Simple idea for developers of synth/instrument apps

db909

I would like to put this out there for you all to consider. If your app is a sound generator instrument of any sort, whether it be a full blown synthesizer, a sample based thing, a groove box or combination of any of the above and it comes with its own sounds/presets. Consider adding an easily accessible button to randomly select one of the built in presets and or user created presets. Some synths already have a random generator for new sounds. This would just randomly select any one of the built in sounds or saved/user created sounds. Because let's face it, sometimes you just don't know what you're looking for. And scrolling through a menu or pressing "next" a bunch is SO 2015.

lieslavish

That's a pretty clever idea! Scrolling through presets based on name, type, or genre does get boring, after so many years.

ExAsperis99

Well, yeah, but the alphabet is pretty damn random when the presets are named things like EVIL FROG QUEEN or SLIDING WINEGLASS.

Redo1

I have another simple idea for the developers...
Include a button to toggle keyboard shown/hidden.
For use with a midi keyboard, in hidden mode the full screen can be used for more controls.
Just like the great Moog Model 15 app.

lukesleepwalker

@ExAsperis99 said:
the presets are named things like EVIL FROG QUEEN or SLIDING WINEGLASS.

mschenkel.it

@Redo1 said:
I have another simple idea for the developers...
Include a button to toggle keyboard shown/hidden.
For use with a midi keyboard, in hidden mode the full screen can be used for more controls.
Just like the great Moog Model 15 app.

+1

Kaikoo2

@mschenkel.it said:

@Redo1 said:
I have another simple idea for the developers...
Include a button to toggle keyboard shown/hidden.
For use with a midi keyboard, in hidden mode the full screen can be used for more controls.
Just like the great Moog Model 15 app.

+1

-2 + 3 , You Win!

Will

Love this idea.

u0421793

This gives me an idea.

Towards a best-practice preset sound naming taxonomy (in another thread now)

bennorland

@u0421793 What you describe is perfectly suited to a preset tagging system. And is indeed close to what some developes do once they're buit tagging into thier virtual instruments.

RUST( i )K

Zillidrone

Has some of whay you ask.

RUST( i )K

ZMORS

Has some of what you ask.

RUST( i )K

@u0421793 said:
This gives me an idea.

Towards a best-practice preset sound naming taxonomy.

As stated above, people crouch and repeatedly press a digit against a box listening to the first milliseconds of various honks and bleats, searching for that perfect one. After about seven or so fall into the mental shortlist, we go back and completely forget which ones they were, and start again, or pick some we initially rejected.

The names, again, as stated above, are primarily at fault. The names are as far away from being truly useful as is possible to be. They’re just some artistic whim that floated through the mind of the synthesist, at the point they were faced with a save dialogue box.

I propose a scheme of naming. Many people name their own presets with their own initials, and this is a fair allocation of some characters as the initial “name space”, because it is the space for your name (or someones). Following that, we’d be tempted to do what? State what kind of sound it is? Certainly, yes, but how?

We could describe the sound, or alternatively, describe where it is to be used. Such different approaches have different outcomes. I would suggest avoiding the latter — the ‘where it is to be used’ direction, as what we might consider an appropriate use of a sound in 2016 may be cliched and dated later in a new genre of the future (think of orchestral stab samples in music of the past few decades, or crashing late ’80s snares).

I would therefore instead suggest describing the sound as it sounds, not where it should be used, and furthermore I would veer away from ‘artistic’ poetic descriptions, as these occlude actual guidance.

How to do it

My suggestion is to describe sounds first and foremost by envelope description. This sounds unusual but bear with me. A significant amount of the character of a sound is in the envelope, even ignoring what else occurs within the sound. After the creators namespace, therefore, I would place a taxonomic family description of envelope type. The envelope family names would be unambiguous to the extent that anyone — any generation, any language, anywhere on the world — would ascertain correctly what shape the sound is from the naming, most of the time.

Following the env type (and I really do think that that was the single most important characteristic in sound description), perhaps I’d suggest a property I could call “extroversion”, or “harmonic content”. This would simply describe how “in your face” or extroverted the sound is (and we all know how some sounds stick out in the mix like a dick in pyjamas, no matter what you do). It doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a higher pitched sound, or solo, or lead line. By contrast, an “introversion” naming indicates the sound will happily stand to the back, not demanding all the attention.

Following that I’d have an indication width or focus. What this would indicate is how “noisy” the sound is, whether it is spattered about all over the spectrum, like a noise hit of a cymbal, or shimmering orchestral strings, or voice “aah”s. Or, focused, such that it has a narrower area of leverage, like a piano melody or a kick drum or a synth blip, etc.

Following that, I’d have a classification of dynamic evolution — how does it change during the sound? Not much — it came out sounding more or less like it came in? A lot — once the note started it took you on a journey changing this way then that, then over the hill and back again with the shopping done. This is useful, but not as a “family”, more as a “species”, as some closely related butterflies are bizarrely coloured while their cousin is plainer, hence I’d put this last in the taxonomical naming classification scheme.

Anyway, it is just an idea. (Should I put it in a separate thread?)

Yes.

I have some things to potentially contribute on this idea. Mainly based on my designing various preset banks for various apps and techniques I have encountered that are helpful.

u0421793

@RustiK said:

@u0421793 said:
Anyway, it is just an idea. (Should I put it in a separate thread?)

Yes.

I have some things to potentially contribute on this idea. Mainly based on my designing various preset banks for various apps and techniques I have encountered that are helpful.

In that case, I’ve chopped it out and stuck it in a new idea.

db909

In a situation where you don't know what you are looking for, just want something that catches the ear, I think a random button is best. In such a scenario, the names don't matter. Now granted, you'll still be hitting that button numerous times. This would still be quite different from say, hitting "next". We all know how that goes: you get to a point where you're thinking "oh great, here comes the pads section, or here comes the sound fx section. Better get that finger warmed up." This may actually contribute to users skipping out on potentially inspiring sounds. A sound that pops up randomly might be given a second more consideration and sound better to the ear when it's not being heard as just one of many from the "pad section" or whatever section you're absentminded plowing through.

u0421793

The iVCS3 random button — I had no idea there were so many different types of silence.