the economic curve & xenharmonic keyboards (was Re: 72-tET implementation)

> From:  "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...>
> Date:  Tue Jul 16, 2002  3:00 pm
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> > --- In tuning@y..., "Mark Gould" <mark.gould@a...> wrote:
> >
> > > Oh for a lego style erv wilson / generalised Bosanquet keyboard
> kit....
> > ***Possibly. We'll see how those work, but as somebody who was, at
> > one point, a fairly accomplished Halberstadt pianist, I must say
> > there would be a significant learning curve.
> >
> > Joe Pehrson

Even leaving aside those of us without a hope of ever becoming
proficient keyboard players anyway, these would still be
wonderful tools for the composer in us.

> But if you want a keyboard that will do justice to 72-ET, then you
> would need something like this:
>
> /tuning-math/files/secor/kbds/KbDec72.zip

Nice !

> With the Decimal keyboard you would not be restricted to 72-ET. You
> could also have 31 and 41 or any just system that could be mapped
> onto 31, 41, or 72 (including Partch's 43-JI). The learning curve
> would be a little steeper than with the Bosanquet for 31, but 41
> would be better (compared to the Bosanquet), because everything is
> more easily reached.

Thanks for this, George. BTW, why is it called a Decimal
keyboard ? It's not something I should already know is it ?

> The major scale would need to be learned only 4 times -- the
> Pythagorean and best-ratios-of-5 patterns for each hand would be
> unaltered in changing from 31 to 41 to 72.
>
> I think the real problem is the economic curve.
>
> So dream on ...

Actually I *think* it may be more economically feasible than
most may imagine.

On May 24 (I get the digest, so don't know the message no.), I
sent a post to the MMM list, 'CV to MIDI convertors to build
microtonal controllers'. In it I mentioned Doepfer's CTM64 (Euro
€ 99.00 (i.e. about US$ 100.00 ;-) Contact To MIDI
Universelle MIDI-Out-Nachrüstung / Universal MIDI Out Kit.
<http://www.doepfer.de/ctm.htm>

It just may be possible to build 128-note non-velocity sensitive
keyboard controller arrays for around 100 Euros/Dollars each
which can be selectively plugged into the CV-to-MIDI board of
your banker's choice. Look for "tactile switches" on the www,
Radio Shack, http://www.e-switch.com/, http://www.omron.com,
etc. These switches retail for well under a Euro/Dollar each.

So Dr. Frankenstein, the 220 note beastie in your graphic
*possibly* could be brought to life within the region of 400
Euros/US Dollars.

The PAiA MIDI Brain, US$87.75, <http://www.paia.com/midibrn.htm>
can do velocity, but has only 8 inputs, so would work out to
considerably more dinheiro.

I bring this up again for 2 reason, 1 to share (such is love,
Charlie Brown:), 2 to see if anyone here could tell whether the
suggestion is realistic. I've never been much good with a
soldering iron, nor do I actually know anything about the
workings of electronics. I could program a VCR if I had to
though...

> --George

Cheers,
Joel

--- In tuning@y..., Joel Rodrigues <joelrodrigues@m...> wrote:
> I bring this up again for 2 reason ...
> ... to see if anyone here could tell whether the
> suggestion is realistic. I've never been much good with a
> soldering iron, nor do I actually know anything about the
> workings of electronics.

There are very, very many basic guides to electronic projects (I remember Craig Anderton had one that especially addressed the needs of musicians with limited 'bench skills' to build projects. With your knowledge base and a little common sense, I can't see any obstacles at all.

However, I've often wondered about this: why would anyone feel that building a non-velocity sensitive input device for music would be a valuable thing? I confess to never having been an organist, and maybe they could shed more light. But in these days of velocity sensitive sound devices (synths, samplers, etc), it is still hard enough to make music that breathes and lives. Starting right out of the gate with no expressive ability (from the kbd) would be a compromise that I (personally) couldn't live with.

But, as they say, YMMV...

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., Joel Rodrigues <joelrodrigues@m...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_38674.html#38674

> > From:  "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...>
> > Date:  Tue Jul 16, 2002  3:00 pm
> >
> > --- In tuning@y..., "jpehrson2" <jpehrson@r...> wrote:
> > > --- In tuning@y..., "Mark Gould" <mark.gould@a...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Oh for a lego style erv wilson / generalised Bosanquet
keyboard
> > kit....
> > > ***Possibly. We'll see how those work, but as somebody who was,
at
> > > one point, a fairly accomplished Halberstadt pianist, I must say
> > > there would be a significant learning curve.
> > >
> > > Joe Pehrson
>
> Even leaving aside those of us without a hope of ever becoming
> proficient keyboard players anyway, these would still be
> wonderful tools for the composer in us.
>

***Hi Joel!

Absolutely! I agree with you and George on this issue, and would
enjoy trying one myself.

But, ultimately, probably one would want to also use it as a
*performance* instrument, as the older Halberstadt was, and my point
(if there was one... :) was that it would undoubtedly require the
years of practicing, practicing and practicing that go
into "mastering" any instrument.

That is, if people still play *live* any more by then... :)

best,

Joe

--- In tuning@y..., Joel Rodrigues <joelrodrigues@m...> wrote:
> > From:  "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...>
> > Date:  Tue Jul 16, 2002  3:00 pm
> >
> > But if you want a keyboard that will do justice to 72-ET, then you
> > would need something like this:
> >
> > /tuning-
math/files/secor/kbds/KbDec72.zip
>
> Nice !
>
> > With the Decimal keyboard you would not be restricted to 72-ET.
You
> > could also have 31 and 41 or any just system that could be mapped
> > onto 31, 41, or 72 (including Partch's 43-JI). The learning curve
> > would be a little steeper than with the Bosanquet for 31, but 41
> > would be better (compared to the Bosanquet), because everything is
> > more easily reached.
>
> Thanks for this, George. BTW, why is it called a Decimal
> keyboard ? It's not something I should already know is it ?

It's the keyboard geometry based on the Miracle temperament, and the
idea first appeared in print in 1975 in Xenharmonikon 3 in a brief
article I wrote. I didn't flesh out the keyboard until last year
(with color coding, key dimensions, etc.), but I did post a message
about it late in May (#37151) that will give you some background and
details about it, including the name. (Also see Graham Breed's
decimal notation for the Miracle temperament at
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/dict/decimal.htm )

> > The major scale would need to be learned only 4 times -- the
> > Pythagorean and best-ratios-of-5 patterns for each hand would be
> > unaltered in changing from 31 to 41 to 72.
> >
> > I think the real problem is the economic curve.
> >
> > So dream on ...
>
> Actually I *think* it may be more economically feasible than
> most may imagine.
>
> On May 24 (I get the digest, so don't know the message no.), I
> sent a post to the MMM list, 'CV to MIDI convertors to build
> microtonal controllers'. In it I mentioned Doepfer's CTM64 (Euro
> € 99.00 (i.e. about US$ 100.00 ;-) Contact To MIDI
> Universelle MIDI-Out-Nachrüstung / Universal MIDI Out Kit.
> <http://www.doepfer.de/ctm.htm>
>
> It just may be possible to build 128-note non-velocity sensitive
> keyboard controller arrays for around 100 Euros/Dollars each
> which can be selectively plugged into the CV-to-MIDI board of
> your banker's choice. Look for "tactile switches" on the www,
> Radio Shack, http://www.e-switch.com/, http://www.omron.com,
> etc. These switches retail for well under a Euro/Dollar each.
>
> So Dr. Frankenstein, the 220 note beastie in your graphic
> *possibly* could be brought to life within the region of 400
> Euros/US Dollars.

The illustration shows only two octaves of keys, which would be just
barely enough to use as a tool for exploration and composition. For
a performance instrument I would like to see at least five octaves,
but that would raise the cost considerably (for both materials and
labor).

> The PAiA MIDI Brain, US$87.75, <http://www.paia.com/midibrn.htm>
> can do velocity, but has only 8 inputs, so would work out to
> considerably more dinheiro.
>
> I bring this up again for 2 reason, 1 to share (such is love,
> Charlie Brown:), 2 to see if anyone here could tell whether the
> suggestion is realistic. I've never been much good with a
> soldering iron,

If you mounted and wired the switches yourself, you'd probably get
enough practice soldering to get proficient at it.

> nor do I actually know anything about the
> workings of electronics. I could program a VCR if I had to
> though...

And I'm sure there are a few people here with electronics expertise
that could give you some guidance.

--George

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:
>
> However, I've often wondered about this: why would anyone feel that
building a non-velocity sensitive input device for music would be a
valuable thing? I confess to never having been an organist, and maybe
they could shed more light. But in these days of velocity sensitive
sound devices (synths, samplers, etc), it is still hard enough to
make music that breathes and lives. Starting right out of the gate
with no expressive ability (from the kbd) would be a compromise that
I (personally) couldn't live with.

Hi, Jon!

When Scalatrons were made with the generalized keyboard (3 in all) in
the 1970's, velocity-sensitive keys were very new and very expensive,
so they were out of the question, but they were provided with
expression pedals. Mine has three, two to control volume (for
separate output channels) and one to serve as an analog voltage-
control device.

Much more recent synthesizers that I have tried (with velocity-
sensitive keys) lacked an expression pedal -- evidently somebody
thought it was unnecessary. That's fine with a percussive timbre
such as piano or harpsichord. But trying to control the volume with
a sustained timbre (such as organ or a synthesized wind instrument)
with only velocity-sensitive keys drove me nuts -- there was no way
to control the volume once the key was down. And I hate those string
section patches in which the tone gradually oozes in with a slow
crescendo -- they're about as musically phony as it gets.

Give me a choice between velocity-sensitive keys and an expression
pedal, and I'll take the pedal any day.

--George

Hello to you, George!

--- In tuning@y..., "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...> wrote:
> Much more recent synthesizers that I have tried (with velocity-
> sensitive keys) lacked an expression pedal -- evidently somebody
> thought it was unnecessary.
> ...
> Give me a choice between velocity-sensitive keys and an expression
> pedal, and I'll take the pedal any day.

I haven't shopped in the last year or so, but most all of the kbds I've ever looked at in the last decade or so had both sustain and velocity-control pedal inputs on the back (1/4" phone jacks). I don't know *how* widespread it is, but my impression with many that I looked at handled the second pedal in a programmable fashion: you could assign it to any of the midi control messages, and therefore use it as a volume pedal, or modulation (to keep both hands on the kbd instead of reaching for the wheel), or other assignable feature.

Beyond that, there are a number of companies that make midi interface control units that would accept a pedal as one of the control sources.

Cake: had *and* eaten!

Cheers,
Jon

gdsecor wrote:

> When Scalatrons were made with the generalized keyboard (3 in all) in
> the 1970's, velocity-sensitive keys were very new and very expensive,
> so they were out of the question, but they were provided with
> expression pedals. Mine has three, two to control volume (for
> separate output channels) and one to serve as an analog voltage-
> control device.

My ZTar (which is a MIDI input device shaped like a guitar) is usually set
up so that the left hand keyboard has no velocity response. Even if it is
sensitive, it isn't that easy to control the velocity. You get nowhere
near as much control as a weighted keyboard. The advantage is that,
because the travel's short, and each string is monophonic I can play very,
very fast on it. I assume wind instruments are the same although I don't
have experience with good ones.

The key triggers aren't that expressive, but I am getting the hang of
them. The expression pads are very good and I'll work out something for
them sometime.

No demos yet, although Stellar Floor Text was step recorded with the key
velocities.

> Much more recent synthesizers that I have tried (with velocity-
> sensitive keys) lacked an expression pedal -- evidently somebody
> thought it was unnecessary. That's fine with a percussive timbre
> such as piano or harpsichord. But trying to control the volume with
> a sustained timbre (such as organ or a synthesized wind instrument)
> with only velocity-sensitive keys drove me nuts -- there was no way
> to control the volume once the key was down. And I hate those string
> section patches in which the tone gradually oozes in with a slow
> crescendo -- they're about as musically phony as it gets.

There should be a socket on the back for a pedal. Make sure you get the
right one because they aren't all calibrated the same. You can also get
MIDI boxes with some knobs and a pedal. You can also set aside a knob for
transposing the keyboard.

> Give me a choice between velocity-sensitive keys and an expression
> pedal, and I'll take the pedal any day.

Another thing about pedals is that you can control the expression no
matter how complex the chords are getting. For a lot of the 13-limit
things I've been playing with it's hard enough to get my fingers in the
right place. Thinking about velocity as well is too much.

Most things at <http://x31eq.com/music/> would have been
impossible without an expression pedal.

Graham

--- In tuning@y..., graham@m... wrote:
> Another thing about pedals is that you can control the expression no
> matter how complex the chords are getting.

OTOH, with a pedal you are affecting all notes (currently active) the same way. With some form of keyboard or individual pad (don't forget I'm primarily a percussionist) you have the ability to affect each note.

Bottom line we'd probably all agree on: the more expressive control we have, the more musical the end result.

Cheers,
Jon

--- In tuning@y..., "jonszanto" <JSZANTO@A...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_38674.html#38679

> Hello to you, George!
>
> --- In tuning@y..., "gdsecor" <gdsecor@y...> wrote:
> > Much more recent synthesizers that I have tried (with velocity-
> > sensitive keys) lacked an expression pedal -- evidently somebody
> > thought it was unnecessary.
> > ...
> > Give me a choice between velocity-sensitive keys and an
expression
> > pedal, and I'll take the pedal any day.
>
> I haven't shopped in the last year or so, but most all of the kbds
I've ever looked at in the last decade or so had both sustain and
velocity-control pedal inputs on the back (1/4" phone jacks). I don't
know *how* widespread it is, but my impression with many that I
looked at handled the second pedal in a programmable fashion: you
could assign it to any of the midi control messages, and therefore
use it as a volume pedal, or modulation (to keep both hands on the
kbd instead of reaching for the wheel), or other assignable feature.
>
> Beyond that, there are a number of companies that make midi
interface control units that would accept a pedal as one of the
control sources.
>
> Cake: had *and* eaten!
>
> Cheers,
> Jon

***Regrettably, my 88-key *Studiologic*, an affordable $500
MIMI-out-only instrument doesn't have a volume pedal. (Maybe that's
part of the reason it's affordable? :) Otherwise, the keyboard
emulates the piano feel reasonably well, and doesn't seem "cheap..."

(Jon, you probably recall, that's why it was necessary for me to
program dynamics in the *sequencer* according to your suggestion...)

Any more on this thread should probably go on MakeMicroMusic.

Joe Pehrson