An Interview with Scott Peer of SoundEngine.com By ... - Ugo Audio

An Interview with Scott Peer of SoundEngine.comBy Jeff McLeodI'm a Fizzer. I'm one of the lucky folks who own, play and love a "loveableloser" of a digital synthesizer with the funny name of Fizmo. It wasavailable from synth and music company Ensoniq a couple of years ago, butdidn't last longfor several reasons. I believe that the thing was just toodamn weird for the people that it was marketed topeople like DJs andtechno/dance musicians. For the experimental, industrial and noisemusician, however, the Fizmo is a dream. Once digging in and programming,one can create sounds from scratch that range from thick, evolving synthpads to total environments of sound that are so alive-sounding, morphingand constantly growing that it'll make your head spin.Ensoniq's Fizmo was built upon Transwave synthesis. Transwaves arewavetables, which many other synths have used, but transwaves are muchdifferent in that that each one has many loop points rather than just onewhere the sound can cycle back around. Ensoniq has used transwaves sincethe 80s. The Fizmo was the first synth that they devised that was totallybuilt around them. It features bank of knobs to tweak and tear apart soundsthat can easily be used in real time--which is great for performance andfor quick work during composition. It also has a superb multi-effectsengine to modify sounds even further. One can run any outside sound sourcethrough the effects via an external jack, and the Fizmo has a built-invocoder for processing one's voice via the keyboard.I spoke with Scott Peer, who worked for Ensoniq during the development ofthe Fizmo and now runs SoUnDEnGiNe.com, a self-proclaimed "creative outlet"where he offers new synth patches to musicians. They've just released awonderful collection of more meat-and-potatoes sounds for the synth called"Fizmo World," which were designed by Craig Snoke, another Ensoniq/Fizmoalumnus.Previous to Ensoniq, Scott worked for Sequential Circuits, Peavey,Fostex, and Passport. Scott started at Ensoniq in 1996 with the position ofSr. Software Engineer, where he wrote sample import code, worked on thesynthesizer engine for the MR-Rack, which eventually evolved into theMR/ZR-76 and the ASR-X seriesthe same synth engine used in the FIZMO. Heacted as project leader and Software Engineering Manager for a group of 4-5engineers, QA, and Technical Documentation. Soon after, he was promoted toDirector of Product Development, which coordinated efforts betweenMarketing and Engineering to specify and develop product concepts.The Fizmo stands alone in a musical community riddled with synthsattempting to model other ones. It's no virtual modeler, nor is it verycommon-sounding. I believe that its oddball approach, collection of strangesound patches and means of creating even weirder user sounds really put

people off when it was released. Scott has unique insight into the Fizmo,it's concept, uniqueness and untimely demise.1. What was the creative spark behind the conception of the Fizmo? Whatwere the original ideas for this synthesizer?Originally, FIZMO was referred to as PHYS-MO. Bill Mauchly (Ensoniq ChiefScientist) and I were talking about developing a synthesizer around a chipcalled the OTTO-FX. Which combined the ASR-10 Synth Engine and EffectsEngine on one piece of silicon. This chip never shipped in a commercial MI(Musical Instrument) product.What eventually evolved was a product based upon Transwaves, which I felt werethe most compelling new sound synthesis technology that Ensoniq had in hand.Things really started to happen after Waveboy (aka the aforementioned BillMauchly) and Soundengine.com (aka me) independently released two transwaveproducts for the ASR-10.2. When the idea for the synth was pitched to Ensoniq what was the response?The idea of a transwave synth was pitched to Ensoniq management. I was Directorof Product Development at the time, so my role was essentially to generateconsensus among Engineering and Marketing Management. I convinced theDirector of Marketing, the VP of sales and marketing, and the VP of M.I.Engineering that this was financially viable product, and we got started.3. How was the Fizmo to be marketed?As a non-"me too" analog simulation synthesizer. The notion was that itinitially would have more appeal in Europe (with all of the dance music beingwritten there) than in the US.4. How long was it actually on the market before being discontinued?It was actively marketed for about six months. Around the time FIZMO was to bereleased, Creative Labs, in their infinite wisdom, decided to merge the EnsoniqMI division with Emu.There is an entire story here, within the merger.

Emu and Ensoniq were culturally, *completely* different, and incompatiblecompanies. From my perspective, Ensoniq was more of a "get it out the door"company, whereas Emu was a "we have a formula" company, which made the mergerdifficult. Ensoniq, the engineering and marketing teams, and all of ourproducts, did not fit into the Emu formula.Ensoniq was also quite different in how decisions were made. Consensus was theapproach on the East Coast, while closed door office politicking was the methodat Emu.5. Why was it discontinued?IMHO, Emu didn't get it, and at that point, some other events had happened atEnsoniq/Creative where it didn't matter that much. Creative Labs decided topull all of the engineers that were working on MI products in Malvern (Ensoniq)back onto Sound Card, Video Card and other Multimedia related products. Theengineers who remain at 155 Great Valley Parkway, Malvern are still doing this.The company line on this transition was that the Ensoniq MI Engineering was"too valuable" to leave within Emu control, because Creative believed that Emuwas failing, and would be absorbed into other divisions soon. Personally, I didn'tbuy the company line, as the Emu Engineering team most certainly was astalented as ours, they just worked within the political system that existed atEmu. I believe the Ensoniq MI return to Multimedia projects was purely apolitical power play at the Creative Labs US level. But anyway, it's all historynow, and in the long run, it really doesn't matter.FIZMO has a history of defects because of one simple reason. It wasmanufactured by a team of people (the Creative Labs MalvernManufacturing Team) that were frankly, tired of making keyboards. They weremore focused on seeing the hundreds of thousands of Audio and Graphics PCcards go down the product line. Keyboards were much more bothersome to build,because there is much more craftsmanship involved. As I understand it, most ofthe FIZMO related defects are power supply related, which meansthat it's likelythat an inferior supplier was chosen for cost reasons.6. What do you think were the reasons for it not being very popular? Pleasetouch on some of the "Fizmo Bashing" that's very evident on synth reviewarchive sites on the internet and what you think about that and its origins.I think the main reasons behind the FIZMO bashing are two-fold:

[1] For some reason, the message about it *not* being a virtual analog synthwasn't related well enough, and when customers tried it out, they couldn't findthe TB-303 patch or the "Jump" patch.[2] I think the factory set of presets is a bit too "evolutionary" in nature.What I mean by this is that I have seen the typical way people normally try outsounds on a keyboard in a music store. They have one hand on the "+ Preset+button, and the other on the keyboard. If the sound they select doesn't hithome within 1-2 notes, they hit "+ Preset." This method of course, doesn't let thedynamic, synthetic, transwave technology be heard in FIZMO. Try selectingsounds this way - I think you'll agree.7. What do you think are the most innovative and unique things about the Fizmo?What got overlooked?Transwaves, audio processing through the best sounding effects in the business.8. What do you think are its most detrimental attributes? What really hurt itschances with users.I think if I had the opportunity to design it again, I would include an LCD displaywith text characters.9. Tell me a bit about SoundEngine.com and what your missionwith that company is.SoUnDEnGiNe.com has been around since 1991! At Peavey, where I worked in alife prior to Ensoniq, my employment agreement laid claim to *all* materials thatI developed there, including any sound programming that I did at home. I didprograms for all of the synths I designed at Peavey, as well as at SequentialCircuits, where I worked before that. I always wanted to have a sounddevelopment company, and when the Internet started to take off, it was a naturalvenue for me to market what I had created.SoUnDEnGiNe.com now has evolved into something much more. I view it as acreative outlet for me, and an opportunity for sound developers worldwide toapply what I have learned in participating in online sales for 9 years, to markettheir sounds. I am fortunate to work with *extremely* talented sound developersfrom Australia, Germany, the Netherlands and the US. I offer a more generousroyalty than other sound development houses. I look at SoUnDEnGiNe.com as acollective. With that perspective, the last two years have been the most

ewarding in the company's history.10. Why have you released a new collection of patches for the Fizmo? Isthere a renewed interest in this synth?I don't know if there is renewed interest. Craig Snoke and I have maintained afriendship since we both left Ensoniq, and this was something he wanted to bringto market. Good thing he did - sales have been great!11. Why do you feel that many experimental and industrial musicians haveembraced the Fizmo?Short answer: because they get it. They held Middle C on the keyboard for morethan 1 second, and tweaked the knobs rather than press the "+ Preset" button. Iapplaud them. They understand that FIZMO is a completely unique soundingsynthesizer. Joe Kramer, the former product manager for FIZMO at Ensoniq and Ijoke that in 2005, FIZMO will be as valuable as TB303's were two years ago,because they are so rare and unique - a cult classic.12. With all the modeling devices popping up every day, there seems to bea revival of synthesis lately. Please share your thoughts on this.We were discussing this the other day. I agree that there is more synthesis outthere. Call me a dinosaur (and to some degree, I call myself one), but I thinkmost of what is considered "the revival" in synthesis is software basedproducts. This technology sounds good, but being the Brontosaurus that I am,it's not fun nor interactive enough for me to tweak virtual knobs on a CRT. Iwant the buttons and lights. They are what keeps me interested enough that Ilook up at the clock and realize is 1:30am.