User Posts

So far, so good! This is definitely on the right track. DO make sure and get some sort of isolated stereo out module for your level step-down as well as isolating out any noise/hum/crap. Happy Nerding's got this one that I really dig, fits in 6 hp, and it gives you two stereo busses in with an extra level control...great for parallel processing your final mix with some FX and having direct control over the FX return. Plus, nice metering and a 1/4" stereo headphone out as well. A reverb might be nice, too...check that Purrtronics digital that came out some months back, as it has a mono-in/stereo-out architecture that would mesh really well with that second stereo bus on the HN module.

Solid...although, the Morgasmatron won't do much for you on dynamics. However, it's a killer dual filter, with roots in the Korg MS-20 pair, albeit massively expanded in functionality. For ambient-type work, it's a damn good choice to keep timbral content shifting in neat ways; should play nicely with the Rainmaker. The Jellysquasher is probably what you meant...however, I'm not 100% sold on keeping dynamic functionality in the modular. You might find that there's some outboard choices that'll offer a better result.

Instead of the Jellysquasher, consider adding some sort of complex oscillator, both as part of the voicing and as a possible audio modulation source. Sticking with Intellijel, if you can source up a used original Rubicon (also 18 hp, the new "II" version is 20), that would kill. It'd give you some very complex FM capabilities via its thru-zero modulation, as well as lots of complex crossmod potential.

DFAM's never struck me as seeming really 'drummy', though...although it's an excellent sequencer and has some very worthwhile functions in of itself. Delptronics, however, makes a very compact solution with their LDB-2e/2x combo. In 12 hp, you get the main components of the Roland-esque analog percussion spectrum plus some ample control over pitches, etc. That plus the Eloquencer would take care of a good chunk of that need.

I'll second that VCA sentiment. Look for something that gives you several in a tight space, preferably switchable between linear (good for CVs, not bad for audio) and exponential (better for audio due to our exponential perception of apparent loudness, but more difficult to control for CVs if they can even pass DC at all). Plus, most multiVCA modules also function in various ways as mixers, which you'll also find come in handy.

You also save a bit on the Quad VCA...use that to buy a couple more patchcords. Otherwise, I'm having trouble finding anything I'd change here save for the overall layout to get the patch flow a bit clearer. Nice job!

Yep. Go big, or go..........out and buy another cab! ;)

Depends. If the discontinued devices are from a major maker, such as Mutable Instruments, Intellijel, etc, there's not likely to be any worries, plus these may in fact be easy and cheap finds on the used market (in some cases). But when it comes to smaller boutique makers, it's likely best to stick to ones whose output has been ongoing over the long term in case technical issues arise. Also, if the device in question was a kit build, be very cautious unless the build was done by a builder with extensive experience. My Digisound 80, for example, was a kit build...but it had been restored and cased/powered by the legendary Kevin Lightner (RIP), one of the greatest synth techs ever. So even though it was a kit build, Kevin had gone over all of the functions and corrected any faults that might have been present because...well, that's what he did. He was a picky guy in that way.

Again, as with anything used, it's a caveat emptor kinda joint. When first getting a "new" used module, check all of the functions, controls for noise, dropouts, jumpy control behavior (all of which tend to indicate dirty controls, etc), and make sure the patchpoints are snug and electrically solid. If you have an oscilloscope (definitely a tool serious modularistas ought to have on hand!), examine LFO and VCO waveforms for spectral purity and proper waveshapes. Also, VCFs can be checked similarly by bringing them into self-resonance and examining the output for a good, clean sine wave. Mixers and VCAs can be checked by sending known pure waveforms through them and looking for distortion components, and waveshaper functions can be checked against their settings by observing how they manipulate a simple waveform. Dirty pots and switches can usually be sorted out with some of Caig Labs' wonder-drug, DeOxit, and badly-performing jacks can either be spritzed with that same magic formula, or you can obtain a jack burnisher to scrub crud off of contacts.

Ah, you're right...hard to read the Erica stuff when it's itsy-bitsy...

You might not want to keep the subchains as separate as that. It may make more sense from the point of interaction between parts to work out some sort of structure that allows more than just a time-base between all parts. For example, a shifting LFO curve in one part could, via a comparator, switch on an action in a second part when the LFO was above (or below) X level. Say, if your VCF cutoff in the first part went above a certain partial frequency via that LFO, the same LFO could start a sequence via the comparator gate, then stop it when the VCF's cutoff dropped. And going further, that triggered sequencer part could, in turn, activate some other timing function (such as ratcheting) on another sequenced part. And so on, ad infinitum. Best way to proceed, from my experience, is to start by mapping the basic action of a part, then identifying points in that part's signal and/or control chains where the insertion of something that 'reads' the activity could be used to interact with another. And at the same time, identifying points of 'action change' in the affected parts, and figuring out how you want the changes to occur, etc. Usually, these sorts of system require a great deal of control density, which you're definitely getting toward in this build, but it might make sense to spread out more for the ease of programmability and interaction with the system as a whole. Since you like the Erica stuff, have a look at some of their cases...the deep 2 x 126hp will allow you to stretch out more, add a few more bits, and provide more than adequate power while avoiding any depth conflicts.

VCAs? I don't see any, and if you're aiming for generative work, it's essential to have those so that constant level changes over both audio and CV can be programmed into the structure. Plus, with VCA control over CV, you can then add comparators into the fray which will allow gating to start/stop events based on CV level changes. They're sort of a must if you want to get some real mileage out of that Boolean logic module in the bottom row.

BTW, "generative" refers to a method of multiple-order control in which the synthesizer is programmed to 'play itself', constantly altering modulation levels and paths, working within a set of parameters defined by the overall patch prior to setting the whole thing in motion. By restricting the possible stochastic outcomes as a part of that patch, there's a level of semi-predictability to how a generative system functions within a given set of possibilities. "Controlled chance", more or less; I'm not sure that's what you're trying to do here...

Nope, just plain-jane algorithmic digital reverb. That Eventide box should be perfect for that sort of thing. There's a lot of possibilities in using contact mics, too, especially with something that's designed for that such as the Field Kit. For example, try stretching out a metal Slinky (the plastic ones will not work for this) between two points, and place a contact mix on either end. Then fiddle around with the Slinky...tapping it, springing it back and forth, etc. Or run a signal in one end via a transducer to a contact mic on the other end for utterly fucko bizarro spring reverb craziness. Another fun one: get a ride cymbal and a violin bow. Put the cymbal on a stand and contact mix it right at the top of the bell so the mic doesn't impede its ringing. Now bow the cymbal. MUCH craziness of an ambient-ish variety...sort of like a cheapo version of what Stockhausen was up to with his "Mikrophonie I".

Electronic music doesn't have to involve a synth. Sometimes some weird amplification methods and processing works...sometimes even better!

Correct. Overdriving a simple waveform such as a sine or triangle will result in distortion, but in a simple waveform this actually translates into adding harmonics...which is the same thing a waveshaper circuit is specifically designed to do via wavefolding, rectification, clipping, or basic ol' nonlinear distortion. With a more complex sound like drums, where there's not a specific pitch as such, this can result in a heavier, more 'crunchy' sound. Quite a few producers that I knew back in the days of the rave scene would use input preamp overload on their TR-909 kick signal to push that sound into the range of the fuzzy, semi-pitched BOOM that would make the dancefloor go crazy. In fact, if you listen to a lot of Aphex Twin's earlier work up to around the time he released "On", he employs a host of "bad/wrong" production and engineering techniques that wind up making a "right" in that it defined that crazed, ultra-hard acid sound he championed, most notably on his "Dice Man" and "JOYREX" releases.

It's actually a far easier process than most people might think. The real key is in figuring out the dimensions of the rails (and which rails) and mounting plates. Given that all of these are easily available from various sources, with dimensions clearly given by the manufacturers, it's simply a matter of sorting out how much hp you want, how many rows (and what type rows), and then proceeding from there. But let this stage be the actual startpoint...work from the inside out!

As for the outside, that's up to you. You can go with some sort of hi-impact paint to cover, or source up some tolex in various patterns. Alligator? Sure, why not? One thing about the outside that I suggest, though, is to find quality ATA case fitments and use them...corners, edge rails, handles, closures. They will up the weight...but if you plan to use the case on gigs, you'll be very grateful for those. They also look pretty professional in a studio setting.

Third (and most important!) consideration: power. You should fit this with a power supply that, optimally, provides around 1/3rd more amperage than your system's total draw. There are two reasons for this...first, less stress on the power supply means less heat and less wear on its components. Heat, also, might be a factor in detuning modules, so making the P/S hot as a firecracker is a bad thing for stability. And the second point is current inrush; for less than a second after switching the system on, the total current draw will be somewhat higher than the 'in operation' figures. Best rule of thumb says that with 100% solid state components, around a 1/3rd surplus should more than handle inrush. But if there are tube components, their inrush and warmup stages can actually close to double their current draw for a few hundred milliseconds and that'll have to be taken into account in the P/S spec. As for the AC connection, use a standard fused IEC female chassis mount and mount the P/S as close as you can to this to minimize the AC line run within the cab. Remember: those lines can induce plenty of hum, so keeping them to an absolute minimum length inside your synth is critical.

Most systems these days with inboard power use switching supplies. And if you're careful to choose reputable makes of supplies, this can be OK. But with switching supplies, you have a risk of ultrasonic AC ripple creeping onto your DC bus lines. To avoid prolems with this, there are two strategies. First, don't use a switching supply; linear DC supplies don't have these problems with ripple or noise to an extent anywhere similar to switching supplies. So you win on stability, but linear supplies are VERY heavy, clunky things and take up more room inside your cab than switchers. But if you can swing it, or opt for an external cab for your P/S with a beefy polarized multipin or Anderson PowerPoles to connect your cab's DC busses to the supply, they are the optimal choice electronically. The other strategy is to use Eurorack power bus board with filtering. And actually, you should do this anyway as the filtering schemes not only deal with a lot of the garbage on the main DC busses, but they quiet down any crosstalk coming back down the DC lines from the modules. Some bus boards these days also have onboard 5V supplies...and if you have modules that require it, these are pretty goofproof and effective ways of supplying that.

Your power bus lines inside the cab should be fairly heavy gauge, because this also helps with heating issues (some of which could lead to failure) and eases any impedance load on your P/S. Using stranded 12 or 14 ga copper wiring might seem like overkill, but I recommend it due to both the current loads being carried on these lines and the impedance benefit. Make sure your DC bus lines are well-secured to the inside of the case, using the shortest runs necessary from the P/S to the busboards. For DC distribution and any inline interconnections, I strongly recommend automotive-grade distro blocks and connectors, as these are very beefy, designed to deal with high temps and vibration, and their design is overspecced for your use. BTW, the more you can OVERspec your power system, the better (and more reliably) the build will work!

Your bus boards should be on spacers to keep them away from the rear wall of the cab. 1/4" clearance is good, and of course, higher is better. The point of these is to help prevent anything that might get loose in the case from contacting the bus board traces and shorting the power supply. And also, making sure your individual DC lines coming off the P/S have individual fusing per line is another good safety idea. Don't skimp on cost on these boards, either; they are, quite literally, the 'backbone' of your synth. Some of the newer boards with wide/thick power bus traces are definitely not about the hype...they'll handle current better and, natch, ease the impedance burden on the P/S a bit more.

A lot of these design points actually come from my own 22 module Digisound 80, which resides in a custom case with a power system designed and built by the late, great Kevin Lightner. I've had this for a couple of decades now...and it's a 100% solid performer. The dude built his custom designs to last forever, and his logic behind the choices that made that happen was totally bulletproof. Other bits are from my amateur radio experience, where high-amperage DC is a common thing.

EDITED Dec 8th 2018, 23:30

Exactly, Ronin...plus, with the absence of intensive development, there will be drawbacks that can be avoided by going with an existing DAW package. The key will be to find something that has the right 'feel'. Don't ever approach DAW selection from a mindset that you're creating a 'studio in a box'. Instead, view the approach as one might look at building a modular system; you're creating an instrument, essentially, with the big difference being that the 'instrument' all resides in code. Beyond that one point, a DAW really needs to function like the same sort of 'musical extension' of yourself as any other traditional acoustic and/or electronic instrument.

Years ago, when I first started working within recording studio environments, one of the things that I always found troubling was the system division inherent in that working space. But then, I learned from some of the 'old-timers' back in Nashville (where I'm originally from) that the key to how they got their sound was that they approached how they dealt with a studio as if it were a unified system, from room to mics to desk to tape machines to processing to monitors, all of which synergized to create the 'sound' those producers and engineers were gunning for. And this fit in with what I'd learned about the likes of Brian Eno, Conny Plank, and Can, all of whom I still admire to this day for their adventuresome approach to the studio-as-instrument. And while in undergrad and learning how to isolate the living crap out of everything and never print with processing and all of that old-school malarkey, I was eyeing developments such as Real World, Peter Gabriel's studio in which he'd dispensed with the separation of 'cutting' and 'control' spaces altogether, much as how Can did so but with the bleeding edge tech then appearing at the time. And this seemed right...the idea that NO barriers (physical or otherwise) should exist anywhere in the process chain found in the studio. So this did quite a bit to influence me up to the present day, where I don't even see my 'studio' as that...to me, it's a very large musical instrument. And within that context, the DAW system is simply akin to another valve on a horn or knob on a synth. It has to work in integration...not as a thing unto itself. And finding that right DAW package was tricky...we're talking a process that literally took me a decade and a half, but the time spent was worth it in exploring possibilities in the tech as well as in myself as a musician, and what I needed to use to keep forward progress going.

So the upshot is this: don't box yourself in by saying that something like an OS is going to define your work. That's really an ancillary thing. If your musical needs require using Windows or Mac (or iOS or whatever) and you can see possibilities that may happen by getting past the OS 'box', then try and do so. View your setup as an integrated whole and ask "what does my music need from this and how do I let it reach that goal?"

Well, first off, what constitutes a "proper sequencer"? Do you want something that does a full complement of CVs, gate/trigs, in multiple rows with typical end/start/stop/etc control? Or are you talking about just for drums, in which case a trigger pattern sequencer might make more sense. Or a digital full-on controller like a Squarp Hermod or Orthogonal's ER system? Each has pros and cons, but some are suited for one use, and others for...well, others.

Best suggestion I can make: don't freak out. Take your time, use MG's resources to get a better feel for what to do. This isn't a test, nor does the first build you do have to nail the idea you have. Building an instrument more or less from scratch (which is pretty much what modular synthesis is about) is not anything close to easy and at first glance, it's daunting as hell. Expect to refine and whittle away at design ideas for literally months until you hit something that feels right. And the best thing is that if you utterly and irredeemably fuck up your design here on MG, you just delete it and start over. No massive cash outlay and resulting buyer's remorse. Learn at a pace that works for you, and tweak away without worry.

The other suggestion is to start with something too big. If you think you need two rows of 104 hp, go with three, or three rows of 126 hp, even. Allow yourself space in which to screw up ably, then pare that result down, and you'll find that you actually get decent ideas from 'going too far' and then pulling back from that point. And study existing builds by experienced synthesists as well as classic modular systems that still inspire awe perhaps 50+ years on to get ideas of how to proceed. Just don't demand of yourself that this get done NOWNOWNOW...you'll just wind up banging your head against the display screen.

BTW, don't forget that in some cases, distortion can work in your favor. One of the reasons why the Moog CP3 mixer circuit is so highly-praised is because of what it does 'wrong', not for what it should do. If you were to treat it like a normal mixer...well, it would sort of suck at that, because the CP3 has a lot of interesting nonlinearities that just mess up routine audio, but when applied to the purer waveforms within a synthesizer, they act as something of a waveshaping component at high levels. And that 'bad engineering' is actually key to the Moog modular (and now the Grandmother, which supposedly uses a new variation on that original Moog circuit) sound just as much as their famous transistor-ladder VCF designs. If you applied the same principle to drum sounds, they'd likely get a bit more crunchy and hit a tad harder and edgier from the enharmonic distortion.

So 'totally clean' sometimes isn't the way to go. Best suggestion is to research audio clips or go to a dealership if one is within driving distance and see if 'pristine' or 'crunchy' (and for that matter, what kind of 'crunchy') is what works for you.

Right...that period of hyperinflation of analog synths started about 1992, was in full swing everywhere by 1994. Up until then, used synths could be bought for prices that made (and to my reckoning, still do make) sense. But watching things go full-on crazy where prices for a monosynth such as a Pro-One, one of which I bought used in mid-1993 for $80, suddenly and unwarrantedly exploded to something like $750 by the start of 1995...none of this made any sense whatsoever from a purely economic standpoint. But when you encountered a lot of the buzz on the Internet, in print media, and ESPECIALLY through Mark Vail's "Vintage Synthesizers" book where arguments were being pushed that these devices were essential...then it made sense. Or rather, more obvious, yet still utterly senseless.

Anyway, pointing the OP toward effects actually makes more sense. Consider: Brian Eno's "Thursday Afternoon", one of the landmark ambient albums of all time, really has very little going on as far as musical events. What carries the weight in there is actually some elaborately-crafted time-domain processing work. These also offer a wide variety of possible results within an ambient palette, since the real key to that is to craft the imaginary acoustical venue then introduce very basic material into it to 'ring' the 'space' that's been 'composed'. I would even suggest that the OP go with a couple of send/return modules and then inject some stompboxes into the system with those, and then spend less time making the synth noises and more on 'playing' the processing to re-envision what one actually 'performs on' for ambient work. It even works on Pringle's cans...nope, not joking there! A very light 'ping' with a pencil into a properly-filtered reverb at over 45 seconds of T60 will sound quite ambient, indeed!

Yeah, channel 10...makes perfect sense. Back when polytimbral devices were starting to pop up, and even before when people were starting to create sizable piles of MIDI gear, there was this sort-of-a-rule that ch.10 was intended for drums and percussion. Interesting to see Arturia still holding true to that. But yeah...my TR-909, when I had that, it would both respond to and send on 10 out of the box as well.

As for Expert Sleepers...what they have with their Silent Way software is a way to use a DC-coupled audio interface to send and receive CVs, gates, and triggers (and sync, natch) to/from analog hardware. MOTU's Volta is similar to this, albeit Mac-only. Those interfaces that you see on here with the ADAT lightpipes, etc, are actually A-D/D-A converters, just like the ones on the conversion end of your DAW except that they're designed to be 100% DC-coupled and Silent Way compliant. In fact, you can even use the Expert Sleepers interface modules that have 'returns' to the DAW as a means of recording the synth's audio, instead of sending it to the dedicated A-D linked to the computer itself.

BTW, one of the worst drawbacks of using LINUX within music, IMHO, is the fact that the vast majority of development done for the instrument marketplace is going to either be for MacOS or Windows. That's simple economics at work...the installed base is simply larger, and if a music equipment company has limited resources dedicated to developing software, they're going to stick to the two OSs that the vast majority use. For example, right here in this thread, you're missing out on unlocking the Drumbrute's deeper control layers because you can't run the Arturia Control Center, and you can't explore computer control over analog with Silent Way or Volta. And that's among a lot of other things. While I certainly think LINUX has its uses, some in which it excels, using it in music is likely to handicap you in the long run by keeping a large array of tools out of reach.

Well, "quit immediately" as in stopping believing that X music MUST be done with Y devices. I recall the psychotic behavior that went on during the early phases of acid in the early 1990s, where people believed that "real techno" required every synth used to be analog, you had to have a TB-303 and other "church of Roland" accoutrements, and if your track had the ultimate bass patch, you won 1,000,000 Internets. This was incredibly stupid, and I know for a fact that as the prices of 303s, etc started to skyrocket to nosebleed levels, that false notion DID stop people from trying with whatever they could get their hands on. The 303 went from a "we pay you to get it out of here" device to something that was eventually pulling down wads of cash in the $3k range. And unless your dad was an investment banker, you weren't getting one.

And even crazier than this was the fact that, when you go back and review classic tracks out of Detroit or Chicago from the late 1980s and early 1990s, while you do find some artists using these (esp. Larry Heard, who kicked that 303 acid sound off with "Washing Machine" c. 1987), you would also find a lot of digital synths and off-brand things in peoples' arsenals. Hell, one of the Belleville Three, Derrick May, did tons of his basslines on a cheap Yamaha DX-100, such as on "Nude Photo" and kickstarted the "house piano" riff thing using a Korg M1 on "Strings of Life". No analog in those, nope.

So, yeah...I'm a definite believer in the idea that if you possess the ability to make music, you can make something just as good with a Pringles can, a pencil, a mic and a loop pedal as you could with a moving van full of TB-303s and TR-808s (another device that went into economic extinction during that same nonsense). The GEAR is only a tool and the MUSICIAN creates, not the other way around.

Hmmm...perhaps I should quit making ambient, then. My Digisound 80 has none of those...so none of my 15+ albums of ambient work are valid anymore.

(NB: the equipment doesn't make the music. The artist does. Believing that certain pieces of equipment are "necessities" is an utter fallacy, and a great way to kill ones' creativity by becoming reliant on specific musical "crutches". If you can make incredible ambient music with a couple of steel drums, a touch of reverb and multitracking with no other electronics at all (see Stephan Micus' work for this example), then do so. But if you have to labor under the misapprehension that you MUST have X piece of gear to do Y sort of music, then quit immediately, as you're not really making something that truly speaks of who you are musically.)

Yeah, and it's never exactly worked out well. It's worth remembering that Bob Moog did make a drum controller for a hot minute, but that item didn't stay in the catalog very long. The nuance of all of the various drum strike techniques, incremental dynamics, etc just don't come across well in the analog domain. You really do need MIDI to break down those increments so that they come across in the electronics. Also, let's say you want to do a rim shot. Now, if you have a percussion controller that can recognize that as a different sort of stroke than a simple head-strike, then you can keep that very basic stroke in your repertoire. But without that additional sensor, doing any sort of rimshot, or for that matter anything other than a basic 'thud-on-head' hit, becomes totally pointless. And a basic contact mic setup will reduce things down to that level of basics.

A more sensible...albeit more elaborate...option might be to investigate some dedicated percussion controllers, instead of trying to make actual drums behave like not-drums. You're more apt to get into a tasty e-percussion area with something like an Octapad than something that requires loads of constant adjustment. Much lower maintenance, to be sure. Then to get from it to Eurorack is just a simple matter of MIDI conversion of whatever flavor suits your playing style best.

It's a work of pure madness! Basically, it deals with voltage as functions to define a point in Cartesian space...x, y, and z. But instead of a singular point being defined, it moves around as something of a 'blob' of CV so that it fades in and out of the various geometric points it has defined. And on top of that, it alters/processes the incoming CVs to make up the 'blob', so the identity state of that hunk of CV has the ability to be in constant flux, if desired. About the only other thing that purely deals with CV as mathematical operators like that that comes to mind offhand is Ladik's Joystick Math...but it deals solely with x and y functions, whereas the Vector Space not only treats the incoming voltages through that extra z dimension, but also with crossmodding. Very powerful...for generative work, I'd rank it as a prime choice for keeping modulation sources/paths in continuous flux.

Well, a Piston Honda's definitely a whole 'nother sort of wavetable oscillator, to be sure. That 'modulation cube'-sort of paradigm allows a lot of very strange behavior to happen; kinda reminds me of the Z-plane filters E-Mu used on their later Proteus iterations, but wackier. But the MCO definitely whomps it on price. Might make for a nice AF modulator for a Piston Honda, though...just let ALL the wavetable sources morph until your brain melts! ;)

Good to know! That would definitely make it a cheap alternative to buying the full module for those who have the Toolbox. Granted, I see them both being useful, but that ability to flip firmware is nice in of itself, also.

Well, it's about that time again, so here's KICK ASS!!! for November 2018, in which (as usual) I point out some of the more interesting-looking and sounding Eurorack modules for the MG audience.

Things seem to be picking up...I've run across a nice number of bits 'n' pieces to look over, so without further ado:

1) LeafAudio Noisefoc. This thing is way-raucous! It uses TTL-type logic circuits to generate sound, and the result sits right in the cusp between 'noise generator' and 'VCO', I think. The audio clip at LeafAudio's website (link in the module entry) really shows off the sort of aural pandemonium this module's capable of. It's worth noting that the EDP Wasp used similar TTL logic to generate sounds, but where EDP kept things under control (more or less), Leaf allows all of the utterly crazed possibilities to shine through here. And don't just look at it as 'noise'...used carefully, the Noisefoc's capable of adding some complex timbral content alongside basic ol' VCOs, so most anyone could find a use for this. This module's a kit...but you might want to brush up on your soldering skills and give this a shot. 8 hp, around $28, probably via Exploding Shed although the listing for it isn't up on there yet.

2) Takaab Nearness. Takaab's been putting out some interesting but simple twists for a good price for some months now, and this is no exception. This is a fixed level mixer with seven inputs and a stereo pair of outputs...but the twist is that by using the patchpoints closer to each stereo out, the signal to that particular output gets louder. Simple, yep...but imagine this in tandem with a couple of panners. Well, that would give you lots of stereo spatial modulation just by feeding a basic LFO into the panners without a whole bunch of fuss or expense. You can even configure it via a jumper for line-level output, which is awfully convenient and saves on a separate output module. 3 hp, and about $50.

3) ALM Busy Circuits Quaid Megaslope and MCO. Two nifty toys from ALM...the Quaid Megaslope can work as a multisegment EG (sort of in the style of the Casio CZ envelopes), a very adjustable complex LFO, or even as a sequencer with sequenced slope functions. This thing has 'useful' written all over it; I'm sure there's things that can be done with one that go way beyond what I'm capable of explaining. 19 hp, $308, more or less. Then the MCO...oh, boy, is this thing crazy! It's a wavetable VCO in a very convenient 6 hp, but it also has some complex CV functions hidden inside. The PWM and 'Type' controls govern a bunch of interesting pulsewidth weirdnesses, and the 'Wave' control lets you morph through the stored wavetables smoothly. ALM says that this VCO will sound very much like 1990s digital, and having heard it on their website (link in the listing), I'd have to say that's spot on. What I heard sort of reminded me of a cross between the Kawai K3 and K4 oscillators...very 'cold' coloration that hovers in a zone between analog and lower-fi PCM. $174 at the present $ exchange rate.

4) Pharmasonic Digisound modules. I own (for about 20 years now) and love a 22-module Digisound system. These were kit devices dating from the 1980s, and even while using Curtis chips for the most part for their main operation, they were flexible enough so that you could easily patch your way into totally weird areas...industrial grind, ethereal drones, and loads of other things in between. And one of the real secrets to what made the Digisound line cool is their take on a wavetable VCO, the sought-after VCDO. Well, seek no more! Pharmasound's brought the Digisound VCDO back, along with ten more of its siblings, staying true to the original architecture and using the new versions of the Curtis chips. But the VCDO is the real prize here...32 waveforms that can be stepped through in both the tables and table banks, making it a great candidate for sequencer-heavy systems to juice up timbral variation in time with the sequenced pitches. I do hope there's more in the pipeline from Pharmasonic on this front; it would be very cool to compliment my old-skool Digisound with some identical new Eurorack friends. All modules (thus far) are 12 hp, and the VCDO in particular comes in at a very affordable $209.

5) Ladik P-180 Octal switchable 'OR'. Ladik's still popping out some intriguing and inexpensive Eurorack toys. This month, they kicked out their first 'real' VCF, but I picked this thing because, if you're running a system that uses lots of trigger/gates (say, with a few sequencers) and clocking, this thing is a godsend! You have eight logical ORs on this, and you can use each OR's switching to select either the A or B, or a combination of the two via the logical OR. That last part, in particular, makes this appealing for live sequencer work to play havoc with your timing signals with ease. 12 hp, and the kicker is the price: $64, more or less! Most any other device that gives you timing control on this order is going to cost waaaaaymore!

6) 1010 Music Laserbox. OK, on the surface, it's just a laser controller for driving an ILDA laser projector. And that's extremely cool in of itself, especially since you can have a real-time view of the RGB traces on the module via its touchscreen. But hold up...this outputs + and -5V, meaning you could just as well use it, well, anywhere! Now, consider the fun of applying these Lissajous patterns that you can view and control on the module to audio modules. That could give you some really tasty complex modulation which you can use most anywhere. I can figure the generative music crowd would find a million uses for something of this sort. ADDAC had, until recently, a Lissajous generator/LFO in their lineup, but this new take on that idea from 1010 seems to be a lot easier to understand and use in real-time. 26 hp, $599.

7) Percussa mSSP. Also in at 26 hp, this shrunk-down variation of Percussa's powerful SSP might be smaller, but it's hardly less powerful. Loads of different synthesis methods are hiding behind its panel, way too many to go into here. But the real difference here is the price: $549, as opposed to the $2k for the full-on SSP. This thing makes me drool, really...not only does it have the similarities in raw synthesis power like its bigger sibling, but the 'footprint' fits much better into the Eurorack-verse and that price tag is...well, wow! Yeah, I can hear a few people saying that it doesn't have this or that, the screen's smaller, etc. But it loads any patch made on the original, and doesn't eat 60 hp while doing that and more. It's currently in Kickstarter for $549 for the retail version, and has only a few weeks to go while still needing about another $100k, so bust out that magic plastic quick! Hopefully just as the SSP made its Kickstarter goal, we'll see this get over the line as well.

8) Klangbau Köln Frequency Shifter. Add your own quadrature oscillator, and you're shiftin' like a boss. This is basically the 'guts' of a Bode frequency shifter, minus an internal oscillator source for the shifting. But it's got a few tweaks, such as a control (the 'RMO' knob) that lets you morph between ring modulation and proper single-sideband suppression, or a bit of extra I/O for doing delayed shifts. And with the shift frequency set up the way it is, there's lots of abuse potential for feeding those with things that aren't quadrature sine waves. This module has a good little bit of crazy hiding behind its panel, more or less...but the real craziness is the price: $246 plus/minus. Priced a proper frequency shifter lately? If you haven't, bring some tissues for the ensuing nosebleed! KK's taken care of that, though, with the real deal for way less than the usual cost. 10 hp.

9) Steffcorp VCF-12. Take an ARP 4012 VCF. Now, add a lot of freaky stuff...dual KBD CV ins, an extra 2-pole output, a variable-slope (CVable!) out, dual (one invertable) FM CV ins, and you've now got some weird mutant VCF on your hands! It might've originally come from an ARP 2600, but it's gotten mutated into some sort of strange, very CVable creature. Steffcorp even hand-selects the critical parts necessary to give the proper 2600 filter sound, but that's not going to be all you can do with this thing. Potent! 14 hp, $306.

10) North Coast Synthesis MSK 009 Coiler VCF. Speaking of weird, here's a really different take on filtering altogether. The Coiler gets its name from what it uses: inductors. This is an inductor-based multimode VCF, which means it'll have lots of odd nonlinearities, curious behavior, and the like. But as if that wasn't enough, North Coast added a second audio input that feeds your signal through a full-wave rectifier, giving you some extra waveshaping and distortion possibilities that are, well, weird. But very welcome, too. You can get it in two flavors: the assembled version, which is about $204, and a through-hole kit for $136-ish. Oh...and it can also do a few envelope-following tricks, too! Like I said...weird! 8 hp.

11) 2hp Play. Take a sample playback module and leave it in the dryer too long. This is what you get: the absolutely-smallest Eurorack sample player out there. I'm often amazed at the functionality-cramming that 2 hp gets away with, but this is a shocker. Capable of loading 32 mono samples at a time with sample switching via its CVable file control knob, you also get CV control of pitch (1V/8va tracking, of course), several playback modes, software updating and tweaking via micro SD, and it comes with a preloaded micro SD to get you started, all for a measly $149. Talk about a functional gap-filler!

And that, as they say, is that! Nice to see such an interesting bunch of newcomers. Some of these would make for awesome stocking stuffers, too...provided the stocking in question has the proper current supply! Until next month...and for that matter, next year!

That's not a proper power supply, btw. That power inlet was discontinued by Doepfer a loooooong time ago. Also, in a build of this size, you need to do two important things.

1) see how much of the functionality can be shrunk down by using multifunction modules. For example, you have four LFOs in a total of 32 hp. This isn't a very efficient use of panel space. If you were to use, say, two Xaoc Batumis and a 4ms QPLFO, that also comes out to 32 hp...but gives you 12 LFOs to work with. Now, that many LFOs might not work for you, but it indicates that you could easily jam all four LFOs into a mere ten or twelve hp instead and open up room for more possibilities (like more VCAs, for example).

2) collect your module functions. Put all the VCOs in one area, all the LFOs, EGs, etc. This makes a build way easier to navigate, especially for live performance work. Right now, this build is pretty hodge-podged, and while that might make sense in a studio setting, if you ever perform live with this system as it currently stands, you won't have a lot of fun.

The other thing is something that Dom78 touches on: discontinued modules. I see four in this build right off the bat. Always keep an eye out for status markers here on MG that indicate a module is discontinued. But even with that, also check to see if a manufacturer has a "mk 2" version of something, such as that Intellijel waveshaper; there's been a second version of that on the market for about five years, and when manufacturers issue these newer versions you can generally assume that the original isn't being manufactured anymore. It's quite rare to see a "mk 1" and "mk 2" of a module on sale simultaneously. Now, not everything in MG is properly marked...while this site is considered the 'standard reference' for synthesizer modules, its user-driven aspect doesn't always mean that the precise correct info gets on here, and if no one corrects errors when they turn up, things stay like that. So when you arrive at a build that seems to work for you, checking the module availability with vendor websites is a must.
As to why the 'obsolete' modules are on here...well, that again goes back to MG being that 'standard reference'. The idea is to have the 'obsolete' modules as well because someone might have them in their rig or have found some in the used market, and they'd like to see how they might fit in their own system build.

One other thing I would suggest doing: start with a rack that you think is "too big". If you have 2 x 84 hp, try 104 hp or 126 hp out for starters. It's easy enough to scale back, and MG is the perfect place to sandbox ideas until you have something that feels like it would work as a real device. Plus, don't aim for the perfect build on the first try...or the tenth...or 100th. Just create, and watch for areas in a build that have a good 'feel' to them, then make a note of that and repeat what worked in the next iteration. By honing down your eventual physical build in this way, you will save a lot of time, money, headaches, and even learn quite a bit in the process.

Start next with the top row's modules. These are your audio sources and modifiers, so getting those in place and then building up the modulators (row 2) and the rest of the sequencing can go along at a somewhat slower pace. But having your sources assembled should give you a good idea as to what proceeding along these lines will do.

I did some work on this, along with your explanations of what you're trying to do. This should be suitable...

The bottom row is your control surfaces: Melody Mill, Mixology, an added joystick, and your stereo out. But you'll notice that, first, there IS a joystick and the output isn't the WMD. Here's why: first, having an extra control for expression, making global changes, and the like is pretty important. I went with a joystick here because it's a bit easier to flick around when playing other instruments. And the Happy Nerding output has the extra plus of an extra stereo pair that can be mixed in with the fixed-level input. That one's useful because, if you look just above it, there's a send-return module, which sends one mono signal and returns a stereo pair. With this, you can put an external processor into the mix as a parallel process.

Next row...multiple, Metropolis (keep that), then a Shifty, your ARP, and a Malekko setup with the Varigate4+ and Voltage Block. The Erica DSP is next to this and the aforementioned send-return next to that, located so that they're convenient to the mixer's AUX i/o and the main output. The Shifty is an analog shift register, which is a variation on a sample and hold that, each time it receives a clock pulse, shifts the stored voltage on one output to the next while loading a new one, and does this X4. This can also build up different sorts of arpeggiations, intricate hocket patterns, etc depending on how you decide to patch it up and makes an interesting tandem with the ARP. The Varigate4+ got added to give you memory for the Voltage Block plus some better/more complex control functions over that module.

Above that is modulation and VCAs. I added the Pexp-1 for the Pamela's to send clocking out from that via either MIDI or DINsync, which makes it easier to run the Pamela's as a master clock for the entire rig instead of just the modular. And yes, the Pamela's is a good choice with envelopes, LFO sync, sequencer clocking, and quite a bit more. The next two modules are Doepfer A-171-2s, which are clones of the Serge VCS (and which also are half of a Maths) and can work as a lot of different modulation sources. They're extremely versatile. The Contour gives you four loopable AR envelopes, which means they can function either as EGs or user-defineable-waveform LFOs. Four more conventional ADSRs are after that, then you'll find an Erogenous Tones VC8, which works both as eight separate linear VCAs or as two sets of four into one mixers with VCA control. These are DC-coupled, which will let them work equally well on CVs as well as audio. Last up, another mult.

Top row: two Quadnics, then four of the 2hp Plucks. This gives you three signals per 'voice' in a four-part paraphonic-type configuration, but also allows for a lot more. Next to that is a dual ring modulator, then two different Ladik waveshaping modules. After this are two Bubblesound mixers that can either be configured as 6 -> 1 or two 3 -> 1s, as needed. These can work for either the audio or CV, as the mixer is DC-coupled. Four of the Erica Drums are next, plus another mixer to combine these as well as have a free 2 -> 1 mixer as needed. Then the filters: a more conventional Doepfer state-variable, and a Happy Nerding state-variable that offers some rather different filter curves.

This is how I'd proceed, given the elements you said you wanted to leave in the original build plus the sort of usage you mentioned. Note also that the Moogs are not in here; they really do belong in their own cases as they take up quite a bit of valuable Eurorack space and, also, they don't exactly conform to all of the Eurorack 'standards' when it comes to CVs and such. Also, with the Pexp-1, you can lock them via a MIDI clock from the Pam's and not worry about taking up any of your gate/trig outputs. All in all, not a bad setup...

[FYI: the ModularGrid picture-mangling software seems to be working optimally once more, and I had to engage in a bit of a struggle to get (I hope) the right image up. If you see two VCF modules in the upper-right corner, then you're looking at the actual final version.]

EDITED Nov 24th 2018, 23:56

Looking at the build pic and reading what you're trying to do here, I think that the Frames is a poor choice with as few modulation sources as your build has. Also, the Pittsburgh...while it's a good mixer...won't do what you want, either. And as for attenuating the output (which I'm a bit confused about your description of here), it doesn't matter what mixer you use, you have to attenuate an output to a line-level input because synth-level signals are quite a bit hotter than regular line-level.

If I were facing the same problem, I would first go with a different mixer altogether, namely one which has its main functions under CV control, but which doesn't have extra complexities. The Frames is really more intended as an audio signal "morpher" than just a mixer, and the Pitt module isn't as automated. Instead of either one, have a look instead at Qu-bit's Mixology, which is a four-channel mixer with CV over channel level, pan, and effect send and the additional utility of channel mutes and solos.

BUT...and this is pretty critical for making a build succeed overall...you desperately need more modulation sources. I don't see any additional EGs or LFOs, which are major bread-n-butter modules in of themselves, that can be dedicated to envelopes for your level VCAs or effect send VCAs or LFOs for panning and most everything as well. Plus, even with this different mixer, you will still need some sort of output level attenuator/control to keep from running your mixer input into immediate distortion.

At the basic level, this isn't a good build at all. Your Moog devices really should stay in their own OEM cabs if you're building in 84 hp cabs, otherwise they're hogging space that needs to be there for other things. There are no VCAs (linear or exponential) outside of the Moogs, nor any LFOs or envelope generators beyond what the Moogs offer. I would strongly suggest that you stop what you're doing with this, step back, and take some time examining other builds by experienced users as well as classic modular/patchable instruments to see what those people or companies are/were doing. Take some time to go through the forums here, also, plus at other sites such as Muff Wiggler, Synthtopia, etc to get a more concrete idea of how to proceed. Do the very necessary research before continuing, because modular can be a very effective way to create...but conversely, a very effective hole down which money gets uselessly thrown if one has no clear idea of what they're doing. Sure, they look cool and all, which is why a lot of people right now are drooling over them, but without a clear understanding of what you're doing and why you're doing it when creating a build, it doesn't matter how cool it is, it'll just be a waste of your time and money.

Some of the problem, I think, comes down to users who post modules and don't make a selection as to whether a module is "currently available", "concept/prototype", or "discontinued". If people would show a lot more discipline about doing that when posting something new, then it would be easy to use that existing filter to deselect the unwanted entries.

Using the "currently available" filter in searches does help some...but then one runs into the issue of modules that are definitely available but not labelled as such. Again, this is a user issue as I note above.

reidv does make a good point, also...if you're posting something that was a one-off and which is only in your rig, definitely use that "unlisted" checkbox unless you actually plan on making said module(s) available for sale.

Do at least make sure you have some way of locking up clocks between Ableton and the modular, though. You'll find that to be extremely useful. Even so, I'd still consider some way to pass more than just a clock to the modular from Live; the fact that M4L is in there (depending on which version you're using) opens up massive possibilities for modular control that will definitely exceed human limitations.

Perhaps I'm missing something here, but perhaps not. Checking the links provided with each module takes me to a website where there's no information on availability, pricing, and so on. The MG listings show prices and claim availability, but the actual company website doesn't seem to indicate...well, much of anything. The module listings there seem to all link to a Github site...while at the same time, some of those same MG listings show those same modules as being available as a prebuilt module or DIY kit.

In short, this is a tad screwy. Perhaps the user who posted these can clarify things?

Stages and Maths would be OK normally, but the Akemie's is going to eat envelopes for breakfast. Remember: Chowning FM is very envelope-intensive...that's how you get your timbral shifts within the duration of an event, by applying multistage envelopes to a lot of the oodles of parameters. If I were you, I'd be looking at a couple of modules that have a lot of envelope generator density, such as Qu-bit's Contour, Doepfer's A-143-2, or a combo of Erogenous Tones' RADAR and Ping. That'd really make the FM pop and jump. Plus, yes, do consider a basic VCF for the Akemie's...the combo of FM + good analog filtering is something you'll really get fond of.

Also, I'd lose the Roland mixer. For one thing, it has its own 1/4" out pair, and your Intellijel cab has that already (plus you also have the Intelljel I/O in the build) and having another pair of outs seems redundant. My take there would be to go smaller, but still stay in stereo. Have a peek at Verbos' Scan & Pan...stereo, four in, VCA level control plus CVable panning, plus some neat capabilities for crossfade/channel scanning that are a bit unusual, all in 14 hp. That also solves your VCA question, given that that mixer can do your exponential audio VCA duties, leaving the Quad VCA free for CVs or other spot applications where a single free VCA is needed.

Hmm...that Basimilus...do you need it? You could jam a couple of Moffenzeef Dial-ups in that space and still have 2 hp left...or, you could reclaim a bit more space and add those plus a Muskrat for three channels of glitch/noise percussives. Or the Dial-ups and maybe a couple of Erica Pico Drums to combine conventional sampled drums with glitched-out ones. So, instead of going with the question of adding a filter for a single percussion source, see if you think that a few of them minus a filter might be more capable. That would require more gate/trig channels than the Metropolis would have, but since you're contemplating the Varigate 8+ already and that one would be more than ample, I'd say go with that instead.

Last, swap the buffered mult for Intellijel's passive one. You're not splitting CVs enough in here to worry about voltage 'sag', so regenerating CVs won't be necessary, and you can save a few bucks that way.

Yupperz...that's how you do it! Just keep in mind that rule of thumb about audio paths, and you'll be able to go totally bonkers with stereo patch creation.

It's not necessary to use a VCA before a filter. However, if you have one that can be placed there, you can then do things such as routing a single VCO through it and then into the VCO mix, and by giving that a longer attack than the post-VCF one, that'll let you add harmonics/VCO density/detunings/etc as a ramp-up as long as the note-on is present. Or even more things; that's just one example. VCAs are the unsung heroes of modular synthesis, really...they allow all sorts of trickery involving controlling audio levels, CV voltages, and the like that wind up upping the complexity of your patch. But it doesn't convert the VCO signal to audio; the VCO outputs audio itself, and the VCA (plus a modulating source) can control that audio level. Also, keep in mind that the six channels of the HN mixer also have VCAs for audio level control

The Synthacon VCF looks simple...but, having owned a real Steiner-Parker Synthacon for many years (traded it for an ARP 2600 quite some time ago), I can tell you that it's anything but, sonically. It's very versatile, does everything from punchy bass to rip-your-ears-off screeches, and pretty much anything in between. There are definite reasons why the Arturia Brutes use them; I put that in in there so that you have some sonic consistency, but with the added potential of two different simultaneous options with the same filter architecture.

The Klavis VCOs are rather deep, functionwise. But I wouldn't toss the Batumi out just because the Klavis oscillators can tune down into subaudio. Batumis can do tricks with their LFO signals (especially with the Poti expander) that lots of other oscillators can't, such as operating in a quadrature mode or in other phase-relational modes on a single frequency. They also have an internal divider mode that has lots of potential for clocking applications. And yes, you can do a lot with the Klavis VCOs + the Shifty, even beyond a 4-stage shift register. For instance, you can switch the Shifty into 2-stage, then have two VCOs per outputted CV for two-part duophony from the same initial incoming CV. And again, that's simply one possibility among numerous ones. Or as you noted, drop all four VCOs on the same pitch for big detuned punchiness. Or three, then have a single one on top as a lead. The list goes on, as you can see.

As for the Zadar...it's nice, but the fact is that, in the early stages of using modular, you're going to want to have modules that require lots of tweak attention and manual manipulation potential. I've always felt that it was more important to reach out and get a handful of parameter control rather than futz around with menus and assignable controls. And you will definitely find uses for the A-140-2 ADSRs (especially given their jumperable custom configuration possibilities) all over the place, even in tandem with the Batumi's LFOs. You could even use the latter to control the time aspects on the former, varying envelope lengths in cyclical fashion. But for the synthesis parts in that build, I went with keeping everything as 'hands-on' as possible, with the only menu-driven device being the Gatestorm sequencer for the percussion sounds, because sequencers need more direct visual feedback to the user than in most other modules, and also because it's very useful to have recall for your sequence loops and you need to see what's being recalled quickly when switching sequences while playing.

Anyway, this is an easier to learn build, as you've kinda noticed. It's possible to get really deep into sound design with this, but all of the controls remain grabable for the most part, making it also more adept for live work in addition to studio. And it's also a build that's more open-ended, allowing for further augmentation in the future with more cabs, devices, etc. Putting it together with the Mini 2S will result in a very potent sequencer-based rig indeed.

Mind you, Mutable actually revised their Braids module as the much newer and more capable Plaits. That should also be an option you might want to consider.

Also, always treat audio signal paths in a modular environment as singular, mono paths. So if you have a stereo signal at any point, everything from its outputs on has to be treated as if you were dealing with TWO mono signals. If you combine these back down again in any way other than through more stereo devices, you will have a mono signal as a result. If you keep that rule of thumb in mind, and don't look at a signal as a "single stereo signal", it becomes a bit clearer as to what's going on. Ronin's example above is quite correct, especially that last part regarding outputting the Erica DSP2 into two filters with ganged/matched modulation (or not ganged/matched, if you want to impart more difference between your left and right channels).

There's a lot wrong, actually. For starters, there are exactly zero modulation sources, unless you count the Metropolis, which I don't. No LFOs, envelopes, function gens of any sort spell total disaster for getting any sort of intricate modulation structures across time. Also, no VCAs is another very bad move...you 100% need those for controlling audio or CV levels via...yep...your modulation sources.

As for generating things, you won't be generating much of anything with this build, unless you're opting for driving filters into self-resonance or just using it as a bank of processors (which, without the above two module types, you're still quite screwed). There are no VCOs here. None. And given that pretty much ANY synthesis audio path runs VCO->VCF->VCA, you seem to have a rather serious problem here.

Stop. Delete this atrocity. And before starting over, study some reference material of which there's a good bit lurking in the forums here on MG, other places such as Muff Wiggler, Synthtopia, Vintage Synth Explorer (which is also an excellent reference source for classic designs which are still important to electronic instrument design to this day and which I strongly recommend anyone starting into modular study in depth), and have a look at the excellent documentary "I Dream of Wires", among many other study needs. Otherwise, what you're proposing with this build could be more easily accomplished by piling several thousand dollars in your backyard grill, dousing it with gas, and setting it all on fire.

This makes more sense.

First of all, the Minibrute 2 panel (which is lurking on here somewhere) was added so that you can keep its functions in mind as we look at the Rackbrute proper above. Top row is split between your 'voice' and 'drums'. A random CV source at left provides random fluctuating voltages for modulation use. Then a Shifty...this is a four-stage analog shift register/sample and hold which allows psuedo-polyphonic hocketing from a single incoming CV. Each time the module receives a clock pulse, it shifts the held CV to the next register. Then by connecting the registers to separate VCOs (of which there are four next to this, with internal quantizing), you get four-part rotating hocket/arpeggiation-type activity. Two Klavis Twin VCOs are next for four VCOs total. These are very complex oscillators with a lot of internal DSP control, which maximizes function within a tiny space. 4 -> 1 mixer allows you to sum these VCOs with variable levels, then this feeds to Tiptop's new Steiner Synthacon VCF clone. Great filter, lots of sonic possibilities, but still relatively simple and easy to control. Doepfer's new dual EG/VCA combo is last, which gives you an EG/VCA for your pre-VCF signal and one for post.

Drums: Gatestorm gate sequencer is the main pattern control/clock modulator/lots of other programmable things, with its clock incoming (more than likely) from the MB 2S. This generates eight gate patterns. The Delptronics modules to the right are based on the Roland 606 and 808 circuits, and next to that is the expander which allows some extra CV functions over the main drum sounds. A Moffenzeef module provides glitchy/fubar-type percussives, plus a pair of Erica Pico Drums gives you two channels of sampled drums. The drums can be submixed via part of the Levit8 below, and/or individual channels on the stereo mixer.

Bottom row is for modulation sources and mixing. Left side, next to the Power, is a dual lag generator, so that you can add in portamento functions for the voice section above (switchable between up, down, and up/down behaviors) or wherever else simple slew limiting might be useful. Batumi + Poti next; the Poti adds some extra control functionality to the Batumi that can be switched on the fly. Four VCAs after that, which can either function as a mixer or separately, and these can be adjusted for responses anywhere between linear (better for CV control) and exponential (which you more typically use for audio). Four ADSRs are after this. Then the mix section includes the Levit8 from before, a Happy Nerding 6 -> 1 stereo mixer with CV over level control, and then a shrunk-down third party build of the now-unavailable Clouds. This one is by Michigan Synth Works, available directly. A Happy Nerding Isolator at the end gives you a global stereo attenuator, converts synth to line level output, and has dual isolation transformers to help with noise/hum and to add a touch of transformer enharmonics.

All of this fits in the single 6U RackBrute. It costs much less (subtract the MB 2S's $649 from the total), draws less power, has ample internal clearance, and offers more functionality in less space. Now, as for the bass part...what I would suggest is a patchable device of some sort, and there's a few reasons why. First of all, if you want to put things under some level of computer control, it's smarter to have the bass and the MB 2S on two separate MIDI parts. Just makes more musical sense; you don't want everything doing the same exact thing, after all. Secondly, you're going to want to voice that rather differently for maximum 'punch', which also means you want its signal and level control very separate from everything else. Bass being as important as it is, it needs to be treated as its own thing in of itself. Last, you'll want to tweak it and operate it in general differently from the rest of the rig, also because bass is so significant. This means you're probably going to want something with its own internal sequencing or the ability to connect a basic sequencer to it, in addition to having the sound source itself separate, but you will still need to interconnect the clocking. This also means you'll be looking at a small portable stereo mixer to mix the MB 2S, the bass synth, and the stereo out from the RackBrute, plus anything you might add later on (laptop audio, another synth, etc). Very basic little setup, but effective.

As you can see, this is very different from "in the box"...you have to think of things as subunits, which are part of a larger whole, which then come together as a singular instrument, and then those form the whole rig. Inside software, much of the lower level of this process is already decided for you, which is one reason a lot of people jumping directly from solely using software to modular make a lot of critical errors. Now, this above version is A possibility. There are likely others, this one being something I cobbled up on the fly...but it will work very well for your purposes. However, before doing any refinements, study this example, understand how and why it works, then study other examples by experienced synthesists, historical instruments, the underlying concepts in analog synthesis and so on before making changes. And take your time...if you're building a musical instrument, you're building something which you should be using for quite some time. Given that, it should make lots of sense to take the time beforehand to get the most useful long-term result.

1) Are you sure that all of the modules you've selected are either in production or are currently available? I'm going to bet that the answer there is 'no'. Also, have you confirmed the depths required? Note that the RackBrute does have internal obstructions in the row that your power supply is located under, and that it's a very good idea to leave about a centimeter for your ribbons and connectors on the bus board.

2) Have you tried to minimize the 'real estate' occupied by your modules? These are fairly small cabs, with only 88 hp per row. If you can find any modules to shrink (and I see a few right off the bat), do so. In builds like this, it's best also to see if you can actually dispense with certain modules altogether, such as mults (use inline ones) or jam as many functions as possible into as small a footprint as you can.

3) Do you really need 15 discrete attenuators? Don't try to convince me that it's a good thing that they can also mix, because you've also got two 4->1 mixers as well besides the Befaco Hex setup. Remember, most modules that're worth a damn have input attenuator/scaling pots...or they should. The Erogenous Tones one is a killer device, given how flexible it can be. As for the rest...uhhhh...kinda scratching my head here...

4) Never put in a big blank panel when working a build out on MG. Doing this also puts the same big blank panel in your head as far as future builds are concerned. When working out a final build version here, work it out 100%...you can always go back and swap things around/in/out later on. This isn't a test. You can do this over and over (and SHOULD) until you've honed down a real, serious, no-foolin' final build. Especially if you're just starting out in hardware in general, to say nothing of modular itself.

5) Finally...do you actually need to do this in this way? Consider: you're transitioning from an 'in the box' synthesis environment where everything pretty much works within the same operational paradigm to perhaps the most complex form of analog synthesis out there. It's sort of like going from driving a Prius to a Ferrari 488 Spider with no sort of transition in between. Also sort of like that in monetary outlay, too. Sure, these things look cool...BUT...they cost, they require some degree of hardware electronics knowledge, it's possible to make mistakes that can cost hundreds of dollars (or worse) in mere milliseconds, and you need to know how analog synthesis signal flowpaths function (and how they function on your specific instrument) like the back of your hand.

My suggestion is this: stop. Step back, take a few deep breaths. Start at a better and more sensible start-point with hardware than this. If you want "something that can produce leads, bass, drums with easy control for modulation," modular might be a good bit more than you're anticipating. I mean...look at your build above. Does that look like it has the sort of "easy control" you're looking for? Especially when you start interconnecting that with a Mini 2S? My guess there is that, no, it doesn't...mainly because, no, it doesn't!

Do yourself and your credit cards a favor for now, and look into some dedicated devices. Certainly among those, include one or two patchables, which are the best way to sort out what modular does, what it's good for, what it's NOT good for, and how you specifically want/need to use it. This is the real way to transition out of a pure software environment, and in the long run, you're apt to get a lot more done over the long term by doing this than if you plunged right into the deep end of the pool straightaway. Doing the latter will likely be an exercise in frustration, and you'll end up more perplexed about the point of modular than before you started.

OK...I've written a few of these educational essays about why you might want to get into modular, the best ways to do this, what a typical build consists of, and so on. But this time out, I really would like to make some points about why a user should NOT get into modular synthesizers.

Of course, there's some very obvious points off the top, such as not having sufficient capital to sustain a build, not having a basic knowledge of how synthesis works, and the like. But there's actually some value in explaining a lot of these “disqualifiers”, and how you as a prospective user might fit into their various categories and thereby avoid a lot of headache and pointless spending. If you fall into any of the following categories of users, then modular is NOT what you're looking for.

1) “I need lots of presets!” No. You're utterly screwed on this one. While there are certain modules that can store preset states, and there's certainly the example of the Buchla 200e and its storage/recall abilities, the core principle of modular architecture involves making extensive manual patches. So, even if you had full setting recall, getting just one patchcord out of place will render that preset capability pointless to varying degrees. Modular is NOT for the preset crowd that's looking for loads of factory patches, and it's NOT for anyone who has any trepidation about sound design. Modular is for explorers, individualists, people seeking new and different ways of pushing a creative envelope. There will be no piles of presets out there for this, so if you need your hand held where patch creation is concerned or if you're unwilling/incapable of learning the ins and outs of creating them from scratch in whatever architecture your own build gives you to work with, you really shouldn't be thinking about going modular.

2) “I don't know how this works, but lots of cool people have modulars!” ...and you will also notice that those cool people know what they're doing with them, for the most part. True, there are a few electronic musicians with more money than sense who have their twistenknobs und blinkenlichts as stage props, but these people aren't going to be the ones anyone will be listening to in a decade's time...if even a year's. DO NOT get a modular synth and expect that you will be buying a ticket to instant cool. Like anything else in music, no amount of windowdressing will disguise your lack of capability in the long run. This is sort of the inverse of the unprofessional dumbshit behavior of blaming the equipment for your failure of talent, and it will work just as badly as that moronic blameshifting tactic will.

3) “Lots of people are getting into modular!” This is sorta-kinda true...but only sorta-kinda. It might seem as if the whole electronic music world is going bonkers for knobs'n'wires these days. But keep in mind that, back in the mid-1980s, everyone thought that digital synths with only one or two programming interface controls were the shit. The fact that a lot of people are “getting into modular” has more to do with fashion and trends, and not quite so much to do with music. People always gravitate toward what they think is the newer/shinier/faster thing, even if doing so doesn't make a helluva lot of sense in the long run. If modular fits your idea of where you want to go musically, then sure, dive on in. But if you haven't thought that idea out carefully yet, you might want to consider something a lot simpler first, then hit the inherent limitations of that and by doing so, come to comprehend what the user-definability of modular is for.

4) Polyphony. Remember what I said above about “more money than sense”? Modular synthesizers are notoriously NOT polyphonic. This isn't to say that you can't do that, though...because you can. But it's utterly insane. Consider a present-day polysynth, such as the Moog One. So...each voice on that synth has three VCOs, two VCFs, three EGs, a ring modulator, a source mixer, a stereo VCA, and we've not even gotten into the LFOs, the sequencer/arpeggiator, the controller and its layer/split capabilities, and the effects processing, plus MIDI and a whole bunch of other crap I'm forgetting at the moment. $8k ets you sixteen of these voices, plus the aforementioned crap. This comes out to FORTY-EIGHT VCOs and EGs, THIRTY-TWO VCFs, SIXTEEN VCAs and mixers, and so on. If you thought eight grand was spendy, try adding all of the above up on ModularGrid. Now try cramming it into the same space as the Moog One (not happening). Then try and apply a recall/storage system...which, as I noted earlier, you really can't, so each new patch will require retweaking all of those individual modules and changing bushels of patchcables. Utterly...insane. But you CAN DO IT...if you've lost your damn mind already or are looking to do so in the near future, and you also own an investment bank.

5) “I don't know where I want to go with my music, but modular will help me define that!” No...no, it won't. Nor will any other piece of equipment you happen to be able to afford (see #2 above). And in all truth, modular will wind up frustrating you even more as a musician if you don't have a clear vision for your work. It offers near-limitless sonic possibilities, but if you've not developed a sense of direction and the discipline needed to follow that direction, having the ultimate sonic sandbox at your disposal is just going to screw you up. When you look more closely at music and those who make it successfully, you're more apt to see people who work within defined limitations, either by chance or choice. So until and unless you've gotten used to the idea of having musical limits and staying in an artistically-successful comfort zone in those, introducing a limitless device into your environment will probably result in something more disastrous than revelatory.

6) And lastly, “I haven't researched this, but I want/need one.” No. Do the research first. It is what sites like ModularGrid (and many others) exist for. Ask dumb questions, because when we're talking about the possibility of dropping thousands of moneys on hardware over longish periods of time, there are ultimately no dumb questions. And whenever you're contemplating the purchase of gear, whether that's a stompbox or a Steinway, there are two main questions you need to be able to honestly answer of yourself: “Does this purchase make musical sense?” and “Is this the most effective way of accomplishing that musical goal?” If you cannot formulate an answer to BOTH of these questions each time you consider some new device, then DON'T BUY IT. The inability to answer those key questions is the indicator that you've not done your research up to the level of information where you understand the point of your decision. Until you can come up with those two answers, don't even think about whipping out the Magic Plastic.

Basically, it's not a simple decision to dive headlong into the modular synth world. Hopefully the above points will help some of you reading this to get a better idea...for yourself, by doing your homework...of what this sort of equipment and its working paradigm can do, and to avoid making costly mistakes that'll have you kicking yourself for quite some time afterward.

Agreed. OP needs to do more research on what modular synthesis can and cannot do. What the OP wants is in the 'cannot do' column. Even a modular that has preset recall, such as the Buchla 200e system, will still be unable to recall the actual patch if the physical cable arrangement isn't duplicated by the user, by hand. Besides, what they're describing is, basically, a Waldorf Quantum...so why not get one of those? True, it doesn't have the SEXXXAY of knobs and wires all over the place, but does the OP want musical functionality or a stage prop?

KICK ASS!!! October 2018 spoooooky Halloween edition!

Why spooky? No reason. Although, yes, I am whipping this out on Halloween night. Sort of a shorter edition this month as the Eurorack world cools down after the one-two modular punch of Knobcon and SynthFest and the all-in-one that is the AES show. Time to settle in and await the next big explosion of reveals for Winter NAMM in January. But for now...

1) Tiptop Audio MIX7. OK, now this doesn't look all that exciting. But it's got a few tricks to it, and at 3 hp it makes a fantastic choice for filling out one of those odd-number extra spaces. Technically, yes, it's a mixer. But given its basic summing capabilities, it can also act as a logical OR for gates, a trigger integrator, and do arithmetical summing of CVs...and that last one is super-useful for transpositions and the like. Got a sequencer? Sure, they have their own transposers...but let's say you want a couple of transposition operations. Or...let's say you want to easily combine triggers to sum several trigger sequence channels' outputs into a single complex pattern. See? You need one of these! It's one of those not-really-sexy utility devices that you might not be thinking about, but you really need to think about it! $99.

2) Intech/Otto's DIY Protoboard-480. This one's for the DIY hardcore set! Otto's DIY not only has this $3, 8 hp model, but they also do 6 and 12 hp PulpLogic format tiles for $2 and a 16 hp panel for $4. And what exactly is this? Well, it's a prototyping board that's ALSO a Eurorack panel. Breadboard layouts, double-sided plated connection points, preprinted solder pads...pretty smart! The convenience of having precut Eurorack-specific prototyping boards like this is pretty major, as it eliminates trying to fit larger protoboard pieces to the format, plus it gives you some restrictive guidelines to follow to make sure your project fits the form factor. Definitely check the website for more: https://www.intech.studio/shop/protoboard-480

3) 2hp Cat. How many times has this happened to you? You're plugging away at a patch, and you suddenly realize how much better it would sound with CATS! Yes, the fluffy kind. 2hp has you covered! Their new cat synthesis-based VCO gives you voltage control over the primary sonic factors of the average housecat. No, I am not making this up. Seriously, it's there in the frickin' module listings! So, if you don't have the scratch (scratch! ahaha! I kill me!) to pony up $4 grand for Hexinverter's voltage-controlled rubber chicken synthesis module, this may well be the next best thing! Seriously, though, 2hp's video actually shows some damned interesting uses for this with a touch of extra processing and a bit of CV 'misuse'...have a look via the listing. $99.

4) CaviSynth Subway. Those of you who know and love the Roland suboctave VCO architecture are going to want to climb all over this. Inspired by the iconic SH-101 VCO, CaviSynth presents this rather nifty and intelligent rethink of that classic. One and two octave down settings are available, of course...but this VCO takes it down another FIVE. And you're not limited to square/pulse waveforms in your suboctaves, either. Nor are you locked into a matched suboctave, as the module also allows you to detune the sub. Mixing is internal via a CVable crossfader, also allowing you to modulate octave dives/splits. The design on this is seriously right...it has everything those of us remember about the SH-101's VCO's coolness, and tosses in a lot of new and useful control variables on top of that, and doesn't break the bank, either. 8 hp, $135.

Now, if you thought we were done...nope! Let's take a bit of a detour to dip into the TILE selections from the past couple of months. There's some neat developments there...

5) PulpLogic tiles: Split, Clamp, X-Fade. Yep, there's some new PulpLogic stuff out recently. The Split is a 12 hp tile that works as a 1->3 attenuator, and also as a three-way CV source if the input is unpatched. The Clamp is a 6 hp tile that offers hardclip level control over either CVs (range restriction) or audio (waveform clipping/distortion). And the X-Fade is a CV controlled crossfader that can also function as a DC-coupled linear VCA or inverter. This 12 hp tile is based around the reissued version of the venerable CEM3360 VCA chip. $45, $30, and $60 respectively.

6) And one last one: Intellijel Steppy 1U. In just 28 hp across a 1U row, Intellijel has managed to jam in four tracks of up to 64 steps each, with eight internal memories, loads of on-the-fly parameter controls, all designed with live performance control in mind. This is actually a rather complex little device, with more going on than I can get into in one of these little blurbs, so you owe it to yourself to pop over to the 1U tile listings and have a look. It's very much one of those modules that might make you rethink your attitude on tiles. $199.

So...that's it. Like I said, sort of a short haul this month. Probably next month as well, but December into January of next year should see the ramp-up to NAMM and thus a pile of new goodies for me to root through and point out here on ModularGrid for you Eurorack users.

That would depend on what you're trying to do, musically. Right now, you have a fairly 'general purpose' module set. Before going nuts with the Magic Plastic, though, you'd better take some time to sort out where you want to go, musically, and how you think you can best get there. What musical elements do you prefer to work with? What sort of sound are you aiming for? What's your creative 'comfort zone'? Actually, these should've been on your mind when getting the initial setup, along with the question of WHY is it necessary to make use of a modular rig in your work?

Absolutely. Since that VCA module has no input attenuation, it's a good bet that some audio sources are overloading it as not everything in Eurorack is exactly the same as far as peak-to-peak voltages go. Also, given that these are exponential VCAs, there's also a good possibility that deeper swings in CV will also push the VCAs into overdriven ranges since the linear curves of the LFOs are going to be 'misinterpreted' as exponential-type signals. Exponential VCAs really are best controlled with envelopes, and offer a quick and dirty way of using linear EGs to get exponential responses.

Yeah, no link on this one or the other two 'Bizarre' modules that've been posted recently. Damn shame...they look tasty, but without manufacturer/vendor links and/or more info, or worse still, depths and current draws on the first two, it'll be a bit of a stretch to get people jazzed about them (hint, hint!).

Braids, in addition to being discontinued and replaced by Plaits, is only a single signal source. What you need to look for is how many incoming oscillator CVs you see. Braids has only the single 1V/8va CV input, ergo it can only respond to a single incoming pitch value at any time. Contrast this with something like Flame's 4VOX, where you clearly see four separate, distinct VCOs. Now, on those, you DO see two CV inputs...but when you see something like that on something that's clearly a single source, it means that one of the CV inputs is for the 1V/8va pitch control CV, and the other one is actually for incoming modulation signals, such as from an LFO. And even moreso with the 4VOX, you have another CV input that's clearly labelled "PITCH"...so in its case, the 1V/8va signal definitely goes there. But...you could also send that to the CV1 or CV2 inputs and then use the attenuators for each to change the pitch response to something other than the usual 1V/8va, resulting in microtonal intervals.

Perhaps a clearer example would be Studio Electronics' QUADNIC...on that, you clearly see each of the four "1V/O" CV inputs for pitch control of the module's four digital VCOs, and the individual outputs for each one along with a mixed output of all, and a bussed-to-all modulation input. This is the sort of thing you want IF you opt to use quad-type modules which, granted, tend to save a bit over using single discrete modules both in terms of space and money.

Well, yes/no/maybe. 'Quad', in the module database, refers to modules that have four identical (more or less) functions, as a rule. There's a few things that actually are four-channel devices...but not many. Now, as to the yes/no/maybe part...let's say you have a quad VCO, such as Doepfer's latest unit. You could then feed each VCO into each filter on a quad VCF, like Qu-bits, and so on. But that wouldn't quite fit the bill of the reason for having modular, which is to take advantage of the open architecture to construct your own instrumental paths.

Example: with two quad VCOs, then you have two VCOs per voice, which you can deploy as 1-1-1-1 / 1-1-1-1 OR 2-2 / 2-2. More quad filters means more possible timbral combinations. So, yes...quad tends to refer to modules that 'play nice' in a 4-voice polyphonic environment and are convenient for that sort of architecture, but by no means do you have to use them as discrete voice components. It's just handier to patch polyphonically with them.

Sure...there's quite a few modules in different categories that can work for full polyphony use. Search under the 'quad' category and you'll see a large chunk of them there.

Seems fine to me...the only flaw I see is that you're missing an ADSR-type envelope source or two for one-shot modulation of mod signals, especially via linear VCAs. My inclination would be to lose the A-160 and the buffers, then drop in some Ladik IADSR, DADSR, or AHDSR 4 hp modules to make that happen and to also give you some function 'tweaks' beyond a simple ADSR EG.

Looking at the Metropolis...it doesn't seem to clock multiply, only divide. So, if you're sending it an 8th-note pulse, that's your minimum rhythmic value. In order to get the sequencer to step at 16th-notes, you're going to have to use a clock multiplier to half the time on the 8th-note pulses, or just feed a 16th-note pulse as your master clock and then use clock dividers to obtain lower values where needed.