The name “Jupiter” evokes some strong feelings among synth aficionados. Little wonder, than, that when Roland introduced a modern successor, the response was impassioned. CDM was one of the first to look in detail at the Jupiter-80, and I was surprised – given the tendency of this readership away from massive flagship keyboards – to see it become one of our biggest stories of the year.

Roland faced some serious criticism when the story it told about the new Jupiter was less about synthesis and more about the instrument-emulating Supernatural engine. After all, since the days of the original Jupiter’s launch, we’ve come to think of the synthesizer as its own category of instrument – not an emulation of anything else. Then there was the fact that the JP-80′s weight and cost put it out of reach of many musicians.

If those were your criticisms, the news out of last week’s Musikmesse should be welcome news. First, the Jupiter-50 is a Jupiter keyboard for those of you without big budgets and road crews; it’s lighter and more affordable. The lack of the JP-80′s nifty touchscreen isn’t bad news, either – new iPad integration means you can get deep into programming right from your tablet.

Second, the JP-50 and a new second version of the JP-80 significantly refocus on synthesis features. I spent some time talking to Peter from Roland Europe at Messe about the synth stuff added to the JP. A lot of the effort went into behavioral modeling of classic analog filters. (See CDM’s hands-on video above.) Peter can’t say on camera the names, but you’ll get the trademark filters found on synthesizers from Sequential Circuits (Prophet) and Moog.

The new Jupiter-50, little sibling to the big JP-80 introduced last year.

Most notably, I got the sense from Peter that Roland not only heard but took seriously complaints from the synth-loving public that any new keyboard called “Jupiter” really needed to be a synth. Now, don’t get me wrong: I actually think the Supernatural stuff is pretty cool. I can easily imagine someone who needs versatility onstage or is programming film and TV scores or otherwise needs some great-sounding, wide-reaching instruments will really love it. It’s not anything you haven’t heard from big sample libraries on computers, but you get it in a keyboard you can turn on in a matter of seconds and tour with without needing a dedicated computer tech tailing you around. I think, ironically, those features will seem more appealing when you don’t have to choose between a keyboard that makes those sounds and a rich synthesizer. Now you get both of those things in one unit, and via the JP-50, one that can reach a wider audience.

New in the version 2 JP-80 and on the JP-50:

• Three new low-pass filter models, for a total of four
• New effects structures – yes, parallel routing as previously, but now a total of five structures including serial routing. This gives you the kind of semi-modular effects routing you’d normally expect on a soft synth.
• Quicker access to playing a single sound (without all the zones) called Registration Play, and SONAR integration.

Jupiter-80 Version 2

On the JP-50:

• Same sound engine as the JP-80
• 76-note weighted keys. (This isn’t the same class of keybed as found on the JP-80, but it still feels like a premium keyboard; I gave it a try at Messe.)
• Integrated USB audio/MIDI interface, and USB song player/recorder. This also includes, via an optional wireless dongle, the ability to wirelessly stream MIDI and audio to an iPad or iPhone – new functionality also demoed at Messe last week.

Jupiter-50

No official pricing yet, but word is it’ll be significantly less (of course) than the 80, and availability is planned for late spring.

My colleague Steve Fortner at Keyboard Magazine got an exclusive first look at the JP-50. There’s an extensive video series, but to get you started, here’s the sound programming vid:

See the full hands-on (and this, naturally, covers some of what’s new in the v2 firmware upgrade for the JP-80):
Roland Jupiter-50 Hands-on [Keyboard Magazine USA]

Previously:
First Look at Roland Jupiter-80, Images, and Reflections on the Jupiter Legacy

And little did I know how prescient the cooler in German words I uttered would become. Oops. (Hello from Berlin.)

I was actually pleasantly surprised to see our MeeBlip open source synthesizer make a cameo in the latest teaser video for Lemur on iPad, the app I saw in action at Berlin’s Watergate. I expect we’ll have full details soon – and I hope to visit the MeeBlip-in-a-book again soon; even apart from being flattered and gratified to see it use our synth, it’s one of my favorite synthesizer housings ever. But, really, truly, I had nothing to do with this video – that’s not me being coy; I didn’t expect to see it.

Yes, it’s jerky teaser vision, but I love the jam that gets going halfway through. (Curious about the drum machine sounds; no, the MeeBlip doesn’t make that bass drum sound – at least, not at the same time as it’s playing, since it’s monophonic.) I just hope this means we see MIDI out on the Lemur app, in addition to OSC – that’s be a big jump forward from what even the original Lemur hardware could do.

And yes, the secret’s out of the bag – Lemur for iPad will be announced by http://liine.net/en/ – though note that the MeeBlip is the creation of Gwydion from Konkreet Labs. Normally, I would refrain from posting this sort of video, but I rather enjoyed it.

Deep thought: if this is what this young person’s baby toy looks like, what will his computer look like?

Father Matt Durant writes to share a surprisingly spacey, expressive solo by his 16-week-old baby son:

My baby son, Austin, touched an iPad for the first time a couple of weeks ago. I loaded up Moog’s new Animoog app and was blown away with what happened. Mom & I have never seen him so dexterous and thoughtful with any object before. Luckily I had my iPhone within reach so I was able to record his ‘performance’ in video.

I’ve sent it to Moog and they have posted it on their Facebook page, and I have received personal emails from Michael Adams (President CEO of Moog) and their head of Marketing with praise.

cheers, great site! I’ve enjoyed CDM for years now.

http://www.moogmusic.com/products/apps/animoog

Animoog, while otherwise a beautifully-designed app, now has two downsides to consider: its cost is up from a buck cut-rate intro price to US$29.99, and you’ll know, in the back of your mind, you’d darned well better find a way to play better than a 16-week-old infant. That’s right. Austin just p0wned you.

I was accused by one commenter recently of drawing topics into a “polemic” discussion of iPads and interface design. So, true to form, let’s draw a baby – albeit an older one – into polemics. Baby Baphomet prefers the more tactile feel of a conventional Moog. The performance here is definitely less sensitive and nuanced. Perhaps we can agree to disagree – Baphomet as your top choice for your more forceful punk act, Austin clearly as the more lyrical of the two on Animoog. Watch:

(Side note: what kind of people “dislike” a video of a baby on YouTube? Like … really? Fortunately, if either of these young’ns does get trolled, they won’t actually be able to read – and, honestly, whatever they’re doing with their time is a better use of their life than us reading those kinds of comments as adults.)

Thanks, Matt, for sharing this, and hopefully CDM will last into Austin’s later years so we can find out how his playing evolves. Keep on synthin’, kid!

The Pocket Piano remains one of my favorite boutique creations – a devilishly simple, irresistibly fun musical instrument. And now, in addition to other subtle tweaks it has received, it gets MIDI – see video above. We got to spend time with the Pocket Piano at CDM’s Handmade Music Lounge at Solid Sound Festival, presented by Moog Music; video from that coming soon, to remind us of the warmth of summer as we slip into fall.

What does MIDI mean for the Pocket Piano?

• Send MIDI (controller): key presses as note messages
• Receive MIDI (sound module) all 88 notes of a grand piano, taking you beyond the previous 16-key range
• MIDI clock receive: sync the Pocket Piano arpeggiators with external gear
• MIDI clock send: send clock to other devices, and chain together Pocket Pianos

US$275; details:
http://www.critterandguitari.com/content/pocket-piano-midi

CDM guest and photographer Marsha Vdovin joins us for a photo essay. Given free reign to choose what she wanted to do, she visits a Buchla module maker. Photos can speak volumes, and here the beauty of Don Buchla’s synth designs come through, a decades-long legacy of open-ended, eminently-musical sound possibilities. So, too, does the craft of the custom Eardrill modules. Disclosure: while we loved both, a number of us preferred the Buchla 100-series modular to the Moog modular we had, learning synthesis for the first time back at my alma mater Sarah Lawrence. I’d love to see a Buchla versus Moog patch-off at Moogfest this year. Oh, and while I cheekily add this to our “Create Analog Music” series, the 200e is in fact a hybrid system. Analog and digital come together. It’s fitting.

I recently visited my friend Chris Muir, a musician, engineer and all-around super-smart and fun person. Chris has a company called Eardrill and he handcrafts custom modules for Buchla 200 or 200e modular synths.

What was your first analog synth?

I learned on an ARP 2600, although the first one that I could call my own was an Oberheim SEM that I drilled out to bring out all the internal patch points. A band mate had a Minimoog in the dim, dark past, so I got to play with that quite a bit.

In college, I got introduced to the Buchla, and it was love at first sight. At the time, I couldn’t afford Buchla so I went with a Serge Modular, which at the time was known as the poor man’s Buchla.

I worked for Salamander Music Systems (SMS) in the late 1970s-1984, and really enjoyed working on making advanced synthesizers. I sold my Serge and got into a good-sized SMS system.

Why did you start making modules?

I worked in and out of the musical instrument industry for many years, then while waiting for a consulting gig to materialize, I thought it would be fun to get back into module making.

When I worked for Salamander, it was really fun seeing something go from an idea to reality. I love having a design on paper become three-dimensional “just” by working at it relentlessly. There’s something very satisfying about that.

Why do you use a Buchla 200?

To me, the Buchla represents the road not taken. The question “what is a synthesizer” was largely answered in the marketplace by something resembling a Minimoog. Buchla was there at the beginning, following his own vision of what electronic instruments should be. The Buchla instruments emphasize workflow, and put a lot of musically interesting controls under your fingers. Most parameters on a Buchla can be voltage- controlled, so large-scale control structures can be realized. I resonate with the ideas behind it.

Eardrill.com

Buchla Love

Some more Buchla love seems an appropriate way to close this story. -Ed.

Moog made the scene, indeed. In this birthday week for Bob Moog, here’s a gallery looking back at the man and in advertisements, the Minimoog, the keyboard that shaped so much of synthesis to this day.

I could say more, but the images already say so much. Indeed, it seems we’re long overdue for a resurrection of this kind of romance with synthesis and electronic music technology. As I’m also editing remembrances of Max Mathews – a digital counterpart to Moog’s analog breakthroughs – I’d love to have someone do an image like the one on top for Max.

These images are also a reminder of how important the Bob Moog Foundation Archives are. Aside from being the source of these images, BMFA are working hard to get an accurate historical record of Moog and his circle. Moog’s legacy can easily be a catalyst for better understanding all early electronic music history, particularly in the US. Their work is essential and deserves our support:

The Bob Moog Foundation

The Foundation this week unearths an essay from 1951, as Moog writes – for college admission purposes – about what had already impacted his interest in science and learning, at age 17. Thank the Bronx High School of Science, for one.

I’ll let the rest of the images speak for themselves:

http://www.moogfoundation.org/
Supporting the Foundation

All photos courtesy the Bob Moog Foundation Archives, without whom so much of this history would simply be lost.

For more birthday wishes:

Synthtopia asks what you would tell Bob Moog if he were still alive.

Moog Music, via engineer Steve Dunnington, plays happy birthday for him on the instruments of his creation:

And here’s the history of the Minimoog I wrote for Keyboard Magazine last year, in which I sung one unsung hero at R.A. Moog, engineer Bill Hemsath.

Keyboard: The Minimoog at 40, and How A Legend Emerged from Spare Parts Bins

How do you build a new flagship synthesizer — and how do you make it live up to a beloved past name?

That’s the question Roland has taken on once again with the Jupiter-80. Shown to a select few starting at NAMM, then (very) non-intentionally leaked in the past few days, there’s a good chance you’ve seen it. But here, I’ll try to provide some technical details you may not know – thanks to ongoing conversations with Roland and the help of our friends at Keyboard – and also look back to the original Jupiter-8. Whether the resulting keyboard is for you, I think that reveals something of the path of one of the world’s great synth makers, and perhaps explains some of the impassioned reactions (positive and negative) to a new Roland.

1981 to 2011: The First Jupiter’s Legacy

Let’s get this out of the way: the Jupiter-80 isn’t directly based on the landmark 1981 Jupiter-8. And full disclosure: in the past, I’ve questioned whether Roland’s past monikers always fit the new models, as with their Juno-G.

But let’s consider the original Jupiter-8 for a moment. To most of us today, it’s the Jupiter as analog synth (technically, analog-digital hybrid synth) that we love. But that’s not the only story on the Jupiter. If it were, the Jupiter might be lost among other synths of the era.

Gordon Reid has written terrific histories of the Roland company and the Jupiter line. The opening section of his 1994 history of the company for Sound on Sound (“What have the Rolands ever done for us?”) is a must-read.

Reid in 1998 writes about the Jupiter-8 that its ability to sit transparently and clearly in a mix, and its all-around playability and feature set, are what set it apart. Ironically, part of what differentiated the Jupiter series was that it was a step toward the digital age. The JP8A was a precursor of MIDI and – more importantly – digital musical composition and polyphonic sequencing. You’ll see in coming days plenty of complaints that Roland isn’t doing an “analog” synth. But I agree to at least some extent with Roland’s leadership that analog alone is not the only essence of the Jupiter. (*See the endnote to this article below before you accuse me of a terrible heresy.) [1]

SynthMania has a wonderful selection of sounds, including the original factory patches and extensive patch sheets:
http://www.synthmania.com/jupiter-8.htm

Looking back through the original factory patch sheets, it’s also clear that the Jupiter-8 was intended as an device to simulate real instruments – a “synthesizer” in the truest sense. Remember that Roland’s history was intertwined with organ history. The Jupiter line was even designed in ways that could replace or augment organs, and certain features – attempting push-button access to the full range of acoustic instruments – owe their legacy to organs. They also were focused on economy and playability. Fortunately for us, the results – particularly Jupiter strings and brass – were idiomatic. Aiming for old sounds, Roland created new ones.

Below, Jupiter-8 demo videos — and notice the emphasis on the splits and layers. (More on that element and its relation to the JP-80 below.)

And that brings us to the Jupiter-80. The question is, what makes a Jupiter? Do you make a new synthesizer in the sense of synthesizing real instruments, or do you make something that’s a programmable electronic instrument in the sense of what analog synths mean to us now? The JP-80 does both, and that means the question of how well it meets those two goals will likely be high on the list as it is completed, shipped, and fully reviewed.

A Tale of Two Synths: The New Jupiter-80

The Jupiter-80 is really two instruments. It focuses on being two things:
1. A live performance synth, focused on live playing (not being a studio-style workstation)
2. A big pile of sounds

A comparison is way out of the scope of this first-look article, but the Jupiter-80 contrasts with Korg’s KRONOS. The KRONOS is sold as “nine” keyboards in one, and it really is as much full-blown workstation as live keyboard. The Jupiter-80 is more about playing live. The KRONOS is built on an Intel Atom architecture similar to the OASYS distinct from any other Korg product; the Jupiter-80 has more in common with other new Roland synths.

But – and this is where you’ll see some mixed reactions – the new JP is two synths in another way. It has tones that emulate real instruments and articulations, and then the sort of synth sounds that you’d expect for something that says Jupiter on it.

Roland tells CDM that they view the original mission of the Jupiter-8 as being expressive, so to them the SuperNATURAL engine is a perfect fit for the Jupiter – even as synth purists and programmers may feel otherwise.

But before you dismiss it, the interesting element is the way in which you can combine the two tones on keyboards. That isn’t hard to do on a computer, but if you prefer to play an all-in-one synth – or to do this on a single, integrated instrument – it’s compelling.

And what the Jupiter isn’t – whatever you may have heard on the forums – is a ROMpler. The derivative term “ROMpler” refers to instruments that more or less play stock sampled sounds from internal memory with little live control or synthesis. The Jupiter-80′s architecture isn’t that, on either the simulation or synthesis sides.

SuperNATURAL

The SuperNATURAL engine has already appeared on new Roland organs and the V-Piano. The basic model is to provide sound content that’s pre-programmed to emulate real instrumental articulations from a keyboard. That’s always been a challenge to sampler designers. In big computer sample libraries, you’ll find all sorts of tricks for key switching and sample variations and other ways of providing the full range of instrumental articulations on a keyboard. (The piano, after all, was never intended to do what a violin or erhu can.) The SuperNATURAL engine attempts to make those more immediately playable.

Unlike a conventional PCM synth, you also avoid issues like sample looping and phase issues. Vince LaDuca, Product Manager, Keyboards for Roland US, explains the concept:

What happens when a keyboardist is trying to reproduce sounds other than a traditional keyboard instrument on the synthesizer? This is where synthesizers today really fall short because the typical sound engine inside cannot truly “interpret” an expressive keyboard performance done on keys into an authentic guitar, trumpet, or violin performance – a guitarist plucks or strums strings, a trumpet player uses his breath, lips and trumpet valves, and a violinist plucks or uses a bow on strings. All the keyboardist can do is trigger a static digital sonic picture of sound he is trying to recreate, and each time a key is pressed, the same sonic picture is repeated, but at different pitches as played on the keyboard.

The Jupiter-80 solves this problem by using Roland’s newly developed Behavior Modeling technology. It takes care of the “interpretation” by constantly analyzing the keyboardist normal, natural keyboard performance, and instructs the ultra-realistic SuperNATURAL sound engines inside the Jupiter-80 to “play” and constantly “articulate” the reproduced sound just as the “real” performer would based on the keyboardists timing and interval between notes, the strength at which the various keys are struck, or if the keyboardist is pressing a pedal to sustain notes. These actions, among others available to the keyboardist, are translated by the behavior model for the selected sound being reproduced into an authentic plucked or strummed performance in the case of a guitar, aggressive or smooth bowing in the case of a violin, and the sharp or smooth pitch changes created by the valves on a trumpet and the pressure of the trumpet player’s breath. These are but a few of the articulations possible with Behavior Modeling.

Vince tells CDM that he likes the analogy of the keyboardist in this case as akin to the conductor of an orchestra. There is a certain suspension of disbelief.

There’s a reason I mentioned organs earlier – it’s not derogatory. Whether you deem it entirely successful or not, the Jupiter-80 is an attempt in the modern, digital age to stun audiences the way organs once did.

But for Creative Sound Design Lovers…

Okay, so you can have a really “magical” experience and play a keyboard and have it sound like an instrument. But for creative sound designers and synth lovers, does that mean you’re completely left in the dark?

Well, the Jupiter-80 isn’t entirely focused on synthesis, to be sure. You don’t get the terrific physical controls for programming Roland has sometimes introduced over the years. A touchscreen takes its place, but as some of the screenshots show, it’s not as programmable as a virtual analog synth today can be. (See the almost ridiculous range of options on the Korg Kronos.)

But one promising element – still in active development as I’ve been talking to Roland over the past weeks – is very much in the spirit of the original Jupiter-8, and that’s an emphasis on combining tones.

The JP-80′s architecture allows the use of four tones, each with its own effects block, each with independent controls, on each of two layers – upper and lower – plus solo and percussion voices. That 2 x 4 + 1 + 1 in the architecture, which are then mixed together. The upper and lower voices each have reverb; solo and percussion have compressor, EQ, and delay. Touch-button access looks to make it very easy to mix sounds.

Starting with splits and layers, you’re already able to use the massive sound content on the JP to produce big hybrid textures. A Tone Blender function then allows you to work more with movement.

The best way to understand what I mean is to look at the screen shots – these are prototype shots, so the final version may differ, but they give you a sense of what’s going on. And there’s no lack of sound design possibilities here. The Tone Blender mode, top, gives you some of these morphing possibilities. Below that image, registration and effects routings make complex, layered, playable sounds.

Vince at Roland has sent some hands-on impressions. (Yes, he works for Roland and he’s getting hands-on time with it himself – welcome to the synth development process, something I’ve recently discovered first-hand!) This is effectively unofficial — Vince’s own personal reaction to playing the thing. He writes:

It will allow one controller in, then map it to parameters of all 4 tones in a Live Set. I’m not sure how that works when you stack an upper and lower (8 tones), but will dig in more tomorrow. Also there is some extensive controller routing for each MFX used in a live set, of which I think can be addressed with the tone blender.

Another cool thing is how you can stack 27 oscillators, each with independent filter, amp, and LFO. Each “synth” tone has 3 oscillators (called “partials” with independent filter, amp, and LFO), and if you use Upper, Lower, and Solo parts, that’s 9 tones. 9×3=27. We’ve also modeled the JUPITER-8s UNISON mode, so if that get’s dropped into the equation, you’re up in the 70s! Can you say thick?!

While Roland isn’t introducing the 21st Century polyphonic analog synth of our dreams, what they tell CDM they are doing is modeling a wide variety of classic synthesis sounds, meaning this should still provide plenty of sound content for those tastes. Exactly how they’re modeling it and how the architecture works is something I expect to learn in coming weeks.

You Might Still Hate or Love It

Based on comments I’ve seen and heard, this may not be your cup of tea. The visual look, borrowing heavily from the original, is more of an acquired taste when placed into a modern context. And yes, of course, from sampled instruments to flexible sound design, the JP-80 really does have to compete now with software. That, combined with the cost of any of these keyboards, may mean that for hardware purposes many will prefer more focused designs to these sorts of flagship monsters.

But different as those audiences may be, I do think everything from simple soft synths to big keyboards deserve to be compared on their merits, and compared to each other. So I look forward to seeing what the JP-80 has done, and playing a finished version.

And as for whether you’d still want a Jupiter-8, perhaps in place of this newer Jupiter-80? Well, that remains an interesting question. It’s not easy being Roland: they company has a legacy with which to compete, too.

Stay tuned, and let us know questions – Roland folk are standing by to deal with us harassing them answer our questions.

Videos, Notes

From Sonic State, a session with Howard Jones, who worked on sound design with this instrument.

Keyboard Magazine shoots some footage of the engineers from Japan; typically these folks don’t talk to English-language press, so I do find it interesting when we get to hear from them.

[1] People are saying they want more “analog,” but they’re also saying they want “cheap.” I suspect what people may really want is not a new Jupiter-8, but a new Jupiter 6 – or a new version of the Curtis CEM that powered it. These brilliant, economical, musical chips were the sound of a generation of instruments. It was the combination of inexpensive digital technology (which Roland helped promote) and this chip that made synthesis accessible. James Grahame, designer of our own MeeBlip synth, has even suggested this could be a DIY project, which would be very exciting, indeed. I would love to believe there’s a next Doug Curtis – the engineer for which the chip is named – out there somewhere.

The point is that it’s the economical analog synth that people are imagining. Right now, polyphonic analog just isn’t economical – and given the capabilities of digital synthesis, it’s tough to make that choice. But if someone wants to imagine a new replacement for the Curtis CEM, that could change.

Updated: Roland tells CDM tentative pricing is set at US$3999.

John Keston of Audio Cookbook sends in a fascinating project: he’s producing one sound each day from a different synthesizer. Sounds like a great way to build up a library of sounds. He writes:

On January 5, 2011 I started a new project on AudioCookbook.org called “One Synthesizer Sound Every Day”. It’s in the vein of the “One Sound Every Day” project I did from July 2008 to 2009, except focused on synthesis. Last week I surpassed my fiftieth article in the project.

I’ve been posting self-produced sounds from a wide variety of hardware and software synths including: Casio CZ-1000, Roland D-50, Sequential Circuits Pro-One, Roland Juno-106, Dave Smith Instruments Prophet 08, Roland MKS-80, Korg Monotron, Korg MS2K, MFOS WSG, Max, Max for Live, and Cableguys.de Curve Community Driven Synthesizer with more to come.

Some of John’s favorites, he says:
Eerie Pseudo Oscillator Microtrack
Juno-106 Bad Voice Chip Glitch
Roland Juno-106 with Bad Voice Chip Restored
Synthesizer Noise Jam #3 Though Master Effects Chain
Music Technology Soul Searching

Check out the whole collection:
One Synthesizer Sound Every Day [tag]

“din is noise” is a newly-updated “tone board,” making the rectangular plane of its screen into a field of sound you can transform. The video above just begins to show some of what it can do. Pixels can be tones, transformed onscreen. A resonator editor uses Bezier curves to edit sounds across octaves. Each resonator, in turn, can be edited with yet more Bezier curves. Put them together into the drone editor (the bit you see in the video), and you can create vast, sculpted soundscapes from series of rectangles dragged around between octaves.

It’s all free, and it’s all doable for your mouse – a Linux exclusive that might convince you to dual boot, or take a second look at that netbook.

The results here tend toward the ambient, but if you’d like to tap your toe a bit to what you make, there’s already a stereo gate effect, so knock yourself out. And timbrally, you can use any waveform.

This isn’t just a sound toy, either; you can use MIDI, OSC, and …IRC chat?

More tutorial videos after the jump, because I really don’t get tired of watching this thing.

That said, watch for about halfway through the video at top for things to start to get interesting. Initially, it’s just some sine waves. “Yeah, whatever… another…” You skip ahead in the transport. Then big clusters of resonators start moving around, which should make at least a few sound designers say, “Hmmm….,” an evil grin appearing in the corner of their mouth.

For fans of similar concepts (MetaSynth springs to mind), I think you’ll like this approach, especially in a world of fake knobs. This is something that actually makes sense for the mouse, and makes me hope we see more Linux tablets soon.

Download source or 32-bit Ubuntu deb.
Don’t miss the awesome about page. “This is nothing new. / Some old men did it in the 60s! / Punched numbers into cards!”

“Modulation? / Bezier on Carrier and Modulator. / Eat that Chowning.”

Thanks to Ryan Dean for the tip!

(PS, no, I’m not personally calling Linux GNU/Linux. I understand why people do. But average people use short names. And the value of GNU is such an integral part of what Linux is — and other OSes, too, by the way, cough, Mac OS — that I think we can celebrate GNU without saying a clunky name. But if you do, carry on…)

Making music, making blips and bleeps, turning knobs, plugging in keyboards, and having the freedom to modify your gear – these are good things. And that’s why I’m so excited that today is the day the MeeBlip launches.

It’s been several years in development, but now it’s finally here. It’s a hardware box that makes noises – virtual analog synth noises, chip-sounding noises, good noises, bad noises, noises you can make into music. It’s got physical knobs and switches on it, plus a MIDI DIN in port so you can connect that keytar you bought on eBay. It’s also a digital synth you can build, modify, and hack, down to the way every knob is mapped and every sound is blipped.

The MeeBlip is the creation of James Grahame, of Retro Thing and Reflex Audio fame. (He tells the full history of how it came to be.) But we’re serious about the Create Digital Music name going on there, too. We’ll be documenting and helping develop this instrument for some time to come, and we’ve begun building a site and community for the instrument so you have a place to meet other people using it.

The MeeBlip, from code to schematics, is open source hardware. You can hack it, read through the code, make your own and sell it. At the same time, just because it’s “open source” and “hackable” doesn’t mean the MeeBlip is just for hackers. On the contrary – we wanted a synth anyone could play. With the Quick Build Kit, you can assemble the MeeBlip without a soldering iron or, really, much skill, in a matter of minutes. Plug it in, turn some knobs, and you can make some sounds. And if later you decide you want to go deeper or even change the way the instrument works, you can do that, too.

The MeeBlip is available today, shipping worldwide, for US$129. (Kit versions are available for those who know what they’re doing, for $79, as are a la carte parts.)

You can hear what it sounds like with some samples I’ve uploaded to SoundCloud. This is the MeeBlip completely raw – no effects, no sequencing, just me playing live and turning knobs, right into Ardour.

MeeBlip: The hackable digital synth – SOUND DEMO by cdm

We’ve got a massive site for you to go learn about MeeBlip and, if you like, grab one for your own. (The first batch ships within the week, if you get in on the first order.)

http://meeblip.noisepages.com/

Enjoy. I’m personally thrilled that the MeeBlip goes from being silent to making some serious noise.