I have “pitched” the idea of a longer Loom in the Kickstarter comments. I guess it’s also about where one is coming from. For single voice e.g. woodwind instruments or human voice three octaves is close to the upper limit (only few like clarinette have more). For piano on the other hand most repertoire wouldn’t be imaginable with only three octaves. So when being presented with a new three octave instrument the reaction can be pretty different 
Given that it is a polyphonic instrument, having more space to place voices would make musical sense though - so fingers crossed!
1 Like
Did anyone there mention if a zone split will be possible/planned? Because then the 3 (or more) octave version would be a no-brainer.
1 Like
Don’t think that was answered. But there are a number of modular hosts (e.g. GigPerformer) that could add this functionality (split the keyboard at a given note or pitch) in case it is missing.
(Instead of splitting a three octave Loom I would rather extend it with another one 
)
2 Likes
Ha good point. Ha good point.
1 Like
Here’s aodyo’z answer on zone split:
Hi, thanks for your support! This would be a nice thing, especially with the larger version as you say. We’re thinking about it but it’s not something we’ve planned for the moment.
Fair enough. I come from a “small hardware with one USB port and no hub” perspective so a split would have been a nice option even if only 1+2 octaves. But a post-processing virtual split is still possible I guess!
2 Likes
If only hardware synths are used with no computer then something like the Bome Box might be worth considering. But it’s yet another box of course…
2 Likes
Because of our design with 1 touchchip/octave, scan rate is the same whatever number of octave you have (2 or 3).
Now a few words about bigger Loom.
Kickstarter EA price difference between 2 and 3 octave version is around $120 and is expected to be around $180 street price.
We also have 4 octave solution as this is what will be embedded in the Omega keyboard version.
You could theoretically expect a 5 octaves version to cost $240 more (kickstarter price) or 360$ more (street price) but it would really depend on quantity. But this is only theory as one of the main point would also be quantity of 5 octaves version compared to 2 or 3 octaves version. Production of a bigger housing and front panel would also require the use of bigger machines which also means higher cost.
Actually, we were wondering which of the Loom 2 octaves or Loom 3 octaves would be most requested before starting this crowdfunding campaign. Until now, the answer is around 50%/50%.
Best seller MIDI keyboard controller are nowadays 25 and 37 keys rather than 49, 61, 76 or 88 probably because of size and price.
We had this in mind when we decided to offer Loom in 2 octaves or 3 octaves versions.
Shipping cost of these would also get significant rise if size had to be significantly bigger.
We also thought about modular design (similar to Roll Block range for exemple) but this also means extra cost due to special mag connectors for example and much more complex housing design. And above all you wouldn’t be able to get continuous surface between 2 modules.
Carrying longer device could also be an issue.
We also didn’t get that much request for a bigger model so far.
4 Likes
Thanks for the detailed answer!
My guess why 25 key keyboards sell well would be that they are more used as Input, trigger and control Interfaces than for actual keyboard playing.
Might be worth to ask people whether they would buy a bigger Loom for the price that would make it reasonable for you to make some.
I think the performances you would get from people using the larger ones would also have the potential to be much more impressive!
Carrying an 88 key weighted hammer stage piano around is admittedly no fun - much less than even a seven octave Loom would be. Serious players still do it and would never consider a 25 or 37 Keys alternative - simply because it would limit their musical abilities way too much.
Thanks a lot for at least considering!
2 Likes
By the way their “developer mode” is a very nice way to get the software tinkerers (or even plugin or DAW developers) involved.
You can send a specific MIDI message to enter developer mode, where every input will be sent as-is, and you’ll be able to control the LEDs and display by sending MIDI SysEx messages to the Loom from your own program or script running on your computer. This way, you can entirely control what’s happening on your Loom, design new playing modes that you can distribute to others, or use Loom as an experimentation platform.
It is unclear if this really only works “on your computer” but I am assuming any hardware host that sends the right MIDI strings would work too.
1 Like
no doubt it’ll be similar to others (e.g. Erae Touch), you could send from ‘anything’ that has sysex support, but in practice few things other than computers have the processing you’ll need to do anything useful
ofc, ‘computer’ is a pretty broad term here from microcontroller (Arduino) to a desktop…
also we have various embedded devices that might be able to do things (e.g. Electra One springs to mind.)
2 Likes
Anything that can send and receive MIDI via USB and can be programmed can control the developer mode (Raspberry Pi, Arduino, etc).
2 Likes
Will the firmware be open-sourced?
1 Like
I get the idea of being able to own your device and tinker with it at will, but the current answer is no. For now we decided that inputs and outputs are provided in a somewhat raw form via MIDI SysEx and you work with that, and hopefully you can get 80% of the benefits. In the long run, it’d be cool if we could provide a kind of SDK for developing alternative firmwares or modes that run sandboxed on-device (without access to all the very low-level details), but it’s a bit more complex for us to provide this, and in any case we don’t see open-sourcing the firmware as a viable option for us. There are many reasons, among which: we could put ourselves at a disadvantage if we shared a few of our secret sauces, and we don’t have the manpower to support the demands of the open-source community or to help them avoid frying their devices for instance. That’s just our current stance, but we’re open to discussion on anything. What would you do with an open-sourced firmware?
4 Likes
Develop my own firmware fork, and whenever possible, depending on the software license, contribute back upstream via merge requests. I do not use GitHub or GitLab Enterprise Edition due to my security practices, but I am fine with pretty much any other forge at the moment.
My root concern is obsolescence. There have been many hardware MPE products that no longer have manufacturer support, so open-source firmware, preferably with a copyleft license, would extend the product’s lifespan so that it can continue to stay relevant.
2 Likes
We added some new modes to the list:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/aodyo-anyma-phi/loom-multidimensional-mpe-midi-controller/posts/4069427
7 Likes
Keygrid mode is great! As it repurposes much of the y dimension it’s both give and take - but good to have the choice! Please consider a wide range of configurable offsets - optimally from -36 to 36 semitones between rows. E.g. 24 semitones, having three narrow Looms in one with one octave overlap and 7 octaves overall might be interesting!
Or -1 semitone between rows and 3 semitones between “columns” (= 9 octaves pitch bend horizontally when using no quantization), having a vertical minor third layout similar to what I use on Eigenharps, just potentially continuous (so one could play a semitone step by either going one step down vertically or a third step up horizontally. When playing a second interval at least the latter option should remain, as a third finger distance is probably too narrow to detect)
Please consider to make it possible to disable pitch quantization (most challenging but potentially also most fun) - and to set quanization cell “key” sizes arbitrarily - like a third width as in the example above. Even when that means that adjacent cells cannot be triggered at the same time anymore when setting the cells too narrow - that’s ok, still nice to be able to “land” on each semitone when using a high pitch bend range of more than three octaves. In the example above it would alternatively also make sense to be able to quantize to every third semitone only. So the cell widths are square again and easier to hit (sacrificing the horizontal semitones). So a high degree of configurability would be good here!
3 Likes
Veri nice !
Which shows also how it would be extremely useful to have a higher Y size.
Was it determined by choice, by technical constraints or by cost ?
There is at least one centimeter at bottom which is “lost” and would allow a better and finer Y control…
1 Like
A mix of all these reason actually.
Keep in mind the Loom is inherited from our work in progress on the Anyma Omega.
The Y dimension is already bigger than the initial Omega prototype ribbon but still have to find place inside the Omega. Compact size was also something we set in our spec sheet.
The “lost” centimeter at the bottom is actually not lost but technically necessary for the side TouchBar and Slider. Increasing the Y dimension would have lead to a different shaped instrument closer to a small controller keyboard size and would probably be less easy to fit in addition to a MIDI keyboard or computer keyboard on people desk…
By the way, there is still a few units available through our follow up Indiegogo campaign here in case someone is interested:
3 Likes
Okay, I will add the Looom as an entry on my list of MPE hardware controllers.
2 Likes
Backed the 3-octave Looom, because well, one more ‘o’
2 Likes