ModularGrid uses so-called cookies to ensure it's so-called functionality. We also use dubious tracking scripts. Find out more in the Privacy Policy. We use cookies and wanna let you know.
A lot, actually...let's see...there's no modulation sources, for starters. If you want punchy basslines, you're going to have to have some way to modulate that VCF with an envelope. Otherwise, it just goes 'oooooooooo' instead of the 'pwom!' you're hoping for. There's also no LFO or any other sort of periodic modulation, so there's not going to be any variation to the sound that changes back and forth over time intervals.
Secondly, that VCO/RM will prove totally useless without a second VCO. Ring modulators require two inputted signals to produce their sum/difference spectra. The Analogue Solutions VCO/RM's also not a very cost effective choice; if you want two seriously wild VCOs for about the same price as one VCO/RM, check Noise Reap's Bermuda, a rather nasty VCO with a self-modulation feedback-type capability. For good, in-your-face bass, dirtier signals work really well.
That sequencer won't work the way you're expecting. The Ladik S-180 is a trigger sequencer only...which means it doesn't send any CVs with which to make the VCOs change pitch. You would have to use the S-183 or S-184 expanders with that S-180 to get pitches, plus the addition of a quantizer would probably be necessary to keep the sequencer steps in a proper scale.
About the only things you have right here are the use of that Polivoks VCF (great, nasty filter) and the Optodist to get your levels punchy. My advice would be to stop building for the time being, and instead spend some time studying other builds, looking up articles in the MG forum and elsewhere online on what proper synth architecture should be, studying "the greats" in synth design over the past 50+ years, and the like. Get a better idea of what needs to be in a build first, then come back to MG once you've gotten a better idea of what to do. Otherwise, you're just going to wind up wasting your time and, potentially, your money should you try to realize a MG build before understanding what makes up a proper synthesizer.
That shouldn't be a problem. The 'sleeve' connector on patchcables handles the common groundplane amongst anything connected with them. One bit of advice, though...feed both the Befaco and TipTop power supplies from a common AC source to avoid potential ground loops over the patchcables. If you use power strips or conditioners such as the Furman rackmount variety, feed both cabs' AC from the same one.
Sometimes its cache, sometimes its not. I've often noted a problem in embedding a rack into a forum post where, if the rack wasn't previously recognized properly by the screenshot mode, it won't come up with the proper layout in the forum post. As a result, I've gotten used to always making sure that screenshot shows the right build iteration prior to embedding the rack's URL in the forum post. That always works.
Yep, that's exactly what I meant...and this layout looks quite good, indeed. It follows what I call the "up-left/down-right" pattern, where control signals move upward on the left side toward the voicing row(s) at the top, from where the audio flows back downward on the right side through mixers, modifiers, processing and then the final mix. It's a really intuitive type of layout, making it easy to sort out where a problem with a patch might be located, aside of simply making the whole mess easier to control in general. And in between the "control-in" on the bottom left and the "audio-out" on the bottom right is the perfect place for a controller, as it's a simple reach from that in either direction to make changes to your major global functions. Nicely done!
Much of the problem has to do with the maximum headroom allowable on small mixers. Some of them are capable of being attenuated down to a level where they can handle typical audio levels coming off of a synthesizer. I've done this a few times with my Mackie 1202...but we're talking about a 25-year old original 1202, which was a bit of a different beast than the present-day Mackies. I've read some accounts of how the Allen & Heath ZED series is also capable of dealing with the high incoming levels, also.
Another alternative to an in-cab performance mixer that would allow you to route directly to an outboard mixer would be any of the various output modules. Since these are designed to step down the levels to line-level, a bank of several of these would also make for a cost-effective and space-saving option. Ladik has several options here that are worth examining, such as their P-530 dual output module which offers attentuation plus 1/4" outs that should interface easily with any outboard mixer you can think of. In 16 hp, you could have trimmable eight line outs for only $160. Frankly, that seems like the best option, leaving you free to use whichever mixer suits your performing needs.
Well, out with the old year, and in with the new. 2019's here, Winter NAMM's right around the corner, and while this month's hot Eurorack offerings are a tad sparse, much of that is certainly due to manufacturers keeping mum about their new surprises until they hit the floor in Anaheim later in January. But here's a few picks to tide us over until that post-NAMM deluge in a few weeks:
1) Pharmasonic ON IT AGAIN! Back in the last installment of KICK ASS!!!, this Japanese maker dropped a fantastic bombshell when they did a big reissue of many of the much-vaunted Digisound Series 80 modules in Eurorack format. But to do a second line reissue a month later? Wild! And yet, there it sits...Pharmasonic's redux of the key modules from Roland's classic semi-modular, the System 100. Not to be confused with the fully-modular System 100M, the System 100 was more like Roland's take on something like the ARP 2600, which came in a number of “blocks”; the 101 was the main keyboard synth, the 102 was its expander, there was a dedicated mixer (the 103) and sequencer (104) and you even could get a matching monitor pair, the 109. From this, Pharmasonic's given us the System 100's VCO, VCF, VCA, LFO, an ADSR EG, 3-in and 2-out (in parallel) mixer, noise gen, ring mod, sample and hold, and an otherwise-inaccesible pair of inverters that share space with a trio of mults. They're very simple but quite cost and space-efficient, with the majority of the line weighing in at 6 hp, making them great candidates for filling small spaces with an extra bit of functionality. Now I'm wondering what Pharmasonic's going to do in January! Oh, and one more Pharmasonic bit: the Digisound Dual ADSR is also now available: $159, 12 hp.
2) Tesseract Modular 8x8 Buffered Matrix. This has “live performance” written all over it. A set of eight rotary switches that allows for quick resetting of signal paths, the module can also serve as a buffered multiple, but that's only a hint of what this is capable of. Any combination of inputs and outputs is possible...1 to 8, 2 to 4, 4 to 2, and so on. It does limit what you can do with inputs, though, as you can't send several inputs to one output. Even so, for live performers this will be a real blessing, as it's able to change routings on the fly as long as the module's been prepped for the in-set changes. Available in kit or prebuild. Roughly $106, 12 hp.
3) Doepfer A-135-2. Really, what this is is more or less a repackaging of Doepfer's A-135-1. But it's significant nonetheless because while the 135-1 was a not-so-space effective 18 hp, this new iteration gives you the same functionality in only 8 hp, with 5 mm less depth and $56 off the original's price. Very cool! Dieter seems to be looking out for users who need maximum bang in minimum space with this one, which seems to me to be a very logical pick for users who need a handful of linear, DC-coupled VCAs with summing in a tight space. Accordingly, quite a few MG users have already picked up on this module, but it deserves a look from anyone who's planning a space-restrictive skiff build, plus anyone who needs lots of VCAs but doesn't like layout sprawl. $134, more or less.
4) Ladik M-172 mixer. This is pretty much the logical follow-on to Ladik recent 12 hp stereo mixers, but this is kind of the configuration I was hoping we would eventually see. You get four pannable inputs and a stereo input pair with a balance control, all outputting to a 1/4” stereo pair of line-level outs. This is an awesome budget-conscious stereo mixer, with built-in output staging and the potential for using the stereo input to mix in stereo effects. The depth's a bit sizable at 60mm, but if you can swing that, the price is the real convincer: $94 at current exchange rates! That makes it one of the more cost-effective stereo mixers out there, with the plus of not needing a separate output module making it an even cheaper choice.
5) Antimatter Audio v3kt. Now this is super-interesting...a module that allows for quad panning, vector control over either audio or CV signals, internal logic over CVs, and probably a pile more functions that just aren't readily apparent. But looking at the given functions in the listing, I'd have to say that this has super-high “abuse potential” with either a joystick or other modulation signals fed to its various inputs. A lot of people could make use of this: live performers should dig the ability to joystick audio around via this in a quadrophonic space, generative-type users will find loads of uses here for morphing/altering modulation behavior and mixing, and most anyone will appreciate the ability to morph smoothly between four different audio sources in a quad X-Y space. The other thing that's a killer is the space it requires: only 6 hp! This should make it a must-have for anyone who's got a joystick in their builds, as it requires minimal space to blow that joystick's functionality wide-open. $199.
And that's pretty much it for the December 2018 offerings. Like I noted, the real deluge is coming in this first month of 2019, so keep your eyes peeled! Until then, happy new year, all!
Well, a few things...first of all, if you have something that's already in a case, keep it in its case. I'm sure there'll be a temptation to put the 0-Coast and/or Neutron in your Eurorack cab, but you need to resist this. Keep the cab free for things which don't have the convenience of already being in their own case...it allows for more space, and in the end it's much more cost-vs-space effective.
The module compliment sounds decent...but have you attempted to do any test builds of the system on here yet? I really suggest that if you haven't, you should do so. The fact is that, while you could do your configuration testing with the physical devices, it's not really the best idea to be taking them in and out numerous times. The likelihood of damaging something, such as pins on your distro boards, stripping a screw and so on might seem minor, but they can add up to a major hassle if they accumulate. You can also get some clues as to how you'll want to implement that second 104 hp case from how the first case gets put together.
Third, consider your controller situation. You'll definitely want something at hand that has a typical black-and-white keyboard and CV/gate outputs. My suggestion would be to snag an Arturia Keystep...not expensive, plus you get a polyphonic step sequencer, chording modes, an arpeggiator in the deal, plus some ribbons for pitch and mod expression. Adding a Beatstep Pro to this would also give you more (and more complex!) sequencing with onboard quantization, plus an additional pad-based controller, again for cheap.
Sounds like a good start, though...that's a well-considered list.
Not too bad...just be careful to use only one VCO in square wave (that was what the TB-303 had) and only the lowpass setting on the VCF. Granted, the Neutron's VCF is 2-pole, not Roland's weird 3-pole LPF, but in the right parts of the range and with perhaps a tad of overdriving the filter, you should be right in the ballpark. Again, the sequencer is the key here...that odd non-linear glide that the original 303 has is another great example of a "wrong" design doing something "right", sort of like Moog's CP3 mixer.
Still not bad, even with the extra space taken up by the MI modules.
My take on the Mutable thing is this: if Olivier comes out with a successor device (as in Plaits succeeding its predecessor, Braids), that would tend to indicate Mutable's signed off on those earlier designs, so copy away. I do see his point about the currently-active parts of his line, though...but at the same time, there's two points that nag at me. First up, the main reasons why I myself would use the Codex Modulex clones would be 100% based on their size. If Mutable could give me a Veils in 8 hp, I'd certainly rather have that...but Veils fits in 12, and when you need to cram functionality into limited space, hp count is everything. After all, it's why 2hp and Erica's PICO series seem to turn up in a vast amount of builds...people get that point.
The second thing is that open source insistance. Several years back when there were far fewer Eurorack manufacturers, that philosophy make way more sense. But now, in times where massive retailers such as Thomann and Sweetwater sell Eurorack gear, when there's a pile of manufacturers vying for business, open source is a BAD idea. If Mutable's module designs weren't as amazing as they are, Olivier Gillet wouldn't have this problem. But those amazing designs are a double-edged sword if they're not carefully managed like other important intellectual properties. Open source is applaudable...unless the concept boomerangs back around to kick your own ass, then it's very much a royal pain! This isn't like other firms just wholesale ripping off other firms' designs; there's a tacit "approval" for these designs to be used by third parties. But I think some better foresight about modular synthesis's exploding desirability might've been useful here.
Ah...one more tweak, this time for the comparators. Jettison the Doepfers and use the Joranalogue Dual Window Comparator instead. Not only does this jam both comparators into the space one Doepfer uses, these are WINDOW comparators...which means they can trigger gates from several different comparator states (below, in window, not in window, above) instead of simply one via a combination of the comparators themselves and some logic onboard the module.
First modules here, I'd say: the entire tile row (may as well have that in place, since its your main utility set), uRinks, uMotion, Kinks, A-171-2s, Sisters and Stillson Hammer, just to get your basic synthesis functions in hand. Last in should be your drums and sampler players...because you may find things along the way that suggest to you that 1) you might not need them and 2) there are ideas emerging from your discoveries with the synthesis aspect that demand a shift in module implementations.
The key to the TB-303 sound is really the glide function as well as other aspects of the sequencer, and how these make most any typical single-VCO patch behave. The problem with the actual stock 303, IMHO, is that you have a very limited range of possible useable sounds, hence the various modded versions (such as the Devilfish) that popped up in the 1990s to alleviate some of this.
Frankly, I find that when I want a 303 "acid" sound, I turn to software. There are several software sequencers that more than adequately model the 303's sequencer behavior, and once that hurdle's been passed...well, I've found that a software knockoff of the Juno-60 works FAR better at sounding like a 303 than the oodles of "worshipful" 303 synth clones out there. Trying to make a modular synth emulate the TB-303 seems to me to be akin to buying a Lamborghini Countach simply to run errands around town.
I'll second that, having learned much of the basics myself on one of the greatest patchables in history, the ARP 2600. Having the prepatched signal paths was very useful inasmuch as I could see what a "conventional" flow was capable of, and also what patched changes to those signal paths might do. The 2600 in question here was located in Middle TN State's Electronic Music Studio through part of the 1970s and much of the 1980s, and I don't think a better educational analog synthesizer has been created since the 2600. It's something that Korg, through their ties with David Friend of ARP, should still consider reissuing, IMHO.
Good patchables for learning the modular basics that you can get these days include:
Moog: Mother32, DFAM, Grandmother.
Korg: MS-20 mini + SQ-1.
MakeNoise: 0-Coast (excellent for understanding West Coast concepts, btw)
Arturia: MiniBrute 2 and 2S (the 2 is keyboard-based, while the 2S revolves around a step-sequencer)
Plankton: ANTS!
Soundmachines: Modulor114
Dreadbox: Erebus, Nyx
Kilpatrick: Phenol (rather Serge-like...a great intro to banana-patch methods)
Pittsburgh: Lifeforms SV-1 Blackbox, Microvolt 3900
...and I'm sure the list goes on. But anyway, by learning how these work in their normalized states (where applicable), it's easy to see how modules within those work, and how the patching process changes things around. And in most cases, these can be interconnected directly to modular systems, with the Korg and Moog devices being the only ones that have certain control signal tweaks that're necessary to make that work 100%. As for controllers (should you need them), my vote goes to Arturia and their Keystep and BeatStep Pro. Both are sequencers, the former also functioning as a keyboard controller and the latter being more pad-based.
Yep...the PanMix or the Roland 500 series output mixer are decent choices here since you have ample VCAs now to handle your input levels.
The Serge VCS (the originator of the Doepfer A-171-2) is a very prized module. It can function as a slew limiter, an envelope generator, a LFO, a VCO, and probably a few other things that just aren't coming to mind right now. Ken Stone took the original Serge design and added a few tweaks, then Doepfer took Ken's design and did a couple more. It's literally a "Swiss Army Knife" module. MakeNoise's Maths is pretty much two of these under one panel (making the Maths more like the Serge Dual Universal Slope Gen) and added a little bit of logic/arithmetical function voodoo...but it's also 4 hp larger than a pair of A-171-2s, and the additional functionalities are easy enough to replicate on your own.
Basically, what you're looking at is a pair of CVable slews...rise and fall...with the ability to change the slew rate via any sort of incoming modulation. Feeding this with an existing CV results in portamento-type behavior, but with the ability to voltage control the rates. Now, that's where it gets weird, as the module can also output its own CV that rises and falls according to the slew rate levels. This can be done as a one-shot on a gate/trigger, making the module behave like a 2-stage envelope gen...or it can be looped, making it act like a LFO with a user-defined waveform via the slew rates. But it gets even crazier, since the Exp CV point accepts 1V/8va CV just like a VCO...and then you have a VCO with a user-definable waveform. Oh, and since you can feed the slew rates separately, you can make that waveform shift all over the place constantly, yielding some wild waveshaping action that most average everyday VCOs cannot match. And those are just for starters...with a couple of additional modules of various sorts, you can make these act as a little analog computational "brain", bouncing their functions of of each other and outputting loads of modulated CV craziness. This last bit is what the Maths is best at...but you can get there with a pair of A-171-2s, an adder, maybe a comparator or two and some simple Boolean logic, and wind up with a little more user-definability than the Maths. Fun!
I actually have both of those sequencers...the SQ-1 is nice for running typical Berlin school-type sequencing loops, plus it plays nice with my MS-20. The BSP is a different beast altogether, though...much more internal complexity and potential, especially with its software configuration capabilities. I did a live piece a few years ago that had two BSPs merged into my Kawai K5m...none of the four patterns were equal length or at the same tempo, which gave me this nonrepeating ambient wash that worked beautifully once the synth was properly processed. If you were going to be forced to make a choice, the BSP is the one to have...but having both is perhaps even better!
Yeah...while the Time Wizard does contain some logic capabilities (albeit not on the same level as a full-on Boolean gate setup), for the most part the Pam's does what it does. The question would then be whether you'd get more mileage out of the additional functions the Time Wizard offers versus the extra two channels of trigs on the Pam's. But...also, have a look at the Pexp-1 and 2, which are expanders for the NEW Workout and which offer some functions that need to be considered.
My performance mixer fave as of late is different from Ronin's. Qu-bit's Mixology is a four-in, stereo-out...but offers CV control over per-channel level, AUX send, and pan, with a proper AUX mono send and stereo return, which means it plays nicely with reverbs, choruses, and most other FX that tend toward that routing. You also get manual solo and mute per channel as well, which can come in handy when programming complex patches.
As for the Veils, tho...again, Codex Modulex shrank that down to 8 hp and brought the price in cheaper. So ultimately, you could add a pair of those for a hair under $300, giving you eight VCAs with variable response curves, potential submix abilities, and a compliment of VCAs of that size would then easily allow you to CV level control both audio and CV, again upping the potential complexity.
Good moves thus far...the Moog bipolar DC thing is annoying, yep. I would've hoped that they'd learned from example that when there's a standard that's making the development of new things possible, you're supposed to follow that trend mainly for the sake of being constructive. My bet is that with the Moog gear's basis in Bob's older circuit designs, it sticks with their older voltage standards...hence the bipolar DC, the continuing presence of the (ugh) S-Trigs on their modular reissues, etc.
One thing you might look at, though, would be the Erica Pico MScale. That's specifically designed to solve the Moog bipolar DC issue, fits in a mere 3 hp, and only costs around $70. That way, you can just route your pitch CV direct to that and the problem's instantly solved in the first patching step outside the Grandmother. As for the EMW Offset Proc...that not only fixes your control issues, but it allows some extra craziness in that you can modulate offsets with it. So, say you have an incoming CV that controls your VCO pitches...by using a square wave as an offset modulator and a little poking around with the gain control, you can impose a trill of a specific interval onto the VCO CV with that module. And that's just one example of some of the fun you can have with it. My assumption is that EMW mashed an offset source plus an adder in there twice over...not a bad idea at all!
One thing that comes to mind: with as many clock signals as this will have going on, you should look into some logic modules to create more intricate behavior with the gates you'll be using. On a similar note, a couple of comparators would also come in handy for similar reasons...you can use those to derive gate on/offs from CV levels coming out of the Stillson Hammer, for example. Maybe take the Switch Matrix out for some of that, potentially adding a much smaller thing like a Doepfer A-151 to swap sequencer CV outs to create longer sequences. Maybe toss out the uScale, also, since the Stillson has some potent onboard quantization. You can also recover another 4 hp in your top row by swapping the Maths out for a pair of Doepfer A-171-2 VC Slope Gens (basically they're akin to half a Maths each, minus a few extra jacks that you can work around). Even more space can be regained by swapping the Rings and Tides for Codex Modulex's 8 hp versions of each. See how much space you can get back by doing things like this; empty space eventually = more modules, after all! ;)
I'd definitely start with more audio sources. Maybe a Plaits or two to pair with the Braids. An output module would be nice, and if you're thinking about adding FX, check out Happy Nerding for a great output stage that also contains a second stereo input with attenuator, which is super-handy for adding reverb, delays, etc to your stereo mix when you don't have a mixer with an AUX send/return.
MIDI/CV...IMHO, Expert Sleepers for the win there. You'll just have to sort out whether you want to use just MIDI or if addressing the modular with CV/gate/trig under control via Silent Way sounds right for you.
Other stuff...hm...better mixing would be nice. The 2hp MIX is a nice summer for somewhere within a patch, but nothing beats a dedicated stereo mixer with panning and all that stuff. Plus, finding one with an AUX bus would really make the best use of the limited space open for a decent FX module. A couple more EGs and VCAs, and that'd sort of nail it.
First of all, the killer bass sounds you hear in a lot of techno are NOT ALWAYS the result of analog synths. One of the more popular for this purpose in the Detroit end of things has actually, for some time, been the Yamaha DX100. Derrick May, in fact, is a real master of 4-op programming; Carl Craig's also made extensive use of the DX7. The idea that you MUSTMUSTMUST have analog for bass is, in fact, bullshit. Even I have a certain death-dealing bass patch on my long-beloved CZ-101 that has, through the proper amplification setups, caused actual physical damage due to it's subbass properties. So is the Plaits usable for bass? Sure...because in analog synthesis, the key to huge bass isn't the oscillator, it's the combination of the VCF and the right modulating EG for that, plus maybe a little nonlinearity in the VCA to do a touch of waveshaping. A sharp, percussive attack modulating a good 4-pole lowpass VCF fed with most anything will create hefty bass, depending on how you've set up the cutoff and resonance on it and the pitch class of the incoming audio. As for the 303...yeah, sure, it says "Bass" on the case, but most people using it, starting with Larry Heard, MISused the TB-303 to get all sorts of higher-range squelchy sounds, particularly in tandem with the "glide" control in the step sequencer.
Second of all, modulation. The Batumi and the Stages both have sliders. And that's where the resemblance stops. The Batumi is a great source of LFO curves. But the Stages is more akin to a sequencer in that you set your different stage levels and the module sweeps through these to create a user-defined modulation curve, or discrete modulation steps, plus a few other tricks. It's not an LFO or EG per se...but at the same time, it can be both and more besides.
Three, the Maths and the Quadra. The Maths is an interconnected and self-contained pair of what, for the most part, are a pair of Serge-type slope generators. It's more akin to a very simplified analog computer in how it creates both self-generated and externally-derived voltage curves. The Quadra, however, in its base form is just four AD envelope generators. To get it to work on an order of complexity more like the Maths, it's necessary to add the Quadra Expander, which contains the controls and patchpoints for more complex functions. But this also kills another 12 hp of space.
Lastly, why do this in modular? Consider for a minute that if you're simply trying to augment a Shuttle System, wouldn't it be easier, smaller, and cheaper to go with a small patchable or two? You could snag a MakeNoise 0-Coast for much less and make ample use of that (especially its LPG!) in tandem with what you have now. This would also be helpful if you were playing live, in that a handful of patchables, your sequencers, a drum machine to sync with those, and a mixer could easily fit in one decent-sized compartmented flight case. Modular may be sexy...but it's also spendy and, unless you have a very specific need for it, kind of impractical in live settings.
So, by "FM", I'm assuming you mean Chowning FM, also known as algorithmic FM. Now, yes, this is technically doable in a modular environment. There are several 2-op FM modules around, besides Akemie's Castle which is 4-op, using a NOS Yamaha 4-op chip, of which Yamaha made several variations over the years. All well and good...BUT...
The problem with Chowning FM in the analog domain is that, to get the full advantage of it, you need a buttload of modulator sources. Envelopes (looping and otherwise), LFOs, function generators, etc etc are the real 'meat' behind FM. The Akemie's just allows you to control the different operator and oscillator functions via continuous CVs. But that's where the trouble starts...
Go back over to ALM's site and watch the video on this module. Now, when the user starts adding envelopes to control the operators, listen carefully to what's really going on. Notice that 'stepped' bllggn-ingg-eeng-ingg-type sound as the voltage curve sweeps the operator(s)? This is happening because no matter how smooth you make the incoming voltage changes, the Yamaha YM-series chip is going to reinterpret that in discrete steps. And there's not really any workaround for that; it's simply how the Yamaha digital chips were designed to be used, with what's going on in the Akemie's Castle being a bit of a kludge to get one to 'recognize' CVs...but not necessarily take full advantage of the continuous change in the CVs. Sure, you can get some really complex sounds that way, and the Akemie's makes it easy to get a simulacrum of FM under analog control...but you're still only dealing with a simulation. To see what's really supposed to be going on (and does under the proper digital control in Yamaha's FM implementation), see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation_synthesis (NB: the forum mangled this URL slightly...insert underscores between the last three words). Note the little block diagram in the upper right corner; that shows how each "operator" is configured, as a combination of an oscillator, an envelope generator, and a linear VCA which allows the EG to modulate the outgoing level of the oscillator. This result then passes on to modulate a second, identically-configured operator, and so on.
BUT...reading further in this Wikipedia entry, we find some notes about how Don Buchla's complex oscillators also were designed to make use of FM sound generation techniques. Now, this is where it gets interesting. Assume that, instead of having the Yamaha NOS chip in the Akemie's with its digital translation of analog CV curves, you were to build up the operators as discrete modules. There's actually no reason why you can't...and in fact, doing FM synthesis THIS way eliminates that stepped bllggn-ingg-eeng-ingg, replacing that with the beautiful sweeps of truly analog-controlled FM. And hey, look at what Happy Nerding's got...a discrete module that has the necessary VCA configuration, all ready to go. Just add a VCO and modulator, and there you are!
Naturally, though...there's a downside. Or a few, actually. First of all, such a setup will be a bitch-and-a-half to program and control. You'll be in constant tweak mode until all of the many controls in such a setup are exactly where they should be. And if anything gets knocked ever so slightly out of whack...there goes your sound. So you'd have to take a certain degree of unpredictability into account. Then there's the cost. To do six-op FM (like a DX7, more complex than a 4-op but more nuanced), you would need six VCOs, six envelope generators, and six properly configured linear VCAs, plus the ancillary modules needed to control those and alter their routings (if you want to get that complicated). And that's going to get spendy. Plus, that's also going to get sizable unless you're OK with doing much of this on smaller modules.
Soooooo...if the Akemie's Castle is a bit of a 'kludge' and the real analog implementation is insanely complex, what do you do? There's a few options...
1) Get the Akemie's Castle...knowing that, to take advantage of it to its best potential, you're also going to need a pile of modulation sources...mostly EGs, but some LFOs as well, possibly. Result: modular FM, but not exactly as it could be, with a goodly amount of programming and knob-juggling.
2) DON'T get the Akemie's Castle, but try and implement this purely in the analog domain with VCOs, VCAs, and modulators. Result: real, fully-realized FM in the same sort of modality as Chowning FM, but with the sacrifice of easy control and higher cost. It'll also potentially result in a rather large build.
or, 3) Have a look at Yamaha's new MODX synths. No, they're not modular, I know...but for what this modular build will cost, you can instead get an MODX6 (possibly for less, even), which then gives you 8-op FM (like the FS1R, as well as the FM implementation in the Synclavier). The programming gets much easier since it's then under the synth's microprocessor control. Also, programming one of these is NOT the brain-wrenching chore that programming the early DX and related Yamaha models was back in their day, when you had minimal display feedback and one crappy data slider. Since the MODX is an FM-centric offshoot of the Montage, you now get a full touchscreen and ample real-time controls.
Ultimately, the last option makes the most sense to me. In fact, I'll be picking up one of those MODX6s this coming spring, because even if I have a modular setup, it does what IT does best, and the MODX will do what IT does best, avoiding the headaches of the synth programming equivalent of cramming a square peg in a round hole. And, having used the DX series (and I still have two FB-01s, in fact) and grown to HATEHATEHATE programming them, I can safely say that the MODX kills the crappy interface argument against their FM implementation. It's a very different creature. And that leaves my modular for doing things it's happier with...and that I'm happier with, also!
Yup...the ES-8 (and do think about maybe including an expander for it if you're crosslinking it to VCV via Silent Way...opens up loads of extra CV/gate possibilities) and Silent Way are pretty much the 'power-user' way to go these days. Putting the computer in direct contact with the modular's functions will blow the doors off of anything with a basic MIDI converter. Plus, you can also work with other software packages to realize even wilder notions; using Max as an initial control source would allow you to create your own control paradigms from scratch. Plus, keep in mind that the ES-8's return channels also allow functions in the modular to work as "control feedback" for your software environment, neatly closing that cybernetic loop!
You're wanting to build up a system around a Moog Grandmother. All well and good...but to do what, exactly? Don't ask what modules are the ones you should have based on generalizations like that, because the methods for a build is created should always take the MUSICAL requirements in mind FIRST. For example, if you want to direct your musical efforts more toward something rhythmic and danceable, that gamut of modules isn't going to be the same as what you'd need if you were doing industrial/noise, or ambient, or sound design work, or...well, you get the idea.
Creating a modular system for your specific needs is not a simple process. If done correctly, it's not on the order of simplicity of going to the grocery and getting ingredients for a recipe. It requires you to really understand what your music is now, and where you want to go with it in the long-term as long as you want to avoid a pointless outlay of piles of cash on modules that you find aren't ones that work for your purposes. Plus, how well do you know that Moog? That's not been out that long...so have you fully explored its own potential to a suitable limit where you really understand what functions it has that you want to expand upon?
Those are things you need to start on before starting in on slapping together hardware...even in a virtual form such as on MG. Spend some time in things such as VCV Rack (a modular emulator...very useful for exploring module functions and combinations). Spend time on here alongside that, looking into which modules are for what best purpose, alone and in combinations with other modules. Spend time looking at important 'historical' instruments, and find out why they were assembled with the module/circuit complements they have. And expect this to TAKE time; I know people are enamored with instant gratification these days, and ample Magic Plastic + synth retailers galore might seem to make that possible, but the plain fact is that rushing into that situation without ample preparation is a recipe for massive annoyance and fiscal ugliness...and certainly NOT any sort of gratification, unless you're a masochist.
Step 1: remove everything that's already in its own case from this case. Putting these into a Eurorack cab is a major waste of rather-costly space that should be allocated for modules that aren't cased already.
Step 2: remove any discontinued modules...Clouds, for example.
Step 3: if this is an Intellijel powered case (the layout looks like it might be), eliminate the uZeus, since you don't need to put a power supply in a powered case.
Step 4: start over. Do a lot of research on what modules do which functions before building the next attempt. Watch videos and listen to examples of modules from various manufacturers and other users. Study existing builds here on MG by experienced synthesists, also, as well as classic systems to see how they're built up. Expect to spend A LOT of time doing this, as even those who have a lot of time and experience with synthesizers know that you can't nail a modular build on attempt #1. Or even attempt #10, or #20, etc etc. This is a PROCESS of creating an instrument; simply because you can buy a lot of this off the rack with ease and ample cash these days doesn't mean that creating an optimal build is equally easy. The more likely thing that would happen without proper research and prep is that you'd be doing the same thing as putting your money in your backyard grill and setting it on fire.
Also, ask yourself if you know your musical output well enough to predict what an appropriate instrument for it would consist of. And not merely at this moment in time, but in five years...or ten...or twenty. These things COST, and it's best to have figured out that your money is being well spent in advance!
No real reason, actually...Plaits should also work nicely given that it can sweep through changes in a generative system. Its predecessor, Braids, didn't exactly have that ability. It's also worth noting that I put this together about a day or so before Codex Modulex dropped their 8 hp version of the Plaits...given that, I'd suggest that if you go with Plaits, use theirs, which would allow you TWO of them in the Rubicon2's space with 4 hp left over.
In the view where you're working on your rack, you'll see a small menu in the upper-left, above the rack image. Under "Edit", select "Edit rack", and there you'll find the controls to change the rack parameters.
84 hp cabs are very common, but with the wealth of stuff out there these days, it makes more sense to go bigger, such as 104 or 126 hp. Back when you just had a handful of Eurorack firms, cooking up something basic in 2 x 84 made sense, but these days it seems to me to be a better idea to go bigger. And after all, if your MG build uses a 126 hp cab but you find you can cram what you need into 104, you can always edit the cab size back down.
A 104 hp cab would work. Also, have a look at Erica's 126 hp offerings...they do a single row 126 hp case with a serious power supply (1.25A on both 12V rails) for not a helluva lot of money. Then you can add a few more widgets...bonus! ;)
It varies from VCO to VCO. Some are very good about having a very low voltage drop due to the exponential converter. Others, not so much so. But four VCOs does start to get you into the zone where having a buffered mult to divide your VCO CVs is a wise idea. Better safe than sorry, if tuning is critical.
Yes...but have a look at this variation instead:
This changes the arrangement to help with signal/programming 'flow'...control left, output/final processing right, etc. I swapped out the Maths with a pair of A-171-2 VCSs, each of which is more or less half a Maths. This then allowed two more 2hp ADSRs, which will be useful for the A-135-2 Quad VCA Mixer to give you dynamic control over your outputs and/or the Clouds redux. No space for an output module, though, so you'll either have to run into an outboard attenuator or a mixer that can handle synth-level signals. Use a handful of inline mult widgets, and you're set!
Both, as they're not the same sort of thing. The Sisters is a very weird sort of multimode-meets-formant arrangement, great for overall spectral reworking. But the Optomix is actually a pair of lowpass gates with a summing mixer, which means you can take your Sisters outputs on into that and apply the percussive Buchla-esque 'plooks' with the Optomixes LPGs. Put a normal Sisters output on one LPG and the "Centre" on another, and you can tandem your sound back and forth percussively in patterns between "clean" and "FMed" filter responses. Fun stuff!
Total agreement here, Ronin...that Model D really has no place in a small cab of that sort...or, potentially, any cab. Consider that a Minimoog (which it's a copy of) is actually a very simplistic build, one which these days could theoretically be assembled in Eurorack in half the space of the Model D (or less!). Leave it in its own case where it belongs, use the space for something more productive.
As for that, again, Ronin's spot on. There's a serious, crippling lack of modulation sources, VCAs, timing/logic, filters, processors (pretty critical for ambient!), mixing and utilities. Stop working in this direction; instead, take some time to explore what other experienced MG users are doing, as well as looking at classic modular and patchable synths to see how they're designed and what implementations those designs help create. VCV isn't a bad idea, either...start with emulating something basic such as the Minimoog architecture in it BUT with the patchability that modular allows. See how this functions on that simple level...then begin experimenting with how to extend that. Translate the results into practice builds back here in MG. Also, examine what artists you enjoy and respect use, how they use it, and again how you can build onto that to make something that's very much your own.
You won't nail a design in 'one' unless you do massive research, and even then, it would be a real fluke to get EVERYTHING right. Make mistakes. Make lots of them. Screwing up on MG = no money lost. Not so much so if you try this with real hardware first.
You did your research well here...I don't see anything that I can really fault in this build. As for the VCA implementation, go ahead and put the Quad VCA in, since VCA control is such a basic function and you'll want all of the basics in place before making the final decisions.
As for the later bits: the Nebulae isn't a bad choice, and another option to consider if you can find the space would be MakeNoise's Morphagene. Replacing the Rainmaker, though...I wouldn't. If you want an insanely-comprehensive and complex delay line, that module rivals even some of the most complex and celebrated outboard gear, and that makes it an optimal pick for its purpose.
Sequencing: have you also considered outboard? I'm planning for a KOMA Komplex, myself...the concept seems very open-ended, capable both in studio and live work. It would also free up space for additional modules in the cab itself, while defining the sequencer as a proper controller by placement. But there's plenty of possibilities beyond that one, like the Squarp Pyramid or Kilpatrick's Carbon.
Either the 2hp ones or the Intellijel. With the former, you get quantity. But the latter offers functionality in that you get summing and a variable response curve.
Agenda item #1 for you: remove the Neutron from this build. If you look at the functions it provides in the space it takes up, you'll notice that it's a bad use of space vs functionality. Try keeping it in its own cab instead. The Roland Aira module can go too, unless you have one, as it's discontinued AND the Eurorack Airas are notorious for huge power inrush draws on power-up, which could spell trouble for your P/S.
Nah, keep the Marbles. If you're shooting for that weird, jagged, tangential Autechre sort of direction, it'll help the whole rig (mis)behave in just the right ways. One point, though...move the P/S module to the left side to get it away from your audio sources (One, VCAs) in the top skiff to help avoid any noise that might sneak in through the P/S brick. This thing should sound crazy as hell, especially if you tandemed it with some sort of outboard granular processing.
BTW, what's that quarter-bent apple you've got in the thumbnail? It's a sharp look...
Nah. Obsoleted modules abounded, plus there was a lot of 'predictable' there. Instead, I tore it up, came up with this instead:
Now this is a superior piece of kit, tooled for the exact purpose. Around $750 cheaper, too. Maths (the correct one) stayed, added a Marbles for random sampling of CVs and the like. RCD got its expander (great for live performance). Went with a single quantizer with an analog shift register which allows subsequent CV levels to pass on to another destination times three. The 0 Sugar deals with weird logic-based gate scrambling, and a Pithoprakta Euclidean gate/trig sequencer was dropped in for generative timing trickery.
Second row has a dual mix/attenuverter/offset, two linear (for CVs) VCAs. I added a 4ms QPLFO for multiple slow (or fast) LFO sources to create gradual modulation shifts (important for good generative work)...and then a Rubicon2 for warped, spacy crossmod and TZFM. Kept the Plonks, then there's a 4-1 audio mix to sum it with the Rubicon2. After that, a Disting, because...it's a Disting, which is pretty much a Swiss Army Knife for most anything. The Doepfer A-106-1 (variation on the Korg MS-20 VCF pair) has an insert in its resonance path, for which the lo-fi Noise Reap delay is intended, although you could use it as a regular delay. And then a final VCA + envelope to send the results back down to the 2S for the final mix with the MiniBrute's audio and output.
Now these should get you where you want to go. Note, also, that some of these modulation sources can also be aimed down at the MiniBrute 2S to make it act in tandem with the Rack. No mults, also...I suggest using either Stackcables or inline mult widgets, as these save space in smaller builds like this.
Yep...and with the LaserBox's output levels also working with normal synth CV levels, that would make for one crazy LFO bank...lots of phase-correlated modulation, weird Lissajous-based control methodology. Definitely not a sequencer, but if/when the need calls for something like that, it's convenient to flip that functionality.
Extra VCAs would be useful, yep...my suggestion would be to pull the buffered mult (you don't have enough destinations to cause a voltage drop that would necessitate one...use some stackcables or inline passive mults instead and save your space) and the blank and have a look at Malekko's VCA...it's a dual VCA module with switchable functions for linear and exponential response, fits in 4 hp.
The A-119 is probably the more cost-effective of the two. As for BOTH waveshapeable VCOs and a warped idea of what a filter is, Schlappi's Angle Grinder might be something you'd find entertaining. You get those, plus quadrature outputs which can come in handy when using the Angle Grinder as a phase-correlated modulation source.
You might add a mult into 2 hp of that 10. And with the remaining 8 hp, have a look at Doepfer's A-171-2 VCS. Basically half of a Maths, a very useful modulation source to say the least.
'Course, I wouldn't have put the M32 in there, though....it has a cab, plus it eats up a lot of space that could be better used for discrete Eurorack modules.
Simple and basic...that'll work, actually. A couple of additions you might consider, though, would be an audio output module, a quantizer (definitely beneficial with the Rene2) of some type, and maybe the MakeNoise Tempi, as the Rene2 was designed to link with it for some extra timing trickery and it would be useful for triggering extra bits here and there. And while you're on a MakeNoise kick, why not put in a Pressure Points/Brains combo which can also work in tandem with the Rene2/Tempi to provide some direct hands-on control in addition to the Rene2's pads...plus gives you an extra 4-step touch-controlled sequencer to beef up the control capabilities.
Well, for a basic, straightforward envelope follower alone, you might check Ladik's E-510. But if you need more complex functionality, SSF recently kicked out a new module called the DETECT-Rx. It's about twice the price of the Ladik, but serves up some enhancements for the price.
Plus, I think it was you, Ronin, that made the point that you can blow new firmware onto the Toolbox and change its function. That's also potentially a plus inasmuch as you can shift the entire working paradigm of a build just with a switcheroo on the Toolbox's EPROM.
No, the +/- 12V you're probably thinking of is generally what you find on your power rails. Synth-level signals usually work like this:
Audio: this tends to be +/- 8V peak to peak at max, much of the time, but levels up to +/-10V aren't uncommon.
LFOs: as a rule, this is similar to audio levels except when the signals are unipolar. In that case, you see one of two things: either the voltages swing around a given voltage offset level, or 0V is still the center, but there's no negative voltage swing. This last state is also what you see with audio that's been half-wave rectified in waveshaping/distortion.
EGs: 0 to +8V (or a bit more). Envelopes only swing into negative voltages when inverted, as a rule. Some inverted envelopes can also swing from a given positive offset level down to 0V, as well, depending on application.
Gate/triggers: 0 to +5V is the norm. However, some synths use inverse triggers, such as the Korg MS-20, older Yamaha monosynths, etc. Also, the Moog "S-Trig" bus is normally at +5V until triggered, when it drops to 0V; this is unusual, however, as the Moog "S-Trig" is prone to voltage drops due to connecting too many devices to the trigger bus, which can cause the triggering to fire at unwanted times and it's recognized these days as the 'wrong' way to do this.
Note also that some inputs that normally see only positive-going voltages can have interesting reactions when fed with bipolar voltages, and vice-versa.
Control voltages usually scale upward exponentially from 0V in what's known as a volts-per-octave (often written as 'V/8va') relationship. There are different methods, though, with some (again, Korg and Yamaha) using a linear Hz/V scaling, some older synths (notably EML) using 1/10thV steps with 1.2V/8va, and some using bipolar CVs in a V/8va relationship (Moog).
The Eloquencer quantizes internally. Nice feature, that...
As for compression/dynamics, give this a look: https://www.perfectcircuit.com/fmr-rnc.html . Very simple, straightforward, and excellent-sounding. Plus for 'bang for buck' factor, the RNC is hard to beat for a quality stereo compressor. It's a workhorse.
Go to Arturia's website and DL the Matrixbrute manual, and then see page 2. The expression pedal I/Os aren't really supposed to connect to a modular system, but actual pedals. The rest of the I/O should be at normal synth levels.
Yes, the Mackie VLZs will handle synth level appropriately. Just back the trims way down, and there you go. I have an original 1202 that I've had for over 25 years, used it for literally everything imaginable, and it takes loads of signal level abuse and keeps on rolling. Even so, an output module with isolation can tease out some benefits in lowering noise floors, eliminating any potential of groundlooping, and the like. Since you're doing your FX on the Mackie's AUXes, there's another Happy Nerding output module that's just a straight stereo out...but with transformer isolation, and there is definitely some audio benefits to having a bit of 'iron' in your output path like that. Adds a touch of enharmonic nonlinearity that warms up sounds, as a rule, without really mangling them...unless (and this is a benefit, too) you push the transformers into saturation with some high levels, in which case you'll get a nice, warm, wooly saturated sound that you'll likely find some uses for.
Seconds on the Intellijel Quad VCA. As far as multi-VCAs go right now, I'd say that that one's fairly close to being the gold standard. The ability to warp the response curve is brilliant, plus the addition of the mix function is super-convenient for either audio or CV summing. For a smaller rig, it's a good way to go.
