One thing that I am doing is using the free software VCV Rack and Softtube Modular to plan out how the modules work as well as try semi modular gear like the Make Noise 0-coast before I blow 5-10k on a modular setup. Not sure what your experience level is on Eurorack but maybe try a smaller approach in stages?
Whooo...this is not bad at all! Your prospective choices are pretty spot-on, actually. As for the reverb on your chord parts, though...I'd be more inclined to do that outside of the modular via an FX send/return on your primary mixer to have better control/blend over that signal. Otherwise, you run a risk of getting the modular's output signal a bit too muddy and cluttered. However, what I would suggest is to process the chord parts in the modular with a phase shifter to get a nice, potentially spatialized sense of timbral motion. As for the filtering on that, you might consider some sort of resonator...maybe aim for that classic Korg PS-series sort of multiband depth. Both of those together would be really wild...very much in that classic Basic Channel sort of sonic zone, given the dubby/spacy sweeping you'd get.
Another VCF to consider might be DINsync's SARA VCF...it's also a state-variable, but it has a very odd architecture that the manufacturer refers to as 'dual opposed-core', which should be in that dual-peak style of the Praga but might actually be stranger in character. Plus it has two big purple knobs...which would look very visually intriguing for live gigging.
Arrangement definitely needs work, tho...hang on a few minutes...ok, maybe a bit longer since MG's acting up, but...
Howzzat?
Went ahead and, as suggested, fleshed it on out. You'll note a few modules missing from the original, notably the Tallinn and Peaks, which were replaced with the Optomix and a bit of the RADAR. That last thing is a killer...eight looping AD/ASR generators with a separate controller module, the BLIP. I'd say that satisfies all envelope generation needs for this build! I located it centrally to make it convenient to the entire build at the same time.
Batumi (and Poti) added, along with the Belgrad (too little space for the SARA VCF, but the Belgrad fit just fine), along with a Delptronics LDB-2 for analog 606/808-ish drums, then a six-in stereo Ladik mixer, with the Morphagene in 'post' position followed by the Erica Output. Sequencer/clocking area was reordered to straighten out the step-down flow of the clock from the Metropolis thru to the Erica Seq and sequential switch (now in position to switch clock outputs from the Euclidean). All voicing to the top row, where the MTE 4 is set to work as a unity-gain muting mixer for a channel of the Veils. Also, the DSP is post-Optomix to make it convenient for tinkering with the output(s) from that. Didn't cram in a phaser, but there should be enough in there for extreme sonic damage purposes.
Think that'll work?
Yep...the price discrepancy on the Entry Point for the same functions (pretty much) as the A-119 just doesn't make sense, plus you lose 2 extra hp of space to it. Granted, it has that square-wave 'extractor', but if you're not inputting something that has a very pure waveform in the first place, or which has numerous pitches, that's not likely to function properly. Not quite the same thing as a proper P-V converter, which tends to be a bit pricier.
And if we're talking Erica mixers, have you had a look at their Black Output Module? Pricier, but you get a stereo mixer with CV over panning, 3 mono channels and one stereo, a master gain, balanced outputs + a headphone amp, and it only takes up four more hp. That thing is pretty serious, takes care of the output + stereo mix thing, gives you a proper stereo in for the Clouds. $150 more, but I think you get your money's worth on that, given that the Black Stereo Mixer is roughly $150 and a stereo output will run another $75-100 for something decent. Plus the panel width used should be the same.
(Later): OK, I banged on it a little...several modules went away, and the goal here was to jack the functionality up as much as I could in a small space. 6 EGs (two AHDSR, two ADSR w/ inverters, two AD), 6 VCA (Intellijel Quad ($10 cheaper than Mutable's) and two linears), 6-channel mixer for sources, added a Maths, condensed the effects while breaking them out a little for some separate processing. Kept the Clouds, added the Black Output v2, plus also crammed in a ring mod and waveshaper, and cleaned up the signal flow. Here 'tis:
Better?
Hey Lucia, I really appreciate your thoughts. You're right about the selling of my synths, some have rocked up in price and in hindsight I think I wanted something not achievable with really any amount of rackspace.
I think I was seduced by the small form factor and an affordable way into the Eurorack world!
I think I will sell the stuff I don't use and just keep a lurking eye on this site to keep up to date!
Thanks again!
Hey guys,
I'm looking for my first modular synth. I'd like to create something musical, no super-strage melodies, but I'd like to interrelate melodies so i'd picked a quantizer, the quantimator, that should be the brain of my researches. 3 VCos because of the chords progressions, any advise on utility modules or any big oversight I did?
Thx in advance! Big up!
Marco
https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_644608.jpg
Ok so I am looking at getting my first basic Eurorack system for industrial type techno music that can also do house and psy-trance beats. Considering a pre-built system like the Roland 500 series, Erica Synths Drone, Buchla Snoopy, or Soundmachines Modulor114 that already have the modules put together in case/power supply.
What would be the best way to go and why?
Hi there,
I am into modular synthesis for a while and really enjoy the possibilities for sound design, doing ambient stuff as well as technoid tracks. The modular is joining my classic synth portfolio and was at first a kind of supplement. More and more I use it standalone for jamming.
The modular case is build by MDLR with 9u/114 hp featuring a Doepfer PSU-3 with 60 power headers (https://www.mdlrcase.com/product/eurorackcase-9u-84hp-classic-black/). Started originally with Pittsburgh‘s SV-1 I have build up the rack with this larger MDLR case (Roland with 84hp first) and a couple more modules came in during the last months (Noise Engineering Basimilus Alter, TipTop One, Circadian Circles). On the sequencer side a Beatstep Pro is joining the system.
So now I am looking to compliment the built with some more decent modules like a small performance mixer (e.g. Xaoc Praga), a second FX, a capable filter as an alternative to the classic SV-1‘s lowpass filter (e.g. Xaoc Belgrad because of it‘s dedicated sound and capabilities, look and feel) - maybe a low pass gate like Make Noise Optomix in addition, another envelope, a WMD MSCL for sound polish at the end of the mix and for some duckin effects, dropping the Rosie because of the planned mixer for exchange with a simple output module with smaller footprint and last but not least a friend to the Maths (e.g. Xaoc Batumi) for some more modulation.
As said, jamming technoid stuff with this thing and sometimes some generative ambient sounds is the goal for this system. So this means some monotonic, slightly envolving beats (bass drum, snare, hats, on-top percs), bass line, 1-2 melody/seq lines, deep house chords with a lot of filtering and reverb on those chords (telharmonic for this). Would be awesome, if you have any advice or comments on the actual system and the planned direction of development? What are you missing, how would you arrange the modules?
Thx for your help in advance and greetings from Germany
Stue
Yes I am aware of the different amperage on the +12 and -12, I just mentionned the +12 here because as you said it has the biggest load. For now I have 377mA on the -12V so there's still room too. I'll keep an eye on both for sure, and even on the +5V part!
For the mixer, I was looking at the Black Stereo Mixer from Erica Synths. Less features than the Mixology, but still seems to do the job at mixing stereo and the 4th mono input can provide some panning action.
The Doepfer A-119 looks great, thanks for the tip. I was looking at the Entry Point from Pulplogic but it's more than twice the price.
Sigh...sorry to do this, but it's bubble-pop time.
There's only two sound sources in this build, and one of those is a noise generator. Even with a uBraids, the sound is going to be a tad thin.
More confusingly, there's two very large and very complex filters in there. If there's only one actual oscillator, then why have those?
Also, why the ribbon controllers? Or two granular sample processors? Or a buffered mult when a passive one will do here? And where are your VCAs, even for just audio level control?
I have a feeling that these modules aren't going to work in the way you think they will. This might be pretty, but if you were to put this together for real, the only 'pretty' it's probably going to wind up being is 'pretty frustrating'.
See https://www.modulargrid.net/e/forum/posts/index/3015 before going too much further, please. You're contemplating spending a sizable amount of money on something that's only barely a synthesizer if this is an actual consideration. If not, then scrap it, do some more research, and start over. This isn't a simple thing that can be tossed together casually; the likely result will be money ill-spent on a device that only causes annoyance when you figure out what it won't do.
If the goal here is to put together a sort of generative system that you can trigger with your drumkit, I'll warn you right now: you're probably starting too small. Just the amount of trigger and microphone inputs you're going to want (need, actually) and the interactivity from those is going to pass that little cab's space limitations very rapidly. Back up, start again, this time with something like a 6U or 7U (one tile row) x 104 or larger case. Otherwise, the only way this becomes doable is with buttloads of tiny 2 , 3 and 4 hp modules, and if you want to make an adjustment to any of that while playing the drums, you'll discover a whole new level of frustration.
My suggestion: go and look at some examples of the electronic kits from the beginning of that concept, such as the early Simmons kits. You'll find that these tend to be very easy to adjust on the fly because of how their control panels are laid out, basically becoming the template for what electronic controls for drummers (who tend to be QUITE busy with the actual drums themselves) evolved from. Teensy knobs and loads of patchcords doesn't lend themselves to the sort of adjustability and playability as, say, an SDS-8.
It's not a bad idea...it just all has to be done right, or you'll wind up with equipment that has an unusable form factor.
Honestly, I wouldn't put the Model D in the Rackbrute. First of all, it already has a cab and that cab takes care of its power needs. Secondly, it takes up a lot of room, and given the goal you're shooting for, the Model D gobbles up a lot of the rack space you'll need to make that work. Wanting to 'do it all' in 2 x 88 hp is a bit of a tall order...not wholly impossible, but if 70 hp is being used by what's basically a monosynth that can just as easily stay where it is, you probably won't be getting close to that notion.
Third: be extremely careful about which synths to sell. Consider that some of those, if you got them relatively cheaply, probably will not ever be at your disposal again. Case in point is sitting right behind me, and only cost $450 plus a couple of days driving when I got it, and while I could easily pull down a cool $18k for my Yamaha CS-80, I have been balking at it ever since the idea arose...because I will NEVER, EVER find one of these things at an affordable price again! Even if that revenue was 100% channeled into studio equipment, losing that particular synth would be a helluva hole in my equipment. In contrast, I was able to get another MS-20 (Mini), a few others I sold in recent times are redoable in more reliable forms (my PPG setup, for example...Waldorf's Blofeld Keyboard is just fine as a functional replacement, plus Wolfgang Palm's doing some wild stuff now with mobile devices), and one I regret selling can be regotten cheaply enough.
The 'Brute rig is one I've been working on as of late, although the eventual result will be a 2 and 2S with two 6Us (maybe), so this is pretty familiar turf. So, one caveat I would make is that it might be a good idea to get the Minibrute 2 first, pair it with the Model D, and then see what needs present themselves. As for me, I'm familiar with the Minibrute's architecture, so I know what needs to be paired with it to get it to go in the directions I want, but if you've not had a lot of experience with patch-overriding a synth's internals, I would really suggest doing that first before dropping a bunch of money on a Rackbrute 6U and a module compliment, then discovering that, wow, none of this does what I had in mind, so now what?
Also, having just discovered modular synthesizers, you might want to observe first. See what others are doing, research what the 'classics' had, then sort out the various strengths and weaknesses you're going to gradually notice. For example, why did Uli Behringer use (cough, cough, 'steal') the Minimoog's overall basics to come up with that Model D? On that one, if you know why the Minimoog was set up the way it was, you might see a couple of other reasons why I'm saying it doesn't go in the Rackbrute.
And remember: what you're contemplating here involves blowing several grand, ultimately...yes, even in that small a cab, if you want it set up correctly. Treat this more as building an instrument that you're likely to use for several years, not something you can toss like a Volca or some such.
Not trying to throw water on your enthusiasm, mind you...it's just that you're wandering into an area that's INFINITELY deep that makes a read through the Sweetwater catalog look like a cursory glance at a Hallmark card, and I'm just noting that you might want to slow a bit here and find out what all of this not-bought-yet gear can and should do before dropping a bushel of moolah on it. Make sense?
Hi, my aim here is to buy a minibrute 2 and use a rackbrute 6u. I need to keep the space small as I'm likely to be moving around a lot and so will sell some of my old synths to fund.
I am totally new to the modular world, but would like to build in the rackbrute a system that can do it all. I like to noodle mostly and already have a Behringer model d, hence it's in my rack.
Do you think it's possible to have a system which would be able to cover all grounds for creating track, ie drums and such? Or have I wandered to deep into my gear acquisition syndrome and become way out of depth?!
I would appreciate any help with a hypothetical system using the minibrute 2 and rackbrute 6u and Behringer model d to create a comprehensive portable system.
Oooh...be careful about how you're reading that Mantis power spec! Tiptop's site says it has 3 x 1A on the +12 rail only; the -12 rail is limited to 1100 mA, and if that's exceeded there'll be problems.
Eurorack power uses bipolar DC supplies for the 12V rails. One side is positive, the other negative, and the 'common' acts more like a 'neutral' line for the bipolar supply purposes. While the +12 rail handles the largest loads as a rule, the -12V rail can add up pretty quickly as well, and BOTH amperage criteria have to be watched to prevent overloading each of the 12V busses. My suggestion is to find powered case solutions where you have suitably large amperage potential on all rails to avoid overtaxing any parts of the power supply setup.
As for the output/mixer issue...if you're going to mix down to mono (which would be what the TriATT would allow), just get a mono output module. Stereo mixers would be better, though, because you're going to want to step up to a spatialized output signal eventually, so my suggestion would be to look into a small performance mixer that allows CV control over audio levels (via exponential VCAs in the mixer), panning, an AUX send/return for paralleling a global effect, and mutes to drop parts of a global patch out to immediately vary the sound. Qu-bit's Mixology is probably the best value in these at present...four channels, stereo, AUX send and return, and so forth, all under voltage control for $399 which is actually pretty cheap when you consider what's built into it. And if you already have a Clouds, running the Mixology output into it, then on from the Clouds (using the Clouds as a post-mix 'playable' processor) to a stereo output would be the way I'd go.
Input-wise, I've found that Doepfer's A-119 is probably the best feature-to-value module of that sort.
Also...when speccing modules, try this trick: divide the module's price by the hp width. The lower you can get the resulting number, the cheaper the overall space utilization becomes. One of Eurorack's little secrets is that when you have room to spread out and use larger-width modules, the price-per-hp tends to go DOWN, so staying in tightly-confined cabs can actually be more spendy with respect to space used than going with something where you can use bigger modules.
Main goal is to make a modular system who is my band mate that i can jam next to on my drumset.
Melodic Voices: Pico Voice, uBraids, Microbrute
Melody Generator: o_C (in chord modes or quantermain), PNW (to clock)
LFO: PNW, Maths, (do not foresee using o_C in quadLFO mode..)
Drum Voices: Pico Drums (1 trigger- Bass, 1 trigger- Snare/clap/rim/etc), Pico DSP for drum effects
Drum Triggers: Ddrum Piezo Sensors on my acoustic snare and bass drum to trigger Pico Drums (to layer over the acoustic drum track) and maybe more piezo pads later to do things like trigger LFO/reset clock/other events)
VCA: 2hp VCA (x2) and Maths
DAW / Sampling: MPC1000 linked to modular with a-190-2
External Effects: Blue Lantern Module going to my Zoom MS70cdr to mixer
Drum Mics: Audix d6 on Bass Drum, Shure SM57 on Snare, Zoom h4n Pro Room Mic
Controllers: BeatStep Pro, Keystep
Mixer: Zed-10FX
My advice- unless you have limitless pockets and wads of cash to burn is to RUN AWAY NOW! Just kidding :-)
Eurorack is super expensive. I priced out a basic 10 module system with case and power and it was 4-5k!
I can only imagine a serious 9Ux200HP system costing 20k or more.
There are no short term plans for expansion.
Maybe some time later.
-- KlavisThanks for the fast answer! :)
-- bj_gzp
Just a small idea to enlarge the power of this module when " Maybe some time later. " comes: a setting wich outputs the quantised CV on the sub connecter.
I do like the fact that there are a lot of options for scaling. For the projects i'm working on the spanish, pentatonic and hungarian scales are a must.
Thank you Lugia for your detailled answer, really appreciated!
About Reason : as said, I just want to focus on the hardware, so I'm seldom using Reason anymore. Anyway, during the rare times I was using it with the synths, I never noticed any timing issues yet.
The case : the Mantis case has 3A on the +12V distributed over 3 zones (1A each). So I guess there should be enough margin there.
Great tip on the input, I'll have a look at the other options to have more functions, could be useful indeed :-)
For the output : I've read so many different opinions on this, so couldn't get to a decent conclusion. Yours is the most motivated one I found ;-) So an attenuator like the Intellijel triatt followed by an output module (stereo) should do? I've updated the rack with it. There's so many options but I'd like to keep the prices not too high if possible.
Your essay was an interesting read. I plan on using the BSP to send the signals and already have 2 LFOs from my synths so it should get me started... slowly. I just want to build it progressively by starting from the basics. Along the way I might switch to other modules than the ones projected here, I don't know. I'm in no hurry at all as you tend to imply. The Clouds is here for now, we'll see if I like its replacement or not once it comes out, that can wait. This rack is not my first draft and I hit the 'del' button often! I was just to a point where I was satisfied with it and couldn't go any further without asking for opinions first. I'm using VCV rack to get used to the whole modular "concept" and see if it works for me. And Youtube has been a very good friend to discover new modules or check the ones I'd like to have.
Again, thanks for your answer. Cheers!
@leoelectroid sent the module literally two hours after the payment, and was great to deal with all along. recommended.
Hokay...let's get into this. Thus far, the equipment you have on hand makes sense, although using it in tandem with Reason where timing issues are critical might reveal some limitations. I've heard from a lot of professional types that Reason can have problems with timing and sync when dealing with external clocking. My best guess is that Reason varies its latency, so if you start with a fixed latency value and Reason opts to alter this on the fly without warning, your timings between in the box and outside of the box can slip and get a bit sloppy. I've also heard that FL can have issues of the same sort, but not to the magnitude of Reason. And yes, I've used Reason (quite some time back) along with several other DAWs over many years, and I eventually opted to stick with Ableton Live out of experience...which has largely been very positive. So if you notice timing 'slop' starting to ease into your work, suspect Reason first.
- The case : the TipTop Audio Mantis looks nice and not too expensive. I like the look of the Eowave 104HP studio case too. Any reasons why I should choose one over the other?
OK...with powered cases, you need to take several things into consideration. The most obvious is amperage...a sufficient supply should actually supply more than you need, because some modules can load-spike a bit on power-up, with some being worse than others. You want a lot of margin between your total module draw and the supply's rating...and not only because of this point, but also because letting the power supply 'loaf' will mean less component wear, and that spells better stability and reliability over the long-term. I personally like to overspec power supplies by 1/3rd, but that's an old habit from amateur radio work where amperage draws can sometimes fluctuate sizably and abruptly. +20%, however, is good enough.
Also, check what sort of supply you're dealing with. There's two kinds; in Eurorack, we almost always deal with switching-type supplies. These actually use high-frequency methods of regulating and rectifying incoming AC...and because of this, some of them can be noisy at the DC rail outputs. So if the case in question has a switching supply, you're going to want filtered power busboards...these not only knock down the HF crud from lesser-quality switchers, they also help to remove backplane crosstalk resulting from modules sending crud back down their DC supply lines and dirtying up the power rails. The other kind is linear supplies...the 'gold standard', really. Very clean and stable DC outputs, and usually beefy components are used in these that don't tend to fail from simply being a little touchy. Drawbacks: they're heavier, and they're more expensive. But those are really the only drawbacks; performance-wise, they're a big step up from switchers, and in big 5U systems, you tend to see them much more than switching supplies. Honestly, these days I've been looking a bit more seriously at Erica's powered 126 hp x 2 cabs; sure, they're 200 EUR more than the Eowave, but those Latvians build those things for serious work, with 2.5A on each 12V rail via an internal linear supply. And also, this is a good example of getting what you pay for...with hefty linear-supplied DC being well worth the price!
- I'd like to interface my current setup with the modules, hence the Pico INPUT to get the sounds of my synths eventually. Any opinions on this module? Will it keep the signal clean?
As noted above, Erica builds serious stuff. The sole flaw I see with the INPUT, though, is that it lacks either an envelope follower (to derive CV from the incoming signal's dynamics...very useful, actually) or a gate/trigger comparator (to send one of those when the incoming audio's dynamics cross a certain amplitude level...again, quite useful as a control source). But if the idea is to just send audio in without deriving any control functions, it'll work well for that.
- My audio interface is a Focusrite Scarlett 18i8 that should be able to handle modular levels. Do you advice nevertheless some kind of attenuator / mixer before plugging the outputs of the modular? If yes, why? :-)
Here's why: first of all, modular synths can be a bit touchy and unpredictable with signal levels...these can jump around a LOT, from very low, barely audible to (potentially without warning!) 10V RMS or more! If you want to be 100% certain that you can protect the Focusrite (which is a fairly low-end device, not something particularly rugged) from input overvoltage, you WILL need something to step the synth levels down to normal line-levels.
Second: the Focusrite probably has balanced inputs. The patchpoints within a modular are 99.999% UNbalanced (there's a couple of exceptions). These have different impedances, and depending on how touchy the Focusrite is about incoming impedance, it might not like something other than a 600 Ohm balanced incoming signal, resulting in several sorts of irritating outcomes like weird frequency responses, distortion, or even potentially component harm.
Third: ground loops. These are frickin' annoying hums and noises that creep into audio when a signal source is on one ground, but the device it's connected to is on another, and the ground plane tries to establish itself via your audio line. Avoiding this is done in two ways: ground lifts at the connected device (potentially less effective) and balanced and isolated outputs at the source (the 'correct' way). Now, you might argue that if the synth is connected via a DC line from a 'brick' supply, this won't be a problem; if so, you may be in for some annoying surprises, because the ground plane will ALSO try to establish itself via the DC rails under certain conditions, which will destabilize the synth altogether due to AC 'ripple' on the DC supply.
Last: DC offset. You DO NOT want this coming out of your outputs! DC, when fed to amplifiers and speakers in sufficiently high voltages, can cause everything from the infamous 'DC thump' (best known from the ARP 2600, which had DC-coupled outputs) when a signal is present to, under extreme cases, actual electronic damage to amplifiers and PHYSICAL damage to speakers. I've seen this, btw...it's a definite 'oh shit!!!' moment that you don't want to experience!
The solution to all of this is to have an output module that offers some sort of audio isolation, certainly DC isolation, and preferably balanced TRS or XLR output jacks. Best of all are isolator/outputs that offer transformer isolation, as having a little 'iron' in your signal creates very small euphonic harmonic emphases due to transformers' having hysteresis...which is a complex thing I'm not going to explain here (I don't have the time, space, or desire for carpal tunnel syndrome!), but which slightly emphasizes even harmonics in a way that 'warms' the audio and tightens it up without imposing apparent distortion. This, plus attenuation to get the synth-level signals under control, is 100% necessary at a modular synth's output. If you're serious about how your instrument can and should sound, something of this sort is absolutely essential!
- I plan first to get to the "basics" (VCO-VCF-VCA-Envelope...) with the Black Wavetable VCO and the Polivoks VCF, the Z4000 and the Veils. Any opinions on this?
See https://www.modulargrid.net/e/forum/posts/index/3015 I don't write these things for lulz, after all.
- Any good suggestions to fill the gaps are heartily welcomed :-) Still looking for some nice effects modules that could also be used with my actual synths.
Well, yeah...but it seems like you need to get to a more concrete stage in build development first. You're missing the Clouds yet assuming Mutable's replacement will be the same form factor (which wasn't the case with the Plaits, which replaced the Braids), and that's not the best way to proceed. Remember: this isn't a race...you're not trying to crash-build something for a gig this coming weekend. Consider carefully...and do some research. Look at others' racks and look at classic modulars to see why they were built the way they were, and with what. Back up first and build several 'sketches'...if one or two look promising, hone in on what makes them promising. And don't be afraid to screw up, because MG has a 'delete' function whereas physical devices and the costs associated with them definitely don't. Good luck!
Hello!
I've finally decided to get into eurorack modular, because it looks fun and I really like the idea of building your own personal synth... I've been making music for a while now, mostly with a DAW (Reason) but recently purchased some synths. It just feels more real and I spend enough time on the computer already!
My equipement :
- Beatstep Pro
- Microbrute
- Erebus
- Blofeld (desktop)
- Digitakt
- 2 effects pedals (Zoom MS-70 CDR & Boss RV-6).
I'm mostly into ambient, IDM, but also techno and dub techno... Some glitchy stuffs too...
Questions / remarks :
- The case : the TipTop Audio Mantis looks nice and not too expensive. I like the look of the Eowave 104HP studio case too. Any reasons why I should choose one over the other? (besides a stronger and internal power supply for the Mantis, or a cheaper price for the Eowave one).
- I'd like to interface my current setup with the modules, hence the Pico INPUT to get the sounds of my synths eventually. Any opinions on this module? Will it keep the signal clean?
- My audio interface is a Focusrite Scarlett 18i8 that should be able to handle modular levels. Do you advice nevertheless some kind of attenuator / mixer before plugging the outputs of the modular? If yes, why? :-)
- I plan first to get to the "basics" (VCO-VCF-VCA-Envelope...) with the Black Wavetable VCO and the Polivoks VCF, the Z4000 and the Veils. Any opinions on this? Should I start with another combination first?
- The Clouds might be replaced by its successor as I heard it will be out soon.
- Any good suggestions to fill the gaps are heartily welcomed :-) Still looking for some nice effects modules that could also be used with my actual synths.
Thank you for your time and your good advices!
I sent of a bunch of modular sounds to Viktor Pilkington who patched some of them together and added his lovely brand of reverbed atmosphere and vocals to make this ambient pop track. Enjoy!
I would go with the Erica Synths Drone system even though it is expensive.
Noob mistake sorry all if you have added this to your racks please remove it so it can be deleted
Oh bugger cannot delete it been assigned in other users racks :(
Lol you just added a duplicate of the module itself instead of adding one on the marketplace mate.
Please delete.
In a recent MG forum thread, I tossed out some examples of synthesizers and other devices...the prebuilt variety...that I felt 'played nice' in a modular setup. The key there is 'connectivity' – do these synths have useful I/O that lends them to integration in a modular setup, or at least a setup that has a large modular contingent? And it occurred to me: since we tend to concentrate here on MG on true modulars and, to some extent, patchable synths from modular manufacturers, a list of currently-available synthesizers as well as some past gems that can fit well in that instrument set might be useful. After all, a lot of users here may benefit from adding some of these in amongst their modular gear, or users of these could potentially benefit from tossing a rack or two of modules into the fray. Henceforth...
Oh, mind you, patchables from manufacturers that also make lines of modules aren't heavily represented in here. For the most part, MG's users know most of these, so I scaled that back except for some notable examples. Henceforth again...
AKAI: No, no, NO...I'm not going to discuss the 'Wolves', perhaps some of the worst analog implementations in recent history. They were an anomaly, really...but just before those atrocities, Akai did a couple of very analog-friendly keyboard controllers, the MAX49 and 25. But they discontinued these before the modular boom went totally berserk and then came out with...well, yeah. Not everyone in big business is a genius, obviously. But these two keyboard controllers are worth tracking down, actually.
ARTURIA: Lots of stuff works. Synth-wise, all of the 'Brutes' interface well with a typical (ie: 1V/8va scaling, positive gate/triggers) modular setup, with the Micro and the redone Mini 2 and 2S being really obvious examples, but the Matrixbrute also has loads of connectivity. Can't discount their controllers, either...I use a Keystep with my Digisound 80 these days, plus the BeatStep and BeatStep Pro are great controllers for sequencing or drum-triggering. No surprise here that Arturia's stepping into the Eurorack market with their Rackbrute setups...it seems like their next logical step.
BEHRINGER: Their recent synth, the Model D, has proper connectivity, and the supposedly-coming-soon Neutron has extensive patchability. Presumably, Behringer is reissuing a lot of older gear with certain makeovers and form-factor shrinkage, so it's likely there'll be more that fit the criteria. As to when...ahh, who knows?
ELEKTRON: Their Analog Keys keyboard can output CV/gate for all four of its voices, and even more twisted is the fact that the four CV/gate outputs all have their own dedicated track on the device's built-in multitimbral sequencer. It even speaks both dialects of DINsync and knows how to 'talk' to analog Korg and Yamaha gear, and if you get deep into it, it can even control EML's crazy-ass 1/12V-step synths! To be quite honest, those of you on MG looking for a proper master controller that can handle both the MIDI and modular environments might need to take a serious look at one of these! The Analog Four sequencer/synth also has a similar CV/gate implementation...but, perhaps a bit annoyingly, the Octatrack has no such per-voice outputs. Woulda been nice...also, woulda been nice to have that sort of connectivity in their other stuff, too, since they obviously knew how it should work for the Analog Keys, but MIDI only...ah, well...
FUTURE RETRO: They did the 777 right, I thought...and the XS is a nice patchable monosynth with MIDI-CV/gate conversion and a few extra tricks up its sleeve, a worthy alternative to some of the more mass-market patchables out there these days. But some of the other ideas are just sort of...why? The Revolution seems just obtuse and more for looks than function, and the Mobius is pretty out of the loop (pun intended!) as far as hardware sequencers go these days. Really, if they'd concentrate more or player ergonomics and less on trying to look trippy or whatever, I'm sure they could whip out some killer devices. They have before, after all.
KEITH McMILLEN: It's possible to forget, I suppose, that KMM offers the QuNexus, since they don't do synths. Damn shame, too...because the QuNexus is basically the 'poor man's Roli Seaboard'. It has very similar pressure/position sensing and multiple CV/gate ports, yet it's a mere $179. I suppose most people get these and hook them up to a laptop or tablet, but there's more going on to these than might be suspected.
KORG: Korg has used, since forever, the same Hz/V linear scaling and negative gate/triggers that we all are familiar with in the modern-day MS-20 Mini. But more recently, their gear which has 'sync' I/O uses a very compatible positive clock pulse. So while connecting a Korg up to interface with a current modular might be a PITA without a standard-change module like The Harvestman's English Tear, the sync in many of their recent offerings can link up with sequencer clocks without a hitch. A few Korg devices from way back, though, used something that looks like Roland's DINsync...but isn't, as it wants to see and/or output a 48 ppqn pulse signal. Interestingly, Korg also made a MIDI/DIN sync box that could convert this bidirectionally, and which also could switch between 24 (Roland) and 48 (Korg) ppqn sync signals. Good luck finding one of those rare critters, tho...thankfully, you can get an Elektron Analog Keys as well as a few current modules that can handle this duty.
Also, while on the subject of Korg, it's worth pointing out that their ARP Odyssey reissues behave normally, since they're replications of the original ARP circuits which are, in fact, the origin of our beloved 1V/8va + positive trigger/gate standard. Plus, the SQ-1 (aka 'the best sequencer value out there') can work in Hz/V and negative gate/trig as well as 1V/8va and positive, making it suitable for just about anything you can get your mitts on! I can even hook mine up to my weird Crumar that has 1V scaling but negative gating. Pretty damn sweet for $100!
MOOG: Modern Moogs (except for the modular reissues, weirdly) all use the same CV and gate/trig response we all know. However, it's worth noting that earlier Moog gear often used that weird 'S-Trig' system that Moog was so enamored with (plus some of their modulars also did some nonstandard CV scaling). If you come across one of these, you'll recognize that it has this because of the oddball 2-pin 'Jones' jack on the patch panel. This is usable, but only by devices that can output inverted gate/trigger responses. But that aside, Moog also makes a lot of things with proper CV control besides synths, such as their various effects boxes, and their expression pedal is sort of the 'gold standard' for modular synth pedal controllers. Oh, and not to be forgotten is the fact that two of their theremin models (Theremini and Etherwave+) also output CV, which I've always thought was a neat touch. Lots going on there with Bob's legacy in Asheville...
NOVATION: Most recent Novation stuff is purely MIDI for control...except for one item: the Circuit Mono Station, which can output a channel of CV/gate and also has clocking I/O. And this is an odd little box, given its complicated voice architecture but no proper readout for the sequencer and some other functions. Thankfully, there are third-party solutions to this, but you'd think they could've put SOME kind of little OLED 'postage stamp' on this. Sort of a shame that they don't do more with analog control; back in the day, the BassStation Rack and SuperBassStation both had MIDI-CV/gate conversion as well as CV/gate control and were pretty handy for that in addition to being pretty decent monosynths.
OBERHEIM: Yes, the reissued SEMs in their various flavors are not only interconnectable, they're virtually tiny modulars in of themselves! But get Tom Oberheim near Dave Smith, and the analog flame seems to fade, as their collaboration, the OB-6, has the same not-really analog implementation as the rest of the DSI offerings. Kinda annoying of Doug...after all, Sequential's late lamented Pro-One had loads of connectivity, and they were around back when MIDI was just a French word for 'noon'. But Uli Behringer seems to be floating around this, so...meh.
ROLAND: Roland, actually, has always stuck to the same interfacing format that present-day modulars use. So anything Roland that has CV and gate/trig connections can interconnect 1:1 with your modules; quite some time back, I would use an MC-202 with various other modulars and patchables as a controller/sequencer, and the only thing it wasn't friendly with was, of course, my MS-20...for obvious reasons. However, their idea of sync for a long time was the DINsync standard, a 24 ppqn pulse signal that interfaced via 5-pin DIN sockets, so interfacing a Roland's clock only works with something that can translate DIN to clock pulses, or vice-versa. Note that this DINsync isn't Korg's idea of what that was (see above). Some of their recent VCM-type modelers also offer CV/gate outputs, such as the two channels of that found on the JD-XA. I would think that a modular synth might get a bit creeped out by being hooked up to one of these not-really-analog things they do now, tho...anyway, it was also nice to note the trig-out connection on the TR-8S as it really needs that to be a proper successor to the 808 and 909 (and everything else hiding inside it).
(FYI: an SH-01A + the K-25m = pretty much ½ of an MC-202, since the MC-202 was based on the SH-101, which the SH-01A is meant to be a clone of. All that's missing is 'channel 2' on the sequencer and, natch, the annoying 'chiclet' keyboard. Useful info to remember to avoid forking over buttload$ of ca$h on a vintage '202.)
WALDORF: Everything Waldorf does these days keyboard-wise doesn't interconnect directly to a modular environment, but they've got some boxes that fit into the world 'o patchcords just fine. The Pulse 2 can actually function as a monophonic MIDI-CV/gate converter in addition to being a pretty excellent monosynth desktop module. Definitely something to keep in mind if you need an extra monophonic voice AND a MIDI converter. Another weird thing, connectivity-wise, can be found on their Rocket monosynth box...a filter input, allowing you to use it as a sort-of-a-2pole. And, yes...the 2-pole itself, offspring of the 4-pole and X-pole filter boxes, and a fine sound-processing thing in of itself.
YAMAHA: Actually, the early monophonic CS synths have CV and gate I/O...but with these, you run into the same issues as with the Korg MS synths: Hz/V scaling and inverse gate/trigger response. But this also means that if you have a module (or two) that can translate to that, these will work just the same as the present-day MS-20 Mini. I only mention Yamaha in passing, though, because as far as analog, that's it, no analog connectivity for many years now, not even in the CS version of their Reface line; remember, they gave the world the DX-7, the anti-analog synth bar none and a big part of why lots of synthesists jettisoned their analog gear in the first part of the 1980s. After all, the FYOOCHUR WUZ HEER!!!!...yeah right. Dumb.
Anyway, as far as present-day and recent offerings go (plus a few antiques!) from the MI end of synthesizers and the like, that's about it. Thankfully, these are by no means the only game in town, since quite a few names familiar to those of us on MG are perfectly capable and willing to crank out patchables, sequencers, and control devices that have the modular landscape in mind at all times. But everything above offers interesting possibilities, too, and are worth looking over when building out beyond the modular case.
I think, given what's out there right now, your solution is actually going to be in two modules...
Said two modules are in this build: the Erica Drum Sequencer and the 1010 Music Bitbox 2. This setup allows you to change patterns, sequences, etc on the fly with the Erica, and the Bitbox also allows you to trigger things manually by tapping its touchscreen, in addition to its 16 trigger-ins which matches the Erica's 16 trigger-outs.
Also, since the Bitbox can sample, I placed a Ladik stereo input in front of it. Then, since drums like 'punch', I added a WMD MSCL stereo compressor for the Bitbox's output. Handy metering device next, then a Happy Nerding Isolator, which gives you not only a stereo output at line level, but also transformer-isolates the rig's audio outs to help avoid ground loop and noise problems. The Erica Drum Sequencer isn't priced on here, but if you check their website, it's actually 600 EUR. Slap this mess in a suitably-powered 84 hp cab and it's done for about $2k, maybe a bit less. Should be the sort of thing you're looking for...plenty of on-the-fly playability, buttloads of storage for samples, kits, patterns, and sequences, and compact enough to stick in a backpack, more or less.
Agree I will keep the Moog and sell the Korg. Probably add another small desk and ditch the futon which I am not using.
HI Lugia and thank you for your response. I have a lot to think about now! ;)
I alreay own the M.I. Grids, which is very useful to create funky and strange rhythmic illusions. I think I'll stick with that and patch it to some nice fx. But then... what would you recomend for some straight and basic drum patterns? Thinking about live situations: I don't really like normal sequencers, I prefer something that triggers as fast as possible the right pattern when it comes to straight up beats, that's why I was thinking about the Transient.
Are there any modules able to save presets and then just play them on the fly?
...hope I made myself clear...
Glithces and blips can make my day!
Careful...if you sell items, make sure and consider possible future functionality first. In the case of the Sub37, that has a lot that can function well in the direction you're heading. But the Microkorg....not so much so, as it doesn't have the level of connectivity (either physical or sonic) with this new 'universe' as the Moog does. Plus, if the concern is desk space, then it's time to think about a small keyboard stand to move devices onto if they belong there.
But at the same time, there's a sneaky lesson in here as to how a rig starts to grow in size. So also consider the physical expansion factor. You may well wind up beyond the 'all-in-one-bag' result...but the thing to do if that happens (by necessity) is not to try and retrench in the small form factor, but how to grow sensibly into the larger one.
Also, this is the start of where inventiveness plays a big part in a rig's ergonomics. How do you make system growth result in an easier-to-use result, rather than something that's just...well, bigger? For that, I would consider looking at some concepts related to larger UI design and operation; airplane cockpits are a good analogy, as they also consist of numerous indicators and controls, all of which may come into use at any given time. And frankly, this just keeps expanding in scale from that 'seed', since an electronic music studio isn't necessarily as bound to acoustic isolation, massive mix positions, etc as a commercial studio would be. My studio, at this point in time, sort of looks like some sort of industrial process control room, albeit with a mixer and studio monitoring...but then, that makes perfect sense, since composing and performing electronic music on a larger scale is very much like 'process control'.
Don't look at this as 'work', though....just consider it as another part of a 'creative jigsaw puzzle'.
Great! Thank you so much for the quick replies. This seems like a great direction and I will definitely do this!
I'm not all that convinced that the Transient+ has a point to it. FR touts it as a 'drum module', but it can obviously do more. But the 'more' that it can do is hampered by an underpowered user interface, a storage maximum of a mere 16 gig, and too much going on behind too few controls. So I'm left thinking that it doesn't make sense at all, and it's another example of FutureRetro having the right concept, but the wrong execution.
Consider: if it's a drum module only, then why should it be so big? Most dedicated drum modules are pretty small. So that screws the Transient+ on that front. Seriously...Erica has a pre-sampled drum module with quite a few drum sound options that fits in just 3 hp. You could cram four of those in the Transient+'s space.
But then, if it's a sampler module, then why is the user interface so hampering and why the limited data ceiling on the microSD? That's not exactly what you'd want to see. Plus, in the same general price range you already have other sampler modules that can kick this thing's butt up one wall and down the other.
Or...if it can do all these functions, how exactly do you make sense of this? True, it's got a menu-driven method which makes use of its OLED 'stamp' screen...but consider what a bitch it'd be to jump around between needed parameters in a live performance situation. This sort of UI might work in the studio, but when you're 'under the gun' before an audience...perhaps not so well, then.
Jared Flickinger just hasn't really managed to nail a lot of his company's recent offerings, IMHO. Take the Zillion. Now, here's something with a lot of promise: an algorithmic sequence generator based on the concepts used in the legendary Triadex Muse. Done right, this would be a required buy for a HUGE segment of the electronic music userbase. But it wasn't done right; the user interface wasn't intuitive (unlike the actual Triadex Muse, amazingly) and certain parts of the operation were hampered by a reliance on external MIDI cues...again, unlike the Triadex Muse, which was self-regulating once its parameters had been set. In the end, you got a product that was a niche-type curiosity when compared to what it was initially claiming to be. And ultimately, why would I (or anyone) do this with hardware, anyway? In Ableton Live, there's tons of tools that can do what the Zillion was supposed to...and they fit in the same computer as part of the same DAW being used to create works using both internal software and external hardware. And they're already paid for when you bought the DAW in the first place.
So, frankly, I wouldn't go with any version of this. Look either at more upscale at offerings such as the Orthagonal ER-301 or the 1010 Bitbox+ if you're trying to get at what the Transient+ is supposed to be about...or, as you noted, just assemble the various necessary functions from more basic modules. Either way, you get more to work with.
Nice yeah I think I want to pick up the Dreadbox Erebus and Ants as my next modular purchases along with the two Bastl devices. I probably want to sell my Moog Sub 37 and Microkorg as these are taking up a lot of desktop space and I need more portable gear. That should fund these items.
It's damn close...you're making the right choices, but you just need to go smaller on some things to cram more in. The Pittsburgh ADSR, for example...you could just as easily jam in three 2hp ADSRs, and up the functionality in the same space. Or better still, divide that between 2hp ADSRs and EGsin some way. Also, with two Moddemixes in here, you could afford to drop one and go with more VCA-type mixing, such as a Happy Nerding 3X VCA; those would work in either Moddemix spot.
RCD w/ Breakout: smart move. With the Rene and Brains/Pressure Points, in addition to other devices that like clocks, that one module pair now gives you loads of timing options to spread out across the whole rig. But again, even if you start getting into this scale of synth, you're probably still in 'dedicated function' territory as far as drums are concerned. You only really get to the area where you can go 'inclusive function' when the cabs get particularly big, because you'll have ample space to establish several signal chains in their own right without having drums, etc stealing space that those module chains need. So really, I think this is going the right way as it is, and as I noted earlier, outboarding the drums may well work better.
Although, I should note, my take on drums in a modular is that they're better done in dedicated devices, and not in the modular at all. True, you can do that...but I think the current gamut of drum machines, sequencers, etc do such a better dedicated job that unless you're building a percussion-specific modular, you're better off using an external device.
Dreadbox does some interesting stuff...their Greek-lettered modules are amazing, sort of akin to the Roland Aira Eurorack modules done correctly, all inherent flaws fixed. I also like their cab design for their bigger prebuilt systems, with utility modules included as an integral part of the cab itself. Reminds me a bit of what Synthesizers.com came up with with the Box11 5U cases that include built-in mults and power harnesses, or the 1U row in the middle of MakeNoise's Shared System. I wouldn't mind seeing more of this idea, actually...having basics such as mults, attenuators, basic mixers, etc as integral modules provided in some cabs (small portables, especially!).
Werkstatt? Yeah...remember, it's got that infamous Moog ladder LPF in it, and that alone is worth the price of admission. Even if you just used the Werkstatt as a processing filter, you'd still be getting your money's worth of use.
Hi electro-heads!
Italy calling here. I was thinking about getting the Future Retro Transient module. From what I've heard it sounds powerful and interesting. I love and produce IDM. Love to experiment with noisy sounds. I see there is a new version (called plus) of this module, which has new specific funcions (here: http://www.future-retro.com/products.html#!/Transient-Plus/p/84467820/category=0).
I don't like to have modules that come in a sort of all -in-one solution. I love to modify the sound with patches, so I prefer to go simple regarding single module's functions.
That's why I'd rather go fro the first version.
What do you think?
Cheers.
Glithces and blips can make my day!
Cool thanks for the tip as always Lugia! Yeah I will check these out. Right now I think with the new Elektron Octatrack and Make Noise O-Coast gear I should be busy for a while getting both these sorted out. Heck tonite, I made new discoveries on the Moog Sub 37 that I've been using for a while
The filter one knob makes a world of difference in crafting sounds and effects on a synth! Incredible such a simple thing is critical to sound production. I also learned how valuable LFOs are to sound engineering. One reason I want to learn modular and build a Eurorack system is to better develop my real synthesis skills and knowledge. I also find the two tabletop analog semi modular units
from Dreadbox- the Erebus and NYX fascinating. What are your thoughts on the Dreadbox gear?
In any case, do you still think the Moog Werkstatt self assembly item is worth getting? It looks cool for under $200.
Mmm...if you're going to spend Birdkids-type money, check the Soundmachines Modulor 114. That + Ants! = trouble! You could have that going nuts, then have the Dupont-pin setup freaking out, run it all off of a hardware sequencer and when you're done for the night, the whole mes could still fit into a suitably-portable roadcase with a mixer. That, plus a modular cab that can be sealed up case-like, and you've got a whole arsenal of problematic sound to go with one case for one hand and the other for another. Not too shabby!
OK...not long back, I did an explanation of what a synthesizer is made up of in the course of a series of posts. So rather than sorting around to find that, I figured it might make sense to do a better essay on the concept. Ergo...
Synthesizers, for as long as they've been around, really only consist of four 'parts'. In fact, you could extend this concept to even some of the early electronic instruments through a little bit of conceptual stretching.
Those parts? 'Generators', 'Modifiers', 'Controllers', and 'Processors'. Now, yes, in a few cases there's devices that overlap a couple of categories, but by and large everything in a synthesizer fits into these basic types. So, what this essay is about is explaining a few things about these four parts, why they have to be there, and how to use them effectively.
'Generators'
Anything that creates an initial audio signal goes into this category. Obviously, modules such as oscillators fit here, but so do noise sources, samplers, dedicated modules like drums or drone modules, and various exotic widgets like physical modelers and such. If you get some sort of sound from it, it fits here.
Now, one thing that people neglect is that, in order to really make these sources cook, certain ones need doubling, in particular simpler VCOs. This is because when you double a sound, you bring a fairly complicated set of circumstances into play, all of which relates to a desirable level of imperfection...with the end-result being described by a familiar term: 'chorusing'.
Usually, when we talk about chorusing, we're going to be discussing the electronic effect, which isn't quite the same thing. In that case, a sound goes into a circuit where there's a bypass circuit (the 'dry' channel) and a very short modulated delay (the 'wet' channel). The delay for this purpose tends to be too short for us to hear it as a typical delay effect, but when its time is modulated in various amounts and varying frequencies, we seem to hear a 'thicker' sound. Why this happens is because the modulated delay creates the necessary imperfection to the sound.
But in the case of multiple instruments or voices, the imperfection arises from the fact that these sources are never identical from one to the other, nor can they be played precisely the same. That is, in fact, where the term originates; in vocal music, having a single voice or a scant few voices on a part doesn't sound the same as what results when you have, say, a chorus of 20-30 voices on the same part. Certainly, it's not a case of increasing the volume, since the aim of the conductor is to maintain the dynamic level that a given score calls for. What actually gets increased is a certain indeterminacy; no ones' attack is precisely identical, different voices have slightly different timbral spectra, infinitesimal mistunings always happen, and so on, and none of this is ever 100% predictable. Anything with a simple waveform compliment, simple transient compliment, and the like works the same.
Like VCOs, for instance. When you read accounts of early synth designers, you always find them musing on what made their synth so 'musical', and invariably they wind up talking about tiny imperfections...component mismatches, design compromises and so on...that they pin down as the reason. And there's a lot of truth to this; back when the Minimoog was still in its initial production run up into the early 1980s, devotees of these synths discussed how certain serial number runs sounded 'better' than others (in fact, they still talk about this!) and a lot of that came down to tiny 'mistakes' that, in the end-analysis, weren't all that 'mistaken' after all!
But even if you make these things to precise tolerances (such as the Curtis and SSM chipsets), you still have to contend with 'operator error', from which you can still get plenty of accidental (or deliberate) misadjustments that result in that same voice-doubling outcome. And this is why, if you have one VCO in a build, having two or three...even of the same model...is even better. We all have heard that super-fat Moog bass sound (you know the one) that you get from a tiny amount of detuning of one VCO against the others...or more recently, the Roland 'Supersaw', which is a circuit that reliably emulates the 'problem' that would be the actual cause of that huge, sweeping sound.
But note: this will not work with anything that has a complex and constantly-changing timbral component, numerous transient elements, etc. You can't 'chorus' noise, for example, in this way, because noise consists of differently-weighted spectra in a constant, rapid state of change and, as a result, there's nothing there to 'line up' so that proper doubling can happen. Or a sample, because there's too much going on altogether to get a cohesive doubled result. No, in those cases you actually should be using a time-based chorus effect to achieve the desired doubling result by using the modulated delay to cause the sound to act against a 1:1 copy of itself with a tiny time offset.
One more point: generators that output most anything beyond noise (as well as a few noise generators, in fact) have several ways to be controlled. Either a control voltage at a steady voltage level is used for this, or control voltages of changing levels of various sorts, the latter being what we refer to as 'modulation'. In generators, this tends to be something related to pitch, but can also involve synchronization of waveform start-points and, in the case of a number of more elaborate sound sources, the actual spectra of the generator itself. Plus, with samplers, dedicated drum modules, and the like, you also have the on-off digital gates and triggers that make the sound itself start (and/or stop). Even modulating one generator with another at audio frequencies is fair game and, actually, that method of cross-modulative synthesis is a big part of the 'West Coast' sound as pioneered by Don Buchla all the way back at the beginning of synthesizers as we know them.
'Modifiers'
Now that you have that audio signal, you're going to want to screw around with it. And anything that alters the different parts of an audio signal fits into this category. Even something as dirt-simple as a ring modulator, which has been around for decades and actually originates in radio technology from decades prior to the creation of electronic music, is a modifier. In this circuit's case, two signals get combined to generate a set of 'sum' and 'difference' frequencies derived from the sounds' fundamentals and harmonics. And yeah, this sounds reeeeeally modified!
Then there's filters and waveshapers, which are two sides of the same coin. Waveshaping involves all sorts of methods of altering the incoming waveform; since the harmonic content of a waveform determines its waveshape and, hence, its sound, the methods of altering the shape of the waveform tend to increase or restructure the harmonic content we hear. Folding the waveform creates various types of timbral shifts, or you can use various methods of 'degrading' the purer waveform to create clipping, waveform stepping, and so on which usually result in distortive timbral changes. On the other hand, filters work by removing parts of the incoming waveform, often also increasing the amplitude of a certain harmonic or set of harmonics in that signal by electronically forcing the filter into 'resonance' at a given frequency and by a given amount. But filters do the inverse of waveshapers, and are key to 'subtractive' synthesis, or what we tend to term 'East Coast'. And the 'West Coast' method tended to emphasize waveshaping, of course, since Buchla et al's methods of synthesis were based on building up very complex spectra and then 'gating' these without resonance playing much of a part.
Speaking of which, that main West Coast device is known as the 'timbral gate'. With these, you classically have a voltage-controlled amplifier and a non-resonant filter (low-pass, as a rule) controlled in tandem. With this strange modifier, the amplitude AND timbre falls under the same control signal; the idea here is that this would emulate the decay of a sound if it were produced by a physical instrument. In physical devices, as the overall amplitude of a sound diminishes, so does the higher harmonic content along a similar decay curve. Don Buchla's idea here was to create a way to electronically mimic that behavior and to make his timbral gates have a somewhat-familiar sort of sonic behavior; to this day, people still refer to vactrol-based lowpass gates as having a certain 'woody' sound, like tuned percussion, or describe them as having a classic 'plook'-type character to their behavior on incoming sounds.
And about VCAs...yes, these are also modifiers. But instead of altering timbre, they alter amplitude. In a way, you could view them as 'level filters'...controlling the amplitude of an incoming signal according to a certain control signal, in much the same way as a filter controls the passage of a signal's frequency bandwidth according to the control over its cutoff frequency. In fact, both VCFs and VCAs are the prime 'customers' for what envelope generators output as their control signals, and LFO modulation of a VCA changes amplitude in the same way as timbre changes when a VCF is modulated in the same way...or, just as well, VCO frequencies (and so forth) from the selfsame LFO (or envelope generator). This is also what makes VCAs invaluable for modifying control signal amplitudes, such as LFO amplitudes so that vibrato or tremolo modulation signals can build or drop in intensity when passed through a VCA controlled by another LFO or EG.
But it's important to remember that there are two distinct types of VCAs, and you really can't use one in place of the other!
Linear VCAs are optimal for controlling the amplitude of control voltages, such as modulation signals from an LFO or the height of an envelope. These VCAs treat their control signals in a linear fashion: if you want the throughput amplitude to increase by 10%, just feed 10% more voltage to the VCA's control input. This tends to make sense when you want a 1:1 degree of modulation signal control. And since these are more optimal for control signal modification, most linear VCAs are also DC-coupled, meaning that they can pass signals whose frequencies extend all the way down to DC, as well as anything else of a lower frequency than audio. But these can also be used with audio, especially for basic mixing processes before signals reach the final processing stage.
For that stage, you have to have exponential VCAs. These tend to react to control signals in a 'law of squares'-type of manner; the resulting curve of amplification is shaped exponentially, hence the name. Now, why these are a must-have for the final parts of the signal chain has to do with how we perceive loudness. Our hearing processes are set up so that we also perceive changes in apparent volume, or loudness, as an exponential psychoacoustic function. So when an envelope decays that's controlling an exponential VCA, the passthrough signal's level appears to our ears to change in volume in a 'more correct' manner. Loud sounds are clearly loud, while soft sounds are clearly soft, and so forth. Yes, you can also use a linear VCA there...but if you do, then you have to use an exponential control source to get it to behave in the same way. Otherwise, output sounds passed through a linear VCA, controlled with a linear EG, lack a lot of 'punch' and the end-result is that your synthesizer sounds...well, pretty lame, without a lot of loudness differentiation to the listener's perspective. Because of this important usage, exponential VCAs tend to NOT pass DC or much of anything below 1-2 Hz, because DC in an audio signal results in an annoying issue known as 'DC offset'. This issue can damage amps, speakers, give false level readings when recording, and so on, and it's very much NOT desirable. Note also that this 'DC offset' is not the same as a 'DC offset voltage' coming from some sort of control module. In THAT case, you want that extra DC amount to define a certain level or tuning or whatever. But outside of the synth...nuh-uh. Not good. Also, this is why a goodly number of output modules incorporate some sort of DC isolation, to prevent stray DC from escaping into your audio chain outside of the synth. So, make sure your VCAs are exponential and AC-coupled (usually, they are) if they're going to be at the very end of your synth's signal chain!
'Controllers'
This is a huge category of devices of different sorts, and not everything that seems like a 'control' module actually is that. In fact, anything that involves logic actually belongs as part of the 'modifier' group, although what they modify are gate/trigger timing signals and not audio (although you can use logic devices as a type of audio waveshaper, too). Actual controllers are the devices in a synthesizer that make the other three main components do what it is that they do. And actually, this group can be split even further into three significant subcategories. We'll treat each one in turn...
First, there are things that are really, actually, controllers. Devices such as sequencers, keyboards, photocell controls, FSRs...and a whole host of other things that output control signals under more or less manual control, these make up this group. The idea with all of these is that a determinate output, under the synthesist's control, is being generated by these devices. But also, indeterminate control devices fit here, too; the whole gamut of randomness modules go in this slot because, while that behavior isn't usually directly under the synthesist's control, the synthesist has made the programming choice to include control via whatever sort of random factor that they know the module tends to be capable of, ergo it's just as much a 'control option' as using a keyboard, joystick, etc. A Euclidean sequencer is a good example of this: while the output of such a module has a randomness to it, it's a 'gamed' randomization under a certain degree of control by the synthesist by their choice of control functions applied to or within it. Even sample-and-hold modules fed by totally random, indeterminate signals such as white noise still have a given behavior by how the synthesist chooses to control the randomness generated by the noise generator through the 'psuedorandomness' of the S&H. So, if you make 'setting A' on a device and know it'll do 'action B' every time (more or less, in the case of random devices), you're dealing with a controller. One other key controller is the quantizer; a quantizer is actually a type of sample-and-hold circuit with a very determinant pitch-scaled output which can transform incoming changing voltages of any type to held voltages to control other modules that require fixed control voltages, such as VCOs. But if you feed white noise to a quantizer...well, you still get scalar steps, although the distribution of those will be random albeit specifically pitched, and not the same 'psuedorandom' output of an unscaled sample-and-hold.
Then we have modulation sources. In this class, you find modules that run on their own or via a control signal of another sort, and which output control voltage signals as a result. LFOs, envelope generators, function generators, sample-and-holds fed by determinate signals (such as repeating LFO waveforms, envelopes, etc) to create 'stepped' curves...all of these are modulation sources, along with a few other specialized examples which behave in much the same way.
Last, there's timing sources. This gamut of devices is comprised of everything in a modular synth that outputs the various on-off gates or triggers in some way for the use of modules that require these to do what they do. Envelope generators, for example, require triggers or gates to fire (and gates specifically to deal with 'hold' behavior) and 'one-shot' through their envelope parameters. Clock generators and modulators create and alter timing signals for all sorts of actions, ranging from synchronization of larger processes, clocking sequencer or sample and hold stepping, and to generate pulses for logic. But again, logic circuits are NOT controllers. Instead, the various gates, combiners, etc actually operate in much the same way as the varying modifier devices in the audio chain, to alter the fundamental behavior of inputted timing pulses. Case in point: the AND gate. In this case, you have two inputs for timing pulses and one output that generate a pulse only when the logic case for the gate is met. If there's a timing signal at either the A or B input, nothing happens; only when A AND B see a pulse does the gate output its pulse. Because logic gates and their relatives all function in this manner, they are actually something akin to a 'timing filter'...and, as such, they're modifier devices.
This isn't the only example of how modifiers can exist in the controller 'gamut'. Control signals, especially periodically-repeating ones, can be waveshaped in various ways not unlike how the same processes work in the audio chain. A good example is rectification, which results in very distorted audio results by altering the waveform's polarization to shift all of the waveform above the DC level. But in control waveforms, such as from an LFO, the result actually alters the waveshape in the same way, but the result when this is used as a modulation signal is actually quite different, since the signal has been 'half-waved' to create an 'above-zero-set-point' modulation signal. It's also possible to invert this (another modifier...and in this case, usable in audio to cause phase cancellation effects by combining a 'normal' and 'inverted' signal) and cause all of the modulation curve behavior to happen downward, below the zero-set. And of course, the example mentioned above of linear VCAs and their uses on modulation signal amplitudes.
People seem to ignore quite a bit about controller modules. And that's a mistake; controller modules are an important part of the 'dark arts' behind making sounds that behave with incredible complexity. By creating multiple control layers, it's possible to generate elaborate control methods that can result in sounds that, by themselves, qualify as whole compositions. For instance...take three LFOs that have voltage control capability. Feed the first one into the CV input of the second, then that into the CV input of the third. The output from the third will then behave in a very non-repetitive curve...or perhaps more repetitive...depending on how the various LFO frequencies were set. Now, feed that last output into a multiple (we'll get to those), and split it to three comparators, which generate a timing signal when a voltage threshold gets crossed. Set each one to a different threshold, feed their gate/trigger outputs to three different EGs. Then have those EGs control the amplitude of three exponential VCAs that are being fed by different and complex audio signals. Voila! You're starting off into the domain of 'generative music'...albeit, a rather simple part of that. But this illustrates why it's important to NOT neglect the wide range of controller possibilities. They bring the fun into your modular's _fun_ctionality!
'Processors'
Now, these also don't get a lot of respect. Processors are the 'everything else' that takes signals from the audio or control chains and makes them into something...else. These are different from modifiers in that they don't actually impart any change to the signal, but that they change the way the signal(s) behaves. The simplest one is, yep, the multiple. A multiple actually replicates a signal fed into it and sends copies back out. Buffered multiples, of course, are active devices which contain circuits that precisely duplicate and regenerate signals fed into them...but even a passive multiple, which has no active circuitry at all, still fits into the definition of a 'processor' because of what it does.
Mixers, also...these do the opposite by combining signals into a single signal, either monophonic, stereophonic, or even crazier sorts of spatializations. But these don't change the signals fed into them, optimally...the signals are all still there, still audible, just in a composite form at the mixer's output. Anything that works this way fit here. Also, anything that works in the context of signal mixing, such as panning, crossfading, muting, auxiliary signal send/return actions, group level control...all of these functions fit the criteria of processing since, again, the signals' character isn't being changed...only how they behave in the signal chain. And this works for both control signals and audio, since the objective doesn't involve changing what's present, only combining it, even if the resultant combination might appear different on its face value.
Also, anything that is a time-based processor, such as a delay, reverb, or chorus counts as a processor. The signal inputted to these devices is still technically intact beneath the process imposed on them by the module; even super-deep reverbs, while smearing out the sound's transients, are still outputting the original sound even though the overall temporal contour has been altered by generating hundreds or thousands of early and late-reflection copies. And delays, of course, just create singular copies of the signal and repeat them at given intervals for a given period of time.
But processors that actually alter the timbral character of a signal...in short, devices that could just as well be placed into the 'modifier' category...these aren't processors per se, but modifiers, albeit modifiers that are more appropriate at the end of a signal chain. This would include phase shifters, flangers, equalizers, and the like. And that's where this gets a little touchy, because some devices that should be pure processors DO alter the character of a sound. Spring reverbs, for example, are more akin to modifiers than a nice, clean, high-bit-resolution digital reverb because they impart coloration, whereas the digital reverb can alter the temporal factors without 'true' change to the sonic character of the inputted signal. Tape delays, also, when used to impart a tape saturation character in addition to their time-based use, fit here.
Then there's the last...and first...bits of the synth: external modules. Again, these fit in the category of 'processors' because their job isn't to alter the character of the sound, just to either get it into or out of the synthesizer environment. In the case of input modules, they step the signal's level up, and in some cases also derive some control signals from, either through envelope followers that track...to some degree...the incoming signal's amplitude and generate a control voltage from that, pitch-to-voltage converters that turn the incoming signal's pitch into a control voltage, or comparators that fire a gate or trigger when the signal crosses a certain amplitude threshold. In all of these cases, the incoming signal isn't being changed sonically, just used as a source from which the signals can be derived. Output modules are simpler still: they just step the signal level back down to the 'real world' line-level standard, maybe with the addition of a level control or maybe an auxiliary input.
But in actuality, anything that gets a signal of some sort in or out of a modular synthesizer environment is a processor. MIDI, for example, has to be turned into the requisite CV and gate/trigger signals for the synth to be able to make any sense of the incoming MIDI control signal. As such, MIDI usually isn't part of the modular environment (although a few cases do seem to exist, they themselves also do MIDI processing internally to effect the necessary signal compatibility) and has to be turned into the proper signal. In essence, this is a second sort of 'processor'; while processing in the audio chain tries to NOT affect the signal character, MIDI, OSC, etc has to be processed into something a synthesizer can use in the first place. As such, the function of these devices is more akin to a 'translator', even though they 'process' their respective incoming signals into something else as far as signal format. Despite that, the information being 'processed' isn't actually being changed informationally, just as processors in an audio change also avoid changing the audio's 'information'. So, ultimately, they're both a 'controller' and a 'processor' all at the same time, falling into that tiny category of 'a few different things at the same time' which I mentioned back at the beginning.
So, aside of how to power all of this crap and what to put it in, that's the four parts of the synthesizer. And yes, this even applies to synthesizers that are purely digital confabulations, because while the physical devices might be absent, the coding still contains data which contains these four functionalities. So, by keeping this in mind, and knowing what you need to do in terms of where YOU want to go with your instrument, hopefully this pile of info can help you in properly allocating what needs to be in a modular system, how to potentially assemble it into something that works like an instrument, and how to 'get gud' when you're staring down that panel of knobs, wires, lights, and patchcords. Yeah, long essay, I know...but useful, hopefully!
Lugia, Here's my idea for the 3rd row. How would you go about making the most out of this space? How would you construct a drum source using the extra space here? Thanks in advance!
Couple of ways you could approach that Werkstatt, also...either you'll also need the add-on 3.5mm jack expander to connect it into the Eurorack environment...
...or, more sick and twistedly, have a peek at two Bastl devices, neither of which are too expensive considering their capabilities: the bitRanger and the SoftPop. Now, these use the same Dupont pin connectivity as a stock Werkstatt, but when combined with the Moog, you get this frightening yowl/screech/growl monster...perfect for industrial!
-- Lugia
Gosh darnit Lugia, quit helping me spend my cash :-) just kidding.
Yeah! Those Bastl devices look amazing for a portable modular rig. Very tempting indeed! Pair two of these with the Birdkids and Ant and have a night of mayhem. I need to hit Perfect Circle Audio in LA to try out a bunch of this cool gear since the stores in San Diego suck bad and never have any modular gear.
Another item that looks neat is the portable Birdkids the Bateleur modular rig! The Plankton ANTS! modular looks pretty interesting as well. I think that would give me portable modular to learn more patching before spending 5-10k on a full blown 7-9U 200HP setup.
Couple of ways you could approach that Werkstatt, also...either you'll also need the add-on 3.5mm jack expander to connect it into the Eurorack environment...
...or, more sick and twistedly, have a peek at two Bastl devices, neither of which are too expensive considering their capabilities: the bitRanger and the SoftPop. Now, these use the same Dupont pin connectivity as a stock Werkstatt, but when combined with the Moog, you get this frightening yowl/screech/growl monster...perfect for industrial!
Quite true...plus, with more space in the 3U, you can even construct a drum source or two. Just trigger an EG set for a really quick envelope, feed that to a filter which is filtering a noise source. By rapidly modulating the filter with an exponential envelope with a very short duration, you get those 'filter snap' sounds ala 'Computer World'-period Kraftwerk that sound so GOOOOOOD!
That won't work. While the Ears has an envelope follower, it and the rest of the module is designed around the contact microphone built into the module itself, so that the module works as a 'tappable' controller. You're trying to use a proper microphone setup on a drum kit instead. What you actually need is a proper external input module with a mic preamp and envelope follower...or better yet, a multichannel input module and some separate envelope follower modules. But as an indication of what's required to do this, have a look at a Doepfer A-119; this module is sort of the standard for the group, with a balanced/unbalanced input preamp with the proper impedance for external sources, envelope follower, audio output at synth levels, and a comparator to set a level for a gate. That's what needs to be used.
As for the MPC...why not just use it as a proper MIDI controller/sequencer, instead of a more difficult, roundabout and potentially glitchy (not in a good way) method such as audio triggering? Notice, also, that the Ladik module has only one adjustment for its comparator level to generate triggers as a desired audio level. Really, what the Ladik module is better designed for is for use with drum trigger pickups...which are basically insensitive microphones designed to be drum-mounted so that when the drum is struck, it outputs an audio signal (albeit not a very good one) that can be converted by circuits like the ones in that Ladik module. This isn't the right use for either the MPC or the Ladik module; just get a MIDI-to-trigger interface and connect the MPC to that directly via the MPC's MIDI OUT.
Anyway, those need fixing first. There's other problems in this build, but you need to correct the premise behind it first.
Ears to bring in mic’d ACOUSTIC DRUMSET into modular with envelope follower feature
LADIK audio-to-trig to convert Audio Out of MPC1000 to trigger modules
