Revisiting and Rediscovering the V-Synth

It is well documented I am a music gear nerd.  Every once in a while, I go back and dig out the manual for a piece of gear I have had for a while to get reacquainted with it and to spur new ideas for sounds and music. Last night, I cracked open the manual for the Roland V-Synth XT, which I’ve had for about 6 years now but haven’t really used that heavily.

The Roland V-Synth XT. You can't see from this picture, but the rack case has a cool pivoting case. The eight knobs provide a lot of control, and you can switch the touchscreen into a fun control surface.

I’m glad I did. I always thought the V-Synth sounded amazing, and I remember playing the keyboard version in the store when it was released. I liked how one could warp loops and samples using the touchpad, and I thought the overall sound of the machine was great. Then, Roland released the rackmount XT version which also includes a vocal modeling program as well as a D-50 model. I splurged and spent some of my signing bonus at Microsoft on the XT.

Last night I read the XT’s manual cover to cover and switched on the V-Synth to play with some of the features I read about. The effects section on this machine is amazing, with three distinct processors. There’s a multi-fx processor, a chorus/flanger, and a reverberator with flexible routing across the modules. The multi module has just about every effect you can think of plus some stacks, like phaser and delay in one program. The chorus sounds amazing and even approaches the richness of the Juno-60’s chorus.  One of the oscillator types in the voice architecture is “external in,” so one can use the V-Synth as a fancy effects processor.  Fancy in this case means up to four filters with envelopes/amplifier running into up to three powerful effects algorithms.

With a synthesizer of this complexity, it is easy to get overwhelmed with depth. But somehow Roland managed to keep it intuitive. The analog-style waveforms sound pretty good, and the VariPhrase/PCM oscillators have a great deal of depth. Some surprises to me were that the V-Synth has a built in sampler that actually seems more full featured than the dedicated samplers I have. You trade polyphony (e. g. 64 voices in the e6400/S5000) for the ability to play back sounds and change speed and/or pitch independently. There’s also this cool mode in which you set up a sample with specified temporal points and each successive key press steps to the next one – great for sampled beats.

While I was trying out some ideas on the V-Synth after reading in the manual, I stumbled upon the first limitation that made me feel a little disappointed. I was using the square wave oscillator and the LFO to modulate pulse width. Then, I wanted to route an LFO to pitch as well. I assumed there would be independent LFOs for each, but that isn’t the case. I thought there was just one LFO in the V-Synth’s voice! I reconciled this by thinking the Juno-60 which I love so much only has one LFO… but then I found that it turns out each section on the V-Synth has its own LFO. Each section also has its own ADSR envelope, key tracking, modulation… so yeah, it was way deeper than I imagined. Score!

The Roland D-50 - one of the first synthesizers I fell in love with, circa 1987

The D-50 emulation in the V-Synth is also awesome. The D-50 was one of the first synths I lusted after in the late 1980s. While I don’t have room for another 61-key keyboard in my small room, the emulation in the V-Synth sounds just like the real thing, and it even is 100% programmable just like the D-50 using the PG-1000 programmer. I left the manual for this for another day, but it’s nice to know it’s sitting right there waiting to be rediscovered.

Programmer for the Roland D-50. Lots of sliders! This programmer also works on the V-Synth's emulation of the D-50.

Also on the rediscovery pile is the manual for the Eventide H3000 D/SE. This effects processor has been a studio mainstay since the 1980s, and to me the sound even surpasses some of today’s modern processors. When I’m ready, I want to crack open MIDI control of this guy and see what ideas arise.

Old Samplers, SCSI, and Modern Computers

Using computers with old music gear gets harder and harder over time.  I built a large sample collection over the years for my hardware samplers, both by sourcing sample CDs as well as creating my own sample collections.  I have three old hardware sampler machines that I still use today: An Akai CD3000XL, an Akai S5000, and an Emu e6400.

I tried to make the shift over to software samplers that are available now, like Kontakt or Gigasampler.  But for whatever reason, I still prefer the old way of using those hardware boxes.  Sometimes I think it’s the way they sound, and other times I think my fingers just know how to program those front panels faster than I could do the same thing on a computer with a mouse.  Perhaps I just like the tactile interface.

Whatever the reason, it’s hard for me to let go of those old samplers.  And of course, I want to efficiently get sounds into and out of them so the sample library isn’t static.  I definitely do not want to edit the waveforms themselves in the sampler; this is one place where a large screen and mouse blows away working on the hardware.

That’s where the friction begins.  Of course I’d love to be able to plug in any of these devices to my computer via USB (more on that in a minute), but the older devices like the Emu and the CD3000XL don’t have USB.  Instead, they used the SCSI bus to get sounds in and out of their memories.  And if any of you out there have used SCSI before, you know what a pain it can be.  Is the chain terminated?  What IDs are in use?  Do I have the right driver?  Can I hot-swap devices?

I spent a lot of time troubleshooting this part of my studio, how the samplers communicate with a modern computer.  I’d like to share what I learned, in case any of you out there are also gluttons for punishment: you love your old samplers, but you want to use modern computer hardware with them.  Of course, your mileage may vary, and I don’t claim to have all the answers.  However, the following worked for me.  Let’s tackle each piece on its own, shall we?  We have the rough structure of the setup, then each sampler to deal with.

THE SETUP

In my studio, my main writing and recording workspace is an Apple Macintosh computer.  I use either Cubase or Live for tracking, and these programs live on my main monitor.  On the second, smaller monitor, I usually keep a few windows open, like a spreadsheet that contains my routing cheat sheets and so forth.  When I’m using a sampler, I will also open the sampler’s host program on this second screen as well.  What this means in practice depends on the sampler I’m using.

The rack of samplers in my studio. From the top to bottom: Akai S5000, Glyph SCSI switch, E-mu e6400, CD-ROM, Jaz drive, Akai CD3000XL

Over in the racks, I have a Windows 7 computer with a SCSI card connected to an Iomega Jaz drive, a Plextor CD-ROM drive, and a Glyph 3-way SCSI switch.  The switch is, in turn, connected to each of the three samplers.  I really only need to use the computer with the CD3000XL and the e6400, and it’s nice to have a CD-ROM and Jaz drive for reading and writing programs, samples, and so forth connected to each machine.

For SCSI adapters, I recommend some variant of the Adaptec AHA-2940.  Windows 7 doesn’t officially support the 2940, but since Windows 7 and Windows Vista are close cousins as far as drivers are concerned, you can install the Windows Vista drivers, and it works.  I use the AHA-2940UW, the “ultra wide,” single-channel PCI card.

The next issue we need to address is that the samplers in question use what is known as the ASPI Layer for SCSI on top of the SCSI buss in order for host software to communicate with the samplers.  This too is no longer supported in Windows 7, but you can coax this into working as well.  After downloading, unzipping, and installing the ASPI layer, reboot and it should be up and running.

Now that the computer is up and running with a SCSI adapter, driver, and ASPI layer we are ready to get the samplers talking to host software.  Let’s begin with the Akai.

AKAI S2000 SERIES

The steps in this section pertain to the “S2000″ series of Akai samplers.  Akai made many devices that used the same logic generation, all based around the S2000 chip.  These are the S2000, S3000XL, S3200XL, CD3000XL.  These are great-sounding machines, and one can fit some option boards in them for adding effects and a second filter.  The filter card is exciting, because you get a second multimode filter for each voice!  Akai produced a piece of software for this series called MESA that allows you to transfer samplers to and from the machine and to program voices, multis, etc. from the computer.  It turns out that MESA II still runs on Windows 7, and this is what I did to get it running.

Turn on the sampler before the computer.  Make sure the sampler is running the latest version of the operating system, which is OS 2.14.  If you don’t have OS 2.14, you can find it online by searching for it.  Place this on a floppy using the appropriate tools, and put it in the sampler’s floppy drive before booting.

When the computer starts, ensure that you see the sampler listed during the SCSI card’s post screen.  For my computer, it looks like this:

Notice the Akai entry when the SCSI adapter scans the bus

If you don’t see the sampler in the list, that means that there’s no way the host software will see it, either.  Check for SCSI ID collisions, and make sure your SCSI chain is properly terminated.  Cables go bad, too, so replacing the cable is another option to try if yours isn’t working.

Once Windows boots, we need to make sure that Windows can see the sampler.  This is a layer on top of the SCSI adapter.  Open Computer Management and then open the device manager.  You should see an entry for the Akai when you expand the “Other devices” tree node.

Akai CD3000XL listed in the device manager means the CD3000XL is on the SCSI bus and the ASPI layer is working.

If you don’t see the Akai listed there but you did see it in the SCSI card screen, that means the ASPI layer isn’t installed correctly in Windows.  Try it again!

Akai's S2000-series editor called MESA II

Assuming the Akai entry is there, you’re ready to begin using whatever software you want with the sampler.  MESA is great for programming patches and transferring samples.  You might also want to use Recycle, Sound Forge, or Wavelab to transfer samples to the machine.

EMU EIV SERIES

In the 1990s, Akai and E-mu Systems had similar offerings in the sampler market.  Akai had its S2000 series, and E-mu had its EIV series, descended from the Emulator line of products that brought sampling to the masses more cheaply.  Okay, maybe not “the masses” (Ensoniq’s Mirage keyboard was probably the best example of that), but E-mu certainly broke the market open with the Emulator.

The E-mu sampler I have is the e6400, which is based on the EIV engine.  Before E-mu was bought by Creative Labs and ceased making hardware samplers, there was one more revision of the Emulator line: the Ultra series.  These had the option of adding USB communication, like Akai’s S5000 and S6000.  But since the version I have doesn’t have USB, I’m relegated to the SCSI bus again.

Getting the e6400 to work with the computer is similar to the above section for the Akai.  Make sure the device is present in the adapter card’s BIOS screen:

Emulator IV on the SCSI bus means the computer should see the e6400

Windows will attempt to install a driver for the E-mu 8 times – each time, just tell Windows not to install a driver and to leave you alone.  You should then see 8 Emulator IVs in the device manager under “Other devices.”

8 entries for the E-mu in the device manager

At this point, the computer should be able to communicate with the sampler from whatever software you want.  Of course, the software needs to support the Emulator IV series for this to work.  Recycle, Sound Forge, and Wavelab all should work.

EOS-Link, a program from E-mu that brings the front panel of an EIV sampler to a computer host

One fun piece of software I don’t use that much but surprisingly still works on Windows is called EOS Link.  This software was created by E-mu, and it provides a way to see what the device’s display reads and to program the device from your computer.  It is a literal translation of the front panel of the device, though, so it’s not as nice as Akai’s MESA.

AKAI S5000

The last sampler I bought new was the S5000, and to me this was a huge step forward.  It had a USB option card on the way, a nice big screen, many filters, and more good options for expansion.  It also uses the Microsoft FAT file system as its standard, which means that instead of messing around with custom disk formats, one can just drop files onto a regular drive and read it on the Akai.  My solution for the S5000 right now is to use Akai’s Ak.Sys program from my Macintosh over USB.  I’m running Snow Leopard, and generally this works just fine.  However, Ak.Sys is an application compiled for the now-defunkt PPC instruction set.

With the new Lion version of Mac OS X, Apple dropped support for Rosetta, which is a machine code translation layer that lets Intel Macs run PPC-compiled software.  This means it’s the end-of-line for Ak.Sys on the Mac.  However, it still runs on Windows 7, so if I ever want to upgrade the operating system on my Macintosh I’ll move the USB connection over to the Windows machine.

Ak.Sys, Akai's software for the S5000 series and newer MPCs. It supports drag and drop file transfer over USB.

The S5000 series dropped support for programmability over SCSI, so the MESA option is gone.  But that’s not so bad, after all.  Ak.Sys is better, and the front panel is actually not that bad on the S5000.  Transferring samples isn’t that bad either, since it reads and writes a commonly-spoken file format.

JUGGLING FILES

All right, so now we have all the samplers talking to computers.  How do we deal with the samplers’ files?  I use Remote Desktop from my Macintosh to connect to the PC over wireless.  When I do this, I can also map parts of my Mac’s file system to appear on the PC.  So as long as I keep the files together on my Mac, I can transfer them over to the sampler of choice pretty easily.  If I’m using big files, I might put them on a CF card from the Mac and read them on the PC.  This doesn’t happen very often, though.

NOTES ON SOFTWARE

I mentioned that you can use Wavelab, Sound Forge, and Recycle over SCSI to these samplers.  That’s true, and there are more pieces of software you can use than just those.  But unfortunately many of those pieces of software have dropped SCSI sampler support along the way.  The last version of Recycle to support SCSI transfers is version 2.0.  I don’t recall the last versions of Sound Forge and Wavelab that support SCSI transfers, so you might have to do some digging if you want to use those.

Boutique Musical Electronics

The old, beautiful ARP 2600. These are selling for many thousands of dollars currently, much more than they were around the time they were being replaced by Yamaha DX-7s

It has never been a better time to be an electronic musician, at least as far as options for composition, sound design, and collaboration are concerned.  After synthesizer manufacturers moved to digital instruments, for a short period of time the older, analog instruments plummeted in price.  Enthusiasts like to brag about finding the $50 Minimoog or a $100 ARP 2600.  I’m sure that happened for some people, but once musicians grew tired of Spartan, single-slider data entry (a la DX-7) the demand for used analog instruments brought their prices back up.

By the early 1990s, very few manufacturers were still making analog synthesizers.  So the used market for the old analogs really heated up: $1000 and above for the old Roland TR-808s and TR-909s, $1500 for the TB-303, and $2000 for Prophet-5s were not uncommon sale prices.  The problem with this equation was simple: no one was making new devices to stem the demand that had risen for the old sound.

That said, what was happening at the time was the rapid growth of digital systems.  Synthesizers and samplers based entirely on digital circuits got better and better.  So did the computer systems, too.  In the late 1990s, affordable digital systems that could not only sequence and track music but also create the musical lines proliferated.  In 1997, The Propellerheads released their classic program called ReBirth (now available for iPad, it turns out), which packaged the most coveted analog classics of the time into a single, self-contained program you could buy for a fraction of the cost of just one of the old machines.

Rebirth simulated two TB-303s, a TR-808, and a TR-909 in a computer program with faithful accuracy to the originals.

Of course, the Internet too was ascending at the same time digital music instruments were becoming more mainstream, and with the rise of the Internet so too rose the communities of musicians, collectors, collaborators, technicians, and engineers working on musical electronics.  Those communities brought people interested in what were probably fringes of musical technology together for local meetups, gear exchanges, discussions, and so forth.  This ushered in today’s golden age for electronic music.

Now, there are literally hundreds (perhaps thousands) of small manufacturers across the globe developing musical electronics and software.  Moog’s famous modular synthesizer of the 1960s has been recreated several times over today.  Standardized rack formats, power supplies, and interfaces allow anyone with an idea and a soldering iron to plug in new sound generators and modulators.

Taking orders over the Internet also makes short runs of esoteric, specialized hardware such as the Monome and the x0xb0x actually feasible.  Many of these new generation of music hackers release their source code and schematics online for free.

Software is not left behind in this revolution.  There are countless developers out there cranking out code to implement new digital signal processors, synthesizers, and sequencers that plug in to each other using common interfaces, like Apple’s Audio Units API or Steinberg’s VST.  One can build a complete studio with multitrack recording, sampling, synthesis, dynamics processing, equalization, mastering, and more using nothing more than a computer and free software.  Using Open Sound Control (OSC) and tools like OSCulator or Max/MSP, one can even connect a Wii remote or an iPhone to the studio for musical expression.

The Monome 40h is a great example of a product that would not have been feasible before the Internet. These are specialized, niche interfaces but have wide visual appeal.

Most recently, we have seen new developments for musical technology in mobile devices, like the ubiquitous iPhone or now the iPad.  Gorillaz frontman Damon Albarn recorded his most recent album using only an iPad while on tour.

The number of musical instrument applications for the iOS platform alone is staggering, ranging from generative music inspired by Brian Eno to serious commercial music instruments from Moog Music and IK Multimedia.

Here at SXSWi 2011, Ge Wang of Smule demonstrated some of the invigorating applications his team developed for the iPhone and iPad.  To be honest, I was skeptical of the iPhone as an expressive musical platform.  Seeing and hearing Smule’s innovations and drive for true expressiveness in their iOS products made me a believer.

Perhaps the only drawback to all the great musical options out there is deciding just where you want to go with them.  New poly analog keyboards?  Old classics?  Piecing together a modular synth using boutique, limited modules?  Writing an album on your phone?  All options are on the table.  To me, that is a very good thing indeed.

Studio Tour, Part I: Mixing and Routing

My first recordings were extremely lo-fi.  I started with two tape decks, some Casios, and a Radio Shack 4-channel mixer.  I loved working with that old setup at the time, and I’m also glad I started where I did.  The economy of just a few pieces of cheap equipment taught me how to be efficient and how to work well with what I had.  Over time, of course, I could afford better equipment.  With this series, I discuss the equipment, workflow, and practices I use in the studio and have honed over time.

A little background

The workhorse mixer of the 1990s and beyond, the Mackie CR-1604

From 1993 to 1999, I shared equipment and studios with my friends.  We used the workhorse mixer of the industry during those times, the Mackie CR-1604.  The Mackie was a huge leap forward in terms of quality and price-effectiveness in those times.  The mixer had 16 channels, extremely good build quality, and sounded great.  And the price wasn’t bad, either; I think it hit the streets for about $900 at the time.

In the late 1990s, my housemate and collaborator Peter bought an amazing 32-channel Allen and Heath board that really opened all our eyes to what a good mixing desk could do for us.  It had parametric EQs, fantastic sound, and enough inputs to normal just about everything in the studio to a channel.  We were no longer bound by only 16 channels and only the lone stereo buss.

My first digital mixer(s). They were great for the price but not well-suited for complex mixes.

I eventually moved out of the house we shared at Studio 6250, and unfortunately that meant I no longer had access to the awesome A&H board.  I had to find my own mixer and workflow.  Unfortunately, money was tight at the time.  So was space, so I simply couldn’t afford the nice, large-format mixer I was used to.  I wound up buying two Tascam TM-D1000 digital mixers and chaining them together for my studio solution.  It wasn’t great, but I could finally start multitracking to my computer and mix down up to 24 channels digitally with 8 additional channels of analog.  It was the poor man’s 32-channel Allen and Heath.

I recorded my first album and lots of other music using this configuration, but it had severe limits.  The Tascams had only 4 sends, and the 4 busses were actually shared with the aux sends.  There were only two aux returns per board, and I consumed one of them with the stereo mix of my second submixer.  To make matters worse, the user interface on the TM-D1000 was counter-intuitive and slow.

Modernizing the mixing and routing matrix

The dual cheap digital mixer configuration stuck with me for about 8 years, until 2008.  Over time, I had been collating a set of requirements for the studio mixer upgrade.  I wanted a digital mixer capable of total recall with at least 16 analog inputs.  I also wanted at least 8-buss architecture and lots of sends and returns.  Digital mixers frequently have onboard dynamics processing, and since my old Tascams had this capability, I thought it would be nice to include it.  Basically, I was looking for a board that had all the features I got used to on Peter’s old Allen and Heath as well as those I had on my cheap Tascams.

This is where I spend a lot of my studio time: in front of the mixer. I have a controller keyboard nearby too, along with the subwoofer and nearfields.

Tascam released a new digital mixer after the little TM-D1000s called the DM-24, which was close to what I wanted.  It was fully digital and had onboard dynamics on each channel.  I toyed with the idea of buying one of these used, but then they released the DM-3200, a substantial upgrade.  The biggest reason I decided to wait until I could afford the 3200 was that Tascam produced a Firewire card for it that gave the mixer 32 channels of inputs and outputs over Firewire.  This would be a huge step forward in terms of workflow and reducing complexity for me.  Instead of having to manage a separate audio interface and routing that to analog or digital I/O on the mixer, I could plug one cable into the mixer and have full workstation support without additional hardware.  Plus, 32 channels of simultaneous audio at 24bit depth and up to 96kHz sampling rate far exceeded what I could do before.

Today’s configuration and workflow

An overhead view of the 3200. Like other digital mixers, the faders are arranged in pages: channels 1-16, channels 17-32, channels 33-48, busses 1-16, and aux sends 1-8. There's a remote page as well for controlling the computer.

So, the 3200 came home with me one day, and it is now the control center of the studio.  One of the great things about the Tascam is that the routing matrix is completely programmable.  There are 16 analog input channels with trim, 8 additional analog inputs from an expansion board, four assignable analog returns, and 32 possible channels of inputs coming from the computer.  It also has ADAT lightpipe inputs, which I use as digital inputs from my sampler.  There are 16 busses and 8 effect sends, which can be configured as stereo pairs with pan.  And finally, it also has AES/EBU digital inputs and outputs, which I use for two effect processing chains.

Its EQs are great, with four bands that are completely configurable from low shelf, parametric, and high shelf types.  And the dynamics processing is extremely powerful, with each channel having its own gate/compressor with sidechaining.

This sounds like a lot of parameters, and that is no lie.  The board has memory, and I have set up some templates to keep things sane.  One of the great workflow features I take advantage of is being able to quickly switch each input channel from an analog source to its digital source from the computer.  For example, I compose with a few synthesizers and drum machines on the analog inputs.  When I’m ready to commit to these parts, I record them into the computer over firewire and then toggle the channel inputs for those channels.  At that point, the parts are played back from the computer instead, which frees the synths or drum machines for other work.  I can also bounce the channels down to a submix and reuse the analog inputs if I want as well.

This shows you the patchbays in the studio on top with the modular synthesizer on the bottom. It's nice having all the signal routing in one place, which makes it easy to route signals into and out of the modular. Also, my cheat sheet can be seen on the left.

Once the mixer was the digital nexus of the studio, I also set up normalized routes to it from the important pieces of gear in the studio.  I have more than enough effect sends now, and I keep all my processors fixed on the same routing pretty much.  Two processors for delay and room effects are on the first two stereo sends, and the rest of the processors are either on busses or their own sends.  Everything comes back to a channel on the mixer, and I typically use slots 33-48 for the effect returns.  Almost all the synthesizers come into the mixer on their own analog channels, and sometimes I wind up submixing drums initially until I am ready to multitrack them.

The mechanical nexus of my studio is a bank of patchbays, like most other studios utilize.  I also keep a modular synthesizer near the patchbays in case I want to run a part through more filtering or processing.  It would be great if the 3200 had enough inputs and outputs to route everything in the studio without compromise, but that just isn’t the case.  Plus, sometimes it’s easier to physically route signals using cables than it is to program a routing digitally.  Something I learned from studying human-computer interaction is that when there is too much information to keep in one’s head, embedding that information into the world or the interface one is using helps.  To that end, I keep a color-coded printout of the signals in the patchbays taped to the bays themselves.

I keep all the vital signs of the studio on a virtual desktop so I can switch and quickly see DSP usage, the meter bridge, and so on.

While I’m composing, recording, or mixing, I also usually have a virtual desktop open on the computer that shows me all the vital signs of the studio.  On this desktop I can see the overall performance of the DSP engine, my master spreadsheet of routings, and a view of the 3200’s meter bridge in one pane.  It’s great to see all this information at once and just switch over to another virtual desktop with my audio workstation when I’m composing or arranging.

A nice touch on the 3200 is its transport and automation section.  Starting with the million-dollar super analog SSL desks of the 1980s, high-end consoles began to have their own computers installed to control mix automation.  The 3200 has this as well.  Even though I don’t use the automation much, it’s great to have when I do need it.  The mixer responds to and sends MIDI over USB, which means that almost everything can be recorded and sequenced in the computer.  There are a few exceptions, though, and that’s where mix automation comes into play.  Usually I record alone, so that means I have only two hands to adjust parameters during mixdown.  Being able to record just about anything I would do on the mixer for recall later is perfect for the few times I need it.  Pans, EQ, sends, and of course fader movements can all be recorded by the onboard computer in the 3200.

A view of the 3200's transport and mix automation section

Looking forward

In the next installment of this series, I’ll explain the digital audio workstation I use and how that has evolved.  The mixer and computer are tightly integrated now, and since I almost always worked with a computer for composition, this combination works really well for me.