Today most hardware are instruments that need to be played … (most) humans have two hands only, so useless to put a million functions on it. However in the late nineties , just before laptops, studio hardware was actually totally moving in this direction… a maxed out AKAI S6000 for example coupled to Cubase midi functionalities could do 85% of what a DAW can do today…but it wasn’t really an instrument that you can play either. Simple tools with limited functions are for me the nicest to play with and i guess that counts for the majority of hardware buyers today…twist some knobs , do some damage , have fun , …
1 Like
I think the “gear for consumerism” thesis in the thread is correct.
I don’t mind limitations but very often these gadgets are designed with a weird view of limitations in mind (which are probably there so there are never any definitive products, in the spirit of consumerism, which is probably unavoidable due to how manufacturing works nowadays, you gotta offload units).
I want gear that recreates the spirit of the vintage classic gear limitations, not the actual limitations themselves.
For example, the SP 404 MK2 has the potential to be a great successor to the MPC2000XL. But: there are no filters on the individual pads and the sequencer sucks. Now the argument could be: It’s trying to enhance the 404 formula, not reimagine another workflow. But on the other side of the spectrum, there’s only the InMusic MPCs which are completely enveloped in feature overload.
There’s no middle ground, I need manufacturers to find that middle ground and create classic gear again…
2 Likes
As a software engineer (sort of) I also concur, but I’d like to add there’s another aspect to this.
For laptops, it doesn’t really matter. These are fast enough for audio. So, you know, you want to get the best audio device money can buy, get a laptop.
For appliances, however, it’s a different matter. Things like the M8, Tracker Mini or those Sonicware devices run on really underpowered microcontrollers. I mean, they’re plenty fast for what they’re intended to to - run industrial applications, but for audio they’re weak. Most significantly, they lack RAM, as the industrial processes they’re designed for don’t really need that. This means you’re pretty much limited to doing synthesis on them - for which, of course, they’re fast enough.
Of course, with some clever hacking you can sort of make it work (M8, Tracker Mini and a whole lot of other devices are testament to that) but it’s always going to be something of a kludge (for proof of this, consider that neither M8, nor Tracker Mini or Sonicware’s Loft-12 XT can play back and record audio simultaneously - something your Pentium II in 1998 could most certainly do).
There’s exceptions, of course. The Akai MPC line uses fairly expensive mini computers with decent amounts of RAM. And Roland’s SP404 mk II - I have no idea what magic they did to cram such a large amount of memory into such a cheap box - but of course, its performance is rather limited.
In general, however, if you want performance and therefore complexity, you’ll need a laptop. All other music tech is weak.
6 Likes
IMHO laptops are the reason these synths are this way.
You’d have to include laptop componentd in your equipment (adding to cost, essentially what Push 3 does), then you’d have to make things intuitive enough that people won’t want to use it with a computer screen and mouse/keyboard. And now you’re competing with a laptop+midi controller. Imagine the menu diving, it’s bad enough already
Much easier to pick a niche and make something specific for it
4 Likes
You really have to admire the ability of capitalism to create a population who who blame “consumerism” for products they don’t like whilst otherwise behaving according to consumerist norms.
“These products do not meet my needs as a consumer, therefore consumption is baaaaaaaaaaaaad.”
“This product is perfect for my consumption requirements, therefore piece of art/important cultural milestone.”
14 Likes
1 Like
Or an Octatrack since 2010 
2 Likes
Unless I’m missing something with my 6-year old iPad … an iPad is to me the definition of the absence of tactility.
I can’t tell by touch where the buttons/knobs are, and I can’t tell by touch that I’ve pressed the button/ turned the knob. (The latter may have improved on more recent models).
There’s simply no comparison with the physicality of a digitakt or a laptop keyboard.
7 Likes
This is the kind of technological insight I was after, thanks. I was just trying to reflect on the state of the industry and its evolution over the past 20 years vs. what could be logically expected. Quite a few people obviously didn’t understand my point.
The positive side is that all ‘feature request’ threads can now be terminated with a succint “just buy a laptop” it seems. 
2 Likes
Yeah iPad, nah.
I was an early adopter (hate that term) of the iPad, had a few different generations of them, always thinking the next will be better, bought quite a few peripherals like audio docks and midi interfaces and controllers, fuck knows how much I wasted on apps, including some very popular or better regarded ones, but just can’t compare with a dedicated groovebox IMHO.
This dovetails quite nicely with (for my reasons) features are not the whole story - on paper the iPad with some decent apps kills anything other than a desktop or laptop, yet the enjoyment of using it is often lacking, even if undoubtedly the results can be excellent, and let’s be honest, in theory (and no doubt some do) it is entirely possible to make and release high quality music and even visuals if you want, all in a slab of glass and silicon that costs less than a modern polysynth - yet hardware synths, samplers and sequencers still exist and still sell.
The question isn’t really the gear or the technology, it is the individual and the preferences, good.
7 Likes
briliant
O.k. so hear me out…
I think the future is an elektron p-lockable sequencer, that can seed A.I. with multiple seeds per step.
You load up any song, and input genre, medium and decade that you want the AI to reproduce the content in…per step.
Load up “beat it” by m jackson.
Step 1. 90s grunge, cassette tape.
Step 2. Minimal techno 90s on vinyl.
Step 3. 80s synth pop on reel to reel.
Quantum computing in a Digi format box, that also spits out visuals…
Yes, but I was thinking more about capacity rather than complexity. A trend towards focus and simplicity, even niche devices with few functions, I could understand, different companies having different approaches to user interfaces, sequencing or sound design, that’s all great. But I mean we have mini SD cards the size of a fingernail with many GB, and some current digital boxes just have 64 MB of memory? With very complicated backup procedures involving half-baked software just to save your work? With 4 tracks? With limited polyphony? Why is that even a consideration in this day and age was my original question I guess.
Then people say “because of laptops” or “ipad” - well, that only adds to my argument. If you can have a plethora of A4-sized devices that can do it all, including a large high-resolution screen, speakers, camera and microphone, and a million other uses beyond music, for say 1000-1500$, it surely can’t be that technologically challenging as maybe it once was? But maybe it is, I just don’t get it, intuitively.
Some companies are small, but there’s industry giants out there. So I’m leaning more towards market or other considerations.
2 Likes
I suspect the knack to mesh rhythm, time and beat keeping is a skill required for music making. Now software time code keeps everything on time making it almost redundant.
Always fun to see people moaning about other people moaning. What’s the point, I don’t know.
2 Likes
Which is exactly the opposite of what I was discussing. I expected more progress, not less?
It’s all just opinions baby.
3 Likes
Hehehe … yeah. Octatrack is up there with the 404 in the list of amazingly powerful devices. Although, unlike the 404, it isn’t cheap.
Yeah, but in that case you’re cramming a (likely low powered ) laptop in a controller. Which is what Akai and Ableton are doing.
In fact, I think Akai is a good illustration of what is going on: there IS in fact a market for powerful non laptop music making devices, it’s just that they’ve pretty much captured the whole of it.
1 Like
In order to make economically viable musical instruments, you need to be able to source parts over a number of years. The sorts of components powering computers, laptops and tablets are obsolete within a couple of years, requiring regular hardware/software revisions to keep up with processor developments. Most synth consumers don’t want to have to buy new gear every year like they do phones, and most manufacturers don’t want to have to support firmware for multiple generations of the same models.
Hence the use of “outdated” processors and components, because they’re cheap, plentiful and likely to remain available for the long term. Of course, the downside of these components is many of the limitations you and others like to constantly moan about.
8 Likes
there are laptops with touch screens. and smartphones. and tablets with pens and keys . go figure 
1 Like