6U 126 hp rack, opinion needed

Hi! I was planning on building this system with diverse sound sources, capable of performing on its own
and able to provide a bit of sound design capabilities.

Is there something that can be improved/changed?
Thanks for any advice!

https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_1302645.jpg

EDITED Feb 12th 2022, 00:01

please help us, help you by providing a link to a public rack (copy and paste the url)

I would have done it for you, if your racks were public and not private...

Had a look. WAY too many sound sources, and WAY too little in the way of "helper modules". The workflow also seems to be quite jacked-up; I can't exactly see how this would be patched in a way that would make sense.

Figure out what SENSIBLE amount of sources that you need, back down the superfluous stuff, and add the various modulation and utility sources this needs. I mean...dude, this thing's only got four VCAs, and while that's fine for summing a couple of VCOs, how do you expect to control the modulation amplitudes, etc? And how are you going to send those VCAs any envelope signals with just one Peaks for the WHOLE RIG?

I'd strongly suggest that you jettison this build, really. There's too much that doesn't work here, so you shouldn't use it as a restarting point. Then begin again, but this time take time to study experienced builders' and synthesists' builds to see how THEY do this, where you'll probably find a ratio along about 1 part audio sources/modifiers and 3 parts modulation, control etc. And if you don't have VCV Rack installed on your machine, install it. VCV is a VERY comprehensive and FREE Eurorack simulator (and then some!), so you can set up similar builds on it and then troubleshoot how they might or might not work in hardware. And TAKE TIME doing this; really good MG builds can sometimes take weeks or more...because it's important to avoid screwing up in ways that can "doom" the build's usability.

https://vcvrack.com/

+1 on what @Lugia says

see my signature for some useful guidance

Hi! Thank you for your feedback.
I understand the general meaning of having more “helper” modules.
A bit of explaining on how the rack was conceived is required…
As I said, I was planning to have many sound sources that can give me choice and a drum section that is mostly sample based.
About workflow and patching: The main sequencer will trigger the oscillators, many of which doesn’t necessarily require an envelope (plaits, rings), then they can go into the vca and be summed or directly into an fx module and straight into the mixer. Drums have their own mixer that is sent in the main mixer, and they are sequenced either by the per|former or pams. Pretty straightforward to me.
Now, about modulation…
When you say that envelopes are only generated by peaks for a 3 oscillator 6U 126 hp it sounds really like poor design. But that’s not true, the system has plenty of envelope and lfos, that can be generated by the sequncers (per|former and Pam) and don’t forget about Maths, disting, uO_C. (Attenuation is provided by both ends, sending and receiving module)
The funny thing is that I didn’t plan to use peaks as modulation source!

Your argument is still valid, I think the system can get rid of a voice or more and incorporate more CV mangling options, and of course one more VCA.
Do you have some go-to module to suggest?

Thanks

ok I had a quick look at your jpg - urgh

@Lugia is 100% correct

too many sound sources, not enough sound processors, not enough modulation sources (or envelopes) - performer looks like it outputs gates - which are on/off envelopes generally used to open and determine the length of more complex envelopes, and definitely not enough utilities

look at the formula in my signature - it is the best way to get a balanced modular that offers the most versatility for the least expense

you have 7-9 sound sources, 3 sound modifiers etc etc

only 1 envelope and a fucking huge delay which takes up 1/2 a row nearly...

have a serious think about your mixing solutions including the i/o module

on the upper row - plaits is dual mono, as is the twin waves, rings is stereo ish, morphagene is stereo going into a wasp (mono) and a huge delay (stereo) and your have only an stmix to mix on that is 4 stereo ins + a stereo aux for the drum mixer - no panning of mono sound sources and no send/return - unless you count the vca - which isn't particularly useful for stereo mixing - and then you have no vcas for cv - not really up to the job

on the lower row - peaks (if used for drums) is dual mono, plonk is mono and you also have sample drum (not sure as no click through but probably mono) and fx aid which is stereo - again no panning or send/return for the mixer

and where are you getting a peaks from - used or cloned? as it's been discontinued for at least 3 years! everyhting else is at least kind of available - in production - but pandemic is fucking that up quite a bit still and for at least the next year!

on top of that there's no sub mixers to allow you to patch multiple sound sources to the same filter or combine modulation sources (a matrix mixer is good for this!!!)

and that's just scratching the surface of how flawed this rack is - nothing that really leverages the important reasons to go into modular - logic, sequential switches, wave shapers/folders/multipliers, ring mods, etc etc the list goes on

IMO it's a really boring use of 252hp - buy these modules and you'll either grow bored and think modular is shit and sell it - or end up having to buy a second case in 3 months - when you realise that @Lugia and I are correct and you really need the extra utilities to get this to actually function as you hoped it would

Thank you for your time in replying to my post!
I will put more time in researching a more efficient arrangement, incorporating all your suggestions.
Happy patching!

Hello @ascrawa,

In the case that you might not already be aware of this, I thought I'd mention that the Westlicht PER|FORMER is offered as a DIY build only, not as a complete module from Westlicht. In addition, it is only offered as a bare PCB and faceplate - I haven't seen it sold as a complete kit anywhere (in other words, you would have to source all of your own components). I don't know if you have any previous soldering or electronics experience, but it is stated as being a project for experienced builders: the PCB appears to require a hefty amount of surface-mount soldering, which is something that I personally don't feel ready to attempt even after completing about 10 through-hole DIY module projects of my own. Of course, you can buy one built by a third-party individual, but I would be strongly hesitant to do that personally, unless the builder has proven themselves to be absolutely capable.

As far as thoughts on the rack build you've presented, I agree with a lot of what @Lugia and @JimHowell1970 have already mentioned above. Some specific suggestions/thoughts I have on it are:

1. I would at least halve the number of sound sources in the rack. For one this size I would shoot for a total of four or less voices.
2. Rainmaker is a huge module. I would only put it in a rack this size if you have only one or two voices that the rack is being built around, with Rainmaker being planned as a major component of one or both of those voices. Removing Rainmaker would free up a lot of room for other things (see below).
3. If you go with four or less voices, and as an alternative to the PER|FORMER, I would recommend Erica Synths Black Sequencer. In my opinion, it is one of the most feature rich and user-friendly "in-rack" sequencers available for Eurorack. The firmware is still being refined, but it is already an excellent and highly capable module.
4. I'd add at least one more filter. Though, it all depends on what types of voices and sounds you ultimately decide to go for.
5. I would add quite a lot more dedicated modulation sources. I'm not a big fan of multi-function modules like Ornament & Crime and Disting. I find it more satisfying and usable to have a user layout designed around a specific function, rather than having a generic/minimal layout trying to cater to many possible functions. That is just my personal preference though. And it is always important to remember that you'll only be able to use a limited number of those possible functions at any given time (one, in most cases, as far as I understand).

I see those as some starting points for a revision of the rack, but certainly not a final or comprehensive set of suggestions. You'll find that there will be further refinements to make as you change things up, especially in the utility module department.

I hope you find some of that useful!
-Chace

Decided to give it a go myself. I tried to keep as many of your original modules in it as I could. It actually looks quite similar to one of my own cases, so some of my own preferences and approaches show through. That certainly doesn't mean that my choices are "right" or "optimal", and probably means that you would (and should) make your own further edits to it to fit what you want it to do and how you want to use it. It's just a layout to consider. Lugia and Jim, and anyone else, feel free to critique it too. I'm curious to hear what you think of this particular build as well. Feel free to ask about any of the particular choices I made. If I decided to come back to it later I would probably end up making some changes myself. I hope this helps in some way!

Made a change or three here, but the most drastic thing it needed was to clarify the signal flow.

The biggest changes were down at the right end of the upper row. I tossed the VC Mixer, then this opened up some more space, along with relocating the 333 (and turning it into a 321, since it's now a modulation nexus), and then a little graveyard dust and black cat bones, and now your audio row ends with a panning stereo mixer WITH a quad exponental VCA before it for CV level control. But also, some of the debris down on the bottom got pitched, most notably the RCD as I swapped it for a Noise Engineering Fractio Solum. That now gives you CV over clock division and multiplication. And the triple S&H went bye-bye; what you seem to have been shooting for there was probably better served with an Intellijel Steppy, but I couldn't find the 6 hp it needs. Oh, and the PWRchekr, since you've got a convenient 1 hp hole, and it's good to know the condition of your DC rails.

Hey @Lugia, thanks for taking the time to poke at the rack!

My thought on the 333 was to have both a buffered mult and unity mixer if wanting to use both Plaits and Twin Waves together for the same voice. That was also the purpose of having the DTM directly after that, but it only has three inputs, hence the 333 before that if wanting to use all five outputs from the Plaits and Twin Waves. It did feel a bit large at 6HP for that purpose though. I could have easily accomplished that in 4HP, or just had a second 4HP mixer and a buff mult at 2HP.

I agree, a Steppy would be better than the RCD, but yeah, not enough space. Glad to still have the Fractio Solum in there though to use with the Doepfer S&H and to sync the Mimeophon.

VCAs without attenuators have always seemed odd to me, as I always want to attenuate the CV signal. I do understand it's nice when space is limited. How do you typically use them? Do you generally attenuate before with a different module (like with the 321 and Maths, in this particular rack), or just use the full raw CV in some cases (which always feel too crazy for me)?

Definitely digging the addition of the PWR Checker and Qx.

Thanks again for the reply!
-Chace

VCAs without attenuators have always seemed odd to me, as I always want to attenuate the CV signal. I do understand it's nice when space is limited. How do you typically use them? Do you generally attenuate before with a different module (like with the 321 and Maths, in this particular rack), or just use the full raw CV in some cases (which always feel too crazy for me)?
-- Chace

The raw CV. However, that build version relies on the Doepfer stereo mixer downstream, and the quad VCA module gives you more or less equal amplitudes inputted to the mixer, and at that point you can adjust the audio levels instead of futzing with the CV levels. It's a better gain structure, in the end, and a lot easier to use. So all you do is to feed those with envelopes, etc...the usual VCA modulation suspects...and work with the outputs. No need to attenuate the modulation CVs!

Hi! Thank you for all your reply, especially to @Chace, your thorough explaination with an actual case suggestion was really appreciated.
So, I tried to add a CV processing section to the initial design and a more flexible signal routing picking up on the words of the other two users who commented before.
(Those are minor changes of my initial design, nothing drastic, I know)

https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_1714557.jpg

Thanks for the reply, @Lugia. That totally makes sense with audio going through an exponential VCA! I hadn't thought of it that way before, but that's exactly what the signal flow is like on most non-modular subtractive synths: no attenuator on the final audio VCA, just the final output volume level after that.

You're welcome, @ascrawa! I'm glad you found some of that helpful. =]

-Chace