Inside this compact white box lurks a lot of sonic power and technical prowess. Perhaps that explains why the newest version of the open source Shruthi-1 now sports a crazy-badass wolf dog cartoon with glowing eyes.

Since its launch, the Shruthi-1 has gradually evolved new features, with a fairly sophisticated combination of hardware and extensive software. At its core, it’s a “hybrid” synth with digital/virtual analog oscillators and real-analog filter. The digital oscillators allow it to change character, for classic virtual analog subtractive, or wavetable, FM, phase distortion, and vowel synthesis.

The big news with the filter is that the various flavors of filter board are now discontinued. Sadly, the wonderful CEM3379 filter chip is just too rare to have a long-term home in this synth; the Shruthi-1, like other synths (the Dark Energy being a recent example) has hit chip scarcity.

But in its place is something else new and wonderful. The SSM2164 (uh, that doesn’t roll of the tongue, but yes, that filter) combines 15 filter responses with four resonance models, for a total of 60 possible filter sounds. See also the Oberheim Matrix-12 and Xpander for pole-mixing techniques. You also get self-oscillation, and even a Korg DS-inspired diode waveshaper. (I won’t go into any more detail, as maker Mutable describes this in gory precision.)

In a way, the Shruthi-1 – despite its minimal knobs – really hides a semi-modular instrument, one with its own built-in arpeggiator, modulation matrix, duophony, rhythmical oscillator cycling, and lots of other features. If there’s a technical feature possible – just about any feature – the Shruthi-1 does it. Combined with that terrific filter and digital grunge, I think it’s a terrific deal in desktop synths.

In fact, my only real criticism is, it does so much, you’re likely to be stuck paging through menus – or should focus on MIDI programming – because of the minimal controls. I can see why members of the Shruthi-1 community have been building expansion controllers for it to get more hands-on control. But on the other hand, to me, it’s entirely worth the tradeoff going compact – even with a complex menu system. The result is a synth that’s far more affordable and portable. It’s a natural for MIDI users.

The new design is also unquestionably the best-looking Shruthi yet, thanks to translucent white plexiglass and white LED lighting. 130 € buys you the kit (plus another 20 € in parts), but I’d strongly recommend the pre-assembled version if you’re less familiar with bigger builds. There are a lot of parts and two boards, plus a pretty white circuit board that will look grimy if you don’t solder carefully. For experienced builders, it should be a great assembly process into which you’ll want to sink your teeth, wolf-like. But for less-experienced builders – or just people who want to get straight to making sound – I think 349 € is a small price to ask. (A carry bag and European wall wart are included.) Just grab the pre-built version fast; because they’re hand-assembled, they won’t last long.

Full details:
Shruthi-1, 4-Pole Mission edition

Be sure to have a listen to the way the new stuff sounds:

The other important thing to mention about the Shruthi-1 is that it’s a fully open source synth. (An earlier version prohibited commercial use, but it now uses a more permissive license.) The best way to see what lurks inside is to check out GitHub. Apart from being able to modify the Shruthi-1 hardware and software design, there’s a library you can use in your own projects:

https://github.com/pichenettes/shruthi-1

This also means the Shruthi-1 joins our own MeeBlip among open source synths. I’ve been a bit amused at people comparing the two, because what I like about the Shruthi is that it’s basically MeeBlip’s opposite. We kept the design of the MeeBlip as minimal as possible, both with an eye to keeping one-to-one hardware controls and making modification simpler. The Shruthi is lovely because it’s the reverse: it retains a small footprint, but packs lots of sonic options. It’s the maximal alternative.

I’m just happy that the hardware landscape in general offers loads of great choices for people wanting to augment their computer soft synths with hardware. Who says the synthesizer’s best days are in the past?

Who says you can’t make your own consumer electronics? David A. Mellis, a co-creator of Arduino who now is starting a PhD in Leah Buechley’s group, High-Low Tech, at the MIT Media Lab, has shared his Fab Speakers, an open source, portable speaker project:

These portable speakers are made from laser-cut wood, fabric, veneer, and electronics. They are powered by three AAA batteries and compatible with any standard audio jack (e.g. on an iPhone, iPod, or laptop).

Why open source them? Mellis says he designed the speakers to be affordable and easy to assemble, in the hopes that he would “see changes or additions that I didn’t think about and to have those changes shared publicly for others to use or continue to modify.” Speakers are perhaps ideal for this exercise: the housing matters, both aesthetically and functionally, and because a speaker is something relatively straightforward and simple, it’s easy to imagine modifications that retain the basic role of the design.

Big-league design blog Core77 takes note of what sharing this design can mean, as Mellis turns to designer Sarah Pease to imagine an alternative housing:

Here’s a great example of what can happen when experimental research is documented and posted on the web with plenty of explanation and resources. RISD student Sarah Pease, a junior in Furniture Design, took part in an independent study with the High-Low Tech Group at MIT’s Media Lab this past Fall.

Sarah Pease turns to something you probably already have in your house:

Using readily available household items and basic construction methods allow for even further customization and flexibility of the Fab Speakers. Varying jar shapes/sizes can be mixed with alternate feet for different looks.

High-Low Tech Research Group Project’s Jarring Effect

Building speakers was once a common activity, to the point that many, many musicians made their own speakers or amps or simple effect circuits. For all the excitement over DIY these days, a lot of people don’t have this experience – but with Internet documentation, the time is right for more.

Indeed, I’m keen to hear from people who do have experience building speakers: what might improve the sound quality of this design, and looks aside, what would be the best housing shapes and materials?

In the meantime, I’ll have to give this a try:
Fab Speakers [David Mellis @ MIT Media Lab]

http://sarahpease.com/audioJar

More pics:

Via comments, here’s yet another design – Jon Moeller’s adorable “owl” speakers:
http://moeller.io/owl-speakers.html

I have a bunch of jars, so I may need to give the jars a try here.

The original vision of the MeeBlip was to make something affordable, something open and hackable, something anyone could get, something that could tell a story, and something we’d use to make some music. And since those are all goals of Create Digital Music, too, it’s a perfect physical compliment to what we do. For me, personally, it means putting my money where my (blogging) mouth is. It’s a chance to learn.

So that makes this a really special week. It hasn’t been easy getting here, but now the MeeBlip begins its second chapter.

This week, we’re announcing availability of the MeeBlip SE. US$139 (intro price) buys you a version you can put together in a few minutes with just a screwdriver, a complete, MIDI-capable digital hardware synth. (We ship most places worldwide – and we’re shipping now.) Through incredible work by the MeeBlip’s principal designer, Canadian James Grahame, the SE revises our original design:

• It’s more playable. With lots of feedback from users (and extended chats with Francis Preve of Keyboard Magazine and Academik Records), we made the control layout more logical and more fun to play.
• It’s got a greater sonic range. Anti-aliasing on/off, and a variable pulse width knob combine with more unusual features like its digital distortion and intentionally-quirky digital filter.
• Everything responds to MIDI. If there’s a knob or switch on the front panel, there’s a MIDI parameter – and vice versa. Whether you use your hand or a MIDI message, everything is accessible.
• It stores patches. 16 patch slots accessible from the front panel mean you can use your favorite sounds live, and you can store them somewhere other than your brain.

And you can get one right now. (MeeBlip SE, and for DIYers, either the SE Build Everything version or the compact micro board.)

But, of course, as we learned how to make the synth better, we learned a lot more about how to make the business of making a synth better. Learning is wonderful: I’ve been floored by seeing what people have done with these instruments, by seeing them pop up in unexpected places and making brilliant, unexpected sounds. Learning is also painful. We made some mistakes, as demand for the MeeBlip went beyond what we expected, and the limitations of the chip we chose made developing our more ambitious ideas take longer than we wanted.

In other words, users have been incredibly inspiring – reality has sometimes been incredibly challenging – and those are the two things that have moved us forward.

So, it’s now a daily task to work on ways of making the MeeBlip more accessible, more available, and better.

While we work on that, you can now find all of our schematics and code – including many, many hours of James’ work, in particular – on GitHub. Axel Werner, a programmer in our community, has already contributed to making that code better, so when you play a MeeBlip, you’re playing some of his work, too. (The lesson of open source: if just one person does something with what you share, it’s already worth it. And Axel’s not alone.)

I’m working mainly on documentation – both for users just wanting to make music (even if this is their first synth), and developers who want to learn about code and sound.

You can learn about the MeeBlip, read those new docs as they’re added, keep up with the latest, and – if you like – buy the new MeeBlip SE as a kit or quick-build synth – at the synth’s site:

http://meeblip.com

Let’s Get Some Music in Here

I can’t talk about the MeeBlip nearly as well as its users can show it.

Case in point: we didn’t know one Jeremy Leaird-Koch until the video above popped in our inbox. It’s a demo video of the MeeBlip SE, and it shows off all the new sonic features of the instrument, and demonstrates the PWM width functionality, and shows how to make music, and does a timelapse of building the kit from scratch. Here’s the funny part: we didn’t ask him to do this. His demo video puts anything we’d make to shame.

Jeremy’s story behind this, and the reason there are two MeeBlips in there, was even more amazing. He wrote us about a month ago:

My boyfriend and I had put off exchanging Christmas gifts because I was waiting for the MeeBlip kit (his present) to arrive. Finally, about a week or so after XMAS, it came, I wrapped it up, and gave it to him. I unwrap his present to me, and it’s in a Canada Post box, too. Turns out we got each other the exact same thing. Two MeeBlip kits. Absolutely hilarious.

Anyways, the next day we built them up and played around with them. We also made this little video documenting one of the builds and our first explorations of what it could do. Damn, what a fun little box.

I nearly cried – well, for two reasons. One was, it was a clear explanation of why you go nuts trying to make a synth. The other was, we really screwed up shipping in 2011, and if anything told me to never let that happen again, this story did. We’ve changed the way we source parts, the way we assemble the MeeBlip, and the way we distribute it, and it’s one of the things I think about every morning when I wake up. But thanks, Jeremy and your boyfriend; you’ve absolutely inspired us.

And most importantly, I want to hear more music, made on whatever thing you choose, because I really enjoyed it. And that’s what this is all about.

Side note: if you like soldering, you want the MeeBlip Build Everything kit for intro US$119, which is what he has here. If you don’t, don’t let this scare you; you can get the Quick Build and just use a screwdriver, and it doesn’t take a whole lot longer than this does in fast-forward timelapse time.

http://meeblip.com/get-one/

But whether you’re in the US or in one of the many other parts of the world where we count readers, let’s pause to consider what makes us thankful.

I’m immensely thankful to have the opportunity to make music. I find it’s always worth reminding myself of that, and reminding to fight for the time to do it, to keep myself sane. Highlights for me so far in 2011: playing a friend’s grand piano in Brooklyn on a wintry-feeling March day (the samples of which make up the performance Saturday), spending Hurricane Irene jamming on a Mono/Poly with King Britt and Rucyl Mills, firing up Pd and getting lost in granular samples on a gray day in Berlin, assembling a track in Reason or Ableton in a hotel room… these are the sort of moments where, all at once, you find under almost any circumstances you can reclaim your sense of center and happiness, and give everything else clarity.

I’m also, and I don’t get to say this enough, unbelievably thankful for the readers of this site and some of the print projects I do. As a professional writer, writing is not a claimed right, but a privilege granted at the pleasure of your readership. Then, on this site, I get the gift of being able to see the inventions and expressions of people around the world. And yes, even getting criticisms and hearing people argue with what I say is a terrific motivator, one I don’t take for granted, especially when print writing remains largely without feedback. For me as a musician, it’s come to be part of who I am – not only my personal output, but all this input, having the chance to write about what’s happening. It doesn’t conflict with being a musician; it’s an essential element of that process for me.

I’m so grateful, in fact, for these two things, that I feel I can always do more.

And more is coming. I’m thankful that after a lot of work behind the scenes, there are new possibilities that lie ahead to expand upon what CDM does. And yes, as some readers or residents of Berlin have worked out, I’ve personally for the last few weeks been in the capital of Germany and not the city of New York. You may also have met Marsha Vdovin, who came onboard earlier this year as Business Development Manager and who has already moved forward what CDM can do and how it can grow.

Also, as of this morning, delays suffered by our open source MeeBlip project are at last coming to a close, beginning with new shipments of the MeeBlip micro and all-new firmware for all models, available now on GitHub. (We’ll have a full update on the MeeBlip project next week, as everyone gets back from the holiday.)

Most importantly, I’m working now on plans to completely rebuild Create Digital Noise and give readers and like-minded artists the community they deserved, instead of the failed experiment we got. If you’re interested in being part of that conversation, get in touch; otherwise, more on that very soon.

But it’s those things for which I’m thankful that motivate all of this. And I’m thankful, as always, not so much for what lies in the past or somewhere off in the future, but what is halfway-done and in process, partway through the story, which is where I find the really good stuff lies. In that spirit, here’s a documentary that deals with the notion of delivering in beta, and getting things out the door – something that goes as much for music as it does for inventions, I think. (As it happens, director Gabriel Shalom and photo editor/titler Patrizia Kommerell are sitting next to me in a hotel lobby as I write this.)

What are you thankful for? Let us know – or have a look at ten music technologies I gave thanks for last year.

We’ve followed open source hardware – and generally hardware that is more open to user customization and modification – on this site since the beginning. As I prepare for a talk on the MeeBlip at Berlin’s Create Art & Technology Conference, though, I think it’s time to do a proper survey of the hardware that’s out there.

The ability to modify music gear is something that’s important to a lot of people as musicians. It means the ability to learn how the technology we use works, and therefore to have a deeper musical and compositional understanding of it. And it can mean the ability to make music hardware more expressive of your sonic imagination and creative ideas. Finally, it adds an additional avenue through which you can share your understanding and use and modification of musical instruments with other people.

Explanation below, or just skip to the survey, or live event in Berlin.

A Spectrum of “Open” in Music Gear

Even proprietary hardware can become more “open” in the general sense. In the early days of synths, it was commonplace to include detailed specifications and even circuit diagrams. That arguably furthered the evolution of music gear, as knowledge was shared, and it certainly allowed more advanced users to better understand how that gear worked. We’ve seen a subtle return to those days, with examples like Korg’s Monotron and MonoTribe hardware, for which the company released schematics.

The viral, revolutionary spread of the monome design owes in part a community built around modification, access to critical schematics, and some open sourced software which the community took and modified. The monome, however, focuses on a fully open-source protocol and availability to schematics. Those schematics are not free for use in your own creations, which has sometimes caused friction as makers sell modified or homebrewed variants of the monome. On the other hand, many in the monome community value the handcrafted original hardware and don’t particularly want “clones” and the like, and have found the available information more than enough to fuel their musical needs.

Open Source Hardware goes further, by placing everything under a license that makes it free for use. This would include the software (either running on the device, on an attached computer, or both), the schematics of the design, and even visual elements of the design, as well as the documentation. Projects that give their users the most freedom to work with any modifications they make also allow for unfettered commercial use; that is, you don’t have to worry if you sell a few, or even many, if you run afoul of the project’s original creators. Without going into the debate for or against such an approach, if this kind of sharing is your goal, then it follows it will important for you to make that freedom explicit. This sort of explicit use is also what is described in the Open Source Hardware definition, which our MeeBlip project has adopted because we feel the project and definition fit one another.

Note that there’s a very real debate about whether the ideals of free software are applicable to open source hardware. There’s no debating it’s an apples-to-oranges comparison: copying hardware means physically manufacturing something. (I’m surprised to see, in German, the use of the term Freie Hardware, which has generally been avoided in English. See also the Open Source Hardware and Design Alliance, which goes beyond some of these specific – and possibly not-really-applicable – licenses.)

I’ll say this: I think adding in the issues of economics, materials, sustainability, local manufacture, labor, distribution, and international trade make this question more compelling for discussion. It’s messier than software, yes – but given that all software relies on hardware on which to run, dealing with these messy and often demanding questions means engaging more of the many dimensions in which technology interacts with economics.

Resources:
Open Source Hardware (OSHW) definition / principles
Business models for Open Hardware
Amusingly, the MeeBlip continues flying under the radar as an open source hardware project, but once we actually get our shipping picture in place over the next couple of weeks, maybe we can work on that.

Let’s See the Gear!

But first, we just need to find out what’s out there. And that’s where you come in. If you’ve got a project, or use a project, or just know about a project, let us know. If it’s your own project – especially if you feel we’ve ignored you in the past (trust me, you don’t want to see my inbox or brain) – now’s your chance to tell us about it.

Because it’s the narrowest and most sharply-defined category, I’m most interested in those projects that fit the Open Source Hardware definition – not for philosophical reasons so much as taxonomic ones. But other projects are welcome, too; I’d like to hear about them.

About that MeeBlip…

And we’ll have the first of a series of updates on the MeeBlip project later this week. (The new SE and micro projects, and updated firmware, as well as vastly-expanded documentation, are all due soon, held up only by international shipping, weather, and illness challenges I’ll describe later.)

In the meantime, fire away.

Or Talk in Person!

If you’re in Berlin, this weekend join some terrific discussions on creativity, technology, and DIY, including my talk on the MeeBlip, lots of talks on hardware design and prototyping (including for beginners), and projects like the fantastic libmonome. And if you see me, say hi! (My talk is Sunday morning.)

http://createartandtechnology.de/

Survey

Direct link to Google Docs survey (login not required)

It had to happen — button triggering, as popularized by the monome, here meets a conventional two-channel DJ mixer. But the layout I must say is quite spare and lovely, the work of the Japanese-based PICnome project. Furthermore, it’s Open Source Hardware, covered as I have recommended by a ShareAlike Creative Commons license (with no commercial restrictions) and GPL v3. (The creator prefers the term “Free Hardware,” which I love theoretically but have avoided for fear of people demanding we mail them MeeBlips by sending us a self-addressed, stamped box.)

With clean, subtle markings and a nicely-composed layout, it’s hardware that doesn’t scream out its design with big decals or overblown features. It’s just a (colored) grid controller, similar to the monome, combined with controller setup laid out as a two-channel mixer, with the sorts of features you’d expect of each. I love the angled labels, at least aesthetically. (I should note that this is not related to the monome project; the monome is not open source hardware, though it works via open software and commercially-restricted availability to some schematics. It is, of course, deserving of credit for inspiring a whole generation of hardware.)

The controller works with both OSC (OpenSoundControl) and MIDI for maximum flexibility. And, incidentally, this could be an ideal live visual controller, too, especially with that native OSC support.

Good grief; I realize I filled this post with nothing but technical jargon. Hopefully, those of you who speak in such tongue-twisted terms have followed along, and everyone else just looked at the pretty pictures and video.

Carry on.

PICratchBOX – Sneak Preview [atelier.tkrworks]

http://made-in-yamamoto.com/

Japan, hope to come visit you some day soon. Thanks, Regend, for the tip!

Update: Read in comments about some lingering frustration that the original PICnome project was derived from the monome; since the monome doesn’t permit the sale of derivative designs, that could be viewed as an abuse of the available specifications for the monome. In this case, based on what I see, however, I’m hard pressed to see this product as being subject to the same criticism by virtue of having buttons, unless there’s some detail I’m missing. If I am missing something, please let me know.

By the way, if you want to revisit the PICnome project and decide for yourself, that thread is still on the monome community. It’s not accurate to say as some commenters do that the PICnome was a “bootleg” or simple clone of the monome, as it was re-implemented on a PIC chip. The issue is that the product was then made available for sale, because it was built on monome schematics; while those are readily available, they are not licensed for this kind of use. The firmware is free for use; it’s covered under a GPL license, which is non-revocable. However, to my knowledge, those same concerns may not necessarily apply to this project.

To recap: the PICnome project indeed is technically incompatible with the intentions and licensing of the monome project, but the new PICratchBox should be fine. So, here’s to the PICratchBox, which is more interesting precisely because it’s something new.

It is my view that the original PICnome project violated the terms of the licensing of the schematics; whether because of a misunderstanding or not, that’s not something to condone. But the new project does not do so, in my view. I contacted monome’s Brian Crabtree and while we didn’t have an on-the-record conversation, he took no issue with that statement.

Chicago-based hacker and synthesist Matt Heins is working on an open source synth kit. As a co-creator of the MeeBlip open source-synth hardware, I’m biased — I want more open synth hardware! So this is looking like some great company. The instrument is 8-bit, with analog filter circuitry, coded in C. The specs:

Fully Open Source Hardware and Well-Commented C Software Design
Digital Analog Hybrid Circuitry
2 Digital Oscillators with 16 waveshapes, updateable to more
2 Low Frequency Modulation Oscillators with 10 destinations
Innovative Digitally-Controlled Analog Filter with Low-Pass, Band-Pass, and High-Pass with Envelope Control and External Audio Input
Analog Voltage-Controlled Amplifier with Envelope Control
Drone/Loop Mode for Playing by Itself
19 Knobs to Twiddle and 8 Switches
Full MIDI Input and Output
Sound Patch Save and Recall

I think the self-playing mode is particularly clever, and of course having presets is nice. There’s already a PCB and lots of interesting discussion of the design and sound on the blog:
http://hackmeopen.com/

And, as seen in the video, this is a Kickstarter project – invest early, and down the road you’ll be at the top of the list to get a synth.

Since this is likely to raise some comparisons to the MeeBlip, I can summarize: for now, the MeeBlip uses a digital rather than an analog filter, it’s a 16-bit synth rather than 8-bit, and it comes in a case if you like. We’ll have more of an update on the MeeBlip soon, but it will be available for sale again this month, alongside an updated Special Edition and reworked workflow. Also, by the beginning of August, I’ll have tutorials on how to code for it very quickly without any previous experience with programming (yes, even in Assembly).

But I’m excited that there’s a range now of open source music hardware; I will try to do a full write-up soon. And in the meantime, Matt, I hope I make it to Chicago in the next couple of months and we can say hi — the synth is sounding great, and I look forward to trying it! The dream of an open music-making hardware rig is now very close to fruition.

If you do want to get onboard on Kickstarter:
Rockit 8-bit Synth Kit

Yesterday, we saw a bit of the idea of making mobile gadgets more sociable with each other. The idea is, through network/wireless and cabled connectivity, you extend possibilities for expression, control, and collaboration with yourself and others. It’s the same thing that makes a recording studio useful: tools work together to let people work together to create music. It’s absolutely not a new idea; the engineering question is just making it work well on new platforms.

On iOS, we’re already seeing some of this: apart from MIDI connectivity, developer like KORG have even tried using wireless features intended largely for multiplayer gaming to connect multiple beatboxes and synths over a network.

Continuing a look at the Android side of things, Andrea Belloni sends an open source project that gets a sequencer working over a network with a computer and Arduino-based hardware project. It’s really a proof of concept – let’s call it a hack of concept – so they say specifically they weren’t concerned with making it pretty. It’s at an earlier stage of the process, but it’s nice to see that. The basic idea is to control the hardware sequencer, built on Arduino, with a Processing sketch running on the phone, all over a WiFi network. Take the same basic idea and streamline the hardware a bit (the Arduino and shield get a bit clunky), and this could actually be practical.

Android Arduino Sequencer [Italian + English]

But I think as an illustration of what I was saying in words yesterday, it’s worth covering this just so I have an excuse to use this picture:

Yep, that’s the idea. Add in some other operating systems to that graph, too, if you like!

Adding hardware to tablets, as it has with decades of computing technology, can open up new worlds for software and music. It can animate a conventional piano, or provide new physical interfaces for touching music. But let’s not wait for it to happen; let’s get hacking.

Following on today’s line of thinking about hardware-augmented touch, I’d like to look a bit at the recently-transformed landscape on Android. iOS users can connect to external hardware via the Core MIDI protocol or, via official channels, through the Apple Dock Connector. That’s not a perfect situation, however. Hardware developers have to be approved through the Made for iPod program in order to make accessories, there’s no standard class support apart from MIDI, and while Bluetooth can connect you to other iPads, you can’t connect arbitrarily with hardware via Bluetooth. (At least, that’s what I’ve found speaking with iOS developers, though some Bluetooth gamepads appear to work, possibly because they simply act as keyboards). WiFi wireless connection is also a possibility, one I expect will continue to be exploited.

But Android does have some interesting options here – a reminder of why getting familiar with more than one platform can be enlightening. A lot of those possibilities could open up new ideas in music hardware, ideas that could work not only on Android but in some cases (as with standard USB support) with desktop and tablet Mac, Windows, and Linux machines, too.

Case in point: check out a Motorola XOOM controlling a piano above, for a kind of hacker’s Disklavier. (Apologies to Yamaha.) Yes, it’s a great deal messier than existing USB MIDI devices (more on that in a moment), but it’s a visual reminder of why we do this in the first place – and it doesn’t have to be quite this hacky on Android, either.

Simplified, your options are:

Android Open Accessory

Currently the best wired common denominator, the Open Accessory program allows you to use a third-party accessory as the USB host, even on devices that lack USB host support. You just need a device with Android 3.1, 2.3.4, or greater. In a much-ballyhooed feature, there are prototyping possibilities with the open Arduino platform. Google’s own hardware is obscenely pricey, though, at around $400. Instead, DIYers will want to use a standard Arduino. Two early examples:
Android ADK with a standard Arduino Uno and USB Host Shield
Google’s open accessory development kit on standard Arduino hardware

These prototypes could, in turn, be converted into simple kits or even standard off-the-shelf accessories, without asking anyone’s permission.

See a video at top for one of the Arduino Uno examples in action.

Also, for the actual code, look at:
UsbAccessory

More on DIY implementations that don’t require $400 hardware kits (more like … $40, tops):
http://developer.android.com/guide/topics/usb/adk.html

Microchip also promises an open PIC24 library with a driver for ADK

That said, because Google’s implementation is specific to Android, those accessories aren’t useful anywhere else. That’s why it’s worth considering USB host mode.

USB Host Mode

Tablets are the Android devices about which I’m most excited at the moment, because as with the iPad, the tablet devices wind up being more flexible and capable than their phone handset cousins.

One key feature: Honeycomb tablets support actual USB host mode. That means you can connect standard USB HID devices like joysticks. It also means you should be able to make a MIDI interface that isn’t kludged together from a bunch of proto boards and $400 Google Android kits and that works with Android but not your computer, as above.

In fact, the existence of this option made me a bit puzzled when I read Phil Torrone’s* editorial in Make. (See postlog, though, on why listening to Phil is still a good idea.) Phil focuses there on Arduino, and doesn’t mention standard USB host.

Why Google Choosing Arduino Matters and is This the End of “Made for iPod” (TM)?

Now, Phil’s correct that the Arduino is currently the easiest platform for hacking with this stuff. But I actually think even that could change. There are already a number of AVR-based platforms for doing USB host implementations. Like Arduino, you can develop for them with free, open tools and a wide community. Unlike a standard Arduino I/O board, though, it’s easy to create something smaller, cheaper, and more flexible – and to plug your creation into any device that supports standard USB hardware. Now, actually implementing some of these things is nowhere near as simple as Arduino at the moment, but that to me is a testing and documentation problem more than anything else. I’m bullish on the possibilities here; it’s part of the reason we chose a standard AVR platform for our MeeBlip synth and not Arduino. I’ve started messing with its firmware, finally; more on that soon – it’ll also be relevant to playing with DIY hardware for Android.

The Arduino stuff is absolutely cool, don’t get me wrong. I just think you could substitute “open hardware” more generally in that article for “Arduino,” specifically. (The article’s nonetheless well worth a read for some stimulating ideas.)

Executive summary: I betcha we can come up with a really simple DIY MIDI interface, via both wireless and wired connections, for Android that doesn’t touch the Arduino side of things and will work with your computer, too.

See:
android.hardware.usb in the Android documentation

IOIO – a Chat with the Developer

Following CDM’s coverage of the Google announcement of the ADK in the first place, a number of commenters pondered the inexpensive, DIY IOIO board marketed by Sparkfun (pictured).

Developer Ytai Ben-Tsvi shares some thoughts about how IOIO relates to the ADK:

First, you can see some of my (and others’) thoughts on this thread:
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/ioio-users/3JDn6XZJ9aE/discussion

Aside from what’s written there, I have immediate plans for implementing IOIO on top of ADK. This means that when IOIO is connected to an Android device, it will first try to establish and ADK (accessory-mode) connection with it and if that fails, will seamlessly attempt to fallback to ADB. ADB will still be used for firmware upgrades, as I believe this is the most secure way of making sure the user is involved in the decision to update the firmware (via enforcement of a single signed application that IOIO agrees to talk to).

In the (hopefully near) future, a similar behavior will be achieved by connecting a Bluetooth dongle to IOIO instead of an Android device, enabling a remote connection between Android (or even the Android emulator!) and IOIO, on expense of reduced bandwidth and increased latency.

Some points to emphasize:

• IOIO is targeted at the hobbyist/educational community. I believe ADK is primarily targeted at serious hardware developers. As a result, in terms of support, design considerations, feature prioritization, ease of use etc., IOIO is more likely to stay loyal to the hobbyist community in the future.
• At the time of writing, IOIO seems to be the cheapest solution for communicating with an Android.
• IOIO currently provides a high-level Java API which hides underneath it a rich protocol for controlling many of the board’s features from Java. “Mainstream” users will never have to touch embedded programming when working with IOIO. My hope is that this API will eventually become a standard, and that people will implement it on top of other boards as well. If that happens, application developers will be able to easily port their applications to different hardwares.

IOIO is available now for US$49.95. Honestly, if you’ve got a phone that it works with, it’s a fantastic choice.

IOIO @ Sparkfun

Bottom line:

At first it seemed like there is conflict here, but now it appears to me like there really isn’t! IOIO is an end-to-end solution for physical computing (a-la Arduino) from your Android device, ADK is a protocol for enabling you to connect peripherals to an Android device, and this is Google’s motivation in this game. The boards that came with ADK are just reference implementations, and to me they seem in no competition with IOIO at present. So IOIO and ADK will probably be good friend in the future, when ADK provides the underlying connectivity and IOIO provides the high-level platform for the hobbyists.

Updated: There’s already good news.

Since he wrote the comments above, Ytai got everything working with IOIO and ADK:
IOIO over OpenAccessory (ADK) Available [Ytai's "Microcontrollers, Electronics & Robotics" Blog]

He makes a strong argument for why IOIO may be your best solution. In fact, for my money, IOIO plus USB host development is just about perfect.

Bluetooth

Enough about all these wires: you do lose some of the beauty of these mobile devices when you attach a lot of spaghetti to them. Enter Bluetooth. It’s reasonably cheap, light on power consumption and well-suited to embedded hardware (key differences with wifi). It’s also gotten steadily more robust. For wireless MIDI and wireless control, it really can work.

On Android, it’s possible to interface directly with hardware over Bluetooth. That opens up the chance to do, for instance, MIDI over Bluetooth without a wire in sight. For lots of thoughts on this, the best reading is Peter Brinkmann’s blog. (Peter is also the primary author of libpd.)

I hope we’ll get to talk more about this soon. Ahem.

http://nettoyeur.noisepages.com/

I’ll admit: I’m actually kind of a sucker for wires. So I’m glad to have Peter around to encourage me not to create giant, ugly tangles of crap.

Postlog – Phil Torrone and Mobile

I just want to add one background note on Phil Torrone.

Phil deserves loads of credit for seeing this stuff coming long before it was popularized. Here’s what he had to say in 2002:

A simple hiking stick was way too low-tech for Macromedia Flash expert Phillip Torrone.
So Torrone equipped his stick with GPS and Flash applications that let him identify trails and track information on local flora and fauna — and leave messages for other hikers.
He’ll show off the hiking stick and more of his quirky creations, such as a digital belt buckle made from an old Palm V, when he discusses wireless fashion at a Flash conference here Friday.
His inventions are sure to delight his geeky audience of developers and designers at FlashForward. But his audience will start taking notes when he brings out mass-market, Flash-enabled devices such as a Microsoft Pocket PC Phone Edition and an O2 XDA, two Pocket PCs that are also phones.
Flash developers believe mobile devices like these are the wave of the future, Torrone said. “Last year, wireless phones outsold PCs for the first time,” he said.

Lots of Flash, Even More Sizzle [Wired, July 2002]

In music, we have the opportunity to test these same ideas not only for a quick geeky hack, but as a real means of self-expression, in deeply emotional, intimate ways.

And just remember, for anyone caught up on platform debates, at some point even words like “iPad” or “Galaxy Tab” will seem as distant as “Palm” and “Pocket PC.” But the ideas behind actual work for those platforms will remain. (Oh, and… I guess we still have Flash, huh?)

Now … who wants to do some hacking this summer for music? (And science!)

The gaming industry has made their bet, and it’s that touchscreens go better with tactile controls. Might digital musicians reach the same conclusion?

A funny thing has happened on the way to the touch era. The vision of a device like the iPad is minimalist to the extreme: an uninterrupted, impossibly-slim metal slate, as impenetrable as some sort of found alien scifi object. The notion is that by reducing physical controls, the software itself comes to the fore. It’s beautiful conceptually … and then you find yourself tapping and stroking a piece of undifferentiated glass. For navigating interfaces – and even, I’d argue, exploring sound design and composition – it works brilliantly. But for live digital performance (what to game lovers is called “gaming”), for anything that wants tactile feedback, it can be imprecise or unsatisfying, or both.

Watching this shake out as a design problem is fascinating, especially coming from the perspective of music. Digital musicians were exploring alternative interfaces since before it was cool. Given the ability to make any sound we can possibly imagine, the question of how you design an interface around sound is compositional, philosophical, essential.

Whatever winds up working in the marketplace, there are some fascinating ideas for combining touch with tactile. Since both are good at certain tasks, why not do both?

We’ve seen several examples among musicians and researchers exploring how to augment the touchscreen with physical input:

Mike Kneupfel’s research at NYU’s ITP program, in the video at top, investigates adding additional inputs. See: Extending the Touchscreen.

We saw that kind of extensibility in an iPad dock concept by Livid Instruments.

While it lacks additional tangible controls, I/O extensibility is featured in a still-as-yet-unreleased “pro” dock by Alesis, and most recently in a DIY dock by circuit bending pioneer Reed Ghazala.

Now, game vendors are moving in the same direction – even with prototypes that look quite a lot like the research project above. (Sometimes, arriving at the obvious conclusion is necessary for a great design.)

Sony’s PlayStation Vita, successor to the PSP mobile game platform, augments touch input with tactile controls in much the same way as Michael Knuepfel’s work does. Notably, it also proposes how these inputs can coexist in a form factor that’s larger than a phone, but smaller than a tablet – scaled roughly to a comfortable holding distance between your two hands. (Microsoft and Apple each unveiled standard split keyboards on Windows 8 and iOS 5, respectively. The era of thumb ergonomics is now fully underway.)

Nintendo’s Wii U controller combines a lot of sensing capabilities into one device. Like Sony’s effort, the centerpiece is the combination of the interactive touch display with analog controls. But true to its Wii heritage, Nintendo is packing other sensing technology, too. While its evolution has been more piecemeal, the same is true of the Xbox 360 in the Kinect era. The Kinect camera is really a bundle of mic and stereoscopic camera sensing with software intelligence for motion analysis and even speech analysis via a variety of methods. While Kinect is touchless, the conventional gamepad still plays a role.

What’s the relevance of all of this evolution to music? Digital music’s demands parallel gaming, requiring precision, accessibility, scalability from beginners to hardcore experts, and real-time interaction. Also, music research has often been at the forefront of experimentation with a variety of means of translating sensory data to expression. And since musical practice itself is roughly as old in human evolution as language, if not older, it’s a key way of glimpsing how ubiquitous interfaces can become meaningful.

Let me put that another way: the stuff game companies are doing now looks a heck of a lot like what computer musicians have been doing for years.

While much of the acclaim for platforms like the iPad has been for their transparency and unadorned interfaces – and while I believe those are valuable concepts – bundles of capabilities for interacting with the world can become powerful. That means efforts like Apple’s addition of USB MIDI connectivity to the iPad, or Google’s nascent work to standardize USB host mode and open hardware development (based on Arduino), take on new meaning. Add to this additional connectivity via Bluetooth and wifi, and it may be that we only really see what these platforms do when, like the PC, they start geting sociable with a range of other gear.

This could also mean that communities like the music community have a chance to prove that the “post-PC era” is a little different than it’s been described in the mainstream press – and maybe a little less a radical departure. The “post PC era,” we’re told, is less about being a hub for a lot of hardware. But as people look for tactile feedback, some of the coolest applications of these platforms may not be in the mainstream use as “consumption” devices, but at the fringe.

I’ve just come from the launch of the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 in New York. You’re not missing much; there were a handful of people snapping up the tablets. (I think the 10.1, and a few other Honeycomb-based tablets, do have a bright future, though their growth may be a bit slow at first as developers get their hands on them and give people a reason to buy them.)

What was most compelling to people at the launch, though, was a planned appearance by pop star Ne-Yo (at least according to some staffers to whom I spoke).

But the connection was, at best, tenuous. It may be when devices like these tablets are made more viable for musicians onstage that that connection starts to make sense. And that may mean that Apple and Google/Android vendors alike need to start to think more aggressively about the larger ecosystem and hardware applications. Remember all those futuristic promises from Apple about hardware accessories? Right now, the most significant hardware is the Square payment add-on, and it uses a hack to make it work through the audio jack. Both Apple and Google can do more work to open up hardware development.

It’s all well and good for the tablet to be a “post PC” device, to be different from PCs, to be better. But they may simultaneously need some of the openness to other gadgets that made the PC age so revolutionary.