The previous post attempted to cover the basics of String, describing its inner and outer workings, and attempting to unravel its mysteries. (That was a pun: string, unravel... okay, it was weak, I admit!)
Now our focus shifts towards the more problematic aspects of the interface and design of String.
String: Description
String: the last of the OP-1's many and varied synthesis engines to be covered in this initial run of blog posts.
I'd like to thank everyone who has offered encouragement and appreciation (and suggestions and corrections!) on the forums; this has been a considerable effort and, while it's generally fun work, it's nice to know that I'm not the only one who's interested in such minutia.
At any rate, with the end in sight -- at least the end of this initial pass through the marvelous, wonderful world that is the OP-1 -- let's press on and take a look at String.
I'd like to thank everyone who has offered encouragement and appreciation (and suggestions and corrections!) on the forums; this has been a considerable effort and, while it's generally fun work, it's nice to know that I'm not the only one who's interested in such minutia.
At any rate, with the end in sight -- at least the end of this initial pass through the marvelous, wonderful world that is the OP-1 -- let's press on and take a look at String.
Pulse: Critique
The previous post discussed the basics of the Pulse synth engine: an oscillator composed -- unsurprisingly -- of two pulses, whose amplitude and relative position could be manually adjusted as well as modulated by a dedicated LFO, before being fed through an adjustable lowpass filter with a decaying cutoff envelope. At least, that's my best guess! :)
As always, I'm now going to try to discuss the most notable flaws or awkward design decisions of this synth engine, in terms of both synthesis and user interface. It bears repeating that this isn't intended to be a criticism of Teenage Engineering or an indictment of Pulse; it's simply useful and interesting to identify, examine, and consider the weakest aspects of a design -- especially when the design is software-based and thus relatively fluid and malleable.
Let the scrutiny begin!
As always, I'm now going to try to discuss the most notable flaws or awkward design decisions of this synth engine, in terms of both synthesis and user interface. It bears repeating that this isn't intended to be a criticism of Teenage Engineering or an indictment of Pulse; it's simply useful and interesting to identify, examine, and consider the weakest aspects of a design -- especially when the design is software-based and thus relatively fluid and malleable.
Let the scrutiny begin!
Pulse: Description
We're nearing the end of this first series of articles, which have been an attempt to document the OP-1's current bevy of synthesis engines.
It's funny, I've been discussing them in the order in which they're listed in the menu, and I only now just realized that this is in fact alphabetical order! Maybe I'm not the best person to be methodically documenting things, if I can completely overlook something that obvious...
Anyway, the subject of this article is the penultimate synth engine, Pulse. (I'm going to leave the synth-sampler for later.)
It's funny, I've been discussing them in the order in which they're listed in the menu, and I only now just realized that this is in fact alphabetical order! Maybe I'm not the best person to be methodically documenting things, if I can completely overlook something that obvious...
Anyway, the subject of this article is the penultimate synth engine, Pulse. (I'm going to leave the synth-sampler for later.)
Phase: Critique
The previous post was an attempt to explain/introduce the OP-1's Phase synthesis engine; how successful of an attempt it was is debatable, but it's at least an initial stab in the dark and will be updated in the future with corrections or supplemental info -- if you have any thoughts or ideas, please hit up the forum thread linked to at the bottom of the post.
Now that we've established -- no matter how shakily -- what's happening inside Phase, and put forth some guesses at to how, it's time to look with a critical eye and ask why its current design was chosen, and whether there are any avenues for improvement in future iterations of the software.
Now that we've established -- no matter how shakily -- what's happening inside Phase, and put forth some guesses at to how, it's time to look with a critical eye and ask why its current design was chosen, and whether there are any avenues for improvement in future iterations of the software.
Phase: Description
We are now definitely on unstable footing; in order to prepare this article I resorted to recording and analyzing recorded waveforms in a DAW. This is unfortunate, not only because it's very tedious, but also because it represents what I think is an unhealthy shift away from the ethos that Teenage Engineering have imbued into the OP-1.
Instead of engaging with the synth in realtime and constructing rich (if inaccurate) mental models, I found myself laboriously transcribing its output and endlessly scrutinizing waveforms in an attempt to discern the underlying mathematical models; this felt wrong. Yet, without such tools I wouldn't be able to explain at all what's happening under the hood of Phase.
This is the slippery slope at which I find myself: should I return to synths previously discussed and apply the same mechanical scrutiny? Looking at the waveforms would make the shape of Digital's main and sub oscillators perfectly clear, but using the computer screen to do a job best suited to my ears seems like a perversion of the OP-1 spirit.
For now, I will avoid re-examining previous synths "under the microscope" in preference for an approach more akin to taste-testing them. With Phase I will have to rely somewhat on the clinical results, and even then I'm afraid you will find many gaps and unknowns; as usual, there will be a forum thread linked at the bottom of this post, so if you have any insights or corrections, please let me know!
Instead of engaging with the synth in realtime and constructing rich (if inaccurate) mental models, I found myself laboriously transcribing its output and endlessly scrutinizing waveforms in an attempt to discern the underlying mathematical models; this felt wrong. Yet, without such tools I wouldn't be able to explain at all what's happening under the hood of Phase.
This is the slippery slope at which I find myself: should I return to synths previously discussed and apply the same mechanical scrutiny? Looking at the waveforms would make the shape of Digital's main and sub oscillators perfectly clear, but using the computer screen to do a job best suited to my ears seems like a perversion of the OP-1 spirit.
For now, I will avoid re-examining previous synths "under the microscope" in preference for an approach more akin to taste-testing them. With Phase I will have to rely somewhat on the clinical results, and even then I'm afraid you will find many gaps and unknowns; as usual, there will be a forum thread linked at the bottom of this post, so if you have any insights or corrections, please let me know!
FM: Data
Here are the lists of frequency and topology settings that I've compiled; there are probably some errors, and they certainly aren't very nice to look at, but this might at least help you to get your bearings a bit.
FM: Critique
The previous post provided a brief overview of the OP-1's FM synth engine.
As usual, I will now attempt to identify some of the possibly problematic aspects of this synth. Again, it is with the utmost appreciation for the hard work and genius efforts of Teenage Engineering that I offer these pieces of feedback; I merely want to address any and all of the rough edges that exist so that future versions of the software can be even more perfect and awesome.
Let's begin!
As usual, I will now attempt to identify some of the possibly problematic aspects of this synth. Again, it is with the utmost appreciation for the hard work and genius efforts of Teenage Engineering that I offer these pieces of feedback; I merely want to address any and all of the rough edges that exist so that future versions of the software can be even more perfect and awesome.
Let's begin!
FM: Description
We're now moving into the OP-1 synth engines which are perhaps less well-served by this blog; to be honest I'm questioning the use of writing this post. While the previous three synthesis methods were novel and each contained somewhat cryptic mysteries, in the case of FM there is almost nothing to tell -- and in any case I'm certainly not the person to tell it, having never touched a DX7 in my life!
I suppose that, having come this far, I might as well finish this series of posts, but I would urge any readers to please post on the forums (the thread will be linked to at the bottom of this article) with corrections or important information I've missed -- I'm sure there will be many omissions and errors as I move out of my comfort zone and start writing about the synths with which I am less familiar.
At any rate: FM
I suppose that, having come this far, I might as well finish this series of posts, but I would urge any readers to please post on the forums (the thread will be linked to at the bottom of this article) with corrections or important information I've missed -- I'm sure there will be many omissions and errors as I move out of my comfort zone and start writing about the synths with which I am less familiar.
At any rate: FM
Dr. Wave: Description
And so we come at last to that most glorious of OP-1 synth engines: Dr Wave.
(I'll actually refer to it as Dr. Wave rather than Dr Wave from now on, because whether or not this was the intended nomenclature, I think "Doctor Wave" is an awesome name)
Anyway: we have now reached the third method of synthesis currently available in the OP-1, the Dr. Wave engine. This is definitely one of my favorites, and very likely my absolute favorite -- it's got range, it's got personality, and it's really fun and easy to use.
(I'll actually refer to it as Dr. Wave rather than Dr Wave from now on, because whether or not this was the intended nomenclature, I think "Doctor Wave" is an awesome name)
Anyway: we have now reached the third method of synthesis currently available in the OP-1, the Dr. Wave engine. This is definitely one of my favorites, and very likely my absolute favorite -- it's got range, it's got personality, and it's really fun and easy to use.
Dr. Wave: Critique
The previous post attempted to explain -- or at least guess at -- the inner workings of Dr. Wave.
I mentioned several times that this was among my favorite of all the synthesis methods currently provided by the OP-1; this is not to say that Dr. Wave is without flaws, as there are some UI quirks of varying severity which I think could stand to be addressed in some way.
Let us therefore turn a critical eye towards Dr. Wave...
I mentioned several times that this was among my favorite of all the synthesis methods currently provided by the OP-1; this is not to say that Dr. Wave is without flaws, as there are some UI quirks of varying severity which I think could stand to be addressed in some way.
Let us therefore turn a critical eye towards Dr. Wave...
A Brief Aside
(This was pulled out of the forthcoming Dr. Wave posts since they were too long already -- even by the lengthy standards of the previous posts -- and seemed a bit out of place.)
Digital: Critique
The previous post saw me grasping at straws, trying desperately to glean some inkling of insight into what's creating all the crazy interference-filled noisey Digital grunge we all know and love.
As with the Cluster critique, I'm now going to try to go through the various things I think could be improved or at least revised somewhat in future versions. Again, I mean no disrespect and I have nothing but love for the wonderful magicians at Teenage Engineering who have devised this clever device -- I just want to probe around and see if perhaps there are some ways to improve the current state of things.
(I promise some of these posts will be effusive with praise; actually they all should be, but I'm taking the good aspects for granted and focusing on what I think the biggest problems are -- especially in terms of UI/interface -- simply because that seems like the more useful topic to discuss: since TE are still actively developing the software, it's not too late to change the course of some of these things. At least, this is the hope.)
And so we begin our descent into the depths of Digital.
As with the Cluster critique, I'm now going to try to go through the various things I think could be improved or at least revised somewhat in future versions. Again, I mean no disrespect and I have nothing but love for the wonderful magicians at Teenage Engineering who have devised this clever device -- I just want to probe around and see if perhaps there are some ways to improve the current state of things.
(I promise some of these posts will be effusive with praise; actually they all should be, but I'm taking the good aspects for granted and focusing on what I think the biggest problems are -- especially in terms of UI/interface -- simply because that seems like the more useful topic to discuss: since TE are still actively developing the software, it's not too late to change the course of some of these things. At least, this is the hope.)
And so we begin our descent into the depths of Digital.
Digital: Description
Today I'm going to ramble on and on about the Digital synth engine, and it will definitely be shorter than the previous Cluster-centric posts... but maybe not by much. Digital is a pretty bewildering and chaotic beast, and it's definitely one of the highlights of the OP-1 at its unconventional best.
Anyway, enough endless blathering: let's look at what exactly Digital does!
Anyway, enough endless blathering: let's look at what exactly Digital does!
Cluster: Critique
The previous post covered the basics of the Cluster synth engine -- my best guess as to what's going on under the hood.
Now I'd like to try and provide a critique of all aspects of Cluster, from UI to sound. This is maybe a sensitive topic, and I'm going to try not to sound like a pompous ass -- it goes without saying that the folks at TE are absolutely stellar and magnificent designers and my hat would go off to them if I wore one.
Moreover I adore the OP-1, so I don't want this to come off as some sort of bashing or flame-baiting -- I just want to genuinely inspect the current design decisions in the hopes of teasing out some interesting possible future directions or alternate paths, or at least starting a discussion about the whys and hows of each synth engine.
Anyway, this is the first attempt at such a critical treatment, so please bear with me as I delve into the wonders of Cluster.
Now I'd like to try and provide a critique of all aspects of Cluster, from UI to sound. This is maybe a sensitive topic, and I'm going to try not to sound like a pompous ass -- it goes without saying that the folks at TE are absolutely stellar and magnificent designers and my hat would go off to them if I wore one.
Moreover I adore the OP-1, so I don't want this to come off as some sort of bashing or flame-baiting -- I just want to genuinely inspect the current design decisions in the hopes of teasing out some interesting possible future directions or alternate paths, or at least starting a discussion about the whys and hows of each synth engine.
Anyway, this is the first attempt at such a critical treatment, so please bear with me as I delve into the wonders of Cluster.
Cluster: Description
I guess I'm just going to go through the synth engines in the order in which they appear in the menu and/or the 1-8 buttons. This particular post is going to be a bit of a proof of concept as I have no idea how to best format these meandering thoughts!
I think for the sake of brevity (or, realistically, slightly-less-book-length-ity) it would be best to split the discussion of each synth into two parts: a description of the synth -- how it works and what the knobs do -- and a critique where the interface and design decisions are discussed.
I should point out that I'm not an expert and in no way affiliated with TE -- or else I would have actual info to share here and not just rambling conjecture!
Anyway: Cluster.
I think for the sake of brevity (or, realistically, slightly-less-book-length-ity) it would be best to split the discussion of each synth into two parts: a description of the synth -- how it works and what the knobs do -- and a critique where the interface and design decisions are discussed.
I should point out that I'm not an expert and in no way affiliated with TE -- or else I would have actual info to share here and not just rambling conjecture!
Anyway: Cluster.
Hello OP-101
Welcome to the OP-101 blog!
The purpose of this blog is to document, discuss, critique, and investigate Teenage Engineering's wonderful invention. (That's right, I just rocked an Oxford comma; deal with it!) Or at least lots of ranting and minutia.
I should mention that there won't be any comments directly on this blog; the explanation for this is slightly long-winded so please bear with me.
All of the posts I will be making here were initially planned to be threads on the OP-1 forums. That's really the best place for this sort of thing -- starting a conversation/live document where people can contribute and add details that I missed in my first pass. Sadly the formatting options on that particular forum leave a lot to be desired, with the result that anything longer than a short paragraph becomes an unreadable mess.
Since this blog will allow tables, lists, fonts, colours, and other readability-enhancing formatting, my hope is that by posting my thoughts here -- rather than on the forums -- you'll be able to more thoroughly enjoy reading, or at least not want to tear your eyeballs out of their sockets. Hence I'll be posting here en lieu of on the forums.
HOWEVER
Not wishing to in any way fragment the tiny community, I think it's more appropriate if discussion stemming from these posts takes place on a corresponding forum thread which I'll create and link to at the bottom of each blog post. I'll try to update the blog posts to reflect new info gleaned from the forum, but who knows how well that will turn out: I tend to be quite lazy, and besides -- I've got better things to do than edit blog posts! (I'm hinting here that the very act of writing these posts is somewhat annoying, since every minute away from the OP-1 is a minute wasted.)
Is this a foolish idea? Should I just post on the damn forums and hope people have the patience to look at the horrible wall of text that results? Or should I just leave well enough alone and let people figure out their own interpretation of what the hell "Telematic" means? (spoiler alert: it's just a wet/dry mix)
Only time will tell.
Anyway... hello!
p.s - Who am I? Just an OP-1 addict who can't resist geeking out over minutia. Delicious, delicious minutia. In case you're interested, I've made a Soundcloud page for some of the OP-1-based stuff I've been working on: voila!
The purpose of this blog is to document, discuss, critique, and investigate Teenage Engineering's wonderful invention. (That's right, I just rocked an Oxford comma; deal with it!) Or at least lots of ranting and minutia.
I should mention that there won't be any comments directly on this blog; the explanation for this is slightly long-winded so please bear with me.
All of the posts I will be making here were initially planned to be threads on the OP-1 forums. That's really the best place for this sort of thing -- starting a conversation/live document where people can contribute and add details that I missed in my first pass. Sadly the formatting options on that particular forum leave a lot to be desired, with the result that anything longer than a short paragraph becomes an unreadable mess.
Since this blog will allow tables, lists, fonts, colours, and other readability-enhancing formatting, my hope is that by posting my thoughts here -- rather than on the forums -- you'll be able to more thoroughly enjoy reading, or at least not want to tear your eyeballs out of their sockets. Hence I'll be posting here en lieu of on the forums.
HOWEVER
Not wishing to in any way fragment the tiny community, I think it's more appropriate if discussion stemming from these posts takes place on a corresponding forum thread which I'll create and link to at the bottom of each blog post. I'll try to update the blog posts to reflect new info gleaned from the forum, but who knows how well that will turn out: I tend to be quite lazy, and besides -- I've got better things to do than edit blog posts! (I'm hinting here that the very act of writing these posts is somewhat annoying, since every minute away from the OP-1 is a minute wasted.)
Is this a foolish idea? Should I just post on the damn forums and hope people have the patience to look at the horrible wall of text that results? Or should I just leave well enough alone and let people figure out their own interpretation of what the hell "Telematic" means? (spoiler alert: it's just a wet/dry mix)
Only time will tell.
Anyway... hello!
p.s - Who am I? Just an OP-1 addict who can't resist geeking out over minutia. Delicious, delicious minutia. In case you're interested, I've made a Soundcloud page for some of the OP-1-based stuff I've been working on: voila!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)