You can hear that difference especially when listening to the part of the video where a single pulse wave is following the pitch of the guitar solo. A vocoder would not be able to do that. Comparing it to the Fumana for a moment instead of Clouds can reveal more of the similarities and differences of both concepts.

Regarding your understanding of how the Panharm is actually working I am not sure either. I don’t see how you possibly can create „a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental“ on this device. Or let’s say the Bandwidth control does not work as precise as it would need to to create something I would call a predefined relationship of a series of waveforms to a fundamental as it is common in additive synthesis. That series of waveforms hugely depend on the spectral content of the input signal. You can shift, widen and transpose it or bring it down to one single wave, which is al great and exciting - but you cannot define the relationship of the single waveforms to a fundamental independent from an input signal.

So maybe one could call it a very interesting and exciting new take on additive synthesis as an sound processor in modular synthesis.
Orange
starthief wrote:
3hands wrote:
Fabulous. I’ve not heard of SpecOps but my god what a sound. Thanks so much for sharing!!


It's a crazy-ass plugin, but it can do more subtle stuff than this, basic pitch or frequency shifting, noise filtering etc.

Anyway, I'm hoping to hear some clearer examples of Panharmonium, maybe the freeze stuff and how different waveform choices and settings affect it, etc. It's probably going to take an hour-long DivKid or James Cigler type demo to get through the basic possibilities... grin


The Panharmonium deserves a long demo from DivKid. Maybe two. One for the basics and a second one for the love of the music. Rockin' Banana!
synonymist
underthebigtree wrote:
Here is a video on the Panharmonium that I shot at Synthplex 2019:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYx6eNUaqCE


Hello. Thank you for making and posting that video.


At 4:15: "Here's a human voice re-synthesized with just four triangle waves." ―Bob Bliss


And that isht sounded good, too. I'd hit it. thumbs up
Dragonaut
underthebigtree wrote:
Here is a video on the Panharmonium that I shot at Synthplex 2019:



Thanks for posting this, my interest is way piqued.
coolshirtdotjpg
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:


Ummm, again, no, not at all. It is a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental etc.

It is also, by definition a vocoder, if you have an understanding of the fundamental types of synthesis you are talking about, you will know why (regardless of whether it is FFT or filter bands).

This isn't some pedantic thing like correcting someone who calls phase modulation FM, this is something that fundamentally sounds completely different. If someone buys this thinking it is going to sound anything like clouds, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

I'm sorry, but you're fundamentally misrepresenting what this is, and don't seem to understand the basics of what you're talking about.


Hm, I don’t understand the need to get personal, especially when just paraphasing me. seriously, i just don't get it

You asked why people seem to compare the Panharm with Clouds and marked that as odd - I answered by sharing my thought that many people might classify sound processors into the four groups delay, reverb, modulation effects (phasing/flanging/chorus) and somehow exotic (i.e. Clouds, but Rainmaker surly falls into that category too). Coming from there I proposed that comparing both is good and helpful to see if and how they differ from each other, which is that Clouds is a take on granular synthesis while the Panharm is more on the additive synthesis side.

I still argue that it is by definition not a vocoder, since a vocoder modulates a carrier signal with the spectral content of a modulator signal, while the Panharm resynthesizes an audio signal by adding a lot of single waves to recreate its spectral content.


Again, you fundamentally don't understand what a vocoder is. A vocoder does not modulate the voice. It analyses it and resynthesizes. Nothing personal, just stating the facts.
Funch
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:


Ummm, again, no, not at all. It is a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental etc.

It is also, by definition a vocoder, if you have an understanding of the fundamental types of synthesis you are talking about, you will know why (regardless of whether it is FFT or filter bands).

This isn't some pedantic thing like correcting someone who calls phase modulation FM, this is something that fundamentally sounds completely different. If someone buys this thinking it is going to sound anything like clouds, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

I'm sorry, but you're fundamentally misrepresenting what this is, and don't seem to understand the basics of what you're talking about.


Hm, I don’t understand the need to get personal, especially when just paraphasing me. seriously, i just don't get it

You asked why people seem to compare the Panharm with Clouds and marked that as odd - I answered by sharing my thought that many people might classify sound processors into the four groups delay, reverb, modulation effects (phasing/flanging/chorus) and somehow exotic (i.e. Clouds, but Rainmaker surly falls into that category too). Coming from there I proposed that comparing both is good and helpful to see if and how they differ from each other, which is that Clouds is a take on granular synthesis while the Panharm is more on the additive synthesis side.

I still argue that it is by definition not a vocoder, since a vocoder modulates a carrier signal with the spectral content of a modulator signal, while the Panharm resynthesizes an audio signal by adding a lot of single waves to recreate its spectral content.


Again, you fundamentally don't understand what a vocoder is. A vocoder does not modulate the voice. It analyses it and resynthesizes. Nothing personal, just stating the facts.


This article points out the origins of the vocorder and how that Tec was applied th music Tec. People were thinking the same thing about the Sonicsmith ACO based converter+, that it was a vocorder, which it is not.


https://www.izotope.com/en/blog/music-production/a-brief-history-of-th e-vocoder.html



"Fundamentally, successful use of a vocoder requires a blending of two sources, the first of which is usually a human voice, which is called the Modulator. It provides an input signal which is broken down into a number of bands (as per Bell Labs’ original design) using filters running in series. There’s also the Carrier, the synthesizer component of the vocoder, which substitutes a traditional Oscillator stage by using a frequency analysis of the Modulator as an audio trigger. In other words, singing into a microphone and then playing keys on the vocoder will trigger the pitches played, producing a multi-voiced, harmonized, and otherworldly performance interpretation of the words and notes you sing."


https://sonicsmith.com/faq/


"5. So your audio-controlled synths are basically like a vocoder, right?

Audio-controlled synths may remind you of some vocoders at first glance, but PROBABLY only because we have demoed them using voice + microphone and the internal VCF can impart a “vowel voicing” (or wah-wah type) sound when you modulate its cutoff frequency. However, the underlying technology making them work is completely different than what’s inside a vocoder.

First of all, a vocoder takes two audio inputs — input A is usually a voice input and input B is usually a “synth” input (from an external synth source). A vocoder, in contrast with our synths, does not generate its own synth sound internally. Input A is analyzed through a bank of fixed band-pass filters, which basically detects the energy levels present in input A at each of the filter frequency bands. The level envelopes are detected from these band-pass signals and used to control input B which has its own set of band-pass filters tuned to the same frequencies as the first set. Input B (the synth signal) is passed through these 2nd set of band-pass filters and each band goes through an independent VCA. Finally, the VCAs on input B are all controlled by the envelopes extracted from input A (the voice). That means they impose the same levels as detected on input A so the synth sound will have similar frequency response as input A (hence the synth will sound like the voice) If this sounds complicated and expensive, that’s because it usually is. Two sets of band-pass filter banks is a lot of analog hardware. This explains the high cost of most analog vocoders. Keep in mind that a vocoder doesn’t analyze nor care what is the fundamental frequency (AKA pitch) of any of its audio inputs."
Leverkusen
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:

Again, you fundamentally don't understand what a vocoder is. A vocoder does not modulate the voice. It analyses it and resynthesizes. Nothing personal, just stating the facts.


Oh, well – all right! Nevermind, 'cause it's more convenient that way!

seriously, i just don't get it seriously, i just don't get it
coolshirtdotjpg
Funch wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:


Ummm, again, no, not at all. It is a series of waveforms which can be brought closer to the fundamental, or further apart, with wave-shaping, and predefined relationship to the fundamental etc.

It is also, by definition a vocoder, if you have an understanding of the fundamental types of synthesis you are talking about, you will know why (regardless of whether it is FFT or filter bands).

This isn't some pedantic thing like correcting someone who calls phase modulation FM, this is something that fundamentally sounds completely different. If someone buys this thinking it is going to sound anything like clouds, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

I'm sorry, but you're fundamentally misrepresenting what this is, and don't seem to understand the basics of what you're talking about.


Hm, I don’t understand the need to get personal, especially when just paraphasing me. seriously, i just don't get it

You asked why people seem to compare the Panharm with Clouds and marked that as odd - I answered by sharing my thought that many people might classify sound processors into the four groups delay, reverb, modulation effects (phasing/flanging/chorus) and somehow exotic (i.e. Clouds, but Rainmaker surly falls into that category too). Coming from there I proposed that comparing both is good and helpful to see if and how they differ from each other, which is that Clouds is a take on granular synthesis while the Panharm is more on the additive synthesis side.

I still argue that it is by definition not a vocoder, since a vocoder modulates a carrier signal with the spectral content of a modulator signal, while the Panharm resynthesizes an audio signal by adding a lot of single waves to recreate its spectral content.


Again, you fundamentally don't understand what a vocoder is. A vocoder does not modulate the voice. It analyses it and resynthesizes. Nothing personal, just stating the facts.


This article points out the origins of the vocorder and how that Tec was applied th music Tec. People were thinking the same thing about the Sonicsmith ACO based converter+, that it was a vocorder, which it is not.


https://www.izotope.com/en/blog/music-production/a-brief-history-of-th e-vocoder.html



"Fundamentally, successful use of a vocoder requires a blending of two sources, the first of which is usually a human voice, which is called the Modulator. It provides an input signal which is broken down into a number of bands (as per Bell Labs’ original design) using filters running in series. There’s also the Carrier, the synthesizer component of the vocoder, which substitutes a traditional Oscillator stage by using a frequency analysis of the Modulator as an audio trigger. In other words, singing into a microphone and then playing keys on the vocoder will trigger the pitches played, producing a multi-voiced, harmonized, and otherworldly performance interpretation of the words and notes you sing."


https://sonicsmith.com/faq/


"5. So your audio-controlled synths are basically like a vocoder, right?

Audio-controlled synths may remind you of some vocoders at first glance, but PROBABLY only because we have demoed them using voice + microphone and the internal VCF can impart a “vowel voicing” (or wah-wah type) sound when you modulate its cutoff frequency. However, the underlying technology making them work is completely different than what’s inside a vocoder.

First of all, a vocoder takes two audio inputs — input A is usually a voice input and input B is usually a “synth” input (from an external synth source). A vocoder, in contrast with our synths, does not generate its own synth sound internally. Input A is analyzed through a bank of fixed band-pass filters, which basically detects the energy levels present in input A at each of the filter frequency bands. The level envelopes are detected from these band-pass signals and used to control input B which has its own set of band-pass filters tuned to the same frequencies as the first set. Input B (the synth signal) is passed through these 2nd set of band-pass filters and each band goes through an independent VCA. Finally, the VCAs on input B are all controlled by the envelopes extracted from input A (the voice). That means they impose the same levels as detected on input A so the synth sound will have similar frequency response as input A (hence the synth will sound like the voice) If this sounds complicated and expensive, that’s because it usually is. Two sets of band-pass filter banks is a lot of analog hardware. This explains the high cost of most analog vocoders. Keep in mind that a vocoder doesn’t analyze nor care what is the fundamental frequency (AKA pitch) of any of its audio inputs."


Right, but this device is, from the description, the former, and not the latter. There is no VCF/VCA to produce vowel-like sounds, it resynthesizes a bank of oscillators, it may be slightly more complicated in this case, but it follows the same basic concept, even if it is implemented digitally.
coolshirtdotjpg
Leverkusen wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:

Again, you fundamentally don't understand what a vocoder is. A vocoder does not modulate the voice. It analyses it and resynthesizes. Nothing personal, just stating the facts.


Oh, well – all right! Nevermind, 'cause it's more convenient that way!

seriously, i just don't get it seriously, i just don't get it


I'm sorry it hurts your feelings, but maybe take a second to read the wiki page on the tech that you are claiming to have knowledge of, before posting it in a semi public space where you will misinform people.
Dragonaut
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
Funch
Dragonaut wrote:
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
yes we know its not a vocorder. Seems to be a lot of "lost in translation" type goings on happening in this thread. hmmm.....

The dude that makes this really should put out a proper demo though.
Zymos
Funch wrote:
Dragonaut wrote:
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
yes we know its not a vocorder. Seems to be a lot of "lost in translation" type goings on happening in this thread. hmmm.....

The dude that makes this really should put out a proper demo though.


What's a "vocorder"? Is it like when a vocoder gets lost in translation?

The "dude" is showing it for the first time right now at Synthplex. I'm sure better demos will be forthcoming...
Ras Thavas
Had a chance some years back to fool w/ analysis/resynthesis on a Kyma system.

My take at the time; interesting, but like many other additive synthesis systems it was hard to interact with it in a meaningful way, the interface struggles with the shear number of oscillators and how to deform/control the resynthesis in a musically useful way.

I found good speeding up/slowing down w/o pitch change, good inharmonic sounds from rescaling the pitch relationship of the oscillators, and some really nice floating sine pads by reducing the number of oscillators, slewing their response and slathering some reverb on top.

Looking forward to better and more audible demos. Agree it would be nice to slew between the stored analysis snapshots.
SynapseCollapse
I'm looking forward to more videos, but am really excited by what we know so far about this new rossum electro-music module!
Sinamsis
Ras Thavas wrote:

My take at the time; interesting, but like many other additive synthesis systems it was hard to interact with it in a meaningful way, the interface struggles with the shear number of oscillators and how to deform/control the resynthesis in a musically useful way.


This pretty much sums it up for me. I think I would struggle with this, but I'm looking forward to hearing what others will do with it and learning more about this.
Funch
Zymos wrote:
Funch wrote:
Dragonaut wrote:
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
yes we know its not a vocorder. Seems to be a lot of "lost in translation" type goings on happening in this thread. hmmm.....

The dude that makes this really should put out a proper demo though.


What's a "vocorder"? Is it like when a vocoder gets lost in translation?

The "dude" is showing it for the first time right now at Synthplex. I'm sure better demos will be forthcoming...
congrats, you found a typo.

From that posted Synthplex video it sounds like crowd noise, because that's mostly what I heard. First impressions are important and a manufacturer might want to control that.
erstlaub


Every single time I read about this module my brain wrongly parses the name into the Parma Hamonium.
uniquepersonno2
I tried it out as well. Seems really powerful. Sounds good too. Looking forward to getting more in-depth and in-detail with one, the show was loud. Definitely a fun module though.
I wouldn't really think of it as a vocoder. From my understanding it's definitely using a similar process but with an additive structure using oscillators to recreate harmonics, not a subtractive process using filters (which a vocoder uses).
Kummer
No other videos? Some's had to have made another video, preferably with a direct line in of the audio?
Zymos
Funch wrote:
Zymos wrote:
Funch wrote:
Dragonaut wrote:
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
yes we know its not a vocorder. Seems to be a lot of "lost in translation" type goings on happening in this thread. hmmm.....

The dude that makes this really should put out a proper demo though.


What's a "vocorder"? Is it like when a vocoder gets lost in translation?

The "dude" is showing it for the first time right now at Synthplex. I'm sure better demos will be forthcoming...
congrats, you found a typo.

From that posted Synthplex video it sounds like crowd noise, because that's mostly what I heard. First impressions are important and a manufacturer might want to control that.


An attendee posted a video from the show floor. You want the manufacturer to "control that"??

I wish we could have heard the module better too, but no one is going to seriously judge it based on this one video, and Rossum doesn't need to worry about someone's first impressions.
gummyboy
What do you think about this module if compared to Fumanan?
Funch
Zymos wrote:
Funch wrote:
Zymos wrote:
Funch wrote:
Dragonaut wrote:
(In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH!
yes we know its not a vocorder. Seems to be a lot of "lost in translation" type goings on happening in this thread. hmmm.....

The dude that makes this really should put out a proper demo though.


What's a "vocorder"? Is it like when a vocoder gets lost in translation?

The "dude" is showing it for the first time right now at Synthplex. I'm sure better demos will be forthcoming...
congrats, you found a typo.

From that posted Synthplex video it sounds like crowd noise, because that's mostly what I heard. First impressions are important and a manufacturer might want to control that.


An attendee posted a video from the show floor. You want the manufacturer to "control that"??

I wish we could have heard the module better too, but no one is going to seriously judge it based on this one video, and Rossum doesn't need to worry about someone's first impressions.
well they could certainly ask not to be filmed with poor sound quality so that their product is not represented poorly.which imo, it was.


https://growingsocialbiz.com/first-impressions-in-buiness-and-branding  /

"The Power of First Impressions and Branding. “Buyers make most decisions by relying on their two-second first impressions based on stored memories, images and feelings.” Most of us know intuitively, that first impressions are important."
lisa
Zymos wrote:
An attendee posted a video from the show floor. You want the manufacturer to "control that"??

But how?! you ask. By posting proper demos, of course. cool
uniquepersonno2
gummyboy wrote:
What do you think about this module if compared to Fumanan?

I have a fumana. It's completely different.
MarcelP
erstlaub wrote:


Every single time I read about this module my brain wrongly parses the name into the Parma Hamonium.


Might pair well with the Balsamic Iteritas Alter.
-S.L-
erstlaub wrote:


Every single time I read about this module my brain wrongly parses the name into the Parma Hamonium.


Can't unsee that anymore lol
starthief
Funch wrote:
Zymos wrote:

I wish we could have heard the module better too, but no one is going to seriously judge it based on this one video, and Rossum doesn't need to worry about someone's first impressions.
well they could certainly ask not to be filmed with poor sound quality so that their product is not represented poorly.which imo, it was.


https://growingsocialbiz.com/first-impressions-in-buiness-and-branding  /

"The Power of First Impressions and Branding. “Buyers make most decisions by relying on their two-second first impressions based on stored memories, images and feelings.” Most of us know intuitively, that first impressions are important."


Have you watched any other trade show videos? This was better than many, because they didn't try to rush through it in 3 minutes and interrupt with not-very-insightful questions.

We got the chance to hear something from the module that gives at least a partial idea of what it can do -- a longer, more in-depth, written and edited video would be required to show us more. We got to hear the designer explain the module a bit. We should be grateful for that.

I've worked trade shows (for game development tools) and it's a real challenge trying to present a complex product in a short time span in a loud, distracting place for 8-10 solid hours three days in a row, to people who are themselves overwhelmed. I'm glad I didn't have to add the sound quality of videos other people shoot to the list of things I had to worry about...

Also: the first impression for most of us wasn't the video, it was their web page with a nice clear picture of the module.
Gyroscope
Panharmonium = Harmony everywhere. Get along people love
Zymos
Yeah, but it's also a play on pandemonium....
Gyroscope
Zymos wrote:
Yeah, but it's also a play on pandemonium....


And pan doesn't really mean everywhere. Let's go on for 2 pages on that hihi
starthief
mdoudoroff
This Sonic State video came out pretty well, I think:



Cool stuff.
Zymos
After that first video with poor audio quality, I decided I didn't want this module that at first seemed really cool and exciting. But after hearing the second one, I changed my mind-





-said no one ever.
starthief
OK, between something he said in the previous video about "thousands of bands" and the delay we're hearing in the wet/dry mix in the Sonic State video at around 3:10, it seems it is using FFT.

Nice demo this time of frozen spectra, which sounds pretty great! And reverb-like applications. Not sure how practically useful the feedback is going to be without a controllable delay time, but it's possible.

Sounds much cooler with sung vocals than spoken vocals, but I see why he starts with that for demo purposes.

I'd like to hear it with drum loops to hear what the drum mode does for it, and also see how it does working with individual synth parts rather than full mixes.

Definitely going to keep an eye (and an ear) on this one.
Orange
mdoudoroff wrote:
This Sonic State video came out pretty well, I think:



Cool stuff.


Bulls eye!
Congrats mr Rossum with this piece of art.
Funch
starthief wrote:
Funch wrote:
Zymos wrote:

I wish we could have heard the module better too, but no one is going to seriously judge it based on this one video, and Rossum doesn't need to worry about someone's first impressions.
well they could certainly ask not to be filmed with poor sound quality so that their product is not represented poorly.which imo, it was.


https://growingsocialbiz.com/first-impressions-in-buiness-and-branding  /

"The Power of First Impressions and Branding. “Buyers make most decisions by relying on their two-second first impressions based on stored memories, images and feelings.” Most of us know intuitively, that first impressions are important."


Have you watched any other trade show videos? This was better than many, because they didn't try to rush through it in 3 minutes and interrupt with not-very-insightful questions.

We got the chance to hear something from the module that gives at least a partial idea of what it can do -- a longer, more in-depth, written and edited video would be required to show us more. We got to hear the designer explain the module a bit. We should be grateful for that.

I've worked trade shows (for game development tools) and it's a real challenge trying to present a complex product in a short time span in a loud, distracting place for 8-10 solid hours three days in a row, to people who are themselves overwhelmed. I'm glad I didn't have to add the sound quality of videos other people shoot to the list of things I had to worry about...

Also: the first impression for most of us wasn't the video, it was their web page with a nice clear picture of the module.
I think you hit on another point about people listening with their eyes, not ears. They are taking pre orders on this module based upon a description, picture of knobs and flashing lights.

Is that standard practice in the eurorack modular scene?. Don't know, just asking because in the guitar gear market, products and brands receive positive product feedback based upon the initial sound demo releases. They do best when they hire a professional that can make anything sound good.

Check out the electro-harmonix pedal demos by Bill Ruppert who is a Chicago session guitarist. This is how its done. Notice how they are re- releasing a popular pedal with improved features giving their customers what they want.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.youtu be.com/watch%3Fv%3DfUmS4FLXMMQ&ved=2ahUKEwj7lqLcw6_hAhWE9Z4KHQ7wDmYQ3e 4CMAt6BAgDEAY&usg=AOvVaw2fymL-AugxxhS9ij-u1IRx

But Maybe eurorack modules sell better by attracting people to bright shiny objects?
CaneMan
Funch wrote:
But Maybe eurorack modules sell better by attracting people to bright shiny objects?


Not entirely. Mr. Green Rossum modules also have a good rep, and this module brings something new to the table. It doesn't hurt that a lot of us are into nontraditional "music". I'm waiting for more demo's once this is closer to release, but I'm cautiously optimistic that this is something I'm going to want.
starthief
Funch wrote:
But Maybe eurorack modules sell better by attracting people to bright shiny objects?


meh

To some extent, yes, they do expect to get people excited about the module based on an image and a feature list, because most of their customers are smart enough to realize the implications of those feature lists.

This module isn't in production yet and they're not taking preorders. I'm going to guess the hardware is finalized and will go to fabrication soon, while the software is in more or less a beta state but not final.

If you look at their other product pages, they have media examples. Compare the page for Morpheus, an established product:



with the Panharmonium in its current state of readiness:



There's plenty of time to add demo media when they have an actual product ready to sell people.
Zymos
Control (and probably other retailers) ARE taking preorders.


Rossum is an established successful business owner. He doesn't need people telling him he's "doing it wrong" meh
mdoudoroff
Zymos wrote:
Control (and probably other retailers) ARE taking preorders.


Although there’s nothing wrong with it, I have felt a bit alarmed with shops instantly taking preorders for just-announced modules we’d never even heard, most recent examples including the Panharmonium and WMD Crucible. The timeliness of preorders is probably just the manufacturers being organized and communicating with their dealers promptly—generally a good thing. I think my ambivalence comes from the culture of scarcity that has crept into Eurorack hard in recent years: from time to time, modules are fully allotted sight-unseen, and it’s now common for initial runs to be sold out for months before a unit ships. So, my the second question is now always whether I need to worry about availability. cry
lud
All the modular companies are way smaller than electro Harmonix and surely can't spend anywhere near as much on promotional material, getting in session musicians to demo etc
buyingitwontmakeucool
mdoudoroff wrote:
Zymos wrote:
Control (and probably other retailers) ARE taking preorders.


Although there’s nothing wrong with it, I have felt a bit alarmed with shops instantly taking preorders for just-announced modules we’d never even heard, most recent examples including the Panharmonium and WMD Crucible. The timeliness of preorders is probably just the manufacturers being organized and communicating with their dealers promptly—generally a good thing. I think my ambivalence comes from the culture of scarcity that has crept into Eurorack hard in recent years: from time to time, modules are fully allotted sight-unseen, and it’s now common for initial runs to be sold out for months before a unit ships. So, my the second question is now always whether I need to worry about availability. cry


I agree. I can only speak for myself but I would never by an audio device without hearing audio examples (I don’t care if there’s video or not, but demos with a high level of crowd noise don’t count for me personally). So my problem is that this actually is something I think I might be interested in, but if everyone has them up for preorder there’s a chance that it could be sold out before I’ve even heard enough. My loss. But I can still complain about it
starthief
Zymos wrote:
Control (and probably other retailers) ARE taking preorders.


My mistake.

Zymos wrote:
Rossum is an established successful business owner. He doesn't need people telling him he's "doing it wrong" meh


That's true!

mdoudoroff wrote:
it’s now common for initial runs to be sold out for months before a unit ships. So, my the second question is now always whether I need to worry about availability. cry


Yeah, things increasingly seem to come down to "is this just FOMO, or am I going to regret not getting in while it was available at a reasonable price?"
Zymos
Well, a few hundred people have now heard Panharmonium in person, and presumably some of them liked what they heard enough to pre-order it.

For me, Crucible was an instabuy. I love Chimera and Fracture (and WMD in general), and there's very little chance I'm not going to love it also.

For something like Panharmonium, which is twice as expensive and pretty large, it's not as quick a decision. I've heard enough from the videos to know it's super cool, but not enough to convince me that I must own it.

There are some manufacturers (MI for one) where first runs sell out really quickly and the next batch can be months down the road. Not sure how it's been with Rossum, I've only had second hand modules which I bought pretty long after they'd been released.
mdoudoroff
Zymos wrote:
Not sure how it's been with Rossum, I've only had second hand modules which I bought pretty long after they'd been released.


Rossum has been pretty good about keeping stock available for all their modules.

They’re professionals.
TemplarK
Amazing module!
Kummer
I thought even the bad sound video sounded interesting, I just wanted to hear it with out the background noise. This module is going to be lots of fun I think!
Funky40
vocals, sung and spoken me likes.

very interested to hear it to reproduce drum sounds.
single sounds like snare and cymbals to get a better idea.


personally i found any kind of "blip" sounds i heard so far uninteresting. not unexpected though.
Who cares where a shitty blip came from originally ?
starthief
Hmm, now I'm wondering what it would be like to FM a resynthesized vocal. Among lots of other things. This is fun!

I was thinking it's kind of a shame that the "dry" mix doesn't have an automatic delay compensation option so it blends perfectly in time with the resynthesized sound.
coolshirtdotjpg
starthief wrote:
Hmm, now I'm wondering what it would be like to FM a resynthesized vocal. Among lots of other things. This is fun!

I was thinking it's kind of a shame that the "dry" mix doesn't have an automatic delay compensation option so it blends perfectly in time with the resynthesized sound.


I did that in several max patches I made for electronic musicians who use vocals, it sounded pretty interesting. I'm sort of glad it's FFT rather than a traditional vocoder design, because there is a severe lack of FFT Freeze modules, and none (as far as I can tell) with this many features for manipulating the sound.
starthief
I was literally dreaming about this module just now (though in my dream a singer visited me to record a few songs for a collab EP, and she was annoyed by my synth corner's terrible acoustics, noisy aquarium and lack of decent mics lol). And I woke up thinking about how cool this would be even just as a weird reverb. I might be a bit obsessed now.
Dragonaut
This is definitely one of the more interesting and powerful modules to come along in a while. It has a lot of different use cases which is great but also a problem for people who have trouble concentrating on one idea at a time. Like me.
peripatitis
Dragonaut wrote:
This is definitely one of the more interesting and powerful modules to come along in a while. It has a lot of different use cases which is great but also a problem for people who have trouble concentrating on one idea at a time. Like me.


Usually the main issue is selecting the material to send thru. Since the analysis is coupled to the synthesis there are not many things you can experiment with.
In a system like Kyma, staying with the premade solutions, you get a myriad of ways to use the data of the analysis, and of course you can get into the nitty gritty and make your own.

Do they say though this is an fft?
starthief
peripatitis wrote:
Do they say though this is an fft?


Not directly, but he did say "the analyzer section splits the incoming audio into thousands of frequency bands" in the first video. And in the second, he demonstrated that there's some inherent latency in processing.

To me that screams FFT, rather than the bandpass bank that some people (including me) had speculated.
Zymos
I thought on that first video he was asked if it was FFT and said sort of.

Edit, around 3 minutes in. I think his distinction was that the analysis was like FFT, but the resynthesis part makes it different
coolshirtdotjpg
Zymos wrote:
I thought on that first video he was asked if it was FFT and said sort of.

Edit, around 3 minutes in. I think his distinction was that the analysis was like FFT, but the resynthesis part makes it different


The reality is that a lot of DSP starts with FFT (it's what makes digital sound possible in some sense), my guess is that the resynthesis portion is the 32 waves they talked about, and the thousands of sine waves are the analyzed waves that were mentioned in the video. That would make sense given the fact that they offer waveshaping and other forms of manipulation. Having hundreds or even thousands of waves in the analysis section would make sense if you wanted to remain accurate while blurring the sounds together, or focusing on a different part of the spectrum.

This is very exciting to me (at least) because this is part of what I was trying to do by integrating modular synths with Kyma.
starthief
Zymos wrote:
I think his distinction was that the analysis was like FFT, but the resynthesis part makes it different


Yeah, FFT analysis, but it feeds an oscillator control algorithm instead of monkeying with the data and then doing inverse FFT as many applications do. (I've written a few VST plugins that play with FFT, all pretty crude but sometimes useful.)

I suspect the algorithm in Panharmonium has a bit more sophistication than "pick the strongest bands" -- and I wonder if it also takes the selected oscillator waveform into account. (As in, if you've got a square wave it knows you're getting the third harmonic of any band for free.)
mojopin
Been looking for a cool all-in-one vocoder for the modular and this keeps popping into my head. Can't wait for some more demos!
coolshirtdotjpg
starthief wrote:

I suspect the algorithm in Panharmonium has a bit more sophistication than "pick the strongest bands" -- and I wonder if it also takes the selected oscillator waveform into account. (As in, if you've got a square wave it knows you're getting the third harmonic of any band for free.)


That wouldn't surprise me either, considering how accurate the results were.
ishi
Was only starting to understand Trident and now this... it just never ends smile
cg_funk
On the Sonic State video, around 10:30 the music processing demo starts.

It's pretty impressive what this thing can do.

Are there any other modules that can do live pitch transposition of real-time audio? The whole re-synthesis thing sounds like it will enable us to do absolutely crazy things with modular.

For example, imagine using this as a guitar input. You could have the modular going and changing key signatures and things, and use the V/oct input on the Panharmonium to key-change the guitar so you can just play in A the whole time.

This effect works great with keyboards, and I already love it. However, being able to do that with guitars would be unreal!!
PietroC
[quote="Dragonaut"](In Arnold Swartzeneger voice) IT IS NOT A VOCODAH![/quote]
hahahahaha
bandenoire
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
Funch
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?
bandenoire
Funch wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?


Because this is something entirely different. Running a recording through a reverb or any effect is still the recording through that effect. however, if something run through this process is 100% wet, then technically nothing of the original signal exists. It’s an approximation of the original signal recreated by new waves.
starthief
I'm no lawyer, but ask yourself what happens if you perform someone else's copyrighted material without permission, and then think about this again.


Anyway, I just preordered because I'm excited about experimenting with it as both a means of synthesis and an effect (and I just sold a couple of pieces of gear I was letting go of and it suddenly was within budget). hyper
peripatitis
bandenoire wrote:
Funch wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?


Because this is something entirely different. Running a recording through a reverb or any effect is still the recording through that effect. however, if something run through this process is 100% wet, then technically nothing of the original signal exists. It’s an approximation of the original signal recreated by new waves.


In that case playing it back through another medium would be enough.
Obviously it isn't and in practice obviously it is.
Funny how journalists 20 year latter face the same problem..
Btw I can't imagine a digital processing method that does not involve sampling.
bandenoire
starthief wrote:
I'm no lawyer, but ask yourself what happens if you perform someone else's copyrighted material without permission, and then think about this again.


Anyway, I just preordered because I'm excited about experimenting with it as both a means of synthesis and an effect (and I just sold a couple of pieces of gear I was letting go of and it suddenly was within budget). hyper


For sure, just a thought experiment. Have no plans to nick some famous bonham break or the like and try to get away with it.
electricfence
Funky40 wrote:
Who cares where a shitty blip came from originally ?


I demand that the shitty blips that I listen to have a distinguished provenance. That's why I only listen to shitty blips made with Cwejman oscillators run through Schippmann filters into a Natural Gate. Miley Cyrus (Sorry. I couldn't resist.)

In all seriousness, I'm really interested in trying one of these in person. I wonder if they'll be at Moogfest.
bandenoire
If they make an expander for this module I hope they consider a 33 channeled pitch and envelope follower that’s fed from the analyzers/fft output. Ridiculous, yes, but in theory could be amazing
coolshirtdotjpg
peripatitis wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Funch wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?


Because this is something entirely different. Running a recording through a reverb or any effect is still the recording through that effect. however, if something run through this process is 100% wet, then technically nothing of the original signal exists. It’s an approximation of the original signal recreated by new waves.


In that case playing it back through another medium would be enough.
Obviously it isn't and in practice obviously it is.
Funny how journalists 20 year latter face the same problem..
Btw I can't imagine a digital processing method that does not involve sampling.


It definitely sampled in order to do FFT (the digital to analog conversion is sampling in some sense), but those samples are not audible synth the audio is resynthesized, that is, of course, unless you crossfade it in. I have no idea what the legal ramifications of this are, but I suspect you'd have a lot of trouble explaining how something that sounds exactly the same isn't the same to a judge. I'm not saying it's impossible, but from a practical perspective, you're not going to win against a large corporation.

There's some weird confusion here (not saying you, but in this thread generally) about how digital audio works, what different types of synthesis mean, etc.) Let me lay it out, for those who don't entirely understand:

There are samplers, aka, devices that include an audio file that is at one point held in a buffer and recalled. Some can recall multiple files from storage (such as an SD card or harddrive), some can record directly into the buffer, some can do both.

There is granular synthesis, which takes a very small sample and uses this as the basis for synthesis. Some of these allow for repitching and this works essentially as it would in a sample, but because these small grains can loop, the create the perceived effect changing the pitch of a sound without affecting the length. It also possible to sample multiple grains. If you think that a sample and a grain are different aside from their application, you are misinformed.

There is no reason sampling has to be digital, the same is true for granular synthesis (see many of Xenakis' tape compositions for evidence of this), but it certainly helps facilitate this process.

Then there is vocoding where a sound is sent into X number (usually 16 or more) of band pass filters spaced such that there is very little overlap between each filter. Each filter output has it's own slew limiter (aka envelope follower), which then controls the amplitude envelope of X bandpass filters for another sound. Most commonly this is a synthesized sound. You could also use X number oscillators tuned to the center frequency of each bandpass filter, put send them into a VCA and control their amplitude to produce essentially the same effect.

Then there is this, which is a black box to us, but we can assume it samples the audio into a small buffer (since there are some time-based analysis, making it similar in some sense to convolution aka impulse response reverb aka phase vocoder) at some point in the chain Fast Fourier Transform is performed which allows them to determine the amplitude of the most important frequencies at a given moment, from this a variable number of these frequencies are chosen for resynthesis, thus preserving the character of the sound and allowing for modification. If this sounds like a digital version of a vocoder, that's because it is a similar concept. It's not directly comparable like granular synthesis and sampling (ever notice how the phonogene becomes a granular synth when you make the samples really small?), but it's obviously much closer to a vocoder than a traditional sampler since the "sample" is never heard when the effect is fully wet.
bandenoire
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
peripatitis wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Funch wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?


Because this is something entirely different. Running a recording through a reverb or any effect is still the recording through that effect. however, if something run through this process is 100% wet, then technically nothing of the original signal exists. It’s an approximation of the original signal recreated by new waves.


In that case playing it back through another medium would be enough.
Obviously it isn't and in practice obviously it is.
Funny how journalists 20 year latter face the same problem..
Btw I can't imagine a digital processing method that does not involve sampling.


It definitely sampled in order to do FFT (the digital to analog conversion is sampling in some sense), but those samples are not audible synth the audio is resynthesized, that is, of course, unless you crossfade it in. I have no idea what the legal ramifications of this are, but I suspect you'd have a lot of trouble explaining how something that sounds exactly the same isn't the same to a judge. I'm not saying it's impossible, but from a practical perspective, you're not going to win against a large corporation.

There's some weird confusion here (not saying you, but in this thread generally) about how digital audio works, what different types of synthesis mean, etc.) Let me lay it out, for those who don't entirely understand:

There are samplers, aka, devices that include an audio file that is at one point held in a buffer and recalled. Some can recall multiple files from storage (such as an SD card or harddrive), some can record directly into the buffer, some can do both.

There is granular synthesis, which takes a very small sample and uses this as the basis for synthesis. Some of these allow for repitching and this works essentially as it would in a sample, but because these small grains can loop, the create the perceived effect changing the pitch of a sound without affecting the length. It also possible to sample multiple grains. If you think that a sample and a grain are different aside from their application, you are misinformed.

There is no reason sampling has to be digital, the same is true for granular synthesis (see many of Xenakis' tape compositions for evidence of this), but it certainly helps facilitate this process.

Then there is vocoding where a sound is sent into X number (usually 16 or more) of band pass filters spaced such that there is very little overlap between each filter. Each filter output has it's own slew limited (aka envelope follower), which then controls the amplitude envelope of X bandpass filters for another sound. Most commonly this is a synthesized sound. You could also use X number oscillators tuned to the center frequency of each bandpass filter, put send them into a VCA and control their amplitude to produce essentially the same effect.

Then there is this, which is a black box to us, but we can assume it samples the audio into a small buffer (since there are some time-based analysis, making it similar in some sense to convolution aka impulse response reverb aka phase vocoder) at some point in the chain Fast Fourier Transform is performed which allows them to determine the amplitude of the most important frequencies at a given moment, from this a variable number of these frequencies are chosen for resynthesis, thus preserve the character of the sound and allowing for modification. If this sounds like a digital version of a vocoder, that's because it is a similar concept. It's not directly comparable like granular synthesis and sample (ever notice how the phonogene becomes a granular synth when you make the samples really small?), but it's obviously much closer to a vocoder than a traditional sampler since the "sample" is never heard when the effect is fully wet.


if it's anything like the technos axcel, then what you are hearing is 100% multiple waveforms (in this case 33) with envelopes applied approximating the sound coming in through fft processing. if i understand it correctly, we don't hear any of the fft processing. it only divides it to what is essentially pitch and envelope trackers which then spits the info out to vcos. what's beautiful about this module is that there are multiple oscillators vs. strictly sine
coolshirtdotjpg
bandenoire wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
peripatitis wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Funch wrote:
bandenoire wrote:
Preordered directly after watching that sonic state video. I’ve been wanting a Technos Acxel but obviously could never afford one and bought a kawai k5kr years ago hoping to get the sound diver program to output waves to the synth. This is just a brilliant execution with a great price tag.
It brings up an interesting paradox about sampling. Does copyright still hold true if this is a synth and not the original sound? Could one feed a scratchy break into it and get a fairly clean (albeit with possible digital artifacts) resynthesized version out of it that is technically a new sound.
Super stoked on it either way. Between assimal8or and the zplane, I think rossum might be my new favorite in design and execution.
if you run another persons recording through a Reverb did you violate the copyright if you try to sell the result? Of course. Why would what you propose be any different?


Because this is something entirely different. Running a recording through a reverb or any effect is still the recording through that effect. however, if something run through this process is 100% wet, then technically nothing of the original signal exists. It’s an approximation of the original signal recreated by new waves.


In that case playing it back through another medium would be enough.
Obviously it isn't and in practice obviously it is.
Funny how journalists 20 year latter face the same problem..
Btw I can't imagine a digital processing method that does not involve sampling.


It definitely sampled in order to do FFT (the digital to analog conversion is sampling in some sense), but those samples are not audible synth the audio is resynthesized, that is, of course, unless you crossfade it in. I have no idea what the legal ramifications of this are, but I suspect you'd have a lot of trouble explaining how something that sounds exactly the same isn't the same to a judge. I'm not saying it's impossible, but from a practical perspective, you're not going to win against a large corporation.

There's some weird confusion here (not saying you, but in this thread generally) about how digital audio works, what different types of synthesis mean, etc.) Let me lay it out, for those who don't entirely understand:

There are samplers, aka, devices that include an audio file that is at one point held in a buffer and recalled. Some can recall multiple files from storage (such as an SD card or harddrive), some can record directly into the buffer, some can do both.

There is granular synthesis, which takes a very small sample and uses this as the basis for synthesis. Some of these allow for repitching and this works essentially as it would in a sample, but because these small grains can loop, the create the perceived effect changing the pitch of a sound without affecting the length. It also possible to sample multiple grains. If you think that a sample and a grain are different aside from their application, you are misinformed.

There is no reason sampling has to be digital, the same is true for granular synthesis (see many of Xenakis' tape compositions for evidence of this), but it certainly helps facilitate this process.

Then there is vocoding where a sound is sent into X number (usually 16 or more) of band pass filters spaced such that there is very little overlap between each filter. Each filter output has it's own slew limited (aka envelope follower), which then controls the amplitude envelope of X bandpass filters for another sound. Most commonly this is a synthesized sound. You could also use X number oscillators tuned to the center frequency of each bandpass filter, put send them into a VCA and control their amplitude to produce essentially the same effect.

Then there is this, which is a black box to us, but we can assume it samples the audio into a small buffer (since there are some time-based analysis, making it similar in some sense to convolution aka impulse response reverb aka phase vocoder) at some point in the chain Fast Fourier Transform is performed which allows them to determine the amplitude of the most important frequencies at a given moment, from this a variable number of these frequencies are chosen for resynthesis, thus preserve the character of the sound and allowing for modification. If this sounds like a digital version of a vocoder, that's because it is a similar concept. It's not directly comparable like granular synthesis and sample (ever notice how the phonogene becomes a granular synth when you make the samples really small?), but it's obviously much closer to a vocoder than a traditional sampler since the "sample" is never heard when the effect is fully wet.


if it's anything like the technos axcel, then what you are hearing is 100% multiple waveforms (in this case 33) with envelopes applied approximating the sound coming in through fft processing. if i understand it correctly, we don't hear any of the fft processing. it only divides it to what is essentially pitch and envelope trackers which then spits the info out to vcos. what's beautiful about this module is that there are multiple oscillators vs. strictly sine


That is correct, insofar as that's what the manufacturer has implied (and how it sounds). Having wave-shaping rather than sine waves make it very interesting, also the time-domain processing is very unique in euro.
cg_funk
Well, then this module isn't strictly a vocoder either... Otherwise they would have just gone with a bank of many sine waves. Instead, the intent of this module is to apparently sculpt and create new sounds derived from inputs, so it uses saws and squares to build up something with the same spectrum as the input... Although I am not exactly sure what that means. To my ears the demos on human speech sounded a lot like low-quality MP3 compression.

Also, after listening to the demo like 50x times, I am hearing a whole lot of high-pitched overtones and clangs that I would honestly need to filter out. Is that caused by the aliasing? Originally I thought it was just noise from the auditorium. I really need to hear some more demos of this thing, when is divkid gonna get a test-unit??

One of the things that Noise Engineering has done with their digital stuff is to change the sampling rate dynamically with the fundamental pitch, which means that the harmonics and overtones are always in-key. Now I can really start to understand why this is really important! I don't know how this module handles aliasing, so it's really up to the demos for me.
coolshirtdotjpg
cg_funk wrote:
Well, then this module isn't strictly a vocoder either... Otherwise they would have just gone with a bank of many sine waves. Instead, the intent of this module is to apparently sculpt and create new sounds derived from inputs, so it uses saws and squares to build up something with the same spectrum as the input... Although I am not exactly sure what that means. To my ears the demos on human speech sounded a lot like low-quality MP3 compression.


They don't choose your waveshapes for you; as far as I can tell from the front panel, you can shape them yourself. All that means is, essentially that you can add/remove harmonics/partials to the waveforms they resynthesizes, I'm guessing they start with sine waves, but it doesn't really matter.


Yes, it does sound a bit like a low quality MP3, because MP3 compression removes the waveforms that aren't loud at a particular moment in time. In theory this works perfectly because of so called "masking" phenomena. Jonathan Sterne's book, MP3: The Meaning of a Format is a useful history of compression/perceptual coding, if you want to know a bit more about that.
coolshirtdotjpg
cg_funk wrote:

One of the things that Noise Engineering has done with their digital stuff is to change the sampling rate dynamically with the fundamental pitch, which means that the harmonics and overtones are always in-key. Now I can really start to understand why this is really important! I don't know how this module handles aliasing, so it's really up to the demos for me.


This doesn't make any sense, unless you are talking about intentionally introducing aliasing. As long as you don't go above the nyquist frequency (pitches above the nyquist are always brick-wall filtered out, in any modern digital system) the harmonics and overtones of any sound will always be in preserved if the pitch changes, any frequencies above the nyquist will be filtered out, and if the nyquist is set a reasonable frequency (say 24000 hz with a 48K sample rate) these are not frequencies that are audible to the human ear anyway. Granted if you want aliasing, you can do some interesting things by changing the sample rate so that the aliasing is harmonically related (aliasing frequencies are heard at the difference between the frequency of the waveform that has crossed the nyquist and the nyquist frequency, so if you have a waveform at 24300 and the nyquist is 24000, you'd hear a distortion at 300hz).

You will of course hear artifacts using the pitch shift process in the panharmonium, but it has nothing to do with aliasing, since you aren't hearing audible samples, and they aren't synthesizing waveforms above the nyquist frequency.
cg_funk
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
cg_funk wrote:

One of the things that Noise Engineering has done with their digital stuff is to change the sampling rate dynamically with the fundamental pitch, which means that the harmonics and overtones are always in-key. Now I can really start to understand why this is really important! I don't know how this module handles aliasing, so it's really up to the demos for me.


This doesn't make any sense, unless you are talking about intentionally introducing aliasing. As long as you don't go above the nyquist frequency (pitches above the nyquist are always brick-wall filtered out, in any modern digital system) the harmonics and overtones of any sound will always be in preserved if the pitch changes, any frequencies above the nyquist will be filtered out, and if the nyquist is set a reasonable frequency (say 24000 hz with a 48K sample rate) these are not frequencies that are audible to the human ear anyway. Granted if you want aliasing, you can do some interesting things by changing the sample rate so that the aliasing is harmonically related (aliasing frequencies are heard at the difference between the frequency of the waveform that has crossed the nyquist and the nyquist frequency, so if you have a waveform at 24300 and the nyquist is 24000, you'd hear a distortion at 300hz).

You will of course hear artifacts using the pitch shift process in the panharmonium, but it has nothing to do with aliasing, since you aren't hearing audible samples, and they aren't synthesizing waveforms above the nyquist frequency.


Interesting. My hearing tops out around 14k, so I would not be hearing 24300.

What I was saying is that because for any given sample rate, there will be only a set of frequencies that are perfectly divisible by that sample rate. It's nothing to do with the nyquest freq theorm or whatnot, it's just simple math. If the wave frequency is not perfectly divisible with the sample rate then there will be some periodic noise in the subdivisions, it's unavoidable. You could however be correct that it's not very audible!! But for additive synthesis with some waveforms (triangle!) these effects could be amplified. So yeah, I think they could be intentionally introducing aliasing or something in the process to give the sound more weirdness.

Also with the demos, there is a lot of clipping between the spectral slices in some modes.

Anyways! My point about the MP3 sound, it isn't neccissarily all bad. Magneto, for example, sounds like a crappy tape recorder and we LIKE that because it's a rad vintage sound. Beat up MP3 is like the new tape recorder, so it's kinda funk to have a module to make those compression glitch sounds IMO!
coolshirtdotjpg
cg_funk wrote:
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
cg_funk wrote:

One of the things that Noise Engineering has done with their digital stuff is to change the sampling rate dynamically with the fundamental pitch, which means that the harmonics and overtones are always in-key. Now I can really start to understand why this is really important! I don't know how this module handles aliasing, so it's really up to the demos for me.


This doesn't make any sense, unless you are talking about intentionally introducing aliasing. As long as you don't go above the nyquist frequency (pitches above the nyquist are always brick-wall filtered out, in any modern digital system) the harmonics and overtones of any sound will always be in preserved if the pitch changes, any frequencies above the nyquist will be filtered out, and if the nyquist is set a reasonable frequency (say 24000 hz with a 48K sample rate) these are not frequencies that are audible to the human ear anyway. Granted if you want aliasing, you can do some interesting things by changing the sample rate so that the aliasing is harmonically related (aliasing frequencies are heard at the difference between the frequency of the waveform that has crossed the nyquist and the nyquist frequency, so if you have a waveform at 24300 and the nyquist is 24000, you'd hear a distortion at 300hz).

You will of course hear artifacts using the pitch shift process in the panharmonium, but it has nothing to do with aliasing, since you aren't hearing audible samples, and they aren't synthesizing waveforms above the nyquist frequency.


Interesting. My hearing tops out around 14k, so I would not be hearing 24300.

What I was saying is that because for any given sample rate, there will be only a set of frequencies that are perfectly divisible by that sample rate. It's nothing to do with the nyquest freq theorm or whatnot, it's just simple math.



I have to correct you, it has everything to do with the nyquist frequency. The nyquist frequency is half the sample rate. This means that any frequency below the nyquist frequency can be represented accurately. 48k sample rate means that everything below 24k can be accurately represented. Since the highest harmonic you can represent in the system is a 24k sine wave (other waveforms would mean harmonics above the nyquist), you will still have 2 points within that waveform, from which you can accurately derive a sine. There is no other waveform that will solve the equation for those points. Any other wave form will have enough information to be represented accurately, since they are, by definition, at a lower frequency than 24k.

If you haven't watched this video, you should. It shows exactly what I'm talking about:

cg_funk
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:


I have to correct you, it has everything to do with the nyquist frequency. The nyquist frequency is half the sample rate. This means that any frequency below the nyquist frequency can be represented accurately. 48k sample rate means that everything below 24k can be accurately represented. Since the highest harmonic you can represent in the system is a 24k sine wave (other waveforms would mean harmonics above the nyquist), you will still have 2 points within that waveform, from which you can accurately derive a sine. There is no other waveform that will solve the equation for those points. Any other wave form will have enough information to be represented accurately, since they are, by definition, at a lower frequency than 24k.

If you haven't watched this video, you should. It shows exactly what I'm talking about:



Interesting video BTW! Yes, digital audio is not stairsteps, and this is an important point you are making. Thanks :-)

You will still hear lots of distortion as you get even close to approaching that limit. It is simple math and I can describe the easiest example where you'll totally hear aliasing despite the tricks in this cool video you shared:

Say you have a 48K sample rate and try to represent a 24K sine wave, then you'll make exactly 2 data points per wavelength! Hopefully they don't fall at the zero-crossing! But say for example you are not exactly at 24K, what shape do you get if you have an exactly 23.99K sine wave sampled at 48K? You'll get a perfect undistorted low-frequency wave, right? To avoid this they make the sample rate of MP3s divisible at a non-musical interval that's unlikely to be used by classical musicians, but what if you tune something at or near that frequency on your modular??

Of course, if you have 3 or more samples per wavelength then do you force a sine wave of the right frequency. So, the limit should really be 3, not 2? However, if you have a complex waveform as is typical in modular, then you'll want to have more than just 3 samples per wavelength or you'll lose most of the harmonics.

Anyways my point wasn't about the sample rate or whatnot, I was just saying that I was hearing a lot of strange aliasing artifacts from all those high frequency sounds being added together. I don't know if it comes from the clipping between spectral slices, or what, but I don't particularly like tinny sounds.
starthief
cg_funk wrote:
Of course, if you have 3 or more samples per wavelength then do you force a sine wave of the right frequency. So, the limit should really be 3, not 2? However, if you have a complex waveform as is typical in modular, then you'll want to have more than just 3 samples per wavelength or you'll lose most of the harmonics.


Nyquist theorem applies to any harmonic content, not just the fundamental frequency. "A complex waveform" already has higher harmonic content than a sine.

A sinewave at 8kHz only has 8kHz content. A squarewave at 8kHz is going to have partials at 24kHz, 40kHz, 56kHz etc. This is why digital oscillators tend to be band-limited, and why digital samplers will low-pass filter their input.


cg_funk wrote:
Anyways my point wasn't about the sample rate or whatnot, I was just saying that I was hearing a lot of strange aliasing artifacts from all those high frequency sounds being added together. I don't know if it comes from the clipping between spectral slices, or what, but I don't particularly like tinny sounds.


I don't think that's what you're hearing. You might think it's "tinny" but unless the oscillators in this module are naively implemented without band limiting (highly unlikely) or are intentionally aliasing (even more unlikely for this application), any aliasing you might hear would be an artifact of the recording process or downsampling/transcoding by YouTube, rather than the module itself.

(And let's face it, the audio quality in those videos is not pristine. It's enough to give you an idea of what things sound like, but not to make quality judgements IMHO. For that, for now, we probably have to trust Rossum to not suck Mr. Green and accounts of people who were physically present and said it sounded "magical")

It might just be "tinny" because it's analyzing and then reproducing partials in high frequency ranges -- and when the output section is set to sine or sawtooth it's likely going to add more high-frequency content than the analyzer picked up in the first place.

So all this should be controllable by filtering the input into the analyzer so it doesn't monitor high frequencies (which seems to be built in), choosing waveforms that don't add lots of high harmonics, or doing some post EQ or filtering.
Zymos
Maybe they should have named it the Rossum Pedantic Argumentator....
Sinamsis
Zymos wrote:
Maybe they should have named it the Rossum Pedantic Argumentator....


That would be the Noise Engineering take on this module actually...
coolshirtdotjpg
Sinamsis wrote:
Zymos wrote:
Maybe they should have named it the Rossum Pedantic Argumentator....


That would be the Noise Engineering take on this module actually...


It’s only pedantic if you have no interest in understanding how the thing you are using, or digital audio in general works. As a Ph.D. candidate in digital media, writing a dissertation on the aesthetics of simulation in audio, I happen to find this sort of thing pretty interesting. Oddly enough, I’m at the same university where EMU was created.
coolshirtdotjpg
starthief wrote:
cg_funk wrote:
Of course, if you have 3 or more samples per wavelength then do you force a sine wave of the right frequency. So, the limit should really be 3, not 2? However, if you have a complex waveform as is typical in modular, then you'll want to have more than just 3 samples per wavelength or you'll lose most of the harmonics.


Nyquist theorem applies to any harmonic content, not just the fundamental frequency. "A complex waveform" already has higher harmonic content than a sine.

A sinewave at 8kHz only has 8kHz content. A squarewave at 8kHz is going to have partials at 24kHz, 40kHz, 56kHz etc. This is why digital oscillators tend to be band-limited, and why digital samplers will low-pass filter their input.


cg_funk wrote:
Anyways my point wasn't about the sample rate or whatnot, I was just saying that I was hearing a lot of strange aliasing artifacts from all those high frequency sounds being added together. I don't know if it comes from the clipping between spectral slices, or what, but I don't particularly like tinny sounds.


I don't think that's what you're hearing. You might think it's "tinny" but unless the oscillators in this module are naively implemented without band limiting (highly unlikely) or are intentionally aliasing (even more unlikely for this application), any aliasing you might hear would be an artifact of the recording process or downsampling/transcoding by YouTube, rather than the module itself.

(And let's face it, the audio quality in those videos is not pristine. It's enough to give you an idea of what things sound like, but not to make quality judgements IMHO. For that, for now, we probably have to trust Rossum to not suck Mr. Green and accounts of people who were physically present and said it sounded "magical")

It might just be "tinny" because it's analyzing and then reproducing partials in high frequency ranges -- and when the output section is set to sine or sawtooth it's likely going to add more high-frequency content than the analyzer picked up in the first place.

So all this should be controllable by filtering the input into the analyzer so it doesn't monitor high frequencies (which seems to be built in), choosing waveforms that don't add lots of high harmonics, or doing some post EQ or filtering.


Thank you for doing the work for me. It’s weird how insistent people are abput these things, despite the fact that this is very much a settled science.
jmax313
this thing looks omg. Awesome demo by sonic state.
brandonlogic
I would love to hear some more demos.
Some high quality direct raw recordings
Kummer
When can we see/hear more demos of this??
prophonic
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
starthief wrote:
cg_funk wrote:
Of course, if you have 3 or more samples per wavelength then do you force a sine wave of the right frequency. So, the limit should really be 3, not 2? However, if you have a complex waveform as is typical in modular, then you'll want to have more than just 3 samples per wavelength or you'll lose most of the harmonics.


Nyquist theorem applies to any harmonic content, not just the fundamental frequency. "A complex waveform" already has higher harmonic content than a sine.

A sinewave at 8kHz only has 8kHz content. A squarewave at 8kHz is going to have partials at 24kHz, 40kHz, 56kHz etc. This is why digital oscillators tend to be band-limited, and why digital samplers will low-pass filter their input.


cg_funk wrote:
Anyways my point wasn't about the sample rate or whatnot, I was just saying that I was hearing a lot of strange aliasing artifacts from all those high frequency sounds being added together. I don't know if it comes from the clipping between spectral slices, or what, but I don't particularly like tinny sounds.


I don't think that's what you're hearing. You might think it's "tinny" but unless the oscillators in this module are naively implemented without band limiting (highly unlikely) or are intentionally aliasing (even more unlikely for this application), any aliasing you might hear would be an artifact of the recording process or downsampling/transcoding by YouTube, rather than the module itself.

(And let's face it, the audio quality in those videos is not pristine. It's enough to give you an idea of what things sound like, but not to make quality judgements IMHO. For that, for now, we probably have to trust Rossum to not suck Mr. Green and accounts of people who were physically present and said it sounded "magical")

It might just be "tinny" because it's analyzing and then reproducing partials in high frequency ranges -- and when the output section is set to sine or sawtooth it's likely going to add more high-frequency content than the analyzer picked up in the first place.

So all this should be controllable by filtering the input into the analyzer so it doesn't monitor high frequencies (which seems to be built in), choosing waveforms that don't add lots of high harmonics, or doing some post EQ or filtering.


Thank you for doing the work for me. It’s weird how insistent people are abput these things, despite the fact that this is very much a settled science.


Is it correct to say that fft always leads to harmonic results (additive sine waves being its subject matter), while granular slides can also be inharmonic ?
starthief
prophonic wrote:
Is it correct to say that fft always leads to harmonic results (additive sine waves being its subject matter), while granular slides can also be inharmonic ?


Nope, the sines don't have to have any particular harmonic relationship.
prophonic
Ah, makes sense., Thank you!
cg_funk
A new demo is out by Sound on Sound magazine, for all interested. Sound quality is better than the previous demo.



My understanding is that if you do the resynthesis with anything other than the sine, you will add lot of higher frequency harmonics to the sound and get a more "brassy" sound as they say. I don't happen to like the resynthesized sound.... so I guess that's that for me.

Every demo just sounds like an overcompressed MP3 with aliasing artifacts to me, I can't get over that. Sorry! I don't care if there is no aliasing in theory, or whatever.
coolshirtdotjpg
You seem to be calling any sound that is artifact-y aliasing. What you are hearing is the sound of a complex signal being made into a less complex signal. This is just what happens when you eliminate less relevant frequencies, which is why it reminds you of MP3 compression. When you hear a low-bit-depth mp3, do you think that is aliasing? If so, you might want to pull up a sample rate reducer and listen to what aliasing actually sounds like. It's just weird that you're so insistent on using incorrect terminology. It's not that there is "theoretically" no aliasing, it's that the sound artifact you are hearing is not aliasing, and doesn't sound anything like aliasing.

For the record, I recreated something similar in max msp and was able to produce similar sounds with less artifacts by resynthesizing with more waveforms/analysis stacked closer together, which is what you would expect. Wanting a resynthesizer that sounds exactly like the original sound is like wanting a low pass filter that doesn't remove any harmonics.
starthief
I have serious doubts about whether running a full mix through it is the ideal way to demo it. It's literally always going to sound like "full mix, but messed up."

It's certainly nothing like how I expect to use it (detuned doubling with oscillators or full voices, acting as a wonky psuedo reverb/comb delay thing, capturing spectra and using it as an oscillator...)

I wrote a plugin a few years ago that does an FFT analysis, sorts the bands by the strongest amplitude, and throws away all but the N-most bands (with some smoothing algos and a couple other tricks). It's not quite the same as MP3 compression, especially when you take it to extremes; I actually find it a pretty useful tool when I want to obscure a background.
cg_funk
coolshirtdotjpg wrote:
You seem to be calling any sound that is artifact-y aliasing. What you are hearing is the sound of a complex signal being made into a less complex signal. This is just what happens when you eliminate less relevant frequencies, which is why it reminds you of MP3 compression. When you hear a low-bit-depth mp3, do you think that is aliasing? If so, you might want to pull up a sample rate reducer and listen to what aliasing actually sounds like.


Well, regardless of what you want to call it. It still sounds a lot like a lower-quality MP3 at this stage, and that is not exactly what I wanted....

I wanted pitch-shifting without degrading the original sound too much. And I wanted to play guitar into it and have the resynthesis track pitch-CV and layer some cool effects. Think like the octaver effect, but more deeply linked to the modular. As it is, I guess that a guitar input after the resynthesis will lose a lot of its presence, (would 100% love to hear a demo like that though, it might change my mind.).

There's also still a chance this module could in fact do what I'm wanting, they are again choosing these very dynamic sound sources in their demo that make it hard for me to imagine how it would sound in my hands with a solo instrument as an input... I will stay tuned for more demos.


coolshirtdotjpg wrote:

For the record, I recreated something similar in max msp and was able to produce similar sounds with less artifacts by resynthesizing with more waveforms/analysis stacked closer together, which is what you would expect.


So from what you are saying about trying this out in MAXmsp, is when faster CPUs come out that'll let them make one that does 500 oscillators rather than 33 it'll probably start to sound a lot closer to 'perfect'? This would basically be my dream recording tool for external audio manipulation if it sounded less artifact-y.
Funky40
starthief wrote:
I have serious doubts about whether running a full mix through it is the ideal way to demo it. It's literally always going to sound like "full mix, but messed up."

i share that thought.
Though, a full mix might be a good idea to give an idea where the limitation is wink


would be interesting to see the module in use with typical modular patches.
Well, with that type of sounds. Could be a recording !
Don´t has to be a big busy patch as such wink

some modular percussions with air to breath ( a phrase mentioned in another thread by someone in regards to demos) so that the Panharmonium could be shown more as a FX-y module for example.
jamm it ! ........just a wish to get a fuller picture of what it could do wink


or, @Rossum, shift some short simple vocal/speaker phrases, -having them as a loop with lots of empty air at the end-, off into FXed-up territory as a fade out of the speak.
would be interesting to hear what you get out wink
coolshirtdotjpg
cg_funk wrote:



So from what you are saying about trying this out in MAXmsp, is when faster CPUs come out that'll let them make one that does 500 oscillators rather than 33 it'll probably start to sound a lot closer to 'perfect'? This would basically be my dream recording tool for external audio manipulation if it sounded less artifact-y.


Yeah, sort of, pitch shifting it will never sound like the music is just being played at a higher pitch, you are going to have harmonics become inaudible, some things aren't going to sound normal being pitch shifted, etc. but it will definitely sound closer to the original signal than just cutting it down to 33 waveforms. I'm sure starthief and others with more experience programming DSP will have more detailed thoughts on that, but that was my experience.
Jumbuktu
This was due to be released sometime in June. Any sign of stocks appearing yet?
Marco Alpert
Jumbuktu wrote:
This was due to be released sometime in June. Any sign of stocks appearing yet?


We've added some features that pushed it out a bit. We're currently looking at starting shipment in the first week of July.
Jumbuktu
Marco Alpert wrote:
Jumbuktu wrote:
This was due to be released sometime in June. Any sign of stocks appearing yet?


We've added some features that pushed it out a bit. We're currently looking at starting shipment in the first week of July.


Thanks, looking forward to it! Any heads-up on the extra features?
Marco Alpert
Jumbuktu wrote:
Thanks, looking forward to it! Any heads-up on the extra features?

We've added an assignable CV function that allows you to CV control more of the real-time parameters. Also the ability to back up and restore stored presets and spectra to WAV files. Plus some additional functionality for the Tap and external clock input.

More details soon.
Jumbuktu
Marco Alpert wrote:
Jumbuktu wrote:
Thanks, looking forward to it! Any heads-up on the extra features?

We've added an assignable CV function that allows you to CV control more of the real-time parameters. Also the ability to back up and restore stored presets and spectra to WAV files. Plus some additional functionality for the Tap and external clock input.

More details soon.


Thanks, I like the assignable CV idea.
tiger001
i like the backup functionality
EXITEXIT
Hope this module didn't lose its screen to appease a vocal minority more interested in simplicity and novelty than fleshed out tools. Rossum modules are easily the most intuitive and well thought out display centric modules I've used, and I'm not at all looking forward to the possibility of remembering button combos to assign CV or save spectrums. Still looking incredible, my most anticipated module this year for sure.

Has any manufacturer ever explored developing a display based control module to access deeper features of a whole range of screenless digital modules for those so inclined?
Jumbuktu
EXITEXIT wrote:
Hope this module didn't lose its screen to appease a vocal minority more interested in simplicity and novelty than fleshed out tools.


I don't think it ever had a screen. It really seems pretty intuitive as it is - not sure why it needs one. Where was the 'vocal minority'?
mdoudoroff
[never mind]
EXITEXIT
Jumbuktu wrote:

Where was the 'vocal minority'?

Rearing their empty heads to throw an autistic fit everytime a module with a screen is announced.
Zymos
EXITEXIT wrote:
Jumbuktu wrote:

Where was the 'vocal minority'?

Rearing their empty heads to throw an autistic fit everytime a module with a screen is announced.


Is this your sock puppet account you've been saving for years for lovely pronouncements such as this?
Mend
As far as I know Panharmonium never had a screen. Maybe this is merely a side effect of Panharmonium's hypnotizing capabilities?

Stay tuned.
EXITEXIT
Mend wrote:
As far as I know Panharmonium never had a screen.


I wasn’t trying to imply that it did, just that I hope they didn’t forgo one early in development solely for the sake of simplicity and analog design fetishism. The feature set as it is doesn’t necessitate a display at all as far as I’m concerned.
damase
was recently shopping alternatives for additive resynthesis to see if i really ‘need’ this module, as i likely use it more as a stereo processor for my daw anyway...

afais, there is no options anywhere that match the immediacy of this in software or hardware. correct me if im wrong please... kyma seems to have nailed the sound (used to make wall-e) but really theres no comparison for cost and learning curve at all here.
Marco Alpert
EXITEXIT wrote:
Mend wrote:
As far as I know Panharmonium never had a screen.


I wasn’t trying to imply that it did, just that I hope they didn’t forgo one early in development solely for the sake of simplicity and analog design fetishism. The feature set as it is doesn’t necessitate a display at all as far as I’m concerned.

Just jumping here here to say that there was never discussion of the inclusion of a display. And certainly no analog fetishism. Our philosophy is to use whatever technology and interface design we feel is best for each specific module.

With release a few weeks away (most likely first week in July), we've posted the final production panel and the Quick Start Guide to the web site: Panharmonium Product Page.

There's a fair amount of info in the QSG, so check it out.
starthief
Marco Alpert wrote:
With release a few weeks away (most likely first week in July), we've posted the final production panel and the Quick Start Guide to the web site: Panharmonium Product Page.


Excellent! w00t
Jumbuktu
Marco Alpert wrote:


With release a few weeks away (most likely first week in July), we've posted the final production panel and the Quick Start Guide to the web site: Panharmonium Product Page.

There's a fair amount of info in the QSG, so check it out.


It's peanut butter jelly time! It's peanut butter jelly time! It's peanut butter jelly time!
theflyingfridge
Is there interpolation between wave selection, or is she a jumpy glitch-bitch? Couldn’t tell from the demos and didn’t see it mentioned anywhere.

seriously, i just don't get it
Marco Alpert
theflyingfridge wrote:
Is there interpolation between wave selection, or is she a jumpy glitch-bitch? Couldn’t tell from the demos and didn’t see it mentioned anywhere.

seriously, i just don't get it

No, no interpolation. However, waveforms do always switch at slice boundaries.
Jumbuktu
Marco Alpert wrote:


With release a few weeks away (most likely first week in July), we've posted the final production panel and the Quick Start Guide to the web site: Panharmonium Product Page.

There's a fair amount of info in the QSG, so check it out.


That's a lot of button-pressing to access the extra options. Maybe it does need a screen? smile

This is the first time I have ever done a cheat-sheet for a module that isn't even available yet!
thetwlo
Jumbuktu wrote:


That's a lot of button-pressing to access the extra options. Maybe it does need a screen? smile

True. that's kinda weird, I guess if we don't uses those functions frequently that's fine... Pre-ordered and excited for it, I'd rather not have another screen , but if it's justified....
tiger001
would it be possible to just mutate the incoming audio, and not re-synthesize ?

(just shift warp/semi incoming audio )

what do i have to imagine with the L-FX-R audio path ?
cuttingeugen
tiger001 wrote:
would it be possible to just mutate the incoming audio, and not re-synthesize ?

(just shift warp/semi incoming audio )

what do i have to imagine with the L-FX-R audio path ?


I think resynthesis is just the name they used for the way this module works. Building sine waves or other waves types according to the spectra of the material you put in. You can then change these waves in various ways e.g. shift, warp...
I would also be interested to know what L-FX-R audio path means...
organon
damase wrote:
afais, there is no options anywhere that match the immediacy of this in software or hardware. correct me if im wrong please...


Well, there's Alchemy, which has an additive resynthesis engine that does pretty much the exact same thing as Panharmonium. But it's inside Logic only.

Also there's Metasynth which is much more powerful, but that is not very immediate, that's for sure.
Marco Alpert
Jumbuktu wrote:
Marco Alpert wrote:


With release a few weeks away (most likely first week in July), we've posted the final production panel and the Quick Start Guide to the web site: Panharmonium Product Page.

There's a fair amount of info in the QSG, so check it out.


That's a lot of button-pressing to access the extra options. Maybe it does need a screen? smile

This is the first time I have ever done a cheat-sheet for a module that isn't even available yet!

That's nice!

Do keep in mind that the Quick Start Guide is an actual printed card that comes with the unit, so you can use the back page as a reference guide (but yours is certainly cleaner).

One clarification: Once in Drums Mode, you exit Drums Mode by simply turning the Slice knob (while NOT holding the Option button).
Marco Alpert
tiger001 wrote:
would it be possible to just mutate the incoming audio, and not re-synthesize ?

(just shift warp/semi incoming audio )

what do i have to imagine with the L-FX-R audio path ?

No, as cuttingeugen said, it's the resynthesized audio that's mutated.

The L-FX-R routing simply passes your left and/or right inputs directly through to the left and/or right outputs, while the mono resynthesized audio appears at both the L & R outputs (so, if you're monitoring in stereo, it'll be in the middle).
Mend
Hey Marco. Can you update us on the releasedate? I can hardly wait.
Marco Alpert
Mend wrote:
Hey Marco. Can you update us on the releasedate? I can hardly wait.

It looks like we're still on track to begin shipping next week. (We should have the full manual online in the next couple of days to help you pass the time.)
Mend
Excellent. Thanks.
Marco Alpert
For your reading enjoyment, the Panharmonium manual is now available at the Documentation tab here.
tiger001
are you liasoned with a brittish rockband ?


starthief
Marco Alpert wrote:
It looks like we're still on track to begin shipping next week.


How's that coming along? hyper
akavalve
starthief wrote:
Marco Alpert wrote:
It looks like we're still on track to begin shipping next week.


How's that coming along? hyper


Also curious! thumbs up
Mend
starthief wrote:
Marco Alpert wrote:
It looks like we're still on track to begin shipping next week.


How's that coming along? hyper
Yeah that emote is how I'm feeling about Panharmonium's imminent release!
ziggomatic
Control voltage shows they are in transit via UPS schedules to arrive today!!
Marco Alpert
ziggomatic wrote:
Control voltage shows they are in transit via UPS schedules to arrive today!!

Yes, as ziggomatic notes, we've been shipping for the last few days. However, we've got a sizable backlog, so it'll probably be another week or so until we're caught up with all the initial orders. In any case, they'll start showing up in people's hands very soon!
starthief
Excellent smile
SnipeCatcher
Was interesting to check this out. Look forward to more info/demos. The weird pocket protector death match stuff sure does make for a lot of unnecessary reading though confused
Mend
Looks like my Panharmonium and my Microcell are gonna arrive in the same week.

hyper hyper hyper
desolationjones
In stock now at Perfect Circuit.
Sandrine
I have just noticed this really cool module! Upon watching a demo I noticed how amazingly similar it sounds to the Reflex LiveLoop (especially in live pitch shift mode) so it's pretty interesting to me right off! GMTA thumbs up
akavalve
I just received mine. Still feeling my way around but here'a a vid using the filter evaluation approach (i.e. feed it noise and see what it sounds like). Certainly not comprehensive in any way but since there's not much out there, here's a something:

https://vimeo.com/350371027

It starts with a pulsed noise burst from Morapahgene and SMR through an Optamix, fades to 100% Panharmonium for some bit and then back to the dry source for comparison.
starthief
That sounds oddly pretty good around :40 to :52 or so, with just a few oscillators trying to figure out how to track noise smile

Mine is estimated to arrive Monday... looking forward to it!
Funky40
desolationjones wrote:
In stock now at Perfect Circuit.

......Juno had them also. Now they were sold quickly lol (edited a misspelling)

many shops have them.

waiting to hear from your usecases Guys hyper hyper hyper incl. audio
dooj88
akavalve wrote:
I just received mine. Still feeling my way around but here'a a vid using the filter evaluation approach (i.e. feed it noise and see what it sounds like). Certainly not comprehensive in any way but since there's not much out there, here's a something:

https://vimeo.com/350371027

It starts with a pulsed noise burst from Morapahgene and SMR through an Optamix, fades to 100% Panharmonium for some bit and then back to the dry source for comparison.


that's really cool how it starts with noise and slowly morphs into more tonal sounds. at one point the interation goes from a piano like sound to a saw swarm. nicely done.
starthief
Mine arrived today and I've been playing with it for about 3 hours total. Here are my first impressions:

So far I've been trying it with single synth voices as an effect, or "loading" it and freezing the spectrum. No full mixes, nothing especially tricky like hitting it with clicks and pops or whatever smile

Depending on how you set it, you will get:

- glitchy "bad MP3" processing.
- warbly oscillator that tracks input, but sometimes kind of oddly.
- harmonizing delay/chord freezer thing.
- spectral shimmer reverb.
- huge-sounding sub oscillator.
- big-ass pipe organ and string machine chords.
- total chaos.
- some combination of those simultaneously.

Seriously, the best results so far seem to come from slowing down the slice rate -- or syncing it -- and treating it more as "background support" for the input (odd reverb, harmonizer etc.). It's really nice for the kind of dirty ambient that I make, and honestly reminds me of working with Red Panda Tensor, except it comes in from a completely different approach than the "magical pitch shifting tape loop" concept smile

It's not designed to be clocked with an irregular pattern, but I did it anyway, with some feedback and gating the Blur CV, and it was very cool.

It seems to clip pretty easily and should have had some kind of gain control. But it's a pleasant soft clipping it seems, and I kinda like it.

Despite "stereo" ins and outs, the analysis and oscillators are mono. In L-FX-R mode, the dry signal maintains its original stereo image, while in LR-FX mode, "L" is a copy of the dry signal and "R" is the wet (with relative settings set by the mix control). The latter option is useful since you might want to post-filter the saw or pulse oscillators, or mix it in mid/side (which works really nicely).

Feeding it some audio and freezing a spectrum works well too of course -- it's like a completely separate application of the technology since you're now more likely to sequence the pitch and treat it like a regular VCO. But FM on it at audio rates is weird, mangled somehow by the slice rate.

Also the FM attenuverter has an extreme range -- for a nice pleasant slow warble, I had it set very close to 12 o'clock and still had to attenuate my LFO.

The waveshapes don't crossfade into each other, but switch suddenly. It would have been really nice to slowly morph from sine to tri to saw, especially since it can be CV selected.

Overall: it's not quite what I expected, but it's a damn interesting and cool module. I don't think it's going to be the next Clouds, and it's definitely not an "instant houseplant" sort of module. But it but it does have a lot of more esoteric ambient potential for those willing to work at it a bit.

Throwing this out there, but my wishlist for future firmware updates:

- a way to adjust gain to help avoid clipping without losing too much output volume.
- a way to tweak the maximum FM attenuverter range, or change the curve so smaller amounts aren't such a narrow band on the knob.
- a mode that splits odd and even oscillators between left/right outputs for a stereo image... perhaps with adjustable detuning between the two sides?
- morphing between waveshapes would be great!

Matte knobs... okay, that's not a firmware thing. But the glare on the silver part of the knob can make the little black pointer arrows hard to see.
natureclubcassettes
thanks starthief, interesting to read. maybe i'm way off mark here, but when i initially read about this module it sounded like an IRCAM in a box type thing to me, like 80s Bayle type sounds. weird to hear about the stereo image aspect as well, ditto on not being able to morph between waveshapes.
akavalve
starthief wrote:
Mine arrived today and I've been playing with it for about 3 hours total. Here are my first impressions:

So far I've been trying it with single synth voices as an effect, or "loading" it and freezing the spectrum. No full mixes, nothing especially tricky like hitting it with clicks and pops or whatever smile

Depending on how you set it, you will get:

- glitchy "bad MP3" processing.
- warbly oscillator that tracks input, but sometimes kind of oddly.
- harmonizing delay/chord freezer thing.
- spectral shimmer reverb.
- huge-sounding sub oscillator.
- big-ass pipe organ and string machine chords.
- total chaos.
- some combination of those simultaneously.

Seriously, the best results so far seem to come from slowing down the slice rate -- or syncing it -- and treating it more as "background support" for the input (odd reverb, harmonizer etc.). It's really nice for the kind of dirty ambient that I make, and honestly reminds me of working with Red Panda Tensor, except it comes in from a completely different approach than the "magical pitch shifting tape loop" concept smile

It's not designed to be clocked with an irregular pattern, but I did it anyway, with some feedback and gating the Blur CV, and it was very cool.

It seems to clip pretty easily and should have had some kind of gain control. But it's a pleasant soft clipping it seems, and I kinda like it.

Despite "stereo" ins and outs, the analysis and oscillators are mono. In L-FX-R mode, the dry signal maintains its original stereo image, while in LR-FX mode, "L" is a copy of the dry signal and "R" is the wet (with relative settings set by the mix control). The latter option is useful since you might want to post-filter the saw or pulse oscillators, or mix it in mid/side (which works really nicely).

Feeding it some audio and freezing a spectrum works well too of course -- it's like a completely separate application of the technology since you're now more likely to sequence the pitch and treat it like a regular VCO. But FM on it at audio rates is weird, mangled somehow by the slice rate.

Also the FM attenuverter has an extreme range -- for a nice pleasant slow warble, I had it set very close to 12 o'clock and still had to attenuate my LFO.

The waveshapes don't crossfade into each other, but switch suddenly. It would have been really nice to slowly morph from sine to tri to saw, especially since it can be CV selected.

Overall: it's not quite what I expected, but it's a damn interesting and cool module. I don't think it's going to be the next Clouds, and it's definitely not an "instant houseplant" sort of module. But it but it does have a lot of more esoteric ambient potential for those willing to work at it a bit.

Throwing this out there, but my wishlist for future firmware updates:

- a way to adjust gain to help avoid clipping without losing too much output volume.
- a way to tweak the maximum FM attenuverter range, or change the curve so smaller amounts aren't such a narrow band on the knob.
- a mode that splits odd and even oscillators between left/right outputs for a stereo image... perhaps with adjustable detuning between the two sides?
- morphing between waveshapes would be great!

Matte knobs... okay, that's not a firmware thing. But the glare on the silver part of the knob can make the little black pointer arrows hard to see.


Thanks Starthief. This pretty well captures my experience as well. It has a lot of cool sound possibilities but not the ones I expected. Still getting my head around how to use it and curious to hear what others are doing with theirs.
Funky40
to see the potential on vocals would be interesting.
....my brain hovers (in fantasy) around such uses wink

and Thanks for any feedbacks on this module !
williamjturkel
Got mine today. Feeding it back into itself via a compressor (MSCL) is quite nice.
nomass
After a few beers I fed mine some Coltrane and it sounded very cool.
thetwlo
nomass wrote:
After a few beers I fed mine some Coltrane and it sounded very cool.


thumbs up
this thing is crazy! very different than expected, but starting to love it!!
rklem
This is like dancing about architecture. Please let us HEAR something! cool
brandonlogic
rklem wrote:
This is like dancing about architecture. Please let us HEAR something! cool


Yes.
Let’s hear something that will make me regret canceling my preorder (hides)
Startheifs list of what you will get out of it isn’t exactly making me regret it.
Pailo
Take the STO from Make Noise.
Feed the wave folded wave into the input of Panharmonium.
Take the Sub OUT and patch it into the V/Oct.
I don't know what it is doing but its like a melody appears out of nowhere.

Strange and fun. hmmm.....
thetwlo
here's a quick example, not the best, wasn't going to put it up since it has a lot of reverb. It's just a simple rhythm from the Assimil8or into it:

[s]https://soundcloud.com/user-91119069/panharm-quick-edit[/s]
JES
The examples coming through are pretty interesting. Please keep posting them. Feel free to use all the reverb you want.

In the meantime, at the risk of triggering some people from earlier in the thread when this was still a "coming soon" sort of deal (<--kidding about the triggering part), I know this isn't a vocoder, but it does seem a lot like some of the software I have that uses phase vocoding. Looking at this explanation: http://www.panix.com/~jens/pvoc-dolson.par it seems to be pretty similar in layout even though there all sorts of additional possibilities (FM, oscillator type not just sine, etc).

Can someone explain to me how it's NOT a relative of a phase vocoder? I would be grateful just for the clarification.

PS -- if you don't know what a phase vocoder is, the above link is a decent explanation. It's not the same thing as a regular vocoder at all, though they're historically related.
starthief
I'm not a DSP expert by any means but I would say it's certainly related to a phase vocoder. I believe what it's doing is:

-- using FFT to do the analysis
-- filtering the FFT results with bandpass/notch
-- sorting them by strength and keeping the strongest 33 frequencies
-- feeding those to an oscillator control section with slew on the amplitude (blur) and frequency (glide)
-- oscillators can exponentially be pitch shifted (freq, FM, V/OCT) or detuned relative to each other (warp) and have selectable waveforms
-- internal VCA per oscillator, controlled by spectral data and wave crossfading

Instead of a phase vocoder:

-- use filter banks to do analysis
-- optional: monkey with the levels
-- use oscillator banks to do resynthesis
OR
-- use FFT to do analysis
-- optional: monkey with the data
-- use inverse FFT to do resynthesis

I've used the latter technique in a few VST plugins. Just selectively zeroing amplitude on the weakest or strongest bins can be kind of neat.
starthief
Also there may be some extra psychoacoustic wizardry going on in their algorithm -- as in, choosing the most "important" bands rather than necessarily the strongest amplitude ones, according to how the others are clustered.

Or not, I have no idea. smile
boramx
i noticed the lag in one of the earlier demos and didn’t seem too bad. hows is it for you current holders?

given what startheif says about the wet stereo - i kinda wonder why it needs to be stereo at all unless the lag is so insignificant that one would use it often as an effect with the dry signal present.

my first thoughts re:stereophony was giving it two rather different signals at LR and getting interesting effects with pure wet results.
starthief
This is the second time in two days I have tried to post and the post just disappeared into the ether. First time I thought it was my own mistake...

Anyway. A sound example.

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm1.flac

DPO -> Panharmonium -> delay -> feedback into Panharmonium

Mid/side before and after Panharmonium in the feedback loop.

Just messing with knobs unscripted, with a Marbles sequence. At one point I kind of screw up and freeze Panharmonium but don't silence the DPO which is still sequenced and it's dissonant as hell.
starthief
boramx wrote:
i noticed the lag in one of the earlier demos and didn’t seem too bad. hows is it for you current holders?


Latency seems to be somewhere in the 40ms range, but I think it varies with the slice clock.

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm_latency.wav

This is a short "tick" from Rings in the left channel, Panharmonium's output in the right channel. No blur or feedback, 33 sine oscillators. I start at the fastest available slice time and turn up the multiplier as it goes along.

(And yeah, it can sound a little weird with inharmonic inputs.)

Given the slice clock's max resolution is 17ms, it almost always sounds better if you slow it down, sync to a musical clock or else blur and feedback it.


Here's one where I'm just triggering Rings strum, syncing Panharmonium to the same clock, and giving Panharmonium Voices and V/OCT some very simple sequences. Panharmonium wet goes through Natural Gate, triggered by its slice clock output. I tweak the feedback, clock multiplier and octave. Not musically sophisticated or anything hihi

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm_simple.flac
Mend
starthief wrote:
This is the second time in two days I have tried to post and the post just disappeared into the ether. First time I thought it was my own mistake...

Anyway. A sound example.

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm1.flac
This is beautiful. Going to try something similar.
Funky40
starthief wrote:

Here's one .........


yeah, feed the people who can´t get one cause of space limitations and/or uncooperative banks.
Its like getting a "dessert surprise" Mr. Green
starthief
A fun patch:

VCO -> Panharmonium -> VCO's FM input

Monitor VCO and/or Panharmonium.

Works best with fewer voices. Blur and feedback can give interesting results too as you add/remove voices or octaves or slightly warp the frequency structure.

I was using it with FIlter 8's expo FM input, but I'm curious to try it with TZFM. It's not quite as impressive with AM though smile
starthief
Here's the patch I mentioned above. Plus some background noise from E370 modulated by Kermit, and a sub drone from Rings in FM mode (which might not even be audible at this point). Valhalla delay and reverbs.

[s]https://soundcloud.com/starthief/convergence[/s]

No sequencing -- all the pitch shifts are due to FM, and Panharmonium's delayed response to its own influence (I used a slow clock).

This was a couple of different takes mixed. Out of several takes, because finding the outlines of the sweet spot without screwing everything up was difficult.

On the other hand, when I tried stabilizing the pitch with a PLL, it was rock-solid and I could do almost anything on Panharmonium without screwing things up too much -- albeit with a certain minimum threshold of buzzy weirdness. I might have to go back to that sometime and sequence the reference oscillator.
damase
starthief wrote:
This is the second time in two days I have tried to post and the post just disappeared into the ether. First time I thought it was my own mistake...

Anyway. A sound example.

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm1.flac

DPO -> Panharmonium -> delay -> feedback into Panharmonium

Mid/side before and after Panharmonium in the feedback loop.

Just messing with knobs unscripted, with a Marbles sequence. At one point I kind of screw up and freeze Panharmonium but don't silence the DPO which is still sequenced and it's dissonant as hell.


wow, wonderful sounds here. think that seals it for me

kind of surprised at the latency, and also the surprise that its not what i would call “true stereo”. although i do think mono fx are more patchable so maybe its a good thing
starthief
FFT always introduces latency... you have to scan a certain number of samples before you can detect frequencies in it Mr. Green
damase
that does make sense, thank you
desolationjones
Have had some success syncing up the dry and wet signals using d0.

I don't know whether the Panharm architecture allows, but an internal setting for delaying the dry signal would be ace.
starthief
In the two tracks I've recorded so far with Panharmonium, I've had a lot of little glitchy click-like noises that RX6 Declick doesn't detect and required tedious manual cleanup.

With some experimentation, I managed to reproduce it in a simpler case. This is a sine in a 4-note sequence, with the clock synced to it.

Multiplier: 2
Voices: 4
Blur: about 9 o'clock
Feedback: 0
Wave: sine
Glide: 0, then I turn it up near the end.
Octave: 0
Mix: full wet

http://starthief.net/stuff/panharm_glitch.wav

There are no effects on this; the echo comes from the clock and blur. So do the glitches.

It seems like oscillators are kicking in just a tiny fraction of time before they have the proper pitch, so the "click" is the sound of them starting at the wrong frequency and sliding into place quickly. You can hear when I turn up the glide, the glitches go away.

It isn't audible on the crossfading sine, or if the blur is enough for the clock speed (faster clock seems to need more blur) or there is no blur.
Daisuk
Kind of interested in this, but something tells me it probably looks a bit cooler than it sounds. Keep the demos coming. Would love to hear something a bit more melodic and less droney if someone's up for it (preferably using source material that isn't a synth). Mr. Green

Here's a demo I stumbled upon with some interesting things. Ultimately, I don't think it's for me, but it's quite cool none the less - I just don't immediately see the musical application for it, I guess.

starthief
I don't think running a full mix into it really is that useful a thing to do, even though that's how Rossum demo'd it. I tried snippets of 5 songs just this evening and... nothing good comes out IMHO.

I think you have to cherry-pick the content and dial in the filter to get a better result, and even so I'm not sure it's musically useful. Also drum loops don't sound great with it either, even in "drum mode".

It might be good with vocal only tracks, or other solo instruments, not just synths -- regardless, I think for the most part it's at its most musically useful at slower clock rates or synced, not trying to recreate as closely as possible.

I could see using it for things like following a vocal and then sending the output to a vocoder with the dry vocal (though the dry signal might require a delay to compensate for latency).
Sinamsis
I guess you could also run the dry signal into both the Panharmonium and something like a Fumana or even a basic envelope follower, take the Panharmonium into a VCA modulated by the envelope(s) from the Fumana to make it less droney. It's still not my cup of tea, I would be much more interested in something that generated CV rather than audio. But I could see why others might be into it.
starthief
The "droney" part is more my usage of it, both in terms of input and using a slow slice clock. It does follow input dynamics. But then that has the drawback of latency and the slice clock resolution, and the influence of blur and feedback. It's very "program dependent".


One patch I thought about and am too tired to try right now:

- Patch audio source into Panharmonium.
- Set it to 1, maybe two oscillators. Square. Other settings tuned to achieve best results.
- Patch full wet output to a PLL's "signal in" input. Set up another VCO to track with the PLL. (Homebrew PLL with XOR and slew might work here.)
- Mult the pitch CV to a notch filter.
- Run the audio source through the notch filter. Mix the Panharmonium output with that.
- Voila, you have just replaced the strongest frequency band in your audio with a squarewave, in an extremely gnarly way that might not work at all, might sound horrible, or might sound horrible in an awesome way.

I feel like this is a "galaxy brain" sort of module. It takes some doing to overcome the limitations, and it also encourages patches of types never seen before.
Daisuk
starthief wrote:
I don't think running a full mix into it really is that useful a thing to do, even though that's how Rossum demo'd it. I tried snippets of 5 songs just this evening and... nothing good comes out IMHO.

I think you have to cherry-pick the content and dial in the filter to get a better result, and even so I'm not sure it's musically useful. Also drum loops don't sound great with it either, even in "drum mode".

It might be good with vocal only tracks, or other solo instruments, not just synths -- regardless, I think for the most part it's at its most musically useful at slower clock rates or synced, not trying to recreate as closely as possible.

I could see using it for things like following a vocal and then sending the output to a vocoder with the dry vocal (though the dry signal might require a delay to compensate for latency).


Thanks a lot for the info and all the demos in the thread. Really appreciate it. smile
Jumbuktu
I am kind of surprised no one seems to have tried a patch that uses it as a sound source, playing a captured spectrum as a single voice, with modulation. Even one of the factory preset sepctra would be nice to hear. But maybe I missed that.
Dcramer
So is it capable of letting you redefine the resynthesis sines to you own individual tunes? Or must it always use the sines to try to recreate the input harmonics? hmmm.....
starthief
Dcramer wrote:
So is it capable of letting you redefine the resynthesis sines to you own individual tunes? Or must it always use the sines to try to recreate the input harmonics? hmmm.....


It tries to recreate the input harmonics, but you can hold down a button and turn a knob to "warp" them (different detuning per oscillator). You can sometimes get it back into harmonic territory, especially with a smaller oscillator count.
Dcramer
starthief wrote:
Dcramer wrote:
So is it capable of letting you redefine the resynthesis sines to you own individual tunes? Or must it always use the sines to try to recreate the input harmonics? hmmm.....


It tries to recreate the input harmonics, but you can hold down a button and turn a knob to "warp" them (different detuning per oscillator). You can sometimes get it back into harmonic territory, especially with a smaller oscillator count.

Yeah that’s what I’m wondering, can it function like a vocoder in which the partials used for resynthesis can be independently pitched from the source material?
starthief
You can transpose the whole set of partials with the V/OCT input (it's an offset from the frequencies determined by the analyzer, rather than independently pitched). That can work well if you use something else to quantize to subsets of scales (octaves, 4ths and 5ths maybe).

Warping to get a different spectrum may or may not work well alongside that, I'm not sure.

(I sold mine after realizing that for the usage I preferred, I was better off with Clouds, so I can't really test these ideas.)
Outsider Sound Design
Processing a percussion loop .
behndy
yessssssssss! saw the short version on IG, even betttttter longer. OOF.

feeding the PanHam a (technically double stop?) chord from the Acid Lab Technology Chainsaw made her come up with a neaaaaaaaat arpegiation/melody against it -

joey
Just got this thing... it’s like the instant Mika vainio machine

Marco Alpert
Our friends at Control just posted a series of four really nice Panharmonium videos. Check them out:

Panharmonium playlist.
silkynight
Marco Alpert wrote:
Our friends at Control just posted a series of four really nice Panharmonium videos. Check them out:

Panharmonium playlist.



Dope. definitely on my radar...
Dragonaut
Definitely digging the drum mangler possibilities. Are the opening sounds before each video also the Panharmonium?
Marco Alpert
Dragonaut wrote:
Definitely digging the drum mangler possibilities. Are the opening sounds before each video also the Panharmonium?

Control tells us that they are.
dubonaire
Marco Alpert wrote:
Our friends at Control just posted a series of four really nice Panharmonium videos. Check them out:

Panharmonium playlist.


These are the kinds of sounds I was hoping it could deliver and it's now on my list.
Pictus

-S.L-
tested it today in my local shop, must say it was a very interresting module with unexpected results. can be super messy but super musical too, all depends on the source you feed it also.

tempted to get one Mr. Green
mekohler
Are there any examples of running a piano through this?
FatKingTubby
mekohler wrote:
Are there any examples of running a piano through this?


I happened to recall seeing this example using Thelonious Monk the other day on the modular subreddit.
Gringo Starr
Cool module but from all the videos I’ve seen it seems like it would rarely produce anything that would make onto a song or inspire a song. Seems like it produces a total mess. A fun mess though.
-S.L-
because 99% of videos on internet are made by modular "noise artists" that actually can't make music at all.

I tried it, you can make very musical and melodic results.

The two down sides I could say is:

1: the latency from what you put in the input and what comes out, there is some delay. Unless I missed something

2: the waveforms available are maybe too basic and not enough for more variaty.

Appart from that, I thought it was a really cool module, different that what you hear now a days, has its very own character. I'll try again to see if it's worth buying, but so far I really really liked it after one hour of use at the shop
peripatitis
-S.L- wrote:
because 99% of videos on internet are made by modular "noise artists" that actually can't make music at all.


ok so this is made to process music, not sound!
Interesting.....
-S.L-
you can totally make music with processing only, or mixed with it, entirely with it or part of it.

the question was all the videos I’ve seen it seems like it would rarely produce anything that would make onto a song or inspire a song

therefor I replied, you could totally make music (aka something with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies) rather than "noise" or random stuff like, let's face it, most of modular demos. And nothing wrong with noise stuff either.
Gringo Starr
I should’ve specified that it probably wouldn’t make it on the typical kind of song I write. I’m sure there are plenty of musicians making music that this module would be perfect for.

One thing I’ve learned about modulars and me is that there’s always a vision I have on how a specific module is going to perform and sometimes there’s a little reality check when I get it. Doesn’t mean it’s still not useful but sometimes it’s useful in a way I wasn’t anticipating... and sometimes it’s everything that I thought it would be. The good thing about that is that it makes me research a module, be patient, and take my time before making a purchase.

This does look like a fun module though. A buddy of mine has one. I might have to make a pit stop to check it out. What’s interesting is that it sends out triggers at the slice points. No? That could yield interesting results.
peripatitis
-S.L- wrote:


...therefor I replied, you could totally make music (aka something with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies)


That's a pretty brave definition of what music is and I clearly do not agree with it. Perhaps 100-120 years ago it might stand, but still...
And honestly you can find a lot more crap with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies pretending to be music, even if only because they had an early start of a few hundred years...

Spectral resynthesis though does need to "bite" on something recognizable and since you are already "loosing" parts of the transient information you could end up with static spectra. In order to offer some sense of evolution or movement you usually need something less abstract. The Thelonious Monk bit is such a case, any recognizable found object will probably do the trick, but if you are feeding it abstract sounds, well then what you get back is either some sort of filtering or some sort of space. You can crossfade between the states, but it is not often that you get something rewarding unless you are prepared to build a whole structure/composition around that.
.
thetwlo
Still LOVE THE FUCK OUT OF IT. Albeit, I don't make "songs"
dubonaire
FatKingTubby wrote:
mekohler wrote:
Are there any examples of running a piano through this?


I happened to recall seeing this example using Thelonious Monk the other day on the modular subreddit.


That's very cool.
-S.L-
peripatitis wrote:
-S.L- wrote:


...therefor I replied, you could totally make music (aka something with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies)



And honestly you can find a lot more crap with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies pretending to be music

.


i have to agree with that, too
peripatitis
-S.L- wrote:
peripatitis wrote:
-S.L- wrote:


...therefor I replied, you could totally make music (aka something with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies)



And honestly you can find a lot more crap with chromatic tones and pleasant harmonies pretending to be music

.


i have to agree with that, too


+ 1
tuj
Just got around to checking this out. Great layout and overview on the website. Took me literally about 10 minutes to figure out everything but the presets saving and combo press stuff, but the CV assign and all that was pretty easy right from the panel. I'm bad about reading the manuals.

Another triumph for Rossum. Good stuff Dave.
boramx
a really ace module! one of the coolest things to come along in eurorack in a long time - really inspiring and fun. Great layout and control options too.

it *is* an experimental module and what I like about it is not knowing what kind of results I'll get beforehand, but I simply dig in and have go.

As for melodies...one could be very crafty and get beautiful and unique melodies all over the place with this.

Here: a Wagner sample in Morphagene fed into Panharmonium. The result was...melodic? I imagine feeding stuff from a DAW and sculpting away at the source material would really increase the overall composition potential.

click the pic for video.

-S.L-
it IS a really cool module and just like you, I think it's one of the best surprise in Eurorack land for a long time.

As I said, my only regret is the lack of variety of wav forms. That's the main thing that stops me to buy it at the moment
boramx
-S.L- wrote:

my only regret is the lack of variety of wav forms.


i don’t see this as a deterrent. perhaps the waveforms are limited compared with a wavetable osc- but formidable enough when taken in a general synthesis context.

if anything- i think a problem with a module like this is that it is like a MAX patch in a box - and that users will use it without thinking of it in the context of the rest of their system.

with 33 voices the spectrums would have to be perfect just intonation to not be a mess of harmonics with anything other than sines or triangles.

i’d rather do waveshaping or rectification or ring mods etc later in the path to get other timbres.
boramx
also-
wavetable modules like the Wiard one, Shapeshifter and Piston Honda allow you to scan the tables with saw waves - so you can set the Panharmonium to saw and get the 1000s of waveforms that way!
Jumbuktu
Personally, I don't use the more complex waveforms at all. Anything more complex than a triangle just sounds too harsh. I would prefer fewer waveforms but morphing between them.
pyrolator
boramx wrote:

Here: a Wagner sample in Morphagene fed into Panharmonium. The result was...melodic? I imagine feeding stuff from a DAW and sculpting away at the source material would really increase the overall composition potential.


This sold me on the module. I love sequencing like this and will feed it with a lot of my own compositions.... thanks for this input.
pyrolator
The module came today, and I am happy - one of the best purchases of the year. I tried it in combination with Mimeophone and Rainmaker and I took a bath in beauty....
wiperactive
pyrolator wrote:
The module came today, and I am happy - one of the best purchases of the year. I tried it in combination with Mimeophone and Rainmaker and I took a bath in beauty....


Nice to hear this! I'd like to know more of how this pairs up with the Rainmaker in particular as both of these modules are increasingly likely candidates for a next purchase.

Oh, and welcome to Muff's w00t ...

... Kurt? hmmm.....
pyrolator
wiperactive wrote:

... Kurt? hmmm.....


yes. This is fun!
wiperactive
pyrolator wrote:
wiperactive wrote:

... Kurt? hmmm.....


yes. This is fun!


Hug Schnipp!
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Eurorack Modules  
Page 1 of 13
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group