Test 1 - KOMA Elektronik - Field Kit (Electro Acoustic Workstation) 

thanks, drones can never go on long enough, in my mind!

wow, thanks, means a lot!

Aja Maria Archuleta cool! It should get even better when their effects unit comes out soon!

Uncle Homunculus thanks!

thanks, these are fun to make!

piss pie well worth the price

awesome, hope you share some of your creations!

@@immersiveworlds Ordered it from Perfect Circuit, Christmas gift to myself🤣. Will definitely share some explorations.

@@nikpharesmusic5768 nice, enjoy!

thanks!

I hadn’t noticed!

I think this will work; keep in mind that the mixer can add a bit of high frequency noise

@@immersiveworlds thanks, I’m looking to use this with the dust collector by fine gear (the analog effects unit I mentioned. Both have cv so I’m hoping I can have some fun with them.

@@pinkbismuth4457 the Dust Collector looks amazing!

I guess I would say that there is not one proper use. You could modify the sounds, or just use the DC driver, the sensors, the extra LFO, the CV radio. I would say it's a Swiss army knife of sound experimentation.

Well, I suppose that's true.

Phew!

they are the stock ones that come with the Fieldkit.

quite a few applications.

Hi, I see your point. I think it is true that you need other gear as it may not be an effective device all by itself. Good point!

Darn, darn, darn. All this time, riverandstones, I was hoping to get your approval.

Your RU-vid name reminded me of DT Suzuki, so it occurred to me, “If something is boring after two minutes, try it for four. If still boring, then eight. Then sixteen. Then thirty-two. Eventually one discovers that it is not boring at all.”

I really know what you where trying to do here, I really do. But I repeat, ur playing it like a synth, its not a synth.

Of course, if the argument here is one of taste-based on the use of the word “noise”-then it would be appropriate for you to say, I don’t like music/sound A, I prefer music/sound B. Of course, reading Gans and Bourdieu and bringing in both the American and French views on taste, we would say that even taste is a construct. It is rooted in our upbringing, our social class, among other factors. But even if we didn’t get into the taste issue, we could look at this loaded word “noise,” which, on most of the modular and experimental boards/RU-vid channels is actually used in a positive, not negative, connotation. In the contemporary world, so-called noise-which is a purely subjective and political construct, cf. Jacques Attali-is seen as an interesting foundation for music and performance. You know, no doubt, of Russolo’s political and practical works in regards to noise, as well as the many others who came after him in the musique concrete and electro-acoustic avant-garde traditions of the 1940s onward, who all advocated for experimentation as a means of pushing music/sound forward. You have likely also reflected on the rich traditions that consider non-western systems of sound, music, and ambiance-in ethnomusicology-such that we are forced to reflect on our own musical traditions-say Western tonality-as mere possibilities of all of the sonic infinities possible. But, perhaps this is too foundational. Let’s even analyze your word “synthesizer.” I have no doubt you have considered the early histories of sound synthesis-the variety of electronic and acoustic sources that have been used to create both the consumerist synthesizer (FM synthesis) and the non-linear experimental (Buchla) traditions-and no doubt that the “combining or bringing together” (etymology) implied in synthesis means, to you, that any combination of sources, forms of modification, inputs and outputs may result in sound synthesis. I would be curious to know your definition of a “synthesizer” because it is an expressive and expansive one that most of us use, not a limiting one. Likely, the easiest solution to your reflection is to look at the many pages of the “50 Ways to Use the Field Kit” manual, but I would point to page 38, Patch 5 - Angry Chef. It involves the use of an electric motor hitting a pan which is amplified via a piezo which then modulates the envelope follower. I suppose that KOMA doesn’t understand what they are doing since it would appear that they are advocating for the “noise” of a motor hitting a pan. They also must be off base with their own product as they have installed a DC driver (that powers fans and solenoids) on the unit, a CV radio (which, you know since you have likely seen Wouter’s, and others’, videos in which they speak of the legacy of radio “noise” music from the work of John Cage in the CV radio block of the Field Kit), and sensor/signal outs and CV/trigger outs that can only, by, definition, be used to control synthesizers or other sound units that have CV capability. Here is what you miss: what makes the Field Kit amazing is that IT DOESN’T HAVE ONE prescribed use or musical/sound context in which it can be applied. I just wonder, have you actually seen or worked with a Field Kit? This is mainly written for the others who share an ethos of community, care, and experimentalism in creating videos, discussions, and other social sources of commentary on these forms of music. Perhaps you could consider such contributions to moving forward with sound and music in a positive sense. Or, you could find the next video to tag with “I hate your music, this is noise.”

It’s not a synth, it’s a kalimba. It has been realizing it’s own potential for thousands of years.

So your goal on RU-vid is to insult others?