http://audionewsroom.blogspot.com/2007/12/tenori-on-monome-side-by-side.html

Thanks :-)

Thats what i said in my intereview.

Each instrument is playable differently by different people, however the limitations of sound from the Tenori make it more like give 10 people a picture to colour in and 3 colours. Youll get some pics that are identical. Thats how it is with ‘Tenori music’ if its done straight from the box. I will however say that i took it to some friends who are all electronic musicians and work differnt ways; both software and hardware. I popped in 3 user banks for sounds and we passed it around jamming. It was fun to see how each person operated it differently and how the sound changed.

And also, if they work around the limitations of the device and build upon its successes as an instrument then it truly will excel for music makers, both serious and casual first timers. Roll on v2.

I also wholeheartedly agree with you about many successful instruments being used differently than their creators expected. This ‘bending of purpose’ spawned entire styles of music. Often when a new tool is announced, I immediately try to think of how to use it in a way they didn’t intended.

There is no reason why the Tenori-On couldn’t be everything it currently is, AND support open-source community development via a USB port and OSC. The closed nature of the instrument is a lost opportunity.

I applaud Yamaha for taking a chance on something like the Tenori-On, but I encourage the marketplace to give voice to the support of open standards which can only broaden the appeal of the product. Then we’ll really have an opportunity to use something like the Tenori-On in ways the creators never expected.

Iwai and Yamaha wanted to target Tenori-On at people who were more casual music makers. Ironically, my sense is that most of the actual customers are more serious musicians, because of the price, so if that’s really the bar, I’m not sure the Tenori-On is a success. (Then again, a lot of successful instruments behaved differently in the marketplace than their creators expected.)

However, there is a difference between working within limitations and relegating creative decisions to a piece of software. Drawing only with a pen and paper is working within limitations, yet you are ultimately 100% in control of the expression. If you give 10 people these same tools, you’ll see 10 very different results.

The Tenori-On is a smart instrument. It controls much of the output, and the user is not so much expressing themselves as they are guiding the software.

The real proof of this distinction is to listen to a number of pieces produced by a Tenori-On and attempt to determine who is operating the device.

Both machines are very different and gt fun

ive got videos over on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/airventmedia

In this day and age of cheap software instruments and effects vst’s you tend to get bogged down with so much stuff that you never really learn one piece of software to its limits.

When I rebuilt my laptop last month, I deliberatly picked only a few synths to install so I can learn them better.

Steve

what i like about things like the tenori-on, reactable, & lemur, or at least the way bjork introduced them into her show, is that they had cameras & screens on the performers. so they’re bringing the physical performance BACK to the live show, rather than the ‘checking your email’ phenomenon that some people (ulrich schnauss was a recent one witnessed) have been displaying in live performances. it’s nice that as technology progresses the visual performance aspect can still remain in the newest gear.