Voltage-Controlled Gaming: Pittsburgh Modular's Game System

Over the last year, I have developed a keen interest in the world of modular synthesizers.  Between learning the inner workings of synthesis from friends, building a system of my own in the Eurorack format, and exploring forum pages and manufacturers' catalogs, I can proudly call myself a synth geek.  Now, I could write an entire series of articles regarding the topic (as it is indeed that expansive), but in keeping with the spirit of the blog, I will instead shine the spotlight on one specific module that I find as uncanny as I do entertaining: the Game System, by Pittsburgh Modular.

Simply put, the Game System spews out control voltages, which can be used to modulate other modules.  Its beauty, however, lies in its interface: it works like a basic gaming system!  Its screen is an 8x8 grid of LED-lit squares, with multiple inputs (including a button and CV inputs), some of which move the "player character" pixel.  The module itself has six different modes, some of which resemble basic games (such as "Meteor Shower" and "Time Traveller"), while others opt for more conventional synth module functions (sequencers for both music and percussion).

So what does this mean?  Using the Meteor Shower game as an example, the pixel representing the player character would emit a voltage every time it touches a meteor.  This could be used in conjunction with other modules to create the potential sound of this game, or left as a random CV generator to trigger whatever you wish.  The sequencer games can be used along with multiple modules to create a musical sequence or drum sequence, with the additional CV inputs allowing for a more chaotic sequence to unfold.  As is usually the case with synthesizer modules, the possibilities are limited by your imagination... even more so for an avid gamer like myself!

The "400 Hz or 432 Hz" Debate

A school of thought in the music world believes that a certain note in the musical scale is tuned to “warp the consciousness of the masses,” perpetrated by the Nazis for mind control purposes.  Worst of all, the Nazi influence has made its way into the record labels of today, which still utilize this hypnotizing frequency.  Of course, this school of thought happens to fall under the umbrella term “conspiracy theorists,” but the tuning conundrum is indeed real, and rooted in history dating back to the era of classical composers.

The note in question is the A just before middle C, known to audiophiles as the frequency 440 Hz.  Sure enough, this precise quantity has been subject to variation over the years: 19^th century France and Austria tuned the note at 435 Hz, composer Giuseppe Verdi advocated an A at 432 Hz, and Pleyel pianos, most notably used by Chopin, tuned their A at 446 Hz.  The most divergent of the now-standard 440 Hz is Mozart, whose A was tuned at approximately 421.6 Hz – almost G sharp!  This erratic tuning eventually led to the adoption of an official standard imposed by the American Standards Association in 1936.  Since then, the A has been set firmly at 440 Hz.

At this point, the question still stands: which way is better?  Ardent believers insist that music with A tuned to 432 Hz gives off positive energies, not to mention it made classical compositions more wholesome and chromatically-rich.  Some even go as far as to examine the harmonic overtones!  The author of the source article actually conducted a listening test: utilizing software that automatically tunes the 440 Hz frequency down to 432 Hz, he listened to an assortment of songs from a variety of genres.  His findings note that the lower tuning suited softer music, while the higher tuning worked well with louder and harder songs.  Music made prior to the 440 Hz standard sounded (for the most part) better at 432 Hz.  Of course, it’s all subject to opinion, as most listening tests out there on the Internet leave the frequency preference to the interpretation of the viewer.   Feel free to try for yourself!

Reference:

Gioia, T. (2015, June 6). Are We All Mistuning Our Instruments, and Can We Blame the Nazis? Retrieved June 7, 2015, from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/06/are-we-all-mistuning-our-instruments-and-can-we-blame-the-nazis.html

 

The Sony MiniDisc and Why it Failed

Rewind back to the 90s: both the cassette tape and compact disc were in the market, each offering perks that the other didn’t (smaller size of the cassette, versus the spacious memory of the CD).  Enter the MiniDisc, a device that had the best of both worlds: the reduced physical space and the expansive storage space.  Moreover, it was highly touted by audiophiles as a superior alternative to the older formats in the categories of audio quality, lower skipping propensity, and the ability to re-record (the CD-R was yet to be released).  In more ways than one, the MiniDisc was cutting edge… so why did it fail?  Mainly, it was too expensive.

Sony priced the MiniDisc player at approximately $550, and that’s just the playback-only version; for $200 more, you gained the ability to re-record.  While overpricing is typical of new technology, it wasn’t the first time Sony tried that trick, and people weren’t biting this time around.  It didn’t help that Sony’s target audience for this product were teenagers, who neither cared much for MiniDiscs, nor could even afford it if they did.  To add insult to injury, record labels weren’t buying into the new format either, meaning that the catalog of pre-recorded MiniDiscs was limited only to Sony artists.  Setbacks aside, it would be just a matter of time before the technology became commonplace, cheaper, and more readily available, right?  Wrong, because it soon faced competition that completely erased the MiniDisc from the equation.

Much like the Nintendo DS completely overshadowed the nifty Game Boy Micro, the MiniDisc was left in the dust when a certain company based in Cupertino released an MP3 device that shook the nation.  That’s right: Apple’s iPod entered the scene and stole the show, which was terrible timing for the failing MiniDisc.  To make matters worse, the CD-R lowered in price enough to become a better alternative than the MiniDisc, effectively dooming the format for good.  Strangely enough, there was enough of a cult following for Sony to continue selling the MiniDisc and its accessories all the way up to September 2011.  At that date, the format bid the world farewell.

References:

Faulkner, J. (2012, September 24). MiniDisc, the forgotten format. Retrieved May 25, 2015, from http://www.theguardian.com/music/musicblog/2012/sep/24/sony-minidisc-20-years

Parsons, J. (2013, February 1). MiniDisc: The format that failed. Retrieved May 25, 2015, from http://www.t3.com/news/minidisc-the-format-that-failed

Peckham, M. (2013, February 4). The Ides of March: Farewell, Sony MiniDisc Player. Retrieved May 25, 2015, from http://techland.time.com/2013/02/04/the-ides-of-march-farewell-sony-minidisc-player/