Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
> I'm in the hard work of learning how things work in Orville and other > multipourpose DSP machines to get one of them. For Kyma, I recommend an AES preprint "A Framework for the Design, Development, and Delivery of Real-time Software-based Sound Synthesis and Processing Algorithms" by Hebel and Scaletti presented at the 97th AES convention 1994. It's short (text is about six pages) and concise. You can also order a Kyma manual for $35. That's what I did before buying. > I heard Orville kicks Kyma (in flexibility and DSP power). is this true, > having in mind that Symbolic Sound's Kyma is expandable up to 28 DSPs? I'm a Kyma owner so I'm quite familiar with it. After reading the Orville manuals (all three including the programming manual), it's clear to me that Kyma is quite a bit more powerful and flexible. This is not surprising given that a top end Kyma system (not including a host computer) prices out at $11,435 USD. What is surprising is that you can start with a basic unit for $3,300 and expand it without discarding any parts. In a nutshell, the major differences between the Kyma and the Orville are because the Kyma requires a host computer at all times. You only need to use a computer with Orville when you're doing heavy-duty programming. The fact that Kyma requires a computer is both an advantage and dis-advantage. If you can't deal with a computer onstage, Orville is for you. It is well designed to function as a conventional rack-mount effects box. The Orville is more self-contained. For example, you can plug non-MIDI footswitches and pedals directly into it. With Kyma, you must use a MIDI footswitch and CC pedal (and you'd probably need a MIDI hub). On the other hand, the computer gives Kyma some capabilities that Orville simply doesn't have. For example, with a MIDI keyboard, you can use Kyma as a sampler keyboard, triggering samples of any length from the hard drive. You can also use Kyma as a digital mixer/recorder, recording directly to/from the computer's hard drive. Since Kyma programs are stored on the computer's hard drive, you have quick access to virtually an unlimited number of programs. You primarily control the Orville via it's front panel LCD and buttons. Eventide has done a great job with this, but it is limiting. Kyma uses the computer screen to display control widgets on a "virtual control surface." These widgets include the usual assortment of buttons, toggles, linear/rotary faders, etc and is completely customizable. Both Orville and Kyma permit the use of external MIDI controllers such as the Peavey PC1600. However, Kyma provides special support for the MotorMix, a box similar to the PC1600x but with motorized faders and LCD labels for the faders. The MotorMix mirrors the virtual control surface. In terms of programming, both units are similar in concept. You can create a signal flow diagram with boxes representing "functional units" (unit generators). You specify the connections between the boxes. The boxes perform functions such as EQ, delay, level changes, etc and the connections specify the signal/control flow. Both units provide about 1000 of these "functional units" for your use. However, Orville appears less general, distinguishing between control signals and audio signals (i.e., there are different boxes for control and audio signals). Kyma is completely general, permitting you to freely mix/interchange control and audio signals. Also, Orville limits you to the modules supplied by Eventide (unless I missed a developer's kit?). You can create your own in Kyma (a caffeine-laden process of writing DSP assembly language, not for the faint-hearted). I'm writing a set of real-time looper specific modules, for example. Kyma does quite a bit of work to distribute the workload among the DSPs. You don't have to rewrite your programs, for example, to take advantage of new additional DSP cards. With both Orville and Kyma, there is not a one-to-one correspondence between "functional units" (the boxes in your signal flow diagram) and DSPs. Among the software, the Orville features Eventide's famous Ultrashifter and reverb programs. Reverb design being the magical, black-art that it is, I believe that the Orville's reverb is gorgeous sounding while Kyma's probably comes in second. I haven't A-B'ed them so I'm bending to conventional thought here. I never used the Ultrashifter but it is certainly well-known in the industry. So if you need fabulous reverb and Ultrashifting capability, perhaps Orville is for you. On the other hand, I like the Kyma's reverb programs and I'm not primarily a pitch-shifter kind of guy. The Kyma provides very powerful sound analysis tools that I haven't found in Orville. These include several varieties of spectral analysis and re-synthesis. Kyma is used by several researchers to investigate such subjects as psycho-acoustics, modeling physical instruments, and sonification of complex data. The latest release of Kyma provides a timeline interface that is completely absent from Orville. This interface is well suited for time-based compositions. You drag and drop Sounds (signal flow diagrams provided by Symbolic Sound or created by you) onto a time lime. You can have any number of tracks. You can adjust the starting time/duration of each sound. You can also adjust such parameters as panning, levels, etc. on a track-by-track basis. It's quite powerful. I'm getting far afield from looping so it's probably time I quit rambling for now. This posting is too long already anyway! Dennis Leas ----------------------------- dennis@mdbs.com