I am a huge friend of tactile interfaces and the instruments that give me the most “hands on” control have a place in my setup. But on the other hand I don´t like the trend of tiny displays. Rev2, Microfreak and even the Analog Four give me the heebie-jeebies. I don´t necessary need a lot of information on the screen but the size that was industry standard from the 80s until 2010s was good for me.
The Iridium on the other hand has a very well designed user interface and the large screen makes a lot of sense. The (realtime) display of waveforms, modulations and sample management is a big plus and most of the parameters can still be addressed with the knobs. The touch display is a lot more responsive than a V-Synth (the only touch display synth I had before) but still not as fast as an ipad or iphone. But keep in mind that you hold a phone in your hand while the Idirium screen is in the middle of the synth.
I get the aesthetic reasons for not liking touchscreens on musical instruments. Part of what put me off about touchscreens was the Korg Trinity + I bought in the 90’s. It’s fair to say touchscreens have improved since then I also detest iPad apps for music, but it could just be an issue with my 4-5 year old Air2 (or whatever it is).
On the subject of longevity, I should say the screen on my Trinity from 96-97 still works good as it ever did, which is not all that good
The two products that made me rethink touchscreens were the Iridium and EssenceFM. I don’t know how you’d even go about designing knob per function without em taking up an entire wall in your house and costing more than a nice car. I wound up getting an EssenceFM and the layout is very well designed and organized. You tap the screen for the function you want and use really nice, precise encoders to dial in that parameter. Feels musical and makes sense.
Then again, some days I enjoy the more basic aspects of my eurorack, depending on what I’m going for
The one-sided argument here that touch controls are not good for music is a personal preference, not a fact.
absolutely, we are discussing preferences. no single interface type will cater for all situations and persons, but my belief is that there’s a disconnect between the musician and the instrument when dealing with a flat surface (i think this is the case for other touch uses as well but let’s focus on music).
Also to assume everything needs to be suited for live performance is as logical as to think every device you have needs to be able to run on battery power.
i don’t think it’s weird to assume that, given that we are talking about musical instruments. i don’t think we should expect less interactivity of our electronic instruments just because they happen to have a screen and an operating system. an instrument no matter how it’s made should enable the person using it in a fluid way and make it possible to become proficient (even virtuouso) at using it. how do become a virtuoso of touch interfaces? without tactile feedback there’s no difference to your fingers between a knob, a push button or a slider.
Finally just because the controls are physical/mechanical doesn’t mean they are good or precise for that matter, plenty of instruments who has questionable quality of it’s encoders and pads. Just as every touchscreen implementations isn’t poor and lack precision.
i agree. bad precision and bad quality is something that can affect both hardware and software if badly/cheaply manufactured. you can get super high resolution movement on a touch screen (using the entire horisontal/vertical space) for that, which you can’t in the real world. and fat fingers is also a problem for physical interfaces, not just software.
now, i don’t think we should not have touch interfaces in our instruments. some things can be nice to have displayed on a screen (waveforms, meters, eq’s) so there’s a need for large hi-res screens to play with. but i would not replace everything with a touch screen and call it a day.
as mentioned above the new Iridum strikes a nice balance between physical and non-physical with a large modern screen but with plenty of assignable knobs. maybe this is the way to go, maybe not.
In my case, I can edit a sound on one synth, without looking at it, while simultaneously twiddling away at another. This matters to me when I’m performing because I do a lot of work live instead of using prerecorded automation.
Also, the screens are fatiguing to look at. Please stop with blue LEDs and RGB. I bet years from now we’ll be hearing how they damage our vision.
absolutely, we are discussing preferences. no single interface type will cater for all situations and persons, but my belief is that there’s a disconnect between the musician and the instrument when dealing with a flat surface (i think this is the case for other touch uses as well but let’s focus on music).
It’s your belief based on nothing but your opinion, my argument was against the attitude that simply passed on their preference as hard facts.
It’s a matter of preference regardless of what one believes.
i don’t think it’s weird to assume that, given that we are talking about musical instruments
Of course, it’s weird, unless you argue that the majority here regularly do live performance with their gear.
It’s like assuming it’s only performers who buy electronic instruments, there is plenty of gear made that is made for music production and not at all catered to live performance.
But again most live shows i have seen with electronic music involves a lot of looking at the gear they working with, regardless if it’s knobs or screens.
We are also not exclusively talking about instruments but about musical gear in general.
i think you are hung up on rhetoric. i was saying we are all presenting our opinions, not facts. my attitude/preference/view/opinion/philosophy if you will.
personally, i don’t make a division between live and everything else. when i have my things hooked up it’s considered live then and there. whether i’m on stage or in studio it does not matter. the gear is the same and the same interactions occur. at least, the same inefficiencies occur with same type of interface.
i consider most things in my signal chain (that can be controlled by me) an instrument, so i don’t make a division there either. feel free to, though!
What’s odd is that people believe turning a knob or moving a slider is playing an instrument. Odder still is that I would imagine this to be a belief of a younger generation, but this doesn’t seems to be the case in this thread lol
Playing real instrument (piano, violin, guitar etc) requires a lot of muscle memory. Turning a knob doesnt require any.
Horses and courses. I like both
I used to make melodies by manually tuning captured samples in an old Digitech PDS delay pedal in freeze mode. Definitely took muscle memory to do that in a repeatable way.
I like the touch screen on the Quantum. Adds good visual feedback also related to the knobs. With sample based synths, screen feedback is essential for me. Remember if you look at the first samplers, there was the Fairlight ‘With Lightpen’, the Synclavier and the Waveterm. All based on screen feedback.
Elektron sampling has something like a mix of Akai S612 and the S1100 UI.
ya, lot of skill on that roland, for sure. and that’s why i said “a knob.” he’s go lots. lol
there was a fellow at my school who could do really complex farting noises by placing his cupped hand under his armpit while pumping his other arm up and down. he didn’t impressive our music teacher at all, but we all thought he was great.
id definitely choose a touch screen over a sweaty armpit tho
Personally I noticed the more I can “see” my music, the more my mind wants to dictate what’s going on. The more I’m forced to use my ears, the more my feel and intuition informs my choices.
I do like the touchscreen on my MPC Live for many reasons, but personally it is harder for me to get my mind out of the way when I work with it than when working with eg my Elektron gear or Dreadbox synths.
I also detest iPad apps for music, but it could just be an issue with my 4-5 year old Air2 (or whatever it is).
