but, i would really like yall to answer this:
"could you make music on this if all you had was patch-through cables? use imagination."
i just like designing stuff. i think you could make really unique live performances etc.
peace
~~~~
but, i would really like yall to answer this:
"could you make music on this if all you had was patch-through cables? use imagination."
i just like designing stuff. i think you could make really unique live performances etc.
peace
~~~~
why is that, noodlehut, because you dont understand what the modules do, they dont fit your style, or because you think this is a flawed arrangement? im curious. etc. ... ...
I don't have any of those modules so I don't understand what they do right now,
but I'm sure they are learnable and can all do something interesting.
A lot of those things in your design aren't available anymore.
And sure, you can play a simple oscillator like a penny whistle and make music.
But filling a box with random complex modules does not make it a performant instrument.
A car with some impressive engines, but no wheels, no gas tank, no transmission, no seats.
How are you going to mix those audio sources? Coordinate the clocks they want? Blend CVs?
There's several stereo modules, but no way to fully mix them and use the functionallity you would be paying for.
What signals are you willing to throw away going from stereo down to mono filters and wavefolders?
Monophonic and/or polyphonic? Stereo and/or mono? End-to-end stereo is expensive to run and always a pain to plan around.
Many of those modules want to be fed envelopes, but in that pic I can't see many envelope generators or LFOs.
There's too many sequencers, with too few voices for them to feed. Maybe pick two at the most.
And again, with the kind of music I think you have in mind, you have to think about your clocks.
They're everything. Will you need clock dividers/multipliers? What's going to be the usual master clock?
Don't forget, you'll also need a distributed shared reset for the sequencers and counters to establish sync on start.
Also, you have to imagine it with patch cords draped all over it, in a live setting, with challenging lighting.
This one seems a mess.
Redo that whole top row. You can't get those 5 voice modules anyway.
Might as well just use a Rossum Assimil8tor or ALM Salmple for drum duties.
But I do like the Moog follower/filter, that's my favorite thing in the rack.
That, and the SIG module above it.
I have a couple of SIG things and their modules are unique and thought provoking.
If this had to be built and made to work, I'd dump that keyboard and fill the space with a NerdSeq and their added I/O.
And an output mixer.
noodlehut.bandcamp.com
thank you for the detailed reply. my previous designs put a lot of effort into cable sensibility and mixing. this time i thought i would just have fun and hard mix everything with patch-throughs. im thinking, a pattern on the first trigger sequencer could be the clock for the second, creating really wild patterns, and other related possible patches. also thinking about running 4 sequence type modules un synched. i dont know anything about triggering resets for performance. yeah, i admit that there are a lack of cv options. its not really even about building this exactly. its maybe more about designing something more standalone that can do the very best of the potential that collection implies, etc. ... ...
im out. bye. ...
(edit)
and yeah, i now see that there is no envelope for the swarm, but its really meant more to be a drone kind of thing, anyway, and imho there is the right amount of sequencing, as first two triggers work synergistically, and the swarm could be controlled by the stranger and keyboard simultaneously as a kind of hybrid patch. not sure why you brought up the nerdseq.
((peace))
.
(((second edit)))
ok, maybe 4 un synched sequencers and a keyboard is a bit of madness, but i really think you could get some extraordinary results by combining the 1st 2 trigger sequencers in off label ways, and i swear that there does exist a well clocked version that you can still work around, maybe the brainstep being the master clock and then connect everything with patch-throughs...
((((this is my funky patch-through design.))))
peace.
You can get a lot more of that polyrythmic stepping with a Doepfer A-160-2 and it's only 4hp.
You get 8 derivative clocks and its prime number mode makes for very nice repeating patterns
where the cycle repeat isn't evident. Spits triggers or gates. Helpful lights. Comes in black if you want.
Two of them are fantastic for generating interesting, interweaving patterns.
noodlehut.bandcamp.com
thank you for the reply, but i am kind of set right now on 2-4 un synched clocks, and swing in one trigger sequencer glitching a second. maybe, i just want that flexibility.
im trying to execute on something original. how about this: can you imagine, do you see, a self contained offering of the best version of everything this could be, or not, noodle?
and how about the stranger triggering the swarm, using a cv chain for stochastic rate, then playing the scorpion filter on the keyboard over the random chaos, etc. ?
can you see a whole performance using everything even if its more performance art than fully structured linear composition sequence? imagine "tuning" 4 rhythms...
??????
peace
(edit)
another point is that you could 'choose' to either drive 4 voices purely from the brainstep, or use the quantizer and the stranger to produce 2+1 different varieties of stochastic voct, and then the 4th voice being the keyboard, as two completely different patch options. isnt that neat?
((peace))
thank you for the reply, but i am kind of set right now on 2-4 un synched clocks, and swing in one trigger sequencer glitching a second. maybe, i just want that flexibility.
im trying to execute on something original. how about this: can you imagine, do you see, a self contained offering of the best version of everything this could be, or not, noodle?
and how about the stranger triggering the swarm, using a cv chain for stochastic rate, then playing the scorpion filter on the keyboard over the random chaos, etc. ?
can you see a whole performance using everything even if its more performance art than fully structured linear composition sequence? imagine "tuning" 4 rhythms...
??????
peace
(edit)
another point is that you could 'choose' to either drive 4 voices purely from the brainstep, or use the quantizer and the stranger to produce 2+1 different varieties of stochastic voct, and then the 4th voice being the keyboard, as two completely different patch options. isnt that neat?
((peace))
(2nd edit)
its just, it has 2 potentially decoupled step sequencers, swing, 7 drum voices, 4 full main voice chains, full sequencing options, full stochastic options, a drone element with a ton of texture, a keyboard, a joystick, and even if you use zero external mixing, the ability with patch-through to hard mix down to 2 channels or 1 a macbook could take.
isnt that cool?
(((peace)))
{last edit}
and, you could also get the right interface and mix it live on your daw, or, get the right cable to input hard pan into stereo line in, then after recording, go back and turn it into 2 mono channels, then add a panning pass.
{{i think it works. peace.}}
((((ok, one more edit.))))
if i replaced the pralaya with a pams pro, would that make you happier noodlehut?
then it would be actually buildable im pretty sure. etc.
~peace out~
((ok. i did it. happy??))
You can get a lot more of that polyrythmic stepping with a Doepfer A-160-2 and it's only 4hp.
You get 8 derivative clocks and its prime number mode makes for very nice repeating patterns
where the cycle repeat isn't evident. Spits triggers or gates. Helpful lights. Comes in black if you want.
Two of them are fantastic for generating interesting, interweaving patterns.
-- noodle_hut
Don't waste time with singular_sound. He is just a rage baiter with desperate needs for attention.
Hey man, it's been over a year of you posting on this forum and the trajectory is always this:
You post maximalist fantasy racks that you designed with no experience whatsoever, referencing JunkieXL and other creators with huge setups (who 1.) were most likely professional musicians/producers with years or decades of experience before they dove into Eurorack and 2.) started with smaller, self-contained setups or respected the well-documented best practices that veteran users of this forum always point to). You accompany the rack with an unstructured blurb about how conceptual and deep the setup would be and ask for feedback.
First issue: You are specifically prompting users to imagine how it would feel playing your setup. When they tell you it wouldn't feel good to them personally because it lacks basic elements of a modular, such as utilities, and has way too many voices to manage, you reply that it totally makes sense in your head and that your concepts is great, actually. Case in point in this particular thread: unsynced discrete clock sources for different drum modules and mixing via "patch throughs" (I assume you mean stackable cables?). That may sound radical and idiosyncratic to you, but anyone who tried commiting their music to hard drive will tell you that it blows because it takes all the control of a sophisticated audio setup away from you.
When users analyze your systems, they invest a lot of time and effort. You provide little information about signal flow, voice allocation, solutions for interfacing with your other studio gear, etc., so they are essentially flying blind and try to read the tea leaves of your megastructure concepts.
Second issue: The users that are kind enough to respond and make suggestions for manageable, scope-limited setups that might fit your desires, you bombard with replies without engaging with their arguments beyond "Noted, but I like my idea better". You then post more thrown-together rack designs and come across as combative by commenting along the lines of "I made this one just for you, user XYZ". That reads as so massively disingenuous and facetious that the thread often goes cold after that. You swear that you don't start arguments and feel wrongly antagonized, but I stg THIS is why no one wants to engage with you more than once.
You are an avid user of AI chatbots and would like that functionality to be added to this website. Until then you treat the other users as if they were an AI agent. You're all take, no give. You expect to be engaged with, to have your scatter-brained ideas be discussed seriously, but you don't make the cognitive effort to respond in a structured and respectful manner to well-meaning comments. You build modular cloud castles in manic bursts of unchanneled creativity, but never have to reconcile your grand ideas with the financial and technical reality of purchasing and using one.
Third and final issue: There has been zero improvement or progress on your part. Your first post in May of 2024 reflected how almost every newcomer approaches Eurorack setups: A mega powerful, but ultimately impractical machine that does everything. That's absolutely excusable - I was mesmerized by the seemingly infinite possibilities of modular in the beginning, too. I theory-crafted wall-spanning racks with the most esoteric and stimulating sound sources. But over a year later and after many paragraphs dedicated to teaching you the basics of modular design, you still post the same kind of setup and you post in the same solipsistic manner - "edits" to previous posts contain the entire previous post, making the thread virtually unreadable, you ask other users if /cobbled-together rack or addition XYZ/ makes them happy, your "peace" shtick - the list of grievances I have with your style is long. Mostly, it displays a contempt for the opinion and expertise of others. You don't want a forum to engage with respectfully and on equal footing, you want an audience of adoring and always approving sycophants.
You will not find that here. Make good on your promise and leave.