i’m a big believer in constraints. but also flexibility.
teletype has a very limited syntax. it’s easy to learn. and the fact that it’s easy and small means creating scripted interactions can be fun and explorative in much the same way that patching typically doesn’t require heavy concentration.
teletype has (what i consider to be) a rare quality which is easy entry and usefulness, but also incredibly complex possibilities if you choose to go that far.
what other instruments/modules/etc are out there that are intuitive to approach but also have deeper engagement?
I’ve found the Elektron MachineDrum to be the this way as well – very immediately awarding (using preset drumkits and basic drum sequences) but an incredibly deep machine (especially once you get into the synthesis/samplers/LFO routing).
First piece of (non-guitar/pedal) hardware I bought, ~6 years ago now. Still things to learn and internalize about it.
The Roli Seaboard is intuitive to understand, but difficult to master, much like a traditional acoustic instrument. I imagine the same would apply to the other Multidimensional Polyphonic Expression instruments (Haken Continuum, Linnstrument, Eigenharp).
Dolores Catherino does a great job of demonstrating the difference between the Seaboard and the Continuum in this video, then goes on to coin a term for microtonal music: “polychromatic”. The reason for the new term becomes clear as she explains her color-augmented traditional notation system. Again, intuitive to grasp, but it would take a lifetime to master the concepts she’s talking about.
I think I’ve built maybe two scenes for the Teletype and maybe three for the Aleph that I use constantly. I my approach to these open boxes is to design little systems that fit what I want and then treat them like any other “closed” module. Then when I want to switch things up I can code something new instead of buying something new. You can do the same with Max etc on a computer, but for some reason there’s a bigger psychological block. maybe it’s just learning curve.
I have two kids under 5 and a full time job so I can relate to being very restricted in terms of time. But I’ve found the TT very quick to learn and the possibilities it offers give me a lot of inspiration. Working at a computer all day I’m very keen to not use a computer in music making if I can help it, the TT opens up a range of generative functions that make this much more possible.
But it does have limits, some of which I’m looking forward to seeing change when v2.0 is ready, it doesn’t feel like a bottomless pit - more like a flexible and useful goo.
it is the most perfect instrument…i was just ruminating the other day about how crude and limited cv and triggers are in comparison to the similarly electronic pulses which control the muscles when singing
Specifically, I proposed the “vocal learning and rhythmic synchronization hypothesis” (henceforth, “vocal learning hypothesis”), which suggests that the capacity to synchronize with a musical beat resulted from changes in brain structure driven by the evolution of complex vocal learning. Complex vocal learning is learning to produce complex vocal signals based on auditory experience and sensory feedback.