While on the MU format subject, given that some other firms beside COTK are now doing half-height modules, might it be time to add a half-tier option to MU? Something similar to how 1U tiles work in Eurorack...much the same row selection method could be employed in the rack creation interface, I should think.
A clarification: given that VCV is an open-source project with respect to the module developers, it's apt to fall victim to the open-source issues that tend to dictate that those developers don't necessarily coordinate their efforts on resource utilization amongst themselves. And this was where my issues were arising; adding certain modules, notably FFT-heavy ones, were causing glitches to appear in timing and control signals to the point that, eventually, the patch would either become unusable and/or VCV itself would crash. This could be avoided, to my way of thinking, in a couple of ways:
1) Establish clear resource-management standards amongst the module developers. This isn't unusual; Dieter Doepfer's de facto establishment of the hardware Eurorack standard early on, with clear form-factor and bus connection standardization being the goal, is one of the things that makes Eurorack work. And yes, there's been attempts to buck that, most notably Analogue Systems' adoption of a physical form-factor that wasn't in line with what other companies (piggybacking on Dieter's work, which was in turn based on existing process control hardware form factors) were doing at the time. Result: Analogue Systems makes some pretty hardware that doesn't see nearly the usage that it could, because it doesn't physically 'work'. Now, in a virtual device, the physical form factor issues are minimized, but processing resources become the 'elephant in the room' if several developers can't follow some sort of programming methodology that allows all modules to exist happily with the same resource utilization standard. And this was what seemed to be part of the issue I ran across; adding modules that were FFT-heavy with respect to their needs would bog all modules in a given patch, some worse than others. It strikes me that what has to be done, therefore, is to give developers a map they must stick to in terms of resource management, or to employ some sort of reallocation within VCV itself to force things to work more seamlessly. And knowing what I know about computing, the latter method seems as if it would be very wasteful and ultimately detrimental to the whole under the present circumstances.
2) Reconsider VCV's core. Yes, this gets into that last bit above, but if a very robust memory/process management routine set could be added that could do this fairly seamlessly, it would go quite a ways to solve issues of this sort. This would also be the logical point around which multiprocess/multithread support could be dealt with more effectively. VCV needs some way of becoming 'machine-aware', gauging what resources it has at its disposal, and then allocating those resources effectively to the myriad plugins. And no, I'm not under some illusion that this would be an easy task...in fact, I think it would be difficult on a number of levels...but it's an effort that would make the difference that could keep VCV around for many years, which is what I think we all would like to see. I'm not under an illusion that hardware is better than software, as each have their own strengths and weaknesses, but more that there's room for both, and if both can be the best they can, then they definitely should be. It's not, to my way of thinking, a situation where anyone should be saying "it has to be like this because...", but more one of "why can't it be that way, given enough effort?" Some of what you state above tells me that there are some solutions that don't get into the really headachy aspects of sample-rate sync et al, so it strikes me that taking steps to have VCV's core process do some sort of processing reallocation that dodges the nastier digital audio issues could be feasible. And any bump in 'horsepower' in the end would be worth the effort.
Yes, I do see this as a developer vs. user issue...but one in which there's potentially a lot of common ground that could be very fertile. After all, had Bob Moog not been listening to his musician userbase and, instead, approaching his hardware development strictly as an E.E exercise, we'd likely not be having this discussion right now. The inherent problem is that those of us who approach VCV from a purely musical standpoint are apt to run across issues due to working methodologies that diverge from what developers tend to see as issues of importance. But also, musicians can vote with their feet, so to speak. For example, I myself have a rabid hate for ProTools. For many iterations, it didn't work in a way that a composer like myself, making intuitive decisions and trying to think outside the box, could feel comfortable in. Then along comes Ableton Live...developed by musicians, basically. It does what PT can do, but a lot more, and its workflow functions in a more 'musicianly' manner (if that makes sense).
So, when coding a musical device such as VCV, approaching it from a bit of a less-rational standpoint might seem like a recipe for disaster from a coding standpoint...but it winds up becoming something that doesn't impose itself on how musicians tend to think. It's a very weird tightrope-walk...but an invaluable one.
A few things...first up, the mixing really needs to be internal. Buchla's mixers also did quite a bit with CV over spatialization and weren't merely level controls. Have a look at https://www.modulargrid.net/u/buchla-system-interface-model-227 , which is the original 200/300 mixer I'm familiar with. Note that you have control not merely over stereo panning, but quadrophonic spatialization, in addition to a bunch of other functions that, to be honest, really bring a level of convenience to a synth mixer that you mostly don't see now. The closest thing to this would probably be Koma's quad performance mixer, which would make a decent stand-in for something like the 227.
Filters...if we're not talking LPGs but actual, typical VCFs, you can probably do with less. Buchla's gear was more about wave combination/shaping, so typical subtractive methods didn't happen much. But note that: 'much'. There were still a few filters that made it into typical Buchla architecture that we'd recognize, and of course there's all of the spectral-type filtering that was a lot more common starting in the 200 series. The Bark filters definitely satisfy that need. Also, there's only one thing I can think of that's like a critically-significant Buchla 'filter', the 296 (see https://www.modulargrid.net/u/buchla-296), and that would be the Frap Fumana. Not cheap, but definitely in a similar vein to the 296 in function and usage methods.
Lastly, the controller. If you're not going to use touchplates, you're not going to get the same...ah, hard to describe...'behavior' out of an iPad. The iPad (or any other tablet) will correct a lot of the weirdnesses that the various touchplate controllers brought to playing the Buchla. For example, one thing I was warned about is that setting certain touchplate voltages before spending some time settling into the studio will likely later result in values that aren't what you had in mind. Yes, these things could be that biologically sensitive! They literally bring you into the instrument circuits themselves, if that makes sense.
Also lastly (yeah, yeah...), it could be smaller. Yes, big 200/300 systems were hulking things, but Don built those modules in a larger format (4U-ish), and you'll notice that present-day 200e setups are pretty small, physically. Even the System 200e we see Marton Subotnick using in "IDOW" is a smallish affair when compared to his original 100 rig. You can do more with less in a typical West Coast setup, to be honest, so it shouldn't be too necessary to go quite so big here.
Mind you, Buchla stuff is getting cheaper if you go outside of Buchla itself. Northern Light, Roman Filippov, et al are gradually getting the Buchla-format pricing under a modicum of control, so one could make do with a few of the nosebleed-pricey Buchla modules augmented by a lot of other not-Buchla that doesn't cost so much.
Very clarifying reply, what you can do outweights what you can not do.
One of these is the automatic breaking of ALL modules upon each new iteration of the software.
This is effectively solved with the build system designed at https://github.com/VCVRack/community. Since most modules are open-source, a breaking update to Rack's ABI just means re-running the automated build script and distributing updates to everyone via the Plugin Manager.
There are no software projects that solve the problem of API/ABI incompatibilities. Steinberg doesn't solve it either---they "solve" it by never releasing updates to the VST standard. You might say that VST is backward-compatible. No, every VST host has to implement the VST 2, 3, etc standard separately.
When Rack 1 is released, all 1.X plugins will be compatible with 1.Y. Rack 2 is many years down the road and will be like the migration from VST2 to VST3, except it will be automated for users and semi-automated for developers with help from the "VCV Community" project.
You are confusing Rack as a stable software package at this time. Two decades ago, "beta" meant early, unstable, in-the-works, experimental, and buggy. Now, some consumers think it's another name for a stable release. If you want professional, stable software, DO NOT use beta software.
There's also no basic standardization of how the OS should work. Some knobs work one way, others in some other method, so you have to keep what works how memorized as you're also trying to do music.
Fair point, and I don't like inconsistent knobs as a user, but if developers want their own unique look and feel, it would be against the grain of the flexibility and hackability of community software to stop them. Imagine if all websites looked the same. That would be great for me when I'm trying to read information, but no web developer would have the chance to attempt to stand out from the crowd, and regulating that seems counterproductive.
noting that multiprocessor support wasn't some idly-addable feature that, clearly, 'laypersons' woudn't understand the requirements of
Here's the thread https://github.com/VCVRack/Rack/issues/823 to your GitHub issue for reference. It's not snarky---it gives a good lay-person's reason for not supporting it at the time, and I linked the thread https://github.com/VCVRack/Rack/issues/195 which is a full discussion of the technical issue if you prefer that instead.
A bit of a mid-level explanation is that modules in Rack exist on a unidirectional graph with no specific graph-theoretic structure whatsoever. If you try to assign different modules to multiple threads, they'd need to synchronize upon each sample before continuing, and 1/44100 seconds is too short for this on non-realtime operating systems like Mac, Windows, and Linux. There are some tricks that might work in theory, which is discussed in the technical thread, but Rack would be the first to implement a solution to the general problem proposed there.
With that said, I imagine your wish is not actually to multithread Rack's engine thread, but to make it handle more modules. The bottleneck of Rack is not actually the stepping of its modules, but samplerate conversion, rasterizing SVG with OpenGL (specifically tessellation of curves), and DSP block operations in particular plugins. The only modules that need to be on different cores are the ones with block operations like FFTs or file encoding/decoding/IO, and they absolutely can do that, and there are some that already do.
I should point out that Native Instruments REAKTOR, Softube Modular, Puredata, and all other virtual modular synthesizers I'm aware of all do not multithread DSP either. It's not because it's a super difficult problem (although it isn't easy), but because it's not a huge problem after all. One core can do the serial DSP stepping, one core can draw the complex 2D UI, 7 cores can do asynchronous FFTs, 2 cores can run your DAW, etc.
Virtual modulars are different from DAWs because a multitrack DAW can be thought of as a one-level tree that processes 64-1024 sample blocks, so multithreading is much easier. Same goes for N-voice synth VST plugins.
VCV Rack doesn't work like the actual thing.
Rack wouldn't be possible without the hardware it was inspired by! Go out and support your nearest hardware modular manufacturer. But before beating the dead horse that hardware is better than software (we all know it), remember that there are millions of would-be musicians in the world that would give anything to play a musical instrument but are not financially able to express their creativity in the way they wish.
VCV Rack is already used by a few household names, live musicians (even I wouldn't recommend doing that right now, but I won't stop you), Hollywood film composers, and university professors, so while it might not fit into the industry standard rules of being a "professional audio application", professionals and amateurs both get use out of this "toy".
Trying to downsize what I have and acquire maybe some new modules that take up less hp and maybe have more outputs than some of the modules I already own, for more routing possibilities. I'd love to hear everyone's opinion on this rack, as I know the basics of synthesis, I don't fully understand the depths and interactions of each module to each other or sometimes in their own environment. MG is an amazing place, but it gets overwhelming at times.
I wouldn't say no to an "invisible" enclosure for Eurorack as well. Same as Pittsburgh without the wooden sides. Not sure if/how to design it and add, but definitely interested.
Also, there are new uCases coming from Tubbutec, at 18hp. Any chance we can lower the minimum HP size of a case? Just curious. Not a big issue to begin with.
I was thinking that if possible, it might nicer if the Info, Zoom, Rotate and Trash icons were in a sub-popup menu that is opened by clicking on a single icon
They are too prominent, in the way? You can hide them quickly by pressing ESC.
True but they show up again as soon as the mouse/cursor moves. I think I'd prefer just a toggle button at the top to turn the
buttons off completely when I don't need them.
The log out period seems really short these days! It used to be too short for my liking and then it seemed to get longer and more recently it seems extremely short! :-(
If it creates too much of a burden on the server to have lots of people logged in, maybe time out could be a lot longer for Unicorn folks? ;-)Mhh. I did not touch the settings in the past. Maybe some PHP update changed some INI. I have increased the values now. The server should handle the users we currently have just fine. In future there should be an US proxy though...
Thanks! I'm not sure how short it was but maybe only 15 or 20 minutes?
Small HP case sizes needed for MU and MOTM.
-- JohnLRiceA bit tricky. I have checked it, the graphics of most enclosures look scrambled with 2HP MU/MOTM...
Yeah, the cases with feet and corners etc would look weird but Shelf, Pittsburgh Cell Style, Geeklapeeno Cluster might work? Or maybe there could be an "invisible" enclosure that is just a solid black or grey line, sort of like the "No Board" option for pedalboards but still acting like the other enclosures?
Synthesizers.com sells 1, 2 and 4 MU (hp) enclosures with or without wood sides:
https://www.synthesizers.com/qcb124.html
https://www.synthesizers.com/products/qcb124/qcb124_1000.jpg
Thanks for listening and considering requests! :-)
I don't think i've missed anything crucial. Still on the fence on Catalyst Audio vs more Verbos stuff. Looking for demos of CA b100 clones, please post if you have them : ) . Especially for the oscillator.
8 oscs
14 VCAs (6 lpgs, 8classic)
8 envelopes (well, more if you count the multiple outs, but 8 controllable by hand)
7 filters
3 FX
Lots of controlled randomness.
The control base will be ipad with Lemur
Mixing is going to be external or maybe on a skiff
Everything is hands-on touchable, absolutely no menus, screens - its ment to be played like a piano :D
Yes, I have...however, the fact still remains that VCV doesn't have the ability to fully utilize the given resources in a typical pro-level DAW machine. Once you've hit the limit on the one core it's using, you're done. Period. While this might not be as severe an issue in a quad-core Intel running at a fast clock speed, if you're working with a major multicore setup for the sort of brute force it offers, VCV is pretty sad stuff when you start getting into sizable module counts, such as what you'd see with complex generative patching, etc. And I know quite a few pro-level users who've gone with the big multicore Xeon, etc setups because when you use something that is multicore-aware, that software becomes screamingly powerful and tends to outstrip quad-core much of the time.
Unless you run VCV. And with no clear indication if multiprocessing will ever be added (as is the case with pretty much ALL other pro-grade audio software), I'll stick with considering it to be a 'toy'.
Additive synthese is something I do not want in my eurorack, I rather keep it more analog.
The difference between a ladder filter and a z-plane filter is huge, sticking with the Evolution.
Thanx for replying though.
I was thinking that if possible, it might nicer if the Info, Zoom, Rotate and Trash icons were in a sub-popup menu that is opened by clicking on a single icon
They are too prominent, in the way? You can hide them quickly by pressing ESC.
The log out period seems really short these days! It used to be too short for my liking and then it seemed to get longer and more recently it seems extremely short! :-(
If it creates too much of a burden on the server to have lots of people logged in, maybe time out could be a lot longer for Unicorn folks? ;-)
Mhh. I did not touch the settings in the past. Maybe some PHP update changed some INI. I have increased the values now. The server should handle the users we currently have just fine. In future there should be an US proxy though...
Small HP case sizes needed for MU and MOTM.
-- JohnLRice
A bit tricky. I have checked it, the graphics of most enclosures look scrambled with 2HP MU/MOTM...
solitud.de | YouTube | Soundcloud | Bandcamp
I would recommend you add some kind of way to mix the patterns, maybe something random, with chance, or just some kind of CV mixer or sequenctial switch.
Also, you could try replacing Grids with Marbles.
I suggest you view Perfect Circuit Audio's prebuild Rhythm systems, it can give you ideas.
I'm seeing issues both in Pedalboards and Eurorack cases.
Aaargh... should be fixed. For the pedalboard part you might have to clear browser cache ...
solitud.de | YouTube | Soundcloud | Bandcamp
Well,I think that in your case the best one would be an Expert Sleepers ES-8, that way you can use it as your audio interface. It has 8 outputs and 4 inputs.
Another very good option is Hermod, which also doubles as a midi interface and does a lot of sequencing. Mutable Instruments Yarns also could serve this purpose.
The limitation with the Mutant Brain is that it only has 4 CV outs, the others are Gate/Trigs so that limits what you can do with it. Yarns, for example, can be configured so that any output can be any kind, be it CV, pitch, gate, trigger.
@modulargrid I'm seeing issues both in Pedalboards and Eurorack cases. Pedalboards seem to have lost the ability to delete pedals, there are no more menu buttons when you mouse over a pedal. Eurorack cases are ok, but the drop-down menus get mixed with the panels of modules some times. Just FYI.
I think what I need is a Mutant Brain: https://www.modulargrid.net/e/hexinverter-Electronique-mutant-brain
Sadly not out yet!
Small HP case sizes needed for MU and MOTM.
There are commercially available cases the hold as little as 2 MU modules so it would be nice if this were possible in ModularGrid. I know a 2 HP case in eurorack would be pretty ridiculous but in large format modulars it's quite reasonable.
The log out period seems really short these days! It used to be too short for my liking and then it seemed to get longer and more recently it seems extremely short! :-(
If it creates too much of a burden on the server to have lots of people logged in, maybe time out could be a lot longer for Unicorn folks? ;-)
I was thinking that if possible, it might nicer if the Info, Zoom, Rotate and Trash icons were in a sub-popup menu that is opened by clicking on a single icon (like a grey one with three ellipsis/dots). The reason I suggest this is because the 4 icons now cover over half the module face of 4 hp and smaller eurorack modules.
I wouldn't mind if the buttons were smaller also but I know that would make it harder for mobile users.
Alternatively maybe just a new option button next to Popover Off etc that would toggle the buttons on and off? Sometimes I just want to move modules around quickly and don't need and options but the buttons slow down doing so.
Ah yes, thanks you're right, I've got a Focusrite Scarlet 6i6 which is AC.
So now i'm looking at a whole world of other possibilities... I have an SPDIF output. I could get a cheap USB to ADAT and use an ES-3. OR. Get a MIDI to CV. I may just ask a general question about this as i'm not quite getting the answers from the copious threads i've read...
I basically would like to use the DAW to play out simple compositions which I can fiddle around with on the rack. I guess my priority is that eventually id like to have a few voices controllable through midi...
Fix: it's possible to delete 1U modules again. This was broken by the zoom button.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: info@modulargrid.net
I agree partially, have you red this interview with the developer? https://www.synthtopia.com/content/2018/01/22/open-source-synthesis-behind-the-scenes-with-vcv-rack-creator-andrew-belt/
The last update solved a lot of issues, it was the biggest update yet.
Some of the modules in there are not emulations but clones, exactly coded like the hardware like for instance the texture synth (Clouds).
I am in experimenting stage with VCV but I like the potency of it. Like you can use your midi controllers easily within it and therefor within my harware rack also. And also using multiple audio interfaces I find appealing.
Time will tell if it is here to stay but because I am on a limited budged I'm very interested in a hybrid setup with it.
Processing rack, hm? Check this out:
Contains stereo phaser (fully patchable), Intellijel Rainmaker stereo delay line, the Erbeverb, an attenuating buffered mult for splitting incoming signals for parallel processing, then two channels of a KILLER combo between two Eventide EuroDDLs and two frequency shifters (think dual Eventide H949 or 969s, but way crazier) and last, the Dual Looping Delay. Toss in a couple of passive mults, and that's got it!
If you want to screw around with VCV, that is; see my thread on my experiences and conclusions regarding it.
As for digital generation raw power in Eurorack, my suggestion would be to wait until Xaoc Devices gets the Odessa on the market, supposedly this summer. Basically, as I noted in this past month's 'KICK ASS!!!' column, this module is more or less akin to having a monophonic iteration of the BellLabs Alles engine (ala Crumar GDS, DK Synergy) in a Eurorack module. You don't need many of these, but in order to get them to really shine, you do need quite a few modulation sources (LFOs, envelopes) to get the elaborate additive spectra moving in all the ways the Odessa allows for.
And as far as filters are concerned, honestly, I think Dave Rossum's Evolution is...ok...but the Morpheus filter would be very suitable with an Odessa or two. Again, modulation sources would be needed, but you can also use some mults/attentuators to split existing ones up to tandem modulation curves to both the oscillator(s) and filter.
Hi everyone,
I've been working on this rig for a while and I wanted to reach out with two specific questions.
First: what do you think of the power supply? I recently acquired the 4ms row power 40 because it seems like the best option. But if I get the 4ms flying bus cables, I only get 13 male header pins via two cables and it looks like I'll need a few more to fully power all the modules. Is there an easy way around this? (Sorry if this is a noob question.)
Second: I originally planned on the Pulp Logic 1u mixer, but it's currently unavailable. I'm looking for something simple that will function as a master out, so two 1/4" outs or a stereo 1/4" headphone out is preferred. The Synthrotek mixer is the only one I could find. Looks like it pretty much does the same thing, plus it has some panning options. Are there other 1u mixers I should be looking at? I have a Synthrotek 84hp 7u case, so anything by Intellijel is out, unfortunately.
Big thanks-
In order to use your audio interface that way, it's outputs must be DC coupled. Most audio interfaces are not, so be sure to double check yours.
The advantages of the stereo mixer is that you can do panning but a quad vca allows you to have CV control over volume, but it ends up mono. It's up to you to decide which is better, but generally a VCA is more flexible.
Hey, thanks yeah I’m hoping to use expert sleepers “Silent way” from logic out of my audio interface. If I can’t get that to work then midi control yeah, maybe an Intellijel umidi? I’m wondering about swapping out the stereo mixer for a Doepfer A-135-1 quad vca? Might be a better bet?
T
Hola Tooth, how do you plan on controlling your modular? With the modules you have you'd still be missing either a sequencer or a MIDI interface to play it.
Agree with you guys here regarding VCV Rack, I tried to use it and it was flawed at best. Since I have NI Komplete and was trying the Reaktor blocks that is way more fun. Not rich enough to buy a full on Eurorack setup but think with Reaktor, Massive and my 0-coast that should tide me over for a while. It is sad how VCV Rack wasted its potential in reaching musicians.
Thanks cg_funk
I was hoping I could use the Doepfer a101-2 as a via or in dual mode for the moment? Do you recon I’m gonna need another V&A too? I kinda got tides instead of shelling out on a maths. I also like the way you can get an extra voice from it, which I thought would be good in a small set up. Que get a maths comments...
Thanks cg_funk
I was hoping I could use the Doepfer a101-2 as a via or in dual mode for the moment? Do you recon I’m gonna need another V&A too? I kinda got tides instead of shelling out on a maths. I also like the way you can get an extra voice from it, which I thought would be good in a small set up. Que get a maths comments...
Hi Lugia,
Wanted to follow up with you in regards to my updates and (hopefully) continue to get your feedback. So I took your advice and tried to make the best out of my rack. I played with what I have for a few weeks and absolutely love it. I'm completely addicted. Here's what I ended up filling up my rack with...kind of a mix of things you offered in the first reply and second reply.
So now that I've used it for the first time, I'm understanding things much better (though I'm still a lost newbie). I love sequencing drums but am realizing it's taking up a ton of my voices. I barely have any voices left to fill out my sounds that I want. I also realized how much I miss delay and reverb (these are the 2 effects I use all the time on guitar). So what I'm thinking is making another smaller rack. I want a delay and reverb module, but other than that, I just want to make it as flexible as possible. Can you help me fill this out? Your advice was invaluable last time and I really appreciate it. Take care.
Take care.
Hi all,
Modular mates, what do you think of my growing rack?
I run this besides a MFB Tanzbar and a AS Fusebox. Next to my daw (ableton) and other stuff.
The Popcorn was my first module and it is fun, liked it so much I've purchased the 2 expanders retail, the Links is the other retail purchase. The Befaco InAmp and Out are DIY's, got them cheap, the rest I've bought second hand.
I do not see my rack as a stand alone, triggers, gates and CV's can be digital or analog; I am experimenting with use in Ableton and VCV Rack, I do not have any sound generating modules yet.
Right now my first next module could become the Rossum Electro-Music Evolution, HQ ladder filter which I lack.
What I am aiming for is a versatile (polyphonic?) sound, or perhaps a multi channel mono set-up, I'm not sure at all.
What I do know is that digital modules are decreasing in attraction, for instance, Clouds comes within VCV.
Akemie's Castle looks good, I wanna build a powerhouse.
Help me please :)
Monde Synthesizer Z Series modules
Inz to input balanced and unbalanced inputs like guitars and microphones.
Pedz for expression pedals to control VCFs, VCAs, and Panners like Panz.
Stompz to loop stomp boxes in and out like choruses or as an output to mixers and amplifiers.
Hi Tooth,
I am rather new at this stuff, but I think you will probably need a VCA module in addition to the LFO and envelope modules.
The way it works is that a LFO generates your waveform, and you connect it to a VCA to control its volume. Then you link up the envelope generator to the CV of the envelope stage so that when you trigger the envelope you get a sound out through the VCA.
Both the Tides and the Doepfer modules are two different styles of envelope generators, so you might just pick your fav if you want to have fewer parts. The Doepfer is more of a standard East-coast Moog-style signal ASDR, while the Tides is like a new West-coast thing that other fancy features behind menu-pushbutton selection options. The downside to the Tides is that you have to read the LEDs to know what function it is set to, the knobs change their purpose depending on the mode.
cg_funk
How’s this for a starting point? I went Doepfer for affordable and trusted and mutable instruments for versitility and sound generation. I don’t have any effects yet, I thought I’d master this first. What you think? Am I missing or could have done similar cheaper / better?
Have you thought about adding a Mutable Instruments Ears as input for your guitar? https://mutable-instruments.net/modules/ears/
This will allow you to use your guitar's sound to generate envelopes and gates while the output jack will pass the audio through for further processing/sampling etc. I've added one to my skiff for both external instrument processing as well as strumming MI Rings. My goal is to run acoustic and electric guitars thru Ears for sampling/looping playback via Morphagene (or similar modules) and using Ears' gate and envelope out for CV processing such as triggering sequencers, running Maths functions, etc. When not using Ears as an instrument input, I use it to play Rings, drums and other things. It's a really versatile module.
For large case, I suggest getting rid of the pre-built drum modules and go for less but more versatile modules to build your own drums. This way you can: modulate drum pitch, decay, release, volume etc.
I am fairly new in modular also, so my advice is with heavy grain of salt, but I have done tons of drum programming and therefore not a fan of generic drum modules UNLESS space is an issue (as for my own rack).
Get some noise/sine/filters with bunch of gates/adsrs and design your own drums. Otherwise get a ready-made drummachine. Only thing I see problem with patching manually is cymbal, which can be complicated, especially if you are completely new to actual sound design.
I am designing a drum rack with performance in mind. After weeks of going through various redesigns, this is my current thinking (I have a few of the modules already).
The aim is to have something robust and able to deal with most rhythm duties, but generally serve for glitch, tribal and industrial mayhem.
I think I might need more modulation sources, so might need to add a mult. Possibly a sequential switch. I was looking into clock dividers, but I think Pam and the various drum algo modules deal sufficiently with beats (I can modulate these to achieve what I need).
Does anyone have any thoughts as to whether it is missing anything, or what they might do differently or in addition?
4 CV outs, 12 Gate / trigger outs in 6HP:
https://www.modulargrid.net/e/hexinverter-Electronique-mutant-brain
That is, if you can wait till June - August.
I am trying to build a minimal dub-techno type setup that I interface with computer (sequencing with Pure Data). I also have a Doepfer Dark Energy I and Arturia minibrute (considering switching it to micro or 2. gen if I figure out what to do with the old one) which I think is enough for what I plan to do, trying to keep it minimal and with limited budget inside my 60hp portable case.
The most problem I have is figruing out how many midi to cv-out I need. There are either incredibly large modules which give me enough cv (like Polyend poly) or modules that are too small. I also prefer using Linux computer with Pure Data as a host since I already do a lot with it and like to program my own generative sequences from scratch. Windows is also an option since own a lightweight windows tablet.
Maybe I need another bassline module? Considering getting rid of the Grains since I lack ADSR etc and need different kind of switches between echo/delay (possibly custom DIY).
This is my first modular and trying to figure out what I need. I probably get the midi-cv interface and drums first and see from there. Anything I am missing?
Hello
I found this module: https://dspsynth.eu/webshop/product/dspx-platform-module/
Since I like customization, I thought maybe I give it a go, but I found absolutely no info/reviews on it (maybe I am just a dumb searcher, so google it for me).
Has anyone had any experience with it? How can it be programmed, is it with some interface or pure C++? I see it has some VST preinstalled and wonder how it works but I am hesitant to buy it if I do not see the manual and complete specs.
This is what I have now. Any suggestion what to fill the last 16hp with. And what modules will work with my Vermona 208 case.?
Hi! Just recorded a condensed version of a set I played live recently and want to share it with you! Just an example of modular being..so modular.
Im hoping to start doing consistent videos showcasing different setups, songs, and all things modular. Check out my youtube channel and subscribe for updates :)
follow me on intstagram for the day and life of Alani.https://www.instagram.com/alanivierra/
I still have yet to get my first eurorack, but I have played around with most "modular" software and my favorite so far is Reaktor Blocks. Sure it is not emulating any eurorack modules, but I think it provides a professional-grade tool that is customizable and has some of the same spirit of eurorack. The best part is that you can use Reaktor to control and/or compliment a Eurorack setup.
In my opinion, VCV Rack is nice to get an idea of how a eurorack module works (provided there is an emulation of it) and could be a great option to explore new modules before actually commiting to them in your eurorack. But I would not use it as an actual musical instrument. Perhaps it'll get there one day, but that day is not today.
OK, in starting here, I'd like to point out that I haven't upgraded to VCV 0.6.x. There are reasons for this which should be apparent as I go on.
There's been a sizable amount of hype around VCV Rack being a be-all/end-all open source Eurorack emulation system. In theory, the idea seems like a good one, allowing users to experience the concepts behind modular programming in a very cost-effective way. And in a real sense, this is a very good use for VCV Rack. It's a nice set of...ah...introductory tools. But getting beyond that, there's some very real problems.
VCV's developers would like us to think that their creation is a just-as-valid item as the hardware. And this is where I part company with their aims and goals. As I've worked with the system, starting in 0.3.x and moving up to the final 0.5.x iteration, a lot of very irritating points have made their presence known, ones which are very much NOT part of the actual hardware modular experience. So, let's have a look at these:
1) VCV Rack is not a pro-grade tool. This shouldn't be too surprising at this point, especially noting the 'working-beta' status of the software. But even beyond that, there are issues with VCV that I've encountered that rise above simple beta-era growing pains. One of these is the automatic breaking of ALL modules upon each new iteration of the software. No, I kid you not. Every time a new beta appears, every plug-in developer is required to scamper back to the drawing board and recode their module sets for the new iteration. To me, this is the most egregious part of the unprofessional aspect. Consider what would happen to software plugin development if, every time a new version of the VST standard appeared via Steinberg, ALL plug-in developers would be faced with a scenario without backward compatibility. It would certainly stifle development, and moreso, stifle the value of the format. Do that, and the money goes away, then the platform falls flat on its face. In a professional-user environment, this sort of thing is totally untenable.
There's also no basic standardization of how the OS should work. Some knobs work one way, others in some other method, so you have to keep what works how memorized as you're also trying to do music. This eventually becomes a point of frustration and I for one don't appreciate being made to feel frustrated by the very tool I'm trying to create with. Certainly, this comes from the open source concept's somewhat anarchic way of dealing with its plugin developers...but at the same time, it's extremely annoying for those who don't see any functionality in allowing this degree of freedom in emulating a hardware environment where, yes, knobs work the same way, switches all perform the same way, and you can intuitively grab any of these and work them without having to remember how to turn or switch them.
These are just a couple of points. There's a lot more that I and I'm sure others have run across, and that list just gets too long to slap up here.
2) VCV Rack's developer seems to have a disconnect with its end-users. I encountered an issue in 0.5.x where the process I was working on was bogging as I added sampling modules, gradually wrecking all of the patch's internal timing. I examined what was happening, and quickly noticed that VCV wasn't multiprocessor-savvy; all of the work was being done on just one of my multitrack machine's 16 cores. leaving the rest to just idle while one single Xeon core was repeatedly being taxed beyond its limits. So, I did the logical thing one would do with open source software: I got on GitHub, searched amongst the loads of issues and bug reports, found little-to-nothing on what I was encountering after 45 minutes of searching, then posted about what I was running across, also inquiring about the possibility of multiprocessor support at some point down the line. What I got back was a rather prickly, snarky email from the developer that my thread was closed as my issue had already been raised (somewhere), then noting that multiprocessor support wasn't some idly-addable feature that, clearly, 'laypersons' woudn't understand the requirements of.
Ummmm...excuse me? Are you aware of who your user base is? It's not coders, for the most part, it's musicians. To dismiss the primary segment of a user base as 'laypersons' is not only rather tone-deaf, it seems to imply that VCV Rack isn't really about the musician end-users, but to satisfy some segment of the coder community. As such, that revelatory email cast a lot of doubts in my mind as to the long-term usability of VCV Rack; there didn't seem to be a sense that, once the application reached its initial full-release stage, the developer wouldn't move on to some other coding curiosity, basically orphaning VCV Rack in the process.
3) VCV Rack doesn't work like the actual thing. Yes, the module emulations are stellar for the most part. But it has a serious flaw in its single-core operation. It's sort of analogous to what happens when we hit power supply limits in hardware...but unlike hardware, you can't go out and get a bigger power supply. So when processor bogdown starts and things begin to go awry, there's basically no fix. None. You simply can't do what you'd envisioned, period, end of story. And for something that is to emulate simple builds, that's not a problem. But to do massive, complex work, you either need to have some sort of howling-fast CPU so that the sole working core for VCV can max it out...or you need multiprocessor support, which is the real answer, but one which isn't tenable from what I gather. And also, when VCV glitches, it's not pretty! Things we might find musically useful in hardware translate into hangs and freezes of all sorts of things, ranging from parts of a patch all the way up to the computer's entire OS. Hardware doesn't do that, either!
So, for those wanting to merely explore modular synthesis...yes, VCV Rack is a nice...toy, ultimately. But I'm totally put off of using it seriously, which I'd had high hopes of doing and, apparently, a lot of plugin developers would like to see as well. It won't replace hardware; I don't even find it to be an acceptable substitute.
Keep:
* Telharmonic
* Rings
* Akemie's Castle
* Links
* Loquelic Iteritas
* Ripples
* Shades
Sell:
* Metropolis
* Discrete SVVCF
* Frames
* Tides
* O/A/x2
* Quadra
* Rubicon
* Optomix
* Streams
* Atlantis
* Flux
* Temps Utile
* Ornament & Crime
Yep...go to your rack's page and then select 'Screenshot' under the 'Show' menu. If the screenshot view doesn't coincide with the actual page, refresh the screenshot. At that point, you should be able to refresh the forum post and see that it now matches the current state of the build. This isn't foolproof, though...sometimes it takes a bit more prodding, putting the forum post into 'edit' and back out again, etc. But the main problem comes from the rack's screenshot not matching the rack's actual page, so when posting racks always remember to make sure the screenshot is in sync before putting the post with the rack in question up.
