I started to think about this after seeing the video for NanoStudio. It is amazing to think that you can now have a 24 track DAW on your mobile phone together with a huge range of synths and drum machines and countless other amazing apps. But does this raise the bar too high for developers?
Sure we all want the next amazing app for creating music on any given device, but it wasn't that long ago that getting a simple drum sequencer on your PDA was a miracle in itself.
I can remember being amazed when I first saw Microbe for the Palm OS and when Bhajis Loops appeared I struggled to accept it was true at all.
I wonder now how many developers there are out there who have ideas and projects that we'll never see because they think there's no market left for them.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating going back to when the majority of mobile music apps were toys, but I do think that there's room for all kinds of mobile music apps, not just the most powerful and complex tools, but also apps that take a more experimental tangent into music creation. Apps that appeal to non-musicians and encourage creativity without any musical knowledge and training.
Pixelh8's software for his marching samba band is a good example of this. An application running on a DS that encourages kids to make music under the context of gaming. That kind of thing helps children to explore music through a device their already familiar with and that has to be a positive thing.
So where am I going with this? I'm not entirely sure. I guess I want to encourage diversity in mobile music as much as possible because I think that diversity in the range of applications will continue to bring people into more creative activities wherever they are.
As always, I'm really interested to know what you all think. I'm sure there'll be lots of views!
7 comments:
I agree that there is definitely room for all strata of music creation apps, from the mightiest to the most meek. In order to not "discourage" development of less than all-encompassing applications, integration will be crucial moving forward, so as to allow all of these varied tools to work together and blend there individual strengths on any given platform. This will be the true turning point on mobile platforms like iPad and iPhone, and really open the door for all up and comers ideas, while creating a universal inclusiveness.
I'm not really sure this is even something to be concerned about. Different people will use different things. Not everyone who uses GarageBand upgrades to Logic, and the same will hold true for mobile music apps. Some people will use Sunvox, some people will use BeatMaker, and some people will use NanoStudio. Others may be content just farting into their iPhone's mic while FiRe records. There's plenty of room for all of this stuff.
I think there are several types of consumers out there and so there is plenty of room for different types of applications. I, for one, am not looking for a single application that does everything. I prefer using the best applications designed for particular tasks (drum pad, synth, recording and editing etc) and then combining the results to get a unique result. Personally I find the all-in-one style apps to be too much like programing rather than making music. Even the input methods for the iphone leave a lot to be desired compared to a real keyboard, guitar or other instrument and so if I can I simply use the apps as a way of modifying and recording the input from a separate instrument. This use of the iphone as an effects processor is really in its infancy in terms of applications so there is plenty of room for new apps that work along the lines of the Jasuto or Touch-band microphone input.
Healthy competition is a wonderful thing.
A definitive "do-all" music app is released... so what?
More than likely if it does EVERYTHING it will either be priced at the market rate or a bit higher than its competition.
This will lead to a response of the competitors (those of whom who want to stay in business that is) to match the "do-all" with its features and then some, or lowering their prices to beat it.
Either way, consumers win. Consumers NEVER win by artificially barring entry into a market. Just think about government enforced monopolies (not those that naturally occur due to the nature of the industry) that one finds in socialist economies. Do consumers get modern cheap electronics, vehicles, food, clothing, etc. under that scheme? No, they do not. They stand in line 2 hours for meat.
So I say bring it on with the competition. One needs to only look in the plug-in markets of RTAS (either platform) vs. Mac AU vs. Windows PC.
What is the ranking of best to worst in price/selection?
1. Windows (best)
2. Mac (okay)
3. RTAS (s*itty)
and you can guess the order of how much competition is present on each of the platforms.
Long live the quirky apps.
I really want to see a dll type library to help developers utilize a standardized set of functions for integrating with studio setups.
This would include an OSC or DSMidiWifi interface, audio and midi-file output.
I think that the requirement for built in sequencing is what will be the hindrance for small developers -- not matter what the function of the sound app is the sequencer needs to be ergonomic and well designed.
These functions would make the quirkier apps more viable as serious production tools without the need for built in sequencers and effects -- all of which are going to pale in comparison to desktop versions anyway.
I have been petitioning developers for these features. Jesse of Thumbjam fame has, in a recent beta, really hit the ball out of the park.
An interesting thought!
I don't think that we're in any danger of hitting the point where its not worth developers investing their time in creating new music Apps yet as so many of the current Apps are great for a specific purpose but have substantial limitations. (Not always a bad thing.) There are also plenty that are moving in the right direction but haven't quite made it there yet. ( Loopers with no audio/copy paste, guitar effects with no loopers, groove boxes with no automation of key sound parameters and resampling...)
I did wonder however whether we might see the "Killer App" at some stage. One that includes all the key features, flexible instruments including both synths and samplers, decent effects with automation and resampling, an interface that fits the multitouch environment and the ability to include content from other Apps without the use of a PC. Would the 'i' community get behind something like this to the exclusion of other Apps? Will something have the impact of Cubase VST or Audio in defining the shape of the Apps in the future?
I don't know the answer but if these super Apps allow the flexibility to copy and paste from other Apps I suspect that there will still be plenty of space for quirky Apps with good interfaces to flourish.
I am not sure that I agree with Mr A's harsh 'free hand of the market' critique, but in time i guess the bar will be raised so that apps are more thought out in terms of their usefulness. There are many great apps (nLog and Argon in particular) that are awesome but I can't find a use for them. Maybe if they had a sequencer I could at least sequence them to the beat and edit synth patches in realtime; without this functionality, however, if you've ever used a desktop DAW it comparatively seems like a pain, at least for me. Again - Sunvox is awesome and powerful, but too fiddly to use meaningfully. This is why Nanostudio excites me - I can use it to compose, edit and sequence, as if it were a cut-down desktop app with a familiar and hopefully usable interface.
Then again, it's wonderful forums like PALM SOUNDS that will continue to expose the lesser known apps (which you've done countless times for me)to the public. At the end of the day though, the most useful and creative apps will be the ones that will find their niche. It's a shame, but life is short :)
Post a Comment