Peaks (and Braids) Discontinued?


#1

I just saw that Peaks has been moved to the Discontinued area of the MI site, along with Edges.

Is this a recent development?

I’m intrigued to know why you decided to retire what I’ve always assumed was one of your most popular modules, @pichenettes.

Also, would love to know if you have any plans to replace it with something similar.

It’s departure does leave a hole in the MI product line, when it comes to LFOs, and all things tempo-synced.

Maybe something similar, but with CV control could replace it. Lack of any CV control was always an issue with Peaks, I think, though the basic feature-set is brilliant, in my opinion.

a|x


Braids Joining Peaks
#2

> Here is his explanation. :slight_smile:


#3

For those without facebook:


#4

I thought it was just me who didn’t use FaceBook :wink:

That does make a lot of sense.

On the other hand, the multi-function aspect of the MCU-based MI modules has become a bit of an USP, so moving away from this paradigm may be slightly risky.

Personally, I think it’s the right move, long-term, and Peaks is possibly the best example of where multi-function/mode-switching breaks down (or at least becomes confusing), mostly because there’s so much functionality hidden behind a very limited UI.

a|x


#5

“Expect simpler, monothematic things from Mutable Instruments.” makes me joyfully looking in the future.

Rings and Tides are really straigthforward. This easy operation makes it better to experiment with them.

On the other hand I regret selling my Peaks because it does a great job with Tap LFO´s.


#6

Rings and Tides are still very much multi-function modules, however, with each control, input and output doing quite different things, depending on the active mode.

a|x


#7

I don’t care if I sell less modules. What matters is that I sell products that mean something to me.

Rings: only STRUCTURE controls something different from mode to mode. Let’s not talk about those silly easter eggs :slight_smile:

Tides: sure, the AD / AR / Loop setting impacts the behaviour of the module. What’s important is that all these options are various facets of a similar process - and actually, it’s the same bit of code that handles all three variants. The knobs continue doing the same thing.


#8

All true, and I applaud you sticking to your principles :slight_smile:

a|x


#9

makes perfect sense to me.
peaks always felt a bit too, i don’t know, arbitrary?
hooray for more focused modules! :slight_smile:


#10

On a side note, Peaks is great for focussed, small racks because it can be so much! I like mine, they won’t go anywhere anytime soon


#11

Well… imo peaks just needs better panel indications… these symbols are useless. But yes, hooray for modules where function is clear.


#12

Like this :rofl:

Note that it didn’t even have the drums…


#13

Yes, why not,that would still be better than what it is today, especially for the LFO functions (A/D/S/R is obvious enough to anyone and could be left out). LFO waveforms are very much needed too. Indeed, I used a handwritten sticker on my unit so it can be actually useful as a LFO.

About the drums, with no modulation inputs I consider them more like a cool bonus so I don’t mind not having any indication on the panel, as it is for the easter eggs.

And it’s funny you mention the distings because it was my experience with the peaks that lead me not to buy it in spite of my friends praises.


#14

and the more I look at this panel, the more I think this would be a good MK2 :stuck_out_tongue:


#15

Yuck!

Then you’ll be very surprised (and disappointed) by my new take on some of the things Peaks used to do!


#16

Not sure. Peaks helped a lot when I had too few modules, but now that I have dedicated modules for envs, lfos and drums, I would probably not be interested anyway in a mk2. And good to know you’re up to something btw. Lookin forward to it.


#17

def chuckled at that proto UI. Thanks for putting in the hours on making those NOT that!


#18

One solution would be to substitute a little 128x32 pixel 0.96 inch OLED display where the upper set of LEDs and labels are. The OLED could then dynamically label each of the 4 knobs. The lower column of LEDs would be unnecessary.

Explicit soft labelling via little displays in immediate juxtaposition to the controls and I/O which they label is the UI paradigm of choice for multi-functional modules, IMHO. A display screen doesn’t necessarily mean that an encoder and menus are required - displays can be be treated as dynamic panel labelling The costs of the displays continue to fall and their availability improves. So far, the OLEDs seem quite robust and reliable.


#19

Perhaps a low-tech alternative to the OLED dynamic labelling could be a simple set of card templates that fit over the controls, buttons, LEDs etc. There could be one template for each ‘expert’ mode permutation, with each control labelled according to the chosen purpose: LFO vs ADSR vs Drums etc.


#20

Yes totally, though multi-functional modules often create more problems than what they solve. So the question is: maybe it’s not the UI, maybe it’s the functionality underneath that needs to be changed. Multi-functional modules seem like a good solution on paper, since they give you the feeling that you are getting a lot of “bang for the buck” (not just in monetary) and in fact they often are. Modular systems are often highly redundant (though some people are really good at being very efficient with them) and by nature are open to all sorts of things. This also means that having certain functions combined into one module often makes sense, since it will give you a similar functionality range but let you save on HPs.
Apart from the often mentioned UI issues and the fact that it’s harder to build a muscle memory for something that is very modal in nature, another problem is that modules like these tend to increase the complexity of a system, adding an additional dimension to the “mental map” required to be able to patch the thing. With an old school analogue system you basically have to think in a 2D map, since everything has more or less one function, which is physically laid out on a 2D surface. With multi-function modules you add a 3rd dimension, which is the different modes the module can operate in.

This said, I also have to say that it just needs a bit of practice. I mean, you can stick little post-its to the frets on your guitar reminding you which note is where… or you can just play the thing until you just know it. :slight_smile: