All Posts

You have definitely been uninspired.

would it make you two happier if i replaced the pam pro with two tempi s ? is that it ? because it only takes me like 20min to make updates...

zachsname: i already bought the first bit. a po-33 k.o. . its in the box since holidays. i have been uninspired. coming in here and designing fantasy systems was designed to unstick me.

results always vary.

peace.

I just have individual 3U cases I wouldn't recommend it for everyone, but I play a lot with other people and keeping my case setup small helps me stay creative and engaged while not hogging up too much space for others to play in.

One is a "dedicated sequencing rack" for my Nerdseq and one is just Buchla Tiptop modules supported with a couple utilites in a Niftycase (this normally sits with my non-modular gear). I also have semi-modulars added to this and a Microfreak nearby to play CV and Gate into synths as well (and just because it's awesome for layering on top). I want to get one more 104 (or even 126) hp rack for random stuff I want to try (though this has sort of accidentally laid itself out as a monosynth that I could also take out and use separately). This all sounds chaotic, but it's actually working quite well for me, and once it's set up all together it's not much different from just having a Mantis on the table. When I go out I just unplug the piece I need. It seems scatterbrained from the outside, but if I had everything in one case, it would be harder for me to scale up or down as needed. Also, I don't really want to expand much further than that - it's already quite a bit for two hands, especially when one of my semi-modular units is a big Finegear Dust Collector that I would keep before any of it. I feel like anything else I do would just be starting an entirely different setup, and two is plenty. I still have a Polyend Tracker/TX81Z based setup and a DAW as well, and I can't do everything.

I wouldn't necessarily present to people what I've done as advice, but I would present it as an example of trusting yourself to know what you need and what produces good habits for you.

EDITED May 11th, 17:01

There's already a section for fantasy cases on Modulargrid. Just click the My Modular tab and design away. This is the forum. Here, your fantasy meets reality (or at least the fantasies of others).

What do you plan on buying first?

zachsname: i dont think you understand how i am trying to use the pam pro, op ned, and 1cv step sequencer, either. its kind of hard to explain, but im pretty sure it would work. like 4 out of step clocks on 2 root note sequences, and 2 arpeggiated voices on that root, all being timed differently. does nobody even know how to use a pam? im leas to believe it can do a lot of things, or maybe i really do need to go out and invent a 'wacky clock multiplier'. ...

peace out.

zachsname: i dont see the big harm in wanting an experimental maximal full studio equivalent dawless eurorack setup i think i can make work in ways you dont see, just to play with it. can i just not want a new toy if its too expensive? cant i just pretend on here as a 'fun joke'? i would bet 7 doll hairs that if i had those first four cases i posted, i could make 9 datach'i level albums. do ypu just not like me aiming that high, or do you have god like omnicient powers into my own creative process? i think the idea of 'ttest ssystem' is fun. i say there should be a new forum: 'fantasy cases'. here here.

peace. out.

pammelas pro work out plus op ned plus 1 sequenced cv is a concept im trying to explore, like, maybe you could even get pam to do random quantized gate triggers between 1-128 clocks average frequency gaps, just by menu diving, and then it wouldnt be unplayable, it would randomly play itself. i think im talking sense.

peace.

there, i stayed up all night, and designed a second completely self contained 12u 84hp system, just to make you happy, zachsname.

do you like it better? is it modular enough, now? too many oscillators, eh? eh? eh? eh?

just give me some honest feedback, on just the design.

(its more modest, now. better?)

peace.

peace.

peace.
-- singular_sound

there, i stayed up all night, and designed a second completely self contained 12u 84hp system, just to make you happy, zachsname.

do you like it better? is it modular enough, now? too many oscillators, eh? eh? eh? eh?

just give me some honest feedback, on just the design.

(its more modest, now. better?)

peace.

peace.

peace.
-- singular_sound

The third row is the closest thing to an effective and efficient instrument I've seen so far. If you waited on getting the filter and Opp Ned and replaced them with a Maths, you could start with that row and learn pretty much everything you need to make and plan a big system that makes sense. Two Plasma Voices is also a lot, but that is a much better idea of what kinds of maximalism are available, and they do have built-in synth tools that make them super helpful in a smaller space, so I say go for it on those.

I wouldn't start with Datach'i's hardware when looking at their work for inspiration. I would look at his history and productivity. He was a professional musician long before modern modular became big and these setups became possible. Richard Devine's setup that he used when I saw him live is another good example. I was able to find it on here (like I was able to do with Datach'i's setup), and they both have unique setups heavy on percussion and pings and short triggered sounds in ways that don't rely as much on modulation like envelopes. However, these people have workflows and styles unique to them from working with hardware and software over the years and delivering results according to their specific vision. Most of the stuff in their current Eurorack setups hasn't even been around for more half the time they've been working. They already knew what all this stuff was before it was even designed. It's not really fair to yourself to look at someone like Datach'i and think your system should be comparable now. You need to learn what you need before setting yourself up with those kinds of expectations, and starting with the basics so you know the parameters will help you design unique systems with greater efficiency and accuracy. Your music and what it needs to be is more important than any design.

I imagine the Junkie XL comment is a joke, but remember that his giant wall is a 5U setup and based very much on the kinds of standard modular stuff missing in this setup. I'm not exactly a huge fan of his style (nor do I need to be as long as he doesn't do anything so bad it ruins the movie for me), but he is extremely educated and practical when it comes to owning a giant wall of noise machines. Hans Zimmer is the same - when it's not softsynths, it's usually something fairly oldschool and simple in terms of design. Their big systems are rhe opposite of yours (and that may not be a bad thing - they are the opposite of Datach'i amd Devine as well).

If anything, this is what everyone is trying to get at here with you: the best path to a big modular setups is to find a place in your existing music making system that modular can contribute to and then see how much more modular infects your life from there. Let the virus spread naturally, and don't worry about "design" - worry about playing music.

I don't know where the joke begins and ends with this post exactly, so I'll just say that it's usually a bad sign for your joke when you are consistently telling people it's a joke. That might just be you telling yourself that it is a joke, which is probably not convincing for either of us.

jimhowell1970: i like to have the most performant part on the bottom left, and either all sequencing on bottom row, or one multi-voice per row, and i like the final mix to come out of the top right, when possible. its just whats most aesthetic to me. ... ... ...

in this rig, the pammelas pro workout is essentially sequencing everything through a minimal arpeggiator and step sequencer, with random trigger outputs, as well. im 90% sure the pam can do all that. im not an expert, but this is designed to be 100% pam driven, like you could create a 2 part harmony using a 'clock multiplier' and the op ned and 'sequence thing', plus some random goodness im pretty sure the pam has. maybe im wrong, in which case, somebody invent me a 'wacky clock divider', lol.

peace.

jimhowell1970: so, a few things. im thinking of four equal generative or random sequenced triggered equal voices coming out of the pam pro into the zazou creating a basic tonal part, and that gets mixed at the bottom into a single zazou channel, then the pam also triggering 2 op ned clocks while the whole op ned is tuned by the step sequencer, with another step sequencer underneath, to maybe sequence the 2nd plasma voice maybe differently, both advanced by the pam, creating 2 more melodic points being mixed on the same rack, and then a filter just for those 2 voices. the drum rack i think explains itself, and i heard you can use the plumes as 2 lfos. the idea is that its driven by a pam pro working as a wacky clock divider and and op ned with a 1 cv step sequencer driving the melody forward, with 4 generative random-ish plonk-y melodic texture. maybe you might have to menu dive in the pam for 20min, first, but i dont think its unplayable. also, the drum sequencer would be the master clock, if that is possible. please do reply if this makes any sense. peace out.

I have an experimental monster case with effects modules, complex oscillator and filters and mixer and a good sequencer and utilities. That is used for creating weird soundscapes. For performance oriented stuff like dance music, I have two cases one a 4u and another 7u Intellijel case with Eloquencer sequencer, Queen of Pentacles, mixer and utilities in the 4u case that works great live. My other portable case also has an Eloquencer sequencer, mixers, utilities, and several drum modules and an oscillator/filter combo that work well. I like using the same sequencer as it has good format for drums and music live in that I can view 8 tracks at same time and create song mode and patch presets for recall later.

it's an interesting question... and one that's obviously been asked many times...

I have 8 cases... in an almost permanent layout...

2 slightly angled but almost vertical with sound sources, modulation, filters and some utilities

2 almost horizontal with mostly percussion, sequencing, control and mixing (plus effects)

these add up to 18u of 188hp... and are roughly organised like a 2600

then a smaller case with some effects, pedal interfaces, instrument interfaces and es8/es6

that sits on top of 12u of a 19" rack holding 4 rows of 84hp - which is effectively an overspill rack - some audio and some video...

and then a tip top mantis which is my main video rack...

if I need to take an audio rack anywhere I can take modules out and re-purpose the mantis and the interface rack as required...

EDITED May 11th, 14:48

Yes, I did recognize her. Long live the cats! (Here, we've got four...)

I think the last rack is much better at least in the first instance although it is still (virtually) unplayable... and imnsho - there are still way too many sound sources, not enough sound modifiers or modulation sources and definitely no where near enough utilities...

this is partly due to layout... the sequencers are in places where they will be obscured by cables, so difficult to access, and the magneto, is as far away from what I imagine to be your end of chain mixer as possible - so unneccessarily long cable runs for no benefit whatsoever!!!

I'd rather have this in 2, 6u racks - for reasons of ergonomics... one near vertical primarily for voices, processing and modulation and one in front of it near horizontal for control, sequencing and mixing... for this I'd chhoose mantis cases as they can be fixed in this position...

there are also functions that are missing - which are needed to facilitate the usage of the synth...

how are you going to split the output of the sequencers to the sound sources? please explain...

also submixing voices before processing with filters and delays/reverbs before end of chain mixing is a very good idea!!

why only a single filter? you have a lot more voices than that (I kind of count 7) - I'd realistically want at least 5 or 6: assuming the pulsar generators are going to be kind of used as drones (not enough envelope generators) then one each for those, one for the sampler, at least one for the drum kit, one for the plasma voices and one for the sinc legios...

whilst I'm a big fan of the magneto - I have one and love it - I think it's not a good fit for a rack this size, especially with so many voices in it... you need the space for other modules... the same could be said of both the plasma voices & pulsar generators... slightly smaller modules that do similar things are undoubtedly available... and would free up space considerably...

why 4 sinc legios??? I'd expect that 2 would realistically be enough for a single bass voice - either slightly detuned or in combination with the warps clone... please explain your intended usage of 4 identical sound sources for a single bass voice, with no filter... reducing these from 4 to 2 would free up a lot of needed space...

to a large extent the rack still demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of modular synthesis and in particular patching modular synths - which is to be expected from a newbie... but arguing about how you know better with people who almost definitely have significantly more knowledge and experience of modular than you isn't exaclty charming is it??? at least som eof the people helping would, if modular synth forums were academic bodies, hold doctorates, based on the amount of research, practice and deep thought they have excerted on the subject, whilst you are effectively applying to an associates degree...

this almost always ends with people coming back and saying they should have listened!!!

maybe eat some humble pie!!

remember we are trying to help you... something that you have asked us to do & that we are doing freely!!!

plus the rack appears to be 85hp not 84hp... dfficult - the top row won't fit in 84hp... so maths/spatial awareness isn't a core skill either...

EDITED May 11th, 14:32

Nyx hasn't come for a Synth session for a while, its her on the mug too!

Cheers

A real moment of pleasure: little touches of delay incorporating bells, plucked sounds and voices on a sheet of silence. And... your black cat as a guest star (btw nice mug :) Bravo for everything!

jimhowell1970, you almost slipped by me there, with all the monologue i was doing. i nearly intended this setup as a joke about being maximal. i really do think i could squeeze 9 albums out of it, if i really tried. i just built a smaller, more modest 4 3u 84ph case. do you like it better? im really looking more for feedback about the general design principal more than practicality. like i said, this is a bit of a joke. i just wanted to make some pretty designs. do you like 'ssecond ssystem' better? much more managable, id say, but i still say i could manage with all 1600hp.

thanks for the comment. peace.

there, i stayed up all night, and designed a second completely self contained 12u 84hp system, just to make you happy, zachsname.

do you like it better? is it modular enough, now? too many oscillators, eh? eh? eh? eh?

just give me some honest feedback, on just the design.

(its more modest, now. better?)

peace.

peace.

peace.

Cheers Guys.

Here's a spot more madness!

also, zachsname, dont you like that it is 4 near perfect squares, and that i left no gaps anywhere? isnt that aesthetic? and i think you could really create some awesome and unique patches on it. i want you to critique it on quality of design, not say that its probably over my head or too complex. this is not a real system. its just a design i have in my head. please just critique the design. etc.

p e a c e .

just figured out how this forum works. a beter view of my 'ttest ssystem' here in the thread view:

id appreciate if the rest of the comments could focus more on 'what is enough, anyway', as in, let it be a 1600hp system.

.

oh well, i guess ill just go to sleep next week ... ... ...

"peace."

last point before i seriously go to bed.

the gigging and touring issue:

if i 'canned' it 100% live,

recorded extra cv, too,

then did live visuals on a laptop,

even using the extra cv data,

then worked the crowd,

and an rmx-1000, too,

nobody would even care i didnt bring the whole thing.

gnight.

(peace.)

There is a coexistence, a balance that is established over time between what is convenient (easy access to certain controllers for example) and what is necessary (the constraints of dimensions, power consumption, etc.) I use several racks and the question then becomes the placement of the racks :)) I could one day be tempted by the beautiful creations of CaseFromLake: https://www.casefromlake.com

it feels like i havent slept in like a week. im going to bed, now. hope to hear from you later, 'zachsname'.

☮☮☮☮

also, there are a few jokes in there: 2 maths, 2 matrix ii s... i know i could use them, somehow, but its mostly really just kind of a meta joke about being maximal. i really wish you would accept the premise more before doling out your advice...

peace.

question, zachsname: if my setup is to maximal for you, then what do you think about datach'i s rig in this vid?

i want help making my 'ttest ssystem' as cohesive and well tuned as 'system'. i do not want to be told to make what i already did smaller.

the thread title should have already let you know i was trying to be as maximal as possible. i want advice on how it could all work better, not just to start from scratch again smaller. this is my dream system im trying to build. please, just accept its premise.

"peace out".

i personally like the aesthetic having a bottom most rack for 1 off triggers, sequencing, and other melodic units, then filling in the rest of your voice chains, and whatever else you may want, wherever it will fit into the rest of the case, so that you dont need a keystep or or midi controller or anything like that and can just play the case as is and do most of the performance on the bottom most rack. im no expert, but thats just the way to build a case that seems most aesthetic, to me. you can look at my fantasy 4 case 'ttest ssystem' where i tried to apply this as best i could, and yes, i did quasi intend for them to work somewhat seperately, too. im just getting into modular. i decided to build fantasy systems on here for fun.

☮

i hope you come back, zachsname. i really would like to hear if you have any final thoughts.

☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮

(peace.)

btw, a couple things i wanted to add but couldnt find:

1. an integer as opposed to exponential clock multiplier.

2. 2x4 cv joystick internal matrix.

3. granular vocoder with sampler.

4. master out stereo multiband limiter / compressor for mastering.

if anyone knows where to find these, drop me a d.m.

☮

EDITED May 11th, 06:38

just tell me: what do you like, what dont you like, what seems interesting, what do you think doesnt work. just dont tell me: start smaller, too complicated, youll never figure it out, more clock multipliers. etcetera.

☮

zachsname: re, the tukra. i like it, because it just does the drums and does them well, and then i also have the two simpler modules in the first case plus a sampler. i dont want my drum patch to be 1,000 modules. id condider doing things the more "datach'i" way, but to be perfectly honest i have zero idea how he produces his drum tones and triggers. whatever he does is way over my head, but if i could figure it out i could be convinced to do things more that way, if i could even make it all fit.

peace. out.

☮

i guess the real title of this thread should have been: "i tried to design a 4 case 12u 100hp full studio system. do you think i accomplished on this well? all comments welcome, except 'that is way too maximal, brah'.".

peace peace peace peace.

☮

a major inspiration was "datach'i - system". he made a whole album on 1 case. i wanted to try to make 9 albums on 4 cases. its a high concept design. i get it if its not your cup of tea, but id appreciate if we could focus on making it better or more functional, not: 'smaller and more ordinary'. nothing against you personally, zachsname, but like, you wouldnt tell slipknot: 'just get rid of one of your dudes. too maximal.'. im open to little tweaks or redesigns, but i will not compromise on the high concept. like i said, i designed this for fun.

peace. peace. peace. ☮

like i said, this is a test dream rig im thinking of like a full studio. please, any future comments judge it as this.

peace. (peace.)

also, also, lastly, zachsname,

i have the opposite problem.

i bought myself a po-33 last holiday,

and i have 'blank daw syndrome'

because there are not enough

"options".

i need all that stuff to 'unstuck' me.

peace out.

☮

also, zachsname, id really appreciate it if you would listen to 'snarky puppy - outlier' and 'moondog - moondog' if you havent heard them already and possibly reconsider the aesthetic of my maximal modular approach, etc.

peace. ☮

i just want to know, zachsname:

is it really way too much,

or just enough for a 'singular_sound'?

peace.

out.

... ... ... ...

also, zachsname, you mentioned 'complex modulation', thats why i put the two maths there. im not sure exactly what they do, but i have a hunch they could do some pretty interesting things to two lfo signals.

peace. out.

hey zachsname, i designed a 3u 84hp case like you asked me to, how about you design 4 tandem 12u 100ph cases, and then we can compare notes. should be really fun, i think, lol.

peace. out. "peace".

im sorry if i let this feel a little personal, zachsname, but what i really want to know is: would you enjoy patching and playing this rig, given that its intended to be maximal, or do you think its a bad design entirely and needs re-thinking, even if its intended for each performance to only use a subset? like, do you think there really is a cool 9 albums in there, or have i really left too many options off the table? like, think of it as a whole studio; is it workable, etc? just want to hear you critique it on its on terms, not on how the average case should be set up. like, the way the modules are set up, is it aesthetic? what specific might you do different? thats what i want to know. peace. out.

also, re: "building up one unit at a time", im pretty sure "junkie xl" just plopped down $100k all at once, and it worked out just fine for him. ... ... ... "p.e.a.c.e".

i re read your comment about layering vs modulating, zachsname, but what im really going for is multitude of melodic voices, many options for sequencing and arpeggiating, possibly with multiple melodic voices out of synch, an enormous bass line, lots of performance options, a canvas of vocal samples i can layer, and a record straight to disk workflow. do you think there are any modules that are not there that should be, or is it just too big. i basically want to never run out of a patch idea is the big concept. sorry if you dont like this. p e a c e . . . . . . . . . .

a lot of cases seem to be 'only about 1 patch only' systems, to me. do you not like that i am trying to make a '1,000+ patch system', or do you really think i could get everything i want for less, seeing what is already there? tell me, zachsname, whats exactly the matter with trying to give myself a full daw in eurorack? is it that it would cost too much, or am i really making that fundamental of an error. do tell me. peace...

im sorry if you think my system is to maximal, 'zachsname'. i like it, and, i think it really does make good use of modular sound modulation potential. i havent heard you take any issue with any module or how they might work together, only that i could do more with less, but, i am literally trying to d more with more. im sorry you dont like it. its just a concept. 'peace'.

i just want to know, zachsname, do you not like 4x 12u 100hp systems, or do you just not like my 4x 12u 100hp system. lets pretend i really know what im doing and have a lot of ideas, do you like my design, asthetically, or would you do a 4x 12u 100hp system completely differently? im thinking, like, this would be my one studio forever forever, if i had it. do you like it just for that concept? peace peace peace out out out.

EDITED May 11th, 02:36

i like the tukra as a performance instrument for drum sequencing, then i can have 2 clock divided arpeggiation voices, with seperate adsr, and then the chao can sum the two synths and feed the pure tukra out into something an mbox would take, by abusing it a tiny bit. if i wanted 'just 84hp' then, i cant think of anything less that would give me the options i want. the whole point is to give myself the right amounts of 'nooks and crannies' to really keep me intetested. i already have like 20+ patch element ideas that i would want to test out. i dont think i would get 'blank daw paralysis'. i think i would have a lot of fun trying 1,000+ things out, but, thats just my opinion because i dont have the physical thing. are you against maximalism? is that why you like albert ayler? j.c. peace. out.

Albert Ayler is certainly not everybody's thing, nor does he need to be. I'm glad you took a look and I hope you at least understood what I meant about how much comes from simple sounds being well modulated. In the end, these are just oscillators, samples, and drum machines like any other electronic instruments - it's the workflow and design for each voice that makes it.

I do understand how the Tukra works, but the fact that it's a sound source makes it more of a liability in the small rack you posted (unless you just ditch the other oscillators entirely until the case expands). In a bigger setup this changes, and it's not a bad start at all if it's what you really want, but when you've only got a bit of stuff at the beginning it won't be as much of a team player as it could be if there's also oscillators to manage (though the Doepfer mino synth does make a cool modulation hub if you abuse it like modular is meant to be abused). A modular drum machine setup focused solely on facilitating and manipulating the Tukra would be a great start and could probably get that first hour of music going pretty soon.

I'm not engaging with your concept because it's too theoretical. It's not that a big system like this is bad, but no one can know what it needs to be at this stage when you haven't yet explored what it is and what it accomplishes. Spend a month with something like that Taiga on its own and you'll find it can fill out entire tracks on its own. You'll probably get your 60+ hours of music a lot easier from thinking in terms of one thing at a time, spending time with each stage of your modular setup and using the little nooks and crannies in it to fuel your inspiration rather. If you somehow got rich and just got it all at once and had to sit with all the possibilities and decide where to start, I doubt it would be as productive. Your concept, aside from the idea of a big system, which is good but best done gradually and through trial and error, seems to just be "what if I could get the analysis paralysis of a DAW in physical hardware?" Staying focused is the only way to keep modular from being an expensive chore rather than good, useful fun.

For those fortunate enough to have more than one Eurorack case/system: How do you go about organizing them?

I recently added another case to accomodate my growing collection of modules. I know I could splurge on a monster case to accomodate everything but for some reason the large price tag always seem's daunting. Even though I know logically it's a fraction of what I've spent on my whole system My silly brain gets scared by too many digits. LOL
Typically I have organized my cases into functions. For example: A Subtractive Synth Rack, Drum rack, and Sequencer/Control rack, Mixing & effects rack. I just got a new case and while planning it out on here I thought, "is there a better way?"
So I come to y'all for your wisdom!
Is it silly to have all your sequencing in a seperate rack from your synth voices? Is it more fun to have each case be its own standalone instrument? I have recently had to travel a lot... maybe having multiple standalone systems would be more managable. Instead of lugging around 3 cases just to get a jam going, is grabbing one and seeing what can be squeezed out of it better? Or is it more advantagious to have everything set up and ready to go in the studio?
What do you think? What works for you?

Cheers!

yeah, like i said, i just decided to design this for fun. i intended to go a bit overboard, ie using a whole nerdseq for just 1 bass tone. i want to be doing most of the performance on the tukra, so i want that to be the clock for most of it, as i like how its clock control works, but yes, i would program in the whole set into the nerdseq first. i think you dont fully understand how the tukra works. i checked out the albert ayler, but tbh i prefer snarky puppy and moondog. also, to the point about lugging it to gigs, if i had to, i could can a whole live performance, then do live visuals on a laptop and work the croud on stage. i really wish you would consider this design for its own merits rather than suggest i do things more the way other people typically do. i get that its a lot of units and a big price tag, but thats what i set out to do. i wanted to make a maximal system. i just want to know if you think its too maximal, or doesnt makr any sense. this is a 'dream system'. i just want to know if you even like it. peace. peace. peace.

i just like to design things for fun. dont you think, if i work out all the bugs, that a system like this could make one even more creative? do you have any specific complaints or do you just think its just too much? peace out.
-- singular_sound

I think it's definitely too much to get at once... do remember that all plans fail as soon as the enemy is engaged - and that enemy is you!! and quite frankly you need it to...

as a one off purchase - it will likely be overwhelming and will almost definitely not work how you want it to in practice... plus if you haven't got the money for it in your hand right now, it's almost definite that some modules you've picked will go out of production and become like rockinghorse shit - and new ones that are (potentially) more interesting will appear...

I'm revisiting this after taking a look at the racks - they show a poor understanding of the necessities of modular synthesis - it's almost devoid of utilities (including some that you'd absolutely need in order to make tonal music - sequencers without quantizers & no dedicated quantizers, too few vcas and not a sub mixer or attenuverter/attenuator/offset to be found), no filters or waveshapers, not enough modulation, way too many sound sources with almost definitely not enough support modules to control them - the list could go on forever... and contains quite a few modules that are only available used and possibly difficult plus some modules that are near unuseable...

either start with vcv rack (or similar) and then start with a much smaller rack or just start with a much smaller rack with a few modules and expand slowly... this way you'll learn modules better and to a much deeper degree - and learn patching techniques - that you almost definitely won't do if you bought everything at once... and you won't need 1/2 the modules you have here to achieve what you want - but you'll NEED a good few other modules to achieve it...

a good starting point is: a sound source, a modulation source, a sound modifier, a way to play and a way to listen (I'd go for a quad cascading vca for this - it'll be mono, but it'll do the job) - and then expand that towards one of your goals and then start on another and then work out how to get them to co-operate...

4 12u cases are a multi year project - whether you go all in and buy everything at once or if you build up slowly... you still have to learn the modules and you need to learn how to patch them together and how to control them - and at this size of modular it's at multiple different levels - which generally requires multiple sets of things like vcas and mixers and envelope generators etc etc etc

if you bought all of this as is in one go - you'd need to buy at least another 2 cases the same size to add the modules you'd need to support the ones you'd have already bought...

take a look at my signature and think long and hard about what it says... and especially think about how it relates to the racks you have planned etc etc..

and this is coming from someone with a similar sized modular and a lot of expereience - I'd be looking at this and wondering how to get more than a thrird of it to work not because I don't understand the modules that are there or that I'm overwhelmed by the size of it - it'd be because I'd be missing the things that I'd need to have in order to get it to work - filters, waveshapers, enough modulation & primarily the utilities that glue all these things together...