ModularGrid uses so-called cookies to ensure it's so-called functionality. We also use dubious tracking scripts. Find out more in the Privacy Policy. We use cookies and wanna let you know.
Decisions, decisions...yep, welcome to EuroCrack. Seriously, tho...do the Morpheus since it can go off into some warped zones. At one set of sessions many years back, one of the guys I was working with had worked out a Max patch that allowed him to access a E-Mu Morpheus's Z-plane filter's multiple axis controls simultaneously (which E-Mu hadn't designed into the Morpheus because of how the Proteus line synths' UIs worked) and the results were completely INSANE. Given that Dave Rossum's redux of the Morpheus filter in Eurorack IS that filter, but now with total simultaneous control...yeah, I can imagine how bonkers that thing can get. I'd say leave that thing right where is it!
Would things have been different without Bob's input? Absolutely. After all, Bob took synthesizers in a direction that made them more recognizable as a 'proper instrument', such as the keyboard interface, keeping all signals (mostly) on the same level, exponential VCO/VCF response, and so on. Don's ideas were monumental, and we do have him to thank for things such as the sequencer in the end, but the Buchla 100s, back in the day, weren't anything like Bob's musician-friendly efforts. They used a weird CV scaling, they weren't as clear-cut with respect to their controls as the Moogs, and they were VERY counter-keyboard in the initial years. It's worth noting that Buchla actually tried mass-marketing his 100 series systems via CBS (who also controlled Fender et al back in the late 1960s) and they were a resounding flop at the same time that Moogs were selling hand-over-fist. These days, I think we've reached a point where the differences just don't matter, though; everything uses the same scaling for the most part (Korg as well as EMW's EML reissues notwithstanding), all signal levels are designed to interconnect (save for Buchla, still), and this has opened up things to a wild, infinite set of cross-hybridizations of synthesizers. It's not so much a "west coast/east coast" dichotomy anymore.
That does sound pretty interesting. I can see how it can get out of hand quickly, though I cannot imagine that is a bad thing.
When you say chained LFOs, do you mean one LFO modulating another's frequency/rate? If so, that is actually a really interesting concept and I can see how that could create chaotic and interesting waveforms. Sampling it with a quantizer would make it all the more interesting.
I assume that S&H's can be worked into this in a similar fashion as a quantizer, no?
Yea, merging digital and analog is definitely really awesome. It really brings the best of both worlds and blending them together really makes for some neat results. Interesting you mention Arduino, that is something I had gotten into in the past; I'm not superb coder, but I can get by sort of. Using it for synthesis would be really fun.
There's a company called Bleep Labs that makes standalone synths and devices, a few of them use Arduino now that I think of it.
I might try implementing some of their ideas and designs into a Eurorack format.
Little sketch of a quick and dirty patch that I use that creates some incredible sonic timbres. Now that I have the Bitbox, I'll be sampling drums, but for pure analog acid, this is what I do! Criticisms are of course MORE than welcomed!
Right...consider this: you have an LFO cascade with irregular but very long periods. You then set up a comparator to view this, then send the LFO curve on to a filter cutoff, perhaps with some attenuation. The comparator's gate output then goes to the start/stop of a sequencer, so that the sequencer only runs when the LFO cascade's output voltage exceeds X amount. Then you also send the comparator on to a XOR gate, which has a clock on its other input. When both signals are present, the gate sends nothing. But when only the clock is there, it passes and then goes on to some other device, such as a Euclidean sequencer's clock input, so that when one sequencer is running, the rhythmic pattern generation of the Euclidean stops, and when it's stopped, the rhythms pick back up again. This is what's neat about having all of these digital control subprocesses going on behind the scenes; they allow for an incredible amount of complex control staging that can be just as generatively controlled as pitch CV processes are in a generative compositional system. In short: it'll drive ya NUTZ...but that's a good thing!
The big changes in recent years, which partly (I think) got kicked off by Don Buchla via the early 200e modules, is the whole 'digital in analog's clothing' paradigm, where you have analog control over a module which, behind the panel, is based around some sort of DSP setup, either via a dedicated DSP, or a cheap micro such as an Arduino or Raspberry Pi. The ability to seamlessly merge that sort of digital generation architecture in with all of the analog stuff is blowing things wide open right now.
I did watch some videos of the new TR-8S and I don't see whats all the hype about, for some reason I am not too keen on the Roland stuff at all, maybe I just need to get my hands on them! I like the Aira series aesthetics tho, very modern and edgy in a good way : D but I have bit of a mentality that if I were to get one, then I would want the rest of the series too haha I did get the Monologue over other similarly priced monos because I already had Minilogue and they go so nicely together! But anyway, I'll keep my eyes on the TR-8S, but Drumbrute will still be my no. 1 choice for now.
Jeez, that's a relief to hear it looks ok to you.. I've been stressing over my choices like crazy lately. It literally has been keeping me up at night.
I'm just about to order vco's/vcf's for the top rack and am now having all sort of second thoughts. Do you really think 2 filters would be super useful? I mean they would be.. But I can't help but wanting the Plaits AND the Rings instead.. Maybe even keep the 3 sisters but swap out that Morpheus for a few Utilities/samplers. GAH. The decisions never end!
That is funny to hear about the Buchla though.. That thing always looked like something that came down inside an Asteroid or something, at least with the Moog's I can look at them and have some idea of what does what. That being said the Buchla's do sound fantastic (from my limited scope of youtube), There's a video of Kaitlyn Aurelia Smith playing the Music Easel and it's really something special.
Love that example too, hah! That about sums up just how different the two companies philosophies were. Do you think Synthesizers and Electronic Music as a whole would be a lot more interesting if Moog never existed perhaps? Or if the Buchla mindset prevailed over the Moog? I wonder..
Hahaha... that looks awesome. I never dared even to start putting together a box like this... But it's definitely looks like fun. Let me see once again what's in there. :D
Awesome, definitely going to look into more of those.
It's interesting, I had learned quite a bit about digital logic, and had never really applied it to much outside of controlling stuff. I'm thrilled to see that it can be applied here for all kinds of really interesting sound generation.
I had seen the Turing Machine mentioned several times; it is another on my "to get" list.
That's actually really true; like I said, it's really crazy to see concepts that I had learned about used in these really cool ways. I like that Eurorack has really become more than just VCO, VCA, VCF, envelopes and all that. If it's changed that much since the 70's, I can only imagine what it will be like in another 40 years.
Well, lessee...the Toppobrillo Quantimator does both quantizing and has an onboard shift register. Also, Mark Verbos's Random Sampling combines a lot of Buchla-esque random source capabilities with a shift register. Those would be an idea. Also, there's several quantizing modules that can also output chords based on incoming CVs, with one huge (and very complex) example being the Instruo Sinfonion, and those could be interesting in a generative situation. Using some separate modules might not be a bad idea, either, and would let you pair something quirky like Erica's microtonal quantizer with a couple of Elby analog shift registers for some real strangeness.
Another useful module would be a quantizer; several of these can extract gate/triggers from voltage curves and output a number of different control signals that could then be fed into logic to create even more complex rhythmic behavior. Joranalogue's Dual Window Comparator is especially neat, since it has several different ways of obtaining gates/triggers beyond the usual single crossing-point activation behavior. As for logic, ARC's Artificial Neural Network looks like it has a lot of 'abuse potential' beyond the typical Boolean gates. A couple of stochastic 'skippers' could be fun, too, and Ladik's are pretty cost-effective/
Plus, don't neglect some of the random sequential devices, most notably a Turing Machine. In its full-blown expanded version, it's a generative fun-house! And as for interesting random sourcing, Nonlinearcircuits' 'Sloth' variations offer a lot of slow-motion change across, in theory, several hours. One of those hooked into an LFO cascade as an extra modulation-variance source could get pretty entertaining.
The neat thing about where Eurorack's at at present is that there are SO MANY choices and possibilities, it ultimately makes creating most any sort of device a piece of cake...provided you're willing to wade through the gazillions of possible modules and combinations of modules. But what we have now is raw power on a scale I'd never envisioned when starting off in electronic media way back at the end of the 1970s. Pretty cool!
Thanks for the feedback.
The size is temporary; I figured I would start small, get a feel for things and not get too overwhelmed. As of now, I have just an 84HP panel. I do intend to expand to something a little larger, or add another 84HP panel. When I do, it will likely consist of more control/modulation modules, perhaps another voice or two, as you suggested.
I'll have to check out Time's Arrow.
Maths is definitely a module I am considering, pairing it with various logic as you suggested sounds pretty interesting.
Are there modules with quantizers and shift registers? I know there are plenty of logic functions out there. I am definitely not against making some myself as well; would be a really good use for the random IC's I have floating around in drawers.
Nice! I like the way you handled the compression on that, too...it 'breathes' well. The middle part with just the sequencer part against the higher sound-mass kinda reminds me of a darker/weirder take on some of Robert Leiner's stuff, but crossed with a noisier sound...more Fennesz or Tim Hecker-ish. The processed guitar sample, also...that works. Definitely on the right track and sounded excellent on the (rather unforgiving) KRK 9000Bs here.
Looking at this, I'm not seeing a lot that can generate elaborate stochastic structures. As a synth, it's an excellent build, but I'm thinking it'll be rather limited for complex generative work, particularly something self-regulating. Have you perhaps considered a second cab to tandem with this one that can handle that level of complexity? Yes, less CAN = more...but for what you're envisioning, it seems a little TOO 'less'.
Consider something that adds some complex stochastic CV pattern generation, like a Catalyst Audio Time's Arrow, then tandem that with some methods for altering clocking behavior that includes both a stochastic element (such as a Euclidian sequencer) and logic functions that complicate potential trigger/gate patterns, which would work nicely with the Pamela's. Lastly, consider some sort of modulator 'cascade', in which you have some low-speed modulators that can continuously vary some downstream LFO or envelope sources, or a function generator such as a Maths, and maybe tandem this with a quantizer + shift register to 'grab' voltage curves for quasi-random arpeggiations. So that way, you'd have a top cab for 'voice' and the lower for 'control'. With something like that, you could also add some sound processing and also subject that to generative control.
Smart move! I've gotten really enamored of the new Minibrute/Rackbrute combo myself. It's cost-effective, portable and the form factor works. With the Minibrute handling the basics, having the Rackbrute to stock up on 'weird' to alter the Minibrute with is a super-attractive possibility. However, having seen the new holy terror that is the Roland TR-8S, I'm actually on a rethink about a Drumbrute for myself. It actually seems as if Roland came up with something new that ISN'T some sort of compromise like the original TR-8 was. Have a look and then you might be reconsidering the Tiptop section in the rack above!
Note that there's a few non-2hp things in here. First and most important, a Koma Strom+ power supply. This thing draws nearly a full amp on the +12v rail, so you HAVE to have a beefy p/s. Second, I had to go with two Erica Picos for an input and output stage, as 2hp doesn't make anything of the sort. No waveshapers or ring mods, either...so that's how the CFM rectifier and Circuit Abbey Twiggy got in there, although they fit the designated form factor.
Anyway, this resulted in a typical 84 hp cab stuffed with the above, plus six VCOs, MIDI interface, six VCAs, two LFOs, three VCFs (two multimode, one LP), four EGs (two AR, two ADSR), four 4-1 mixers, the usual clock, noise, random, S&H and a logic module, plus 16 step x 3 channels of sequencing, quantizer, a delay and stereo reverb. Came out to about $4200, minus the case of course as well as whatever power bussing might be on the inside...which will be very interesting given that you're going to have to figure out how to power up a system that requires 38 bus connections in an 84 hp cab! So, yeah...doable, but there's some interesting challenges that a system like this poses.
Not a bad start, actually...all the basics are there, although if it were me doing the build, I'd try to add a couple more VCAs, maybe a second EG to control the filter separately from the signal amplitude. Also, one or two more VCOs, plus a proper ring modulator to get those metallics and weirdness in the mix. Sparse tho it is, it's actually on the right track!
Here it is. I have a few of the modules already (braids, kinks, the LFO and BRST, the power supply and uJack) and have already had a blast experimenting with what little I can.
Overall, I am interested in generative patches, particularly ambient and noise.
The Mutable Instruments modules are pretty awesome in general; played a lot with the ones available in VCV.
This rack has mostly been inspired by Comparative Irrelevance over on YT. His three module series has helped me learn a lot and shown me that less = more.
Some background: I have some experience with mostly virtual synths through Reason; took some courses on MIDI and synthesizers in college, so I have a general idea of what it is all about.
I'm an electronics major and computer guy, definitely something that makes modular appealing to me, along with watching a machine make music with little to no human interaction. Random patterns and all that sort of thing have always fascinated me.
Ive finally made some decisions! I will get Arturia Minibrute 2S to get my feet wet with modular as well as have plenty of familiar stuff in hand (and what seems to be damn nice and fully fledged sequencer)
After getting the Minibrute 2S, I will save up for the Rackbrute 6U so I'll have neat little package to expand on and what do I have here is the Minibrute expansion rack Ive designed with simple drum machine from TipTop (alltho I might switch those for other modules if I get the Arturia Drumbrute which also goes well with the modular gear with all individual outputs from the machine!), some Mutable Instruments ambient gear as well as MATHS!!! and Expert Sleepers ES-8 that I will use for interfacing with VCV Rack to get heaps of more modulation and sound possibilities!
Hi,
I really like the concept of Pico System from Erica synth. I'm thinking about a similarly usable small entry-level systems from other vendors. How would you design a mini-system from 2HP for example? Any ideas/suggestions?
Cheers, A.
Hi all. This is the rack that I’m working towards at present; I’m building the GMSN modules myself and some of the others also as DIY. I want to put together a rig purely for sound design in the techno realm and handling all drum sounds and sequencing via software alone.
Any thoughts as a starter for ten are appreciated.
Just received my 4ms QPLFO in the mail from @Jpald . An absolute pleasure to do business with this fine gentleman! The module came perfectly packed and shipping went super fast, especially considering it had to travel quite a few kilometers to get to my place. :D
OK...picking up where we left off in the 1960s, let's start off looking at the beginnings of synthesizer music. Around 1964, both Bob Moog (in upstate New York) and Don Buchla (working with the San Francisco Tape Music Center) separately developed voltage-controlled synthesizers, beginning the development of what most people would recognize as 'electronic music'...despite the fact that that already existed for decades previous. The new technology, however, allowed for the instruments and the music made with them to be more readily encountered by the general public. Even synthesizers predated this, such as the RCA Mark II at the Columbia-Princeton Center for Electronic Music or Oskar Sala's Mixturtrautonium as deployed at WDR Cologne and elsewhere. These instruments, though, were anything but accessible; only a few Mixturtrautoniums were made (along with their East German counterpart, the Subharchord), and the gargantuan Mark II took up an entire room, bolted to the floor and not open to public access.
Moog and Buchla changed this. For starters, their respective systems were much smaller, even portable when compared to the Mark II or Mixturtrautonium. They actually felt more like playable instruments. Comparatively, the RCA Mark II required users to program the synth via numerous switches, mixers, cables, and unwieldy punch-roll contraptions that dictated that the instrument could never be used 'live'. It also looked user-hostile, like some sort of defense-contractor machinery cobbled into functioning as some mad sci-fi movie prop...and in fact, the defense-contractor part was rather accurate! Moog and Buchla housed their devices in organic wooden cabinets, in contrast, and what you were working with was clearly labelled and laid out.
We're only going to look at one RCA Mark II composition here for starters, since it was created around the same time as the inception of the voltage-controlled synth. And that piece is...
1) Charles Wuorinen: “Time's Encomium” (1968/69). By the time Wuorinen had completed this work on the RCA Mark II, the development of voltage-controlled synthesizers was ramping into high gear. A commission from Nonesuch Records (which also commissioned Morton Subotnick's “Silver Apples of the Moon” around the same time), this won the Pulitzer for music in 1970, becoming the first electronic work to win the prize. But even so, Wuorinen noted the Mark II's limitations in his notes on the work, pointing out that the piece had been limited to 12-tone structure and pitch-derived temporal relations by the Mark II's idiosyncracies. This would be one of the final works of note with the instrument, in fact, as Moog, Buchla, and their offshoots were creating electronic instruments at the same time that far surpassed the Mark II's capabilities.
Now, let's move on, and start into the lineage of works that involves synthesizers that we would recognize today...some of which, in fact, are still in active manufacture!
2) Morton Subotnick: “Silver Apples of the Moon” (1967). This work was actually the first electronic composition commissioned by a record label (Nonesuch) and slated for public release. Having moved to New York City, taking with him a sizable Buchla 100 system, Subotnick realized this work in a self-built studio designed by him specifically for synthesizer-based electronic composition. It's still an amazing listen, and I've even heard more adventuresome DJs spin Part II of the work into sets against a minimal track such as Maurizio's “M5”. It works. Subotnick's palette of sounds on this work and the following “The Wild Bull” did quite a bit to inform later electronic musicians of the timbral and rhythmic potential lurking in the Buchla's circuitry. But the one that grabbed everyone's attention was...
3) Walter Carlos: “Switched-on Bach” (1968). Released as part of a push by Columbia Records into newer musical territory, alongside Terry Riley's “In C” and a rather forgettable album entitled “Rock and Other Four-Letter Words”, Carlos's realization of Bach's works in fully-electronic media seized the public's attention that year, and still commands that attention decades later. It was a fixture at #1 in Billboard's classical charts from 1969 to 1972, in fact. While the album was derided by many traditional electronic composers of its day (Stockhausen referred to it as 'old wine in new bottles'), it introduced the wider public ear to the new electronic sound spectrum. It still remains influential to this day, and should be mandatory listening to anyone involving themselves in electronic music of any genre. Which is a little odd, because the Moog synthesizer which was critical to 'SOB' was featured prominently...but not obviously...on...
4) The Doors: “Strange Days” (1967). The second album by the LA quartet, this album gave them the luxury of expanding their level of studio experimentation, and during its production the West Coast reps for R.A. Moog, Paul Beaver and Bernie Krause, were often employed to open the magic of the Moog to the group. The title track, which opens the album, prominently features the Moog, but in use as a processor for Jim Morrison's vocals instead of its more typical role. There's a lot of Moog on this album, in fact, but more often than not used as a method of sonically-tampering with the band's sound. Brian Eno would later come to prominence with Roxy Music in a similar role, 'treating' the band's sound with EMS gear. But this was the first of that. The Moog finally came out of the studio woodwork on a bigger scale on...
5) The Beatles: “Abbey Road” (1969). Having acquired a Moog system and some tutelage from Bernie Krause, George Harrison added the Moog to the musical forces of the Beatles on this album, the last they were to record as a unit. And it's all over on this album, from the multitracked parts on “Here Comes the Sun” to the wind noise in the final minutes of “I Want You (She's So Heavy)”, the Moog was a critical part of the album's sound and was the first major, out-in-front pop usage of the new technology. The Beatles' use of the synthesizer cemented the instrument in the pop music industry's growing arsenal of important devices, and after this, the presence of electronics was more commonly-heard in popular music.
6) Popol Vuh: “Affenstunde” (1970). On the other hand, the growing presence of the new electronic instruments was to allow other musicians to explore much farther afield in their own efforts. On “Affenstunde”, Florian Fricke utilized the first Moog IIIp system purchased by a German musician to create two sides of music that, while it was released on a pop label, went so much farther beyond any boundary in 'pop' and forged the initial steps toward many future genres that rely on electronic instrumentation. While Fricke was to step back from the heavy use of electronic instrumentation on later Popol Vuh efforts, this initial release was an apt start-point for much of the trippier synth work that emerged from Europe.
7) The White Noise: “An Electric Storm” (1969). And this was very much the starting-point for a lot of the more extreme synth work. Teaming up with BBC Radiophonic Workshop veterans Delia Derbyshire and Brian Hodgson, American ex-pat David Vorhaus created this very strange album that alternates between novelty tracks, jarring sound-collages, eerie atmospherics, and outright noise that predicted much of what would later be termed 'industrial', especially on the album's title track. Vorhaus and company made extensive use of a very different synthesizer for their work, the then-new EMS VCS3, which can be heard everywhere in many forms on this release. If the Beatles paved the way for pop music groups such as ELP and Yes and Popol Vuh for much of the 'kosmische' scene in Germany, The White Noise set the stage for later innovators such as Throbbing Gristle, Cabaret Voltaire, and SPK.
Now, let's jump out of the pop realm for a bit. By the early 1970s, new music composers had finally accustomed themselves to the massive change in technology that synthesizers brought, and to entire new realms of composition that the equipment allowed. This actually opened the door for major aesthetic changes to enter into new music in the post-sixties period.
8) Eliane Radigue: “Adnos I – III” (1973-80). Radigue, a French composer previously associated with Pierre Henry and the Club d'Essai, worked in New York City for a period in the early 1970s, and first encountered a Buchla 100 system installed at NYU. Recognizing the potential for the new technology to create a music that was akin to a slow 'unfolding' of sound, she purchased an ARP 2500 system and returned to Paris to build a new personal studio around the new instrument. The resulting 'Adnos' works emerged from that, with an interval in between the first and second works where she intensively studied Tibetan Buddhism. These three works, all quite lengthy and concentrating on minimal, evolving drone textures, represent a major sea change in how electronic media would be approached in new music. The synthesizer, in these works, is of critical importance, since it allowed for the long-sustained tones and sound structures that are critical to them.
9) Brian Eno: “Discrete Music” (1975). Similarly, electronics allowed Eno, who was then well into his post-Roxy Music solo career, to create simplistic sonic textures that lent themselves to the development of what he termed 'ambient music'. But even moreso, “Discrete Music” was the beginning of his work with 'generative' processes, as the combination of a VCS3 with a sequencer plus a long-duration tape delay system allowed for the complex interaction of very simple musical structures to form very intricate formations, while at the same time never vectoring off into the more chaotic areas of other chance-based compositional techniques.
10) Mother Mallard's Portable Masterpiece Company: s/t (1970/73). Back in the USA, composer David Borden, who worked with Robert Moog on the development of the Minimoog as well as improvements to their modular systems, formed this ensemble in upstate New York, with the intention of creating a live performing ensemble based solely on electronic instrumentation. This album featured works by both Borden and fellow member Steve Drews, but in live performance the ensemble also performed music by minimalists Terry Riley, Philip Glass, and Steve Reich. MMPMC's efforts were critical to the future of electronic instrumentation, as they represented one of the very first efforts to utilize synthesizer technology in a live concert setting, thereby creating a 'proof of concept' that convinced Moog that synthesizers were not simply meant for studio settings, opening the door to Moog pursuing instrument development that would create the first performance-oriented synths such as the Minimoog, etc.
...and thus, the stage was set. Emerging from a purely experimental origin, the synthesizer was now a normally-encountered and often-used instrument. In the years following, further development of both electronic music and instruments blossomed. But in these notable efforts above, the idea that electronic instruments could be worth investing time and money into was first brought up and demonstrated aptly. It also marked the shift in the development of the synthesizer apart from the avant-garde musical realm, retargeting the R&D money and efforts toward the more typical music creators and performers, changing the course of electronic instruments from being an 'elite' spectrum of devices and toward a more democratized direction. Quite a few companies that emerged in the wake of these developments still exist to this day, having taken up the creation and development of electronic instruments after having seen that their purpose went far beyond that of major universities and studios. Also, many musicians were encouraged by these developments to also plunge into this new sonic dimension, with quite a few of these remaining influential to the present day.
The development of the synthesizer was a massive change in music, therefore, with repercussions that will likely continue for centuries in the future. Just as the development of the piano was directly related to the emergence of mechanized industry in the mid-1700s and altered music's direction to the present day, the emergence of electronic technology in the 20th century was a revolution that enabled a similar course of development, with the synthesizer emerging as the result. Really, we are very early-on into what these instruments are likely to do to music, and it's just as possible that someone reading these words here on Modulargrid in the present day may go on to be a part of that continuing change.
Ours is an interesting and storied heritage. Embrace it, enjoy it, and create what comes next!
Would it be possible to export the entire module database to a CSV or Excel compatible file? Sometimes I'd like to run a more complex search or filter than the website enables.
It's not a bad idea, except that some of the databases change so rapidly that by the time you'd got done with the offline work, there's a possibility that the export file might be obsolete. One thing I've noticed from doing the past two 'Kick Ass' reviews of selected Eurorack modules is that that pool of modules can grow by several dozen new entries a month...which makes it easy for me to highlight a dozen or so for the review bits, but the rapid degree of accumulation could be a problem for offline use. Especially around certain points in the year, such as NAMMs, Musik Messe/Superbooth, etc. Some of the new 'drops' at other times can be pretty significant, too; just the other day, Mutable pitched out the new iteration of their 'macro oscillator' and successor to Braids, the Plaits module.
Frankly, I'd also be curious if there were some spreadsheet export functions as well...but not anywhere near that magnitude.
Would it be possible to export the entire module database to a CSV or Excel compatible file? Sometimes I'd like to run a more complex search or filter than the website enables.
Also, maybe this feature already exists - is it possible to drag and drop modules between racks such as in the Command Center view?
Yes, I have an outboard Mixer and everything is on its own tracks. Also have an Eventide H9 Max in the send/return for delays and reverbs and such. Staying busy for a long time is the plan !!
The Frames clone is just perfect. This gives you eight VCAs, four audio-specific, and the other four to shuttle between linear and exponential duties as needed. Lots of nice modulation there, the Morpheus is a killer fit...damn, this is looking like a serious piece of circuitry! I think you're awfully close to a stop-point here; the only things at this point would be up to you, if there's something else you think has GOT to go in there. As for me, I don't see any potential major alterations...alongside your other stuff mentioned above, this is a boxful of raw power. I'd still go with the Minibrute 2s versus the Dreadboxes, though...mucho patchpoints, has the weird Brute VCOs, the yowling Steiner filter...yeah. I definitely see that, add the Keystep, screeching halt. Perfect.
Buchla...yes, very influential. I've used a very large 200/300 hybrid system way in the past and while the sound is...my gawd, it's that frickin' SOUND...it is more than a bit confusing to patch if you're not used to how Don started doing things with the 200 series, separating control and audio signals nearly totally. I've not had an opportunity to work with a 100, though, and that might be a happier experience given that you don't have to separate those signal paths; it's a lot more like Eurorack, with 3.5mms, everything connects (in theory) to everything. Another telling point about the difference between Moog and Buchla: the very first time I encountered a Moog system, waaaay back when, I couldn't get it to do diddly-squat. But the first time with the 200/300 (granted, that was later on), I had that thing emitting sonic havoc in pretty short order. Which is kind of funny...the Moog LOOKS simpler, but there's a lot of hidden ill engineering behavior there, whereas the Buchla was designed by a bunch of acidheads and could theoretically be worked even when the patch panels seemed to be melting! Ergo, it's actually a bit 'friendlier', especially the 100 Series according to a few people I knew who used one themselves.
As for them being 'outliers'...that was by design. Moog wanted something that was AN INSTRUMENT, by god...where Buchla was working with the San Francisco Tape Music Center's experimental music community firsthand in the early-mid 1960s, and there was more of an idea to replicate 'classic studio' techniques electronically with the first devices. As such, there wasn't an aim to make it 'traditional' in any way, while Moog was actually aiming his systems at a more orthodox clientele. I think it says it all in that Moog debuted his earliest system at an AES show, whereas Buchla's first big public outing was for one of the Merry Pranksters' 'Acid Test' events.
Ooh that plaits does look pretty wonderful doesn't it.. Good call on the 2nd filter I looked around and the Morpheus looks amazing, but it's pretty large which makes it a tough choice for my little system...
Here's my new edited version:
I feel like I'm getting closer to something coherent and fun here.
I swapped out the distings and the sequential circuit to make room for the Morpheus, also swapped the Mangrove for a 2hp osc to make room for the Frames Clone (what do you think of this choice?) It would either be the frames or a 2nd Plaits.. But considering I plan on using this system with some outside sound sources I figured more modulation couldn't be a bad thing..
That's an interesting idea with the Minibrute 2s, I hadn't considered that one.. My plans HAD been to run this system alongside a Koma Field Kit, Lyra 8 (which I already got), Dreadbox (nyx or erebus) and an Arturia Key step.
But it's all just a pretty murky vision at this point.
I guess it only makes sense that those old systems would have problems they didn't know to work around back then.. It's so easy to fetishize those old beasts because of how epic they look and the price they cost, but in reality we are super lucky to live in a time where I kind cram all that ^ into a rack not much bigger than a pizza box.
Have you played with much Buchla stuff? Buchla is a very interesting mystery to me. His systems are so super influential on the world of synthesizers, yet seem very much on the outskirts of it all considering..
Frickin' excellent! All of the interconnectivity between the kb37 rig and this stack should keep you busy for some time. I take it you've got a proper outboard mixer, or at least a digital interface that has enough inputs to separate all of this onto their respective tracks? The DFAM is something I've certainly considered...not for drums, however, but more for its 2 x 8 step sequencer and to separate out the various submodules in it via the patchpanel to drop into other signal paths. Ultimately, I think that might be its best use, and for the price, that's a lot of module functions!
I think that, with the early Arturia stuff, there were some concerns. But they've got some excellent stuff out now, starting around the period where they introduced the Microbrute. I have one; I think it's built like a brick s**thouse, actually! Definitely an 'everyday user', not something I have to be delicate with. Same goes for my BSPs, and I'm digging using the Keystep with my modular these days. While I would've given them a pass back when they were coming out with things like the Origin, they've majorly stepped their hardware game up.
Braids is supplanted by Plaits now, so toss that and go with the V2 that it is. Also Clouds...but in that case, Mutable's not issued a revised version (yet?). So right off the bat, you have to rejigger the spacings...ha!
Anyway, yes, the modulation sources are kinda lacking here. I would suggest looking at something that gives you multiple loopable AD envelopes, since those can do double-duty as LFOs as well. Don't worry much about the panel size, because that's kinda compromised as it is because of the above issue. Better still, consider these as something to clear space for, and given there's some redundancies already, you might be better off with that. Check, of course, the ever-popular (and for good reason!) MATHS, but also Erogenous Tones' RADAR/BLIP combo...putting those two in gives you massive modulation power and also likely save some money because you could dispense with a lot of single-function modules (and their costs) in the process.
The last thing here that bugs me a bit is actually the sequencer. While Doepfer's A-154/155 combo is a workhorse, there's better alternatives that've come along since that was introduced many years ago. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if Dieter was considering an update to it at some point, like he's done for some other modules in recent years. One that recently got put out that, frankly, I would (and have) look at is this new device from Golt!...the 'Red Light District'. The timing capabilities are much more extensive, as well as the pattern activity, amount of steps, etc etc etc. It also has internal CV quantizing, plus MIDI sync and can also output DIN sync for locking up classic Roland/Korg gear. Or perhaps go outboard altogether with several standalone options that're out right now that can do both MIDI and CV.
So now that I've totally rEKT! your system...heh...you might also think about how to increase the functional density of the overall setup. Devices like MATHS and Erogenous Tones' stuff allows for that, jamming maximum function into modules that, while they seem spendy, actually leave you coming out ahead on function vs price. Losing things like single-function VCA modules, for example; let's say you yanked the two single-function Doepfer VCAs, for example. That would leave you only 2 hp short on the space needed for an Erogenous Tones VC8...which is EIGHT linear VCAs, plus mixing functions, in that space + 2 more hp. That's one example, and there's likely to be bunches more if you take a look.
Actually, that's a lot closer than the starting rack! Another fairly complex filter would be a good idea, plus I'd just go ahead and swap the Mangroves with another Plaits, given what it is (Olivier's PERFECTED Braids...yeaaahhh!!!). Not bad, now...if you slapped this into a Rackbrute and then strapped that to a Minibrute 2s, that would be a king-hell impressive small rig. And the fact that that sort of solution isn't all that spendy...well...
As for the Moog 55...ahhh, it LOOKS impressive. But the sad fact is that, compared to even modern-day MU-format systems (and certainly Eurorack), the shortcomings become really apparent really fast! For starters, there's the old and awful S-trigger system, which Moog Music STILL insists on using in its modular reproduction systems. Bob had this idea to use a logical hi-state (+5v) to indicate 'off', and a drop below a certain threshold on down to 0v as 'on'. if there's only one or two devices in this arrangement, it's workable. But there's a certain point, which varied for each module and certainly for each system, where connecting too many S-trig bus connections leads to a voltage sag...and then your bus would send a spurious 'on', often when doing so would drive you up the wall! This is, in fact, why we use buffered mults these days when voltage levels are critical across numerous connections, such as in VCO CVs which need to be stable to maintain tuning. But Bob didn't consider adding any sort of regeneration for the S-trig bus, so...well, you get the idea. And that's just ONE issue among several annoying ones. Honestly, these days, we have it easy; many older modular systems contained idiosyncracies that often amounted to 'boobytraps', since the whole concept of what a synthesizer should/could be was being worked out in tandem with the process of 'what's a synthesizer in the first place?' Mistakes got made...and got entrenched!
Well, consider this idea: lose the Linix and put in two Intellijel Quad VCAs instead. Those have a variable response curve, so you can actually tailor the dynamic response to exponential for audio, but roll it back to linear for CV work, or hit any point in between, so that could allow you to back the curve down for your background parts, but let you go full-swing exponential for your leads and anything else that needs to jump out. Also, that'd take you to eight VCAs, plus both modules also work as mixers and have 6 dB boost circuits which will help in getting a little more saturation/crunch in the audio when that's kicked in. The Cold Mac is actually pretty interesting in of itself for screwy modulation tricks, so that might be a keeper. As for the Triatt...ahhh, look at Livestock's Felix...SIX attenuverters in the same space plus summing into a buffered mult, configurable as either 6 -> 1 or 3 -> 1 x 2, and it only costs a whopping $2 more than the Triatt!
As for the compression on the mix...you might benefit a little from looking into the issues surrounding the Fletcher-Munson curves. See here: https://ledgernote.com/columns/mixing-mastering/fletcher-munson-curve/ . Now, while this mainly deals with how we perceive 'loudness', it's worth noting that if a mix has a lot of signal build-up in the ranges where we don't perceive loudness as well as at other ranges, you start to get this...well, 'lump'. And to get things to cut through the 'lump', you have to have more aggressive changes in transients so that those important lines in the track stand out. With linear VCAs, what happens is that the VCA follows a linear mathematical relationship to its control signal. Up the signal by 2, the VCA's response is to increase level by 2. But with exponential response, up by 2 actually equals a response by the VCA of up by 4...which makes sense when you consider that exponential VCAs also get referred to as 'logarithmic' VCAs. The response curve follows a logarithmic scale: 1, 4, 9, 16, etc.
This does a few things, mixing-wise. First of all, the snappier transients tend to jump out better, since we tend toward experiencing changes in apparent loudness logarithmically. With variable-response VCAs, this actually is pretty cool...you can alter the response of the VCAs necessary to create an illusory 'foreground/background', giving a mix something approximating 'depth of field' easily. It also helps to break up a loudness 'lump', because at that point, everything can follow different transient behavior and it's not all stuck at the same level. As for the heavy compression...ahh, a little study of the 'literature' might be useful. Spend a little time listening to tracks that, although they might be 25+ years old, STILL have the power to blow a dancefloor the f**k up...I'm thinking things such as Chicago ghetto house, Detroit techno circa 1990-95, harder Euro tracks, and the like. Notice how the groove 'breathes', dynamically, in these cases. That amount of dynamic range and interplay is part of those tracks' secret to get people to go nuts...because it grabs them, feels animated, and such. A lot of the EDM these days is afflicted with the technical problems that arose with the 'loudness wars' issue which stemmed from trying to jam dynamic range into the tightest possible range while making the overall volume as loud as possible, and THAT actually came from radio, where the idea was that if you have a 'loud' signal, people will listen to your station more. For stuff for gettin' down, this doesn't work, because it kills all of the transient motion and contrast and makes the rhythmic feel really weak.
Anyway, consider the module changes as well as the notes above on compression...I think you'll find both pretty useful...
Thanks for the replies. I've looked into Arturia gear, but haven't liked the way it "feels". The 2s looks interesting though. I am going to look into that 176hp case as an option for the future. That seems like a great deal. I think I am going to use my 48hp case for an effects module to run the DFAM through. I think thats probably more what I need at this moment.
Hi guys, I want to dive in modular synthesis for a while now. I am planning to buy the mother 32 this summer to start out, and the modules in my rack are those chosen by a friend of mine. I don't know exactly how they would complement my mother 32. Please, I would love some advise and/ or recommandations about nice modules that would go nice with my mother 32. Thanks in advance!
Hello all!
Trying to figure out how to finalize my two Doepfer LC9 racks. I also have 1 rack with 2 x Mother 32 + Behringer Model D (spaces left there as well = later topic). I think that Roland and Moog is well represented in my three racks. Now, I have two black holes in my right hand rack - one 14 HP and one 18 HP. I have a gut-feeling telling that I need more ADSR/ENV/LFO's. I like 2HP very much and the same goes with Make Noise and Dopefer. Suggestions, anyone?
I see what you mean (if only a little bit). It is amazing what we can accomplish so easily now. Hell we can do more musically on our smart phones than anybody could 100 years ago I'll bet.
That's too cool you got to use a Model 55... Damn.
I'm starting to realize maybe Generative is a bit above my head for now though. I love the idea of it, and I love listening to it, but I don't know if it's something that's so easy to just jump into as I first thought.
By the way that piece you shared with me was epic. Really beautiful. That would be amazing to witness in a concert hall or someplace I'll bet.
I'm toying with new ideas for Racks now, simple sound sources, lots of modulation like the one you shared (which looks really intersting by the way), I wish I could see it in action to better understand how it would all gel together.
Here's a little prototype of a build I made tonight, it could probably use more filters and VCA's and probably some other stuff I'm not thinking of. I haven't even gotten my first module yet and already 6u feels too limiting haha.
Thanks for your feedback. I did also use a lot of digital processing and compression so the track is quite squashed. So you think I should get an exponential VCA? is there one in particular you would recommend? With an exponential VCA/Triatt/Cold Mac added do you think I'll have enough utilities?
Had a listen...and yes, not only is the lack of exponential VCAs obvious in the build, it's also obvious on the track. All of the dynamics are really sort of flat; there's no actual 'hit' to them, which is sad because the track, musically, sounds good...but had the different transient material been able to 'punch' more, it'd really be banging. Linear VCAs aren't bad per se (and they're what you need for controlling CV levels), but to get amplitude changes that listeners perceive as being more hitting, that punch thru the mix better, you need the exponential VCAs to get those big amplitude swings. That way, the track would 'breathe' better, not sound so all-the-same in terms of dynamic ebb and flow.
The only other thing I would question is losing the Tides. Having something that can do the slower LFO curves for gradual changes of parameters is pretty useful for just about any sort of music...slow change is what makes music 'go somewhere' over extended periods of time. Adding the Xaoc phaser, in fact, would be a prime use for the Tides' slow modulation abilities to give a track a trippier overall vibe. The Batumi, though, makes good sense as a swap for the A-143-3, but also see if you can find a way to jam the Poti expander switch module in for it as well. Maybe consider not going with the Rings? I kinda think that, given what was on the sample track, you'd lose a lot of the resonant subtilty that it can bring...it would potentially get buried in the mix. OTOH, adding something that could bring a bit more 'grit' into the sound, especially on your more lead-ish parts...that could work better, since the leads would 'cut' more and stand out. Just a few observations...
Hey everyone, I've been wiggling for about a year now and I'm planning on switching some stuff around in my system and expanding it. I produce idmish music but I'm not really sure what to call it. Here is a track I made with mostly my modular if you're curious about the type of music I make. Here is my current rack:
Here is what I'm planning on adding/removing:
What do you guys think of this as an expansion? What am I missing? Are there any glaring issues with my rack? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
I've got to agree with dinorrific's observation above that a patchable system might be a better next step, although I'm more inclined to suggest an Arturia Minibrute 2 over a Mother32. I like what Arturia's up to with their system integration...the Eurorack cases that fit together with the 2 or 2s, complete with handle and stand, and nothing being hideously expensive. Plus with the Eurobrute cases being 88 hp, you can pop the DFAM into that instead and still have room for some further augmentation. Have a look at that setup: https://www.arturia.com/minibrute-2/overview . The price on the Eurobrutes are also really nice; the 176 hp 6U version retails right now for $359, power included.
You might be right, three full-blown VCO's may be overkill, but an LFO would be very useful and free up your other audio-rate oscillator for things like FM or a secondary voice to mix in. You also definitely need a couple of VCA's - one for the voice to fully silence once the main envelope closes, and one to be able to play around with things like bringing modulation in with an envelope, etc. There are filters (granted, with only one filter) that include a built-in VCA, like the SSF Pole-Zero or Mutable Instruments Ripples, but a dedicated VCA - or even one included in a mixer of some sort - is a necessary utility to have on hand.
