Expressive E Osmose...

[TigerBalm]

(Oops I posted twice, deleting this copy)

[Rimwolf]

I have a ContinuuMini, and am really impressed with EaganMatrix. Soundwise it can produce the most organic tones I've heard from any synth since the Yamaha VL1-m. In terms of programming, I find the Editor very dense, but once I got used to it, really appreciated that you can basically see everything on a single page. The way connections are definable between modules is incredibly flexible: you can modulate the amplitude of any connection by combinations ("formulas") of X, Y, and Z, each with a definable curve; along with shape generators (think LFOs and ramps), macro controllers ("barrels" and "Gens" -- some of their terminology is idiosyncratic), smoothing parameters, etc., all in the same formula as needed. The point is that it offers a lot of flexibility in terms of dialing in the response you want from playing gestures.

It pairs well with a LinnStrument. All the built-in presets have a bend range of ±96, so one of my LS All Settings has that, along with 4 MIDI channels selected. (If you have more channels selected than the voice count of a patch, it ignores the extra ones; 4 is enough to audition most of the presets. I seldom play more than 4 notes at once on the LS anyway.) Many of these patches are LS-playable without any tweaking. I have the right split set up as 8 MIDI sliders, mapped to the 6 macro controllers, volume, and reverb mix.

Now, I'm one of those people that like Pd etc., but I really find the matrix setup more usable, because it's all right there. Pd tends to get really messy with the control logic, but with EaganMatrix that's all nicely split off in the formulas.

I got my C'Mini during their Kickstarter, and spent some time wrapping my head around EaganMatrix earlier this year. It needs a MIDI host between it and the LS, so I was usually using my computer for that. Since I have MainStage, Bazille, and some favorite patches on that already, mostly ended up just using those. But that computer's in repair now, and I'm using a much older slower one. I downloaded the editor on that and really concentrated for the last while on EaganMatrix, and am really digging into it and digging it. I did set up a Raspberry Pi to be usable as a Host between the two, which was a different geeky venture.

A separate box along the lines of the Osmose UI with a MIDI Host port would be great for my purposes. With the Mac, once I got a few patches to my liking, I spent most of my LS time just playing them. So that's how I'd use an EaganMatrix box as well: hook up the computer when I want to create or tweak patches, and otherwise just plug and play.

By the by, if you've watched the Osmose videos (particularly the gestures one), you'll have seen them get a mandolin-like strum from pumping a key up and down. I've found some C'Mini patches that respond to the same technique on the LS, vertically vibrating my finger on a pad.

[Rimwolf]

A simple example is I wanted to tune one oscillator against another, say a 5th. I'm a pretty technical guy and could not work out from the documentation how to do this.

It occurred to me that you could just multiply the frequency (for a just 5th) by 1.5.

(Edit) Or you can transpose the X curve in a formula.

[TigerBalm]

Lippold’s response about not having time to “take on another controller” suggests that he may have misunderstood your question.

I’m curious. For those of you who highly value having the Eagan Matrix in a stand-alone box, do you have a Continuum or ContinuuMini and therefore your interest comes from extensive experience with the Eagan Matrix, or is your interest second hand, having read others’ praise or watched videos of it?

Oh nice catch, I sent a follow up email to clarify.

I am just interested second hand. I liked the sounds of the Continuumini in Loopop’s video.

[BobDog]

A simple example is I wanted to tune one oscillator against another, say a 5th. I'm a pretty technical guy and could not work out from the documentation how to do this.

It occurred to me that you could just multiply the frequency (for a just 5th) by 1.5.

You don't have the frequency though, you have W, X, Y and Z.

(Edit) Or you can transpose the X curve in a formula.

You can change the Zero point settings in the X component, this was how it was done before they added the NN to kilohertz transformation. The patch "Martian Landing Pad" does it like this.

I got all this info from Edmund Eagen himself, as I said I couldn't work it out and needed help!

I have attached a patch that uses the NN transformation to play a 5th.

[Rimwolf]

You don't have the frequency though, you have W, X, Y and Z.

? The output of the X formula is the frequency in kHz, equivalent to a formula with X at center point C5 and transfer function "Convert result to kHz".

[t-IB]

Lippold’s response about not having time to “take on another controller” suggests that he may have misunderstood your question.

I’m curious. For those of you who highly value having the Eagan Matrix in a stand-alone box, do you have a Continuum or ContinuuMini and therefore your interest comes from extensive experience with the Eagan Matrix, or is your interest second hand, having read others’ praise or watched videos of it?

In my case its second hand in that I've been really impressed with some of the sounds I've heard coaxed out of it. In honesty I think id hate the programming - I'm very much hardware interface focussed - but I'm hopeful the end would justify the means enough for me to persist with it.

[BobDog]

You don't have the frequency though, you have W, X, Y and Z.

? The output of the X formula is the frequency in kHz, equivalent to a formula with X at center point C5 and transfer function "Convert result to kHz".

So what is your formula?

[mrspiral]

My understanding is that Expressive E is well aware of EaganMatrix's reputation for being completely impenetrable by non-coders, and along with the hardware development and construction, a major effort is underway to create more easily usable software for programming the synth engine. At the very least, the Osmose will ship with a huge pile of optimized presets.

[John the Savage]

Lippold’s response about not having time to “take on another controller” suggests that he may have misunderstood your question.

I’m curious. For those of you who highly value having the Eagan Matrix in a stand-alone box, do you have a Continuum or ContinuuMini and therefore your interest comes from extensive experience with the Eagan Matrix, or is your interest second hand, having read others’ praise or watched videos of it?

Given the complexity and esoteric operations of the EaganMatrix, I'm pretty sure that Lippold's answer is based on the presumption that the average user is expecting a library of presets, custom tailored to their controller of choice. To be fair, that's probably true, and probably necessary. However, my suggestion of making a standalone EaganMatrix, at least in theory anyway, includes having the available macro controllers cover a reasonable range of essential (and sensible) synthesis functions: i.e. like tuning an oscillator, for instance, as Andy suggested earlier. The community can take if from there, if code and algebra are required. That said, I don't see how it needs to be as complicated as it is currently; but then, I don't pretend to understand what all was involved in making the EaganMatrix either.

Anyway, no, I don't personally have any hands-on experience with programming the EaganMatrix. I mean, without buying a Continuum, how could you? I've just heard what it can do, watched a few tutorials on how to make it make sound (as if), and I'm not one to shy away from a technical challenge (within reason, of course).

At the end of the day, I'd be just as happy if someone put Equator in a box. I just look at the left-most side of the Osmose—with its screen, knobs, and sliders—knowing there is a comprehensive MPE synth inside, and can’t help but think "if only"... (sigh).

Cheers!

[Rimwolf]

So what is your formula?

Formula C in the attachment:
C = W * X, where W=1.5, X with center=C5, range=(-1.0, 1.0), transform = to kHz

I'm not saying this is "better". It's a technique that works when you're more interested in frequency ratios (overtones, say). What you posted works well when you're interested in equal-tempered intervals.

[Tj Shredder]

So what is your formula?

Formula C in the attachment:
C = W * X, where W=1.5, X with center=C5, range=(-1.0, 1.0), transform = to kHz

I'm not saying this is "better". It's a technique that works when you're more interested in frequency ratios (overtones, say). What you posted works well when you're interested in equal-tempered intervals.

The range has first to be transformed into a frequency, then you can multiply by a ratio. The same distance to the right of a C to get an octave is a multiplication by two, to the left, an octave down, its 0.5...

My hands on experience with the Eaganmatrix is playing for some minutes with the ConinuuMini at Super Booth controlled by my LinnStrument. I would love to get a boxed version...

[BobDog]

So what is your formula?

Formula C in the attachment:
C = W * X, where W=1.5, X with center=C5, range=(-1.0, 1.0), transform = to kHz

I'm not saying this is "better". It's a technique that works when you're more interested in frequency ratios (overtones, say). What you posted works well when you're interested in equal-tempered intervals.

Ah I get you now, you use (Convert result to kHZ) on X rather than (Proportional to Octave with nn to kHz at the end). Sorry fuddled brain last night!

[SteveElbows]

My understanding is that Expressive E is well aware of EaganMatrix's reputation for being completely impenetrable by non-coders, and along with the hardware development and construction, a major effort is underway to create more easily usable software for programming the synth engine. At the very least, the Osmose will ship with a huge pile of optimized presets.

Yes thats great to hear, and makes sense. I've used Expressive E's Lie app for the Touche and their aesthetic and UI approaches are very different to the EaganMatrix. And a lot of the evolution of the Continuum and what side of the musical universe it has come from is kind of baked into the existing UI - eg it was designed to be simpler and more domain specific than Kyma, but thats still a different world to what many synth heads are comfortable in.

I agree about the optimised presets. That and getting the on screen parameter (barrel) controls on the Osmose itself right are the important foundational steps. Then a facelift of the editor app would be sufficient to remove some of the superficial criticisms. To actually make it far more accessible would require further steps that would probably require some changes on the conceptual level (of the UI at least). If it happens then bravo, if not then there will be a bigger market for patches the hardcore EaganMatrix synth programmers make!

[t-IB]

Well I dithered and the previously stated December 31st pre order is now closed - not sure whether I'm relieved or opposite. Under normal circumstances I'd have jumped on this for the sound engine alone, and probably made use of the keyboard aspect as time went on. It's kind of inevitable that once cash starts flowing again I'll grab one of these to try the engine - with any look in the meantime John will get his wish of a standalone Eagan matrix box, since that alone was the pull for me...