Ellard

I just bought an EMS VCS3 for twenty bucks.

You were momentarily excited – actually I bought a virtual instrument which is decorated with a front panel similar to an EMS. Sonically, I got my twenty bucks. Because it doesn’t matter what the damn thing looks like when it comes to the sound. But we fools just keep on plunking down money for paintings of old synthesisers even when it makes controlling it harder, limits the visual feedback and constrains the creative possibilities.

On the left a real VCS3. The dials are sized for your hand, ergonomically placed, the unit is L shaped to present all to easy reach. I have played such a machine, it’s pretty whack. On the right is a painting, with knobs the size of a gnat, fiddly little click points to place virtual pins and some LED lettering for god knows what reason.

Just think about that last point – how many software titles do you use that have fake LED readouts? And how many of them are music software? Can you find any possible advantage of using bright red LED numbers over the more sophisticated high resolution text used in all other software? Apart from HURR IT LOOKS KEWL ‘N RETRO? And can somebody tell me why the damn do we have virtual wood panelling? Are musicians particularly easy to fool?

The original VCS3 pushed the limits of what could be brought together into a single unit. The replica removes a number of potential connections in some daft idea of matching the signal flow of the VCS3 … even though it’s not a physical object and you can add any connection you damn like. For all that – it doesn’t sound like the real thing (there is a new version planned that will be closer).

Just in case in seems I’m being harsh on poor old Xils Lab, take a look at this:

Arturia specialise in paintings of old synthesisers. This one is supposed to remind you of a Roland Jupiter 8, which was a fine machine to be sure but really there are many other 2 oscillator 1 filter synthesisers you can download for free that sound the same – or in the case of Synth1 sound a hell of lot BETTER. I tried the demo of the Jupiter-8V for about half an hour before realising that the CPU hit was the only notable high point.

A Tort.

Here’s somebody at least trying something different. They took Kandinsky’s painting from the last post and turned it into an interface. Full credit for trying something new but about as ergonomic as a worm farm.

Ladies, when developing synthesis that will be displayed on the computer screen, is it too much to ask that the media match the medium? Give me clear, easily adjusted controls, easy to read text, colour schemes that do not cause the eye to water. Musicians, try not to buy software that has virtual wood panelling, you embarrass yourself.

This is what I mean – Clearsynth by xoxos is specifically designed to be easy to comprehend. Isn’t that a worthy aim for all our tools?

Bloody hell.