User Posts

The interface you need, hands down, is an Expert Sleepers ES-8. Eight DC-coupled outputs and four inputs with a USB or Lightpipe interface to the computer. And with this, not only can audio go in and out, but by using ES's Silent Way software (or, on a Mac, also MOTU's Volta) you can also send and receive CV/gate/trigger signals via the same interface to control the modular or, via the inputs, have the computer 'track' the modular's behavior.

As for the Moog 104hp skiff, you'll have to be very careful with your depths. A better choice...as well as a potential source for a bigger cab...might be one of Erica's powered ones. Module depths make more sense, plus you have ample power via their OEM supply, which frees up space on the patch panel, and they're rather cost-effective. Stackable, too, via interchangeable end-panels.

Module-wise, this isn't a bad start, but consider something which can mangle incoming audio under CV control. Have a look at MakeNoise's Morphagene and/or Phonogene...great choices for external processing.

I don't, but there should be. It's also worth noting that there's several manufacturers located in either Portugal or Brazil, so some discussion with them might prove fruitful. Check ADDAC System and Club of the Knobs (MU format), both in Portugal along with others, and Vinicius Elektrik/VBrazil and (if they're still in business) EMW in Brazil.

That's a damn fine build there! All the bases are getting hit with this, and there's even a few quirks that just make SO much sense, like the CV switch (awesome tool for generative work!), plenty of VCAs, lots of break-out-able mixer/attens, little hidden function bits, and so forth. It's a really rich sandbox, usable for most anything, and a great example of what you can jam into a smaller cab with some diligent MG work!

...and a partridge in a pear tree???

Did you attempt to reach Chris Muir by telephone? He does have that listed on the site's main page...

I've found over the years of dealing with 'hybrid' control systems that if you have something that works as a manual control, then implement it as a manual control. Plus, if you're not sending envelope CVs over the ES-8 setup, that frees up a channel or two to send something else, like a cross-rhythmed trigger or a counterpoint CV. So, I would suggest leaving the ES-8 in place specifically for sending clock, CV, and gate/triggers only, but also using the ES-8's return inputs to have Silent Way (or whatever is doing the CV/gate sends) track activity on the modular. That way, you can have the software reacting to actions generated by the synth, setting up a control feedback loop. For doing more complex things, generative work...this is very useful. As for the rest, envelopes, LFOs, and so on, these really work better as 'hands-on' control devices so you can live-tweak these parameters instead of being 100% locked into what the computer says to do. With that, you get variation, and variation is key to making music 'human'.

Linear VCAs, perhaps as a VCA mixer. A couple more VCOs. More modulation sources. One or two more complex VCFs. An output module. I'd remove the Eloquencer, since you don't exactly need eight channels of CV/gate in this simple a system. Add a mult or two. Some clock modulation to mess with the various clocks. Maybe a multichannel switch to 'chain' Eloquencer channels into longer sequences.

But ultimately, I'd scrap it altogether and start over in a larger case, given what the intent of the build seems to be. The core modules here really need more ancillary devices to make them really 'jump', and right now, you've not got the space to really add to this to the extent that those core modules need. I'd suggest stepping up to 3 x 104 hp, or even something like Erica's triple 126 hp powered skiff rig as long as you're mindful of the module depths. It's far better to start with a larger form factor and then pare that back if you find it to be too big than it is to start too small and then try and stay in that size and shoehorn the crap out of the build.

Yeah, lots of changes in the market dynamics these days. Sweetwater, for instance, now carries Dreadbox, MakeNoise, Intellijel, 4ms, 1010 Music, and a lot of others alongside the 'big names'; I recall a few years back that their people couldn't figure out why they needed to stock multiple modules because they 'didn't do anything'. This is good, as opposed to the ancient times where music dealers couldn't even make sense of what a synthesizer was, and absolutely NO ONE wanted to carry these weird-ass boxes with knobs and switches. The situation is definitely in a permanent 'improvement' mode now, and I do think that over time, it may lead to changes even at the high end. Already with Buchla, you see their LEM builds and the H series modules, plus other companies entering that format...and that last thing was totally unheard of way back in Don's day.

Anyone heard anything about the general health of EMW? I went to check something on their site a few days ago, and they appear to have lost their domain, which is now being squatted by a Brazilian shoe company. A post over on MW also mentioned that they didn't seem to be answering emails, plus Perfect Circuit now has all of their modules/devices on a 20% discount.

It'd be a damn shame to lose them. I really like their designs, which are very cost-effective. Plus they'd started stepping into some pretty complex areas in the past year, putting out a stereo VCA mixer, another module that appeared to be based on the ARP 2500's mix/sequencer, and so on, in addition to their revival of the EMW 200 and 300 from further back.

For seamless (or as close as you can get) integration with a DAW, I would suggest dropping the conventional MIDI interface and going with an Expert Sleepers ES-8 plus maybe a couple of expanders for it. This way, you can run several different possible things on the computer that lock up to the DAW itself, plus send CV/gate/trigger info to the ES-8 as DC-coupled audio via USB with zero MIDI latency. Also, the ES-8 has four return channels which can allow you to use the modular as the master clock or, via something like MAX, allow the DAW to 'track' behavior on the modular as cues to DAW actions.

Definitely to augment. Consider the following:

Take two Pam's outputs. Run one to one side of an AND gate, and the other to the other side. Then take your modified timing signal out of the AND gate's output. What will happen as a result is that the gate will only send a gate signal when there is a 'high' state (ie: gate on) present at both inputs. So unless the Pam's outputs a gate at the same time on both channels, no gate gets sent to whereever it's patched. By doing lots of these little tricks, plus adding things like gate delays, skippers, swingers, dividers, multipliers and so on to screw around with the 'raw' gate signals, you open up a big box of polyrhythmic craziness that wouldn't normally be doable without those + some logic. Or...let's say you have a pattern running on Pam's, but it should only pass when stage #6 is active on the DFAM. Set the DFAM's 'velocity' row to only output voltage on #6 (the rest of the row has the pots all the way down), patch 'velocity' to one side of an AND gate, and the Pam's pattern to the other side. So...when the 'velocity' CV is present plus the pattern at the AND inputs, the pattern gets through the gate...but only while step #6 is active. So, yeah...lots of fun like that, which can really open up loads of interaction between sequencers, rhythmic elements, etc. Use your imagination; I'm sure you can come up with loads more ideas!

Another good one is Happy Nerding's OUT...which offers balanced stereo 1/4" outputs, a headphone amp, plus a second stereo input with a ganged level control, pretty useful for inserting AUX-sent stereo effects into the final mix. Lots of options out there...Eurorack always seems to offer a way to get the job done.

Remember, Morty was super-duper lucky as he was there at the very beginning for Buchla; it was him and Ramon Sender, plus a $500 Rockefeller Foundation grant to the SFTMC, that led to the original 'Buchla box' which is now at Mills. I kinda exclude him from that list, since if it wasn't for him, Ramon, and Don discussing the whats and hows of this 'electronically-controlled studio' (the original concept for the 'box'), the whole West Coast thing might not have happened.

Suzanne, also, is a bit different. Her initial Buchla system was pure 'sweat equity'...she worked for Don in the Berkeley factory, which apparently was quite a challenge in the day, stuffing boards and doing solder work, and that's how she 'bought' her 200 system. And again, this was a long time back...early 1970s, plus that Buchla of hers got used for a lot of scut-work to pay the bills. Things such as advertising work, odd session bits (such as Starland Vocal Band's "Afternoon Delight" and the discofied "Star Wars" album by MECO). I can respect that, too...doing ad-work sessions is pretty much the gold standard of 'no fun'.

But yeah...Buchla 200 series gear is pricey. A lot of that comes from the massive amount of control devices on the interface, things like banana and 3.5mm jacks, loads of knobs and buttons and so on. Those things are actually pretty costly, which is why you saw this jump to the awfulness of the 'display + slider' paradigm when digital control became the norm in polysynths circa 1983/4. I don't even want to think about how much all of the little sliders, buttons, controls, widgets etc cost on my Jupiter-6, for example, and I can see why Roland ran screaming from that into the slider/membrane panel/LED display era, only offering the actual programming controls (the PG-series boxes) as spendy 'extras'.

PLL: glitch-device extraordinaire. You feed it a simple oscillator signal, and the PLL will lock to it to drive the module's internal VCO/F/A circuit. But feed it weird things, and it goes NUTS. Mistracking, craziness...like the MS-20 percussion thru input trick on 'roids!

And VCAs that can do linear and exponential are great...expo for audio, to follow how we percieve 'loudness', linear to screw around with CVs.

EDITED Aug 11th 2018, 20:47

No worries on Buchla now...Foxtone bought out BEMI and vowed to bring the company back to the same ideas/principles that Don had, and thus far they appear to be making good on that.

As for communists...eh, I've actually entertained the idea of relocating to Hanoi. I have no problem with those politics as long as the government cares about the people and their culture, which Vietnam does. They're nowhere near as money-maniacal as the CCP has become, and actually toe more of a proper socialist line than China these days. Hanoi's new music scene is starting to percolate, too...it's kind of turning into a SE Asian take on Prague, with the leftover French colonial touches that the Vietnamese kept because, well, those were the neat parts.

And besides, if I were ever to do a modular company, that would be an awesome place for it. They know the tech, the government likes investment like that, there's a skilled labor pool that can do it, and the like.

EDITED Aug 11th 2018, 20:42

I don't see any problem there, nope. I discourage people from getting a small rack if they're beginning with this because it's a good idea to have a broad-based starter rig when you first get into modular. But when someone has a specific musical concept in mind and they know it'll work best in a smaller form factor, then by all means go for it. And given that you're running a DFAM already, snagging two more 60 hp Moog cabs (watch your module depths!) for a total of 120 on which to expand the DFAM makes a lot of sense. Moog's designers already thought of this by offering their matching cabs and double and triple racks. Slap a couple of uZeuses in those and get busy!

One thing, tho...given that you're building this up around a DFAM and thinking of adding a Pam's to that, also consider a couple of things to deal with clock modulation and logic. That way, you can patch up all sorts of timing strangenesses that key off of counts (dividers and multipliers), CV (comparators, derivators, etc), pulse manipulation (width controls, clock delays) and randomfactors (probabilistic skippers, etc). Ladik makes a number of these that fit into 4 hp each, and Doepfer has their divider and ratcheting multiplier, and there's a few companies that offer nice, space-thrifty Boolean operator modules. May as well make that sequencer turn some cartwheels if you've got the space for a few of those.

The Volta + dc-coupled external MOTU interface method is a bit of a kludge; there's a better way to go within Eurorack itself. Have a look at Expert Sleepers' ES-8 USB interface and ESX-8CVmkii expanders, as well as ES's Silent Way software instead. Cross-platformable (Volta is Mac-only, last time I checked), much more compact, plus you have four return CVs back to the computer to use either for recording or tracking CV/gate activity, or both. Voltages range up to +10 as well, giving you a full CV range instead of the MOTU's restriction.

Have a look at Ladik. They provide a wide range of 3.5mm-to-1/4" devices for both input and output, mono and stereo, and they're quite cost and space-effective.

EDITED Aug 10th 2018, 21:33

Yeah, that's a rig to be proud of!

Well, I agree...the USA used to lead the world in electronics manufacturing up until the 1970s, and even then it still held an edge in component manufacturing for some time. And yes, there are some issues of various sorts with China in terms of how workers are treated, corruption, and intellectual property. But the fact is that electronic instruments have become a rather 'fungible' thing. Look at Eurorack itself, for example: the format was devised by a German firm, retooling a concept that was created on two different ends of the USA. It has a pool of several thousand modules to date, made everywhere from Thailand (Takaab) to Scotland (GMSN) and everywhere in between. Its users routinely cross many borders in their shopping and research, via Internet sellers and resources (such as, say, ModularGrid). It's very much a 'world instrument'.

At the same time, though, there's that 'affordable' factor. Yeah, that's a key thing. But also, that 'affordability' relies on things much worse/sketchy than the Chinese Communist Party. If you thought the concept of 'blood diamonds' was awful, have a romp through the socioeconomic darkness that surrounds coltan, a vital mineral used in the manufacture of a lot of discrete components, definitely including those in the very computer I'm typing this on and which I use for my multitrack work and ones which show up all over the place in our electronic music gear.

Ultimately, trade wars hurt the people that the warring states roll over in their belligerence...just like in real war, but perhaps a bit 'cleaner' in a lot of cases. Less bloody. No less good for that, though. So, yeah, I have mixed views, too...but I look at Moog's situation and see a company that was a pioneer, an originator, led by a visionary and now owned by its employees who trade on a rich, impressive legacy. And I see that forcing a company like that to make ugly, dumb choices is not going to lead to something good...just as, back in earlier decades, it didn't lead to anything good for R.A. Moog Inc. as Norlin got its hooks into it, and then Gibson Brands (aka 'that place on Elm Hill Pike where music companies go to die' -- bit of Nashville slang there) nearly killed it.

Eventually what it all comes down to is this: what do WE do with these machines? Are WE creating work which dignifies everything that makes up the bits and pieces? Are WE mindful of what went into the bits and pieces, and do WE work to create something with them which produces that dignity?

I belong to a music fraternity that holds an important tenet: "Let there be nothing but Truth in Music". So when I sit down to work...many years after I first heard those words and was forced to consider the depth of that concept...I try to always maintain a mindfulness of these things I note above. I know full well what I work with, what it cost (not in money, but in human costs), what had to be done to generate the power that runs the devices, and so on. All of those things really matter to me, and it matters to me that what I create with them carries the human truths behind every tiny part forward in the music, hopefully to poke a bit more light into darkness via that truth. Does it matter where the components come from? Yes, absolutely. Are those origins truly avoidable, though? Perhaps not...but if not, then what comes from them must be right, and I hope that that's what I do. Create something right and good and true.

So, yeah, I have a lot of mixed feelings about that situation with Moog, too. But I also recognize that there are wider concerns than just materials and money afoot.

Exactly...when you're dealing with an instrument that works on discrete note-on/note-off behavior, then the point of actual discrete polyphony enters into things. A good parallel in guitar would be the various complex picking styles of Doc Watson, or the techniques found in a lot of classical guitar repertoire, flamenco/Andalucian style music, etc. Paraphony is more akin to strumming chords and the like, where a single attack occurs more or less simultaneously for all notes, and the result is more of a single sound without internal attacks, modulation characteristics, etc on single notes within the chord.

Yuppers...Joe knows how a serious, hardcore factory-built system should be put together, to be sure!

And yes, you can get the CV Bus in the 7U case. Besides, with many of these companies, it's not like you're dealing with a bunch of suits...they're usually run by musicians just like us, on budgets that're often just like us as well. If there's something that you've got to have, then just ask 'em and see what they say. Most of the time, you'll find Eurorack builders to be a very approachable lot, and certainly not a bunch of restrictive asshats who only cater to the ultra-rich. They're in this to please users and get their gear into peoples' hands, and often enough, flexibility is the name of the game for these companies.

It hasn't gone anywhere, really. The idea of having all modules from the same maker goes back to the beginnings of synthesizers, when you had to rely on full systems from a manufacturer. The difference now is that all of these different full systems can 'talk' to each other plainly, whereas before you had all sorts of different CV and gate/trig standards that weren't always compatible. Full systems give users the ability to use that older paradigm...but they work just like any other modular in that they speak the same CV/gate 'language' and, if you desired, you could pull one of the full system's modules and drop something of your own preference in. That's the point of modular.

Yeah, part of the problem does lie in patching and programming a beast like that. It's pretty daunting. Even a simple poly setup on my Digisound (basically, one VCO into one VCF into one VCA, same individual EG per voice for timbral and amplitude envelope, same LFO per voice for modulation), while it's fairly simple to patch, usually involves quite a bit of tweaking to get the balances and tunings right.

As for the difference, it sort of depends on how the VCF is being used, and how the voicings work. If the polyphony is very tight, and the VCF isn't doing anything really high-Q, it can sound much the same as normal polyphony. But when the VCF settings per voice start to get critical, as in something at near-breakthrough in resonance, then the drawbacks start to become apparent. Also, if the polyphony is spread widely, this too will be noticeable.

Really, this works better in actual polysynths, where everything can be under microprocessor control, and where everything is all chip-based. That way, the hardware costs get minimized, programming is less of a pain, and everything behaves more tractably. An example of one polysynth where this doesn't exactly happen is in the SEM-based Oberheims, where you technically have several individual synths under one master programmer's control, and once again, you can quickly find yourself in knob-tweaking hell trying to get the several SEMs to match up exactly. There are ways around that, though, but the SEM Oberheim polys are such an esoteric thing that that example's almost moot (even though Oberheim reissued them in recent years).

It's not that doing it with VCOs is costly...it's the whole concept itself. Full polyphony means that you have a fully-independent synth under the control of each voice signal, so you have to replicate the VCOs, VCF, VCAs, EGs, LFOs and so on over and over until you arrive at your final output mixer, where you'll mix the different voice signals together for a single mono or stereo output.

The next step down from this isn't actual polyphony. It's something referred to as 'paraphony'; each set of sound generators is controlled by a single voice signal, but instead of replicating the rest of the audio and control chains per voice, the mixdown to a single signal happens after the VCOs, then this goes through a single VCF, etc etc chain to the output. This method actually makes more sense in a modular context, since you can branch and recombine all sorts of paths along that post-VCO chain for sonic variation and arrive at a more controllable (and affordable!) system as a result. This is what I'd recommend as an approach, as a true polyphonic modular is, by default, going to be very spendy and also hell to patch and control. Think something along the lines of Junkie XL's MU 'wall' or Hans Zimmer's monster wall rig of Moog, PPG and Roland modules.

Yeah, it's spendy, but I also think it opens up some interesting random/generative process capabilities. I did pause a bit before adding that to this month's list because of the price, but I thought that the 'abuse potential' factors were way too great to ignore. Also, the only prebuilt version of something using the 'rungler' circuit that I could think of was Epoch's version of the Benjolin, and since that goes for about $85 more, I felt it was worth tossing into the July lineup.

That 'rungler' behavior is quite worth the price of admission, I should note. I have a Max for Live mappable rungler object in my Ableton setup, and the mayhem it can dole out all over the different aspects of a signal chain is amazing.

The idea behind identical VCOs is that, if you're doing some slight detuned doubling, you'll want the VCOs to behave exactly the same way in terms of CV tracking, nonlinearities, and the like so that the end result actually seems to sound like a single source. Technically, it's not 100% necessary to do this these days, but it does assure users that if they want a specific sound that requires matched VCOs (such as emulating Minimoog bass, and so on), it'll be easy enough to do without having to make an excessive number of tweaks to deal with dissimilar hardware.

Oh, and one other maker with a line of full kits: Erica. Their DIY line is very Polivoks-inspired.

July ain't much for modular, normally. The only big show around is Summer NAMM, which as I've noted before is known also as 'Guitar NAMM'. Not smart, actually, since the show's in Nashville and while some people tend to stereotype Nashville as a 'guitar town', the real fact is that the city's been neck-deep in all sorts of tech for many, many years, some of it even in prototypical form. Anyone here ever lay hands on a McLeyvier, for example? I have...and yep, it was in Nashville. How about a Quantec Room Simulator? Yep, that too. First Roland 100m, or Moog IIIc, Chroma (ARP-badged, mind you!), or ARP 2600? Nashville, for me. The synth crowd needs to get on top of Summer NAMM, really...Nashville isn't all pointy boots and twangy gee-tars. Anyway, that being said, it's...

KICK ASS!!! for July 2018.

In which I root around in MG's seemingly-endless Eurorack listings for stuff that looks and sounds interesting, abuseable, and otherwise the sort of stuff that modularheads might want pointed out to them so they might not miss it in amongst the Eurorack deluge. So....to begin:

1) Patching Panda VIBRAZUM. It's a triple resonator. Or it's three bandpass filters. Or it's three filters pretending they're a mixer. Or, or, or...lots of 'or' here. This module is actually all of those things, and potentially a few more. Full CV over three 2-pole bandpasses, each with the option of a direct VCF out or the ability to mix to a single output. It's pretty bonkers, and sounds quite nuts in PP's video example. One thing I like, also, is the size: 14 hp, which for a triple-resonator-type device is rather convenient. About the only thing I'm missing here are individual VCF-ins, but hey...this is impressive enough as-is. $231, also kit @ $175-ish via Thonk.

2) Eowave Swing. This is a pretty nifty thing to jam into all of 5 hp. You get, count 'em, four clock delays under the same incoming pulse, with the extras of an onboard reset function, and three delay modes: absolute, probability (no info whether that's over a timing variation or a skipping function), and burst mode. This one's kind of a “you need a peek at this”-sort of thing for anyone doing a drumkit or sequencer-heavy build, as this has some nice timing mojo capabilities, and it's easy to squeeze in. $111.

3) G-Force Audio 101-VCF. Ohhhhh, yeahhh...this gets my attention right off the bat! Had a 101 for a long while, then later an MC-202 (about the same thing, soundwise), still semi-regretting not having either. Why? That beefy, intense sound...and that sound's key is this filter. G-Force says this is damn close to an exact replication, right down to the OTA chip wherein lies the magic. But they also add a two-channel mixing input and separate, attenuated CV inputs for cutoff and resonance. And it's blue...perhaps because some SH-101s were, too? Who knows? $210 is well spent here.

4) Recovery Effects and Devices Bleeding Hearts. Really, the video for this does much more explaining by example than I might be able to do, but here goes...it's a bit-crusher/waveshaper/distorter...but it has its own onboard 8-step sequencer for controlling the mayhem, in addition to external CV/gate control. Sound-wise, it's sweet...while I'm sure it can be pushed in the direction of digital mangleage, aliasing, and the like, what I heard was super-excellent analogish low-end gritty fatness derived from a...sine wave? OK, I'm impressed! Those seeking beefy crunchiness should have a look-see. $229.

5) Fancyyyyyy Rung Divisions. An unholy cross between the main bits of the infamous Benjolin and a clock divider, this thing is kinda nuts! It uses the chaotic aspects of Rob Hordijk's random-synth module plus some math/logic voodoo to create a core that allows the user to, well, “Benjolinize” (hey, i inventd a werd! kewl!) pretty much anything you opt to connect up to it. So instead of simply having the Benjolin's rungler circuit doing the usual thing within that module, it's possible to take that same chaotic behavior and have it do...well, anything you want, anywhere you can think of it. Again, too complex to explain in a blurb like this; check the actual module page for an extensive (and scaaaaary!) list of some possibilities, although this thing is so deep in the abuse potential zone that that list only scratches the surface. $314.

6) Ladik L-124/125 Harmonics LFOs. Oh, yeah...now this is sweet. Two different LFOs, two different methods. The L-124 is a sine LFO with taps for the fundamental (300+ secs – 20 Hz) plus four harmonics of that fundamental. Additive-ish...but we're way on down in the modulation zone here, even though you could conceivably get audio out of the harmonics taps at the upper range. The L-125 is a different critter, tho...fundamental, plus two user-settable harmonic taps that can be ranged between the 2nd and 12th partials, plus the ability to jumper-select some additional phase-angle fun on each tap. Both mix their composite signals down to a single output for a nicely-complex modulation signal, and both go for the stoopid-cheap price of $62 each!

7) Retro Mechanical Labs GPI. Effects pedal send/return done right. This module gives you two mono channels of send and return, with trimmable levels to the pedal send outputs, and dual multed outputs on the return. Very simple, very nicely-done, and very open-ended, since you have no worries about how to deal with the channel differences between mono and stereo pedals. The price, also, is killer...$89. A great price, one low enough that one might not be enough!

8) Takaab 2LPG. And last, with the least in the price department, is Siam Modular's passive low-pass gate pair. Yes, passive...no power needed! I wish these had a demo, but judging from the description, these seem to have some tonal similarities to the old Buchla 100 LPGs. Also some behavioral ones, since lower cutoff frequencies appear to give shorter decay times, which I seem to recall being a 'quirk' of the early Buchla LPGs. But they're nowhere as big; the duo takes up only 3 hp. Being passive, though, a bit of signal gain after these would be a good idea, since they're apt to be a bit lossy in terms of gain structure. But...holy cats, they're only $32!? Someone get me a spatula...my jaw's on the floor!!

So, yeah...that's it for July. August will be interesting, though, as that month is a big ramp-up to Knobcon, with the AES show about a month later. Time for those synth module makers to get big busy!

Problem is, though, that sometimes having a pile of the same thing is legit. Sure, umpty-leven Distings is dumb as hell...but someone building a large cab with, say, 16 of the same VCOs...potentially not so, especially if they're putting together a modular polysynth or some sort of major additive rig. The question would then be: 'where does one put that quantity cutoff limit?'.

Not a bad idea, that last bit. As for the LxD, the top channel is supposed to be a 12 dB, 'mildly resonant' gate. But what that sounds like is either that the gate is miscalibrated or outright faulty. I'd check with Make Noise about that, actually.

Weird...you're in Australia, you want to do DIY, and not an Elby module in sight...?

The Morphagene should 'play nice' with the Eloquencer's CV outputs as well as the gating. As to exactly how to do it, that's best answered by yourself once the modules are in hand, as your best method might not be the same as mine. So...what I would suggest is to add a trigger sequencer, potentially clocked by Pamela's, to deal with dedicated drum triggers as well as triggering any envelopes, etc. The Pamela's should probably be locked to an incoming MIDI clock via that interface, which you can either pass from the Pamela's to the Eloquencer, or you can mult the MIDI interface's master clock to both. Eloquencer is also excellent for the Noise Eng. module.

As for which drums...hmm...that's more a matter of what sort of music you're trying to do. I'd suggest spending a good bit of time researching the drum modules on here, particularly if the listings have links to video/audio material where you can get a good idea of what sounds you're going to get. Also, you'll want a few more submix channels as the amount of drum modules grows; I'm also not sure that the Mixup is the right device for the job here, as something with actual pan controls would make more sense for your final stereo mixer.

Had a look at the 8NU8R specs. Is the hum occuring when you have your output plugged in, but no input into the 8NU8R? If so, then what you're running into is normal for the module, since it's designed to output an offset DC voltage when no input is present. Headphones might not pick up on the humming, but with something active such as a preamp stage (as in the Focusrite box), it's going to be brought up to audio levels...and then some. Plus, running DC offset directly into a preamp, depending on the type of preamp, might not be a good idea.

Really, that module isn't designed to be a proper output, upon closer examination. A proper output is something more like this: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/pittsburgh-modular-lifeforms-outs where you have a ganged stereo attenuator and 1/4" outs, possibly also a separate headphone amp, and the like. While the point about the star ground I made earlier is also valid here, using a proper output module is probably what's actually needed.

Depends. The two main issues I see here are 1) what exactly do you intend to do with the sampler and 2) is this more drum-centered or sampler-centered.

For the first point, is the idea that you want to live-sample and manipulate that flow (in which case the Morphagene is perfect) or to have a large amount of triggerable samples onhand in various banks?

As for the second, the real issue will be the sequencer. If you plan on doing a lot of pitched-type electronic percussion, then the Eloquencer is excellent. But if the idea is to use 'fixed' drum sounds, then something simpler and more trigger-oriented might be better. Plus, whichever choice is the primary idea, you'll still need to control a sampler. The Morphagene can work fine with something simple, but if you want a lot of samples and such under the sequencer's control, then something more complex such as a Squarp Hermod might be a better idea.

I wouldn't get too bent out of shape about it. This whole series replicating most of the Roland 100M stuff is still vaporware, and what we see here is a computer rendering of the final result + some speculation by Uli about the eventual price. Sure, it's cheap, but it's also very nonexistant as of the present time, and there's no clear indication if B even intends to put this out. Again, it's Uli Behringer trolling with yet another concept, fishing to see what part of the synth community will bite.

76 hp? DIY-ing the case, I assume? Otherwise, no snarks here...not a bad idea, really, as long as you have a way to get power into this by something other than the front panel.

...and it's not like a rig that small really needs a buffered mult anyway. My suggestion would be to pull the Output tile and the Pulplogic Buff Mult to get 16 hp, then fill this with an Intellijel passive mult and use an Intellijel 2 hp blank to fill the row out. Then, keeping the existing 3U stuff, add to that a 2hp Trim to adjust the Clouds stereo out levels down to line level, and that should do it. Gives you a pair of passive mults and stereo passive line-trims for your output.

Not a bad idea at all...plus in a wide sort of all-pass setting, you can use it and a pair of VCAs to cobble up a phase shifter. About the same price as Intellijel's Dr. Octature and smaller than the original Mankato, too.

Yeah...actually, this seems a lot more capable than the prior iteration. There's some really apparent-on-examination things in there, plus lots of latitude for exploration/abuse potential. And yeah, you can make the Mangrove sound gnarly...all depends on what sort of modulation you send it, and to where. And like you note, you'd have two divergent 'voices' in there: a more background-y sort with the 3 Sisters' output, and a more in-your-face lead coupling the Piston Honda and Polivoks. Not too shabby!

Gotta agree with the above, but my inclination would be to go with the Arturia Minibrute 2 and/or 2s. That way, you'd have hardware that's ready for Eurorack addition via Arturia's Rackbrute subsystems.

The power bus problem is easy: check out Pulplogic's Passive Bus Block. This gives you six more 16-pins (you connect it via a free 16-pin on the existing bus boards, so even though it has seven, you really wind up with a gain of six) plus ten prewired tile-tails. And since tile-tails are easily split with Pulplogic's splitter cables, this is pretty much an optimal solution.

Given the way that SOMA stuff likes to lie flat (the Lyras, etc) and work as both device and controller, I was sort of thinking the best way to set up a tandem with the build above plus the Pulsar 23 would be to put the Pulsar 23 in front, where a keyboard might go in a more conventional rig, maybe with some taller feet in the rear to rake the control panel just a bit. Then behind that on some type of riser (perhaps something like this: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/MDS100--ultimate-support-mds-100-modular-desktop-stand) with a steeper angle, that would be where the Eurorack cab would be. That way, you can easily interlace the two devices, then the Stargazer could go to the left, Eventide box on the right, and that would make for a pretty ergonomically-friendly rig. One other concern, though...there's not really any sort of interfacing that can go from synth to line-levels, so whatever you're sending to the Space would be pretty hot for its front end. Alternately, you could add (somehow) a small stereo send/return module such as Ladik's A-525 to step down and up, and then deploy the Space box in more of an inline configuration within the Eurorack patch, instead of as a post-Eurorack device. Just an idea...

Personally, I'm a fan of Doepfer's A-106-1. It's their take on the Korg MS-20 Sallen-Key filter pair with some extra nastiness (fun on percussives) and an insert point in the resonance path, which opens up all sorts of abuse potential for mangly things by altering the resonance circuit's behavior, either with or without CV control on the altering device. Consider, for example, what sort of trouble you could cause with just a little mono delay line in that path...

Don't worry about it...pretty much no one gets a build right on their first attempt. There's always ways to tweak and improve. My suggestion would be to spend some time looking at builds done by experienced synthesists on here, as well as studying what makes classic synths such as the ARP 2600, Minimoog, etc the classics they are in terms of module complement, control layout, and the like. Like anything worth doing, doing this takes time and patience.

Much of what's needed is there, but you'll have to cut the Braids and Clouds out, since both of them are discontinued. Unless you already have them, you'd either have to locate used ones (good luck!) or use a third-party build of these, in which case the panel layout won't exactly be like this. Also, the SILTA power supplies are a bit of overkill in terms of price and size for what you get with them. A 4ms Row Power 40, for example, takes up 2 hp less, gives you a bit more amperage on the +12 rail, and is a tad cheaper. Or, better still, opt for a powered case such as one by Doepfer, Erica, et al and see if you can get even better amperage numbers with zero hp used.

Seems fairly on point. I take it you'll be clocking the entire thing off the Tempi, using the logic and other pulse sources to set up variations for the Pulsar23? Anyway, the only thing that's a bit bothersome is the layout; I suggest trying to group functions with like functions (VCOs near sequencer/quantizing, processing near the end of the chain, etc) so that the interconnection between this and the Pulsar23 isn't quite as tangly and difficult.

If you want to stick with two rows, have a peek at Erica's 126 hp deep cases...Perfect Circuit has those in the USA. Great price for the size, nice hefty power supply, and major depth, even above the power supply. But yeah, I get the idea now...sort of a modular synth take on an old blown-up Supro amp sound, sort of Howling Wolf-esque.

I can see that working for noise/industrial-type stuff, yeah. Although, my instinct would be to eliminate one of the Optomixes in favor of a proper VCO so you can get good audio-frequency modulation. In fact, one pops into mind immediately: Doepfer's A-143-9...quadrature VCO/LFO. That way, you get AF...but you can also switch it down to LFO range and make big use of the quadrature-phased outputs on the VCAs, O&C, etc.

Well, first up, you get 16 hp back since Clouds is discontinued.

The problem with these sorts of builds is that they just don't work out in small cabs. And that gets back to the 'start too big' idea: if you start off with an improbably huge case, you wind up realizing that, hey, it wasn't improbably huge. That strategy works for all builds, actually; start too large, then pare things down to workability (on your own terms...'workable' differs from user to user) gradually until you get to a result. Also, first builds on MG always turn out in the 'WTF?' zone, as far as a usable instrument is concerned. MG is perfect for this, tho...it's a great place to make mistakes, because they're not costly ones. Screw up? Just delete and restart. Try that with actual hardware; it's very spendy and totally frustrating.