Gibson Guitar has announced in a press release they’re acquiring the Stanton Group, which includes, aside from the well-known Stanton DJ brand, KRK monitoring products and Cerwin-Vega loudspeakers.

It’d be easy to see this as a guitar company buying a DJ company, but it’s more than that. KRK and Cerwin-Vega are speaker/monitoring brands. Stanton and Cerwin-Vega each have footholds in the larger consumer arena, not just the pro world, a detail Gibson is quick to emphasize. And Gibson themselves have quietly, steadily grown beyond just guitars. The new “Gibson Pro Audio” banner is added to a list of brands that Gibson reels off: “Epiphone, Dobro, Kramer, Steinberger, Tobias, Echoplex, Electar, Flatiron, Slingerland, Valley Arts, Maestro, Oberheim, Baldwin, Sunshine Piano, Take Anywhere Technology, J&C Fischer, Chickering, Hamilton, Wurlitzer.” But it would seem dropping the “Guitar” from the name would be realistic.

There are two interesting details to the way the press release is worded. First, the lead is that Gibson’s move is “part of its continued expansion as a lifestyle brand.” That’s perhaps going to send a chill down the spine of anyone who prefers to focus explicitly on “musicians.” Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz even says the move “allows us access to 20 in 20 consumers instead of the one in 20 we currently hit.” That contrasts with the emphasis of, say, organizations like NAMM who talk about the general market of “musicians,” not only “lifestyle,” whatever you take that to mean. On the other hand, this is really nomenclature we’re talking here; the question I have is how “lifestyle” actually translates into a strategy, and how well it works for Gibson.

The other detail is more interesting. Gibson and Stanton Group reps each stress the potential for overlapping R&D. Juszkiewicz has touted R&D projects in the past, though largely centered around new guitar tech. We’ll see if the two companies can deliver on that R&D promise and do something really innovative. I have no idea what that’d mean in this case, so if anyone cares to speculate, I’m all ears.

Anyone?

Gibson Guitar Acquires Market-Leading Pro Audio Companies KRK, Cerwin-Vega!, and Stanton [PR Newswire]

Online chatter has in past not been very kind to Gibson on its past acquisition record, so I expect some people will raise the spectre of at least one acquisition again. Let’s see… comments…

I don’t personally view this as flame-bait; Gibson’s a perfectly-respectable guitar maker and I imagine there could be some smart business opportunity here, especially with Stanton together with Gibson in Nashville. However, let’s consider: the names Gibson and Stanton, guitars and DJing. I imagine some flame-broiled comment thread on the Internet somewhere.

And yes, reasons to be skeptical:

Promises of this sort of R&D synergy could easily fail to materialize. And whether Gibson can manage these essentially unrelated businesses is an enormous question mark. There aren’t a whole lot of acquisition success stories in this business.

Scratching, meet recycling. Rather than allow MIDI DJ controllers to consign themselves to landfills, a new open source project promises to retrofit these gadgets with scratch capabilities.

Scratch Decoder is a collaborative, open source effort to add or extend obsolete controllers, CDJs, and turntables with digital vinyl control – before they get tossed. Inspired by a 2009 thesis by Swiss student Ramon Mathis, advised by the folks who first developed the Ms. Pinky vinyl control system for Max/MSP, and rooted in years of work, the system is now publicly documented.

The ingredients:
An Arduino hardware board
The encoder sensor and board on a Numark CDX – which this project actually hacks into
MIDI, and Ms. Pinky’s software library

Upshot: add a computer, and you can translate scratch movements to MIDI messages for use with your DJ software of choice.

The video is in Spanish, so Mudo, who’s on the team, explains:

In the video, Norbert shows, as proof-of-concept, hijacking the encoder signal and connecting it to the digital inputs at Arduino. Then he sets up the software involved (serial-to-MIDI translator and Traktor controller panel) and starts the platter of the Numark CDX (the CDX is a CDJ without the ability to send MIDI from the platter) — all without a timecode CD, of course. It is not perfect right now, but it works at last.

I actually kind of like that it isn’t perfect.

This deserves further explanation for those for whom this isn’t obvious (mainly, most normal people). Typically, digital vinyl works by including a disc (vinyl or CD) encoded with timecode. That way, by looking at the audio playback from the device, as someone moves the record, the audio stream can be decoded in order to tell that, say, they’re scratching the disc.

In this case, a device that lacks that timecode disc and has sensors that refuse to see MIDI can be retrofitted to provide signal to software.

The team in this case is inspired by other experimental turntablists, artists who explore the potential of modifying technology for use in turntable performance technique. The project says it draws from the artistic ideas of these inventors as well as their technological research, looking to the likes of DJ Sniff, Jason Sadural and the Rastieri Project, Aaron Faulstitch, Jesse Kriss, and Scott Wardle.

I’m finishing editing a video interview with DJ Sniff showing of his current rig, but I asked Sniff, aka Takuro Mizuta Lippit, about this project. He points CDM to a range of “hackable gems,” devices for DJing that failed in the consumer market but are now available for creative use in used form.

Examples:

The Tascam TT-M1 is, says Taku “essentially just an optical encoder that rides that spinning platter.” It’s the sensor you can add to something like the CDX – a non-open equivalent of the project above, meant to rescue your CDX from the trash heap.

The Stanton SCS.3M brought to bear a fascinating array of interactive touch strips, a compact, all-touch controller for DJing. It’s a device we covered on CDM when it came out, particularly due to its similarity to [warning: getting obscure] the never-released M-Audio [then Midiman] Surface One controller prototype. The SCS got further than the M-Audio piece in that it was manufactured, but apparently has since been discontinued and didn’t quite take the market by storm. [Fair warning: I don't see confirmation from Stanton that it's discontinued, so its status may simply be, "not the biggest controller ever to hit the market" until we hear otherwise.]

Taku uses that gadget in his work, which you’ll see in the video soon.

In the meantime, to follow these community projects, there are some interesting discussions and sites coming together.

En Español and in English:
Proyecto 1: Scratch Decoder. Convierte tu viejo equipo en un controlador midi para scratch!

Discussion on the DJ TechTools forum of this project:
Which controllers with motorized platter does Traktor support? [a slight misnomer in the subject header - eventually, you wind up with the project here!]

See Ramón Mathis’ dream of an open community for sharing scratch skills, styles, and “tricks” via an interactive e-learning system and community:
http://www.skrat.ch/

Want to reignite interest in DJs who actually use their hands and fingers to slice up and juggle sounds? A cavalcade of “laptopists” is the ticket. Suddenly, at least in some corners, people are again interested in turntablism. It’s nice to see how a controller can integrate digital loop and cue points with a setup that still focuses on scratching. And Stanton’s SCS.3d turns out to be scriptable in the open source DJ software Mixxx. As some live PA musicians revert to a “push play” mentality, DJs can keep it interesting.

I’m generally not so interested in posting videos from manufacturers, but in this case it’s fun just watching DJ Jungleboy work behind a pair of Stanton SCS.3d controllers. These instruments seem designed for him. In a way, a lot of what he’s doing could easily be done with a sampler and drum pad, like an MPC setup, but then he’s got it mapped in a slightly unusual way, and the radial layout serves that nicely.

Oddly, what Jungleboy is doing is “DJing,” whereas some people with Traktor or Ableton Live supposedly doing “live PA” (some, not all) are basically just playing finished tracks – something you might more accurately term “iTunesing.” It’s a strange world, and what may ultimately happen is that we start to divide things between people who are making an effort to be musicians, good or bad, and people who aren’t.

These SCS.3d’s I see are now at a street price of US$200, which could make them a nice buy.

Open Source SCS.3d Scripting?

Need another reason to check out the SCS? All due respect to the folks at Serato, here’s a neat twist: you can script the SCS.3d with Mixxx, the open source DJ tool for Windows, Mac, and – yep – Linux. Serato is a terrific and solid tool, but if you’re looking for something a little different, Mixxx looks terrific.

This also demonstrates why choice makes controllers much more powerful, just as you’d want choices and versatility with a musical instrument. There’s a detailed post over at Mixxx’s blog from back in February. Basically, if you’re a power user, you can make the SCS.3d do any trick you like with its controllers, response, and lights. If you’re not, you benefit from the hard work DJ Pegasus has been doing to make this possible.

MIDI Scripting and the Stanton SCS.3d (Videos)

Now, I wonder if we’ll see this scripting applied to Akai’s APC40 soon, too, in Mixxx – my guess is yes, if that team gets their hands on one.

One thing’s for sure: the spirit behind turntablism, virtuoso manipulations of sound, lives on. And those of you just faking turning knobs? You’ll have to figure out how to live with yourselves.

Stanton has sent CDM some product shots of the new DaScratch touch controller. What we couldn’t see before is evident here: the fit and finish looks like it has some potential, and most of all, this device is really compact. (Well, that or they just shot it using someone with very large hands.) I look forward to seeing it up close and personal.

I want to hear from you: what do you think is the competition for this device? What are you looking for in terms of expressive controllers — controllers that aren’t just mixer / control surfaces? Mixer-style layouts or simple boxes of encoders/knobs have tended to be the rule. (Coming soon, we’ll have a round-up of controllers on iPod touch and iPhone as well as DS. They’re fun, but none of those give you a whole lot of surface here.)

More photos, as you ponder:

Stanton has released the details of its new DaScratch touch controller, and I have to admit, it looks pretty terrific. About as far as anyone has gotten with a smart touch controller is an X/Y pad; this controller, by contrast, defines different areas of the touch surface for different functions and provides LED feedback so you can see what you’re doing. “Scratching” alone doesn’t really make sense in the computer world, even with DJ software, so you get lots of different functions for live performance. I think this may be as big a hit with Ableton Live users and laptop musicians as DJs.

Updated: Richard Devine video above now restored.

The specs:

• 5 touch sliders, 3 of which are switchable via preset
• 1 rotary touch controller (switchable)
• Loads of buttons: 4 hardware backlit switches + 10 + 9 switchable buttons
• USB bus powered
• Windows, Mac compatibility (Linux should work, too; it’s class compliant — you just miss out on the included software app)

What can you do with those touch areas? Stanton suggests scratching, scrubbing, navigation, cueing, looping, sampling, pitch shifting, effects, and the like, but of course, you can hook it up to whatever you like, and for our friends building crazy Pd and Reaktor soundmakers, this could be even more fun.

By switching modes, you can shift the kind of gestures you’re using on the center touch area, selecting three vertical faders, or one vertical fader and a circular touch area, or one fader and buttons. That’s in addition to the buttons and fader areas elsewhere. I’m impressed that in a small space, there’s a significant set of controls. If you want more, you can even snap together multiple units.

The clever addition is that, on top of the hardware, you get a software app called DaRouter. Dumb name, but functional stuff: built on Bome’s MIDI Translator, the software makes it easy to swap between presets for Traktor and Serato or select a generic/Ableton preset. You can’t edit the software presets directly, but you can make your own in MIDI Translator. See the DaRouter page for more.

The best part? Our friend Richard Devine demoing the unit in the video at top. I’m sure Richard can do something a lot more out there with this as the controller, though.

Lots more at the product page:

SCS.3D: DaScratch

Pricing: US$299 list
Availability: Unknown

Stanton wants this to be part of some giant “system,” by which they mean they want you to buy more things from Stanton. I’ll leave that up for you. On its own, this looks like a potentially wonderful controller; I’m eager to try it and see if the hardware build and touch quality delivers.

Previously: Stanton to Release Touch DJ Controller; Surface One, Thunder, Reborn?

Stanton is teasing a new DJ controller with touch controls, and particularly a circular scratch/control area, with live LED feedback. This allows “virtual” controllers not only for DJs, but (Stanton hopes) VJs, laptop musicians, and the like. (Stanton says “multimedia artist,” to which we suggest “visualists”.) I especially enjoy the “confidential” site, though I’m not sure marking press release with “do not publish / embargoed” has much more impact given a lot of sites these days.

It’s a little hard to tell, honestly, how this is different from a lot of controllers that use physical controls, thus giving them better tactile feedback. And the Stanton brand earns some skepticism from the discussion on the Ableton forum. But there’s some potential here; launch date is supposed to be September 19 so I’ll update with availability plus other specs then.

In the meantime, DJ/vinyl/DVS site Scratchworx deserves full credit for breaking this story posting the first video; they picked it up from the basement of one of the beta testers. (It looks reasonably cool, though, again, surely any controller could keep you from having to touch the laptop.):

Updated: Retail list is expected to be US$299; see turntable poetry which appears to be the first blog to have carried the story.

The moment I saw the DaScratch (or wait, is that da DaScratch? an DaScratch?) … I thought of the aborted Midiman (now M-Audio) Surface One. Announced in 2001 but apparently scrapped after it was determined to be overly expensive to produce, the Surface One still looks desirable. It combined touch controls with physical encoders, and the faders were arrayed in positions that made sense for, well, human beings with two hands.

Apparently I’m not the only one who is sad the Surface One never saw production.Our friend Nathanaël Lécaudé even made a fan page. I believe that prototype may be floating out there somewhere, assuming it works.

Look very closely at the Stanton controller and the Surface One, because touch sensors tend to come from a handful of vendors. (Yes, even the old iPod scroll wheel came from a third party.) A popular vendor is Quantum Research aka QProx, now owned by chip giant Atmel. (Yes, that’s the same Atmel that brings you goodies like the brain of the Arduino for you DIY geeks.) Atmel’s acquisition of Quantum speaks to the conventional wisdom that these kind of touch sensors are becoming an important commodity, so I expect the Stanton could be the tip of the iceberg.

The Surface One, in turn, owed a great deal to the ca. 1990 Buchla Thunder. Don Buchla is just one of those people in music technology who seemed to get there first – Buchla had a jump start even on waving around controllers in your arms before Nintendo caught on, and I gather a new generation of Lightning controllers is coming soon. The Thunder was actually made, too — just not in any quantities; I don’t even know where any of them are. Somehow, one of them managed to get reviewed in Electronic Musician, and at just under US$2000, costs roughly the same as today’s multi-touch Lemur, proof that every generation can have its own limited-run, pricey touch controller.

So, Stanton has another touch controller coming. But they now have to compete with $200 iPods that run any controller software you like. Stay tuned.

Related:
I should also note the DIY controller Stribe, though its touch strips are significantly less sophisticated than the options mentioned above (particularly the high-end, pressure-sensing ones originally slated for the Surface One).
Hands-on, Interview: Stribe Multi-Touch Controller

Since this week has become Unplanned Unofficial Vinyl Week, I might as well keep going. Vinyl with printed timecode is just one path. Here are two examples (one recent, one upcoming) of products that have found other means of connecting digital sound to the turntable. If a product like Traktor Scratch or Serato Scratch Live represent the maturation of the integrated vinyl + hardware + software solution, these two tools virtualize the turntable experience in other ways. And they demonstrate just how much control technology can change in music, turntable or no.

The Numark X2, above, as pointed out by beatfix in comments, is a hybrid of two approaches. It’s a conventional turntable (meaning you can actually hook it up to an amp and hear something, which isn’t the case with timecode-encoded vinyl). But it also uses the turntable to manipulate an MP3 CD. Now, obviously, Numark has missed the obvious next step: why not transmit control data to a computer instead of a CD? The X2, with a street well below US$1000, isn’t new; it’s been around a couple of years. But I’m still waiting for the concept to be applied to a computer output. (Anyone?)

In the opposite direction, the Stanton Control System, unveiled at NAMM in January and due to ship in June, does away with the turntable. The deck, the SCS.1d, simulates the feel of a turntable with a high-torque motorized platter and even a motorized pitch fader. Personally, I love this — and think it could be a sign of other, non-DJ controllers with tactile feedback. (You heard it here first. Uh … but I do expect that to take a while, as tactile control design is hard.)

But the turntable has some control features of its own: trigger pads, LCD scribble strips, encoders, transport controls, and preset triggers and navigation keys. They look a little odd, honestly, on a faux turntable, but it does save some space and gear.

The SCS.1m on left is a traditional mixer control surface with LCD "scribble strips" (reminds me a bit of the Novation keyboards) and endless encoders with a light-up ring (as we’ve been seeing various places.) The mixer controller is also a FireWire audio interface with mic and phono ins and dedicated headphone out, plus a footswitch input. That might win the hearts of some Ableton Live users who aren’t necessarily DJs.

This answers what Stanton has been doing post-FinalScratch. With that system defunct, what the Control System does is get you into whatever software you happen to choose. It works with Traktor Studio (the non-Scratch version of Traktor), Ableton Live, Deckadance, and MixVibes.

Cost: US$1499 for the deck, $999 for the mixer. And you can see the problem — a real turntable might be cheaper. But then, given what DJs make… hey, even a few VJ gigs might make it worth it if you really wanted it.

Part of why I find all of this interesting, even without being in the market for such a device myself, is what it says about controllers. The DJ market ought to be fairly predictable at this point, theoretically. And yet here are two examples of products that suggest that even conventional DJing, with a pre-defined set of basic techniques and hardware, can become unpredictable with the addition of a computer. As people struggle to define what a controller might look like for a laptop artist or musician using software like Ableton Live, I think the possibilities become even more wide open.

But then, that’s the fun of it.

I just want to see more high-torque motors in stuff.

This November, digital vinyl as we now know it will turn 10 years old. This setup is pretty simple in theory: instead of music, put encoded timecode on a record, then decode that timecode to provide information about where the record is in relationship to the needle. The idea is basic enough that, patent or no patent, it was inevitable that various developers would pursue the technique (and the very difficult work of implementation). Simulate the effect of scratching or needle dropping on a computer, and you’ve got virtual DJing, as found in products from Serato, Stanton, Native Instruments, Ms. Pinky, and others.

And as of Friday, it seems that the ongoing saga of a dispute over digital vinyl, beginning with the 2006 "divorce" of digital DJ titans Stanton Electronics and Native Instruments, may be over. NI released a statement Friday saying they had not only settled a US civil action patent case over their use of digital vinyl in Traktor Scratch, but had agreed to license the technology from N2IT Holdings, the US patent owners for digital DJing.

Apologies for the cat photo cliche, but … this involves patent law. We’d better have something cute and furry around to get through it.

The conclusion — the two have settled, Traktor Scratch is licensed per-use from N2IT, and N2IT’s patents are valid:

Native Instruments acknowledges the validity of patents held by N2IT, and has now fully licensed their usage worldwide for its TRAKTOR SCRATCH digital DJ system and related products.

The patents held by N2IT relate to general principles of digital music playback using time-code records, which are being utilized in TRAKTOR SCRATCH as well as in other manufacturers’ digital DJ systems with time-code control.

Acknowledging the validity of N2IT’s patents is actually pretty sweeping. You can read N2IT’s primary patent on Google Patent Search. The key words here are that N2IT patented the basic idea of using a turntable with encoded timecode on it for DJing. Theoretically, that could open up other digital DJ products to patent liability — keeping in mind that NI is a special case, because it was a development partner on N2IT’s FinalScratch product and was familiar with the technology.

How We Got Here: A FinalScratch History Timeline

I’m neither a patent lawyer nor a historian of digital DJ technology, so I quickly get out of my depth with the twists and turns this plot has taken. But I can offer at least a basic timeline of what’s happened, which puts today’s digital DJing in some context — albeit a somewhat strange context.

It goes something like this:

1. Revolutionizing Digital DJing — on BeOS (Doh!)

November 19, 1998: N2IT announces FinalScratch — for BeOS. [See Harmony Central, 1998] They even show off a working prototype at the COMDEX computer convention in Vegas. The product is developed with input from Richie Hawtin and John Acquaviva, who become its first users. (Incidentally, that’s why NI made a big deal of Hawtin switching to FinalScratch, and why Hawtin claims to have been on the cutting edge of digital DJing. At least in 1998, he certainly was, though you could argue the point now if you like. The choice of Be seems strange, but recall that under two years earlier, an Apple acquisition of Be Inc. had still seemed possible — until Amelio decided to go with Steve Jobs’ NeXT Inc. instead. And BeOS’ unique audio system gives it exceptionally-reliable, low-latency performance that could put today’s Windows and Mac OS X to shame.

Gustavo Lanzas aka Audioelectronic was there in the early days, as he describes on the Ableton forum:

Final Scratch was developed by a small Amsterdam-based 2-person company called N2IT in 1997-1998. The two creators were active in the rave/club scene, and had experience djing.

I was hired in 1998 [think this actually mean 1999 -Ed.] to go to Vegas and demo the very first system seen in the US at a BeOS event at the Treasure Island Ballroom. Here is a link to an archive of the event:

http://www.beatjapan.org/mirror/www.be.com/events/NAB_party.html

The hardware at the time was a hand-soldered prototype in an open aluminum project enclosure. The software it controlled was the BeOS media player. You could open multiple instances, and control whichever one was in front. Very rough, very primitive, but it worked more or less the same as it did now. There were exactly 2 prototypes, and no one had invested 2 million dollars into the company. Smile

Here’s a link to an early press release (I don’t think the product actually existed as such at this date):

http://news.harmony-central.com/Newp/1998/FinalScratch.html

I had worked with Timothy Self, then audio evangelist for BeOS, prior to this at Opcode Systems, makers of Studio Vision & several top-notch midi interfaces.

It looks to me like N2IT actually did show something at the 1998 COMDEX, because the Be folks gave them award and have a photo.

The Version 1.0 release comes out on a modified version of Debian Linux as well as BeOS. (The 1.0 software doesn’t seem to have been released until 2000.) Among early Linux adopters: Josh Wink.

2. N2IT to Stanton

[Date needed]: Stanton Magnetics buys FinalScratch from N2IT. I can’t find a date, which I assume means this wasn’t a publicly-announced acquisition. (And given the fact that the software was primitive and ran on Linux and BeOS, that’s not a huge surprise.) I’m also a bit unclear on the history of N2IT Holdings, though I’m gathering these exist for the purposes of retaining US patent rights.

January 2002: Bearing the Stanton name, the first complete commercial FinalScratch product comes to market at winter NAMM, for BeOS and Linux.

March 2003: Stanton and N2IT release Linux source code to the ScratchAmp driver — but note this only covers the audio interface, which is relatively meaningless; the real value is the timecode on the vinyl.

3. Digital DJing on the Mac, Windows

May 8, 2003: Version 1.1 of FinalScratch began the collaboration between Stanton and N2IT. It’s more like what we now know: Mac compatibility, and (courtesy Native Instruments) more usable DJ software. NI’s Traktor FinalScratch product even included a Linux version, though, for anyone who thinks NI has never done Linux development.

Native Instruments is really the ingredient that takes FinalScratch mainstream. They later port to Windows as well as Mac OS X.

4. Digital DJ Divorce

Late 2006: Native Instruments and Stanton end their relationship. (For some reason, this is listed as late 2005 on Wikipedia, with no reference; the divorce was not formally announced until October 2006, with an effective date of December 31, 2006.)

One stipulation of this separation is that Stanton releases a legal statement requiring NI to remove compatibility with FinalScratch timecode from its Traktor software line.

5. Traktor Scratch, Legal Disputes

Early 2007: The NI / Stanton divorce turns ugly. First, NI releases a competing product, Traktor Scratch. Stanton now lacks the important software capable of doing anything with timecode input, so they can only position the audio hardware — arguably the least important part of the equation — now called Final Scratch Open. Stanton also attacks NI, blaming them for compatibility problems between NI-developed FinalScratch software and Intel Macs. NI fires back that Stanton didn’t give NI enough time to complete updates to the FinalScratch software, while tying NI’s hands on updating Traktor via legal action.

June 16, 2007: N2IT files a claim against NI to try to get Traktor Scratch off the market, claiming NI’s familiarity with the underlying timecode technology.

This also illustrates why N2IT’s patent dispute with NI might not apply to other digital timecode products. From N2IT Holdings’ US legal representative, Bingham McCutchen:

In anticipation of working with Stanton Magnetics and Native Instruments to develop a new version of their product that would operate on Windows, N2IT claims it provided confidential information about its technology, and trained Native Investment employees on how their product worked. Last month, according to Billboard Magazine, Native Instruments released Traktor Scratch, which N2IT claims is similar to Final Scratch and uses its patented technology.

Now: By settling with N2IT and licensing the technology, NI effectively ends the Final Scratch chapter of history — at least to the extent that the FinalScratch / Stanton / Traktor / Traktor Scratch line appears to have passed (legally, now) to Traktor Scratch. Stanton is out of the business, left only with an audio interface. But, of course, with competing vinyl timecode systems, NI’s Traktor Scratch is also no longer the only game in town. And there’s nothing preventing N2IT from pursuing legal action with the competitive products, particularly now that they have legal precedent with the NI settlement. We’ll see.

How RZA "Invented" Digital DJing: The Legendary of Replicator

Of course, then there’s the bizarre footnote to this story — if it’s anything other than a random interview rant. In late 2007, RZA from Wu Tang Clan claimed in an interview with KotoriMag.com claimed that he had invented the digital vinyl technology used in Final Scratch on an Atari the year before N2IT — using technology from NASA, and millions of his own money. (Oddly, he also claims that music tech in general has come from space tech. I always suspected Cubase was powered by Tang… erm, the NASA-tested powdered beverage, I mean. Unless that’s how Wu Tang Clan got its name…)

There’s only one little problem: there’s no actual evidence of any of this. That, and the timeframe RZA describes is concurrent with, not prior to, N2IT’s development. So I have no idea what he’s talking about.

Here’s the take from illdoctrine.com, via a ProHipHop.com post of late last year:

And the complete interview:

So, is NI settling with RZA next?

I doubt it. But a RZA Edition Traktor Scratch — perhaps with a big Space Shuttle emblem — now that’d be cool.

References:

Final Scratch history [Thread on FinalScratch Forum]

Final Scratch @ Wikipedia

Updating the timeline:

If anyone has details to fill in, please let us know in comments.

For those of you who missed the fireworks, Native Instruments recently left its partner Stanton Magnetics (makers of Final Scratch) to pursue its own DJ strategy, which it unveiled at NAMM as (coincidentally named, I’m sure) Traktor Scratch. As with any breakup, that raised questions about support.

Here’s where the first bad news hits: the existing Final Scratch software is incompatible with Intel Macs. And that combined with other compatibility issues could mean the big losers here are Final Scratch customers, who are likely to be really unhappy when they learn the “solution” means buying new products, whether from NI, Stanton, or a third party.

Meanwhile, with NI dropping support for the software end of Final Scratch, Stanton is in the unenviable position of trying to keep their user base from leaving altogether.

Step one for Stanton: rename their existing hardware audio interface Final Scratch Open. What’s “open” about it? Well, it’s an audio interface, with ASIO (PC) and Core Audio drivers (Mac) that let you use it with any software you want — just like any other audio interface. Not exactly news, of course, and the only reason Stanton has to push hard to communicate this message is that they had previously focused on marketing an integrated solution, rather than an open, BYO software solution. The ScratchAmp could be a great audio interface, but you’ll still need a DJ app and control vinyl to complete the solution. Given that there are other DJ audio interfaces on the market, it’d be more fair to call this “Final Scratch Unbundled.”

Step two — here’s where things get ugly: blame Native Instruments for the compatibility problems. In a statement released this week and spread wide on the Web, Stanton said it was unable to patch NI’s software, because NI is responsible for software support and refused to create an update:

The ScratchAmp is and always has been fully compatible with all Mac technology, but an Intel compatible update for FS2 users on the software side was never developed, and all of Stanton’s requests for this software update have been denied by the developer … We would also like to stress the fact that we are open to offering compatibility to ALL developers, including N.I., and any others who may choose to stand behind the ScratchAmp and implement our code in their programs, present and future. We invite you to encourage your software company to make their developments ScratchAmp compatible!

See The Official Word from Stanton – again, plus discussion, from our favorite turntablist site, Skratchworx

Here’s the only problem: it’s not ScratchAmp’s capability as an audio interface that makes it appealing to Final Scratch users. The whole point is the ability to use the control vinyl. Let’s see how Native Instruments responds in a counter-announcement recently posted to their website:

Statement regarding Stanton Magnetics FinalScratch, February 23 [Native Instruments]

First, NI effectively claims they were already in “divorce proceedings” by the time Stanton asked for an Intel Mac version:

“Stanton Magnetics never requested the development of a Mac Intel-compatible version of the FinalScratch software within a reasonable timeframe before the partnership of the two companies ended. Native Instruments has completely fulfilled all development and support responsibilities towards Stanton Magnetics.”

This would seem to confirm that Stanton did ask for Intel Mac compatibility, and NI said no. That’s a pretty big admission, whether in a “reasonable timeframe” before the partnership ended, or not. NI then says the reasons were legal:

Native Instruments had originally planned to maintain FinalScratch compatibility in TRAKTOR 3 for an indefinite amount of time. Stanton Magnetics has however issued, and never retracted, a legal statement that has forced Native Instruments to remove FinalScratch timecode compatibility from the TRAKTOR platform. The announcement of the “FinalScratch Open” program in January 2007 has not relieved Native Instruments from this specific legal constraint.

Of course, this is the big irony of Stanton’s new “open” platform. All audio interfaces are “open”; the issue is the timecode for the vinyl control technology — there’s a reason the product name is Final Scratch and not Final Phono Connector. But, squabbling aside, what’s NI’s solution?

To provide a favorable alternative, Native Instruments will instead offer a special crossgrade that will allow FinalScratch owners to switch to the TRAKTOR SCRATCH system at greatly reduced costs, while even allowing them to keep their FinalScratch system.

There’s the rub. Current customers will have to wait for Traktor Scratch, the new NI product, to ship, and then pay for an upgrade. (For the record, street price on the crossgrade is US$395, versus $595 street for a fresh copy. Could be worth it, but that’s still a chunk of change.) Or you could wait for Stanton to come up with their own solution, though that seems unlikely, since Stanton by their own admission are a hardware company, not a software company.

Based on the two statements, it seems the two companies are both telling the truth — mostly at least. NI was the software side, Stanton the hardware side. The problem is, software support is a non-issue as long as Stanton controls the timecode technology.

In the meantime, there’s nothing stopping you from plugging Final Scratch into other software that does support Stanton’s vinyl control scheme, like DJDecks, and the upcoming Deckadance; the latter even runs as a plug-in inside other applications. (Important caveat: DJDecks’ Final Scratch compatibility is officially unsupported, though it works. Deckadance promises support for Serato, Final Scratch, and Ms. Pinky out of the box. In current beta builds, only Ms. Pinky support is currently functioning.)

Why is vinyl compatibility a legal problem for NI but not for other developers? As near as I can figure, the reason is the order of events: NI dumps Stanton. Stanton says “fine, then you can’t use our vinyl.” It’s difficult to tell, though, what actually happened between the two companies, only that both now seem to want to punish the other and win over the other’s lucrative customer base.

As CDM’s DJ editor Wallace observes, it’s hard not to see this as a divorce in which the real losers are the kids — the customers. NI and Stanton may be in equal parts responsible for the closed nature of the technology they developed, but it seems that in effect, they’ve made an excellent argument for solutions that give you a choice. Imagine if soft synths only worked with one brand of MIDI controller. Why shouldn’t you be able to mix and match vinyl control, audio interface, and DJ app? And if NI won’t support Final Scratch, why not support another existing technology in Traktor, like the excellent Ms. Pinky? (Or, at long last, plug-ins — especially since NI are themselves one of the biggest plug-in developers.) No matter how good Traktor is, it’s hard not to see open, flexible solutions as more appealing — particularly after this fallout.

If Stanton and NI are so keen for customers, their best strategy may be to put the customers first. It’d be terrific to see their products really be “open” — not just in name, but by supporting more different setups and playing nicer with complementary vendors. It’s not my opinion that matters; it’s the customer base. And both companies are now likely to lose customers and trust: Stanton because they have no workable solution, and NI because they give the appearance of forcing their customers to buy something new by breaking something they already own.

Updated: Native Instruments has responded officially with their side of the story. They argue that the request for an Intel Mac in fact came so late that there was no way to respond, and they’re now focused on their new system:

Internally, we have been working on Traktor 3.3 since January, which has a completely new timecode decoder tailor-made for the Traktor Scratch high-resolution timecode, with all the corresponding changes to how the timecode section is integrated into the GUI etc. Introducing additional FinalScratch timecode compatibility at this point is therefore not about flipping a single bit in the code, it would basically mean rewriting the whole timecode part of Traktor 3.3, just to accommodate a timecode format that we are probably still not allowed to use from a legal perspective, that belongs to a product that we are no longer affiliated with, and which we consider to be inferior to what we have designed in the meantime.

While everybody here can understand the disappointment of some FinalScratch users, and we really try to accommodate them as best as we can, implementing FS timecode decoding into the current build of Traktor is just not feasible for us.

Of course, this makes it all the more disappointing that Stanton seems to have fumbled figuring out their own backup plan for their customers. And while Native makes a strong argument for developing their own combined hardware/software solution, they do face other competition. We hope to test NI’s upcoming product alongside Ms. Pinky, Stanton, and Serato options, and the various software choices, and see just which hardware/software combination is best.

Those of you out there who do have Final Scratch 2, we’re curious to hear your plans.

Final Scratch Open
The Official Word from Stanton – again [Skratchworx]
Statement regarding Stanton Magnetics FinalScratch, February 23 [Native Instruments]

Native Instruments, maker of the leading Traktor DJ software (now part of their DJ line, have quietly announced they’re ending their relationship with Stanton, the company that makes the vinyl-to-computer interface Final Scratch. Given that the Traktor/Final Scratch combination has been dominant in the DJ club world, that’s big news. Here’s what Native had to say announcing the “mutual” decision. (I cut the part where Stanton said “we’ve been together for several years now — where is this relationship going?” and Native said something about how they “really liked Stanton” but things had been getting a little “too hot and heavy” and that “maybe the best thing would be a break.”)

The successful partnership with Stanton Magnetics based on the pioneering FinalScratch digital DJ system will mutually expire in 2006, with both companies focusing on their respective product lines from that date on. Native Instruments will continue to maintain the FinalScratch user forum on its website until December 31st 2006.

I was planning on calling on my secret informant deep inside NI’s Berlin headquarters to find out what was going on, but it turns out it’s in black and white right in the press release:

In the future, the DJ Division of Native Instruments will completely concentrate its operations on the TRAKTOR platform, and will also develop integrated solutions for the DJ market based on its own internal hardware engineering capabilities and expertise.

There’s your answer: NI clearly wants to build their own hardware instead of relying on Stanton (unless they’re planning on using their “internal engineering capabilities and expertise” to build model airplanes or something).

So, good news or bad news? I think that depends entirely on what NI plans for their hardware. Personally, to me the core of what Traktor is is, well, Traktor. Now that NI has had some experience building a plug-in host in the form of Kore, it’d be great to see Traktor DJ take on plug-in support and other software features. And if there is hardware, it’ll be up to NI to prove they can offer something existing offerings don’t do already. Of course, for DJs who really want to redefine their techniques in digital terms, NI’s real strength is its wild sound-mangling capabilities in Reaktor, but I won’t kid myself about the size of the market for that — part of what makes it cool is that the experimental DJs doing crazy things with Reaktor are a radical, fringe group. The reality on Final Scratch may simply be that it’s a technology others can replicate; even M-Audio recently jumped in with its own hardware product line.

The best news: NI is dropping its confusing product names like “Traktor DJ Studio” and going with “Traktor”, which is what we called it anyway.

In the meantime, here’s my hope. I don’t think anything can replace the feel of real turntables, any more than I would give up playing acoustic pianos forever as a pianist. But there are a number of good products for connecting vinyl to Final Scratch. What there isn’t out there is a strong control surface for DJs, many of whom have developed new techniques in Traktor, Live, Reaktor, Max/MSP, and others, to say nothing of VJs. I’d love to see NI apply some experience to that; so far we’ve had a few knobs and foot pedals here and there, but no hardware that’s yet as striking as NI’s software.