Welcome to Thum Club Forums Sign in | Join | Faq

Thummer Hardware

Started by J. Plamondon at 10-25-2006 11:52 PM. Topic has 3 replies.

Print Search
Sort Posts:    
   10-25-2006, 11:52 PM
J. Plamondon is not online. Last active: 5/2/2007 8:20:18 AM J. Plamondon

Top 10 Posts
Joined on 01-06-2006
Posts 17
Beta Tester Feedback
Reply Quote
Beta testers: please post your initial reports as a reponse to this posting.  Thanks!  :-)
   Report 
   10-26-2006, 9:48 PM
Tollan is not online. Last active: 8/25/2006 11:47:11 PM Tollan

Top 10 Posts
Joined on 08-25-2006
Posts 5
Re: Beta Tester Feedback
Reply Quote

Hi Everyone

My name is Nick Allott and I just recently started testing out the Eaton Prototype for Thumbtronics (I’ve had it for about ten days). I primarily a piano and synth player, but I also sing, play guitar a bit and used to play the clarinet a bunch in high school. I currently play in Cherry the band (see www.cherrytheband.com.au) and am also working on some other side projects.

My work in Cherry has pushed me to be quite expressive as a synth player. Whatever parts are not covered by the rest of the band are down to me. Subsequently, I’m often jumping between sounds or playing many sounds at once. I currently use a Korg Oasys (please note that the sounds on the website are from my old Casio WK3500).

I really liked the idea of the Thummer from the get go. A more expressive alternative interface to the keyboard is something I think many synth players would love to have (as long as the benefits gained are worth the investment). Some interesting ones have been released over the last few years (including the Continuum Fingerboard, Music Pole and Morrison Trumpet) but none quite like the Thummer.  The combination of having a digit permanently available for expression in addition to a very logical button interface is quite tempting (I made a Thummer chord and scale sheet excel document that you can download from http://www.box.net/public/g6v2ubkvp3 ).

The button interface of the Thummer makes more sense visually than any other interface I have seen. The piano is also a very visual interface but the Thummer betters it by making every type of interval look and feel the same in every key. This means that you have in effect only one key to learn instead of 12, which is a great saver of brainpower and time (which could be better put towards musical expression). You still need to remember where every key is, but after that it’s all the same.

I also like how the button layout is symmetrically opposite for each hand, making every pattern the same in both hands. This is great because you can then have your stronger hand teach your weaker hand (which is a very effective way to learn). This way of playing is quite different to both piano and guitar (which have higher notes on the left and lower notes on the right). With the Thummer, it’s more a case of lower notes are towards the centre of the body and higher notes are away from the centre. I am still not used to this way of thinking, but I can see logically that it will make more sense over time.

I reversed the pitch bending on the joysticks to reflect this. The default had the pitch getting lower away from the body, which didn’t make much sense to me.

The finger patterns needed for the Thummer feel quite different to those needed for the keyboard. As it uses only the four fingers, a horizontal and vertical pitch interface (as opposed to only horizontal for piano) and can involve playing multiple notes with one finger, it actually feels a lot more like a guitar than a piano (in terms of layout). There is this strange “finger walking” sensation that you have to develop when moving up and down scales and arpeggios.

The variety of hand shapes needed are also quite more varied (and need to be more precise) than those on piano. On the piano, I generally have most of my fingers slightly to moderately curved. On the Thummer though, I might have some fingers curved in heaps and others out almost straight ( if I’m trying to use the full pitch range in one hand). You may also have all your fingers bunched close together or spread wide apart (in different instances).

However, while your fingers need to be more precise and dexterous, you never have to move your elbow or body to reach certain notes, so the notes are always in the same relative position under your hand. Only time will tell wether this proves to be better or worse, but with practice this system could probably work for anyone.

The bar across the front prevents you from playing Barre style three octaves chords with one finger. It might be a good idea to remove that bar for that reason.

Developing thumb independence is actually more tricky than I thought it would be. I’ve been trying to play chords and scales while keeping my thumb still (in various positions in its axis) with varying degrees of success. Teaching my thumb to respond (or not respond) to what my fingers are doing is going to take a bit of time to develop and frankly, I haven’t yet put in that time. So I’ll have to get back to you all on how easy or hard it is to do.

It did start me thinking about what the best level of joystick resistance might be though. My left hand Thummer joystick is completely busted (and so has no resistance) while my right joystick has a fair bit of resistance (it snaps back to centre quite quickly, just like a regular video game joystick). Both of them had their advantages and disadvantages.

With the broken one, if you wanted to leave the joystick at a certain point on the axis it was easy. You just put it where you want it and then leave your thumb hovering slightly above it. With the other joystick though, you had to fight against the resistance while trying to play note with the other fingers. So it tended to move from that point a bit and sometimes slipped off my thumb.

With the resistant joystick though, it was much easier to stay in tune for pitch bending. If you wanted to return back to centre pitch, it’s just a matter of taking the pressure off and the joystick moves there automatically. Also the joystick never moved away from the centre on its own. The default Y axis on the left joystick was set to volume and I’d often find that I’d have no volume because the joystick had move all the way to the bottom.

I also found the joysticks to be a bit slippery after my hands got a bit sweaty. Wouldn’t it make more sense for the joystick tops to be concave rather than convex? That way the thumb would always has something to push against, slip less often and would probably respond better.

I also don’t think the joysticks should be at a ninety degree angle. Its position should better represent the default angle at which the Thumb meets the joystick, which would probably make it more comfortable. It might also be a good idea to raise it a bit higher (but changing the angle might negate the need for that).

I would have also liked the joining cable between the left and right Thummers to be a bit longer. That way you could have each Thummer sitting nice and comfortable on each side of your body when playing piano style. Does anyone know if that chord will eventually be a USB?

Now I’m finally ready to get to the most critical issue regarding the Thummer prototype: Button pressure sensitivity and feel. I’d like to say outright that I do not like how these buttons respond and without a good button response, all the other benefits do not matter. In comparison to my synth action Korg keyboard (which is a bit lighter and more uniform than the action of an actual piano), the drum pads on my Korg, or even this keyboard I’m typing on, the Thummer does not cut it.

As the primary point of expression, these buttons should be high precision machines specially calibrated to suit the pressure range of the human hand and designed to help prevent injury. I don’t think the Thummer adequately meets any of these criteria.

My biggest gripes with the buttons are that they do not move or cushion impact, they require too much effort to get a response and the effective velocity response range is quite low. A pianissimo on the Thummer is equivalent in pressure to a mezzo forte on my keyboard for the most responsive pads. For the least responsive, it is well beyond fortissimo.

The big question is “Would I buy the Thummer and use it as an alternative interface to the keyboard?”. For me, it all depends about whether you are referring to the prototype I am currently using, or the expected finished product.

If you are referring to the prototype I am currently using, I’d say “definitely not”. This button sensitivity issue makes the Thummer less expressive in comparison to my keyboard, and therefore holds no real advantage (apart from giving me some interesting new melodic ideas (which I would then probably play on the keyboard)).

If you are referring to the final product that will no doubt be more responsive and consistent, look better and won’t require any software, then possibly yes.  I would as long as the buttons feel very comfortable to play (this is the big thing for me). I wouldn’t stop playing the keyboard though; I know it too well as a tool to just give it up entirely. For someone who hasn’t invested years in playing the keyboard though, it might be a great complete alternative (provided these bugs are fixed).

There are also some other initial thoughts that I had that I emailed to Jim but I haven’t put here. If you like Jim, you can post them in the forum somewhere.

I’m very interested in finding out what other Beta tester’s experiences have been with this prototype and whether they are quite similar or different to my experiences. If some of what I said has or hasn’t been the same for you, let me know.

All the best.

- Nick


   Report 
   10-28-2006, 7:33 AM
gav is not online. Last active: 10/28/2006 5:13:18 AM gav

Top 50 Posts
Joined on 10-28-2006
Posts 1
Re: Beta Tester Feedback
Reply Quote

My name is Gavin Healy and I have been a Beta Tester for Thumtronics since the end round of the Capel prototype.
I have been working in the Perth music industry as a professional musician for the past 12 years.

My first comment on the Thummer is that I think it is simply amazing and why it hasn’t already become a huge world wide success just blows me away!!!

I was titled Worlds Best Thummer player in 2005 and I honestly believe that I have only scratched the surface of the Thummer’s ability.

What I don’t like about the Thummer is that I can’t just simply plug in and play! I also think that the Capel prototype looked more professional and elegant, not that I don’t like the style of the Eaton prototype. I feel consumers may prefer something that looks more like a classical instrument.

What I found amazing is that the Thummer taught me patterns of intervals like this one: whole-tone, whole-tone, semi-tone; whole-tone, whole-tone, whole-tone, semi-tone – which defines the major scale. This to me was like a revelation; I could simply remember this pattern and automatically transfer it to my instrument of choice. I felt like this was a hidden secret of music theory. Instead of learning all these different fingerings for scales, chords, progressions etc on the piano or whatever instrument when I was a kid, I could have been taught the geometry of music which actually makes more sense.    

The Thummer is unique! What other instrument can you play more than two instrument sounds and use your two thumbs with 360º control for multiple expressions with your two hands at the same time? There is simply nothing like it.

I have used the Thummer (Eaton prototype) at my performances and I have had a huge amount of positive feedback from the general public and from respected musicians and industry individuals. Some have found it confusing as it is not a conventional instrument and its layout and theory seem alien to them at first.

I have musician friends and industry friends who have home recording studios and would love to purchase one as they think it will benefit their studio and creativity.

The Thummer is a universal instrument and can be adapted to all musical cultures around the world. I believe we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg with the Thummer and that with its geometric layout, new and exciting concepts, styles and techniques will naturally occur.

I look forward to the final product and I am very grateful to have been a Beta Tester of the Thummer prototypes for Thumtronics.

Well done Jim, Matthew, Scott & Andrew.

All the best,

Gav ;)


   Report 
   11-27-2006, 3:06 PM
garthpaine is not online. Last active: 11/27/2006 1:57:42 PM garthpaine

Top 50 Posts
Joined on 11-06-2006
Posts 1
Re: Beta Tester Feedback
Reply Quote

I feel the Thummer needs to be defined - that is, is it a portable, hand-held performance interface, or is it a two part, table-top interface. The manner in which the interface is deployed is critical to it's appropriate design. For instance, if the Thummer is to be hand-held then the issues relating to securing the interface so that the hands are not load bearng and can move freely accross the interface are critical. If the interface is to be table-top mounted, then these issues are irrelivant, however, the flexibility of movmnt is lost; it is no longer feasible to track the rate of movement or relative position of then interface in 3D - potentially one of the most rewarding features of the Thummer.

I have some concerns about the keyfields - although I see the benefits of the ease of transfering fingure patterns accross all key signatures as simplifying learning and potentially assisting newcommers to musical performance to more rapidly reach a fulfilling level of musically expressivity and competance, the muscle memory training associatd with this learning is not transferably to any other instrument, I beleive the music education industry, and individual performers will see this as a disincentive.

The current Keyfield has gone too far away from the first version, in that the keys no longer rock from side to side (good improvement), but more importantly, their feel and travel has been adversly affected, The keys on the current version do not provide a responsive feel, the pressure sensing is unreliable and does not match the physical feedback porovided by the key. This could be addessed in two ways:
1. Make the top of the keys out of a material that provides more controlled cushioning for the fingers, providing feedback about the pressure being applied to the key.
2. Increase the travel of the keys.

The key velocity sensing is critical and currently feels of poor reolution and inconsistent. It must be 100 percent consistent and provide a high degree of neuance and feedback to the performer - this is the key to the buttonField being a rewarding interface for musicians who must be rewarded by the interface for the hours of training and the emotional investment they place in their instrument as the conduit to musical expression.

The joysticks are currently too big - that is they pretrude too far from the body of the Thummer and also provide no real feedback to the performer. They should be adjustable - that is the height from the body could be adjusted - screw them in or out - but more importantly the spring pressure [ie. The resistance] needs to be adjustable to individual needs.

I feel the Thummer really needs to move away from the Keyfield into more of a pressure sensitive, possibly capacitance sensing array, which would allow the reconfiguring of fingure patters to match current keyboard interfaces or to match other musical instruments - the development of a fixed behaviour in an interface of this type is, I think, an unnecessary imposition. A sensing array would also allow for glissandi, or for the use of the interface fields as 3D point sensors as in a Wacom Tablet, This kind of flexability can be seen in the Lemure (http://www.jazzmutant.com/) interaface which is completely re-configurable to suit the performers current need.

I have always felt that the position sensing option in the Thummer provided for the most exciting, expressive and innovative applications. Being able to add vibrato by slowly rolling the interface around it's axis or exicuting a trill by shaking the Thummer, and varying the pitch by moving the Thummer higher or lower to match acoustic instrument intonation were exciting prospects. In addition being able to squeeze the Thummer to vary the timbre or possible the amplitude envelope of a sustaining sound would also be excelent [as per the squeezable interfaces from MIT].

The interface should use OSC to transmit information with the option of a OSC-MIDI converter. The options for networked performance and multi-Thummer interfaces afforded through the implementation lof OSC are too rich to ignore.

I fell the conertina and piano accordian provide the best acoustic instrument models for the Thummers development, both provide continuous note control, amplitude, pitch and timbre variation throughout the duration of the note.

Cheers,
Dr Garth Paine
University of Western Sydney

   Report 
Thum Club Forum... » Thummer » Thummer Hardwar... » Beta Tester Feedback

Powered by Community Server, by Telligent Systems