Some instructional listening. Well, the start of some of it. And where I'm going to start is back in the pre-synth era, since the first synthesizers were a technological answer to the difficulties of what are known as 'classical' electronic music and its limitations. For a very good look at the point of inception where this happened more or less simultaneously on both the east and west coasts, I point you to the very excellent book “Analog Days” by T.J. Pinch and Frank Trocco. Essential reading, truly; a must for anyone involved in electronic music, since everything we do and use now bases itself in these origination-points.

Pretty much everything on this list can be hunted down online, both in sound (sometimes even in filmed versions!) and text references. Those with a sense of both adventure and inquiry will likely find these examples pretty inspirational.

1) Paul Hindemith: “Concertino for Trautonium and Strings” (1931). A proper concerto-style work for string orchestra and the newly-invented Trautonium, an instrument created by Friedrich Trautwein which used a neon-tube relaxation oscillator and a continuous ribbon-type controller.

2) Edgard Varèse: “Ecuatorial” (1932-34). The original version of this work included two of the then-new theremins in its ensemble; later, Varèse rescored the work to use the more-controllable Ondes Martinot (see below).

3) Olivier Messiaen: “Fête des belles eaux” (1937). One of the very first purely-electronic works, scored for a sextet of Ondes Martinots, a fairly-complex and partly-keyboard electronic instrument created by Maurice Martenot in the mid-1930s. The work was intended for outdoor performance along the River Seine in Paris, so in a very real sense it also is an antecedent to ambient music and its development.

4) Pierre Schaeffer: “Cinq études de bruits” (Five Noise Studies) (1948). This series of five works of 'musique concrète', or music using existing sounds outside of those normally produced by instruments, is where much of the concept of tape music emerges. Although Schaeffer's initial works used disc lathes and turntables to composite and manipulate sounds, the emergence of commercially-available tape machines shortly after the time these works were created plus the concepts broached by Schaeffer and others in the French 'Club d'Essai' would combine to form the 'manipulation' side of 'classical' electronic music technique.

5) Pierre Henry & Pierre Schaeffer: “Symphonie pour un homme seul” (Symphony for one man alone) (1950-51/rev. 1966). This work could probably be considered the ultimate expression of the concrète techniques pioneered in Paris. However, it was nearly-impossible to perform in its original form, due to the limitations posed by the phonograph techniques still in use. Later revisions pared the work down considerably, followed by the restoration of one removed section in the 1966 version.

6) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Gesang der Jünglinge” (Song of the Youths) (1955-56). Stockhausen pioneered the use of purely electronic sounds in music a few years previous to this in his two 'Studien', but this work is perhaps the best example of those concepts, assembled together with 'concrète' manipulation techniques of childrens' voices, to create something which is pretty much the start-point for what we now know as 'electronic music'.

7) Edgard Varèse: “Poème électronique” (Electronic Poem) (1958). This work, which only now exists in a stereo version, was originally intended for the Philips pavilion at the 1958 Brussels World Fair. In that venue, it was spatially-distributed over some 300+ loudspeakers, through which the audience moved. The work varies from concrete to purely electronic media, and would later be the model for the Japan track “Ghosts”.

8) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Kontakte” (Contacts) (1958-60). Stockhausen's next step beyond the above work was to explore the continuum of sound that ranges from pitches, to rhythms, to periods of time. Using pulse generators as the primary sources for both sound generation and modulation, he created this work which aptly demonstrates the direct relationship of all time-based aspects in music.

9) Vladimir Ussachevsky: “Wireless Fantasy” (1960). This, one of Ussachevsky's early works at the newly-formed Columbia-Princeton Center for Electronic Music, more accurately belongs to the 'musique concrète' domain, but it too uses electronic sound sources, this time derived from shortwave radio.

10) Luciano Berio: “Visage” (1961) Created at RAI Milan's studio, Berio's piece subjects the word 'parole' ('words') to a mind-wrenching series of electronic and electroacoustic transformation processes. Cathy Berberian's voice in this work is made to go in directions that only electronic media would be capable of.

11) Milton Babbitt: “Philomel” (1964). Also created at the Columbia-Princeton Center, this work is perhaps one of the most famous compositions that makes use of the earliest instrument known as a 'synthesizer', the RCA Mark II, along with soprano voice.

12) Pauline Oliveros: “I of IV” (1966). Created during Oliveros' tenure at the University of Toronto, the work uses her methods of ultrasonic oscillator manipulation to synthesize elaborate sonic textures. She was also present at the birth of the Buchla synthesizer at the San Francisco Tape Music Center just before this, but hadn't yet made the leap to the new synthesizer technology when this work was composed. Nevertheless, those familiar with the sound of the early Buchlas will notice certain similarities between what she accomplishes here and the 'complex oscillator' behavior of those early synths.

13) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Hymnen” (Anthems) (1966-68). This work is perhaps the crowning opus of pre-synthesizer electronic music. At two hours in length, “Hymnen” represents, in very real ways, the limit of the 'classical' studio techniques. During the composition and realization of this work, of course, the development of the Moog and Buchla systems was in full swing, and would soon become the focus of later electronic music development...but this four-movement work is, in a very real sense, the climactic creation of the pre-synthesizer era in electronic music.

FYI, while I point out the early instruments above, the later works also contain significant contributions. Schaeffer and his compatriot Pierre Henry worked on techniques that would go on to spawn sample-manipulation (in fact, the Make Noise 'Phonogene' and 'Morphagene' owe their existence to some of these methods, albeit translated into modern digital technology). And Ussachevsky was the first to establish the makeup of sonic dynamic envelopes as containing an Attack, a period of initial Decay, a level of Sustain, and an eventual Release. So while these pieces all seem distantly-located in comparison to what everyone here on MG is working with, they (as well as many others; these are really just 'cardinal examples') are in a very real sense antecedent to everything we're up to today. And because of that, they're very much works that anyone involved in electronic music should have at least a passing familiarity with.

Anyway, that's all for this pile of edumacationable material. Next list I post (after a while), I'll start looking at the early synth works, starting around the general time where this list leaves off.

Nice! Is the uScale mainly for the TM? Might be better to get a Disting then. Disting has a TM-algorithm with built in quantization and can do like 70 other things too.

I'm not sure what the Maths is for since you don't have much CV to mix in this rack? Envelopes and LFOs? If that's the case then there are other, less hp-consuming options.
-- sislte

Disting MK4 looks sick and not nearly as difficult to operate as I thought. I'll definitely be picking one up.

OK, so I got to thinking that while I often note that users should study up on some of the classic monosynths that have stood the test of time, I haven't really given a lot in the way of examples to specifically look at. So this post is designed to correct that omission. All of this fun stuff can be found on and referred to at Vintage Synth Explorer (http://www.vintagesynth.com/#synth-models), which is a pretty good reference site for prebuilt synths, including some of the preconfigured modular gear of bygone times. You could kill hours on this site easily...but I guarantee you'll come back to MG with a head full of ideas as a result. Let's hit the high points, though...

These synthesizers are ones which I'd like to point out as being classic instruments which also go quite a way to explaining both how a proper synthesis signal path should flow. Also, their configuration gives some very good suggestions as to how to lay out a modular cabinet in such a way as to get the result to have an 'instrument feel'. There are very good reasons why some of these command big money prices on the used market and, in fact, why a few are still in production to this day. None of these are modulars per se, but a number are patchable and can be inserted into a modular setup. But again, the point here isn't the modular aspect, but how you can look at classics such as these as a 'roadmap' for your own modular efforts. The ones to pay attention to are:

1) ARP 2600. This is actually halfway in between a modular and a prebuilt, since the patchable architecture was always intended as a 'convenience', with some submodules not patched into that but easily configured via patchpoints. Also, it's worth noting that other devices were created that act essentially as 'modules' that connect to the 2600, such as ARP's 1604 sequencer and Tom Oberheim's initial synth effort, the SEM.

2) ARP Odyssey. Technically still in production thanks to Korg, this was probably the best non-patchable monosynth that ARP came up with. It had duophonic architecture, and the panel layout was (along with the Minimoog) influential in the designs of many monosynths that followed.

3) EML 101 'ElectroComp'. In some ways similar to the ARP 2600, this and its separate modular expander, the EML 200, are still devices that turn up in educational studios to teach the fundamentals of synthesis. The panel shows the flowpath exactly like a road map, so it's hard to misunderstand how the various subsystems go together...which also makes it a good example for the flowpath for present-day modular design as well.

4) Korg MS-10 and MS-20. The latter, of course, is another reissue in its 'mini' form by Korg...and rightfully so, since it's probably one of the most capable small monosynths ever made. These two monosynths, with the 10 being a simplified 20, also make use of patchpanels to override the built-in patch architecture as well as to patch in a number of other MS-line devices. And again, the way that Korg laid these synths out provides a great example of how 'flow' should work. After all, the MS-20 dates from the late 1970s, and it still sells bigtime given how it can be used for both very basic duty and very extreme uses. I would even go so far as to call it the 'Japanese ARP 2600', because in some very real senses, it's that.

5) Moog Minimoog. The first of the 'lead synths', really, this was originally derived by Moog engineer Bill Hemseth from Moog's modular line in its prototype form. Bob Moog actually didn't like the idea of this machine, but came to see the potential that it had in the end. The layout was derived as something of an extremely scaled-down signal flow version of the Moog IIc, with a reduction in VCOs but still retaining Moog's classic 904A low-pass filter. Numerous Moog monosynths begin their lineage from this synth, including the Micromoog, Multimoog, and Prodigy, as well as the more recent Voyager. And of course, it's worth noting that Moog has brought this specific 50 year old synth design back more recently still...because, simply put, it works.

6) Roland SH-1 (and its offshoots, the SH-09, SH-2a, and the later SH-101). Another line that will not die, the SH monosynths were a basic working tool of many a synthpop player in the late 1970s and up through the development of techno and on into the rave scene of the 1990s. And yet again, it's because they make simple, straightforward sense. You would have to really try hard to make a mistake programming these. And yes, they still linger on, with a VCM model version of the SH-1 available for Roland's present-day System synths, and the SH-01 being a redux of the venerable 101 with a bit of the related MC-202 thrown in for good measure.

7) Sequential Circuits Pro-One. A monosynth based on the Prophet-5's CEM-based architecture, this powerful monosynth yet again boasts an excellent and intuitive flowpath on its front panel, plus the complexity of the modulation matrix. This is something that I think everyone wishes Dave Smith would reissue just as it was, because it remains a very sought-after monosynth...great sound, intuitive programming environment.

8) Yamaha CS-monosynths (CS-5, 10, 15). These bear some basic resemblance to the Korg MS-series in sound and appearance, but not in implementation. These probably have some of the best road-mapping of monophonic synth architecture, especially the CS-15 with its flowpath showing how to use it in either monophonic or duophonic modes via a bit of extra patching. I would go so far as to say that the CS-10 or CS-15 might be some of the best 'explainers' as to how an analog synth signal path gets put together.

OK...so there's a few there that I think are perhaps the best 'study pieces' for anyone stepping up to the task of designing a modular in any format (well, except maybe a Buchla or Serge). And better still, if any of you reading about these can find some of the actual devices to check out, hands-on. Any of these serve as an excellent template to build up a rackful of modules, because following these fixed-build synths will help you to cook up a modular rig that both has what you need AND has a layout that is intuitive and possesses some of the same characteristics of playability that keep them in the 'very desireable' column for many electronic musicians. So...class dismissed! Study well, o my droogies...

Thank you so much! I'll try it!

MATHS is fine...it's probably the best bang-for-buck complex modulation source out there. The only concern I have here is about that MS-20, since it uses a different CV scaling and inverted gate/triggers, and usually that means a standard-changer module needs to be in the system...but only if you're needing to fully link this cab and the MS-20. But sending voltage curves from the MATHS directly into the '20s patch panel...that won't need that. Plus, there are a few 'creative' ways to fudge the MS-20 into some neat behavior by using its external processor section to do a little 'mistranslation' of incoming signals. Try feeding it some electronic percussion signals, for example, and then spreading the results out to both the '20 and the modular. Depending on how much early Aphex Twin you've heard, the results might seem...familiar.

I'll second that! That's a killer MIDI interface for the price, and it brings up a good point: don't always try and put all of the modular's devices IN the rack...sometimes outboard is the right way to go. Like here, apparently!

Other than that, this looks good...but again, I don't think you're going to need a buffered mult. A regular one would be fine, since you're not likely to need to branch one CV out to, say, seven or eight sources and keep them all on-scale. Also, having the other two percussion voices of the 'holy trinity' of kick/hat/snare might be a good swap-out for the Yarns if you go with the outboard MIDI, and you'd still have a bit more space to play with besides if you use small-hp snare and hat modules.

I'd actually think the 'minus VAT' price makes more sense, since it's a tax issue and not a 'list price' issue. In Erica's case, if they were shipping direct to a EU client, that client would have to factor their VAT on an overall basis against all their EU-purchased devices, but not something from the US or Canada unless it was purchased thru an EU retailer. Likewise, if someone walks into a shop in the USA to make a purchase, local taxes will apply, so an Erica module here would have a lower initial price, but the addition of sales tax (state and local, as a rule) changes that price differently. And, of course, you have the whole issue of import duty, etc etc. Gets messy and confusional...so going with a manufacturer's 'base price' seems right to me, with the onus being on the customer in question to factor their taxation situation as per where they are and how things get purchased.

So if a manufacturer posts a 'with VAT' price, actually those who don't have to deal with VAT come out ahead. Again, it's a 'worst-case' price in which the 'surprise' is the lower cash outlay, instead of the 'best-case' price that isn't realistic for the majority of users who wind up with sticker-shock on ordering.

It's pretty close, actually...you could lose the buffered mult in favor of a regular one, since you don't have enough going on to justify a buffered mult to make exact copies of CVs, etc. They're great for keeping a dozen or so VCOs in tune off of the same CV, but in here it's sort of superfluous.

Soundscaping often tends to call for more in the way of filtering and processing, btw. Maybe a couple of VCFs instead of the single Erica would be better; better still would be a filter with an insert point such as Doepfer's A-106-1, which allows you to put something into its resonance feedback path. A delay would work nicely there, or any sort of time-domain effect. Overall processing is important as well, which I figure the Disting is for, but you might want to consider another processor to feed it into to set up a 'processor cascade', which also works nicely thru adjusting the wet/dry balances, etc as you 'play' them. As for the leads and drones, this is on the right track, though...I think you might want to tinker with the layout, though, putting sources in one area, modifiers in the next, modulators, etc. Since this is supposed to live in a KB37, do some research on existing monosynths over history, paying attention to why some are 'classics' and others just didn't make it.

Well, for starters, the Braids is off the menu unless you have a line on a used one or one on hand already. Not sure about the need for the tuner module, either, especially at $175. If you want/need a strobetuner, just get one of the lower-end Petersons and run it outboard. The Roland 500 ADSR could go, as there's plenty of those out there and adding a VCLFO is simple enough.

Ahhh, what else...? OK, the stereo out; this rig doesn't seem to do anything in stereo...so shifting to any of a number of mono output modules would save some cash and space. This system also has the 'missing VCAs' problem...only one actual one, plus an LPG that really gets wasted just using it as a VCA alone. I would actually chuck the Ladik faders and the MFB VCA and go with an Intellijel Quad VCA, since you can break those up for CV modulation or audio as necessary, plus they can do some of the mixing. A six-channel mixer doesn't make sense here anyway, as there's not really six sources in the first place.

Hmm...the Buchla Timbre is not bad, but it really works best (or more typically) when used on a regular VCO. Using it with the Braids (which you'll have to find as a third-party build there days) sort of falls under the old adage of 'gilding a lily'. It might make more sense to use something more straightforward as a waveshaper, such as Tiptop's Fold. Definitely cheaper, too.

Overall, I would suggest the sort of thing I suggest quite a bit: more research. Use MG's resources to look at other peoples' racks who appear to be working in a direction similar to yours. Also, to get the prices under control, select your module type then use the 'price' view option to look at things in ascending (or with a second click on 'price', descending) order of cost. Last, if cost is a major factor, remember this simple formula: price / hp = cost per hp. The lower you can make that resultant figure, the cheaper things become overall. You can use that calculation on single modules, whole rows, or a whole cab. It works very well to keep overall costs under control since you're getting direct feedback on the prospective overall cost as the build takes place instead of at the very end when everything gets tallied. And redo constantly; there's really never any such thing as a 'finished' build, not even when you've physically built it.

Thanks for the advice! I can't wrap my mind around the Disting at the moment. I am very new to Eurorack so i'd prefer to start with each module doing one thing (no menu diving) Maths is because everyone says that everyone needs it. I'll be running some offboard synths (Ms-20 etc) so Maths can have fun with those as well.

Nice! Is the uScale mainly for the TM? Might be better to get a Disting then. Disting has a TM-algorithm with built in quantization and can do like 70 other things too.

I'm not sure what the Maths is for since you don't have much CV to mix in this rack? Envelopes and LFOs? If that's the case then there are other, less hp-consuming options.

Wow, that midi module seems cool and super usefull, tnks for the suggestion :)

If a price is wrong and added by a normal user of this site it can be changed, so that's a good thing. But what should be done when the makers are adding modules with incorrect quotes? Example: Erica Synths post all of their modules excluding "21% VAT".

Some melodic sequencing and thick powerful drones. Thoughts?

https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_598632.jpg?1519264068

My goal with this rack is to insert it into a Waldorf KB37. I plan on making drones, ambient soundscapes, and leads more than rhythmic sequences. I would appreciate any feedback.

Seems good Tototun. u should be able to do what you want. 4 voice poly + drums and fx.
couple of things u might want to know: you have an output module which makes me think you want that as a final output but you might want to add a mixer so you can have more sources going in there .
also as for midi be aware that this exists too: https://www.tindie.com/products/hotchk155/cvocd-a-super-flexible-midi-to-cv-box/
so you can have poly midi AND trigger a lot of extra stuff for less money than the yarns.

theres about a thousand ways to design a case that does what you want so i wont give you any advise there its much more fun choosing your own modules i think :D

cheers S

So I'm just getting into modular and I have a "finished" rack. Can someone give me some tips or maybe point me to some less expensive modules that might serve the same function? Thanks for your help in advance!

Not really sure how to put a picture of the rig so here's the link. :)

thanks @rklem for the quick and good trade

Positive trades with the following good people. thanks! @Ashram @rees @Kaneda87 @jeanclaudevanlee @szebenyi @jadore88

Yeah..

I have rechecked and asked Mr Schreiber:
Synthesis Technology does not manufacture the MU modules and for that reason prefers not to be listet as a MU Manufacturer.

Great idea thanks! I've decided to swap out the chronoblob for an ultra random analog

... if I turn the Popover off, the spinner icon doesn't disappear along with the Info and Trash icons.
-- JohnLRice

That should be fixed now.
-- modulargrid

Thanks much! I checked on both a eurorack modular and a pedalboard and can confirm it is working.

Maybe a "trending" filter in the modules search page would be cool, a filter that give us the more used modules in the month or something like that (and not like "popular" filter that give us the most used of all times)

... if I turn the Popover off, the spinner icon doesn't disappear along with the Info and Trash icons.
-- JohnLRice

That should be fixed now.

The first two you listed "may" be duplicates

They are the same. The original one is locked by the manufacturer, the duplicate has better info, though.
I have pm'ed the manufacturer to unlock or update specs on the original.

I am taking notes, John, but I don't promise anything ;)
-- modulargrid

Anyways, unfortunately ModularGrid doesn't support CP sized modules in the way that 1U modules are supported for Eurorack (hint hint? ;-)
-- JohnLRice

I am taking notes, John, but I don't promise anything ;)

I'm looking for a rack that can i use it with and without a computer, with polyphonic (4 voice) capability and a small drum and fx section, i hope i nail that, but i'm a noob so i need the help of the community to understand if i'm making some mistake.

EDITED Feb 20th 2018, 08:48

Yeh I shall look at other setups. But I haven't really seen /heard any setups on youtube that creates the sounds and the tone I imagine, they all sound too complicated.

I'm actually replicating this to sound & act simular to classic synths that I like with a modern approach.

With the seq switch I could add a voltage attenuator or something to smooth out the voltage changes? The timbral will of cause be different when fed through a filter if the waveform changes, and this is exactly the subtle change I'm looking for.

I appreciate you taking the time for the advises, but I really need specific suggestions on the modules and the setup itself.

Anyways I will study more on the modules that I've chosen.

btw do you have some modular music you can share, like to get an idea of the sounds you create. Maybe our idea of sound is a bit different.

Thanks!

Yeah, exactly...differentiate between things to control directly and things which can be left alone, and treat the array of 'control-required' modules as sort of a surrogate control surface. Always works. A lot of people don't think out the ergonomics of what makes a synth an actual instrument, but you seem to have the specifics of use down. Nicely done!

You're going to dig the Keystep with this...I used to control the Digisound with either the CV output from my ARP 2600's keyboard or, alternately, with an MC-202. But this thing is like mashing both of those together and then some! And UNlike those...it's dirt-cheap. Maybe consider something MIDI-ish down the road that can deal with USB MIDI (Expert Sleepers FH-1, for example) and get twice as busy with BOTH control signal sets...

Well, the Clouds sort of is a sampler. Admittedly, what it actually is is a granular sound processor...but since granular synthesis is based in chewing up incoming and/or existing sound into small 'bits' (ie: grains) and manipulating them, there's a lot of overlap there in functionality.

Ultimately, I have to agree with jburzy01: a lot of what you have there isn't going to behave the way you think it will. Using a sequential switch to switch between oscillators for waveform timbral changes, for example, will likely wind up giving you a kind of ugly result if/when the switching happens between major cyclical differences in waveforms. That'll often result in a nasty 'click' in the signal and not a clean 'morph'. Also, much of the timbral work in any synth happens with the filtering, and there's only one filter there, so it'll tend to sound more similar than different, especially at lower cutoff frequencies and resonance values.

Seriously, I would suggest stepping back from this for a bit and looking at other users' builds who're trying for a similar result, as well as studying what makes a synth that's renowned for the sort of thing you're looking for what it is. And not just recent ones, but going back to the 'classics' that people readily fork over thousands for; finding out why they're worth that will save you a lot of time and money when you work on your own builds.

Admittedly, this all looks easy enough: slap modules in box, patch, instant gratification. It doesn't work that way, though. The main reason I spend time on MG is because I'm repeatedly honing a certain idea, over and over, in order to avoid making costly mistakes when it comes time to fork over the cash. And I would say that that's what a good number of users on here are up to as well. Believe me, it's easy to make errors in judgement that cost a chunk when you're first diving into something spendy like this, and fortunately things like MG do exist to help that from being the norm...but that only works if/when you put the time into studying the possibilities and honing how they should be implemented.

So...step back, take a few deep breaths, and actually dive into a study of the 'whys' of what makes a thing the thing you're shooting for. And yes, you might find that this really isn't the right course. But before that, I would suggest spending some time, if at all possible, with a modular synthesizer to see the effective (and INeffective) ways to get the things you want done. And always remember: modular synthesis isn't THE way...it's A way. And there's plenty of ways to get most anything you can think of accomplished.

Not too shabby! I think you might want to tinker a bit with the layout if this is intended for live use, so that you can get a little better 'flow' for the signal paths and make the setup a bit more intuitive. The only thing I would change out, to be honest, is the uJack...it's great if you're using Intellijel's mixers because it can directly interface with those, but with the Befaco it's just expensive and no better than a lot of other stereo-out modules. Have a look (under the 'Other' manufacturers) at Olitronik's PRO Out...gives you everything in the same space that the Intellijel does, but throws in metering and comes out saving some cash.

As regards the Keystep: yes. That really sums it up. I use one with my Digisound 80 rig, and just love the hell out of it. Also, if/when you jump up to the MB 2s, do consider adding one of the Rackbrutes. It's just a no-brainer move, lets you augment the MiniBrute 2s easily, and also ties into the above nicely. Arturia's really going to have an impact with their both-feet-first entry into Eurorack; this was, I think, a genius move by them.
-- Lugia

Thanks for the info man! I've already got the uJack and since I'm Canadian it shipped super fast and for free too! My plan was to upgrade to a dubmix and connect via jumpers, but then I found the befaco mixer with more channels and mute switches, which seems awesome for live use, and takes up no extra HP. Though the VU meter on the PRO Out seems useful, unless I could sell the uJack for roughly what I paid, I'm probably holding onto it. Also, I took a good hard look at my rack and instantly saw what you meant. I think this current layout is a lot more streamlined for quick patching/live use. As you can see I still care a good bit about the overall aesthetic of the case but now VCAs are closer to EGs, Voices are closer to effects, etc. but what I really like is having the Dirty glitch and Bastl stuff next to Ears. Now if I ever want to trigger my OCD, I can run my finger from the aluminum phonogene panel up exactly 1mm and have that sound amplified. Lol but seriously, thanks for the advice, I'm surely gonna get a keystep now, and keep in mind my workflow as I expand.

Gotta agree here...this is a little too 'undercooked' at this point. 'Take it slow' is wise advice, to which I would add 'look at other examples', which is another great asset of MG, although you need to be careful to check ones done by the numerous users on here who've got some experience rather than using random examples.

As for sequencing...for something rather tight on space, you might even consider going outboard, since sequencers are usually space-hungry things. Have a look-see at the KOMA Komplex; that, in combination with a Monome setup, would be downright scary.

External processors aren't a bad idea, either (would let you lose the Magneto and free up buttloads of hp!), but remember that the right way to use them, in most cases, is to employ some sort of send/return module(s) that step down the signal to the effect, then step its output back up to re-insert it into the modular's signal level. Also, not a bad idea having that 1U tile row there, but keep in mind that Intellijel's tile format locks out all of the other tile choices, whereas you can kindasorta fudge Intellijel tiles into the 'conventional' format with a little ingenuity (and a bit of hacksawing on the mounting holes on their tiles).
-- Lugia

Hey thanks for the reply.

Why do you think its under cooked?

My approach is to keep it simple, not really into making new crazy sounds. Hence I would like to focus on making good melodies. Some might argue I wouldn't need to go Eurorack for this... and this is also what I have asked myself.

I will be sequencing with the grid and ansible. I think the pair can already do A LOT in terms of pattern creation along with shifty to create new melodic ideas. It can also do modulations on the fx processing side with the magneto & cloud working with the pamala's workout & chance. I'm planning to use the seq switch & T43 for different wave & octave variations.

I agree a LFO module would probably be good as what jburzy01 have suggested.

I'm planning to have some sort of sampler in there for live instrumental improvisation in the future.

EDITED Feb 20th 2018, 03:40

About the only thing I can see that's missing is some sort of randomizing source, which is a shame since you've got the Noise Rainbow, which makes for an excellent weighted noise source for all sorts of random signal generators. This could be as simple as a couple of S&Hs (actually, Ladik's dual 4 hp one also gives you track-and-hold options) or something more complex and variable like a Doepfer A-149-1, which gets you into Buchla-esque Source of Uncertainty territory. Otherwise, this is pretty spot-on. Don't get rid of the Mother32, though...sidecar it, maybe team it with a DFAM in a double-tier Moog rack, but keep it handy. It does so much for so cheap...very much a 'keeper'.

Not too shabby! I think you might want to tinker a bit with the layout if this is intended for live use, so that you can get a little better 'flow' for the signal paths and make the setup a bit more intuitive. The only thing I would change out, to be honest, is the uJack...it's great if you're using Intellijel's mixers because it can directly interface with those, but with the Befaco it's just expensive and no better than a lot of other stereo-out modules. Have a look (under the 'Other' manufacturers) at Olitronik's PRO Out...gives you everything in the same space that the Intellijel does, but throws in metering and comes out saving some cash.

As regards the Keystep: yes. That really sums it up. I use one with my Digisound 80 rig, and just love the hell out of it. Also, if/when you jump up to the MB 2s, do consider adding one of the Rackbrutes. It's just a no-brainer move, lets you augment the MiniBrute 2s easily, and also ties into the above nicely. Arturia's really going to have an impact with their both-feet-first entry into Eurorack; this was, I think, a genius move by them.

Gotta agree here...this is a little too 'undercooked' at this point. 'Take it slow' is wise advice, to which I would add 'look at other examples', which is another great asset of MG, although you need to be careful to check ones done by the numerous users on here who've got some experience rather than using random examples.

As for sequencing...for something rather tight on space, you might even consider going outboard, since sequencers are usually space-hungry things. Have a look-see at the KOMA Komplex; that, in combination with a Monome setup, would be downright scary.

External processors aren't a bad idea, either (would let you lose the Magneto and free up buttloads of hp!), but remember that the right way to use them, in most cases, is to employ some sort of send/return module(s) that step down the signal to the effect, then step its output back up to re-insert it into the modular's signal level. Also, not a bad idea having that 1U tile row there, but keep in mind that Intellijel's tile format locks out all of the other tile choices, whereas you can kindasorta fudge Intellijel tiles into the 'conventional' format with a little ingenuity (and a bit of hacksawing on the mounting holes on their tiles).

Oh, hell, yes....those morphing VCOs they've concocted are wonderful if you've got the space. I've heard a number of recordings of experiments and demos with that and its bigger sibling, the E370, and everything I've heard has been really nice. Subtle to extreme seems possible, too, so there's a lot of latitude to play with in terms of coming up with suitable sounds.

I think that my future plans have more or less settled around this rack. So far I have about half of these modules and I am looking to expand over the next few months. Before I do I wanted to post here to get some feedback. Do you see any obvious holes that I am missing? I will probably eventually move the Mother 32 out but I really do love the filter and I like having everything all together.

Current modules in my rack:

Intellijel uJack, Dixie ii+, MI Tides, 2hp Mix, Bastl Quattro Figaro, Erica mix/split, Erica VC Clock, Sys. 80 Jove, Sys. 80 850, Beast Dirty Glitch, Synthrotek VCA, Befaco VC ADSR

Next 5 (in order):

Maths, Disting, Ears, Phonogene, Fuzz Factory

Modules I want/have in this system and how I think I'll use them

(I'm gonna keep adding onto this section)

Sequencers – SQ-1, Keystep, Minibrute2S, PO Metal series
-SQ-1 I already own and find really intuitive and easy to use for creating a simple pattern.
-Keystep seems like an extremely useful tool for chord progressions and live performance.
-Metal series POs are the latest and greatest portable 16 step sequencers with the ability to add new sounds via sampling and some software. I own the PO-32 already and love it for adding an evolving drum beat and synth bass to my currently bland SQ-1 sequences.

External interaction/modulation – Ears, Phonogene, Hendrikson, Spring Reverb:
-Ears will probably be used for delayed percussive sounds using the cables I'm performing on the teleplexer with to scrape the surface. It's also good for guitars apparently, and I can use it to bring pocket operators up to modular level and not waste a VCA (ty DivKid)
-Using phonogene I'll probably sample an old vinyl and modulate the sound till I get some weird rhythmic thing going.
-Hendrikson will be my primary guitar interface unless there's something I'm missing that makes ears better for that. It's also a good stompbox FX send, I can't wait to hear eurorack sounds thru some Earthquaker pedals.
-Spring Reverb isn't really external (I mean kinda?) but I can just smack it for that classic springs clashing explosion/gun sound. Put thru fuzz factory it'd probably sound mad. It's 2hp less than the Intellijel one also which is cool.

EDITED Feb 20th 2018, 05:48

After months of looking at modules, hunting demos, and reading manuals to understand the intricacies of every module in this rack, I think I'm finally ready to start a thread on it. First few posts I'll go over modules in chunks, and give my rationale for why I think I want them, and how they'll work within the rack. So far I own some of these modules, and I have a KORG SQ-1 which I find very useful for sequencing my 104HP of modules. I'm thinking of expanding to a Minibrute 2s when the rack is finished, and getting another SQ-1 or keystep along the way to sequence and play lead sounds. I'm going to use the Pocket operator metal series to sample and create interesting drum lines/vocal&bass sounds. All in all, what I'm looking to get out of this system is a decent tool to live perform on, interact with real world sounds and instruments, and sample.

EDITED Feb 19th 2018, 20:47

You say you are looking for lots of sequencing options yet I don't see a sequencer? Are you using a monome grid to sequence? Right now, that A151 isn't doing you much good. For that you will need multiple sequencer channels to switch between. You could send two different random voltage outs from Pam's into the disting to quantize them, then into the A151, but I think you would benefit from a dedicated sequencer like the voltage block or metropolis. Also, where are your LFOs? SurePam's has LFOs but they are clocked and not all that fun to mess around with. I would get a Batumi, or swap out the Dual ADSR for a Maths which has looping envelopes. Next, my suggestion would be to add more filter options. I think you will get bored of only having the A-105. Maybe a less conventional filter with lots of options like Belgrad. Other than that this seems like a good start. However, what I really recommend is to take it slow and add modules as you see fit. If you went out and bought all these modules chances are half of them won't do what you had in mind. Take it slow, but most importantly, have fun!

Thanks! I was thinking about adding a Synthesis Technology E352 to the rack too?

So this is the build I'm envisioning!

I'm really looking for simple sounds (traditional mono synth) with lots of sequencing options to create melodic ideas.

I also have outboard fx I'm looking to integrate into the setup.

Any suggestions ?

EDITED Feb 19th 2018, 12:24

Nifty! It's sort of what might happen if a clavichord died and came back as an upright grand.

Kinda...the problem I have with some of the Moon stuff is that, fully-implemented, it's space-hungry. I went instead with the Dotcom Mix++ modules, both to mix/invert/distro VCO audio signals as well as to do the same with modulation sources. They do a lot of the heavy lifting there, but don't require extra routing, etc expanders. Although, I do like their Quad Reversable Attenuator module. It's turned up in some other build sketches I've done in MU as a convenient and cost-effective attenuverter bank, as has the 592...but the 592 tends to get 'evaluated out' because of the space vs cost issue, while the QRA always seems to make it thru to the final refinements.

On the other hand, the more I see of the Grove Audio modules, the more jazzed I get about their features in small spaces aspect. You'll notice quite a bit of their devices in the above layout, and their appearances have actually been something of a growing trend as I slog toward an eventual budget-commit final version. Their 1-space Quad VCA/mixer is frickin' brilliant, IMHO, and that new Quad VCA stereo mixer is turning into a 'given' in some further refinements of the above.

Ultimately, while a portable cab version is the 'optimal', the real fact is that I'll likely go with something like this:

...if only for cost-savings. It cuts down the module compliment to something a little more fiscally-rational, and the Studio cabs do bring the price down incrementally. Still comes out to roughly $22.5k, which is...spendy, but I like the functionality vs space issues this refined version gives. FYI, the bottom 'row' actually denotes two Box4 enclosures that attach to either end of a QKB37, and these get filled with eight (yep, eight!) wheels to give me some expression CVs that can be sent back upward to other destinations in the synth. Costs a bit more, but that's a functionality tradeoff I like.

EDITED Feb 19th 2018, 05:43

Do you guys know about the Una Corda?

A fantastic, odd piano with a sound to die for. If you want to go with a pure hardware setup you can get one for no more than 14 000€ + VAT.

thanks to @richc90 for my newly acquired a-138d. Communications, payment and delivery went smoothly. great seller!

Actually, is there a MG rule on that? I'm never sure if I should put a module that was DIY'd into a different format under the manufacturer of the "guts" or if it should be under Other/Unknown??
-- JohnLRice

It's a bit tricky. While DIYers want to show respect by labeling their builds with the inventors brand, some manufacturers don't want to have DIY modules labeled with their brand. Our suggestion is to better not label DIY builds because if manufacturers complain we remove them anyway.
-- modulargrid

Thanks! :-)

I think that Synth Tech MU modules were in Other/Unknown because they never manufactured any MU modules. Any of the ones in ModularGrid are DIY hacks by individuals, at least that I can recall. I'm not saying to do it one way or another, I'm just saying. ;-)

Ah John, you're right.

Actually, is there a MG rule on that? I'm never sure if I should put a module that was DIY'd into a different format under the manufacturer of the "guts" or if it should be under Other/Unknown??
-- JohnLRice

It's a bit tricky. While DIYers want to show respect by labeling their builds with the inventors brand, some manufacturers don't want to have DIY modules labeled with their brand. Our suggestion is to better not label DIY builds because if manufacturers complain we remove them anyway.