Earlier this year Splice launched a new mobile app called CoSo that used AI to build what it calls "Stacks" collections of samples that are supposed to work well together. Slowly but surely elements of that app have made their way to Splice proper under the banner of Create. But it was always just a complete roll of the dice. You picked a style and Splice spit out four loops. You can swap out individual samples if you don't like them. But that's about the extent of your ability to curate.
The latest update to Create allows you to start a Stack from any loop in the Splice library. (Well, almost. Currently Create only works with loops of eight bars or less, which generally works out to under 25 seconds.) As you're browsing around the site or the desktop apps you'll see a new option when you hover over a sample giving you the option to create a Stack. This opens up a side bar with a fresh Stack featuring the sample you were just eyeing.
Here you can swap out samples you don't care for, add more layers or tweak the mix. You can also change the BPM if you want to hear what the loops would sound like slowed down. Perhaps more interesting though, is the ability to change the style informing the AI's selections. This is great hearing what a sample might sound like in a less obvious context. Sure, that tasty Rhodes lick sounds great over mid tempo breakbeat, but how does it fair when placed against a 140bpm distorted kick drum and thick synth bass?
In general this new approach feels a lot more useful than the original CoSo and Create AI features. I tend to use Splice one of two ways. Either, specifically to find drum loops (I am not a drummer, don't own a drum set and my drum programming skills need work), or to dig up something unexpected (percussive or melodic) as a jumping off point. And I'm usually looking for an undiscovered gem buried in the nether regions of the Splice library.
The new ability to start a Stack based on (almost) any loop in the Splice library adds an additional layer of abstraction to this process. It's another thread to pull at in my effort to turn up something unique or ear catching. The use of AI in the creation of works of art, whether that be images or music, is definitely a controversial topic at the moment. But it seems like Splice has figured out a rather innocuous way to use AI to aid in the creative process, without actually stepping on the toes of the creator. After all, what makes an artist is not necessarily their technical skill or willingness to spend valuable hours digging for diamond in the rough, but their taste.
The new Create feature will be available even to free users, though it still hasn't made its way to the mobile apps just yet.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/splice-create-uses-ai-to-find-samples-that-work-with-any-loop-that-catches-your-ear-160029462.html?src=rss
Last year Meris took its digital effects prowess and built a ludicrously powerful guitar pedal, the LVX. Now the company is back with another modular creation, the MercuryX, but instead of delay it's all about epic reverbs.
Like the LVX the MercuryX is built around a "advanced ARM processor" of unspecified origin and a 24-bit AD/DA converter with a 32 bit floating point DSP. It also inherits the LVX's large LCD for navigating the interface and the basic scheme of combining structures, types, and processing elements to create a unique reverb effect.
In Meris' lexicon "structures" are the core reverb effects. There are eight different options: Ultraplate, Cathedra, 78 Room, 78 Plate, 78 Hall, Spring, Prism and Gravity. Those first two are borrowed Meris' popular Mercury7 pedal, the middle three from the company's collaboration with Chase Bliss on the CXM 1978, while the last three are completely new creations for the MercuryX. Type determines the characteristic of the reverb, while processing elements are effects that can further alter your tone. These can be as straight forward as compression, as wild as a granulator or just a nice hazy lo-fi effect. These can go anywhere in the signal chain as well, allowing the elements to affect only the reverberations or to completely replace your dry tone.
You can also modify parameters automatically using the two LFOs, an envelope follower, a sample and hold function, or the sixteen step sequencer. Not to mention there's an expression jack input and robust MIDI support.
And if that wasn't enough, there's a stereo freeze effect separate from the reverb, a tuner and an absurd 2.54 secs of predelay. The latter means you can effectively turn the MercuryX into a delay pedal thanks in part to its modular feedback routing and selectable note divisions for each stereo channel.
The early demos make it clear that the MercuryX is indeed a beast of a pedal capable of delivering pretty convincing spring reverb emulation. But it's obviously meant for more epic and creative sounds. This is the sort of thing you might want in your arsenal if you're into ambient, post rock or film scores.
The Meris MercuryX will set you back a decent chunk of change however. It's available direct from Meris for $599 and through select retailers as a preorder.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/meris-mercuryx-is-a-modular-reverb-pedal-for-the-sonically-adventerous-230559405.html?src=rss
It's always good to see companies delivering updates and new features to devices long after they've launched. And Roland's TR-8S and TR-6S were already pretty capable to begin with. But with the latest firmware updates they're picking up two huge new additions, including one that that I'm personally quite excited about.
TR-8S 3.0 and TR-6S 2.0 add an ACB model of the CR-78 CompuRhythm and a chromatic TR-808 mode for building basslines. The ability to play an 808 kick chromatically greatly expands the flexibility of the two drum machines. While you could tune drum hits and samples on the to create some melodic elements it wasn't exactly an easy or pleasant experience. This opens up the 8S and 6S well beyond strictly percussion, but does so in a way that seems natural. The 808 emulation was already part of their feature sets. And, especially in the world of hip hop, it's a staple for creating basslines, not just drum grooves.
The CR-78 emulation is another huge addition. It was the world's first programable drum machine and my personal favorite of Roland’s classic rhythm boxes. In fact, I called out the lack of a CR-78 model in my review of the TR-6S as its one glaring omission. (I'd like to believe I had something to do with the decision, but I know better.) All of the sounds from the hardware are represented, as are most of the original preset rhythms, plus a few new ones. But what's particular exciting is the ability to use the more modern programming features and sound design tools available on the TR-6S and TR-8S to tweak the CR-78 for more modern productions.
In addition to the two new sound engines, the TR-Editor app on Mac and PC is getting an update with some usability tweaks and new compact UI for easier use on small displays. All these updates are available now for free directly from Roland.com.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/roland-adds-cr-78-percussion-and-808-bass-to-the-tr-8s-and-tr-6s-drum-machines-195628859.html?src=rss
Native Instruments' Kontrol S series MIDI keyboards are a favorite among producers and musicians for their solid build and tight integration with the company's instruments like Kontakt and Massive X. This year the controllers are getting a pretty significant upgrade that pushes the hardware to new heights and tightens the integration with the company's flagship software.
Physically there are few immediately obvious differences on the Kontrol S MK3. For one the stark matte black aesthetic has been toned down a bit. Don't get me wrong, it's still a mostly black affair, but there are some additional lights and colored labels have been added to some of the buttons. The touch strip has also been moved above the pitch and mod wheels which, might seem like a minor tweak, but greatly improves playability. It could often get in the way and it's something that a lot of Native Instruments' customers complained about, so it's good to see the company listening to feedback.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
The other glaring difference is the screen. Where the MK2 had two small, but functional screens, the MK3 has one large hi-res screen. It's bright and crisp and easy to view from any angle. Many of the graphics and UI elements have been updated to take advantage of the new display, too. You can't do everything in your DAW on the keyboard, the way you might with say with an Ableton Push, but you can do almost anything inside of Komplete Kontrol. The screen allows you to browse through all your Native Instruments plugins and sound packs, and even many third party VSTs, like those from Arturia, complete with artwork. And then change parameters, complete with visual feedback, until you get the sound you're looking for.
If you'd rather not deal with the additional overhead of Komplete Kontrol, the keyboard can tap directly into Kontakt 7. Frankly I much preferred this. While being able to browse, load and tweak presets, regardless of instrument directly from the keyboard is nice, it can be a little overwhelming. And there is a touch more lag loading Kontakt soundbanks when you're going through the middleman of Komplete Kontrol. (And they open slow enough on my four-year-old Dell as is.)
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
The eight knobs under the screen give you quick access to a number of parameters based on what instrument you've loaded. And in Kontakt, there's additional flexibility because they can vary based on preset, which loads with a performance mode by default. These are the eight parameters deemed most important for live tweaking. But you can dive deeper by hitting a button above the screen to switch to edit mode where you can page through the complete set of options and get really detailed designing a patch. All of this is thanks to the new NKS 2.0 (Native Kontrol Standard) platform.
Two of the other major changes to the S Series are a little less obvious. For one there's a new unibody shell that, might not make any practical difference, but does give generation a slightly more solid feel. The capacitive encoders and pitch and mod wheels are all made from machined aluminum as well. This is a keyboard that feels worthy of a professional studio.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
More exciting though, is the new keybed which was developed in coordination with Fatar and brings polyphonic aftertouch to the Kontrol series. While there aren't a lot of Native Instruments' plugins that take full advantage of this yet, it does add a bit of future proofing to the lineup. With MPE gaining in popularityThe company had to do something to keep pace with the time.
It feels great too. I tested the Kontrol S49 which, like its slightly bigger sibling the S61, has a semi-weighted keybed. The travel for aftertouch is short, but satisfying and in general it responds to playing naturally allowing you to get a lot of nuance from your playing. The S88 however will have a full hammer action keyboard that might appeal more to serious piano players.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
Lastly, it's worth noting that there is plenty of connectivity on board as well. Obviously, there's MIDI over over USB-C, but there's also dedicated five-pin MIDI ins and outs, plus four pedal input jacks (one sustain, one expression and two assignable).
The Native Instruments Kontrol S Series MK3 keyboards are available for preorder today starting at $749 for the S49, $849 for the S61 and $1,299 for the S88. All three are expected to start shipping sometime in October.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/kontrol-s-series-mk3-hands-on-a-high-end-midi-keyboard-for-the-native-instruments-faithful-162055627.html?src=rss
What exactly constitutes “high-end” when it comes to a Polaroid camera? At least for the modern incarnation of the company, there really hasn’t been such a thing until now. That’s not terribly shocking since, for much of its existence, Polaroid has been associated with instant gratification and point-and-shoot simplicity. Of course, in the digital age, waiting 10 to 15 minutes for a Polaroid to develop can seem like an eternity. And the soft, saturated images they create have a decidedly lo-fi feel when put side by side with the razor-sharp photos even the lowliest smartphone can capture.
The new Polaroid I-2, however, retains all of the quirks and charm people turn to instant film for, but packs a number of modern amenities and features that might appeal to a more serious photographer. There’s a lot to like, but there is one immediately obvious obstacle: the price. At $599, the I-2 costs four-times as much as the next most expensive camera in the company’s lineup, the Polaroid Now+.
That premium does buy you the fastest lens in the current Polaroid lineup. It’s 98mm f/8 which, according to the company, is roughly the equivalent of a 38mm f/2.8 on a 35mm camera. I punched the numbers into a few online calculators and got pretty close to that claim, around 40mm at f/3.1 equivalent on 35mm when accounting for the larger film of a Polaroid. That’s not an exceptionally wide aperture, but it's larger than most other Polaroid cameras which often top out at f/11 or even f/16. And you’d have to go quite a ways back (to at least the 1980s as far as I could tell) to find something faster than f/8 from Polaroid.
The lens is made of acrylic and polycarbonate, instead of glass. But the company claims that the difference in quality was negligible without dramatically driving up the cost of the camera. Again, though, this is an area where I’ll have to take the company's word, as I have no viable means of testing the claim.
Polaroid is very proud of this lens, though, regardless of how the specs might appear on paper. It’s pitching the camera as a love letter to the instant cameras of yore, and even pulled two Olympus engineers out of retirement to help design it.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
It took roughly four years of development to bring the I-2 to fruition and while holding it, you do get the sense that this was a labor of love. Yes, it's almost entirely plastic, but it feels solid and, in my opinion, looks gorgeous. The matte black body with dark silver and red accents is decidedly classier than the more brightly festooned Now line. Almost every bit of the camera feels fussed over, right down to the underside which features a quote from Polaroid cofounder Edwin Land.
This is also the only camera in the current lineup that can use standard lens filters. This means you can just walk into B&H and grab a 49mm ND filter off the shelf and slap it on. That might be necessary too, since the I-2 has a top shutter speed of only 1/250 of a second. When combined with the 640 ASA of standard i-Type film, it can be tricky to get a proper exposure in bright sunlight.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
That shutter speed also means you’re not gonna be freezing any fast-paced action in your frames. That being said, it’s still faster than the Now+ which tops out at 1/200. Oddly the $99 Polaroid Go can actually reach 1/300 of a second, making it the fastest camera in the family, and with a nearly as large f/9 aperture, too. That said, it does use smaller Go film.
What the I-2 has that the Go and all other current generation Polaroid cameras lack is on board manual settings. While the Now+ does offer some options via an app, only the I-2 gives you complete control of the aperture and shutter speed on the camera itself. Both are adjusted via a single ring around the lens, though, so you have to press a button to switch back and forth between them. It’s much easier to opt for aperture or shutter priority mode where you only have to worry about one variable with the ring.
I generally stuck to shutter priority to give me the best chance of avoiding too much camera shake. The placement of the shutter button on the front, while perhaps traditional, isn’t very ergonomic. That might just be down to my tiny hands and the relatively bulky camera. But I did find it introduced slightly more movement than a top-mounted shutter button.
One way of avoiding that would be to use the app, which is excellent, but does kind of defeat the purpose of having all the controls on the camera itself. The app connects immediately when you power the I-2 on. There’s no pairing and almost no delay. If you change a setting in the app it is immediately reflected on the tiny screen on the camera, and vice versa. Having spent the last couple of years fighting with Fuji’s app to even connect, this felt like a revelation.
The app would definitely come in handy, though, if you’re using the I-2 on a tripod. This is going to be particularly useful for landscapes and long exposures. You could even do some night photography and light painting by setting the shutter to bulb mode. There’s also a 2.5mm TS jack for connecting to an external flash if you wanted to go full professional studio with your Polaroid.
The one thing the app can’t do is provide you with a live view of what the camera sees. You will have to physically look through the viewfinder for that. But, I have some good news there: the viewfinder is spectacular. It’s large, bright and there’s a small display underneath that gives you exposure information as well as your shutter speed and aperture. If I have one complaint about the viewfinder it’s that it’s a little tough to figure out where your frame ends on the right side, especially when you’re trying to navigate around the eyepiece with glasses on. But I've run into similar trouble on other cameras too.
You can just point the camera in the general direction of your subject and hope for the best however, since the I-2 has a true continuous autofocus system that uses LiDAR. That’s in stark contrast to the other Polaroid cameras which are either focus free or have basic two zone focus systems. You can even press the shutter button halfway on the I-2 to lock your exposure and focus then reframe your shot before taking a picture.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
I would still suggest looking through the viewfinder, though. Not because the autofocus is unreliable, but because Polaroid film is too damn expensive for a shoot and pray approach. Even i-Type, the cheapest film compatible with the I-2, is $17 for an eight-photo pack. That’s $2.25 per picture. That’s way too much for you to be hoping a shot comes out the way you planned.
If you’ve been waiting for the other shoe to drop in this review, this is it. I shot six packs of film over my couple of weeks with the I-2 and spent a lot of that time just hoping a shot would come out. Even in full auto mode I got inconsistent results. Setting the exposure compensation to -1 could still deliver blown out photos in bright sunlight. And I suspected this is largely down to the pairing of a maximum shutter speed of 1/250 of a second with 640 ASA film. But when I tried SX-70 film with its lower 160 ASA I routinely got underexposed shots regardless of mode. I also shot a pack of black and white i-Type film that repeatedly jammed and only gave me two usable shots.
Yes, part of the charm of analog photography is the unpredictability. As someone who recently got back into shooting film I can appreciate that fact. But this was a tad too unpredictable, especially considering the high cost of Polaroid film and the I-2 in particular. Now, it’s possible I have a faulty unit. I’ve been in contact with the company and I will update if troubleshooting turns up anything. It’s also possible that a firmware update will solve many of my problems. Or maybe this all just a really embarrassing case of user error.
But at the end of the day it’s hard to imagine that anyone but the most experienced and most fanatical of Polaroid shooters will be comfortable spending $600 on a camera only to hope it can deliver more hits than misses at over $2 a pop.
Update, September 7 2023, 10:35 AM ET: This story originally stated that Polaroid claimed the 98mm lens was the equivalent of 50mm on 35mm film. This has been updated to reflect the correct equivalence of 38mm.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/polaroid-i-2-review-a-return-to-high-end-instant-cameras-130010508.html?src=rss
What exactly constitutes “high-end” when it comes to a Polaroid camera? At least for the modern incarnation of the company, there really hasn’t been such a thing until now. That’s not terribly shocking since, for much of its existence, Polaroid has been associated with instant gratification and point-and-shoot simplicity. Of course, in the digital age, waiting 10 to 15 minutes for a Polaroid to develop can seem like an eternity. And the soft, saturated images they create have a decidedly lo-fi feel when put side by side with the razor-sharp photos even the lowliest smartphone can capture.
The new Polaroid I-2, however, retains all of the quirks and charm people turn to instant film for, but packs a number of modern amenities and features that might appeal to a more serious photographer. There’s a lot to like, but there is one immediately obvious obstacle: the price. At $599, the I-2 costs four-times as much as the next most expensive camera in the company’s lineup, the Polaroid Now+.
That premium does buy you the fastest lens in the current Polaroid lineup. It’s 98mm f/8 which, according to the company, is roughly the equivalent of a 38mm f/2.8 on a 35mm camera. I punched the numbers into a few online calculators and got pretty close to that claim, around 40mm at f/3.1 equivalent on 35mm when accounting for the larger film of a Polaroid. That’s not an exceptionally wide aperture, but it's larger than most other Polaroid cameras which often top out at f/11 or even f/16. And you’d have to go quite a ways back (to at least the 1980s as far as I could tell) to find something faster than f/8 from Polaroid.
The lens is made of acrylic and polycarbonate, instead of glass. But the company claims that the difference in quality was negligible without dramatically driving up the cost of the camera. Again, though, this is an area where I’ll have to take the company's word, as I have no viable means of testing the claim.
Polaroid is very proud of this lens, though, regardless of how the specs might appear on paper. It’s pitching the camera as a love letter to the instant cameras of yore, and even pulled two Olympus engineers out of retirement to help design it.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
It took roughly four years of development to bring the I-2 to fruition and while holding it, you do get the sense that this was a labor of love. Yes, it's almost entirely plastic, but it feels solid and, in my opinion, looks gorgeous. The matte black body with dark silver and red accents is decidedly classier than the more brightly festooned Now line. Almost every bit of the camera feels fussed over, right down to the underside which features a quote from Polaroid cofounder Edwin Land.
This is also the only camera in the current lineup that can use standard lens filters. This means you can just walk into B&H and grab a 49mm ND filter off the shelf and slap it on. That might be necessary too, since the I-2 has a top shutter speed of only 1/250 of a second. When combined with the 640 ASA of standard i-Type film, it can be tricky to get a proper exposure in bright sunlight.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
That shutter speed also means you’re not gonna be freezing any fast-paced action in your frames. That being said, it’s still faster than the Now+ which tops out at 1/200. Oddly the $99 Polaroid Go can actually reach 1/300 of a second, making it the fastest camera in the family, and with a nearly as large f/9 aperture, too. That said, it does use smaller Go film.
What the I-2 has that the Go and all other current generation Polaroid cameras lack is on board manual settings. While the Now+ does offer some options via an app, only the I-2 gives you complete control of the aperture and shutter speed on the camera itself. Both are adjusted via a single ring around the lens, though, so you have to press a button to switch back and forth between them. It’s much easier to opt for aperture or shutter priority mode where you only have to worry about one variable with the ring.
I generally stuck to shutter priority to give me the best chance of avoiding too much camera shake. The placement of the shutter button on the front, while perhaps traditional, isn’t very ergonomic. That might just be down to my tiny hands and the relatively bulky camera. But I did find it introduced slightly more movement than a top-mounted shutter button.
One way of avoiding that would be to use the app, which is excellent, but does kind of defeat the purpose of having all the controls on the camera itself. The app connects immediately when you power the I-2 on. There’s no pairing and almost no delay. If you change a setting in the app it is immediately reflected on the tiny screen on the camera, and vice versa. Having spent the last couple of years fighting with Fuji’s app to even connect, this felt like a revelation.
The app would definitely come in handy, though, if you’re using the I-2 on a tripod. This is going to be particularly useful for landscapes and long exposures. You could even do some night photography and light painting by setting the shutter to bulb mode. There’s also a 2.5mm TS jack for connecting to an external flash if you wanted to go full professional studio with your Polaroid.
The one thing the app can’t do is provide you with a live view of what the camera sees. You will have to physically look through the viewfinder for that. But, I have some good news there: the viewfinder is spectacular. It’s large, bright and there’s a small display underneath that gives you exposure information as well as your shutter speed and aperture. If I have one complaint about the viewfinder it’s that it’s a little tough to figure out where your frame ends on the right side, especially when you’re trying to navigate around the eyepiece with glasses on. But I've run into similar trouble on other cameras too.
You can just point the camera in the general direction of your subject and hope for the best however, since the I-2 has a true continuous autofocus system that uses LiDAR. That’s in stark contrast to the other Polaroid cameras which are either focus free or have basic two zone focus systems. You can even press the shutter button halfway on the I-2 to lock your exposure and focus then reframe your shot before taking a picture.
Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
I would still suggest looking through the viewfinder, though. Not because the autofocus is unreliable, but because Polaroid film is too damn expensive for a shoot and pray approach. Even i-Type, the cheapest film compatible with the I-2, is $17 for an eight-photo pack. That’s $2.25 per picture. That’s way too much for you to be hoping a shot comes out the way you planned.
If you’ve been waiting for the other shoe to drop in this review, this is it. I shot six packs of film over my couple of weeks with the I-2 and spent a lot of that time just hoping a shot would come out. Even in full auto mode I got inconsistent results. Setting the exposure compensation to -1 could still deliver blown out photos in bright sunlight. And I suspected this is largely down to the pairing of a maximum shutter speed of 1/250 of a second with 640 ASA film. But when I tried SX-70 film with its lower 160 ASA I routinely got underexposed shots regardless of mode. I also shot a pack of black and white i-Type film that repeatedly jammed and only gave me two usable shots.
Yes, part of the charm of analog photography is the unpredictability. As someone who recently got back into shooting film I can appreciate that fact. But this was a tad too unpredictable, especially considering the high cost of Polaroid film and the I-2 in particular. Now, it’s possible I have a faulty unit. I’ve been in contact with the company and I will update if troubleshooting turns up anything. It’s also possible that a firmware update will solve many of my problems. Or maybe this all just a really embarrassing case of user error.
But at the end of the day it’s hard to imagine that anyone but the most experienced and most fanatical of Polaroid shooters will be comfortable spending $600 on a camera only to hope it can deliver more hits than misses at over $2 a pop.
Update, September 7 2023, 10:35 AM ET: This story originally stated that Polaroid claimed the 98mm lens was the equivalent of 50mm on 35mm film. This has been updated to reflect the correct equivalence of 38mm.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/polaroid-i-2-review-a-return-to-high-end-instant-cameras-130010508.html?src=rss
I've been wracking my brain trying to figure out what would be the next vintage synth to get the Arturia emulation treatment. At this point the company has tackled many of the most iconic synths in history, and spent much of last year focused on its original creations like the Augmented series, Pigments, Fragments and Dist Coldfire. We did get a version of the Korg MS-20 in May of 2022 as part of V Collection 9, but otherwise things have been pretty quiet. Well, I feel slightly embarrassed because there was a pretty obvious gap in Arturia's lineup I had overlooked: The Roland TB-303.
Arturia Acid V is probably one of the simpler instruments the company has made in recent years. In part because the original 303 is a reasonably simple instrument. It's a bass machine — monophonic with a single oscillator, a 24db lowpass filter and an envelope generator to manipulate the filter. That's kind of it. What made it special was its odd squelchy sound that, when paired with the slides in its sequencer, produced something totally unique and became the core of acid house, hence the name Acid V.
Arturia
As usual the company does a solid job bringing the TB-303's physical interface into a virtual space. But we all know Arturia can't stop there. There's the customary advanced tab. This is where you'll find the three modulation sources which go well beyond your standard LFO, the dedicated effects section (where you can combine up to four effects) and the sequencer.
The sequencer on the 303 is part of what granted it squelchy super powers, it was also notoriously annoying to program. Thankfully Arturia recognizes that it's 2023 and there's no need to saddle its VST with some arcane 16-step logic puzzle in the name of authenticity. There's a pretty straightforward piano roll interface, with toggles under each step for slide, accent and vibrato. Across the top you can shift individual notes down an octave, up an octave or up two octaves, to get that signature jump that almost any good 303 bassline has.
Arturia
On the left you can lock the sequencer into a particular scale to simplify things, add swing, change the sequence length (up to 64 steps) and even generate random sequences. You can easily shift sequences up or down a note chromatically or to the left and right to change the note order. And there's even a polymetric option that allows you to change the sequence length of the notes, slides, vibrato and accents individually. This gives you a lot of power to build something that's constantly evolving, especially if you're taking use of the full 64 steps. Oh, and if that's not enough there are different playback modes so you can pingpong through a sequence, play it backwards or just bounce around randomly.
Arturia didn't save all the upgrades for the advanced tab, though. The main instrument has added a few welcome amenities, including a sub oscillator with three selectable waveforms which gives the Acid V more oomph than the original ever had. Next to that you'll find the vibrato controls and then the dedicated distortion circuit. One of the most common tricks used on the 303 was to overdrive it into oblivion, and Arturia puts 14 algorithms at your fingertips for doing that. Some are better than others. For example, the crusher is fine, but there's a better bit crushing option in the effects section. And the destroy algorithm fails to live up to its name. Still, the tape, soft clip and overdrive are excellent.
Arturia
Acid V goes a step beyond typical modern amenities. There's a little arrow over the name of the instrument in the top right hand corner, and if you click that you're in effect "opening" the machine. Here you'll find virtual trim pots for adjusting things like the pulse width of the square wave, the cutoff range of the filter, the pitch tracking off the filter, clipping level and even a bass boost knob.
Of course, all the features in the world don't matter if the instrument sounds terrible. But, there was never much concern about that, honestly. Arturia has been in the game for a long time now delivering excellent quality plugins that a misstep would be a true shock at this point.
I've never played an original TB-303, but I did briefly own a Behringer clone and I've tested the Roland Boutique TB-03. The Acid V compares pretty favorably to those. Being an actual analog synth, Behringer's TD-3 does sound slightly warmer than Acid V and the TB-03, but in the context of an actual song I think you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the three. And, as much as I love a good piece of hardware, if I had to choose between the three I'd probably opt for Arturia's plug in just because it's so much easier to use and has infinitely more sequencing versatility.
Arturia Acid V is available now at an introductory price of $99. Or you can get it free when you buy the entire V Collection for $599, though, you're probably better off waiting for that to go on sale.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/arturias-acid-v-is-a-roland-tb-303-without-the-headaches-150035249.html?src=rss
I wrote my first synth review for Engadget in 2019. At the time I thought it might be a one off. Maybe it would afford me the opportunity to play with some fun gear now and then, but “Engadget synth beat reporter” was not something in the cards long term. Well, four years later I’ve not only managed to turn music tech into a regular part of my job, but I’ve become something of a connoisseur of weird, cheapsynths. I’d almost say that I’ve become jaded by the relentless releases of wannabe Volcas and VSTs-but-hardware. So I was somewhat skeptical of SOMA’s Rumble of Ancient Times (RoAT from here on out), a $170 “8-bit noise synthesizer.”
Well, this little pile of battery-powered weirdness has silenced my inner cynic. It’s reminded me to stop being so precious about my music. That creating art should be fun. And that, sometimes, you just need to let things go.
Before I turn you off with more philosophical ramblings (and don’t worry, there will be more), let’s lay out exactly what the RoAT is. It’s an 8-bit digital synth and sequencer inspired by video games of the early PC era, which had to do a lot with incredibly little. The core here isn’t some high-powered ARM processor; there’s no advanced physical modeling or complex wavetables. Instead, the RoAT runs on a very basic microcontroller like you might find in old kitchen appliances. (Not the kind that connect to the internet and have giant touchscreens.)
There are four freely tunable oscillators with 16 waveforms to choose from. The frequency range available is huge and the potentiometers can only turn so much, so dialing in a perfect scale isn’t something that’s going to come easy. The 16 voice options are all harsh and decidedly digital. Think Atari 2600 in a blender. And the resonant filter is deliciously lo-fi. I know that it’s somewhat cliche at this point to say that a synth is oozing character, but I don’t know how else to describe the sound of RoAT. It’s one of the more characterful instruments I’ve had the pleasure of using at any price point.
The sequencer is basic, too. An oscillator is either on or off and that’s it. If you want a particular note you have to lock it in with the tuning knobs. The one variable is that by default, the voices can either be momentary on, or momentary off – so you can set one to drone while the others pop in to add color. The sequences must be played in live, nothing is quantized and the pattern length is just a single bar. But since it’s not a step sequencer, that doesn’t matter quite as much. You can always just turn the tempo down to 70 bpm while actually playing at 140 bpm and effectively get two bars.
Terrence O'Brien
The simplicity here actually makes it fun and fuss free. You just hold down the record button and tap the little copper pads under each voice button, wait for the loop to come back around and tap some more to add additional triggers. The whole process of dialing in notes then sequencing them is sloppy and playful. You don’t have to think about ratchets or parameter locks. The limitations actually free you up to focus on jamming, experimenting and iterating.
The one part of the RoAT interface that might seem intimidating at first is the bank of registers. This is how you do actual sound design on the instrument. There’s a table in the bottom right hand corner where all the various parameters are laid out, like frequency, wave selection, LFO type and speed, etcetera. They’re in numbered rows, from zero to seven, and you navigate between them using buttons on the left side labeled one, two and four. So yes, you will need to do some basic arithmetic if you want to change the release of a voice or tweak the filter resonance, which you’ll find on page five and select by pressing the one and four buttons (1+4=5, got it?). While this might seem unnecessarily complicated, it’s actually pretty easy to wrap your head around and I’d argue far faster and more enjoyable than trying to scroll through an endless menu.
Some of the parameters need a little more explanation than what can be squeezed into the table on the front. But flip the RoAT over and you’ll get most of the info you need on the back of the unit.
Terrence O'Brien
The one exception to this is page six of the registers, which is where you’ll find the summing algorithm controls. These are explained on the back of the device, but I’d be lying if I said I fully understood what they all meant or why they affect the sound the way they do. I have a feeling that many people will be in the same boat as me. That being said, you don’t really need to understand to simply tweak the knobs until you hear something you like.
By the way, turning knobs until you hear something you like is perfectly a valid approach for any instrument, but it seems particularly appropriate here. The dramatic changes even a tiny bit of movement introduces mean this is best navigated by feel. And if that seems like too much work for you, there’s that button labeled “CHAOS” in the top left corner. I bet you can guess what it does. (It causes chaos, btw.)
This button randomizes all the parameters except for the row you’ve currently selected in the register. So if you don’t have any of the numbered buttons on, you’re on row zero which controls pitch, you can knock out countless iterations on a particular melody or sequence, swapping in different waveforms and algorithms.
Terrence O'Brien
Now this is where the limitations of the RoAT might become an issue for some. Do you like the chaos you’ve just created? Great, you better record that right now. Get out a field recorder and a TRS cable, or fire up your DAW or something. Because once you flip that power switch on the RoAT off, your creation is gone – forever. There’s no saving of sequences. No presets. No MIDI out to control other instruments.
There is analog sync out, but no sync in. That means that, while you can connect the RoAT to a Volca or a Pocket Operator and keep them in time, you have to use the clock on the RoAT to drive everything. And there’s no tap tempo here or a screen where you can see the exact tempo you’re at. So I really hope you enjoy your jams at 108.45 BPM.
Terrence O'Brien
Practically everything about the RoAT is messy and ephemeral. But, that’s also kind of what makes it so great. I realize that a lot of what attracts me to the RoAT might not matter to many of you. You might just want to play a pleasant melody on a clean sounding synth. Which, great, I like doing that too. That’s not what you come to the RoAT for, though.
It’s excellent at noisy rhythmic patterns perfect for industrial or chiptunes. But it’s limited connectivity and inability to reliably reproduce the same exact results multiple times means it’s not an ideal performance instrument. Instead it’s best as a source of inspiration and samples. Though, thinking of the Rumble of Ancient Times in purely practical terms misses the point. It takes obsolete technology that would otherwise be destined for a landfill and mutates it into an experimental instrument that’s easy to get lost in. And every time you turn it on feels like a brand new adventure.
Terrence O'Brien
Remember when I said earlier that it reminded me that sometimes you need to let things go? Well, I am a digital hoarder. I have saved practically every photo I’ve taken since 2008 (and every crappy photochop since 2005). I have a hard drive overflowing with song sketches that are absolute trash and clearly going nowhere. And I have a hard time parting with even insignificant personal items floating around my house.
Not only that, but I am the sort of person who second guesses everything. I will nitpick and obsess over a project – be it a song or this review – until I hate it. In April of last year I mentioned in my review of the Chase Bliss Habit that I had been sitting on three songs for an EP for over a year. Well, absolutely zero progress has been made there. In fact I’ve since decided one of those songs is worthless and I’ve cut it.
Which brings me back to the Rumble of Ancient Times. Its simplicity, playfulness and sloppiness are a natural counter to my obsessive tendencies. Its insistence that you explore, iterate and constantly push forward prevents me from getting stuck. And the fact that I can’t save a sequence – that I have to start with a blank canvas every time I turn it on – keeps me from hoarding half-baked ideas that I will never revisit.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/soma-labs-rumble-of-ancient-times-is-the-chaotic-neutral-of-synths-154507287.html?src=rss
We're only two and a half years into Apple's transition to its homegrown CPUs, but things have advanced reasonably quickly. Today the company unveiled the M2 Ultra which is powering the latest refresh to its MacStudio and Mac Pro line of desktops. While previous versions of the M2 have been found exclusively in laptops, Apple was able to take brakes off with the Ultra version and claim some serious jumps in performance. It's literally two M2 Max chips stuck together using what Apple calls UltraFusion: A 2.5TB/s low-latency interprocessor connection. This is very similar to how the M1 Ultra stuck two M1 Maxes in the same package.
On paper the M2 Ultra is huge leap from the M2 Max found in the MacBook Pro. Core count has doubled from 12 to 24, GPU cores double with up to 76 available on the high-end model, and RAM support jumps from 96 to 192GB with 800GB/s of bandwidth. Granted, almost no one needs that much RAM, but it's nice to know it's an option. Considering the M1 was limited to just 16GB of unified memory when it launched in November of 2020, this is a massive improvement. The Neural Engine is getting a similar boost to 32 cores for AI-based tasks, which should be 40-percent faster than the M2 Max.
Apple made a big point of talking up the media capabilities of their new chips, calling out the ability run 22 8K streams of ProRes footage simultaneously. That sort of power should make short work of almost any video-editing project. The Mac Pro specifically was singled out for having the equivalent power of seven Afterburner cards which the Intel-based Mac Pro relied on for video acceleration.
Apple
The level of expansion though is what might truly set the M2 Ultra apart from its laptop-focused predecessors. There's WiFi 6e, Bluetooth 5.3 and 10Gb Ethernet built-in (dual 10Gb Ethernet on the Mac Pro), but also room for up to eight Thunderbolt 4 ports on the Mac Pro and six PCIe gen 4 slots. PCI expansion is kind of a necessity for any pro-level desktop, and something that hadn't made its way over to Apple Silicon machines yet. For Apple Silicon to make inroads in the workstation market it was going to have to offer users the ability to add high-end audio cards or 3D accelerators for rendering complex models.
The launch of the M2 Ultra alongside the refreshed Mac Pro finally completes Apple's years-long transition away from Intel chips to it's own silicon. The company talks a big game about the advantages of its homegrown chips, but it remains to be seen how successful it'll be at infiltrating the highest end of the market.
Follow all of the news from Apple's WWDC 2023 right here.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/apple-announces-m2-ultra-chip-with-double-the-cpu-and-gpu-cores-171204873.html?src=rss
Playing guitar and growing up when I did, it basically means I am legally required to worship Tom Morello. So when I got wind that Neural DSP's latest collaboration was with Rage Against the Machine guitarist I knew I'd have to put it through its paces. Archetype: Tom Morello turns the company's meticulous modeling ears to the sounds that defined not just Rage but Audioslave as well, just like it has for Gojira, John Petrucci and Rabea Massaad previously. The result is a stunningly accurate recreation of Morello's tone, and one of the simplest entries in the Archetype series yet.
Where as most of the other Archetype plugins have multiple amp sims, racks of effects and even a synthesizer, Morello's is a single amp and five core effects pedals, with a few extras tossed in. That shouldn't be that shocking, though. Morello has played more or less the same exact rig since the earliest days of Rage Against the Machine through to this very day on stage. Neural DSP modeled his specific amp, a beat up Marshall JCM800 50-watt head, that he famously has his tone literally etched in. The dials basically don't move. You can set them to whatever you want in the plugin, but why would you?
Photo by Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
His pedal board hasn't changed much over the years either. The core here comes down to five effects: an EQ, a phaser, a delay, a wah and — of course — a Whammy pedal (or simply "wham" here for trademark purposes). There's also a dive bomb pedal, though I'm fairly certain the effects its being used to create here were done on Tom's guitar with the tremolo arm or with the Whammy. Which I think is evidenced by the fact that none of the Morello-designed presets make use of that effect.
There's a bonus delay and reverb pedal, plus an EQ section (separate from the EQ pedal) and you can mic the virtual cabinet with 10 different virtual mics, change their position and distance from the speakers or even load your own IRs (impulse responses). While the later is a nice bonus, it will lead you away from the stated goal here — to make you sound like Tom Morello.
Well, there's good news and bad news on that front. The bad news is: You will never sound like Tom Morello. (Unless you are Tom Morello. In which case, welcome.) Morello's playing is as much about his unique style and carefully crafted technique as it is his gear. But, I will say that Neural DSP can get you like 75 percent of the way there. The raw tone from the amp sim is spot on. I always struggle when I decide I feel like banging out some Rage songs because I can't get anything even remotely close to the required punishing grooves out of my Yamaha THR 10 or Fender Blues Jr. But with Archetype: Tom Morello I was able to match the raw sound of his riffs.
Photo by Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
Since Morello relies heavily on digital delay and pitch shifting, those effects relatively easy to recreate in a plugin. Even his trademark phaser, which is analog, is pretty accurately captured here. The one effect that doesn't quite land is the wah. It's a bit harsher and nasal than what I hear on Rage records.
It's important to note, though, that to really get the most out of this plugin, you'll need a MIDI expression pedal. Trying to play Morello's iconic Whammy heavy solos without an expression pedal is like trying to cook without salt. It might be technically possible, but the results will be... unpleasant. This is where I ran into a small problem. I do not have a MIDI expression pedal amongst my piles of gear. I have an analog expression pedal, and I was able to connect it to my computer through Arturia's new KeyLab Essential mk3, but the results were uneven.
Ableton sometimes failed to recognize the full sweep of the pedal and I'd be unable to make the full two octave jump while playing the "Killing in the Name" solo. And when bypassing my DAW and using Archetype: Tom Morello as a standalone app, it inverted the sweep of the expression pedal, even when I reversed the polarity. So I had to go heel down when I would normally go toe down playing the wah guitar in "Bulls on Parade," which was a bit tough to adjust to.
Photo by Terrence O'Brien / Engadget
I also found that some of the presets, even the Morello-designed ones, needed a little EQing to sound their best. Especially the "Killing in the Name" and "Like a Stone" ones, where rolling off some of the high end was necessary to keep the highest Whammy notes from driving my dog insane.
Minor hiccups like that aside, channeling my inner teenager — wildly flicking my pickup selector on and off while creating cascades of high-pitched digital noise was insanely fun. Obviously, personal taste will play a major role here. But Rage Against the Machine and Morello were very important to my development as a guitarist. I will never be as talented, creative or famous as Tom Morello. But for an afternoon I could role play as a chaotic good master of riffs. At least until my five-year-old asked why the man on the stereo kept shouting "fuck you, I won't do what you tell me."