User Posts

OK...no, having the already-cased synths in the Eurorack case is a BAD idea. For one thing, it's incredibly wasteful. So, let's look at your case for a second, which is apparently a 4-row Doepfer "Monster".

That case has 672 hp available, and it's already powered. Street price on it at present = $1849. 1849/672=$2.75 (approximately) is the cost per hp for housing something in there.

You have 330 hp of this covered by synths that HAVE cases and HAVE power already. That 330 hp = $907.50. This is how much it costs YOU to house them there. So, break that six ways, and this means you've effectively added just over $150 to the cost of each one of those by doing this.

Yes, I get it...this is for convenience, etc. But there's definitely better ways to do this, such as a triple-tier Moog stand for those alone. By avoiding this, you're also keeping space open for devices that don't have power or cases already...such as the vast majority of Eurorack modules.

I wonder what module one would use to replicate the inherently-defective power circuitry in the Fizmo...?

Seriously, that's why they're rare. Ensoniq did such a lousy job of hardware design that they more or less sabotaged this synth. The power circuitry was VERY prone to failure, and that failure would cascade throughout the entire synth when it happened, basically destroying it.

But duplicating that synth? That'd be a tall order. Ensoniq's "transwave" system was, admittedly, a variant on scanned wavetable synthesis (which Ensoniq was the only other manufacturer to use at that time aside of PPG), and while there are a few modules that use this, you wouldn't get the exact "transwave" sound and feel. 'Fraid solitud's dead-on point about that...

That's a ground loop. Your synth's P/S is trying to ground to a different ground than the equipment the synth is hooked up to, and this then allows AC to get onto the audio lines where the synth is finding an "easier" ground.

There's several possible fixes. The most immediate would be to use this: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/happy-nerding-isolator Transformer isolation with ground-lifts per channel and a useful ganged stereo level.

The BEST, however, is to implement a "star ground". Star grounds are called that because they're an array of wired ground lines that all connect to the same grounding point, usually on the mixing desk. What you'd need is a spool of 16ga stranded and insulated wire. Use that to connect ALL of the chassis, racks, instruments, etc etc in such a way that all of that winds up at your "star point"; in my studio, I have a number of 19" racks, and to connect those I'll simply hook a short bit of wire between each rack until I get to the point where I have to run the wire to the star ground. Time-consuming, but VERY effective. Implement that + the Isolator, and there should be ZERO noise problems after a tad of tweaking.

I wouldn't worry about pairings for the Plonk. 48 hp will NOT be enough space for this to work. Either you'll have to resort to a pile of very slim modules that are no fun to work with long-term, or you'll have to compromise on something essential.

Given the importance of MIDI here, my suggestion would be to get an Intellijel Palette...104 hp, preferably. With that, you can locate the MIDI interface in the cab's tile row (along with a number of useful utilities) and use the cab's USB for connection between it and your DAW, controller, etc. With more space, you can then avoid the super-tight spacings common with "Beauty Case" builds AND you'll get to have proper sections for sound generation, control, and modification.

And of course, there's also THIS: https://vcvrack.com/ Best modular "explainerizer" ever. In VCV, it's impossible to wreck things. The worst you'll see are "spitty" outputs due to the package overtaxing your CPU and crashes...and those crashes also tend to happen for the same reason. As long as you keep an eye on the CPU load (VCV has the ability to meter each module!), you're golden. But VCV works pretty much like Eurorack...there's even VCV versions of a bunch of the more notable Eurorack modules in there.

Oh...and it's FREE.

Direct audio to the Fireface UCX? Sure, you can do that, but you won't need all those Tethers and Links since the UCX has no D-Sub audio I/O. But since the UCX also has lightpipe I/O, you could later attach an ADAT lightpipe interface that has the DC-coupled I/O that Silent Way/CV Tools/Volta/etc wants to use, and go back to that idea when it's a better fit. In that case, my suggestion would be the ES-8, with four inputs and eight outputs. But right now, you can just tie your audio outs directly into the Fireface UCX although I STRONGLY suggest you have an attenuatable stereo output module so that you can avoid clips due to the level mismatch between synth and pro audio levels. Something like, say, the Happy Nerding Isolator, which has the ganged stereo control and also has transformer isolation to help deal with hum and noise.

OK...I did a bit to set up the general areas you'd want the various modules in. Note that my typical layouts put the audio sources and modifiers up top, modulation across the center, and mixing and effects in the bottom along with control systems. This allows for an "up on left, down on right" signal flow which makes the build much easier to patch and control.

You'll notice how the existing modules break up into the overall scheme. Also, if you don't already have that MIDI interface, you'll likely have a lot of trouble finding one as Doepfer discontinued it.

Now, one issue I do have is with the cab size. Those 84 hp rows are kinda tight, so it makes choosing just the right modules more important...and one way to choose is by function density. For example: there's a very basic Doepfer ADSR that fits into 8 hp. But if you put in one of their A-140-2 modules instead, you then get TWO envelope generators that work the same way (actually, the A-140-2 EGs also give you CV over time, which the A-140 doesn't have) in the same space. Note that there is a point where you can go too far with this; when you've gotten to a point that it's difficult to play the synth because the controls are all too tightly bunched, that's what "too far" looks like. But if you keep the density to somewhere within reason, you can majorly increase the build's capabilities without the need to go to a bigger cab, AND you'd still get more capabilities.

I like farkas's suggestion, actually. A build of this size could 100% benefit from a comprehensive mixer like that WMD, especially if you pick up the extra fader and mutes modules. It works very well as a final level VCA per channel, plus also, something like that can handle your autopanning, put CV control over your FX send/returns, and give you mutes on every input. Even better, if you add Happy Nerding's OUT, you then get one more parallel stereo input that can be mixed with the mixer's output, and this is a perfect way to slot in one more stereo FX return on your main stereo outs.

Also, take a very critical mindset regarding the modules you currently have, and start considering whether or not they effectively fill their spaces. For example, I see a Make Noise Function in the next-to-lowest row, and that occupies 8 hp and only gives you a single two-stage envelope. If you swapped that for a Doepfer A-140-2, you could fit TWO ADSR generators into the same space...or you could go with their A-142-4, which gives you four independent Schmitt triggers (instant attack, manual control over decay). The Erica stuff isn't particularly "function-dense", so you might consider whether something that provides more functionality would be a good substitute for what's there presently.

Yep, envelopes are a problem here...my suggestion on those, given the build size, would be that you might want to look at Xaoc's awesome Zadar/Nin combo...four envelopes, plenty of control, only 13 hp.

Save your $$$...the only patching thing that will wreck a modular is patching outputs to outputs, as the output stages of a lot of modules aren't diode-protected against reverse voltages. Otherwise, the whole point is to patch everything to everything else while avoiding that one critical misstep, which one typically sees when people confuse multiples with mixers (which they aren't!). The far more important things to remember have to do with POWER...connecting the busboards properly, making sure where modules want the "red stripe" on ribbons, etc. Just proceed VERY carefully if you have to mess with any of that, and you'll be fine.

As for utilities and the like, just slap up a build of the current system and link it to a forum thread. You'll have plenty of experienced people poking at it for $zilch, and while you might get several answers...look at 'em as several IDEAS, implement the one(s) you like, but make sure to keep the other suggestions in the back of your mind in case you need 'em later. The MG Forum is also a super-useful place to get patching tips, etc. So, save the money for...well, more modules, but you'll see how THAT happens once you start using what you've got!

Yep, you go directly to/from the interface. However, there ARE ways to make this work better, and since you've mentioned tile rows, have a look at PulpLogic's Link and Tether tiles. If you use an DC-coupled interface that can handle D-sub I/O, all you'd then do would be to connect the interface to the Tether and there you are. The other nice thing about this sort of setup is that you're purely limited by the amount of D-sub I/O on the interface.

For example, this: https://reverb.com/item/40573842-motu-2408-mk3-pci-audio-interface?bk=eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJqdGkiOiIxMDIzNWMzMy0yMWFiLTRkMzQtODJlMS1iNzJjNGNkOWI2OGUiLCJpYXQiOjE2MjY2NjMwMTcsInVzZXJfaWQiOiIyOTQ1MjI0Iiwic2Vzc2lvbl9pZCI6IjdkNzVkNjc0LTYwMzQtNDhiNS05ZDY1LTEyZGJjZTE1ZjM4OSIsImNvb2tpZV9pZCI6IjRmNzU1OTYyLTM3OTItNDQ0My05OWFjLWI2YWQ5NTI5YThjZiIsInByb2R1Y3RfaWQiOiI0MDU3Mzg0MiIsInNvdXJjZSI6Ik5PTkUifQ.bYfOV-bjfEPC1dlMxZQhf12lY9yiAqV-cpZ5EZibnzM Wow...what a hideous URL...anyway, this has three pairs of 8-channel D-subs plus eight more analog I/O channels. So if you wanted the MADNESS of having 32 channels of CV/gate/trig/clock I/O, you could do that with six Tethers and six Links for the first 24, then another 8 would patch directly (preferably through an outboard patchbay...those things make life much easier in a studio). Just BE SURE to get any necessary PCIe cards and such, as these denser interfaces often rely on things like that.

Another question: Which do you think is better? A synth voice module or a bunch of modules to complete a synth voice?
-- baygiooday

Depends partly on what music you're doing and whether you need to work fast (as in live gigging) or not (studio work). If the former, you might benefit from some single-module voices. But if the rig is only going to see studio work, I'd suggest going with the individual module plan. Also, if doing music with complex sonic elements, individual modules give you the flexibility needed for that...such as for immersive ambient. But if you're aiming for a techno/EDM-type direction, it wouldn't be a bad thing to make your "bleep" and "bass" voices be single module voices.

The screws on the side panels are Torx, right? I've never come across these before. Do you know what size screwdriver you need? Just wanna make sure I order the right one.
-- Manbearpignick

The best solution here would be to hit a home improvement store and pick up a set of Torx drivers. Not all that expensive, plus if you run across other Torx-fitted stuff, you're covered.

I'd check with Expert Sleepers on that point, actually. I doubt they'd put lightpipe I/O there without being able to send/return ALL of the channels; remember, this is not exactly a "normal" ADAT lightpipe interface, but something that talks to whatever CV interface app is in use. But if you want the smaller footprint, the ES-3/6 combo would also be a good fit...just remember that it hasn't got the USB interface that allows you to directly connect a MIDI controller to it in addition to the normal I/Os, and it also only handles outputs. However, you can expand that arrangement to a massive 64-outs for both gate/trig and CV.

Even so, the cheapest and easiest solution still appears to be to use an outboard DC-coupled audio interface. I use that, and so do others here.

Yep, they are...just as long as you use the right format. XODES has tried to come up with a "universal" tile faceplate, though...and it really seems to end-run that issue.

As to the OP's question about outputs to the DAW's A/D, my suggestion...if this is just going to be a studio rig, you might actually be better off with an Expert Sleepers interface module right there in the cab. The ES-9 comes to mind, in fact...plenty of user programmability, plus it works as a MIDI interface for any class-compliant controller while also having 8 channels of output from the DAW...and with 14 inputs to send audio directly to the DAW via either USB or ADAT Lightpipe. Oh, and it also gives you a stereo pair of isolated analog outs so that you could connect directly from that to the PA desk if you DID want to use it live.

The other cheapo method for this is to use a software package like ES's Silent Way, Ableton Live's CV Tools, etc...and then, your next move would be to snag a used but "obsolete" I/O interface (I use a MOTU 828FW mkii) and then use it as a substitute for the ES-9. This gives you an easy 8-out/8-in, and all you need to do is to grab a cheap Firewire 400 card to make that work. Truth is, ANY DC-coupled audio interface will work (usually), and if you stick with the interfaces from back in the old "96 kHz is all you get" days that have that, you can make this fly for a couple hundred.

Hey, Garfield, be patient. It’s a good service.
-- MichaelCrowley

Just an aside, but maybe...just MAYBE...you should take some mass-comm classes in advertising. Because, clearly, this strategy ain't workin'!

Of course, a lot of that is due to your efforts being analogous to trying to sell hamburgers in a colony of vegans, or something similarly tone-deaf. Look up "targeted marketing" sometime.

EDITED Jul 16th 2021, 01:12

I did misstate my goals for the system. The idea was to provide a "standard" instrument arrangement (e.g. bass, drums, lead, arp) in a single system, while still allowing for some wierd-sound exploration. And that's really my goal with modular - sound exploration in a non-DAW environment.
-- jtunes_ia

Ahhh...now, see, that makes much more sense. So, let's tear into this...

First up, having drums IN the cab is probably not the right way to proceed at present, given that you can get all sorts of much more capable standalone drum machines for far less than the modules needed plus the cost of the space they'll take up. You definitely want a machine that you can lock up to the DAW and modular, so that also gives some indications of how to proceed with interfacing on the modular so that everything "plays nice". This doesn't mean you can't send the machine THRU the modular, however; a good stereo input preamp + envelope following = very wild filter-swept percussives in step with the percussion itself. Or lots of other possible implementations. But this then means you'd have a bit of a different mixer complement, because you'll want a mixer that has enough stereo inputs if you're going to do that.

This is pretty much how it works. Define a need, vet whether or not it'll work, then figure out how to implement it. And once you figure THAT out, vet it again...this time with an eye toward conserving space + money. Do you HAVE TO have that set of modules? Can you do it cheaper? More effectively? Would an outboard device be better-suited to the solution? All of these should be in mind while thrashing out a build.

Now, let's see...basic voicing...so, with the bass part, you're going to want two of the same VCO. This is super-important, because you want to be able to detune between them so that the sound gets HUGE. Maybe a bit of waveshaping to get the sound more "in yer face", and then a solid 4-pole LPF...the old Moog ladder topology would be perfect.

The arpeggi/harmonic part is also pretty straightforward up to the point where you start considering how you want timing to work. Do you want just straight-up clocking? Do you want to mess with the clock signals? If so, how? Random drops? Some swing? Boolean logic funtime? This is where VCV comes in, because it's far more difficult to explain this sort of thing and much BETTER to just have at the circuitry to sort out what works for you. However, if you pull up the "clock modulator" category here, you can see there's TONS of possible methods (some making more sense than others!) for altering timing behavior. So pretty much any sort of rhythmic trickery applies here; you can even treat certain sequencers (Euclideans!) as "clock modulators" with internal stochastics.

Now, that lead part...this is actually where you'll want to throw in a LOT of different tweakable parameters in the form of modules in the "voice's" signal chain. So, waveshapers are on the table, distorters, oddball filtering, granularization (a very effective method of "accumulating" yet another multi-"voice" layer, btw), delays, phasers, all that cray shiz...BECAUSE this one voice has to be the most variable and most memorable, as it's out front lots of the time. But by having lots of modules in that signal path that you can bring in and out of the chain and constantly adjust, this will make that one voice jump right out there where it belongs. Problem is, though...what sort of aesthetic in general does this aim for? That'll make a big difference in which modules you'll want for that. For example, if you were doing something more, say, 90s Goa Trance-ish, you probably wouldn't want some Schlappi Engineering stuff in there...but if you were taking your lead voice cues from something like Black Dice, then yeah, you definitely want sound manglers like that.

And as for the users disparaging the idea of hanging onto an instrument for 15, 20 or more years...well, lessee what's in here...

Roland JP-6 (bought 1990)
Yamaha CS-80 (bought 1993)
Casio CZ-101 (bought 1992)
Fairchild Reverbertron 659 (bought 1994)
PTI Ecoplate II (bought 1994)

...and so on. And don't even get me started on the lab gear, some of which dates back to the late 1940s! Yeah, I would have some misgivings about holding onto, say, a Roland D-10 for that long (or for ANY amount of time...man, what a lousy synth!)...but none of those devices (among tons of others here) are ones that I would think you can "deplete" very quickly. That's the key...if something is USEFUL, you don't tend to let it go. And by "useful", I mean that you can dig and dig and dig at programming, and STILL not hit the end of the sonic possibilities.

So...proceed slowly, build something HUGE...and then, start paring it back. Take it down to a point at which you know you can't go any "lower" but where you've still got that sonic versatility, and that's where you might consider stopping. Or, just as likely, something in the pare-down jogs an idea loose and you're back to filling holes again, but with a tighter perspective on what goes in them. It's a process...takes time, if done right, and you'll find yourself constantly rescrambling things in the builds on here. But this is the slow but VERY rewarding process of creating a bespoke instrument based on YOUR music. It ain't simple.

Other trick: start going thru the racks on here. You'll find some builds by some pretty significant folks, and given their experience levels, those builds are great "textbooks" on construction, especially since you'll have some knowledge of what music those synthesists create. Just using the "grid" itself is cool and all, but you can get a really good education on how others have approached their music via this hardware by nosing around in the builds.

And another useful thing: do you want this to be in Eurorack? Because you don't have to...you can try builds in other formats such as the 5U Moog format, Buchla 4U, Serge 4U and so on. And all of THOSE bring interesting and different things to the table...as well as their own particular drawbacks, just like Eurorack.

Anyways, apologies for coming off as cranky as I did before...but when I see someone coming down the pike with a pile of money, noisy ambitions, and so on, it's...well, not like I'm trying to swift-kick 'em for no reason. Instead, I (and I'm sure lots of others) would rather not see yet another build with no VCAs, etc that will wind up in a closet for the next couple of decades. Instead of that, everyone here REALLY wants (I would HOPE) for newcomers to modular to do their builds right so that, rather than being turned-off by the complexity, they REALLY WILL be playing parts of that first system some 20 years down the line in what will likely be very expanded systems that started with little 2 x 84 builds. There's no reason why anyone shouldn't want that, to be honest. Might take the verbal equivalent of a good WHACK on the back by a Rinzai Zen Master (not me, mind you...Shin Buddhist here, not Zen) to get there, but as long as we all DO get there, well, hey...

My take on this is that if you want both "cheap" and "reliable" modules that have a good rep, you might want to have a look at Noise Reap's stuff. Ugly and functional appearance, but VERY interesting sonic capabilities. The Paradox, for example, is pretty nuts for only $120...it's pretty close to West Coast complex oscillator turf and other things that'll cost dearly, with crossmod FM and VCO self-modulation.

Yeah, that's spam alright. Looks like it's time for the MG crew to fire up the filtering...

As for the original question, though...have you thought about something like this: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/nonlinearcircuits-timbre-timbre That there is a pair of independent Buchla-style wavefolders, each with its own I/O and CV input. You could go with an EQ or some such, but something like these gives you a lot more latitude in terms of sound alteration/mangling...just a touch for a little ear candy, or go nutz to get something that would've scared Genesis P-Orridge! Even better, if you've got a stereo delay of some sort in there, you can feed some modulation signals to this module, then send the audio results on to the delay and have each repeat have a different timbral color! EQs and such are easy enough, but if you're in an environment where something of this sort can run and play, this seems like the way to go.

And Mr. Annoying here makes three! So, yeah...remove that Neutron!

Also, Jim makes a good point...the cab's way too small. When beginning a build here, always start with a case that you know is too big...because the reality of the situation is that the "too big" case is usually just the right size! Oh, and you're NOT trapped in an Intellijel case, either...you might want a peek here: https://reverb.com/brand/case-from-lake Case From Lake over in Italia, dahling can do alterations to their stock versions seen at that link, and those include tile rows in EITHER format...so you could do an Intellijel format one AND a "standard" one if you felt the need. Stonkin' power specs from 'em, too...they know what they're doing.

My take on this: if you have a problem with critique, maybe you should pick a different line of work. Amusingly, though, this seems to happen every time someone comes along with their idea of what's going to make them a SUPAH-STAAHH and I or someone else points out the deficiencies in their line of thinking. And this has been going on for a long time; I can recall an incident back in the pre-browser days on USENET where someone popped up on one of the groups, bellowing about his brand new MORPHEUS, and how this brand new MORPHEUS was going to be THE THING that was gonna take him right to the top!!!

Yeah, right.

Fact is, this argument that a given device will vault you into stardom is a load of crap. It's the inverse corollory to blaming your equipment for your own musical shortcomings. Both notions are equally false. Your musicianship depends on YOU...not a Magic Box or whatever.

Now, yeah, sure...you might BE capable of grabbing the (somewhat cursed) brass ring of getting big in music. But when you start confusing your efforts with your purchases, you're operating in a pretty screwed-up area. And the thing that it leads to (and which I and others have seen repeatedly on MG and loads of other places) is a sense of hubris that causes one to incinerate their lines of credit because they've managed to convince themselves of this sort of nonsense. And, also invariably, when they get THAT CONVINCED, any sort of query turns (in their minds) into some sort of ATTACK!@!!!!!!!$$$!1111

Very dumb. Go back and reread my post. Yeah, it's blunt; I wouldn't have survived the music industry as long as I have without being blunt. But notice the actual INFO there...what WILL you do if styles change? Is this system capable of open-ended sorts of work, or have you built a very expensive MC-303? HAVE you actually worked with any sort of modular equipment, virtual or otherwise? And of course, the meat at the heart of the post was ignored...which was this:

"A much smarter move would be to try and NOT fit the system to the music. Really, it should be the other way around."

No lie. Consider: the VERY-copied and now-goes-for-several-grand TB-303 was introduced in Roland's pre-MIDI days as an automated bass line (which is why it says that on there) for acts like bar bands, people doing demos, etc. It tanked. It was, at the time, the music instrument equivalent of the Atari 2600 "E.T." game. And it took several years for Larry Heard to pop into a Chicago pawn shop or used music gear joint, find one, and then MISUSE it for a little ditty called "Washing Machine". And what happens on that track and ALL of the subsequent acid house tracks in its wake is NOT how you're supposed to use a TB-303. But when you talk to a lot of these acid producers, they invariably say that what they do with the 303 is what seemed to them to be what fit with how the TB-303 worked. This is also why it took many years after acid blew up for Roland to warm up to reissuing AN (albeit not THE) TB-303 in some manner, because they thought people were using their synth "wrong" and still thought it was an abject failure...despite the clear and obvious evidence that they could've fired up a production line for them right then and there in the middle of the 1990s, charged several times what the original list of the TB-303 was for the same, already-developed device, and made out like bandits. What finally DID get them to revisit it, though, was all of the small companies making bank on their attempts to clone this thing.

But getting back to that point: if you've not done the research, not had the experience, and are operating on snap decisions, you're going to get severely burned. And I'm not talking about the synth here, but the music itself. Do you actually know what EDM producers use? Is this effort of yours based in any of their useful experiences? Do you often take a pile of money out in the yard and set it on fire? That last one is pretty much what happens if you ignore the two previous questions.

I would suggest getting over your severe butthurt and then actually discussing what you're trying to do, what the aims are, and so on. Fact is, we aren't gatekeeping people out of modular here...but we ARE trying to gatekeep people from making some really awful decisions and winding up with a generally-unplayable instrument. But if you can't handle blunt but well-meaning advice, well...

Sure it does. If it didn't, you wouldn't see the image that tells that the clip was blocked by the owner.

Precisely the sort of thing I was thinking of, Ronin...not a massive change to the site's scripting that would allow you whatever cab you wanted for your build. I think we can stick with the current case layout models for the Grid itself. This would be more of a "gallery" of cabs with full (authoritative!) specs, with space available probably being the best ranking criteria. That way, you could just use the navigation buttons in the existing scripting like we do with modules...you just wouldn't have the ability to pop one up onscreen to build in.

Right now, I see three primary criteria on the case listings:

1) Form factor. Is this a case? A rack housing? If it's a case, is it portable? Does it offer a lid for transport? Does it fold for transportation?
2) Power. Is the case powered? If so, does it use flying busses or fixed busboards? Is the AC supply internal or external. How much current is available? Is the power in "zones" (think Arturia here) or overall?
3) Dimensions. How deep can the modules be? How wide are the rows? What's the total available hp? What external physical dimensions does a case have? If it folds, how big is it for transport?

As far as materials, special latching (like ATA-compliant hardware) and so on...those can be in the case descriptions. Sticking with the above criteria for sorting and sifting through seems to me to be key here.

And also, if you object to Behringer, that's why the FORUMS exist. Don't screw with the database.

I'm not "into" modular (yet), but I have been researching and experimenting here on ModularGrid with rack designs, including this one that I'm calling the "EDMachine".
Jack
-- jtunes_ia

Ummmm...no.

Here's a better idea: if you don't have a copy of VCV Rack on your machine, get one. It's free: https://vcvrack.com/ Next, replicate the above cab as best as possible (there ARE some 1:1 virtual versions of these modules, fyi) in VCV. Then try using it.

So, about the point where you're going to be either very puzzled or very riled up about an hour into this...that's the point where you start realizing that this thing has some SERIOUS flaws. For example, you have no attenuators or submixers in this. That'll be fun.

Here's the real problem: you're trying to work out a build based SOLELY on the descriptions on MG. This is one of those "doomed to failure" sort of exercises. Without some practical, working knowledge of why certain things MUST be in a build, which sort of layouts will work as far as signal flow vs ergonomics, and so on, you're sort of out in a creek without a paddle. Hence the copy of VCV Rack. Trying to do this sort of thing with NO practical knowledge is a sure-fire way to incinerate your Magic Plastic on a box that costs a pile but which winds up in a closet. And speaking of that factor...

Have you considered what to do if EDM tanks? It, like everything else in music, is subject to the whims and vagaries of an easily-amused audience. If someone finds a way to amuse them in a cheaper, more practical way, that's where they'll flock to because the industry likes "cheaper". Audiences are, in general, a fairly fickle "low interest" group...you'll only find a small percentage of "true believers" among them, ever, and the rest tends to be attracted by ANY source of lights, noises, and thrashing around. So, given that, IS it really practical to spend several grand on a system that's purely focused on a musical style? Given the piles of Roland MC-303s found in pawnshops (when they'd still take 'em!) not long after the rave scene tanked in the late 1990s, I would say that, no, it's not.

A much smarter move would be to try and NOT fit the system to the music. Really, it should be the other way around. Create a suitably open-ended build that you feel confident that you'll be using sometime around 2040, and that will FIT ANY music that comes along between now and then. And no, there's no exaggeration there; system adaptability is why people will STILL slit your throat in some circles over a minty-fresh vintage ARP 2600. It's a synth that was designed c. 1970, but designed RIGHT so that it's just as valid fifty years on. And I've seen ARP 2600s in use in everything from classic 70s funk (Stevie Wonder's "Superstition", with the help of Margouleff and Cecil) to classical (even I did that...we needed a foghorn for a production of Puccini's "Suor Angelica" during my undergrad, and I was happy to oblige...and it sounded PERFECT). THAT sort of build is what you should be aiming toward...not something with a stylistic expiration date.

After all, it's not the machine that makes the music. You do. You define what it does...not the other way around.

Expect more of this, btw...I saw some scuttlebutt on YT about a new oscillator from these guys.

Frankly, I'm 100% down...if you said I could have a free VCO, and you offered me a choice between one of their new ones and a Behringer Brains, I'd take the Behringer. At least Uli's stuff tends to be somewhat (to very, actually) reliable; Cre8's modules aren't winning them any big fans in that aspect, and I'd rather have to swallow my pride and question my own ethics rather than having a smoking hole in a rig and a related smoking hole in my wallet.

EDITED Jul 14th 2021, 02:19

Right...IF it's doable. I know already that this would require some tinkering with the various databases, but I think if the mods keep to ONLY commercially-available cases, it shouldn't be too chaotic to add this. Also, what I envision would simply be a "gallery" of sorts where the case specs (power especially!), form factor, etc can be shown alongside an image of the case in question. Definitely NOT calling for being able to USE the cases in builds, as that really WOULD be too much to expect in terms of necessary coding and other headaches.

Lots of problems here...first of all, some of your modules in the build are overlapping really badly, at least in the display view. You need to go back to the build page, call up the "screenshot view" again and hit "refresh" to get the proper image up. Secondly, you can't mix Intellijel format tiles and "standard" format tiles in the same row, as they're not the same size. Third: even if Cwejman was still a working concern (all indications are that it's not), nothing in reality can excuse $600 for a stereo panner/VCA. I don't even care if the solder was custom-made by GOD, nothing justifies that. And lastly, this is a pretty small build, and small builds tend to never work out well if you try and build several subsystems into the same build. In this case, trying to jam drum modules in is something I'd discourage...not because they don't work, but because of the space they require, as well as the space everything else requires, means that the whole build has to be done by underequipping something or another. And you can see some of that here inasmuch as the only sequencer for your drum modules is the Steppy, and all you have for a "voice" source is a single complex oscillator. That there isn't necessarily bad in of itself, but other points are downright strange...such as using a stereo VCF when there's no other stereo modules in the synthesis path.

Since you've got a prebuilt system already, what I would suggest is to replicate that in an MG build first. Then, once that's done, expand the rack further so that you have build space that can incorporate new build activity, and then build into that. By having it AND the sketch system in the same place, you're far more likely to be able to notice how you can expand the Erica effectively. This wouldn't necessarily have to be a public build, either...just one that allows you to see your whole "modular picture" at the same time.

Now, as for the drums...quite honestly, just get a drum machine. For one thing, the expense of Eurorack modules IN GENERAL means that you can get a decent machine for far less than the percussion modules, sequencer, mixer, etc etc that a Eurorack implementation of the same sort of thing would cost. Secondly, they're machines specifically dedicated to beats and rhythm, not a general-purpose device that you have to kludge up a drum machine in. Unless you're willing to throw a lot of $$$ around and seriously mash the space available, you simply cannot build a subsystem (or full standalone system) that can do the same thing. Or a better way to put it might be like this: your Plonk alone costs $349, and a Behringer RD-9 costs...well, $349. And that's $349 with NO extra patchcables, NO panel space robbed, NO extra expense, etc. Yeah, I get it...I don't think much of (and try to think as little as possible about) Uli and his antics, but thus far his clones of synth unobtainium have been pretty spot-on, at least as far as the ones I've encountered. Even so, diving head-first into the expensive stuff sometimes works well, but sometimes it's just a flex that'll come back to haunt your build later on.

Sure will. Once you put in the A-520 and Ciao!, you've got a complete thruput path. Add the Cosmix, and that puts you in stereo. And that's not a bad choice, actually; that gives you the possibility of using the Warps and FX Aid in either parallel (using the Cosmix's AUX send/returns) or series (just hook 'em up). Plus, with the Quadrax and Maths in place, you can begin exploring modulation control over FX.

EDITED Jul 13th 2021, 00:29

Several years ago, there was a competing modular site that not only showed modules available, it also had a section for CASES.

Now, yeah, I get it...it would be rather difficult to be able to insert tons of cases into the MG database and then have users building in them, calling a usable case pattern up for their build. That just sounds like a coding headache.

BUT...while MG is now the de facto "catalog" for the major synth formats, we have no listings for cases, which strikes me as a sizable hole in the completeness. At present, the only real method that exists to shop for cases is to prowl around various commerce sites, forums, etc etc etc. But would it be possible to at least "gallery" cases on here with their specs so that the MG 'one-stop' method can even apply there, making things LITERALLY 'one-stop'? I realize that that's even more spinning plates to deal with, true, but it would make it so much simpler to be able to decide ALL of your possible build actions right here without leaving the site.

Also, I don't think it would be necessary to have custom cases in this situation. Instead, concentrating this purely on the commercially-available case lines out there makes more sense, as DIYers are apt to simply build what they want for whatever spaces and circumstances exist in their situations. This is really more for the beginning synthesists, so that they can get a clearer idea as to space, ergonomics, power capabilities, portability, etc etc.

Doable? Ish?

I'm responding a little late but that's because I wanted to let it sink in for a while. I haven't had much time to really lower it yet but what a fantastic setup have you configured here. I don't think I will go along with everything but there is a lot for me to learn and explore here. I'll report back as soon as I get that far. For now, thank you very much!
-- ensemble

Hey, no prob...the main intent with this build (as with a lot of the ones I work out) was less to provide a specific "destination" and more along the lines of tossing some tangential thought in the proceedings in order to drum up new/different ideas. DO pay attention to the timing section in the 4th and 5th rows' left ends though, as that's definitely assembled with an eye to getting the various sequencers from the original build working at a higher state of complexity. Once you start tossing Boolean logic into timing signals, along with the various modules to make that logic really dance, you've really got a whole new chapter in how to get those sequencers doing some VERY complicated stuff.

Well, I can tell you that one of the biggest hurdles here is going to be abandoning the different "instruments" all over the build. But also, this is part of what makes it so daunting to fill out. Once you've divided up the cabs into separate functional zones, however, everything snaps into focus. Yes, there's going to be some long patchcords involved. And yes, I removed the "backside bus" modules because one other problem is going to be found in having those "hidden" patches, that being that relying on those modules actually makes it a bit more difficult to envision the patch in your head. After all, you not only have to sort out what the front panel cable tangle is about, you ALSO have to remember those unseen routings. Plus, chucking those modules opens up more space for function. Anyway...

Hoo, boy...this took a hot minute! I opted to try and fill the build out completely, so that you could get an idea as to what the original build made me think about the "where should this eventually go?" issue. Here's what's going on here...

TOP ROW: Mainly sources and ancillary modules for them. The E370 starts everything off, but then I added a Veils; since the E370 has four outputs, you can "strum" through them by using different LFOs, envelopes, etc to control the VCAs. After that, you have a Doepfer Mini Stereo mixer to stereoize the output, if desired...or you can just take the sum of the VCAs directly on to a VCF. DPO next, then a 3xVCA for that; you can use the multiple VCAs for a lot here...VCA over modulation level control, VCA over waveshaping, etc, and you still have one free for outputs. Or send three different waveforms to the VCA and have it scan through those. Plaits, Spectrum, and Chainsaw next, with another Veils for level control, then an Omsonic panning module gives you six inputs at unity gain with manual panning into a stereo out. This lets you composite those three VCOs into a single "voice". And then, I opted for some polyphony(ish) via a Qu-bit Chord v2, which then can feed its voices through another Veils/A-138s combo. I put the Typhoon after this, which puts it in place to act as yet another source with a great deal of freedom as to what you can feed it. And at the very end, a 1 hp Konstant Labs PWRchekr keeps tabs on the DC rail health.

SECOND ROW: On the left side was where I opted to combine all of the percussives. But at the end of those, I added a Cosmotronics Cosmix for submixing your drums, and put the MSCL, nanoRings, and one of the FX Aids after those for submix processing when needed. After that, I centrally located the Disting EX so that it's accessible from most anywhere in the build. On the opposite side are your filters; the first few are your current ones, then I pushed that on out with a Rossum Linneaus stereo thru-zero VCF and an Intellijel Morgasmotron dual VCF. The last bit there is a mono-stereo/stereo-mono spatial changer from Konstant Labs.

At this point, all of the audio sources and initial modifiers are located in those two topmost rows.

THIRD ROW: Modulation for days. I put in the two 4ms modules because they can work with very long periods, which is very useful for making changes that might take the length of a track to cycle through. The "pingable" concept used by them works well here, too, given the amount of sequencing going on and available pulses for their timing "pings". Then I put in a quadrature LFO, as those quadrature-shifted sines can be VERY useful (as in, say, strumming the E370's VCAs above, or doing the same with the chord pitches from the Chord). First modifier is next, with a MISO and a 3xVCA. Then the Batumi/Poti handles the more "normal" LFO duties. First Maths is after this, then the second modulation modifier...but this time, I put in a SISM which then allows other modulation signals to control modulating them. This, as you've probably guessed, vectors the build a bit toward generative work. Second Maths is after the SISM/3xVCA, then the Zadar/Nin gets us into the envelopes with a Quadrax/Qx, two dual ADSRs, dual ADSRVCAs, then your "character" VCAs are at the right end.

FOURTH ROW: Random signals are first, with a Nonlinearcircuits Triple Sloth for making VERY slow modulation activities that, while random, can take several HOURS to cycle. These are great for adding (with the Palette adders) to modulation signals for the VCFs, creating small, slow shifts in timbre. I put one of Mark Verbos' Buchla-inspired random source modules next; these not only provide plenty of random signals, but they contain an analog shift register, which is a great tool for generating arpeggi, pitch hocketing, and the like. Then a bit of Serge comes in with an Serge SSG for tackling the various random/mod curves and wrangling them into stepped/sloped waveforms. Ornament and Crime fits nicely with that, then I added a 4-channel quantizer with user-definition over scales. Now...why do that? Easy...quantizing + modulation + a good clock = cascades of pitches that rise and fall depending on what modulator the quantizer is reading. This in a way adds a whole new form of pattern generation to the original build. The gate/triggers can then be summed by the Bytom and sent as a composite to...well, anywhere you like, but the NEXT row provides loads of possibilities. Then a pair of Joranalogue dual window comparators also reads the modulation signals...but THEY output gate signals when specified voltage thresholds are crossed. You can get several gates from just one window comparator, so having FOUR lets you dive head-first into generative turf. After those, there's some CV modifiers, notable Mystic Circuits ANA, which is an analog arithmetical processor that derives sums, differences, maximums and minimums from modulation. Plus, a Ladik Derivator can also read CV motion, outputting gates when an inputted CV rises, falls, stays the same, or moves at all. The "little" logic processor (Frequency Central's Reset Simulation) gives you some basic Boolean gates that can either be used "there", or it can also feed those to the next row down. After this, I put in a Doepfer CVable dual polarizer for CV over inversion/levels, then SSF's Tool Box, which is a little "one stop" module for a number of useful functions. Then your FX are above the Performance Mixer for convenience and clarity, and I added a Synthesis Technologies E560...so now, you've got a frequency shifter in addition to the other phase/chorus/flange things you can do with that module.

FIFTH ROW: Bottom of the ADDAC cab. Expert Sleepers' modules are at the left end to make it easier to access them with outside cables. Then the Pam's, and then a NE Fractio Solum, which is a CVable clock divider/multiplier. A separate ratcheting module is after this, then a four-channel gate delay to change gate positions. A little clock counter is after that, then a Ladik Skipper, an Euclidean pulse sequencer, and the whole point of these (and some of the modules on Row #4): an ARC Artificial Neural Network for complex logic derivations that derive pulses from various other timing signal interference patterns. The Gatesby module is for converting triggers to gates, when needed, and one last Ladik module there fires off probabilistically-determined gate/trigger signals just to keep things a bit more "interesting". Then another bit of random fun, a full version of Greyscale's Permutation, which is a random looping sequencer that's based on the Turing Machine. And a WMD SL3KT then gives you a trio of electronic A-B bidirectional switches. After that is where I moved the DATA so that it can get more use as a diagnostic tool in addition to its other sonic functions. The Befaco attenuators are next, and by them I placed a pair of Ladik envelope followers, with the Befaco now aimed to be used as level controls for the envelope follower feeds. These let you use your stereo inputs to not only input external audio, but you can use audio as well as a lot of other signals to fire these, and they'll output gates AND the derived envelope. They're down here because...well, why spoil the surprise, hm? Anyway, I put the 3xMIA next to serve as a utility mixer for summing signals pre-mix, then the new thing next to it is the Performance Mixer's Mute section. And, natch, the Performance Mixer takes over the rest of the row; I put the fader expander to the right of the mixer in here so that there's a better fit with using the two stereo faders as extra FX returns.

PALETTES: You'll notice that I added a row so that the Palette case modules are now visible. This was very deliberate so that you could see that there's a bunch of I/O possibilities there that were being underexploited. For example, each cab now has the 1U MIDI Interface with the output expander. But the 1/4" jacks on the left Palette were screaming for use...so I put in an FX loop tile at the right end of the first Palette, which connects on the backside to the 1/4" jacks to allow external FX into the system. You can even VCA the output and input levels via the dual VCA next to the loop module. The sequencers remained much the same, but I added a Varigate 8+ to beef up the capabilities of the Voltage Block as well as to give it the memory functions that the Varigate provides. Both Metropolixes also now have quad sequential switches for altering sequences, routing functions, etc. And ALL of the audio ins and outs now go through the right Palette's 1/4" jacks, with the I/O tile right below.

Also, you'll notice that the cab in this build now reflects the reality of your case situation; that was probably another stumbling block, trying to sort out the 104 hp Palettes against the monster ADDAC 197 hp case. I even had problems with this until adding all of the "cardboard" spacers and expanding the build to 212 hp so that I could have 2 x 104 + 4 (spacer) to accommodate the Palettes.

At first, it might seem as if this would be a patchcord jungle when patched. But the reality is that there's a flow there: control signals move up on the left side (more or less) to the top tow rows, and audio flows back from them back down the right side. Controllers/sequencers are all on the "flat" row in the Palettes, and I was relatively careful about maintaining cable flow from the Palettes to the ADDAC and vice-versa. This IS what I recommend for large builds, though...by grouping functions in the same place, you actually wind up with a pretty intuitive layout when things get this big. Now, as for the mults...first of all, each Palette has three buffered mults, so anything needing a buffered CV source will be just fine. But for passives, I suggest going with inline mult widgets or stackcables instead. Admittedly, this build does teeter on that decision line between "no mults" and "add some mults", but I felt that the Palettes dealt with this issue just fine. Also, keep in mind that they also have two precision adders apiece, plus your MIDI and audio I/O.

Sho'nuff! It IS a stereo filter, apparently...uses 1/4" TRS for the I/O. Of course, that could also be to pass balanced signals through the device, too, but Lehle's site says it can do stereo. Must be true, even though it doesn't look like it would!

One other VERY nifty point to it is the max voltage: 9.75Vrms. This means that you could actually slap these into a modular patch as "offset killers" where you've got DC offset as a patch function, but you don't want that offset in the output. I might have to snarf up a couple of these, in addition to using Doffset when DC sneaks in in Ableton. Our American prices aren't quite as nice as the ones in Deutschland, tho...

Plus, there are entire categories of modules that can modify clock signals in various ways. You can count, divide, multiply and delay the pulses, add swing, shuffle, randomly skip pulses, alter the pulsewidth...and then, you've got Boolean logic, where you can take "normal" and "altered" pulses, slam 'em together, and get various other gate pulses out the other side. Logic modules are also super-useful for taking the gates from comparators and derivators, and using those as either "off" or "on" switches for more patch actions.

Tampering with clocking and gates works especially well with a second (third, etc) sequencer. For example, you could add one of Ladik's 4 hp 4-steppers, use that to change the tuning for the main sequencer, but only trigger the Ladik sequencer to shift steps when a certain combo of gates pass a logic gate.

Interesting...I just went thru the manual, and while I was led to believe that the 1/4" outs were balanced, they are in fact 1/4" TS, which is a tad annoying. But there ARE ways to fix that...

Method #1 - Do it in software. Check this: https://www.kvraudio.com/product/doffset-by-wire-grind I use this whenever some sort of DC offset manages to sneak into things in Ableton, and it should be easy enough to track through this plugin to strip any DC before it gets into monitoring.

Method #2 - Do it in hardware. A couple of these little Lehle boxes that are made just for this purpose will fix the DC offset: https://www.amazon.com/Lehle-DC-Filter-Removes-DC-Offset-Voltages/dp/B00KTEZ1O2/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=dc+offset&qid=1625881768&s=musical-instruments&sr=1-1

Method #3 - Void your warranty. It's a pretty simple modification to add a pair of 1/4" TRS jacks, and by "dead bugging" a pair of audio transformers onto these and putting this inline after the 3.5mm outputs (you DO want to keep these DC coupled in case you want to use the 2600 as a complex modulation source). The manual states that these two sets of outputs are paralleled, so this would be the correct method for this mod.

For the present, my needs are being served by WireGrind's Doffset VST if/when there's a DC issue. But if I were to take this out for live work, I'd want to either have a pair of the Lehle filters in hand, or I could just as easily hand this to my local tech to refit the 1/4" outs. Same time, though, having used the ARP 2600 for as long as I have, you get a good eye as to which settings have the potential for DC issues, and you try and avoid that in a number of different ways.

It actually was quite a bit of a shock. After reading a lot of the online noise about it, I was expecting a box of utter nonsense. Instead, what showed up acted exactly like a 3-4 year old "Orange" from ARP's late days that I used back in the early 1980s, especially when you switched the VCF to the 4072 setting. I've tried to patch things up on it that I know that the ARP was excellent at, and all of the settings are pretty much where they should be after accounting for the shorter throw on the faders. Uli even compensated for the thermal issues in the original by venting the cabinet to keep the electronics inside more stable.

The sole annoyance is, yep, the LEDs in the controls. But you can turn them down to a point where they're not quite so eye-shatteringly-bright. I also like the balanced 1/4" outs, as they appear to ensure ZERO passage of DC offsets to the outputs; this was a long-running issue with the originals, with the "thumpy" VCAs that weren't really "thumpy", but what people were hearing was the typical ARP 2600 DC offset creeping into the output. Get rid of it, and you lose the thump. Besides, DC + amp + speaker = some pretty ugly shit. Fire, even.

Granted, you hear plenty of noise on various forums about how the B.2600 isn't "quite like" the original. I would argue that that's somewhat wrong. It acts like a NEW ARP 2600...not one that's been in use (or worse, in storage) for a few decades, and the vast majority of synthesists these days have never heard a more-or-less new ARP 2600. For that set, well, here's your chance to check that out.

However, while I think this new version of the 2600 is pretty fantastic, I will admit that I still have some very strong feelings about Uli and how he chooses to conduct his business. I would feel a lot better about owning any of Behringer's equipment if he'd learn to moderate many of the more...ah...excessive aspects of his behavior and stop the various outbursts of nastiness that he's become known for.

Or you could queue up and get one of Uli's ARP 2600 clones.

Sure that the ARP 2600 is a sexy synth. Do you refer to use it as a standalone synth or to interacting with your modular system?

-- baygiooday

Yes, and yes. The B.2600 is part of a larger "environment" in my studio for all of the modular and patchable gear, located especially so that it has ample access to the Digisound 80. I've used that 2600 + Digisound combination for literally decades, and given that Uli's version works just like an original "rev.4" (when new! one that's been sitting around since 1978 won't sound like a new one), the "fit" should be fine. I already know that the patching spec is identical to typical Eurorack norms (just like the original), so no concerns there.

As for the BSP, I have two, along with a basic Keystep and a Keystep Pro. Given that we're talking synth controller here, I've found that the KSP is super-useful with modular setups, since you have a manual keyboard, the usual mod controls (ribbons), but the clocking and multiple lanes of sequencing is stepped-up from prior efforts. More elaborate, more powerful. But the pair of BSPs also has some perks...such as being able to set up four different but harmonically-related MIDI structures that loop but never re-match, then merging that down and sending it to a single synth as an evolving backdrop across all four lanes sent by the pair.

However, I would still strongly suggest having a MIDI interface here. Even if you don't want to send MIDI note messages, you're still going to want to lock up the sequencing to the DAW's clock, and you'll need a basic interface to do that. Fact is, though, just get a proper one that can handle two voices or more...because you'll eventually want that AND then to be able to use other time-locked controllers along with it.

My bet is that it's either a custom module or, given that it's a render, it might not exist at all.

The link on one of the other "Renierra" module goes to their portfolio website, where there's zero information about any of these modules. Plus, no prices.

Or you could queue up and get one of Uli's ARP 2600 clones. As opposed to some of Behringer's other knockoffs, they actually managed to nail this one; mine works as if it were a much cleaner "rev.4", having used a "rev.4" "orange" ARP 2600 back in the early 1980s when it was still relatively new. I suppose that the large number of eyes on Uli kept him on point on this reissue, since Korg's lunch was his for the stealing after Korg's repetitive screwups with the "same" instrument. $600-ish for what I would say is the best "teaching instrument" (I actually learned on MTSU's "rev.2", many years ago) in synthesis is a pretty decent deal.

I don't like Uli's behavior. I don't like him trying to copy shit he's not entitled to (Arturia Keystep, Mutable Plaits, Intellijel's Quad VCA and a much longer list of pro audio gear dating way on back to dbx and Mackie in the early 1990s), and I don't at all approve of his antics with people who have an issue with his behavior (Peter Kirn, the forum users connected with Sequential that Uli threatened to sue without grounds, et al). As long as he copies devices that are either unobtainable or which can benefit from a smaller/more convenient form factor, that's cool. But he doesn't seem to like staying in that lane. Pretty unfortunate, really.

+1 on removing all of the drums and going with an external drum machine. Just looking at the cost of the drum-centric modules here in the build, you're at $2090 on just those alone. That there would actually buy you just under SIX RD-9s.

Drum modules also don't tend to require the same degree of modulation sources as other modules, but still take up space that those other modules could use for their mod sources.

What I would strongly suggest is to remove ALL of the drum modules. Instead, add a stereo input preamp to your modular so that you can mix the drum machine with the onboard FX, and this would still keep the basic sound control all going through the modular. Given that you've got a WMD Performance Mixer in there, you're fixed for that level of mixing complexity if desired. While the current state of the art in modular is at an incredible level, the drum modules just haven't kept pace with the vast majority of other modules, so this makes much more sense.

Also, having the MIDI interface dead-center in row #2 is an interesting choice; I can guarantee that the first time you accidentally yank the mini-USB cable, it will be a succinct explanation of why external interfaces shouldn't go into the vast tangle of the patch panel, but stay out on the edges to give easy access to any incoming/outgoing cables from the modular. In short, you probably don't want the MIDI interface there, or for that matter, your main mixer outputs. There's a number of 'flow issues' of that sort here, in fact. Try and find a method of organization that puts specific functions in specific areas; this might seem like it would cause more confusion, but if you hear a tuning error, you immediately know to check the VCOs and you can go right to them with ease, and so on. Trying to build a "voice per row" in this sort of build really just leads to four underfeatured voices.

But yeah, lots to pull out here. I'd even go as far as saying that the Pitt SV-1 should go back in its own case, if you bought it with one. And if you haven't, try rebuilding what it does with "normal" modules...you're likely to find that you can squash the SV-1's functionality into a smaller space than it covers itself. And THAT is the key to Eurorack: maximizing function in a tight space while maintaining user ergonomics.

They're OK, sure...although I think the choice of the Brains module would be better-fit by using the actual Plaits oscillator that Uli ripped off. Costs more, but it's a more ethical choice. As for the FX modules, it's a decent complement, but you might also look at some smaller modules with more capabilities (the FX Aid XL comes to mind here) as keeping things small but playable is one of the keys to making this work. This will involve going to smaller modules, but at the same time you want to establish a point at which things get TOO dense for playability to work for your methods.

Another possibility would be to go with a complex oscillator, something a bit more Buchla-ish. With many of these, you get a continuum of variable timbres instead of the fixed wavetables of the Plaits. Bigger, yep, and more expensive...but more versatile in terms of the timbral variety. You also don't necessarily need a second oscillator for detuning and FM with one of those, since the "second oscillator" is already part of the module.

And while working out the build, try and aim for modules that offer multiple functions. For instance, while it's possible to get separate VCAs in modules, you want VCA modules that can also mix, preferably with a "breakable" mixbus like the Veils or Intellijel's Quad VCA. Or if you want something that distorts, look for devices that get tagged as "character" mixers, etc, that let you submix signals while, at the same time, offering a distortion/waveshaping capability. That sort of thing also helps economize space in a small cab such as the Rackbrute 6U.

That sounds like a potential problem, actually. Remember, you only have 176 hp (of which 5 gets lost to the P/S module) in which to create something that does effects processing, sequenced patterns, AND generative processes. And from experience, it's possible to build something that DOES do all of that...but it ain't gonna fit in 176 hp. You're going to have to constrain the purposes here.

Since this is attached to a Minibrute 2s, go ahead and consider the sequencing part to be done. That simply leaves the timing aspects for that function. Effects: easy. There's even loads of space-efficient FX processors in the Eurorack domain.

Generative, however...to make really effective generative music, you need a LOT of modules that can transform one sort of signal into many different signals. So, we're talking about comparators for picking off gates from modulation signals, discriminators that can solve for minimum, maximum, or median control voltages, automated methods of globally changing modulation behavior, VCA complements that can function as mix automators, etc etc etc. Long list, basically. And if you don't go this complex, what you'll get will be the modular synth equivalent of one of those intensely-annoying "chirpy bird" electronic Xmas tree ornaments that only makes one or two sounds decently.

At the same time, it's TECHNICALLY possible to jam this all into a 176 hp cab...if you like moving three controls when you only meant to move one, and accidentally unplugging cables from a super-dense tangle of wires that overlays everything. There is a point at which you have to give way to the musical idea for the sake of making the musical instrument playable, though. In short, you might either want to scale down what this build is intended to accomplish, or consider scaling the build UP to a point where it's possible to do generative w/o it being a total snafu.

I just wonder what sort of weirdass wiring in Uli's head makes him do things like this. One minute, he's reissuing synths and other devices that are legendary pieces of "unobtainium", and the next he's ripping off small manufacturers and insulting music journalists. When he's not putting out things that give modern players the ability to use classic hardware (to varying degrees of success), he's really giving his own firm a big black eye and making it embarrassing to own anything from Behringer. Doesn't seem like a sensible business model to me...

OK, Garfield...where'd you get the DMT?

Another fave, also 6 hp: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/frequency-central-stasis-leak-

The Stasis Leak has the ability to "stereoize" signals via its effects...mono in, stereo out, with your choice of tap delay, chorus, or reverb.

https://www.memecenter.com/fun/574238/please-dont-feed-the-trolls

Our Fearless Leader is, in fact, very correct here. ModularGrid is designed as a neutral reference document, and just like how encyclopedias contain information that's quite disturbing, that can happen here as well. It's not a ringing endorsement of Behringer for their modules to appear here, it's simply listings...just like any other. And this isn't the first time that there's been listings by controversial manufacturers or for controversial products.

Yeah, I'll admit that what Uli's up to with these two new modules is pretty despicable. And what separates those from their other modules is that, while the other modules are also copies (sorta) of no-longer-existing modules (or, in the case of Moog, not-really-available modules, as you can only get theirs in prebuilt systems), the new ones are copies of VERY MUCH existing modules that are still in manufacture by Mutable and Intellijel. If Uli would just stick to reissues of the "greats", we'd still hear about him "ripping off" the designs, but no one would have bread taken from their mouth by that.

But does that mean that Uli gets tossed from MG? No. All MG is for here is making sure that you know what the module is, what it does, what size and power constraints does it have...and that's about it. Just like everyone other manufacturer who has listings here.

Actually, one of the more interesting modulation pairings I've been tossing into builds as of late is the Maths with the Quadrax/Qx from Intellijel. The Quadrax is a 2 or 3-stage EG that can loop and have CV over rise and fall, and with the Qx it also outputs "end of X" pulses. Now, since the Maths can use those "end ofs", and also since the Qx can be used to "cascade" the Quadrax with as many EGs in the cascade as you prefer, that gives you some elaborate AND CVable modulation that pairs very nicely with how the Maths deals with its own rise/falls. Crosspatching those two is definitely a "the sum is more than its parts" situation! Then add to that something like Tiptop's MISO or Frap's 321 and a couple of linear, DC-coupled VCAs, and you'll then have a modulation monster!

And yeah, the DFAM doesn't belong in there. Even if you have open space in the cab after removing it, I'd go ahead and do that, as you don't want to be in the habit of having the DFAM in there and using it in there as well. It's a rather expensive mistake, actually...if you want to see how expensive, take the cost of the cab, divide that by the amount of hp it can hold, and then you'll have your cost-per-hp. Multiply this x60, and that's the hidden "extra" cost of cabbing the DFAM in here. Seriously...put it back in its case, and use the Eurorack cab for things with NO power and NO case.

It LOOKS fine. But then, looks aren't the criteria you should be worried about. That would be performance. And this thing's not going to perform.

For starters, I can tell that you're trying to build one of these mythical "does everything" builds. And yes, they can be built. But in general, they're loads larger than this; trying to build a "does everything" in a cab this small never works. And the results are also apparent here...it's missing a lot of the "boring" modules that actually allow the "sexy" ones to operate at their full capabilities.

First of all, yank out all of those drum modules. No, seriously. Add up how much all of the drum modules cost, as well as the cost of the cab space they cover (this gets calculated like this: cab price/hp count=price per hp). Then jump over to the website of any major music gear retailer and look at their drum machines. Ultimately, you'd do MUCH better with a separate drum machine than trying to build one in here. Not only would it free space in the cab, be easier to lock up with a DAW, and so on...it's definitely going to be loads cheaper unless you get something crazy-spendy.

Once you've freed up space in here, then you'll have room for the modulation generators, utilities, and other devices that the rest of the modules require. At that point, you should probably change the layout so that it makes more sense. Put all the audio sources in one area, filters in another, VCAs, submixers, etc etc. You get the idea. By doing this, it simplifies the "map" of the panel and makes this much easier to patch. As an example, have a look at an ARP 2600 or, for that matter, Behringer's clone of it...and you'll see this some of this sort of layout paradigm in action.

BTW, I have a noob question @Ligia @JimHowell1970. If a VCO has 1 Sub-Osc (-1 Oct) output; should I have at least 2 filter, 2 VCA and 4 EG minimum for that particular Oscillator?
-- Hikove

Nope. Well, actually, you CAN, but it's overkill. One of the most respected monosynths of all time (the Roland SH-101 and, by extension, the MC-202) also has a single VCO + a suboscillator, and the synth simply mixes those two together pre-VCF. However, it IS worthwhile to have a VCA available for the suboscillator since that will allow you to add/remove that part of the oscillator composite signal like you would do with any other source. So, say, you can have a hard attack on the basic output, but with a slower attack sent to the suboscillator's VCA, this would then "fade up into" the main VCO sound.