The independent game Osmos won our hearts in 2009, with transcendent, meditative gameplay built on simulated particle physics, starting as a floating wonderland and ending with some deliciously punishing difficulty. But it’s the soundtrack that sealed the deal: ambient-tinged work by artists like Gas 0095, Julien Neto, Loscil, and High Skies helped us imagine an unseen, microscopic (or perhaps macroscopic) world. Their sonic craft is a great example of what digital music can be.

Now, I’m pleased to offer a lot of that music for your listening pleasure, for free. It’s one of the rare game soundtracks you’d want to hear even after having heard it on repeat while solving some of the title’s trickier puzzles. A huge thanks to the artists, whose generosity made this compilation possible – check out their work if you haven’t already.

The release is overdue, but it comes at a good time. By the end of last year, Osmos migrated from its initial, Windows-only release to Mac, too. Owners of multitouch PCs have been treated to a multitouch version on Games for Windows Live. (I’m still working on loaning a multitouch laptop; stay tuned.)

The most recent news, as seen on Synthtopia and the Microscopics blog: an iPhone version of Osmos is coming soon.

If you’ve already gotten the game but got stuck on Epicycles (ahem), we have a solution for that, too – see the recently-released video from the game developers, who must have heard your pain. (Man, in my day…)

We have two formats for listening:
MP3 for download
M4A extended podcast with visuals and chapter markers
(sadly, there seems not to be an open format for doing this, and one of the only creation tools is GarageBand – I’d love to hear alternatives)

Featured music:
Vincent et Tristan – Osmos Theme (two excerpts)
Gas 0095 – Discovery
Loscil – Lucy Dub
Loscil – Roschach
Loscil – Sickbay
High Skies – The Shape of Things to Come
Julien Neto – From Cover to Cover
Julien Neto – Farewell

And yes, that includes the most-definitely-unreleased samples by Vincent et Tristan, which are short but quite beautiful.

If you want still more music, the fantastic High Skies EP Sounds of the Earth is free for Osmos customers.

More from Mat / Microscopics, including an improved, higher-quality papercraft Minimoog:

I’ve just added a prize draw to win the Minimoog and the Gas 0095 collection on my blog for the Gas 0095 15 year anniversary
http://www.microscopics.co.uk/blog/2010/gas-0095-15-year-anniversary-collection-giveaway/
And I have a Gas 0095 Q&A and have set up a page for people to submit any questions (also via Facebook and our contact page).
http://www.microscopics.co.uk/blog/2010/gas-0095-questions-for-answers/

I’ve also added a new short video of a microscopic journey into the Gas 0095 album art
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYM1_9-HzSI&hd=1

Finally, if you haven’t read it yet, don’t miss our interview with the creators of the game; it offers inspiration that is musical as well as gaming- and design-related.

Completing F3C-3 (Epicycles 3) from hemisphere games on Vimeo.

Being a digital musician requires a new set of skills, a precise tack between the forces of engineering and creativity. Robert Henke aka Monolake is always someone I find thought-provoking, not only because he’s so open and articulate, but because he seems uniquely focused on balancing those two sides of his personality. As a media artist and producer, his work relies heavily on his own technological invention, but he is also able to keep true to his own aesthetic compass.

For acoustic evidence of where Robert’s mind is exploring, his full-length album Silence, released last month on his own Imbalance label, reverberates with clarity. To my own ears, its crystalline rhythms and finely-honed, always-foreground timbres and textures recall all the best of Monolake through the years, back to the early, pre-Ableton collaboration between Robert and (now Ableton CEO) Gerhard Behles. (For an eloquent review, see Fact Magazine’s take.)

As far as engineering in the sense of recording and production, Robert did a terrific interview with engineer/musician Caro Snatch for her blog; she gets some fascinating answers out of him and they even talk about his technique of avoiding compression on electronic sources. But I was interested in how engineering can work in the compositional sense: with open-ended tools like Ableton Live and Max/MSP, how do you create compositional systems? How do you wrestle with the potential of Max inside Live? Where do you draw limits?

As always, Robert has some sharp ideas – whether fodder for inspiration or disagreement, I think you’ll find things worth talking about. And indeed, while technology figures prominently, I think you’ll find some ideas that are really fundamentally about music, about compositional intent, thinking about sound, and thinking about rhythm.

PK: It seems that you’ve always had a really particular approach to timbre, and that it’s especially focused and evolved on this record. There’s a certain purity of tone to which you tend to gravitate, as I hear it. Can you talk a bit about how you approach timbral color?

RH: I can only nail it down to personal taste. I enjoy timbres with inharmonic content, and I like the contrast between very sharp transients and very lush, airy sounds.

I know that Silence, as with your other work, combines synthesized and found sounds. There is a sense that you get to an almost atomic level with each, however, that the synthesized are becoming organic and the recorded sounds are deconstructed to the point that become almost primitive and synthesized. Is there a different approach to each of these, or is that something that happens naturally?

The ambiguity of sonic events always fascinates me. That border between ‘real’ and ’synthetic’ is a quite interesting one, not only in sound design, but also in visual arts. Working with synthetic sound generation sharpens my senses for the real sounds around me, and often I am surprised by how much they can blend. We are not talking any more of sound generation with a single square wave oscillator and a lowpass filter, but methods that are capable of creating highly complex and rich timbres. Those methods’ sonic definition matches the complexity of real sounds and this is where the fun starts. I like to place a recording of a metal thing next to a physical model of a metal thing next to a processed sample next to an FM timbre and see how they become a nice ensemble of similar sounds.

What’s your workflow like now in Ableton Live? On some level, it’s a tool that does things that you have conceived or asked for, or that reworks things you’ve created. On another, of course, it’s also this commercial tool that has been adapted to a generalized audience. Are there areas of it that you tend to work in most? Are there areas or features you tend to ignore or even avoid?

I try to avoid ‘content’. I am not interested in ‘throwing beat loops together’. I do not use presets from other people when it comes to synthesis, this all is just not my way of thinking. Why should I leave that great part of composition which is coming up with interesting timbres, to someone else? I am also not using time stretching / warping as a tool to match beats. I don’t like time stretch artefacts, unless I drive it in the very extreme as a special effect. I don’t need factory groove templates, in fact I never you groove at all, if i want to achieve it, I move notes by hand.

Apart from that, I’d say I use everything Live has to offer. There is not typical workflow, it highly depends on what I want to do. The most significant difference to the old pre-Live times is to me that I can make lots of sketches without any special idea in mind, just let go, and save the result once I am bored with it. And much later I can open all those sketches, and see if anything in there is of interest. Then I grab that element and continue working on the basis of this. I have a lot of complex tree structures of fragments on my hard-disk, and this a great source of material and inspiration.

Recently, you shared some of your early, personal Max patches as Max for Live creations. Were any of these patches used on Silence?

I don’t mean to focus exclusively on the technology, but it seems that these Max patches – even more than any element of Live – really embody some of your aesthetic and taste, yes? They’re a bit like experiencing a Monolake album interactively. Do you conceive them in that way, as a sort of compositional thought formed into a tool?

The tools have a strong influence on the result. Take the Monolake PX-18 sequencer. Its way of expanding a one bar loop into something that repeats in longer cycles is based on such a rigid concept, that it enforces a quite specific rhythmical approach. Some patterns are simply not possible, some are very easy to achieve. This is exciting and this is very musical; a piano is an instrument which makes it very easy to treat all twelve notes of a well tempered scale the same. And it is an instrument which makes it impossible to play with any notes that do not fit in such a scale. This is exactly the same interesting tension between enabling and inhibiting expression as with the rhythmical limitation of the PX-18.

There is an interesting interaction going on between developing tools and achieving musical results. The whole process is far from being linear and entirely result orientated. The idea at the beginning is shaped by first results and experiences gained from playing with a simple prototype of a part of the functionality, this drives the further development of the tool, but also influences the musical idea. If I try to build a granular time freezer, and after initial tests I figure out that I need a lot of overlapping grains to get the sound I want, I can also start thinking in swarms of particles, and this might lead to musical ideas that shape how I try to improve the grain thing. Working this way often provides far more interesting results than sticking to an initial plan. As an interesting side note, this way of thinking also finds its way more and more into general software/hardware development and interface/functionality design. The tools of the future need to _feel_ right. One cannot design a multi touch screen application on a piece of paper, implement it and think it will work. It would, technically, but it might not be inspiring to use and therefor most likely not a success in a competitive market.

A few years ago, when you were in New York, you made a couple of comments that stuck with me. One was that you thought that the tech press sometimes wasn’t critical enough of technology, that, for instance, they weren’t saying critical things about Ableton Live. Another was that you felt like there was less need for Max/MSP partly because of what Live itself does. I’m curious if you have any new thoughts on either of those?

I find myself doing a lot of things in Max these days, since the integration in Live made it so easy and rewarding. When I made that Max statement in NYC, I felt that coding is a trap when it comes to actually creating music. One simply does spend to much time with non-musical problems.In many ways, Max 5 and Max for Live reduced the time needed to get results. And this makes the whole package very attractive again.

I started teaching sound design at the Berlin University of Arts a year ago. I can show my students how to create a simple two-operator FM synthesizer with an interesting random modulation within fifteen minutes and the result is a Live set including the Max for Live part, which I can save and send to the students as an email so they can open it again an continue working on it. If stuff can be done that fast, it leaves enough headroom to actually use it in a musical context. In retrospective a lot of 90s IDM music was way to much driven by exploring technology. At some point one has to step back and say: okay, now lets actually have a look at the composition and not only at the technical complexity of the algorithm.

So, what’s the role of the press in this? One experience I gain from reading the Ableton user forum and from talking with students is that there is a great amount of insecurity about which technology to use. It’s the abundance paradox. Which software sounds best? Which compressor do i need to use? Which plugins do I need for mastering housy dub music with a hint of pop and some acoustic guitar? Having the choice between 5000 compressor plugins whilst not understanding what makes a compressor really sound the way it does it pretty much my idea of hell. So often I have that impulse telling the world: hey, you can use the sidechain input of the compressor you already have in Live, and you can feed that sidechain with a slightly delayed version of the original signal. You could also apply saturation, filtering, or even reverb or again an instance of the compressor in that side chain signal to shape its timing and response to its input. This will have a result of the compression curve, and this means you can build anything from a very normal compressor up to the most exotic effect you can imagine. And you can store those structures for later re-use. You can automate every single aspect of it. You can use ten or twenty instances of it in a song. Are you guys aware that you have more power right in front of you than the best music producers and hardware designers just ten years ago would have dreamed off?

I simply do not want to read any more articles about new compressor, be it hardware or software, unless it provides insight into the amazing possibilities we already have. I don’t want to read anymore sound quality discussions that deal with the last bit of a 24-bit file in a world where people listen to mp3 over mobile phones and enjoy those artefacts.

The most exciting new music comes from young kids guys running some audio software in a bedroom, listening to the result over a shitty hi-fi and use Melodyne all the way wrong. Those folks do not read gear magazines, they could not care less about yet another mastering EQ, but create the most stunning beauty. If people talk too much about gear I usually do not expect too much good music. I am often trapped in this twilight zone between engineer and composer too, so I know what I am talking about here…

As far as your own music, do you find you need some critical distance from a tool as an artist? Or does that fall away once you’re in the process of actually making the record? (It seems, after all, we’re all a bit spoiled by the various excellent tools we have at our disposal.)

Deadlines help. If I know that a project needs to be finished, I simply stop investing time in technology at some point, and instead use what’s there. Its a question of discipline and experience too. I try to teach my students that if they are working on a technically challenging project they need to define a deadline for the technical side. If not, they might work till the very last moment on technical stuff and loose focus on the artistic part. At the end, the result counts, not the beautiful MAX patch, which could possible create a nice result.

And have you ever considered trying to return to just building something simple in, say, Max, and limiting yourself to that? Or are you able to find necessary formal limitations in the tools you have?

I am constantly limiting myself. I set up a multi-dimensional network of constraints and bounce off its walls. Exhausting but it helps getting stuff done. A typical constraint: No more patching in Max till that project is finished, or try to get all Melodyne processing done in one afternoon and use those results.

I’m particularly interested in how you conceive rhythm. It seems like some of the ideas about sequencing rhythm in ATOM are also present here. Some of these rhythms are relatively symmetrical, pulse-like. Then you have these stuttering rhythms, as though a vibration has been set in motion and is naturally playing itself out in space. How do you work rhythmically?

I contrast totally straight 16th grooves with material that itself constitutes a rhythmical quality off that grid. In ‘Silence’ obviously I often used gravity driven processes with their inherent accelerations. Or I played notes with an arpeggiator that is not synced to song time but where I control its rate with a slider. Something Gerhard already did on the very first Monolake track ‘Cyan’ in 1995. Silence offers quite a few hidden connections to Monolake history. My general approach to groove is simple: I change things in time till it feels right.

What was your compositional process like, generally, for these works? Did they start with some of those sounds? With a rhythmic motive?

There is no general rule. I often just open Live to explore an idea, and end up doing something else because I found an interesting detail along the way. Or I have to work on a highly specific project, and have to discard a lot of the results because they do not work in a given context. Instead of throwing them away, I keep them and this might form the basis for another composition.

The title, “Silence,” certainly recalls John Cage. Was that intentional? Were there other meanings here? In an album that’s not silent, what is the role of silence?

Silence is such a great concept. There is no silence, unless in a vacuum, its that great mystic world which cannot exist in our world. Also, in music the time between the musical events is as important as the events itself. But I really leave it up to the associations of the listener to make sense of the title. And of the liner notes and the photographs and the music. I think there is a lot of room for all sorts of connections and connotations.

When we talked at the end of last year, we got to reflect a bit about winter. I’m editing this as I watch a snowstorm here in Manhattan, having come from snowstorms in Stockolm. It seems that winter is again a thread on this record. How did winter play into the album?

I grew up in the Bavarian countryside. Winter there equals silence, introversion, deep thinking, and general inwards focus. I like this.

http://monolake.de/
Free Max for Live patch downloads: http://monolake.de/technology/m4l.html
Silence: http://monolake.de/releases/ml-025.html

OTO Machines’ BISCUIT is new 8-bit effect processing hardware from a boutique design firm in Paris. The essential effect is all 8-bit: using 8-bit converters and processing, you can add crunchy, digital waveshaping, delay, pitch shift, and step filter effects. But because those processes produce distortion and aliasing, BISCUIT combines its 8-bit effects with an analog resonant filter. (It’s switchable, so if you want to retain all the artifacts, you can – but you also have a filter at the ready.)

The whole design is a lovely exercise in reducing a set of sound capabilities to their most essential elements. The appearance of the front panel, though, is deceptively simple. Multifunctional uses, all provided within the eight buttons at bottom and the parameter controls at top, allow effects from filtering and basic bit reduction to wild, radical bit destruction, step-sequenced filtering, delay, and even a little synthesis.

The BISCUIT is also fully MIDI-enabled: every control sends MIDI, and every function receives MIDI CC. Critical to its step-sequenced and delay functions, BISCUIT receives MIDI clock, as well, or you can use tap tempo.

Finally, quality and local production figure prominently in the OTO: the company advertises that they don’t outsource production and work entirely with local companies in France.

Price: EUR529 including VAT (so 442,30 if you’re outside Europe). Available now:
http://www.otomachines.com

That’s pricey, I know, but it also packs as much sonic power as a collection of several Moog effects – and likewise might be the only effects box you need.

And, oh yeah – the future of BISCUIT may provide more than it does now.

I got to look more closely at the BISCUIT (think “bis-QWEE” as in French), at least on paper. I’ve also had the chance to talk to one of the creators about the evolution of this box, which reveals something of the process of hardware creation in general.

First, let’s take a closer look at the hardware.

Inside the Hardware

Onboard controls include:

• Drive: Input gain, up to +15 dB (which can clip your sound prior to conversion)
• Naked: dry signal
• Dressed: 8-bit (wet) signal
• Filter controls: set to green (low-pass), yellow (band-pass), or orange (hi-pass), then adjust cutoff (20-15kHz) and Q
• Brain: changes the function of the rectangular switches at the bottom, between selecting parameters and muting/inverting the 8-bit signal
• Clock: 250-30kHz sample clock frequency
• Bypass: a true relay bypass
• Switches 1-8: mute or invert your 8-bits, select effects and parameters, and recall presets/snapshots

The main issue is that it’s using the 8 rectangular switches along the bottom of the unit that most directly shapes the sound, by allowing you to set each bit independently – literally, the eight bits of the signal itself. Switch off “Brain” mode, and you can directly manipulate the bits of the signal, then mix that signal with your dry source.

The presets portion can incorporate all of your own presets, with 16 slots and SysEx dump functions for storage and recall on your computer. (Hmmm, may be time to dig up an editor/librarian tool, or make a new, simpler one.)

I/O:
Unbalanced 1/4″ inputs (2x mono L+R)
Unbalanced 1/4″ outputs (2x mono L+R)
MIDI in, MIDI out
9V AC adapter

Form factor:
Metal case
1.27 lb (580g)
7.48″ x 2.36″ x 4.60″ (190mm x 60mm x 117mm)

Interview with the Founder/Creator

I talked to Denis Cazajeux, creator of BISCUIT, about his work.

It took time to design this device. I started by building stompboxes in my kitchen under the name Cazatronics (http://www.myspace.com/cazatronics). I built some MIDI controllers, SID and FM Midibox synths (I lover [MIDIBox creator] Ucapps !), analog reverb stompboxes…

Few years ago, I built a box in a plastic butterdish, to simulate the sound of an old Fairlight CMI, but without have to sample through this machine.

The idea was simple: use an 8-bit AD converter with a parrallel output, and connect these 8 outputs to an 8-bit parrallel input DA converter. The sampling frequency was controlled by a special pot. You could pass sounds from a modern hardware or sofware sampler through this box to get an old-school 8-bit sampler sound.

I discovered that I could get some very harsh and radical digital distortion by simply mute (always 0) or invert (a 0 becomes a 1 and the opposite) one or several of the 8 lines between AD and DA converters. The initial box was then upgraded with 8 toggle switches, each with 3 positions (on, mute and invert).

As the sound can become very strong and aggressive, I added a 12db/octave low-pass filter with a Q control.

I forget a little bit this box in my kitchen for some years. One day, I met an engineer/producer in a vintage studio near Paris, where I worked as a sound engineer and maintenance tech. We shared the same passion for music, electronics, lo-fi, 8-bits,… (Thanks for your blog, we really love CDM and have a look on it few times a week!).

He loved the 8-bit box and we started the idea to sell this thing, as there were no other things like that on the market (except Frostwave Sonic Alienator). It took me 2 years to set the company, find the money, improve the initial design (MIDI, stereo, FX, multimode filter, pads instead of toggle switches,…), find subcontractors…

I wanted a strong box, with soft switches similar to a monome, customs knobs…

There’s more than 350 components inside BISCUIT, most of them are SMD (Surface Mount Devices) to keep the product small and not too much expensive. This is small and local economy: all parts (electronics boards, metalwork, pad and knobs design, packaging…) are made in french factories (most of them are in Normandy). Each Biscuit is assembled by our hands and tested by our ears in our workshop.

Input gain (Drive pot), little mixer (Naked and Dressed pots) and filter are analog, but with digital control (using Maxim digital pots IC’s), so you can memorize some presets and have a MIDI control.
I choose to use hi-quality parts (Panasonic low signal relay for bypass, Polypro Caps for filter, Neutrik jacks, linear -8v/+8v power supply…).

Digital processing (waveshapers, delay, pitch, bit manipulations) is pure 8-bits, using a simple Microchip PIC microcontroller. Delay and pitchshifter use the internal PIC RAM (3kB !).

The PIC microcontroller can upgrade its firmware, using a MIDI SysEx utility (SysEx Librarian for MAC users or MIDI OX for PCs).

All firmware upgrades are for free, as a simple SysEx file to download from our website.

In case it wasn’t evident from the gorgeous design of the case and associated graphics, yes, there was a significant design collaboration behind all of this, says Denis:

We worked with graphic artists H5 (http://www.h5.fr/).

They design the:

OTO and BISCUIT logo,
Knob design,
Silkscreen drawing,
User Manual layout.

They work in advertisment for companies such as Dior, Yves St Laurent, Audi…but also for music (record cover and videoclip) : Air, Royksopp (“Remind Me” videoclip), Massive Attack, Goldfrapp, Etienne de Crécy, Alex Gopher,…

They did a very nice job for us so I wanted to talk about them!

Producer/engineer Stéphane Alf Briat is the partner with Denis, and the man who prompted actually releasing BISCUIT as a product.

Let us know if you have further questions for Denis. This is far more information than I usually do for a product preview, but it’s fantastic, of course, to be provided with this much detail. It looks like a fascinating design, and I can think of a couple of friends I expect will want one. More coming soon.

http://www.otomachines.com

Games really are reshaping music. Despite their relatively simple gameplay, the Guitar Hero and Rock Band franchises originated by developer Harmonix are stimulating interest in real music making. It’s no accident that you can walk into a Best Buy and, next to aisles of video games, find a growing selection of serious musical instruments and technology.

These titles are also stimulating interest in music and artists and producing a new distribution outlet, at a time when the distribution picture for music can seem bleak. But until now, that outlet has been limited to big acts, big tracks, and big deals with big labels. It has only promoted music you already know, not the discovery of new music. Rock Band Network could change all that.

We took a detailed look in August at how Rock Band Network worked technically, and how authoring a song for RBN could give you the same level of gameplay and choreographed graphics that the official Rock Band tracks get. But now here’s the big news: at long last, RBN is opening to the general public, starting with an open beta for artists and play-testers.

What it is: Rock Band Network is a new set of authoring tools (built around Reaper), a submission process (built around Microsoft’s Xbox 360 XNA Ceators Club), and an upcoming store to host indie tracks called the Rock Band Network Music Store.

What it costs: Rock Band Network membership is free, but you’ll need a $99/year XNA Creators’ Club Premium account to submit or test music.

What you’ll need: To author titles, you need an Xbox 360, a copy of the Reaper software, a set of free plug-ins for Reaper for RBN, the XNA account, and either a Windows PC or Mac. (You’ll need Windows, either virtualized or on another machine, in order to actually load the tracks for testing, but you can author on either; see below for more.)

What it gets you (as an artist): If you make it through the peer-reviewed submission process, you stand to set your own pricing and receive 30% royalties (retail, excluding tax) on everything you sell.

What it gets you (as a peer reviewer): With the XNA Creators’ Club membership, you can play as many tracks as you want without any additional charge, in exchange for your feedback. Tired: squeezing into sweaty, overcrowded bars at CMJ and South by Southwest to hear new acts. Wired: Scouting for new acts on your cough with your Xbox 360. And that could make a nice community of music, depending on how this evolves.

Where the tracks will be distributed: Anyone with a copy of Rock Band 2 (and presumably future versions of Rock Band) can play your tracks. Releases will initially debut on the Xbox 360 store for 30 days. A “selection” of tracks will also appear on the PS3 and Wii stores after that. (The approved songs will stay on the RBN Store on Xbox 360, regardless.)

When does all of this happen? The open beta launches today for peer reviewers and artists. The store is due, um, “real soon now.” (No specific date yet.) The game itself is ready to go, at least on Xbox 360: a patch introduced way back in September added the ability to play RBN tracks.

CDM Talks to Harmonix

John Drake, Program Manager for Rock Band Network, took some time out to answer my questions on the eve of launch.

CDM: What will the Rock Band Network Store look like? Where will you get access to it? Will it be a similar store on the PS3 and Wii?

John: The RBN store will run in parallel to the existing Harmonix DLC store, and will be in the same menu location within Rock Band 2. The RBN store has more info about each song than our existing DLC store does, and it has more ways to discover new music: you can search by subgenre, album, country of origin, record label, even the author of the song.

The PS3 store will be very similar to the Xbox 360 store. Details of the Wii RBN presence are still being worked out.

Ed. note: It’s especially nice to see the RBN store on equal footing. I had high hopes for the XNA-produced games on Xbox Live, but those titles aren’t displayed or listed in exactly the same way, which I think has hurt the initiative a bit.

CDM: In addition to the XNA Premium subscription, you still need Windows to support testing your own tracks, yes? Do you need a Windows PC to be a playtester?

John: You need to run Windows in order to transfer song files to the Xbox 360, because we use Games for Windows Live to manage the transfer. We have informally tested running Windows on a Mac on a number of virtual machines, as well as BootCamp, and most of them work perfectly for transferring files.

Ed.: I can add, a number of the Harmonix guys are Mac fans, so you can believe they tried the virtualization approach!

CDM: Since we last talked, there has been a private beta. Were there any additional improvements / changes since our August conversation? What kind of feedback have you gotten?

John: The closed beta has been absolutely invaluable to help us shape the experience for the new members just now joining the program. We’ve cleaned up and organized the documents section of the website, added a great deal of new information, clarified policies for submitting songs, and generally made sure that the pipeline is running smoothly. None of the major processes are any different than initially designed, but we have changed a million small details to make it better.

It’s important to note that the members that have been in the beta have been absolutely extraordinary: patient, intelligent, hard working, thoughtful, and helpful to each other as they worked through the inevitable issues that cropped up as we readied the site for launch.

CDM: Have any currently-available tracks come through the private beta process? (Jonathan Coulton’s?)

John: We currently have nearly 40 approved tracks, including tracks by the inimitable JoCo, and a bunch more up for playtesting and peer review. We’re expecting even more great content to go up for testing in the next few days, and we’re excited for people to join our playtesting ranks to get even more songs through the pipeline!

CDM: I see TuneCore is offering track preparation services. Have you seen similar offerings begin to appear? (For some of us, doing the authoring may actually be satisfying – we’re weird that way!)

John: There’s a great variety of services cropping up from authoring houses offering with different programs to create songs for bands. These range from straight, up-front fee structures to a $0 down, pay us out of your royalties deal. It’s really exciting to see how different groups are responding!

*PS, I’m with you on the satisfaction of authoring. I’ve been working with my band to put our whole last and current record (17 songs in total) up for RBN. It’s a lot of work, but it’s super rewarding to get involved in the process! And it’s really doable if you’re used to making music as a passion!

CDM: Outside RBN, are these tools beginning to be used on Harmonix’s own tracks? (I believe that was in the works when we last spoke.)

John: It was always the intention that the tools we developed for the Rock Band Network would be integrated internally at Harmonix and that has begun to happen. With the industry leading amount of content we produce (over 1000 songs and counting) anything that makes the job of our unparalleled Audio Team easier is welcome, and in most cases the Rock Band specific tools were built by members of the Audio Team themselves!

CDM: Okay, enough of the nit-picky details… what’s it mean for you that you finally get to take this to public beta? Now with a few months more perspective on it, what do you think this will mean for musicians to get on this platform, revenue aside?

John: As our Senior Producer Matthew Nordhaus said about Rock Band Network, “It completes me.” We’re already thrilled with the community working within RBN and we’re hopeful to see a lot more great content and enthusiastic playtesters signing up at Creators.RockBand.com now that we’re open!

Additionally, we’re really proud of our teams here at Harmonix and MTV Games, who have designed a really smart way of getting great music into the hands of fans. Empowering musical groups of all sizes and genres to be able to post their own content for sale is really a dream come true at Harmonix. Adding the great variety of music for our passionate fanbase only makes it that much sweeter. We’ll be even more excited when the store turns on and those first tracks sell!

Go Check it Out

I hope to help document both how artists are using RBN and the technical process for doing this yourself over the coming weeks. In the meantime, you can hop on the beta yourself if you’re interested:

How to submit a song: http://creators.rockband.com/docs/Website
Scroll down to “Adding a song to the pipeline.”

How to become a peer reviewer?
http://creators.rockband.com/docs/Playtest_Process

And yes, I still want to see an Amplitude/Frequency Network that’s friendly to electronic music, minus drums + guitar. I think Harmonix knows a few of us feel that way.

Jonathan Coulton on Rock Band Network, from the awesome PAX.

PAX ‘09 Rock Band Network Panel #3 from Harmonix on Vimeo.

Everything you need:
http://Creators.RockBand.com

Video interview by G4:

There’s long been a massive gap in technique, capabilities, and workflow between DJ tools and performance, music production, and live electronics or live PA. Ableton Live’s original hook was that it
bridged performance instrument and arrangement tool. Now, in a product literally called The Bridge, we get Ableton’s and Serato’s first take on how to blend DJing and arrangement/electronic performance. It’s certainly not going to be the last word on the subject. On CDM in the past, we’ve discussed inserting DJ applications in Live, and using vinyl to scratch video (including with Serato’s own VIDEO-SL). The advent of Max for Live means new applications, like Ms. Pinky-powered virtual vinyl devices inside Live. But The Bridge has turned out to be something different, as I discussed Thursday.

And surprise: there’s even some relevance to Ableton Live users who might not normally ponder Serato, even if only to take advantage of improved transport operation in Live itself.

We’ve gotten to speak to Ableton and Serato representatives; see the short video of Ableton’s Dennis DeSantis and Ableton’s official overview of the tool, as shot by intrepid CDM NAMM contributor Neil Bufkin. Based on additional conversations, here’s what we know.

Ableton & Serato @ NAMM 2010 – The Bridge from Neil Bufkin on Vimeo.

Serato to Ableton

Q. What’s this “mix tape” feature about?

A. That’s the easiest to explain, most immediate feature of The Bridge — and it’s the one that’s likely to be appealing to Serato users immediately. You can now export mixes produced in Serato directly into Ableton’s native ALS format.

Q. Wait – does that mean I need Serato ITCH or Scratch Live hardware controllers in order to record my crossfades?

A. Yes. Turntablists aren’t entirely left out, though: the Rane TTM 57SL and the newly-announced TTM-68 performance mixers do record mix automation. And you’ll still have other automation data with which to work, so this is still likely to be useful to everyone, even if there’s some level of variability between the different versions. (If that’s of interest, we can follow up more later.)

Ableton’s Jesse Terry confirms to CDM: “Audio files are laid out in Live’s arrangement on a timeline, according to when they are loaded on a deck in Scratch Live or ITCH. These are new audio files, to deal with scratching, etc, but they are named accordingly.”

Ableton has also posted more information on mixtapes and specific hardware on their Mixtape tour.

Q. CDM said ALS is now an XML-based format – really? When did that happen?

A. Yes, really. Live switched to an XML format with Live 8.1. In fact, save any of your Live sets in Live 8.1.x or later, and all the information about clips, channels, presets, and arrangements winds up in an open, standard format. That’s something I hope to look at more soon, because it could lead to some interesting hacks and power tools. But the reason it’s relevant here is that you can likely thank the Serato and Cycling ‘74 (Max for Live) collaborations for making this a necessity – even as this has potential advantages well beyond The Bridge.

Ableton “Inside” Serato

Q. I see clips from Live Session View in Serato. But that’s just audio clips, right? What about MIDI patterns, instruments, effects, plug-ins?

A. Ableton Live is running in the background. The Bridge requires both a full copy of Live and a full copy of Serato (Scratch Live or ITCH) for a reason: the real, full-blown Live runs at the same time as Serato does. That means everything you can do with Live normally, you can do with Serato, Live, and The Bridge: you can trigger MIDI patterns, use Live’s internal Devices like Drum Racks and Grain Delay, run third-party plug-in instruments and effects, and even – if you’re feeling especially crazy – Max for Live devices.

Q. Wait – but I can do all those things in Live now, and I still even a crossfader. So why wouldn’t I just DJ with Live and skip all of this additional complexity?

A. Answer: you might decide to do just that, especially if you’re a seasoned Live user. On the other hand, Serato DJs can get a chance to infuse more interactive performance bits into their performance easily, and they have manual control over transport tempo and timing. And if you split your time between Live and Serato – which some DJ/performers certainly do – this could mean being able to move from one to the other seamlessly rather than having to switch apps. But yes, of course: this isn’t going to be the right solution for everyone, even those looking to combine Live with DJing. We’ll be looking at other options, too.

Q. What does the integration itself do?

A. What you see:

• A limited window on Session View: You can see 4, 5, or 8 scenes, and 4, 6 or 8 tracks, clip color and status (just as in Session View), track controls, and two sends. You also get effect device controls and two sends.
• Live’s tempo
• Indicators for bars and beats, overlaid atop your waveform views in Serato, so it’s easy to see how the two are meshing (or not)
• A sync player, which Ableton’s Jesse describes as being useful “for adding embellishing songs, in case you’d like to assign Ableton Live’s sync to a song on one of your decks, with out using up that deck with a Live Set.”
• DJ-style Looping of Ableton Live’s Transport — that is, the entire transport for the entire set, not just an individual clip. “This is a big one,” says Jesse, “as previously Ableton Live users weren’t able to loop like this, i.e. Do 16th note looping, and when you exit the loop, you end up back on the ‘one.’”

What you can do:

• Control Live’s transport: play and stop with Serato as if Live itself is another deck.
• Sync Live and Serato easily, without having to worry about which you load first.
• Change tempo in Live.
• Nudge forward and backward (which should make for some nice beat syncopation effects with the pairing).
• Use ITCH or virtual vinyl to control the Live transport.

What you can’t do — yet:

• There’s no reverse audio recording of the output of Live — there’s no way to route audio from Live into Serato, period. So –
• You can NOT scratch or reverse Live’s audio as if it were another deck (yet; of course, it’d be nice to see this in a future release).

(“Yet” is the operative word, as I expect The Bridge may add additional features over time.)

Q. If I can’t scratch Live, I’m out.

A. That’s a valid response. On the other hand, there’s some powerful potential here for adding instruments, effects, and clips, particularly if you keep it simple and balance what’s in Live with what’s in Serato. I’m sure some DJ will make great use of this, even if it won’t be for everyone.

Q. Won’t adding plug-ins interfere with the stability of Serato?

A. That’s worth considering. Aside from stability problems or crashes, adding a lot of plug-ins could increase resource consumption on your computer, add more musical complexity that you have to control, and even – in the case of certain plug-ins that require latency compensation – impact your timing. So Serato users, you’ll want to be really careful and test thoroughly before gigging with a massive Serato-Live set.

Q. How do Serato and Live output to your audio interface, if they’re not routing audio into one another? Can they share an audio output? Might some people just route audio separate for independent mixing and busing via a mixer?

A. That’s a good question, and the short answer is, I don’t know. I turned to Ableton for an answer, but it seems like we may have to wait for more details. Jesse Terry advises us to “stay tuned, we are aware of the complications here and are working to find a simple solution for the end user.”

Q. How do I trigger clips in Live from the Serato interface? Can I use ITCH controllers?

A. Right now, there aren’t ITCH or Scratch Live controllers with controls dedicated for Live, though presumably such hardware could appear in the future. So you can use ITCH or Scratch Live to control the Live transport, and you can see visual feedback in the Serato interface as far as what’s happening in Live, but that’s about it. While we wait to see if new hardware combines these functions, though, you can use an ITCH or Scratch Live controller for Serato and any MIDI controller for Live, including devices like the APC40, Launchpad, a monome, a nanoKONTROL – whatever.

Q. What enables the transport sync between the two programs? Why not just use ReWire?

A. Actually, early prototypes of The Bridge did use ReWire. But ReWire has some limitations, like the inability of a client to use plug-ins or record audio (at least according to the spec), and ultimately people I talked to at both Serato and Ableton felt it wasn’t the right tool for this job. “Serato and Ableton created an entirely new interapplication communication protocol to make the timing as tight as possible,” says Ableton’s Jesse.

Q. Will we get to use this transport protocol for anything other than Serato and Ableton, if it works so well?

A. Maybe. Right now, it’s a proprietary sync spec that works only with these two tools. This is normally where I give my “open standard” speech, but I think it’d be too early to judge whether the solution Ableton and Serato found would even be useful with anything else. It does raise questions for other developers, though, about what sorts of general solutions might work. (Case in point: I recently saw a demo synchronizing 3D rendering, video, and animation tool Blender with the DAW Ardour, all using free software on Linux to do something that’s not currently possible with expensive proprietary solution. What made it tick? A free, open technology called JACK, which does transport interconnects as well as audio and MIDI.)

Side note: I’ve heard from Live users making insanely intensive use of synchronization and timing that they’re finding sync performance is improved under 8.1.1 builds and later. There are a lot of variables in sync, but it’s interesting anecdotal evidence, at least, and The Bridge did require some under-the-hood work on Live’s timing – always a good thing.

The Bridge – Availability, Pricing

Q. What will this cost?

A. So long as you own a copy of Live 8 or Live Suite, plus a copy of Serato, The Bridge is free; there’s no add-on cost if you own both products as there was with Max for Live. (Note that LE/Lite/Starter editions of Live would not quality, and would require an upgrade to the full version.)

Q. Is there a release date?

A. No release date has been announced yet.

Q. Is it working now?

A. Yes, actually – The Bridge is up and functioning with current builds of Live; it’s just not publicly available yet.

Q. Will the release of The Bridge be impacted by the decision Ableton made to delay new releases in order to focus on fixing bugs and reliability?

A. Yes and no. Ableton says they’re not releasing any new versions until they’re again fully satisfied with quality. So that will delay The Bridge. On the other hand, The Bridge is working, so while the release is delayed, The Bridge is coming – and my money says it shouldn’t be too far off.

By the way, the work done on The Bridge may have an impact in the opposite direction. “The work being done for the Bridge helps tighten up Live’s transport for all Live users,” says Jesse. And given how closely a lot of you rely on that transport, that’s good news.

I think that should cover it for now. This is the first-generation product, and it’s not even out yet. But we’ll be sure to cover more developments as they arise, and as we get closer to the release of The Bridge.

Lastly, here’s Ableton’s current video. Unfortunately, what it doesn’t show is video footage of the software in action, just some DJ celebrities talking about how excited they are. (“It’ll change lunchmeat forever!” “It’ll make your face melt!”) Nothing wrong with that, of course, but I’m guessing you’d like to see the tool; stay tuned.

And yes, if none of this is floating your boat, and your face isn’t melting, I’m working on showing more of what Ms. Pinky can do with Max for Live. Having more choices is always good; it means you can find the best choice for you.

Working with music production today is a bit like science fiction. It’s fitting that visions of technology’s promise, menace, and humanity would inspire electronic music.

Create Digital Music, XLR8R, and Pitchfork got to join together with TV network SyFy to curate a free, 13-track compilation of “Music for Our Future.” Inspired by the world of SyFy’s new TV series Caprica, which is set just before the recently-concluded Battlestar Galactica, this is science fiction as the familiar. It’s the near future, not simply fantasy.

Download the full compilation for free, exclusively at:

http://www.xlr8r.com/musicforourfuture

The lineup, curated by the three publications, includes the likes of Lusine, Willits & Sakamoto, The Field, and Richard Devine, to name a few regular favorites on this site, with exclusive or previously-unreleased tracks by White Rainbows, Nice Nice, and myself.

In addition to the music, several of those artists share with CDM their techniques and process.

The full tracks:

Lusine, “Gravity” – this cut comes from A Certain Distance, a CDM favorite album in 2009. Lusine aka Jeff McIlwain is on Ghostly Internationaland, whether it’s  “abstract” electronica or downright electronic songwriting, always manages to put a unique sonic stamp on his work.

Atlas Sound, “Walkabout (with Noah Lennox)” is by Bradford James Cox of Deerhunter fame, from his album Logos.

Hudson Mohawke, “Fuse” – the Glasgow-based artist just debuted on Warp with Butter, including this track.

White Rainbow, “Raw Shanks a Million” comes from Kranky artist Adam Fornker of Oregon. It was my introduction to his work, but see more on this track below. I love its spare, pulsing beats; it sounds like what I’d listen to while jogging to Caprica City’s cybernetics research institute.

King Midas, Sound “Outta Space (Slow Version)” comes from a project started by London’s Kevin Martin, the man behind The Bug. It’s a future-dub track for people who believe space is the place.

Low Limit, “Turf Day” is by San Francisco producer Bryan Rutledge, whom I knew as half of Lazer Sword, and who seems to be right at the center of the good stuff happening in electronic music in California.

Willits & Sakamoto, “Toward Water” comes from 2008’s “Ocean Fire,” the collaboration between experimental guitarist and composer Christopher WIllits and master composer-musician Ryuichi Sakamoto. If you don’t know that full album already, it’s well worth owning.

The Field, “I Have The Moon, You Have The Internet (Gold Panda Remix) revisits the track off The Field’s latest, “Yesterday and Today” – another top pick for 2009, and nicely reimagined here. You can check out Gold Panda, too; his mixes have become big Internet hits, and I love the quality of his work.

Tyondai Braxton, “Uffe’s Woodshop” is off his solo album Central Market and premiered on Pitchfork. The Battles singer is a Warp artist, composer, looper, and yes, indeed the son of Anthony Braxton. It’s an explosion of acoustic sounds amidst the other works here.

Untold, “Luna” is by London’s up-and-coming Jack Dunning, familiar on dance floors both for his original productions and remixes.

Nice Nice, “See Waves” will be a 7” from Warp Records in February, but you get to hear it here first. I love that it brings an entirely different rhythmic feel to this group.

Richard Devine, “Matvec Interior (Feat. Otto Von Schirach)” really is science fiction, an intricate set of colliding sonic forms from the composer and mad-scientist sound designer. It’s a favorite from his 2005 Cautella, but Richard revisits his sonic process for CDM here today.

Peter Kirn, “Anaxagoras” is my own track, premiering here, named for the Greek philosopher who attempted to explain astrological events through science, and fled after being called a heretic. The music, with some sounds of viola da gamba and others synthesized (or resynthesized), fall on that boundary between re-processed past and imminent future.

Now, some notes from behind the scenes:

White Rainbow

CDM: Tell us about the inspiration for this track. What was the process like?

I don’t get inspired to make something in the sense of looking at a butterfly and then writing a song. For me, it’s more like the act of making inspires where things go. The sounds as they come out inspire me to react and create on top of them.

This track was made by recording about an hour of live improv and then editing and cutting down and doing a few overdubs. My set up is:

INPUTS:
mic, computer running ableton using drum racks to trigger samples with a padkontrol, various iphone/ipod touch drum apps (beat maker, idrum etc), synth, electric guitar

MIXED/OUTPUT:

delay, multi –fx, dd-20 giga delay as looper, kaoss pad kp3 as multi-fx and looper

…and this all getting recorded into ableton on another computer in the studio.

I let that sit for a few months, then came back to it, cut things down and added vocal (with the Ableton Looper…one of the only times I’ve used that) and weird synth pad overdubs.

I’ve been making looper based music for a really long time now (going back to the original boomerang pre turn of the century). It’s really tough to keep it interesting… so I’m always looking and searching for new ways to keep myself interested and inspired to make new music in new ways.

I also play in an improvised electronic group called Rob Walmart, wherein we get very wrong and stupid and on tons of crappy gear. Tons of Casio keyboards, MicroKORGs, iPod Touches, Nintendo DS, microphones, etc.A new 3xLP of Rob Walmart will come out on Marriage Records early this year.

People probably still brand me as a new age or psychedelic ambient guy, and that’s cool but to me there is a direct line between synth future funk from the 70s and 80s and say, tangerine dream or Klaus Schultze. Just technology inspiring different people to make wild, "out there" space sounds. I would like to continue along that line.

Richard Devine

CDM: What can you tell us about this track?

I originally produced it in 2005, in collaboration with my good friend Otto Von Schirach. I was a going for something very alien, futuristic, scifi, scientific and unusual for this piece. The sonic timbres and textures are a combination of hybrid computer synthesis and field recordings. Think Aliens vs. Predator happening inside the world of HR Gigers head=)  The track initially started out in Logic Audio, I began cutting up sections and pieces of various field recorded bits. I went to many locations to get some of the sound sources. Many of them quite unusual and disturbing.

CDM: Your work always has these extraordinary layers of sound. What was the production process like on this track?

I started out on this farm near my house here in Georgia. It was during fall, and we went to this Halloween festival pumpkin patch place with my girlfriend. It was a huge field that had a petting zoo, and various other farm animals. I was intrigued by this fairly large turkey they had in a small metal wired cage. I record several takes of him frantically moving around as I got closer with my microphone. I also recorded the sounds of pigs, breathing heavy into the microphones.

I had a pair of DPA 4060’s Miniature Body Microphones clipped and tucked into my shirt sleeves to capture the animals up in close proximity. I also recorded sounds of water, sand, rocks, trees, leaves and debris in my backyard. I used a lot of these sounds and then imported them into the computer for heavy processing and manipulation. One of the main processing engines was the Kyma system by Symbolic Sound. I took a few sounds and converted them into spectral analysis files in which I morphed and re-synthesized some of the acoustic sounds into synthetic grains, or partials. Creating these very alien artificial sounding sounds to the mix. I also did a bit of FM synthesis for some of the percussion. Lots of intense programming in hundreds of layers of processed bits. You will notice that each bar in the composition never repeats, the same sounds or sequences. This was completely intentional. I wanted the entire sonic experience to be kinda like a roller-coaster ride of audio frequency dynamics. I also tried to experiment with interesting new breaks, and redefine what could be considered song structure adhering to no rules or constraints.

CDM: Given the complexity, structurally, of this music, do you tend to iterate through a track over many layers?

I spend weeks, months sometimes designing the sounds, and trying to get all the pieces to work together. Almost like a complex microsound jigsaw puzzle, but the pieces are very fractalized and tiny. Each sound I painfully program by hand. I take each sound as if it was a sculpture piece. I look at the sound in 3D structure. I often compare the sounds to architectural shapes, structures, and manipulate them one section at a time. I read the waveforms and sculpt them into what I want. I then add the pieces together to work into a composition as a whole. This is the most difficult part in my work in making everything seem fluid and natural. It is often difficult to make the transitions work within a short amount of time especially when you have so many sounds and textures you want to squeeze into a 5 or 6 minute track.

Lusine

CDM: What was your process like, creatively – particularly in regards to the vocals?

It was a very long process. It started off as something totally different. Some sort of downtempo disco type track with much more lyrical vocals. But, after several months I realized it wasn’t working for me, so I approached the whole thing from scratch, resampled everything and made a more minimal downtempo track out of it.

The vocals started off a lot more obviously upfront, but I decided to use them more as a musical layer, so I resampled the completed vocal track and started shuffling the bits around. It felt better to me, like the musical layers in the song weren’t competing with the vocals as much.

Ed.: I’ll be curious to hear your thoughts on the compilation, especially since it represents three very different musical perspectives (which to me wound up making the experience richer). The TV show Caprica, for its part, premieres January 22 with another great Bear McCreary soundtrack (I’ve been listening already, as a fan of his scores).

Software of the year: Propellerhead Record

For all the major releases and upgrades and gear, as well as the dominance of a certain Berlin-based developer, if you had to pick one application of 2009, it’d be Record. Record tops the list not because everyone dropped everything to go use it, but quite the contrary. Record bucked industry trends, and provided a love-it-or-hate-it view of what audio software could be. In other words, it was quite reminiscent of Reason.

Centered on a mixer, emphasizing “recording” (perish the thought), and omitting expected features like MIDI out and plug-in support, Record resists modern-day conventional wisdom. That was divisive enough, even before the debates began over Record’s new hardware key. In the long run, it may be the simple fact that Record brings audio signal to Reason that gives it staying power. But in 2009, Record was the application about which everyone had an opinion.

See our original preview, May, plus details on the "Ignition Key" authorization system

Developer of the year: Ableton

What a year it’s been for Ableton. The company kicked off the year with “Share,” “Extend,” and “Touch,” as well as the release of Live 8. It sounded simple. But Ableton’s tech dominated CDM headlines in ‘09 with the variety of user tips and tricks, rants and raves. How’d they do?

New gear: Hardware was in the spotlight – and ranked highest in CDM clicks – even above the software. Many users embraced Akai’s APC40, the first commercial hardware to really balance a variety of Live’s features, as well as Novation’s affordable, simple Launchpad grid controller. But even as Ableton emphasized the ability of this hardware to work out of the box, hackers set about customizing their own control. We saw the Launchpad used with Renoise (complete with a mocked-up Renoise logo decal), and the Korg nanoKONTROL hacked to integrate more seamlessly with Ableton – even when KORG and Ableton themselves hadn’t worked on support. Lesson learned? Make tools for musicians, and you may find some support and development gets crowd-sourced, whether you intended it or not.

See: Hands-on with the Launchpad, nanoKONTROL Myr for Ableton Live, APC40 Hacking Superguide

Live, meet Max: Max for Live has already led to some incredible work, most notably stretta’s fantastic compositional toolkit for the monome. It earned praise (for setting a new bar for sheer power) and criticism (most notably for lacking a free runtime). Some jumped on M4L, some swore they’d stick to the traditional Max, and others swore they’d seek alternative or free solutions. In the end, Max for Live has wound up becoming bigger than, well, Max for Live. It’s begun a discussion of how live performance should work, and how software should integrate and be extended. And that’s a story that should be with us for a long time.

And a few wrinkles: The third prong of Ableton’s initiative was barely visible in ‘09; while a beta is underway, we don’t know much more about how Share will work in December than we did at NAMM in January. Live 8 has been beloved by some, even as others users expressed frustration with stability issues. CEO Gerhard Behles surprised everyone this month on the Ableton forum by conceding the company could do better and promising developers would re-focus on squashing bugs, even putting new features on hold.

As the saying goes, any press is good press. Ableton and their fired-up user base stayed front-and-center on CDM in 2009, even as twists and turns complicated the narrative. The story isn’t quite as clean and tidy as it is was at the beginning of the year, and you can read the full spectrum of comments calling this year everything from a triumph to a failure (and, hopefully, a few more reasonable thoughts in between). But without a doubt, Ableton is the developer of 2009.

Story of the year: Switching from Mac to Ubuntu

After years of tired debates about the merits of operating systems, the potential of the philosophies of open source versus proprietary, and whether Linux is ready for the desktop, in 2009 we saw a new spin: what if you switched to Linux to make your life easier?

That was the question Kim Cascone asked with his switch to Linux. And he wasn’t alone. One of the most-asked questions this year was how to make Linux work for music, particularly as users sought out more-reliable, more-affordable solutions for audio. (Yes, I know – “Linux” isn’t necessarily more reliable out of the box, as “Linux” could mean any number of setups, which I suspect is part of why the question was asked so much.) The popularity of Kim’s story, along with the turnkey Indamixx laptop or the Linux Laptop Orchestra we saw last week, suggest a challenge to CDM as much as a story. It’s the story we’ll likely see more of in 2010.

Linux Music Workflow: Switching from Mac OS X to Ubuntu with Kim Cascone

Biggest opportunity: Rock Band Network

Want a glimpse into the future of the music business? Here’s one way it could look. Rock Band Network provides an extraordinary level of control and customization, allowing your music to work as well with the hit game as music adapted by the developers themselves. As a revenue stream, as a promotional opportunity, and as a new way to play with your music, it looks fantastic. And don’t miss the fact that what made it possible was close collaboration with the DAW Reaper – a big coup for that package. Now, if we could just have the Amplitude Network, too, for electronic artists.

See our inside look at RBN with the folks at Harmonix

Surprise vintage tech: The return of CV

MIDI? What’s that? The biggest surprise revelation in January was that MOTU was set to release a brilliant plug-in called Volta, which elegantly bridged the gap between computers and, through control voltage, analog synthesis. Matthew Davidson (who wowed us with OSC and digital tech in 2009, too, in his monome work) walked us through his creation:

Analog, Meet Digital: MOTU Volta Connects the Mac to CV Synths, Effects Graphically

We also saw other CV solutions, DIY and commercial, Control Voltage on Moog’s Theremin, and in perhaps the hardware product of the year, Moog Music’s exquisite double-band MuRF resonant filter. And yes, the Moog piece even has MIDI for pattern changes and sync, while still making use of CV.

Most annoying story of the year: Anything to do with T-Pain

Yes, the iPhone is well awesome mobile technology. Yes, 2009 was the year in which the music world went from talking exclusively about “albums” to talking about “apps,” too. Yes, it’s amazing how Smule has popularized music technology and alternative interfaces and all that good stuff. Unfortunately, it was tough to focus on some of the wonderful things going on when you had to deal with the sudden and inexplicable success of T-Pain, capitalizing on everyone’s least-favorite effect – AutoTune. Not getting enough overuse of pitch correction on FOX’s hit show, Glee, ruining talented voices of kids and Broadway stars? Now put it on your iPhone, and suck the joy out of the (otherwise fantastic) “I’m on a Boat” video. We all love you, Smule, but, I’m on a phone? I’m in a time machine, trying to escape to some year where AutoTune has finally died.

To cheer up, let’s just remind ourselves why Smule’s chief mind Ge Wang is still cool, while I try to work out how to get off T-Pain’s press mailing list:

Interview: Smule’s Ge Wang on iPhone Apps, Ocarinas, and Democratizing Music Tech

And the Rest

Most important OS release:

Windows 7, for finally making us feel good about leaving XP – and, with the help of tools like Cakewalk’s SONAR and its BitBridge 32-bit plug-in support, giving us a good reason to go 64-bit, too.

Most popular how-to’s:

Instructable: How to Build a Music Studio in an Apartment

Abusing and misusing groove extraction in Live 8

Best reason to attend NAMM 2010:

The hopes of catching Teenage Engineering’s OP-1 synth, in the flesh

Most popular feature, and a reminder of what matters more than the gear:

Take it to the Stage: Reflections on Live Laptop Music from Artists

This analysis piece from a variety of top artists started a discussion about what playing laptops is all about. There was certainly no consensus, but it was – rightfully – the most popular feature story of the year, and something we should cover as often as possible. It’s the reason we’re all here. (Thanks to Primus Luta for putting this together.)

More Top 2009 Lists

Beatportal

Francis Preve takes on the top ten releases of the year for Beatportal, and I can’t help but agree. Having made my list of what caused the most controversy, these are the tools that – big splash or not – deserve some technological recognition.

MetaSynth remains a fascinating and unique tool for sound design, finally in a more modern release, and one I hope to work with more soon.

Logic 9 was a huge DAW release, though to that list I’d add SONAR 8.5 – two radically different tools, each markedly more mature this year.

FXpansion DCAM Synth Squad looks like the most brilliant soft synth of ‘09, and I’m long overdue in spending some quality time with it.

Dave Smith’s Tetr4 synth might make the top of my list if it didn’t have to compete with other fine synths from … Dave Smith.

Then there’s Melodyne, which resulted in some unique and creative results this year.

A must-read: 2009 Studio Technology Top 10

MusicRadar

MusicRadar, the online site that accompanies Computer Music and Future Music (among others), reviews the year month by month. But the list you want is:

In pictures: the best hi-tech gear of 2009

Yours’

Of course, in the end, what all these stories have been about is the full spectrum of ideas from our readers. So have at it. And Happy New Year.

There’s something to be said for the traditional digital audio workstation, its linear arrangement view, and all its editing bells and whistles. When it comes to finishing a track from beginning to end – not doing live PA-DJ hybrid performances or racking up modular synths and effects or programming intricate cellular beats – sometimes the conventional approach can be welcome.

With lots of affordable alternatives – not to mention competition from stable, previous versions – the question with any full-freight, top-of-the-line DAW is whether it can “buy” your loyalties with enough extras? And, for that matter, might it even convince you to enjoy running Windows? SONAR has tempted me before, but 8.5.2 reaches a new level of maturity – and a new level of pack-in goodies to sweeten the deal.

Choosing a DAW is an immensely personal decision. It’s worth saying that we have a lot of exceptionally good choices from which to select tools. Even when they perform tasks in very different ways, any number of tools can achieve the same results. I have had a personal reaction to certain tools, though, and too often in reviews, we don’t get to talk about that subjective experience. I’ve actually started to work SONAR into more of the projects I’m doing, so I speak personally about it.

From the moment you fire it up, SONAR screams DAW tradition, as in, “welcome to the cockpit of my 747 jet plane.” Yes, it’s got rows of squint-worthy icons on its toolbars. And yes, it’s sufficiently utilitarian. Whereas Ableton prides itself on a minimalist approach, and Apple and Digidesign have slapped on layers of slick gloss and shine, Cakewalk remains, behind the occasional pretty icon or knob scattered here and there, a tool that looks like a piece of software.

But don’t necessarily let this surface complexity turn you off. All the way back to the DOS days, Cakewalk has had a history of giving you more of everything, then allowing you to turn on only what you want. You can switch off and customize nearly any element of the interface. Clever tabs introduced in recent versions help keep everything within reach. The UI is still a little harder to look at than I’d like – not aesthetically, but in that the UI can become cluttered, and it’s easy to wind up with a lot of floating windows. But switch off some extraneous toolbars, learn some keyboard shortcuts, and get used to the “packed workbench” set of tools, and SONAR can grow comfortable more quickly than you’d think.

When it comes to editing, production, mixing, and routing, you’ll certainly never say, “I wish I could…” or “if only editing worked like..” More often than not, some tool with just that editing method is nearby.

SONAR is unquestionably the DAW of “more.” But whereas some of its flagship competitors have tacked-on additional tools or bundled items, much of that “more” is also integrated with the host itself. SONAR has also been focusing in the last few releases on the areas about which electronic producers care the most. I recently lamented that Apple’s Mac-only rival to the feature-packed SONAR on Windows, Logic Studio, has neglected some of its bread-and-butter audio effects and MIDI editing features in its most recent release. Apple’s Amp Designer and Pedalboard, MainStage performance rig, and Soundtrack Pro wave editor are nothing if not impressive, but they may not be relevant to everyone. If words like “step sequencer” and “tempo-synced mod filter” appeal more, then read on.

Step and Matrix Editing in a Traditional DAW

Two of the banner editing features introduced in SONAR 8.5 this year likely look a little familiar. The push-button Step Sequencer 2 recalls FL Studio’s step sequencing view, and the new Matrix View seems intentionally modeled on Ableton Live’s signature Session View. If you’re pleased with those tools, they may not make you a convert, either. But there are some reasons to believe that this is a  uniquely SONAR-like take on these kinds of features.

Step Sequencer

The step sequencer is likely to warm the hearts of fans of beat programming, and it could well woo away some users of FL Studio. What’s unique about it is that it’s a step sequencer view of any track you like – not an effect, not an instrument, but a view on the host app itself. Pulling up a step sequencer is now as easy as invoking the time-tested Piano Roll view. Nor is this limited to repetitive, four-on-the-floor patterns: you can determine the number of beats and the number of steps on each beat. (The maximum number of steps is 16, with more beats possible than I could count.) The beats lock to SONAR’s master tempo, as they should, but the pattern itself can even be out of phase with the sequencer time signature if you so desire.

Among other improvements in the new release, you can now add adjustable flam with a double-click, load and save favorite patterns, and populate certain steps automatically.

It’s the way in which the step sequencer integrates with SONAR’s track view that’s especially lovely. You can sketch ideas in the step sequencer, then fine tune them in a conventional Piano Roll view. You can lay out patterns in the arrangement wherever you like. You get all the speed and convenience of the step sequencer, in other words, without having to limit your ideas to accommodate it.

Step sequencing notes is the obvious choice, but you can also set parameters for each step, including velocity, time offset, and (to keep your patterns from getting repetitive) per-step probability. You can also send MIDI messages, including even RPNs and NRPNs for advanced MIDI programming. That makes SONAR an excellent choice for automating external MIDI gear.

There is a skin-deep similarity to FL Studio, but the real lineage here is Cakewalk’s superb instrument Rapture, which used a similar interface to perform step modulation.

Sadly, though, what’s missing in the step sequencer is the ability to automate third-party plug-in effect parameters via the same interface – a major missed opportunity, and something present in tools like Ableton Live’s clip envelopes. You can still do this via automation lanes, but it’d be nice to make use of the elegant control-sketching capabilities of the Step Sequencer. In fairness, the problem here is that many plug-ins don’t respond to common MIDI control change messages, even the few that can be reasonably standardized, such as filter cutoff.

Note that I say “third-party” plug-ins; some of Cakewalk’s own included synths can indeed be automated via the step sequencer, which is good fun. It’s an easy feature to miss, so I’ll cover how to do it in the upcoming SONAR 8.5 tips story. And if your plug-in does implement proper MIDI control, you can manipulate any plug-in with MIDI, too.

Also missing in the Step Sequencer itself is a way to switch amongst multiple pattern buffers. However, this is where the fact that the Step Sequencer is simply a view of a clip becomes powerful. To create multiple patterns, you’d simply create multiple clips. If you need a way to switch between clips, you can drop them into Matrix View and switch between them that way. That’s similar to what’s possible in Ableton Live, again, but for those who prefer the traditional behavior of a step sequencer to a Piano Roll view, SONAR gives you some additional choice.

I do hope that SONAR 9 continues to refine the step sequencer and its integration, as I think this feature has a lot of potential beyond its current, already-useful functionality.

Speaking of steps, it’s not at all a new feature, but it’s worth saying that SONAR has one of the easiest implementations of step recording I’ve ever seen. It’s easy to bang out an idea while cramped in coach with your laptop using just the keyboard. And it’s another reminder that a mature DAW still has its place.

Matrix View

One of the mysteries of music software development over the last few years has been that, for all the success of Ableton Live, it seemed no one tried to copy Live’s biggest features, its clip-launching workflow. (Live didn’t invent the idea of putting chunks of music in an array of triggers – that fundamental idea comes from samplers and drum machines – but that makes the absence of other takes on the idea all the more strange.) Well, the wait is over: Matrix View in SONAR 8.5 certainly seems to respond directly to Live’s Session View.

It’s easiest to talk first about the obvious similarities. As with Live’s Session View, SONAR’s Matrix View arranges audio and MIDI clips into an array. Trigger a clip, and it begins playing. Set the launch quantization, and its playback will begin on a beat or a bar. Trigger the clip again, and it either re-triggers or toggles playback, depending on the mode you’ve set. Trigger a second clip in the same row (SONAR) or column (Live), and the first clip starts playing, replaced by the first. SONAR’s rendition is rotated ninety degrees from Live’s – which in some ways is more intuitive – but the behavior is the same. SONAR even mimics some of the toolbar layout of Live’s Session View.

Because Matrix View is so much like Session View, however, the differences are thrown into relief, too. For the first time, we see what Live might look like if it were redesigned from the ground up. The clip buttons are enlarged in SONAR’s Matrix View, allowing for greater visual feedback on clips. Settings that in Live require a visit to a different pane are exposed in Matrix View, including looping and latching clips.

Matrix View also introduces some features Live users may envy. You can set “Latch Mode” globally, so that clips play back only when an input – like a pad on a drum controller – is held down. That can make your audio clips more playable, encouraging you to use your pads instead of just let them loop endlessly. (It’s possible to do the same thing in Live, but the feature is more exposed in SONAR.) SONAR’s Matrix View also introduces the idea of having two quantization settings instead of just one. Switch clips to bus A or B, and you can set one set of clips to trigger on the bar and another on the quarter-note beat, for instance.

I’ll be honest: I was initially apprehensive about Matrix View. If I wanted Live in SONAR, I’d be inclined simply to use Live, which yo can even easily do inside SONAR via ReWire. Sure enough, if you try to use Matrix View like Live’s Session View, you’re likely to be disappointed. SONAR isn’t built for onstage, real-time live performance in the way Live is, so the sonic results aren’t quite the same. (It certainly operates in real time, but it’s primarily a “studio” program. I did occasionally get brief drop-outs in sound that would make me hesitate to try to play Matrix View onstage. SONAR is a strong choice for onstage use if you’re hosting plug-ins or running backing tracks, but something like Matrix View becomes more interactive.)

Also, while the Matrix View’s array looks like Session View, it lacks the integrated tools for manipulating clips that Live has – to say nothing of Live’s more advanced arrangement options, like Follow Actions. You can warp audio using SONAR’s sophisticated GrooveClips, and unlike Ableton, SONAR has the eminently logical ability to loop clips without warping the audio contained. (Why Live still doesn’t do that after ten years is beyond me.) But Matrix View simply isn’t Live. Nor, says Cakewalk, is it supposed to be; Cakewalk repeatedly told me that, despite appearances, they intend Matrix View as a means of extending SONAR and not even a competitor for Live.

So that’s what Matrix View isn’t. The surprise is, what Matrix View is turns out to be more useful than I expected. Ableton Live is split effectively into two programs, one a linear view as in a conventional DAW and the other Session View. It’s possible to go from one to the other, but you feel like you’re dealing in a way with two separate programs.

SONAR, with or without Matrix View, remains entirely focused on the linear arrangement – and that can be a good thing. Treat Matrix View as a bin of clips, with the focus still very much on SONAR’s linear tracks, and the whole thing starts to make some sense. In fact, SONAR’s means of mediating between the non-linear clips and the linear arrangement seems more intuitive than Live’s to me, even after many years of using Live. Turn on “Capture Matrix Performance,” and you can use Matrix View as an easy way of “writing” patterns and clips into tracks. You can do this without having to turn on and off the transport’s record control, which can result in some messy mistakes in Ableton Live. Toggle “Follow Transport,” and choose whether Matrix View’s behavior is determined by the project transport condition. You can do many of the same things in Live, don’t get me wrong, but SONAR has been able to learn and improve upon Live’s way of doing things, and favor the linear arrangement. Even if you opt to use SONAR alongside another application like Live, that might be useful to have integrated with SONAR itself.

Matrix View’s rows also are not tied to pre-determined tracks as in Live’s mixer-like Session View. You can choose any row of clips and arbitrarily route them to any track you like. Take all of the clips and route them to one audio track. Route some rows to one track and others to another. This makes managing signal routing and recording linear arrangements much easier. It’s possible to do the same thing in Live with busing, but Matrix View is routing to actual tracks, not returns.

Of course, none of this makes SONAR a live performance tool, which for many is the draw and namesake of Ableton’s Live. But if the appeal of SONAR, as mentioned at the outset of this story, is committing to linear tracks, that may not matter.

The net result of all of this is that Matrix View can be a useful way of playing around with clips quickly, while remaining focused on your end-to-end arrangement. It’s also worth mentioning that Matrix View isn’t the only way of dropping audio into tracks. Cakewalk’s excellent, dead-simple Beatscape can do something similar, in a drum machine/MPC-style view. Neither of these tools may convince you to upgrade to SONAR 8.5, let alone switch from another host. But having them available in your arsenal expands your ways of working, which can help prevent you from getting stuck in a creative rut.

As with the Step Sequencer, what’s critical in SONAR’s approach is keeping everything integrated and focusing on the main Track View. I can’t recommend SONAR on the merits of Matrix View – I’d like to see it grow and mature a little bit first, and to see it expand in a Cakewalk way and not just an Ableton way. I’m also not yet confident of its reliability; it’s a new feature, I saw some occasional glitches, and 8.5.2 made a lot of changes under the hood. But it could show promise in the future, and it certainly indicates Cakewalk’s commitment to adding to their host’s workflows.

Arpeggiator

SONAR 8.5 also packs an arpeggiator on each track. It’s a smaller feature than the Matrix View and Step Sequencer, but sometimes little things make a difference in workflow. The tool is very simple, but it’s awfully nice having it always available to use. You get all the basics, and because it’s everywhere, it can spawn new ideas you might not have tried otherwise.

Effect Goodies

If you opt for the full Producer Edition of SONAR, you get a lot of pack-in effects. Previously, the “kitchen sink” approach to effects had been the domain of Logic. SONAR has not only caught up, depending on the applications that matter to you, it could have the most appealing lineup of included effects.

I generally recoil from discussions of how “good” software sounds; a lot of this has to do with the user. But I will say, working with SONAR’s mix engine and bundled tools is an aural pleasure. There’s some really great-sounding stuff in here, and I suppose the “if it sounds good, it is good” maxim holds in music software as much as anything.

There’s a huge collection of new effects. Some aren’t strictly “new,” developed for other Cakewalk products, but no matter – this is a fresh, useful collection of stuff.

The PX-64 Percussion Strip is just fantastic. It combines dynamics (compressor/expander), equalization, delay, tube saturation, and transient shaping. Putting together these modules isn’t just a gimmick, either; the set is complementary, and there’s an elegant drag-and-drop option for changing routing. Seeing everything in one place makes a difference, and it’s nice to any time a software developer includes an expander and not just a compressor. The sound can be really transparent, as well. Combine this with the dedicated Transient Follower introduced in SONAR 8, and SONAR is a terrific environment for tweaking percussion. (Incidentally, it’s just as much fun with synthesized and sampled electronic percussion as recorded acoustic percussion.) 

The VX-64 Vocal Strip, as the name implies, does the same thing for vocalists. It includes a Deesser, compressor/expander, tube EQ, doubler, and delay. As with the PX-64, the VX-64 provides easy-to-use visual feedback and drag-and-drop routing.

The PX-64 and VX-64 are definitely the “headliners” in the new effects. But some of the other plug-ins are gems, too:

Tempo Delay is my favorite in the whole bundle; it’s a tempo-synced delay and modulated EQ/filter that for me, at least, recalls Lexicon classics like the brilliant and inexplicably-discontinued PCM 42.

Mod Filter is a similarly lovely tempo-synced EG/LFO with a rich overdrive.

The Alias Factor decimator is both a bit crusher and a low-pass filter; it’s the rare bit crusher that sound warm and organic no matter how much you stress its settings, and may well have become my new favorite decimator. (In fact, forget I told you about it. So many people are currently overusing the settings on Ableton that it’s become really obvious. So, keep doing that, and I’ll keep Alias Factor for myself. Move along.)

There’s also an included phaser, high-frequency exciter, multivoice chorus/flanger, parametric EQ, stereo compressor/gate, and digital reverb. Not one of these effects is flashy, in sound or appearance. They all have a few knobs. They look like free plug-ins. And I love that – they’re the worst possible option for impressing friends or clients with your pricey, fancy plugs. (They’re clearly modeled on Lexicon’s hardware front panels.) But they sound great, without getting in the way of your mix, and they actually stick to the controls you’ll actually use.

The latest additions sit atop some powerful, beautiful-sounding existing tools, like the Vintage Channel VC64, which incorporates analog-emulating dynamics, gate, De-Esser, and EQ, as created by Kjaerhus Audio. The vintage-styled panel is a gimmick, but make no mistake – the plug-in itself sounds wonderful. Cakewalk also has the well-executed Boost11 compressor.

Not new to SONAR 8.5, but now bundled with SONAR Studio and well worth mentioning, is the Roland V-Vocal editor. The tool incorporates the VariPhrase vocal analysis technology in Roland hardware – at (sorry, Roland) a fraction of the price of buying additional gear. Now, don’t get me started on the many reasons I hate artificial pitch correction and vibrato. But V-Vocal has some interesting creative applications, even if you’re not a singer. You can use it as a harmonizer. You can use it to create special effects with timing, phrasing, and formants. Its pitch to MIDI conversion works really well, too, so you can even sing in unusual synth lines. By “overlook,” incidentally, I do mean overlook – you’ll find V-Vocal as another “view” of your track.

SONAR is not without competition. For instance, I love some of Logic’s oddities, like its Sculpture physical-modeling instrument, or Ableton’s unusually elegant and unique effects. But when it comes to signal processing specifically and what’s in the box, I don’t think there’s a DAW on the planet right now that can match the utility and sound quality of the effects bundled with SONAR. That may not be a big deal if you already have assembled a suite of your favorite plug-ins. But if you want a DAW that ships with a lot of audio-processing goodness, SONAR, particularly in its Producer Edition, is simply unmatched.

Here’s another advantage of SONAR over some of its competitors. Yes, applications like Pro Tools, Logic, and Ableton Live now come with boatloads of plugs. But try to load these tools in another host, and they disable themselves. That’s true of some of SONAR’s V-Vocal, VC-64 channel strip, Lexicon Pantheon Reverb, and True Pianos. But nearly everything else – including the fantastic new Session Drummer – works in any Windows VST host. Want to drop your LinnDrum samples in a Session Drummer instance with the PX-64 effects strip inside the tracker Renoise, without loading SONAR? Go for it. That makes SONAR’s value decidedly greater.

(Notably, Reaper does not have these same limitations, as its fans are likely to be quick to point out. But SONAR, while priced significantly higher, also comes with a broader selection of plug-ins, and it remains a robust host for all of your other plugs.)

Drum Machines and Instruments

The big instrumental addition in 8.5 is the new Session Drummer 3, an expanded drum machine / drum sampler. Like Cakewalk’s other recent instruments, it focuses on the essentials but executes them elegantly: it’s a basic drum kit with open-standard SFZ sample compatibility, MIDI pattern playback and multiple pattern slots, and a friendly graphical view of the kit. The mixer is the really nice part of the instrument: mix via a basic mixing interface and route each audio wherever you like, with separate controls for width and tune. That doesn’t quite add up to a full-blown drum sampler like NI’s Battery, but it still does plenty.

I’m not particularly interested in sampled acoustic kits, so the beauty of this pack to me is the additional vintage drum machines, including Roland’s TR-707, 808, and 909, but also DrumTraks and LinnDrum models – all the things I can’t afford on eBay or store in my apartment. They’re just samples, not full-blown emulations, and it is a little silly hearing an 808 while looking at a picture of an acoustic drum kit. But couple these with SONAR’s step sequencer and transient-following effects arsenal, and you have a combination that should make any fan of electronic beats blissfully happy.

Of course, I’d be even happier if Cakewalk would bundle its modular drum synth, NPulse, from Project5. There seems to be no reason at this point not to bring Cakewalk’s flagship host in line with the rest of the fleet. And Cakewalk is up against various bundles of synths – Reason, Logic Studio, FL Studio, Ableton Live Suite, and even Pro Tools all now come with deep synth bundles. Just remember, you do get a good selection of instruments in Cakewalk’s software, too, including the Dimension Pro sampler and Rapture LE. Unlike the audio effects, I can’t really say the synth and sampler choices in SONAR are a reason to opt for Cakewalk’s tool over other hosts, but they don’t hurt, either.

AudioSnap

Slicing and dicing audio in time is all the rage these days, so it’d be easy enough to miss Cakewalk’s take. But I’d put AudioSnap 2 right up with Logic Studio 9’s new audio mashing features for ease of use. The AudioSnap overlay is brilliantly simple, and best of all for creative production, allows you to copy grooves to MIDI with one click. I could say more about it, but I think the new window says it all. The one thing you can’t see here is that you can now easily tab around from transient to transient.

Cakewalk also employs the high-quality stretching algorithms from the folks at iZotope. Note that Apple has recently developed some in-house audio warping techniques, as has Propellerhead for Record. Seeing how these features stack up, though, would be the domain of another feature.

Usability, Performance, Compatibility, and the Sum of the Parts

There’s quite a lot of additional fit and finish in SONAR 8.5, with additional improvements added in 8.5.2.

The Media Browser is improved, and acts as Windows users would expect; it’s great having a native file browser built into the host, and it fits neatly in a tab at the bottom of the screen.

The “Now Time” marker lets you easily drag around “now” during playback with the cursor so that the transport springs to the right place. It’s a little thing, but a big time-saver; I wish I had it in my video editing software.

Freezing now lets you easily include or exclude effects bins – an obvious, welcome choice.

And if you like buttons, you get even more. There is also a solo button on effects, useful while you’re tweaking. Freeze and archive buttons have been added to save computing resources, especially handy if you’re working on a laptop (or are addicted, as I am, to all those CPU-hungry multi-effects strips). Archiving is really handy when you’re working on a production, in that it allows you not only to freeze but disable a track while you aren’t actively using it.

But I think it’s the compatibility and reliability work that may be most important. Cakewalk has been way out in front with support for the latest-and-greatest version of Windows. They managed to support Windows Vista when, frankly, no one else seemed to work out how to do it or even if it was a worthwhile use of time. They supported 64-bit computing before anyone else, opening up greater memory capacity to their users – and now make it easy, via a technology called BitBridge, to migrate all your 32-bit plug-ins to your 64-bit system. Now, Windows 7 is here and generally doesn’t suck, and SONAR is not only first, but has an exceptional level of support. 8.5.2 in my testing was rock solid.

SONAR in general is one of those hosts that I feel won’t blink when I toss a variety of plug-ins and audio interfaces at it. Running audio interfaces on Windows, in particular, tends not to be as easy as it is on the Mac because of Windows’ multiple audio systems. Yet SONAR can be run reliably, in my testing, under a variety of audio systems from WASAPI to ASIO, with a variety of hardware.

There are subtle but important plug-in improvements here, too, for VST lovers. You can turn on “always suspend on play” to fix plug-ins that have trouble with stuck notes when you stop the transport (been there), and “serialize host access” to fix problems with plug-ins crashing or glitching because of user interface thread sync problems. I’ve definitely seen both of these issues before, though I wasn’t able to locate a misbehaving plug-in to test it. But it shows a level of attention to detail that, on Windows at least, I believe is pretty unique.

It’s tough to talk about reliability. Anecdotally, I know some readers prefer older versions of SONAR to newer versions, and I can’t find a material reason why that might be. But I do say that SONAR is generally a trust I feel I can trust and use reliably, and that to me means a lot.

SONAR Wins Me Over

Is there a place for traditional DAWs in coming years? Small, agile competition is certainly turning up the heat. And SONAR retains the legacy of conventional DAWs. It has an interface that can sometimes be cluttered with options. It requires an investment of money and time. It runs only on Windows, and it certainly looks like a traditional Windows application. By virtue of doing everything, it’s almost guaranteed to do some things you really don’t need.

But for all the beauty of non-linear arrangements, of unusual interfaces and novel music making, sometimes you want to finish a track in the conventional sense. And sometimes that means dealing with an interface with a lot of tools in order to make complex arranging tasks easier.

As for justifying its cost, SONAR can pay you back with reliability, predictability, and an arsenal of effects tools that would be tough to match anywhere else. It provides this set of tools without sacrificing standards support, compatibility with a wide variety of audio and controller hardware, and strong support for the open SFZ sampling format. It is tied to Windows, but it provides an exception level of support for the operating system, not only doing things first, but doing them best.

At the end of the day, we do all of this for fun. SONAR provides, by removing some of the points of pain (driver support and arcane under-the-hood optimizations), while providing plenty of toys for us to relax with. And at some point, with the step sequencer ticking away and an especially-lovely effect licking your drum track, everything else will fade away.

When it comes to stacking up conventional DAWs, I think SONAR deserves mention at the top of the pile. Any of the mature DAWs will likely get the job done. But SONAR covers an extraordinary range of bases that makes it a top pick.

Production software coverage: Watch later this week for some tips on making SONAR 8.5 work as production tool, whether you’re a long-standing user or newcomer. Also, we’d like to continue to offer coverage of a range of production tools / DAWs. If there’s an angle you’d like to see covered, or you’d like to talk about how you use your own tool of choice, we’d love to hear from you. Ultimately, it’s not a matter of talking about the tool itself, isolated from anything else. It’s how we work with these tools in music that matters. -Ed.

Looking at the monome hardware, it could be difficult to understand how a simple array of buttons has become the most important musical design of the decade. It’s been the software that has brought this to life, not least the work of stretta (aka Matthew Davidson).

In the early days of electronic music, the creation of modular systems for synthesizing sound was a major breakthrough. Today, we can produce modular systems for composition, for assembling the music itself. And in a world in which “more” is the key word, many of these systems, by design, do less, focusing on the essential.

stretta reached a major landmark late last week, with the release of the maxforlive monome suite. It’s a set of seven Max for Live devices, with variations, which can be dropped into Ableton Live for use in musical projects. But it’s also more than that – it’s a modular model for how stretta thinks, and each module is designed to be used with the others, all without ever having to take your hands or eyes off the monome controller. Included in the pack:

• obo matrix step sequencer
• pitches for playing notes on the monome
• polygomé 64 for polyphonic, step-sequenced, transposing pitches
• press cafe for repeating patterns of pitches
• spectral display for blinking lights to visualize sound
• step filter step-sequenced filter bank
• automatorgator MIDI- and audio- and OSC- controllable pattern gate

Details and download link (no explicit license coming yet, but Matthew has promised an open license):

maxforlive monome suite released

I got the chance to talk to Matthew about the project, how he created it, how to approach using it, and what it was like working with Max for Live.

All photos by Matthew Davidson; released under a Creative Commons attribution license. Click the images for full-sized versions.

CDM: Can you talk a little bit about what these modules are, and how they fit together, for someone who hasn’t seen them before?

stretta: Obo is like tonematrix as a MIDI plug in. I like analog sequencers because they are tactile. They’re limited, though, so the natural tendency is to add memory to them. I’ve never enjoyed the experience of an analog sequencer with memory. As soon as you add memory, the fun evaporates. You can’t tell where the data matches the knobs, you’re looking at LCD menus… bleah. I’m not saying obo is the answer, as it is a very simple device, but obo (with a monome) does provide a pleasing combination of tactile control, visual feedback and multiple patterns.

Pitches turns the monome surface into a MIDI device. Press a button, get a note. The only issue to resolve is how do you map notes across the grid? One of the first things I did with my monome after I got is was create a pitch grid in columns of fourths and chromatic rows, much like a guitar, but more like a touchstyle instrument like a Warr guitar. I liked the strict grid as it made the geometry of harmony completely portable. The pitches application allows you to customize the interval relationships of the rows and columns and optionally add a modal scale filter on the output so it is pretty much impossible to produce a ‘bad’ note.

Polygomé is one of those things that is most easily explained to people by shoving a monome in their hands. It is kind of like if you took ‘pitches’ and added a step sequencer. You recall the sequence by pressing a button, the sequence is transposed based on which button you start on. Then you can play the sequences polyphonically. Polygomé grew out of this massive, overly complicated project for the 256 I was working on called gomé. The idea was you’d create these geometric patterns then define a ‘path’ or vector across the monome surface that they’d walk across; kind of like how gliders move in the game of life. I was describing this on the monome forums and someone said, "boy, I hope you make this so it works on the 64." I didn’t think there was enough room on the 64 so I re-thought the idea and polygomé was born.

Spectral Display is a non-interactive device that turns the monome into a graphic… well.. spectral display. I developed Spectral Display from vu_spec by [monome creator] Brian Crabtree so this is all his brilliance on display. I merely adapted it to maxforlive.

Press Cafe is another MIDI instrument. The original brilliance of the monome is the fact that the buttons are completely decoupled from the LEDs. Nobody had ever produced a device that did that before. There was always some internally programmed or proscribed functionality that was never entirely suitable for much of anything. So I brainstormed about various ways to leverage this unique ability. Press cafe is a pattern trigger sequencer. It works on any size monome, but if you’re using a 256, you get 16 rhythmic patterns of 16 notes. The rows select which pattern you’re triggering and the columns select which note you’re playing. Naturally, you can use the monome surface itself to edit the patterns.

Step Filter is eight independent sequencers, each triggering a band pass filter. The sequence is edited directly on the monome surface. The real fun begins when you start specifying various loop lengths for each of the filters so they loop independently. You can have one band looping in 7, another lopping in 6, etc…

automatorgator comes in two flavors. One is a MIDI plug in that produces MIDI and OSC automation. The output can be smoothed or stepped. The audio plug-in produces gating effects, or cyclical amplitude modulation.

CDM: What was it like working with Max for Live? How did that impact the way you work?

stretta: I’ve always wanted something like maxforlive. Max lacked a powerful timeline. Most DAWs lacked user-directed internal customization akin to a modular synthesizer. I think this is important for a DAW because it is impossible to be all things to all people. I’d hesitate to say much more because my experience with maxforlive is limited to a couple months thus far and there is so much yet to explore. I would be seriously happy for years on a deserted island with this tool, provided there was some mechanism to share my work with others.

Max 5 brought some concepts like a global transport and the ability to specify time values in a metric-centric way. So, instead of milliseconds and samples, you can think in terms of quarter notes and eight notes. Then maxforlive brought all this inside of a functional DAW which made everything more powerful. It is one thing to be able to manipulate audio like play doh. It is another to be able to do it inside a real production environment, using musically-sensible units.

So, maxforlive is a huge leap forward, but the needs of the monome community were a bit more dire. There are applications for the monome that are functional enough to produce a complete musical statement in real time by itself. A good example of this is mlr. You don’t need anything else. My monome applications are not so clever. I never intended for anyone to sit down and try to express something using polygomé in isolation. I figured it would be one tool you’d use in the context of a greater whole. The problem with this is it relegated polygomé and others to the recording studio.

What the monome needed, was, in my opinion, a meta environment that could host multiple monome applications, ensure they were all running in sync, and switch between them on the fly. It would route audio, host virtual instruments, mix everything and add effects. Then you could save a setup and recall everything by opening a single file. If that could be done, then the monome is transformed from this monolithic standalone device, to a piece of integrated performance hardware.

CDM: Many people are now getting started with Max for Live. Any tips for new users?

stretta: The best tip I can offer so far is adding '---' before any data objects. On run, the --- is turned into a unique identifier so the instance is unique. This allows multiple instances of the same maxforlive device with access to their own data. Of course, you may not want to do this, you may want to retain the ability for multiple maxforlive devices to ‘talk’ to each other and share data which is a cool feature. I’ve uploaded a example patch detailing this at the monome wiki called ‘thisinstance’

http://docs.monome.org/doku.php?id=app:thisinstance

CDM: What if someone is interested in this download, but they don’t own a monome? Is there anything they can do with this pack without the hardware?

stretta: Not much. The only application that operates monomeless is obo. However, there may be enough about obo that is interesting to people to justify the download.

CDM: You should be able to adapt to other controllers, though, with some work – correct?

stretta: Sure, it really is simply a matter of tapping into the matrixctrl object and routing to whatever device. My stuff rarely makes use of monome-specific protocols like ledcol, but I’m doing more of that recently for performance reasons.

CDM: Have you seen other Max or monome work that has inspired or impressed you?

stretta: 7up [SevenUpLive 2.0] is an amazing piece of engineering, although it is mostly Java wrapped inside a layer of maxforlive. Buffer Shuffler was the first example that really blew my mind, and the cool part about this is you can open this stuff up and see how it ticks. When I opened up Buffer Shuffler, I was amazed at how little there really is to it, which says a lot about the level of sophistication of the max objects themselves. I still haven’t explored or opened all the devices that are included with maxforlive. It is a simple matter to lift small sections of max code and repurpose it. It is really early on in the life of maxforlive, so I anticipate the learning process to continue and expect to see more interesting creations as the ideas cross pollinate and everyone starts editing everyone else’s work.

Thanks to Matthew for these thoughtful answers. If you have follow-up questions, definitely let us know. And we’ll be interested to see how you work with these tools, or modify them in your own work.

For the latest, be sure to check out stretta’s blog, The Stretta Procedure:

http://stretta.blogspot.com/

maxforlive: monome integration from stretta on Vimeo.

maxforlive: obo from stretta on Vimeo.

Max for Live is now available, fusing the multimedia, visual programming environment of Max/MSP/Jitter with the plug-in hosting and sequencing and clip-launching and recording of Ableton Live. With two complex products interacting, there are plenty of questions to answer. I asked Michael Chenetz, the creator of the online tutorial site and community max4live.info, to tell us what major points we shouldn’t miss.

Here for launch week are Michael’s answers, information on what you get in the box (including videos from Ableton), plus the best video tutorials from Michael’s site to get you oriented in the new tool – and to begin to determine wheterh Max for Live is for you.

1. You get more than a blank slate – Pluggo and more come in the box.

If you’re wondering how to justify the roughly $300 most people will pay for Max for Live – particularly if you aren’t a Max owner and may not be able to do much with it until you learn it – there is some significant relief. The package comes with a number of pretty powerful instruments and effects you can use right away, even if you aren’t going to have much going with your own patches right away. Some (but not all) of the Pluggo collection plug-ins are included. See the full description below.

2. Know your LOM (Live Object Model).

The Live Object Model describes how your Max patch interacts with all the stuff Live does. It looks complex, but it’s basically a hierarchy that allows you to connect to many of the clip, set, and control surface functions in live. (Not all – see below.) The LOM is to the Live API as the NYC subway map is to the NYC subway – it’s the map that describes the thing that helps you get around.

Interaction with Live is, of course, a big part of the appeal of Max for Live. After all, while you can build sequencers and instruments and effects and video players, you could do that before – it’s the promised integration that’s new.

Live integration currently includes both the ability to provide user interface elements for your patch that appear within Live’s Device display – and behave (mostly) as built-in Devices would – and hooks into Live’s own behavior.

You can do almost anything with the Live Object Model and the Live API, but here’s one notable catch:

3. You can’t access absolute Clip position, or directly update clips.

Michael writes, “Accessing absolute Clip position is currently not available. Please do not ask again. They know and they are working on it. :-)”

Update: The Live API is also not yet as complete in its capabilities as the mouse. As noted in comments, you can’t directly add audio and MIDI clips, either.

4. You can’t use SysEx.

System Exclusive messages are currently filtered in Live and thus not available through a Max for Live patch. This allows Live to use those messages for interaction with control surfaces. However, you can access some control surface functions through the Live API, so while that won’t help with everything you might want to do with hardware using SysEx, it should be useful for some tasks.

This does illustrate a case in which there’s still some advantage to applications that access input and output independently from the host.

5. You can use Open Sound Control.

OSC is the next-generation, networkable, human-readable messaging standard for multimedia.There’s still no native support in Live for OSC. But as a Max for Live user, you have the same access to OSC that you would in Max, via TCP or UDP. That means one big role for Max for Live is likely to be mapping input from OSC-sending tools like iPhone controllers and other software to and from Live.

max4live.info: Tutorial M4L Lemur and OSC from max4live on Vimeo.

6. You can control Live-ready control surfaces like the APC40, Launchpad.

Devices like the Launchpad, APC40, and any of the control surfaces you see defined in the Live Control Surfaces dialog should be able to be addressed right from Max for Live patches. Correction: It seems only “official” Ableton devices, currently meaning the APC40 and Launchpad, are supported, though you can communicate with anything else via MIDI (just not set up as a control surface per se, as a MIDI input device). Michael writes, “If you use a hardware controller the is made for Ableton, then you can access its functions through the Live API control_surface object. Basically made-for-Ableton devices differentiate themselves by using Python scripts in the MIDI Rremote directory that define the functions available in Live.”

Now, the interesting twist here is that, as far as I know, this should work not only for Ableton-approved devices like the APC40, but also for scripts like those for the KORG Nano Series we’ve run here on CDM. You might actually want to hack together your own interactions with Max patches instead of using these control surface options for those controllers, however. This will obviously be something we cover more over time.

7. You can store presets for Max within a Live Set.

This is where the integration gets really cool. You can not only load specific Max creations with a set, but presets inside your patches.

8. Max, Jitter, and MSP are accessible through Live depending on your License.

For those unfamiliar with Max, it’s divided into three groups of tools and their associated objects. Max is the original part of Max, handling basic math, simple messages and lists, and MIDI. MSP does audio-rate signal processing for sound, synthesis, and effects. Jitter does matrix processing of video, graphics, and 3D geometry.

All three are included, in their entirety, inside Max for Live, and they all work as expected. Audio and MIDI routing aren’t directly accessible, as they come from Live – but that’s what you want. One catch, though, is that Jitter disables its output when you edit patches in Live unless you own a full Max/MSP/Jitter license, separate from your Max for Live license, but that’s something to address in a separate story. All will run inside Live with complete functionality, however.

9. Read the manual – both of them.

RTFM? Michael suggests, “Take the time to learn. Check out the documentation and tutorials available in Live and in Max. There are actually two different areas in which this information exists.”

You’ll find both documentation inside Live itself – where the tutorials are – and in Max for Live. These remain the best place to begin. That said, any documentation online on either Max or its very similar open-source cousin Pd may prove helpful for solving a specific problem.

In other words, look under Live’s manual and Lessons (now found at View > Help View, as seen  below) and in the Help menu and manual and documentation in Max itself.

10. Don’t forget to have fun.

I know, I know – top ten lists are often padded with extraneous filler items. But this is probably the most important thing to mention on this list.

Michael is already a convert, of course, in that he runs a community for the tool, but in talking to him over the last few weeks, he’s been really positive about the experience – even with background in many other development tools. And he has had a great time, and believes other folks will, too.

“It may be a learning experience for new users, but it is definitely worth it in the end,” Michael says.

And maybe that’s the real bottom line – whatever you do, have fun. Having taught Max/MSP in the past (at Brooklyn College, among other places), I’ve noted that sometimes it’s doing really simple things that makes these tools useful. Enjoy what you’re doing, and you’ll be more productive.

What’s in the Box, from Ableton

Ableton provides a video overview above of what comes in Max for Live. Included in the package:

• Step Sequencer: 16-steps, adjustable step size and probability, shift, random mode, real-time MIDI control
• Buffer Shuffler: randomized, shuffled audio reordering with different patterns, beyond what is possible with Beat Repeat
• Loop Shifter: trigger playback with MIDI notes, change rate + loop points + filter, morph between states, auto-play without MIDI
• Pluggo For Live: 40 devices from the original Pluggo collection
• Building blocks from Pluggo: basic functions that can be easily combined into your own creations
• Button matrix step sequencer: a step sequencer for grid controllers like the APC40 and Launchpad. (Apparently only those two “official” devices are currently supported; I’m confirming this.)

Because the devices included with Max for Live are really patches, they can be unlocked, modified, mashed up, or turned into your own creations. That had long been a big advantage of Reaktor, but even the full version of Max/MSP/Jitter, for all its included examples, didn’t have some of these kinds of demonstrations.

UPDATED – Max 5.1, gets some additions too: The new objects – though not these whole patches – are included with Max 5.1. That means that, while they’re a strong incentive for those new to Max, some existing Max users may wind up being satisfied building their stuff in Max and skipping Max for Live. After all, a lot of the live performance rigs today – like the monome’s now-legendary MLR patch, used most famously by Daedelus – don’t rely on any other software. Regardless of what makes sense in your work, it’s nice to see Max 5.1 benefiting from Max for Live’s improvements.

Getting Started Tutorials, from max4live.info

I think the folks at Ableton and Cycling ‘74 expect most people to be interested primarily in making musical instruments and effects. But what I hear from a lot of Live users is that they really want to know more about the API and how they can control Live itself. Michael has put together two fantastic tutorials on the subject.

The first video details how to work with the API and the LOM, so that your patches can interact with what’s happening in the set.

Max For Live Paths, Objects, and Observers from max4live on Vimeo.

The second video talks about how to work with clips.

Max For Live Clips tutorial from max4live on Vimeo.

Pricing

Here’s the simplest breakdown possible:

First, you’ll need a copy of Ableton Live 8 or Ableton Live Suite 8. Earlier versions won’t work, and neither will any of the LE/Lite/Starter editions. You’ll need the full-blown Live. (That’s too bad, in a way, as I imagined the idea of buying the cheapest Live possible and then building everything yourself!)

You own Max 5. You can add Max for Live for US$99/EUR79.

You own Live, but not Max 5. You can add Max for Live for US$299/EUR249.

You don’t own Live 8/Live Suite 8/Max 5. Discounted pricing is available.

You own Pluggo 3, Mode 1, or Hipno 1 or later. A US$49/EUR39 coupon is available via Cycling ‘74.

You own an earlier version of Max. You need to upgrade to Max 5 first. You might consider the Live/Max bundle if you don’t yet own Live.

Academic pricing. There’s no individual academic pricing, and the 9-month Max 5 license doesn’t do anything for you (though you are, as before, eligible for $39 off a full Max 5 copy). Institutions are able to get a discount, though; email Ableton educational sales.

For the record, the version that supports all of this on the Max side is 5.1, and on Live’s side is 8.1.

Where to Go for More Information

Max for Live Product Page

Ableton Max for Live FAQ

Cycling ‘74 Max for Live Product Page + FAQ + Resources

Our friend Andrew Benson did a really wonderful round-up of all the things people are doing with Max for Live. I could plagiarize the thing, but I’ll let you read it at the source. (There are some useful resources in comments, too.)

The Edit Button Has Been Pressed [Cycling ‘74 Blog]

And of course, be sure to follow Michael’s superb resource:

http://www.max4live.info/

Nick Rothwell is also blogging on M4L topics:

http://maxforlive.loadbang.net/