Policy, intellectual property, and changing business models remain hot threads to follow on this site as we watch the transformation of music distribution in the electronic age. This time, we welcome a new contributor to look inside the issues. Surprise: one radio host sides with the record industry, and the issues may not be as clear as you think. Jo explains. –Ed.

Imagine this:  A track from your new record is being played out on the radio — nonstop. All the major indie stations in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Miami and Atlanta have picked it up. At this point, I’m sure you’ve already ordered a fancy synth that you plan to pay for with your big check. But there is a problem: You did an acoustic version of Jimmy Edgar’s “My Beats.” So who gets paid? Jimmy Edgar. Guess who does not get paid? You!

The Performance Rights Act is a bill before the US Congress that would require terrestrial radio stations to pay royalties to the performer of a track. It is being supported by artists like Billy Corgan (who recently testified on behalf of the artists’ rights group, the musicFIRST coalition) Don Henley, Jay-Z, Billy Idol, as well as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). Aside from the issue of “fairness,” the United States is one of the few countries that does not require payment to the performing artist when her track is played on the radio.

Celia Hirschman, host of “On the Beat” on Los Angeles’ KCRW public radio, a broadcast on changes and trends in the music business, says she agrees with the act. (Celia notes these are her personal views, and do not necessarily reflect the position of KCRW.)

“For decades, the laws have favored a free license to play artists’ music on radio,” says Hirschman. “This was ratified by Congress and basically accepted by all concerned…This free pass no longer makes any sense, especially for commercial radio. A reasonable compulsory license fee for all radio, with lower rates to non-commercial is an equitable solution for artists and labels.  Commercial radio stations earn their income by selling advertising because of their programming content.  It’s only fair that the content providers are compensated.”

“This free pass no longer makes any sense.”

Celia Hirschman, host of “On the Beat” on KCRW

Opposing the bill is the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) who claim the legislation amounts to a “tax” and will force many radio stations to go bankrupt. Additionally, opponents of the bill point out that many artists were first discovered because of radio exposure, which translates into sales (ticket sales, album sales and merchandise) and promotion of their brand. If the station goes under, so does the performing artists’ potential income.

Dennis Wharton, EVP of NAB, claims that the RIAA “relies on cherry-picking international examples that paint a distorted picture of copyright law.” “The US protects sound recordings for 45 years longer than Canada and many countries in Europe, says Wharton. “If it’s “international parity” that RIAA is looking for, they ought to examine the entire landscape.”

In fact, the international landscape is not equal.  Many countries in Europe run stations owned or subsidized by government funding. The foundation of our copyright laws are different as well. In the United States, we use the term “copyright” whereas many European countries use a term equivalent to “author’s rights.” “Copyright” reflects an attitude that is concerned with the restriction of uses for economic reasons, whereas the term “author’s rights” reflects an attitude that is concerned with the extension of the author’s intellect and self.

I recently spoke with Brian Lee Corber, an IP attorney who has closely followed the Performance Rights Act. In his opinion the bill will not pass. “Collecting royalties for the songwriter is already inaccurate; it’s based off of surveys. Logistically, collecting royalties for the performer is even more complicated…what happens when the performer is an orchestra?” Corber feels this logistical nightmare may make it difficult for the legislature to justify passing this bill.

As a reaction to the Performance Rights Act, NAB is backing the Local Radio Freedom Act which calls for no tax or fee for the performance of a sound recording on the radio. As of March 24th, 9 more lawmakers signed onto the Local Radio Freedom Act, making the total number of co-sponsors 158.

For More Information:

Music First Coalition: www.musicfirstcoalition.org

National Association of Broadcasters: www.nab.org

KCRW: www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/ob

Sources:

Dougherty, F. Jay. Copyright Law Class at Loyola Law School, March 24, 2009.

“Mr. Corgan goes to Washington for a Bigger Piece of the Radio Pie”

http://blogs.suntimes.com/derogatis/2009/03/updated_mr_corgan_goes_to_wash.html

“NAB disputes RIAA Claim Ahead of Performance Rights Hearing”

http://radioink.com/Article.asp?id=1206143

“NAB, musicFIRST go Head-to-Head on Royalties”

http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=1235167

“Smashing Pumpkins Singer, Billy Corgan Testifies Before Congress”

http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/news-smashing-pumpkins-singer-billy-corgan-testifies-before-congress

Los Angeles-based CDM contributor Jo Ardalan is the Managing Director and Founder of Fixed Noise, a community-based company specializing in audio software development, artist management and business development in tech and entertainment.

She’s a veteran of Waxploitation and Native Instruments, an experienced sound designer and engineer, and consultant.

And she has a Reaktor tattoo.

Enough of the empty cheerleading. Web-only networking can have a dark side, too — and the music community can do better. Playing devil’s advocate this week to one-dimensional Web 2.0 optimism, we welcome Dave Dri, musician, producer, and founder of Segue. -PK

I write a column for a weekly street press magazine in Australia. The vast majority of the universe won’t have picked up that magazine, of course. But my topic this week has been bouncing around Interwebs, cafes, and clubs like an alarm clock, waking the electronic music community from a happy slumber. The cause for alarm: the dire state of expectations amongst electronic music producers, digital labels and online stores.

Thanks For The Add!!!

For the host of fresh-faced producers who know only digital labels and online stores, the process of making and releasing music is relatively seamless, and entirely virtual. Countless producers have access to affordable computing power, an endless choice of software, and the ease of uploading to sites like Myspace and Purevolume. For much of this generation, the idea of marketing begins and ends with “thanks for the add!!”. Even veteran producers and performers can be lulled into the steady hypnosis of the Web and its links, emails and forum posts.

The process of song writing often finds a global audience almost as soon as one can come up with a catchy, if eventually regrettable, artist name and an upload of the latest renders. Imagine their surprise when a weekend of link farming across MySpace yields a reply from a digital record label showing interest in one or more tracks. Some emails bounce back and forth, the artist agrees to a 50% share of the profits and, soon enough, the label has uploaded a new release to Beatport. What’s not to love about this system? The producer feels validated as a “real life producer guy”, the label has another release on its books and the wheels of the music industry keep rolling.

The Back In My Day Bit

What’s wrong with this process is, basically, everything. As a contrast, let’s look at the previous generation of producers and live acts. This generation existed on the cusp of technology change and would have its feet grounded in the almost unthinkable days prior to cry of “thanks for the add!!!” These artists swapped tracks on CD-R’s with other producers in their local area and shopped and networked with local records stores by virtue of their primary access to local music alone. They stressed over refining and releasing actual EPs. They met, partied, and bought and sold music with other DJ’s, producers, promoters and music press. They refined their DJ skills or live performances and pushed music as a part of a growing local scene. They knew the local street press writers and sent out promos, hung up posters and generally interacted with the real world. IRL – in real life.

One might suggest that while the younger producers are adding each other to friend lists, the veteran live acts and producers are still out working the venues, pushing discs into the hands of promoters, and doing such wild things as asking for interviews and promotions in street press. As I asked a Web forum recently, guess what the proportion is between digital labels and producers sending MySpace and Facebook messages, versus those actually sending well-written press releases and calling to ask for interviews and promotional assistance? The answer is pretty dire, and quite telling.

Take The Red Pill

If anything positive can be taken from the state of the current industry, then it should be a revisiting of the basic ideas of the music industry. Artists should be backing up their passion for music by investing more efforts into creating better music, and pursuing the best deals from the best labels by building their profile through real-world networking and performances. Labels should be sourcing the best artists, artists whoare actually working to push their own music in the real world, and developing them with the aid of a strong network of industry captains, DJs, credible promoters and all the existing and fringe music media. That means actually writing press releases, actually getting out and meeting people, and following up important emails with phone calls. Most importantly, it’s asking for coverage across the full spectrum of media and constantly developing reasons why the act deserves it.

Really, one might say it just boils down to effort. Why an artist wants to give music to a label that spends little effort promoting a release is as hard to fathom as a label wanting to sign an artist who spends little effort creating their art and profile. Maybe your local community and musical genre mirrors these examples; maybe not. But electronic music has little to lose and everything to gain from more effort and more real-world local community.

Oh — and, before I forget, thanks for the add!

Ed.: Now, of course, I’m not going to slam online communities, seeing as I, erm, run one. But I kept thinking while reading Dave’s article how much online tools can help power real-world connections. We’ve had extraordinary opportunities getting together for events like Handmade Music. I still swap CDs. (Bet your laptop still has a CD burner, huh? It runs at, what, 60x now?) I hate press releases, even when they’re well-written. But I love real-world connections.

That’s, of course, just the beginning. So to reframe Dave’s challenge, how can we use online tools to make meatspace connections easier and more powerful, for indie artists and labels alike? How can we start raising expectations again? -PK

Squarepusher has taken over the music page of the Guardian, and the results bring joy and smiles to children and the young at heart. Just how great is it when Squarepusher is in charge?

Music singles are complete and utter fluff, and he’s not afraid to say so, picking them apart one at a time like an angry, deconstructionist Casey Kasem.

Noise and Italian Futurists get their due. Fluxus is the sort of cinema that accompanies your popcorn.

A gentleman drops by to talk about aesthetic theory, and … uh, something about how great Steve Reich is. Got a little lost on that one, in fact (not that I don’t love aesthetic theory and Mr. Reich).

Squarepusher (and Alex Thomas) demonstrate what music can sound like if you’re a musician. (Note: no fancy delays necessary to make it sound like they’ve got rhythm. Quite unlike when I’m playing, in fact. Well, not that I’m much good with Drum and Bass anyway. That’s real Drum and Bass, you see.)

And best of all, he provides commentary for the above video.

"Sometimes I cave right in." As he walked along the edge of the field, the earth seemed to splinter at each step. A glance along the cold hedgerow hurt his eye. Everything he looked at sent dread through his viscera, none the less sharp for all of its familiarity. Stones underfoot seemed to chatter and sneer, the Luton-grey sky was an idiotic, mocking expanse. He paused at the brook, cold dirty glass. Dull pain accompanied a frame of memory; he had bathed his feet here as a boy. Nearly losing his balance, he said, out loud as if to silence the roaring dead air of the November morning: "That water is too shallow to drown myself in."

The Luton-grey sky was an idiotic, mocking expanse, indeed.

It feels good to hate that video.

Enjoy.

Thanks, wesen and Resident Advisor, via Twitter.

Marc “Nostromo” Resibois, aka “m.-.n,” lives the digital life of computers. The Belgian musician and hacker [@MySpace] is renowned as a Game Boy musician, as the inventor of legendary Nintendo tracker LittleGPTracker, and even has a day job as a programmer for VJ software maker Arkaos. But lately, his thoughts have turned to more traditional synthesis hardware – hardware that acts as tiny computers. Nothing is going to shake me from my love of computers, but that doesn’t mean I’m not interested in having what he describes sitting next to mine. Here’s what he imagines – and it’s a variation on a theme I think we’ll see a lot in the coming weeks and months here on CDM. And without giving away the punchline, that Nintendo DS is going to make another appearance.

I’ve always loved small, self-contained units. Because I’m a software guy, I’ve been developing music software on handheld consoles for years. I love these little guys. They are tiny, fairly powerful, and their physical interface gives you a good amount of control, leading to a growing stack of interesting applications.

However, recently, a couple of interesting projects started to emerge from the hardware side of things. That makes it possible to start dreaming about building your own little synth, even for people like me who can’t even deal with sticky tape.

My first hands-on with hardware was when I started fiddling with the Arduino piano. You might argue that once it’s built, it’s still software platform, but I really enjoy working on this bit of kit. The interaction is even more straightforward than game consoles: press a button, turn a knob, and get sound. Although it might seem limited compared to software synths, it also has dimensions that a lot of virtual instruments lack. I’ll call these qualities depth and exclusivity.

Depth: When you turn a pot on this hardware, you’re really in control. You may argue there’s a lot of controllers out there, but compared to the 1024-level resolution of the Arduino, standard MIDI Control Changes turn out to be bogus for smoothly controlling parameters. Just playing with the default FM patch of the Arduino piano makes it obvious. [Ed.: Of course, I will add there are ways around this – higher-resolution MIDI control messages, plug-in automation, OpenSoundControl, and audio-rate / audio-stream control, to mention a few, not to mention even simple interpolation of lower-resolution MIDI controll messages. But then, we’re talking a very, very cheap piece of hardware on the Arduino, so there’s a big point here. –PK]

Exclusivity: When you play with hardware like the Arduino piano, it’s the only thing you do. You can’t fire Google or start reading your mail, and I think it’s really valuable. Every music "tool" should be able to immerse you enough so that the rest of the world doesn’t exist. All computer-based synths have failed to do that for me.

Of course, the greatest thing of all is that this domain is only at its very beginning. It’s a small spore in your hands waiting to morph to the next level. You decide its fate. And that’s where it gets exciting. Playing with the Arduino piano and looking at it as a synth development platform, I started to think about what I could dream of making with it. What would make it "timeless" for me, using existing available technology?

Here’s what I ended up with:

1. The core: At this point, it doesn’t really matter if we’re talking Arduino, Propeller or any other chip. The point is that there are programmable chips out there that will support development of your very own personal synth. They might run at very low sample rate, they might have the tiniest memory for programs, but they have soul. In the 80s, when digital synths hit the mainstream market, they were likewise limited in resources. Still, they were powerful enough to be admired and loved.

2. The engine: Ideally, the processor should be fast enough to allow a fairly configurable synth engine — something that would allow switching between ‘presets’. You don’t want to have to flash the chip every time you want a new sound. It doesn’t take a major CPU to be able to do something decent. For proof of that, look at Korg’s DS-10 running 6 parameterized synths on a lowly Nintendo DS. Maybe the Arduino is too limited to be a good enough candidate for this, but there are plenty of other possible platforms.

3. Controllers: As I already mentioned, direct hardware control is a joy that can’t be overstated. Having high-resolution pots connected directly to the chip provides an easy and cheap way to tweak your sounds in real-time, in ways you’ve probably forgotten (assuming you haven’t recently used analog hardware and the like). Let’s call them generic controllers: we want them to act in the most expressive way depending on the ‘presets’ that were built for the synth engine.

4. The keyboard: It doesn’t take long playing with the Arduino piano to realize the keyboard is not going to take you very far. Not being a keyboard player myself, my idea is to ditch it and keep a few switches for direct action like switching patches, transposing, etc. I’m pretty sure there should be a way to integrate a decent keyboard in this setup, but how to do that is beyond my reach. One could trigger the sound with just a button. A few pots and a “push me” button – sound familiar? Ed.: See the Dave Smith Mopho, though generally people are hooking MIDI keyboards to it so they can easily input pitch. But then, why use a keyboard at all? Quite a few synth lovers regret the addition of keyboards to synths, because they don’t allow for expression between notes, as on instruments like violins or the human voice. I’m not sure a single button is an improvement, but then, you could create the architecture of the synth to easily allow analog input, thus enabling anything you want. -PK

5. The deep end: This is where it gets fun. So far, we’ve got something fairly basic — running a synth on a chip, triggering sound, and having patch-based control on expression parameters. What could make this synth totally self-contained would to some means for editing sounds from the unit itself. There was a recent post on Analog Industries wondering whether people preferred a simple interface or access to all parameters. In my view, an ideal synth should provide both: when editing a patch, you should get access to all the parameters. When playing it, you should get access to only those parameters that make sense for the sound. The first example I remember of this is the Nord Modular: it provides modes geared for a sound designer or a performer. That’s true with the wonderful morphing effect rack in Ableton Live or the generic parameters of the aforementioned Mopho. But how to do this in a small, self-contained unit? The pots give us a performance mode, but the challenge is how to navigate the deeper possibilities of editing a synth engine? I just don’t want to have to use a computer. I’d be checking Facebook or uploading moods to Twitter instead of making noise.

There happens to be a mobile, compact unit that could be perfect for the job, however: the Nintendo DS. It’s got a small form factor, a few additional hardware controlers, a very playable touchscreen, and a serial interface that could enable bi-directional communication with the synth engine. By throwing the NDS in the picture, we could gain:

• A user interface to edit the synth’s parameters (why not implement a touchscreen based VCS3 type matrix, for example?)
• The possibility of running a small sequencer
• Some additional performance capabilities, a la Kaoss Pad, to control the synth.

So in the end, we have a hardware/software hybrid that’s very powerful, yet fits in a very small form factor, and whose cost (beside the blood, sweat, and tears of building the whole thing) wouldn’t go past the USD 300 mark.

Anyone with too much time on their hands? I’d like one, please :)

Ed.: Some really interesting ideas here. I’m not sure I’m so crazy about the Nintendo DS as a closed platform, though. Reimagine this more broadly as hardware DSP / embedded microcontroller synth engine plus some sort of small mobile computer, and you’ve got lots and lots of possibilities. I’m not tossing my computer – I can close the Internet and focus on music for a while even on a computer – but even as a lover of sound design on a computer, I find all of this very tantalizing. I also know we have some other folks working in similar directions and on other mobile ideas, so stay tuned. -PK

What do you say when it’s all been said? We felt it was time for a fresh perspective on the MPC phenomenon — one a normal review couldn’t provide. So we got the opinion of our friend, samplist/producer and Segue member Dave Dri. And the verdict: there’s still something about an MPC — even if it suggests why there’s also something about software, too. But it involves dust. Here’s his op-ed:

Recently I had the task of reviewing an MPC5000 for a local street press magazine. The MPC part of it was fine — the word limit was trickier. Over the last decade I have reviewed the MPC2000XL and the MPC1000, with a lot of time and gigs passing between them. From early days in a live breaks act to my current progressive house act, an MPC has been right under hand. In the week that I reluctantly handed the 5000 back to Musiclab, the drummer that guested in my band at the Big Day Out festival asked me to play keys and samples in his band at a local festival. [Ed.: Our own Jaymis filmed the Big Day Out gig if you want to check it out.] I found myself in a chance conversation with a friend from the live breaks act Bitrok and the very next day, somehow, I’m on stage with his MPC2500 — a unit which I have since bought. So why did reviewing an MPC5000 lead to me buying an MPC2500 after years of happy service from an invincible MPC2000XL?

If you’re reading this, you probably know what an MPC is, and you can readily review any number of link-bait Google results for the product mentioned in the title of this post. [Ed. Hmmmm, link-baiting MPC's, huh? "10 Ways an MPC is Like a Cupcake"? "15 of the Best MPC YouTube Videos Featuring Hot Women MPCers?" perhaps? -PK]

What you probably want to know is what it’s really like. So I will tell you.

Changes, Rants, and Internet Haters

It’s big. Really big. In fact, it’s so large that it couldn’t fit on the Jerker desk that forms the core of my studio rig, and spent its review loan period on a keyboard stand. In a particularly amusing moment I happened to glance at a nearby MacBook with an Akai MPD-16 controller plugged in to it and formed an unfounded suspicion that the sheer size was simply a ploy by Akai to appeal to some demographic that might use the MPC5000 as the core, if not entirety, of their studio. Would Akai deliberately oversize their hardware to appeal to bling-savvy producers?

It’s got a new screen. Getting past the size, the next comment is usually on the screen. Long-time MPC users with older models are delighted with the display being adjustable in both position and contrast. As one might imagine, navigation and editing benefits immediately, and the old Shift+Number menu system is replaced with context-sensitive Mode and Window buttons. By this point things are getting off to a great start. All the basics work as they should, and getting around the unit is old hat to anyone who has touched an MPC.

It’s a synth – but will it replace other synths? Then we find ourselves exploring the onboard synthesizer emulation that Akai claim “eliminates need for external analog synth modules or buggy software based synthesizers.” We will touch on the concept of buggy software in a minute, but I think we can safely ground the private fantasy jet that Akai seem to be flying around in with the notion that their VA emulation is somehow a replacement for external analog synth modules. As you would expect, the preset patches have a liberal use of the word “Moog” and sound nothing like one. Even worse, it soon becomes clear that you need to load a patch into memory to even preview it. As Just Blaze says on his MPC5000 rant, this is 2008. Having to spend studio time loading a synth patch just to preview to it is ridiculous, and was something that Yamaha seemed to avoid with their RM1X back in the mid to late 1990’s.

As to the marketing claims of “avoiding buggy software”, this is, of course, a point of instant ridicule for anyone who has owned first-generation Akai hardware. If there is any company deserving of an award for consistently disappointing software programming it would be Akai. Optimists like to say that 1.0 OS implementations are likely to have a few issues that soon get fixed, but that kind of logic in the automotive industry would cost lives. In the same sense, broken functionality or crashing operating systems can limit creative output. For a device that costs as staggering an amount as the MPC5000 (MSRP US$3500), it is inexcusable to release such a flagship product without appropriate testing and debugging. It’s not like the world was clamouring for a massive, heavy, expensive hardware sequencer with onboard virtual analog synth emulation. Again I will point to hip-hop producer Just Blaze and his rant at Akai for the state they released the MPC5000. [Ed.: This is not an official CDM comment or my comment on Akai's reliability, because, frankly, I haven't used one. So if anyone wants to add to the rants here or question them -- and perhaps comment on how firmware updates have settled -- I'm all ears; please do so in comments! -PK]

In Australia right now, for the same price as the MPC5000, one is able to purchase a rig such as an Asus laptop, Motu Ultralite audio interface (site | on CDM), Ableton 7 and an MPD drum pad MIDI controller interface. Then again, you couldn’t simply turn it on and start making music out of the box. Despite the need for hardware that simply works, Akai simply cannot afford to rely on Roger Linn’s (on CDM) clever idea from the 1980’s any longer without actually following through on their product promises. Akai commentary aside, this isn’t an outright attack on the MPC5000. Not by any means. The parent company may attract comments on internet forums like “they be smoking crack mangz”, but their products do have a place in the market. This is where anyone left reading can take a deep breath and bask in some hints of genius.

MPC5000’s Brilliant Bits

The MPC5000 does indeed have enough promise to warrant its place on the shelves of your favourite music store or in the database of your choice of online retailer. For a start, the filters and Q-link faders are stunning. Noticing the in-built pre-amp (that Akai have finally copied from their competitors) included in the MPC, I hooked my trusty Vestax turntable and randomly grabbed a record – in this case, one of those James Last records you can’t but trip over in Australian record stores. With it spinning, I pushed record, grabbed a good 20 seconds, mapped the sample to a pad and the pad to a program. Going into sample edit mode, I enjoyed the large screen and multiple faders for adjusting start and end points without the 2000XL style scrolling or shift fader. On a whim, I bumped the resonance on the filter. It took about 5 seconds for me to fall in love with the potential of these filters. Sweeping low, I turned Tijuana trumpets into a resonant sub bass that swept up with my fader movements into the kind of pitched build-up that is still all over progressive house. Sample transformed.

Grabbing other samples from sources less dubious, I began to simply enjoy the hands-on creativity that sampling so effectively enables. Whether you’re a fan of the Sonalksis TBK filter or run your samples through an old Korg MS-20, there is something to be said for the creative aesthetic that comes with a simple sampler, some records and some decent filters. Do I see some heads nodding in agreement over in the French House corner?

Conclusion: Dusty Fingers

So, after a lengthy rant, I managed to say some nice things about the filters and the aesthetic of the MPC. Unfortunately, all specifications and feature sheets aside, the legacy of the MPC series is and always will be the elusive concept of feel, aesthetic, and groove. Once upon a time, this might have been currency to spend on lengthy, impassioned essays to enraptured audiences. These days, the proponents of the tradition of MPC groove tend to get short thrift amongst their contemporaries, who program the same boom bap beats in Fruity Loops, on Roland Grooveboxes and — lest we forget — Madlib’s infamous Roland SP303. There’s a certain element of buying an MPC that’s just down to being down with the MPC format. Plenty of internet forum arguments are waged over hardware versus software, Akai versus Roland, this versus that, purple versus magenta.

Ignoring the actual conflict, it’s obvious that there is something passionate about the range. For me, the MPC5000 reignited a passion that had fallen behind with the 2000XL’s user experience, compared to my workflow in Ableton and Battery. Despite relying on the old grey box for live shows, I had forgotten the unique outcomes of dusty fingers, hands on vinyl, samples on sampler. And it managed to do that in spite of its size, cost, weight and bugs. Once Akai iron out the last of the issues, there is no doubt that this will be a success amongst those producers who are set on hardware sequencing in the box with all the trimmings. For me, the MPC range has been an extension of DAW workflow more than an alternative. In that light, I am content in the MPC2500 bringing crate digging and sampling enjoyment back into my studio and replacing my trusty 2000XL in the flight case at gigs. If the idea of the MPC5000 appeals to you, then I would urge you to test it out for yourself. If you already have then let us know how you found it in the comments below!

Dave Dri is an MPC-wielding Samplist and Producer from Brisbane, Australia. He has been involved with a variety electronic acts running the gamut from Breaks to Jungle. His current project is Segue.

Wallace is CDM’s resident turntablist, and he’s also immune to blind gear lust. I’m waiting to pass judgment until I get first-hand contact with Xponent, but I’m equally confused from a product perspective. Now, let’s see — we could copy and paste a press release here. Or we could try Wally. I just hope we’re able to figure out what he really thinks. -PK

Let me get this straight – an overpriced control surface is what’s gonna change DJing?

M-Audio Torq Xponent

M-Audio announced their Xponent control surface/USB audio interface today, and this long-time DJ is distinctly underwhelmed. You know, when all there was to the SynchroScience line was the Torq software, the Conectiv and the X-Session Pro, I had this idea that they were building this mini-galaxy of interoperable DJ gear that one could purchase bit by bit and eventually put together a nice, integrated digital DJ system with all the bells and whistles. However, the emergence of the Xponent today turns out to be a bit of a head scratcher.

First of all, where are the inputs? It’s got 2 sets of RCA outputs, but no inputs. This thing neither encompasses the functionality of the Conectiv nor does it look like it really works with it. Sure, if I’m a Mac user I can create an aggregate audio device with the Xponent and the Conectiv, but given that Windows users CAN’T do this, I get a pretty strong feeling that this thing is not designed to work alongside the Conectiv.

OK, so let’s judge it on it’s own. MSRP $750 for a USB 1.1 audio interface and MIDI control surface made of plastic? It’s colorful, I’ll give it that – but it doesn’t even have 1/4″ jacks on it. Where’s the mic input? This thing is designed strictly for the person who wants to DJ with their computer and the Xponent and THAT’S IT. You know, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe it’s designed to be the replacement for one’s DJ CD players for the DJ who DOESN’T want to DJ mp3s on their turntables, in which case, that DJ is a luddite and probably not going to be attracted to something like this.

OK, so maybe it’s a nice control surface for people who want to DJ with Ableton Live. Still though, I wonder if those people don’t already have an audio interface for their laptop, in which case, why would they want to spend $675-700 street on this when they could get the much slicker-looking Vestax VCI-100 control surface for $499?

I just don’t understand. I think M-Audio has missed a real opportunity here by not making this something that either works with or includes the functionality of the Conectiv. However, one thing I do understand is this — any manufacturer out there who promises that they’re going to “change DJing” has a shiny new piece of plastic to sell, and that’s about it.