All Posts

Jesse,

Hey, this is VERY cool!

Thanks for the detailed response above. I CAN see the patching now (after I click on your rig).

Do you have video, Soundcloud, or something similar where it's possible to see / hear the results of your approach? I kind of imagine running this setup myself. But would be very interested to see / hear the results.

BTW when Aristotle is ready for purchase, do let us know!

I'll continue to think on this topic and will come back with a longer post if more interesting questions / comments pop up.

Cheers!

Nicholas

Thanks @Roaring_Butterfly I will keep those suggestions in mind!

I see this less as a "forever" rig then as a mobile rig with a solid core to it. That is to say, I plan on keeping 80-90% of the design somewhat stable over time, and just subbing in/out a module when there's one I want to learn in depth. So yes, the OSC2 is not the permanent big OSC, and something more like C-sl may very well take its spot.

I should take a closer look at the mixer/VCA situation as you suggested. My intention with the mixers was to do some parallel voicing chains plus some panning for stereo. But maybe there's a more efficient setup to do that than the current above.

Thanks for the ideas & comments!

Here is a simple stand alone DIY oscilloscope from China that was easy to assemble and works well. It costs about $25 including housing and shipment. It works well with my modular rack so I could really recommend it.
https://m.banggood.com/Original-JYETech-DSO138-DIY-Digital-Oscilloscope-Kit-SMD-Soldered-13803K-Version-With-Housing-p-1051616.html

I like where you’re going with this—especially with the Vector.

I think the Recombination Engine takes a really interesting approach—the waveforms on the scope are gorgeous—but in the end I think I'd got with an Instruō Cs-L to expand the palette of synthesis approaches. IMHO the Cs-L is even more versatile with its two oscillators with different cores, two different PWM circuits, two different wavefolders, and a VCA that can all be used independently, but they’re configured in just the right way to multiply their functionality many times over with hard and soft sync, ring mod, FM, etc. I expect it'd also make the FLD6 redundant.

With the 6hp I'd save I could add a Select 2 from Joranalogue if I wanted some audio rate switching like the Recombination Engine's "scissor" function. I could also add a different third oscillator like an MCO from ALM, or maybe a characterful filter like the Cinnamon from Bastl.

Also, if I had the Vector sequencer at the center of a rack this size, I’d definitely think hard about adding the Jack Expander to get the most out of it. I might also slide the Vector to the left side of the case to increase access to the big knob on the left side of the module that does so much of the work.

Lastly, for me the mixer/VCA situation seems a little disjunct with the Doepfer mixers and Quad VCA. Mixers with built-in VCAs can work double duty. Maybe look at good old Veils, the Joranalogue Mix 3, or ALT from Nano. But for a performance rack I'd start with the Xaoc Praga. It's a little larger but deceptively capable. It's actually got 8 ins (4 channels + 4 returns), 8 outs (2 main, 2 sends, and one on each channel), 4 VCAs, 4 stereo panners under CV control, switchable curves, and performable mutes.

EDITED Apr 24th 2021, 20:07

Here's one. DIY and completed. $155 USD. https://waveformmagazine.com/the-gateway-oscilloscope-waveform-diy-project-2-1/ I haven't used it but this particular oscilloscope screen can be found on numerous hobby sites. If you could save more, the Dave Jones O'tool Plus is totally worth it.

EDITED Apr 24th 2021, 15:19

I would like to have an oscilloscope, but at present only have 16 hp left in my rack and very little money, about £150.

Any suggestions, please ?. It doesn't have to be rack-mounted, could be a stand alone.

Thanks P

Maybe I misunderstand, but if you are patching the VCO outs directly into the delay, you probably won't get much -- just some weird phasing effect mostly. Sounds like what you are getting.

Put the an amp envelope between the VCO and the delay and see what happens. The VCA out of the M32 will probably do the trick.

Hey Nick,
Thanks for telling me about the patch, I had edited it and then hit the browser back arrow on accident so it got deleted. I repatched it above so hopefully that makes things easier to parse. The main pros are speed of programming, and playability. I basically compose in shapes, it's reactive rather than prescriptive, and with Metron, I can make a save with 5 parts planned out but the notes aren't set in stone, I set that with the mixer, I just have a rhythm and a structure mapped out. If I want to make a new pattern it's really easy to do in seconds, on the fly, and because I have the note pool already picked out with the mixer and quantizer, the change won't be jarring. I can then make changes to the note pool if needed, and prepare for another part change. It's great for playing with others and performing live.
The cons are that it won't be exactly the same two performances in a row. Since the mixer settings are manual it's pretty close to impossible to get them back where they were last time, but I actually like that aspect of it too, so not sure that's a con for everyone.

I've also designed another module around this concept, called Aristotle, however it uses a slightly different mechanism to get generate the patterns. Instead of gates in it takes triggers and creates melodies based on the pattern of the triggers. It's a little more akin to something like a cross between the method above and something like the Turing Machine. It's easy to create loops and then a small change in the trigger pattern coming in, creates a small variation on the CV pattern coming out, but if you completely change it up, you get a completely different pattern immediately as well. It's really fun. I am days away from finalizing the design and pulling the trigger on manufacturing, so they'll be available to buy soon!

https://www.modulargrid.net/e/other-unknown-aristotle

I love Nonlinear Circuits designs. I have the Neuron/Difference rectifier, the GENiE, Delay No More, Triple Sloths, and in addition, I modified the circuit for the Let's Splosh and made my own version that outputs all positive voltages, and dessert names that I had heard of before, (this one is my favorite).

I have yet to own any of Ladik's stuff but there are a number of them I have my eye on, and the ARC module is one I've been on the hunt for for years. I have used the Neural Network from the Hemispheres firmware of Ornament and Crimes extensively for such purposes, and it is remarkably powerful, but it takes a bit of time to get used to the interface. I am currently working on laying out a design for a serge inspired panel with Peak and Trough (analog OR and AND logic mixers), 5 channel mixer (2 with attenuverting), 4 comparators, a ring modulator, and 4 manual gate buttons. That will be going into another case from the one above, along with the NLC modules, that is geared more towards experimental wiggling, however.

Thanks again for checking it out,
Jesse

The 2hp module has since been returned. I still have the Pittsburgh. The source is the saw and pulse outputs of the patchbay of my moog mother 32. After the delay, the signal is fed back in through the external input jack with the moog mix knob set accordingly.
With the delay mix knob set to dry, the sound comes through just the way the moog made it. In all degrees of a wet mix, you begin to hear the distortion. It ranges from barely noticeable at short delay times, to like a pw modulation type effect at long delay times. I do hear some familiar sounds when the delay time is moved back and forth.
I have tried all logical settings for each knob involved and then some.

OK...well, for starters, those two delays are set up rather differently, with the Pitt having CV over only delay time, and the 2hp having CV over delay time, feedback depth, and wet/dry balance. Given that these aren't exactly alike, it would follow that both of these shouldn't manifest the same problem. One or the other might be malfunctioning, but both? Not likely.

So, let's look at potential user error. Put the 2hp back online and see if this is what you're doing:

1) Connect an audio source to the "IN". This MUST be a synth level audio source; if you're trying to input a LINE level, it won't work without stepping the audio UP to synth level. Line level audio is either .775Vrms (the "consumer" standard) or 1.4Vrms ("pro" standard), while synth audio in a modular typically runs between 5 - 10 Vrms depending on synth format, etc.
2) Set the "FDBK" to about 10 o'clock.
3) Set "MIX" to 12 o'clock.
4) Connect an audio destination (like a mixer input) to the "OUT"
5) Now, while listening to this, sweep the "TIME" control back and forth. If you're using a pulsed and/or rhythmic signal, you'll hear the change of echo time AND a pitch-shift as you sweep the knob. If you use a sustained sound, you might not hear the delay, but you should still hear the pitch-sweeps.

Actually, the_erc managed to nail the #4 solution...but I'm still puzzling over what a rig like this should wind up having and how it should be configured. Not a simple task, to be sure...give me several days, and let's see what I can toss out.

A month ago I bought the 2hp delay module. The best I could get from it was a blurring of the sound, whether I applied cv to the delay time or not. I figured it must be a result of buying a cheap piece. I just hooked up the Pittsburgh Modular lifeforms delay and I got the same thing. Internet searches have revealed that no one has ever encountered any problem with a delay module whatsoever. This is frustrating.

BTW, if you're not already familiar with the following modules, they may be very interesting for you. I've been looking at logic and semi-random CV lately, this stuff has piqued my interest:

-- Ladik modules, various http://ladik.ladik.eu/?page_id=7 ... scroll down for modules by category
-- Non Linear Circuits modules, esp the logic (neuron) and chaos ones: https://www.nonlinearcircuits.com/
-- this neural network module IMO would be a nice fit for your additive sequencing setup outlined above, see https://www.analogueresearch.com/product-page/artificial-neural-network ... they are not in stock now, but the maker said a next version is in the works and will be released before long

@the-erc, thanks for the technical ideas above. Yes, some switching + logic may work. I've also been considering if some combination of latching or latching switches plus logic would work. All told, I probably have to just mock up some draft patches IRL (when possible module-wise) or on VCVrack and test what I can get to actually work. Part of it is getting clear on the logic / signal aspects of it, which I could maybe work out with pen & paper (& beer & cats).

@Lugia, yes, the little Fux book is alongside a few prized others in the counterpoint section of my music library. I hadn't really thought about pedal point seriously for a while as it is not an obvious fit with my focus genres. But yes, not to be ignored. And I love it in the Bach and Hindemith organ works.... BTW, any other technical ideas / responses to my longer ("step 1-5") post above? I know you a day or two ago said you were mulling it over. Your ideas & draft rigs are always interesting food for thought.

Thanks folks!!!

I'm pretty happy with Cakewalk's Sonar, but Machete don't MIDI and I do very little editing. I'm a basic user. Caveat Emptor.

Gotcha, well I know Ableton the best of my DAW so will stick that. Plus I can figure out how to integrate my Ableton Push MIDI controller with modular.

i like it, also the minimalistic approach --- yes sometimes less is more :)

He, he, interesting video, looks like you have some video-head issues too ;-)

just the usual ;) ...

cheers

EDITED Apr 23rd 2021, 16:09

Yes but that's also a problem - especially amongst smaller 1-person manufacturers - they don't have time to check and update a lot of these things

The perfect example is York Modular - there's a request on the website somewhere, iirc, where someone asks him to update ModularGrid and he basically says he doesn't have the time or inclination

Mostly. There's still issues, though, most notably when a manufacturer discontinues a module and they don't bother to come back and change that module's MG listing. [...]

-- Lugia

Sure Lugia, I am aware of the problems. What users can do currently if they see a locked module with off specs:
Click on the Message the Manufacturer button besides the manufacturer stamp and remind the manufacturer to refine the data or unlock the module.

"One thing I've held onto from Lugia's redux but I'm not totally convinced I need is the expander unit for the Zadar. I'd love to hear from people who use it about why they do or do not feel like the expander is essential."

It's just an extra set of CV inputs. How essential it is to you will depend on how you like to patch. I can't have enough modulation. It doesn't have to be in your face. You can add tons of subtle modulation of the kind you feel more than hear. So for me personally not only it is essential, I wish I could daisy-chain more...
The trigger buttons are useful for testing stuff quickly (and I guess for live use, not my case) but definitely not essential to me.

EDITED Apr 23rd 2021, 06:32

Hi Lugia,

I take your points, but my experience doesn’t quite line up.

1. The Neutron in my DIY portable case is very convenient and even practical for how I use it.
2. I’m as conflicted as anyone about supporting Behringer, but I wouldn’t have gotten into modular without that nudge.
3. Here are my (sadly expensive and currently out of reach) thoughts on replacing the Neutron:
   

That meets or exceeds most of the Neutron features, but in a larger system, not all of those modules are needed where they’d be covered by larger utilities, like VCA, etc.

The Neutron is as effective as a bridge as it is problematic. I wish I could break all the Neutron’s normals, and not just because some of them are leaky.

EDITED Apr 23rd 2021, 19:38

@nickgreenberg Regarding your #4, I think I have a solution, at least for 2 trigger inputs. You're going to need two sequential switches.

The second one will be your gate generator. Wire the out to wherever you need it to go, leave the first input disconnected, and send a constant +5v into the second one. The trigger in will be the output of the other switch. Initially the gate is low, when the trigger arrives it goes high, the next trigger makes it low again, and so on.

The first one will do the switching logic. Put you two trigger channels into the two inputs, A and B. The output will be multed, once to trigger the other switch, and once to the trigger of this switch. Initially the switch passes input A to the output, and input B is ignored. When a trigger arrives on A the gate is turned on by the second switch, and the first switch also advances so it is now listening to trigger B. Now when a trigger arrives on B all the same stuff happens in reverse.

I'm sure there are better ways to do this, but this ought to work. (I'm not really clear what you had in mind for the third trigger but you may be able to adapt this scheme.)

OTOH if your triggers were gates instead you could probably do the job with some Boolean logic.

It depends on what you're intending to make the hardware do. If the objective is to pull off as many signals as possible to route back into the DAW, you're going to want inputs galore...something like MOTU's more recent 24Ai, with 24 ins and zero returns could work here if the MIDI interface is being used for clocking and note signaling. But a more practical approach might be their 2408, as it offers 8 ins and (technically) 10 outs, with the ability to add 16 more channels of I/O via ADAT Lightpipe. Just keep in mind that both of those interfaces require the PCI-424 card...but then, that card ALSO has four interface I/Os, meaning that if you went with 2408s, you could wind up with 96 inputs and 40 outputs for fairly cheap. Plus, if you have one that has the PCI-424 card, you can then snarf up cheap 2408s that don't happen to have the card, making them all but useless UNLESS the card's present...ergo, cheaper.

But again, go and check the compatibility list I've linked above. MOTU hardware is only one option.

For the last 2 hp : I would get a precision adder like Joranalogue Add 2 or a sumtiple like LPZW WK1

Although, what I would actually do is throw away another one of the 2hp modules and get a switch. Like ST Modular Switched or Doepfer A-182-2.

Yeah, we learned counterpoint from a modern translation of the J.J. Fux classic "Gradus ad Parnassum". Old as dirt...but they did get the rules right.

Actually, that "sustained pitch" aspect is yet another form of contrapuntal structure: pedal point. This goes back to the Renaissance, really...you just put down a single pitch (bass tends to work well) and work out over the top. Which, of course, gives me a real chuckle whenever I run into someone who thinks they've discovered some hot new drone technique. John Dunstable would tend to disagree about that "new" part...or he would, if he hadn't been dead for over five centuries. But that method definitely fits as well...after all, Bach's Prelude and Fugue in c# minor wouldn't have that eerie climax without the pedal point breakdowns toward the prelude's end.

One other interesting point about how Renaissance music interfaces with electronic music: a LOT of the post-WWII European composers (and a few pre-WWII ones, such as Webern) were all over music from that period. For example, Stockhausen's early works have the same sense of linear space as you'd find in early Renaissance vocal music, despite the different sonic palette. And then there's the whole issue of the St. Mark's School composers and their influence, several hundred years on, of how spatialization figures into a composition.

Welcome back! A few (not exhaustive) comments:

-- Wavefolders: Intellijel Bifold is super IMO. A little more HP but worth it. 4HP solid options IMO include Joranalogue Fold6 and Instruo Athru. I own all of those (I'm into wavefolders). Still logging time on them and getting to know them, but think they're all good!

-- more vs. less sound sources you ask? Generally, in a medium sized rig, less sound sources, and percussion handled elsewhere (as with your Rytm) as possible. Modular requires a lot of "supporting modules" and in a small to medium sized rack, too many sound sources will crowd out the "supporting modules" and lead to an underperforming total rig design.

-- case? Your build above is mostly full. Best if you can start a build leaving some room to add / grow. But tempting to fill the case early on (which I'm also guilty of). For consideration: your setup is likely to change / grow over time. Investing in a case that that leaves you room to grow is usually a good idea.

-- Panharmonium: I got one of these recently, haven't had time to soak with it yet. IMO it's a super cool idea, and one my shop guys say isn't replicated by anything else identifiable (e.g. there aren't a lot of good alternatives). My sense is it is maybe not a great now or soon install for you because i) you're still getting into your first build ii) your current rack design is already full. My suggestion would be spend some time with your developing modular rig the next several weeks, then build a list of potential adds.

-- Mordax DATA: not in your build, but I really recommend this for almost anybody. Super useful for helping learn what the modules are actually doing. Stages and Tides would have been permanently baffling to me without the visualization from DATA. Bad news is DATA modules are hard to get. If you want one, get on a waitlist with your preferred vendor.

-- overall I recommend, to the degree you are continuing to edit your design, to focus more on a few priority uses. The idea is of course to have a setup that is great at 1 or a few key things, and avoids the danger of being diluted in purpose to mediocrity across most uses. This is not easy to pull off in a small to mid-sized design. I haven't really thought through your design module by module, but need to offer this "design pointer" for any new-ish person building a small to mid-sized rack. That said, your design (above) does seem to have taken several positive steps vs. your prior drafts.

You will have many more concrete ideas and responses once your initial modules show up and you start patching.

Good luck! Enjoy!!

EDITED Apr 23rd 2021, 00:10

Why not use Ableton? It's great!

I also have Logic and I find it very cumbersome by comparison.

Well, thanks everyone. I've had a think and come up with a mk ii version of my potential first system.

A few thoughts:

-I used a lot of Lugia's suggestions but cut out a few things I know I wouldn't use and held on to a few modules from my initial build that I think are more vibey than functional

-I've got 2hp unused and I'm deliberating over what to fill it with (though that decision could be quite far down the line as I want to build my rig a little at a time and really learn each module as I go).

-Is there a smaller wavefolder that doesn't compromise? 6hp seems a little much for that but I don't know

-I'm quite keen to add a second Strymon AA.1 as I have a big collection of guitar pedals and it also seems like a good tool for bussing in stuff like my Deckard's Dream or whatever.

-If I find, as I build this system, that I'm doing well interfacing it with my Analog Rytm I'd probably scrap all the drum modules and chuck some other fun stuff there instead. Would you say I'd be better off with more sound sources or more sound processors?

-Mutant Brain seems a little bit cumbersome to use but I'm not sure if anything else is doing everything it can do in that small a footprint? Would love opinions on this. I would mostly be using it for interfacing my DAW to the modular system. But this would be happening via a MOTU MIDI express 128, so having DIN-MIDI as opposed to USB is important. If it seems like switching to USB-MIDI would really make my life way better I could reconsider this.

-One thing I've held onto from Lugia's redux but I'm not totally convinced I need is the expander unit for the Zadar. I'd love to hear from people who use it about why they do or do not feel like the expander is essential.

-I actually ordered my first modules yesterday! Happened to see a really good deal pop up on an eloquencer with the expansion unit and I grabbed it! Don't have any modules to sequence or a rack to put them in yet, but I'm excited to start my modular journey!

-Completely random: I REALLY want the Rossum Panharmonium but I can in no way justify the space and probably not the price either. Anyone else used one? I wish they'd put it in a desktop module or even a streamlined version in a guitar pedal. Anyone used this beast?

EDITED Apr 22nd 2021, 16:38

Excuse me for exaggerating a little.
Maybe I should have stated that, to be fair, a lot of people I‘ve come to know do still use or did use logic and love the workflow.
I guess that’s really a matter of taste. I‘m not massively into the Toolbox thing for example. But thats beyond the scope of this thread.
Sorry if I offended someone that was not the Intent.
-- Cangore

Not at all. Logic has several issues, e.g. Logics naming for the Drummer function is super cringeworthy, for sure very garagebandish.
I use Logic mostly as a multitracker, they did the automation feature right, especially with Mackie Control.
I use Ableton for creating and cowork.

I really appreciate the time you guys have taken to do this. I would be so lost without all this feedback. I m also wondering what outboard would you recommend for this control rig?.

Well, funny you mention that, as I'm doing something similar. An empty fish tank placed on its side with the opening facing me, and the rack on top of it (those things are designed to endure massive water pressure), giving me an extra layer of horizontal space, but that's crowded already...
I'll give that a thought, as being stackable opens up a few extra possibilities. Thanks!

• picks up monkey wrench * @sacguy71 since you're an engineer I say take a look at Max/MSP, can do tons and might be a next level addition to your modular.

EDITED Apr 22nd 2021, 04:48

Lol, you're right about "canonic." I never write in canon so I don't often think of this. But it's worth remembering... and maybe trying my hand at some canon now and again. And more broadly, sequence offset, delay, temporal divide / multiply, retrigger, invert, retrograde -- all those and more to do with "sequencing sequencers" is in my queue of items to study further.

Speaking of canon and other complex counterpoint, it reminds me of a few years back, trying reading Taneyev's "Convertible Counterpoint in the Strict Style." Barf! I will tolerate a lot of weird and thorny musical / theoretical writing, but that was pressing too far for me. Maybe I should return to that book as it might have more interest / implications now that I'm into modular and trying to push my game on compositional control schemes.

Regarding #4 above, maybe I'm making too much of having a continuous pitch signal available for the counterpoint voice. Maybe it would be fine to just use the rhythmic-value gates to drive the presentation of pitch information (e.g. substitute the rhythmic gates for step 4 above). In other words, a non-continuous pitch signal would be workable too, so long as the pitch information is available during all "note on" time spans.

EDITED Apr 22nd 2021, 03:43

Well that's interesting... gives me a bunch more modules to look up, lol!

BTW for those following Lugia's recent posts on control rigs (as I am), the new / different modules above vs. his other recent-ish posts (in reply to me and Manbearpig) are: Gatsby, Artificial Neural Network, and Permutation / Variant. Which is to say, the rest of the rig is matching themes previously presented. Maybe that means Lugia has a consistent "core control rig" vision in mind? In any event, IMO this is all helpful, to repeatedly see the types and proportions of modules that appear in these control designs.

@Lugia, thanks (again) for above post and comments. Question: if you're "disappointed at the lack of inputs that the Expert Sleepers interfaces," what would be you're preferred setup for getting control inforation from modular to DAW (and vice versa)? Just "any old" DC-coupled interface, or one from a select set of "stars"?

Cheers folks,

Nicholas

You missed one contrapuntal aspect: canonic polyphony. This is easy, though...using a shift register (something like, say, Intellijel's Shifty) and some adept clocking mojo, you can easily offset a melodic line canonically by whatever amount of clock pulses you desire, depending on what you have on hand for clock pulse tampering. It's like the 2b example...but really is more of a "2d" since you can control the temporal shift and therefore the contrapuntal behavior.

There's a lot to play with in your post there...lemme think about the #4 issue for a bit...

Ooookay...I whipped up a "control build" to give something of an example of how a device like this could be configured. You'll notice the absence of sound generation/modification modules...this is PURELY a build for outputting various modulation, clocking, etc signals back to Ableton's VST environment with CV Tools. Also note that the interfacing is NOT part of the build; I was disappointed at the lack of inputs that the Expert Sleepers interfaces offer, so I opted instead to make this something that can work with an outboard A/D. This way, via expansions to that architecture, you can build up whatever you like as far as I/O, and all you'll need is a patchbay to get at the A/D conversion, with all of this being expandable as needs be. However, DO check this list before looking at A/D conversion, because CV Tools requires you to use a DC-coupled interface: https://www.expert-sleepers.co.uk/siwacompatibility.html

I still used the Intellijel 7U here, as the tile row offers some useful utility aspects that fit in the context of this build. However, you'll note that I've inverted the cab, bringing the tile row to the front. Also, even though this might seem comprehensive, it's still lacking in a few things; for example, I'd have wanted to also put a matrix mixer in here, but the other devices crowded that out.

The top row gives a pair of Maths with a MISO for crossmodding/mixing each other, plus giving complex composite outputs from them. Then the right half there is a suite of Erogenous Tones devices...the BLIP is a sequential/memory/probably a few other things controller for their massive AR envelope gen bank, the RADAR. Then there are eight mixable VCAs after this, with their VC8.

Bottom row is a little more complicated. Everything from the left to the middle involves logic pulses and timing modifiers: dual pulse delay, CVable pulse divider/multiplier, a dual probabilistic skipper, Ladik's "Gatsby" which is a trig-to-gate generator, a pulse counter (1 to 7, "0" is the original pulse), and the main logic "guts" are ARC's Artificial Neural Network, which is Boolean taken to a "next level". After that are three "CV readers"...a Min/Max for manipulating CV levels, a Derivator for tracking CV movement, then a dual window comparator for picking gates off of modulation signals via CV thresholds. The Qx/Quadrax gives you a rather different take on the RADAR, as these are easily patchable envelope gens that can be cascaded, made to cross-signal other modules, and so on. Then another MISO (useful!) just before a Permutation + Variant random sequencer and a dual sample and hold to deal with random activity.

Tile row has a MIDI interface (the only thing using the 7U cab's external connectors, btw), then a Temps Utile for clocking and messing with clock behavior, a Noise Tools for another S&H, a master (maybe) clock, slew limiter and the like. After that, a QuadrATT provides manual attenuversion and mixing, then Intellijel's version of the Zeroscope because, with a rig like this, you WILL want some visual feedback to see what your patching is causing.

Again, this isn't a "proper synth", but a complex controller designed to make changes and actions that Ableton doesn't like to do nicely...or rather, that computers in general don't like to do nicely. By using CV Tools to link this control signal generating build to your VSTs and other Ableton architecture, you can make that stuff do things that, as mentioned, would likely cause the computer to have fits because smooth, linear curves are something that computers DON'T do well. Sure, they can MAKE them...but when you call on a computer to generate some really complicated behavior of this type while it's ALSO running Ableton itself, you're asking for trouble. This takes that away from the computer (to a sizable extent), which frees it up...and lets Ableton do a few things it's not exactly supposed to.

@Lugia, thanks for that detailed and interesting breakdown re: making derived counterpoint.

I'm following a bunch of what you laid out, but there are parts I'm not able to envision, mostly around creating & controlling the contrapuntal pitch control. HERE is how I would do it based on what I know today:

Step 1: create a "model" sequence of pitch and timing information (as possible using most sequencers, including Vector). Here the nomenclature I'm using is the "model" is the primary line; the "counterpoint voice" is derived from or fit to the "model." Basically Hindemith's terminology from his spectacular books, but a bit more vernacular.

Step 2: create multiple counterpoint voices that can later be selected from or switched, with substeps as follow

2a contrary motion: the contrary motion counterpoint can be derived from the INVERSION of the model. Scaling, DC offset, and quantization are applied to move this voice to the desired range (above or below the model), constrain its movement to an acceptable pitch max / min, and quantize the results within a PC set complementing the active "model" note (and driven by Intellijel Scale's shift function)

2b oblique (held) motion: uses a sample and hold function to maintain the pitch level of the prior actual counterpoint voice. Quantized the same as 2a above

2c similar motion: is derived from the actual model pitch values (since they move in the same direction). Scaling, DC offset, and quantization can be applied in manners similar to 2a above

Step 3: psuedo-random selection of the counterpoint pitch information (2a,2b,2c above). Route the total gate information (logical "or") to be used for contrapuntal rhythms into a dual Bernouli gate like Branches. Use top gate as "contrary vs. other motion selector" and set at say 50%. Chain the "other motion" output from BernouliA to the input of BernouliB and split that to "oblique vs similar motion" and set the oblique side to 60% and the similar side to 40%. That would give a total weighting from the 3 Bernouli gate outputs as 50% contrary, 30% oblique, 20% similar.

Step 4: here's where I start getting into territory I really don't have a grasp of yet. Take the gate results from Step 3 and route them to what? IMO it needs to some type of "triggered gate" with at least 3 channels, such that if it receives a trigger on channel 1, it opens a gate and holds it open until a trigger is received on a different channel. I don't yet know of any modules that do this type of thing. Any ideas here folks?

Step 5: the pitch info from steps 2a,2b,2c and the three-channel gate on/off info from step 4 would go into a multi-channel summing VCA. I think Intellijel Quad VCA would be fine for this. The 3 pieces of pitch info (2a,2b,2c) enter the VCA and are turned on/off by the 3-channel gate info from step 4. The summing VCA sums the results and outputs A SINGLE CONTINUOUS PITCH VALUE which can be used to drive the counterpoint voice's pitch.

Voila! Those steps 1-5, if implemented adequately, would yield psuedo-random counterpoint pitch information.

Here are the issues I see with this signal chain:
1) I don't have a candidate module ID'd for step 4
2) it seems this approach might require 3 copies of Scales, which seems somewhat wasteful of $s and HP if not absolutely required
3) I'm thinking there should be a more efficient way to design this control scheme, but I haven't ID'd it yet, above is the best I can spell out so far

In fairness, this is a "someday" patch for future IRL, not a tomorrow patch. BUT with the Ladik store seemingly open again, it will be possible (and not so costly in $s or HP) for me to add some key logic modules I'm missing. AND as I'm super interested in advancing my working command of compositional control schemes in modular and their DAW-based equivalents, I want to press ahead on this and related challenges, even if the results are only "paper solutions" (not IRL) for the time being.

Comments? Questions? Thanks all!

"May not fit" is a gross understatement. This thing won't fit, or barely fits in everything I have tried it in. In an Intelligel Pallet you can absolutely forget it. :-(

The other rationale for using Ableton is, if you get the Suite (or the add-on itself), you also get Max for Live. And that ain't no minor addition; in theory, you could use the internal Max implementation to rewrite THE ENTIRE DAW if you got a wild hair to do that. So, what that comes down to is a situation where if there's something missing that you think Live can work better with, you can cook up that "something" all on your own with Max's object-oriented programming. And you can cook up some major complexity in Max...I've seen a few of Carl Stone's (possibly the ultimate Max-fu practitioner!) Max patches, and they looked like spiders had gone bonkers inside the display with all of the object patching lines.

As for Pro Tools...ewwwwwwwww. My first digital editing platform was a Sound Tools II setup (yep, PRE-ProTools) and it had certain quirks that I learned to get around. But when they first dropped the Native version of PT, (back around V.5 or 6 or something like that), I gave it a shot since it (then, but not for long) could use the STII hardware.

I haven't gotten angrier at a piece of software since the horror that was Finale's 1.x iterations, back circa 1989-90. Yes, it could act like a studio multitrack...but not only that, it had all of the drawbacks of that paradigm AND was about as stable as nitroglycerine being handled by Bobcat Goldthwaite. And later Native iterations weren't any better, plus there was an apparent desire to "crippleware" it in deference to the more lucrative HD versions. And don't even get me started on Avid's "lease plan"...

I eventually realized what the problem was. Pro Tools was/is really well-coded...for coders. But if you're trying to do anything outside of the narrow strictures of commercial studio recording, it'll take the first opportunity it can find to utterly jack your creative thought processes. So for a composer, it's AWFUL...since so much of composition involves NOT thinking in one particular "lane" and exploring all sorts of not-commercial tangents, which is the sort of thing that makes PT act up. But with Ableton, you're dealing with a tool that was designed initially by musicians to solve certain problems that DAWs following the PT model couldn't do. And the same musicians still have plenty of input up to the present version.

The problem is in where each platform's developers aimed the DAW. PT is great if you're PURELY an engineer. It's very happy on that side of the glass, acting like an MCI JH-24 on bigtime 'roids. But don't ask it to do anything unusual. Live, on the other hand, can be a PITA for engineers, because it works much more like an instrument and less like a fridge-sized multitrack lurking in the tape room. It's just fine with "unusual", however, and functions far better as a creative tool than just a glorified software multitrack for composers and musicians.

The only reason I prefer manufacturers to register themselves is that they can get a manufacturer account and set the Approved by manufacturer lock which mostly improves the data.
-- modulargrid

Mostly. There's still issues, though, most notably when a manufacturer discontinues a module and they don't bother to come back and change that module's MG listing. Or when the manufacturer in question doesn't exactly "get" what MG is about and they don't complete module listings, etc because they're not 100% aware of the site's utility to a wider synthesist community. I like Jim's idea about a "form email", but I think it needs a bit more fleshing-out...something with a bit of an explanation of what MG is, why MG exists, MG's general traffic levels, what data MG wants, etc. If these companies know more about what Modulargrid is about, and the basic fact that being in this cited reference database is pretty critical to both them AND the MG users, this should result (hopefully!) in even better data that actually gets cleaned-up when the "Approved" lock is on.

Have you considered the possibility of freeing up space UNDER the modular?

No, that's not a joke or a suggestion that you should try and defy physics. Instead, if you have some vertical space above the cab, and we're not talking about a Doepfer Monster Case rig, you could put the modular up a bit higher by using a suitable desk riser. This is something I'm currently playing with, to get some desktop space back from the AE system.

Check these out: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00F0OQ8VG/?coliid=I2GROX26I4EP7U&colid=23QL83O2QNTDT&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it Each platform can handle up to 65 lbs, and uses a stacking block system to vary the height from 2 1/4" to 4 3/4"...and that latter amount is only 1/2" under the space needed for a vertical 3U space. With something angled like a DFAM, you should wind up with a perfect fit for that unit at the base of the stand. And if one isn't big enough, it's not like these cost too much to afford getting a second.

Excuse me for exaggerating a little.
Maybe I should have stated that, to be fair, a lot of people I‘ve come to know do still use or did use logic and love the workflow.
I guess that’s really a matter of taste. I‘m not massively into the Toolbox thing for example. But thats beyond the scope of this thread.
Sorry if I offended someone that was not the Intent.

EDITED Apr 21st 2021, 21:39

I‘d personally say don‘t go with LOGIC as it seems to get more convoluted and confusing every Update. Most People I know now call Logic „Garageband Pro“. And I personally dislike it and avoid working with it.
-- Cangore

Logic can be confusing for sure but mostly the reason is it's dense functionality.
The step sequencers in the last update go very much into modular territory with the ability to run in every direction independently. Also Logic now has a Session view similar to Ableton and still supports 15 years old Emagic MIDI interfaces and Mackie control.
Very good sounding stock plugins too. To call it Garageband Pro is unfair imho, it's a very capable DAW.

One competitor to Ableton is Bitwig. Has also good CV Plugins built in, is a bit more modern than Ableton and even runs on Linux.

I might not have the biggest experience in Modular but since I have a little bit of a backrground in Engineering i thought i‘d chime in.

Lugia is probably right. The Ableton Team are very forward thinking and constantly coming up with stuff to meet the needs of their Customers, so Ableton definitely is a solid choice.

However if you’re looking for something else:
I personally use Pro Tools and do own a copy of Logic.
PRO TOOLS is absolutely Killer if you mainly use it for Audio Capture and Editing, super fast and well equipped fot the Task BUT:
-Expensive
-Shit Customer Support (no support if you don‘t pay for it extra)
- Very basic Midi implementation wouldn‘t want to use it for productions incorporating many softsynths.
-no Surround Sound
-Bad latency compared to Competition unless you put down Thousands for an HD System.

I‘d personally say don‘t go with LOGIC as it seems to get more convoluted and confusing every Update. Most People I know now call Logic „Garageband Pro“. And I personally dislike it and avoid working with it.

If you want something cheap I‘d encourage you to look at REAPER or ARDOUR.
The former is really awesome and can be set up as you wish. Starting from it‘s looks and ending at the shortcuts. Also REAPER already supports ARM processors natively so it should run great on M1 Macs.

Also STUDIO ONE is fairly Cheap and has pretty awesome Interfacing with Hardware through Pipeline XT+ includes a full on Mastering-Suite that is actually great!

At the End of the Day you‘ll probably be fine with anything you choose to go with. Just try and Stick to one and really learn how it works.

(Totally missed that you own Cubase, If you enjoy Cubase probably check out Nuendo too)

EDITED Apr 21st 2021, 18:57

shout out to great sellers @medicineman @Karus @antilophobia for smooth deals. I can happily recommend these people. Thanks a lot!

I have added Dannysound to the manufacturer list and reassigned the modules.

would it be possible instead of only adding manufacturers when they request it to also allow the addition of Manufacturers when requested by a user

-- JimHowell1970

Sure that is already possible. The only reason I prefer manufacturers to register themselves is that they can get a manufacturer account and set the Approved by manufacturer lock which mostly improves the data.

Thanks Lugia,

I will use Ableton then until I find a better DAW option. I know that some pros use Logic like Alessandro Cortini of NIN fame who has tons of modular systems.

@Lugia

Very helpful and very welcome explanation and suggestions. This will help re-thinking not only the thread openers build but also my case setup for more logic functionality and trying out logic experiments.

Thank you a lot!!

EDITED Apr 21st 2021, 07:36

Thanks both for the replies. So not worth the effort then.
The reason behind the swap was I've got virtually no horizontal space left around the modular rack, not an inch, so I guess plan B is to get a bunch of 1.5M patch cords and move the DFAM elsewhere, although the whole point of the swap was ergonomics...