You also save a bit on the Quad VCA...use that to buy a couple more patchcords. Otherwise, I'm having trouble finding anything I'd change here save for the overall layout to get the patch flow a bit clearer. Nice job!
If you're getting the Batumi, get the Poti expander. It's cheap and gives you instant access to different wave shapes, sync/reset options, etc. Most of these functions can be changed by pulling the module and moving jumpers without the Poti. But why suffer that kind of torment?
-- Ronin1973
Hi Ronin1973, I’ve had the Batumi for some time now. I thought about getting the Poti for awhile because ya, pulling it in and out to change waveforms was kind of annoying.. But then some months ago this kind person made this alternate firmware(http://voltexture.hiho.jp/batumi-individual-wavebank-firmware-v1-0-released/)! This added random waveform types(which is typically all I use now) for the middle outputs as well as a new layer of menu to control the type. The added complexity paired with the expert firmware made it a bit of a learning curve, but now that I have it down it feels totally worth it.
Hey Placebo, the Z-DSP's internal rate clock is also clockable to an external input. That means you can get some grunginess out of it. I've had mine for about a month but it hasn't seen much action... yet.
If you're getting the Batumi, get the Poti expander. It's cheap and gives you instant access to different wave shapes, sync/reset options, etc. Most of these functions can be changed by pulling the module and moving jumpers without the Poti. But why suffer that kind of torment?
Some great ideas here Luigia! The slinky idea reminded me of a spring reverb I owned for a short while(the Ekdhal Moisturizer) which had exposed springs. I really enjoyed running sounds through, even something like a simple drum track, and then playing with the springs in different ways, even just breathing on it would yield cool effects.. Now I miss that weird machine..
On a side note, I just posted a thread about a system makeover I'm planning and I would greatly appreciate some of your thoughts(if you have the time)!
Sorry OP for the total hijacking..
I'm hoping I can bother some of you for some thoughts on my system makeover plan.
So far my strategy has been to cram as much capability into my small case as possible, but it's ended up just feeling like a bit of a mess, and with all the micro sized module's and mini pots it's also become a PITA to play.
So my plan is to simplify down my system to a more clear and sensible instrument, which will hopefully be more inviting to create on.
Here is the plan:
Quick rundown:
-I like the sound and the immediacy of the STO's, I only have one currently but I think 2 will compliment each other nicely.
-I have one 3 sisters currently. I really enjoy using it as a sound source, but also as a filter. So having 2 only makes sense.
-The SY0.5 is mainly for percussion.
-The Piston Honda will typically be for drones or waveshaping.
-The Koma VCA and the Dynamix will provide shaping and control over the sound sources.
-The Chronoblob and Clouds will be the systems effects(leaving room for clouds v2 here).
-From my little understanding of it the Cold Mac seems like it can fill many many useful utility duties, in 8hp it seems a no brainer for a small setup otherwise lacking in utilities.
One more thing to note is the bottom row is in its own seperate sequencing skiff, so that extra space is an illusion :p
I feel like it looks good.. But my modulargrid intuition has failed me before so my trust in my own judgement is feeling a bit shaken..
So please, any thoughts/critiques are very much appreciated!
Feeling better about this build, after a previous post took many suggestions into consideration. The case would be a Intellijel 7u 104hp. On the 1u row I have Audio I/O, a reverb, a multiplier, a mixer and some noise tools. Added the Yarns for slaving the rig to an ERM Multiclock signal and having it in sync with the rest of the studio.
Sound sources are the Intellijel Plonk, Erica Synths Pico Voice, Pluck, Vowel, Mutable Instruments Grids, I feel it's varied in the type of sounds I can generate in an overall patch. For sequencing I have the Eloquencer, For modulation I have the Maths, a Korb-Modular DLFO and a Mogasmatron. For VCAs I'm using a Quad VCA and a Streams. For my main delay unit I'd use the Rainmaker. Finally for some dynamics processing I have a Morgasmatron.
Feel this is a balanced setup that can have many possibilities. Of course any opinions and changes you'd make are very welcome. If I missed something essential to this build please let me know so I can work on it.
When you buy a module... the Lugia Law of modular states you'll want to buy another one.
Starting out in a skiff means you're going to box yourself in in no time. There are tons of great modules out there but are exclusively in larger HP forms. If you put a couple of these larger beasts in your rack, you quickly run out of room. Having to slave your next purchase based on available HP puts a serious ding in your set-up when first starting out.
I think the Tip Top Mantis offers 208 HP (104HPx2) for around $300US. I would start in something like that. The balance between price and space seems about right.
I went with the Intellijel 7U 104 case (then bought another one). I still weigh the pros and cons of my decision... but I really wanted the 1U for attenuverters (Intellijel Quadrats). Inverting CV, mixing, etc... I paid the premium to have that.
Recommending a filter is like recommending a wife. It's more about what you like.
In my personal set-up I have an Intellijel Morgasmatron and a Roland (Maleko Heavy Industries designed it) 505 filter module. The Intellijel covers the basic multimodes. The 505 is there because I love the Roland filter sound. The next filter will be the Joranalogue filter. I might pick up a Doepfer Wasp since they are like $100 and have their own unique flavor.
I also have a Xaoc Batumi with the Poti expander for my LFOs. It serves its purpose. But I might wander into something more traditional with PWM for the square wave as well as a reset gate.
I have other gear that can generate LFOs: Intellijel Rubicon II, Tip Top Z3000, Expert Sleeper Disting, Ornaments & Crime, 1010 Music Toolbox Sequencer, Expert Sleepers FH2... so I'm pretty much covered for all my LFOs at the moment.
The bottom-line is this... whatever you decide... you will be wrong. You will have good relationships with some modules and bad relationships with others. Keep the good ones, find alternatives to the "bad" ones.
Get the micro-versions of the Mutable stuff and buy a Eurorack module capable of mixing your signals.
What's the relationship between those vendors and Mutable Instruments? I like Olivier Gillet's work and I like the idea of my dollars supporting MI.
But you'll want an envelope generator and a VCA to go with it.
If I am accumulating gear gradually, I can start out with overdubbing and use the Neutron's VCA and envelopes, I think.
Thanks again for your helpful responses.
-- RelaxedNapper
Mutable Instruments believes in open-sourcing their code. Those people crafting their own versions of Braids, Clouds, etc. aren't violating MI as far as I know. MI isn't your typical manufacturer. You can buy the micro modules and other from respected retailers like Detroit Modular and Perfect Circuit. MI supports the DIYers.
As far as I know, the Neutron only has one VCA. "You can never have enough VCAs." Take that to heart. VCAs can control audio as well as every kind of CV. I would say to try your approach and see if it is satisfactory. You can always try it and buy more modules if you're unhappy with the results.
Change vails for QuadVCA, I had both but realized for myself that the vails is quiet difficult to handle, very sensible
I am a noob getting into Eurorack, and I have spent some time googling and reading. I have put together a final "perfect rack." (Since it changes daily, this is obviously a bit of a joke).
The general idea is to start with something relatively simple that does a bit of everything. This will let me explore and develop my own style, and figure out which coast I prefer. I would love any comments or suggestions to help me along.
I also play electric bass, and I would like to plug it in and play along with the modular (I already have the Sewastopol II, and its "export" actually drives headphones, so it works well as an input / output module).
Thanks all for a great community.
M
Second hand modules was the way to go for me .
I just stuck to “factory built” modules from larger manufacturers ie doepfer ect.
Only been bitten once in 32 modules with worn sockets and it wasn’t a hard fix .
Depends. If the discontinued devices are from a major maker, such as Mutable Instruments, Intellijel, etc, there's not likely to be any worries, plus these may in fact be easy and cheap finds on the used market (in some cases). But when it comes to smaller boutique makers, it's likely best to stick to ones whose output has been ongoing over the long term in case technical issues arise. Also, if the device in question was a kit build, be very cautious unless the build was done by a builder with extensive experience. My Digisound 80, for example, was a kit build...but it had been restored and cased/powered by the legendary Kevin Lightner (RIP), one of the greatest synth techs ever. So even though it was a kit build, Kevin had gone over all of the functions and corrected any faults that might have been present because...well, that's what he did. He was a picky guy in that way.
Again, as with anything used, it's a caveat emptor kinda joint. When first getting a "new" used module, check all of the functions, controls for noise, dropouts, jumpy control behavior (all of which tend to indicate dirty controls, etc), and make sure the patchpoints are snug and electrically solid. If you have an oscilloscope (definitely a tool serious modularistas ought to have on hand!), examine LFO and VCO waveforms for spectral purity and proper waveshapes. Also, VCFs can be checked similarly by bringing them into self-resonance and examining the output for a good, clean sine wave. Mixers and VCAs can be checked by sending known pure waveforms through them and looking for distortion components, and waveshaper functions can be checked against their settings by observing how they manipulate a simple waveform. Dirty pots and switches can usually be sorted out with some of Caig Labs' wonder-drug, DeOxit, and badly-performing jacks can either be spritzed with that same magic formula, or you can obtain a jack burnisher to scrub crud off of contacts.
Correct. Overdriving a simple waveform such as a sine or triangle will result in distortion, but in a simple waveform this actually translates into adding harmonics...which is the same thing a waveshaper circuit is specifically designed to do via wavefolding, rectification, clipping, or basic ol' nonlinear distortion. With a more complex sound like drums, where there's not a specific pitch as such, this can result in a heavier, more 'crunchy' sound. Quite a few producers that I knew back in the days of the rave scene would use input preamp overload on their TR-909 kick signal to push that sound into the range of the fuzzy, semi-pitched BOOM that would make the dancefloor go crazy. In fact, if you listen to a lot of Aphex Twin's earlier work up to around the time he released "On", he employs a host of "bad/wrong" production and engineering techniques that wind up making a "right" in that it defined that crazed, ultra-hard acid sound he championed, most notably on his "Dice Man" and "JOYREX" releases.
-- LugiaYou are the wikipedia of sound great Ligia you open my mind!
-- Lucapiombo92
Lugia*
Correct. Overdriving a simple waveform such as a sine or triangle will result in distortion, but in a simple waveform this actually translates into adding harmonics...which is the same thing a waveshaper circuit is specifically designed to do via wavefolding, rectification, clipping, or basic ol' nonlinear distortion. With a more complex sound like drums, where there's not a specific pitch as such, this can result in a heavier, more 'crunchy' sound. Quite a few producers that I knew back in the days of the rave scene would use input preamp overload on their TR-909 kick signal to push that sound into the range of the fuzzy, semi-pitched BOOM that would make the dancefloor go crazy. In fact, if you listen to a lot of Aphex Twin's earlier work up to around the time he released "On", he employs a host of "bad/wrong" production and engineering techniques that wind up making a "right" in that it defined that crazed, ultra-hard acid sound he championed, most notably on his "Dice Man" and "JOYREX" releases.
-- Lugia
You are the wikipedia of sound great Ligia you open my mind!
Thanks for all the (extensive, wow!) replies. In the meantime, I got a few new modules and updated to another rack (9U 114HP). I've told myself to restrain myself to start filling up both, so I will be using the 3U only for now. ;)
Batumi being added.
About discontinued modules: Should I avoid these in my system?
Ah, you're right...hard to read the Erica stuff when it's itsy-bitsy...
You might not want to keep the subchains as separate as that. It may make more sense from the point of interaction between parts to work out some sort of structure that allows more than just a time-base between all parts. For example, a shifting LFO curve in one part could, via a comparator, switch on an action in a second part when the LFO was above (or below) X level. Say, if your VCF cutoff in the first part went above a certain partial frequency via that LFO, the same LFO could start a sequence via the comparator gate, then stop it when the VCF's cutoff dropped. And going further, that triggered sequencer part could, in turn, activate some other timing function (such as ratcheting) on another sequenced part. And so on, ad infinitum. Best way to proceed, from my experience, is to start by mapping the basic action of a part, then identifying points in that part's signal and/or control chains where the insertion of something that 'reads' the activity could be used to interact with another. And at the same time, identifying points of 'action change' in the affected parts, and figuring out how you want the changes to occur, etc. Usually, these sorts of system require a great deal of control density, which you're definitely getting toward in this build, but it might make sense to spread out more for the ease of programmability and interaction with the system as a whole. Since you like the Erica stuff, have a look at some of their cases...the deep 2 x 126hp will allow you to stretch out more, add a few more bits, and provide more than adequate power while avoiding any depth conflicts.
Hi Lugia,
if you look more closely - there are 8 VCA's in the rack-the two modules at the far right on the bottom row:
https://www.modulargrid.net/e/erica-synths-black-quad-vca
"Controlled chance" as you have stated or constrained randomness in the harmonic and melodic progression is exactly the goal of this build.
Maybe I'm thinking about this wrong, but I've been looking at the system design as 4channels which are interrelated harmonically:
Melodic arpeggios
Harmonic progression ( chords )
monophonic base
Percussion
With each of these "channel" requiring it's own sequencing, but remaining related via the quantizer and fundamental clock rhythm. Ideally each of these channel progressions are allowed to evolve independently ( at different rates )
more research, I guess...
thanks for the comments,
cheers,
-m
VCAs? I don't see any, and if you're aiming for generative work, it's essential to have those so that constant level changes over both audio and CV can be programmed into the structure. Plus, with VCA control over CV, you can then add comparators into the fray which will allow gating to start/stop events based on CV level changes. They're sort of a must if you want to get some real mileage out of that Boolean logic module in the bottom row.
BTW, "generative" refers to a method of multiple-order control in which the synthesizer is programmed to 'play itself', constantly altering modulation levels and paths, working within a set of parameters defined by the overall patch prior to setting the whole thing in motion. By restricting the possible stochastic outcomes as a part of that patch, there's a level of semi-predictability to how a generative system functions within a given set of possibilities. "Controlled chance", more or less; I'm not sure that's what you're trying to do here...
Nope, just plain-jane algorithmic digital reverb. That Eventide box should be perfect for that sort of thing. There's a lot of possibilities in using contact mics, too, especially with something that's designed for that such as the Field Kit. For example, try stretching out a metal Slinky (the plastic ones will not work for this) between two points, and place a contact mix on either end. Then fiddle around with the Slinky...tapping it, springing it back and forth, etc. Or run a signal in one end via a transducer to a contact mic on the other end for utterly fucko bizarro spring reverb craziness. Another fun one: get a ride cymbal and a violin bow. Put the cymbal on a stand and contact mix it right at the top of the bell so the mic doesn't impede its ringing. Now bow the cymbal. MUCH craziness of an ambient-ish variety...sort of like a cheapo version of what Stockhausen was up to with his "Mikrophonie I".
Electronic music doesn't have to involve a synth. Sometimes some weird amplification methods and processing works...sometimes even better!
Correct. Overdriving a simple waveform such as a sine or triangle will result in distortion, but in a simple waveform this actually translates into adding harmonics...which is the same thing a waveshaper circuit is specifically designed to do via wavefolding, rectification, clipping, or basic ol' nonlinear distortion. With a more complex sound like drums, where there's not a specific pitch as such, this can result in a heavier, more 'crunchy' sound. Quite a few producers that I knew back in the days of the rave scene would use input preamp overload on their TR-909 kick signal to push that sound into the range of the fuzzy, semi-pitched BOOM that would make the dancefloor go crazy. In fact, if you listen to a lot of Aphex Twin's earlier work up to around the time he released "On", he employs a host of "bad/wrong" production and engineering techniques that wind up making a "right" in that it defined that crazed, ultra-hard acid sound he championed, most notably on his "Dice Man" and "JOYREX" releases.
Hi Ronin,
I appreciate the comments.
Replies are in-betweened below:
Seems you really like Erica Synth products.
I think that's mostly a result of my research starting with the Erica Synth line of products, so I'm fairly familiar with the product line's functionality. Im also trying to limit the build to a single MakeNoise 7U case w/ CV bus, so the small PICO line of modules are both helpful and problematic with their odd 3HP configuration ( work well in pairs )
All of your oscillators are digital. Is there a reason?
No - Not specifically, mostly I was looking for voice flexibility. I do have 2 analog poly-synths in the studio, but ideally this EuroRack build should be able to run as a portable stand alone system.
It feels that you wanted to go for as many panels in black as possible with the O'Tool being a necessity.
I admit to a certain degree, I was trying to maintain a consistent aesthetic with the rig, but that might not be feasible ultimately.
You're depending heavily on the FH2 for sequencing. Working on modular and go back and forth to a DAW isn't very ergonomic.
I was hoping the FH2 would serve several functions:
Clock source, including clock divisions for triggering percussion elements.
Euclidian rhythm generation
EGs
LFOs
and yes - I was relying on the FH-2's ability to generate LFOs in abundance to save rack space.
My thought was to use the ES Octasource and Dual EG/LFO as interactive EG and LFO sources ( I certainly could easily be underestimating how many EGs & LFO need to be easily accessible )
Have you used a DAW as a sequencer for Eurorack before?
No, I haven't - I'm completely new to Eurorack.
I see one EG/LFO unit. You're loaded up on oscillators, filters, and multi-effects units but really light on EGs. The FH2 can >output envelopes and LFOs as well... but they are really clunky to use in real time.
That's good to know - As I stated above, I was hoping to use the FH-2 for EG's & LFOs that would largely remain unattended once set up.
There's an additional PICO sequencer. Can it be sync'ed to the FH2 or another external clock? I'm not familiar with it.
Yes, the PICO SEQ is a 16 step sequencer that can accept an EXT Clock source.
It can store 16 sequences in memory
It can also generate random sequences internally, but unfortunately it can not be triggered to switch sequences. Changing sequences require human intervention. My thought was to use it as a source for logic operation combined with the Tuning Machines output for sequence evolution.
I would ease into Eurorack rather than buying a ton of modules and filling a case. Maybe this is your current "ideal" but that's >going to change quite a bit once you actually start using the modules.
Copy that - I wouldn't call this build ideal. It's just the result of my research and my current understanding of how these components interact, and my design goals- all of which will change as I learn more about the components.
But I am trying to take advantage of modulargrid and preview the rig as a complete system. ( before spending any money )
Don't depend on the FH2 to get you what you want. I bought one and it's a bit of a pain to use if you're trying to reconfigure it >while connected to a DAW. You have to use a webpage app and send updates via system exclusive to the FH2. If your DAW is >open you can't use the web app to update it at the same time.
Okay- got it. Communication with the FH-2 is thru Midi - SysEx. either your linked to the DAW or the control interface - yeah that could get annoying.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Cheers,
-m
It's actually a far easier process than most people might think. The real key is in figuring out the dimensions of the rails (and which rails) and mounting plates. Given that all of these are easily available from various sources, with dimensions clearly given by the manufacturers, it's simply a matter of sorting out how much hp you want, how many rows (and what type rows), and then proceeding from there. But let this stage be the actual startpoint...work from the inside out!
As for the outside, that's up to you. You can go with some sort of hi-impact paint to cover, or source up some tolex in various patterns. Alligator? Sure, why not? One thing about the outside that I suggest, though, is to find quality ATA case fitments and use them...corners, edge rails, handles, closures. They will up the weight...but if you plan to use the case on gigs, you'll be very grateful for those. They also look pretty professional in a studio setting.
Third (and most important!) consideration: power. You should fit this with a power supply that, optimally, provides around 1/3rd more amperage than your system's total draw. There are two reasons for this...first, less stress on the power supply means less heat and less wear on its components. Heat, also, might be a factor in detuning modules, so making the P/S hot as a firecracker is a bad thing for stability. And the second point is current inrush; for less than a second after switching the system on, the total current draw will be somewhat higher than the 'in operation' figures. Best rule of thumb says that with 100% solid state components, around a 1/3rd surplus should more than handle inrush. But if there are tube components, their inrush and warmup stages can actually close to double their current draw for a few hundred milliseconds and that'll have to be taken into account in the P/S spec. As for the AC connection, use a standard fused IEC female chassis mount and mount the P/S as close as you can to this to minimize the AC line run within the cab. Remember: those lines can induce plenty of hum, so keeping them to an absolute minimum length inside your synth is critical.
Most systems these days with inboard power use switching supplies. And if you're careful to choose reputable makes of supplies, this can be OK. But with switching supplies, you have a risk of ultrasonic AC ripple creeping onto your DC bus lines. To avoid prolems with this, there are two strategies. First, don't use a switching supply; linear DC supplies don't have these problems with ripple or noise to an extent anywhere similar to switching supplies. So you win on stability, but linear supplies are VERY heavy, clunky things and take up more room inside your cab than switchers. But if you can swing it, or opt for an external cab for your P/S with a beefy polarized multipin or Anderson PowerPoles to connect your cab's DC busses to the supply, they are the optimal choice electronically. The other strategy is to use Eurorack power bus board with filtering. And actually, you should do this anyway as the filtering schemes not only deal with a lot of the garbage on the main DC busses, but they quiet down any crosstalk coming back down the DC lines from the modules. Some bus boards these days also have onboard 5V supplies...and if you have modules that require it, these are pretty goofproof and effective ways of supplying that.
Your power bus lines inside the cab should be fairly heavy gauge, because this also helps with heating issues (some of which could lead to failure) and eases any impedance load on your P/S. Using stranded 12 or 14 ga copper wiring might seem like overkill, but I recommend it due to both the current loads being carried on these lines and the impedance benefit. Make sure your DC bus lines are well-secured to the inside of the case, using the shortest runs necessary from the P/S to the busboards. For DC distribution and any inline interconnections, I strongly recommend automotive-grade distro blocks and connectors, as these are very beefy, designed to deal with high temps and vibration, and their design is overspecced for your use. BTW, the more you can OVERspec your power system, the better (and more reliably) the build will work!
Your bus boards should be on spacers to keep them away from the rear wall of the cab. 1/4" clearance is good, and of course, higher is better. The point of these is to help prevent anything that might get loose in the case from contacting the bus board traces and shorting the power supply. And also, making sure your individual DC lines coming off the P/S have individual fusing per line is another good safety idea. Don't skimp on cost on these boards, either; they are, quite literally, the 'backbone' of your synth. Some of the newer boards with wide/thick power bus traces are definitely not about the hype...they'll handle current better and, natch, ease the impedance burden on the P/S a bit more.
A lot of these design points actually come from my own 22 module Digisound 80, which resides in a custom case with a power system designed and built by the late, great Kevin Lightner. I've had this for a couple of decades now...and it's a 100% solid performer. The dude built his custom designs to last forever, and his logic behind the choices that made that happen was totally bulletproof. Other bits are from my amateur radio experience, where high-amperage DC is a common thing.
Ya wow that’s an interesting approach.. Is that Convolution you are talking about? I don’t know much about this stuff but it sure sounds interesting. I have considered getting something like a Koma Field Kit (or just some basic contact mics) and pairing it with my Eventide Space reverb for some fun experimentation.
Hey Ronin, thanks for the input!
Any specific filter and/or LFO(s) you would recommend?
I will definately look into the Behringer and the Music Toolbox. Indeed I come from the world of DAWs, haha.
I haven't really decided in which direction I would go with drums yet. I was thinking the DFAM for easy sequencing, management and decent sound I guess?
Otherwise I would as you say go in another direction and get other drum modules and get a drum sequencer to handle percussion/drums. The thing that makes me hesitate in the later option is that drum modules + seq would eat up alot of HP sadly.
The Roland 531 mixer. Though I've been looking at the Happy Nerding Pan Mixer as well. It's smaller and you can select either pan OR volume to modulate by CV. It also has VU metering.
Update on the 1010 Music Toolbox... loving it.
Hi there. I'm just going to fire off some questions.
Seems you really like Erica Synth products. All of your oscillators are digital. Is there a reason? It feels that you wanted to go for as many panels in black as possible with the O'Tool being a necessity.
You're depending heavily on the FH2 for sequencing. Working on modular and go back and forth to a DAW isn't very ergonomic. Have you used a DAW as a sequencer for Eurorack before?
I see one EG/LFO unit. You're loaded up on oscillators, filters, and multi-effects units but really light on EGs. The FH2 can output envelopes and LFOs as well... but they are really clunky to use in real time.
There's an additional PICO sequencer. Can it be sync'ed to the FH2 or another external clock? I'm not familiar with it.
I would ease into Eurorack rather than buying a ton of modules and filling a case. Maybe this is your current "ideal" but that's going to change quite a bit once you actually start using the modules. Don't depend on the FH2 to get you what you want. I bought one and it's a bit of a pain to use if you're trying to reconfigure it while connected to a DAW. You have to use a webpage app and send updates via system exclusive to the FH2. If your DAW is open you can't use the web app to update it at the same time. If you infrequently change the FH2's settings cool. But I wouldn't depend on it if you're looking to work quickly.
Your current choices aren't bad. You just don't have a lot of options. A filter, maybe an LFO might give you a bit more range.
I would wait until Behringer drops their 808 into production before shopping for a drum machine. The 808 will probably be pretty hot and come in around $400. I can see Moog discounting the DFAM to compete.
As far as sequencers, check out the Eloquencer and then the 1010 Music Toolbox. If you're coming from the world of DAW, the Toolbox is an easy transition to make and it's very flexible with 8 Gate and 8 CV or Gate outputs. It does a variety of LFOs and can even sample two channels of external CV. I bought one and I really like it. It serves as the hub of my set-up now. I'm not saying it's right for you, but to check it out to see if it is.
How do you intend on triggering your drum machine? How many gates/triggers would you be feeding it or do you want one with an internal sequencer you can just sync? That should throw into your sequencer selection. You may even have/need a second sequencer for your percussion.
Hello everyone,
First time experimenting with Eurorack. Im still researching the functionality of various modules, and trying to wrap my head around the flexibility that the CV signal path provides.
The goal with this build is to have a portable standalone generative system which can also be integrated with my Ableton rig.
I'd really like to constrain the system to a single 208HP case. So I'm looking for advise regarding module selection and general system architecture.
My thinking with the current layout: a maximum of 5 voice polyphony w/ percussion:
Monophonic melodic lead
3 voice chord progression
Monophonic baseline
4pt Percussion
Obviously the rig would be capable of many more variations than what I've listed above, but I've tried to support the required parallel signal paths with my choice of modules.
Any thoughts, comments or general observations from more experienced folks would much appreciated.
cheers,
-m
Hey Lugia, thanks for the reply!
Yeah, I've gotten to the point where I feel like I am questioning my previous choices in terms of gear and direction.
Also in terms of knowledge I have gotten to the point where I can shape sounds towards my likings - rather than just randomizing all the time.
So what I think I am looking for as you suggested, somewhat more control to my rack. I've been look at the Winter Modular Eloquencer, but I am not completely sold yet. Also in terms of drums, I am actually looking at the DFAM.
But I'll glady look into any suggestions!
I've got a case with 84hp 9U that I would like to fill up within let's say, a few months. So I've got space to work with (for now.)
BTW, don't forget that in some cases, distortion can work in your favor. One of the reasons why the Moog CP3 mixer circuit is so highly-praised is because of what it does 'wrong', not for what it should do. If you were to treat it like a normal mixer...well, it would sort of suck at that, because the CP3 has a lot of interesting nonlinearities that just mess up routine audio, but when applied to the purer waveforms within a synthesizer, they act as something of a waveshaping component at high levels. And that 'bad engineering' is actually key to the Moog modular (and now the Grandmother, which supposedly uses a new variation on that original Moog circuit) sound just as much as their famous transistor-ladder VCF designs. If you applied the same principle to drum sounds, they'd likely get a bit more crunchy and hit a tad harder and edgier from the enharmonic distortion.
So 'totally clean' sometimes isn't the way to go. Best suggestion is to research audio clips or go to a dealership if one is within driving distance and see if 'pristine' or 'crunchy' (and for that matter, what kind of 'crunchy') is what works for you.
-- Lugia
Thanks for the explanation Lugia then in a few words the distortion can actually improve a sound in the analog?
Hey all,
Don't know if this is a bug or if I'm doing something stupid, but a few weeks ago I was able to search for, find, buy, and add the Attenuhater module to my rack (both physically and on the site). Now, though, I'm not able to find it when searching for modules, even though it's still in my rack and I'm able to get info about the module when I click on it:
https://www.modulargrid.net/e/other-unknown-attenuhater
Did I do something weird to hide it from searches? I even added it as one of "My Modules", but it doesn't show in that list either.
...
I think you might want a much stronger mixer for blending ambiances as well. That'll chew up more HP than what you have... but might be worth it. Roland makes a six channel mixer with pans and mutes that's in my "must buy" list. It's a lot bigger. But being able to mix/pan up to six sound sources as well as mute them might be pretty handy for ambient mixes.
Hi, @Ronin1973. What's the model of that Roland mixer? Is it this SYSTEM-500 530 dual-VCA with six input sliders?
Get the micro-versions of the Mutable stuff and buy a Eurorack module capable of mixing your signals.
What's the relationship between those vendors and Mutable Instruments? I like Olivier Gillet's work and I like the idea of my dollars supporting MI.
But you'll want an envelope generator and a VCA to go with it.
If I am accumulating gear gradually, I can start out with overdubbing and use the Neutron's VCA and envelopes, I think.
Thanks again for your helpful responses.
After realizing that my Arturia DRUMBRUTE responds fine (on channel 10) to MIDI note messages, and after being advised by @Ronin1973 to keep my Behringer Neutron in its original case to save "expensive HP," I got to thinking about what I would use that HP for. Dreaming big, I'd like to have a system that supports other ways of synthesizing (granualar, additive, harmonic, digital). Here's the kind of thing I have in mind.
The thing is, I'm not going to just go out and spend that kind of money. It will take years to get the gear, and I will certainly learn and change my mind along the way. I would probably start with the Qu-bit Nebulae v2 and patch it with the Beheringer Neutron. Then maybe Mutable Instruments Rings. Anyway, in that scenario, I have the huge up-front cost of the case to contend with. To get a nice one will cost a lot more than my first module! ... unless ...
I have a bunch of high-quality particle board in the garage, a saw, a carpenter's square, a drill, wood screws, some experience---I can build a box. I know folks have done this before. I will Google for their stories, but I wanted to ask here, too: What HOWTOs and online guides have you all found most useful when building your own cases? What pitfalls are essential knowledge?
Thanks!
Exactly, Ronin...plus, with the absence of intensive development, there will be drawbacks that can be avoided by going with an existing DAW package. The key will be to find something that has the right 'feel'. Don't ever approach DAW selection from a mindset that you're creating a 'studio in a box'. Instead, view the approach as one might look at building a modular system; you're creating an instrument, essentially, with the big difference being that the 'instrument' all resides in code. Beyond that one point, a DAW really needs to function like the same sort of 'musical extension' of yourself as any other traditional acoustic and/or electronic instrument.
Years ago, when I first started working within recording studio environments, one of the things that I always found troubling was the system division inherent in that working space. But then, I learned from some of the 'old-timers' back in Nashville (where I'm originally from) that the key to how they got their sound was that they approached how they dealt with a studio as if it were a unified system, from room to mics to desk to tape machines to processing to monitors, all of which synergized to create the 'sound' those producers and engineers were gunning for. And this fit in with what I'd learned about the likes of Brian Eno, Conny Plank, and Can, all of whom I still admire to this day for their adventuresome approach to the studio-as-instrument. And while in undergrad and learning how to isolate the living crap out of everything and never print with processing and all of that old-school malarkey, I was eyeing developments such as Real World, Peter Gabriel's studio in which he'd dispensed with the separation of 'cutting' and 'control' spaces altogether, much as how Can did so but with the bleeding edge tech then appearing at the time. And this seemed right...the idea that NO barriers (physical or otherwise) should exist anywhere in the process chain found in the studio. So this did quite a bit to influence me up to the present day, where I don't even see my 'studio' as that...to me, it's a very large musical instrument. And within that context, the DAW system is simply akin to another valve on a horn or knob on a synth. It has to work in integration...not as a thing unto itself. And finding that right DAW package was tricky...we're talking a process that literally took me a decade and a half, but the time spent was worth it in exploring possibilities in the tech as well as in myself as a musician, and what I needed to use to keep forward progress going.
So the upshot is this: don't box yourself in by saying that something like an OS is going to define your work. That's really an ancillary thing. If your musical needs require using Windows or Mac (or iOS or whatever) and you can see possibilities that may happen by getting past the OS 'box', then try and do so. View your setup as an integrated whole and ask "what does my music need from this and how do I let it reach that goal?"
Well, first off, what constitutes a "proper sequencer"? Do you want something that does a full complement of CVs, gate/trigs, in multiple rows with typical end/start/stop/etc control? Or are you talking about just for drums, in which case a trigger pattern sequencer might make more sense. Or a digital full-on controller like a Squarp Hermod or Orthogonal's ER system? Each has pros and cons, but some are suited for one use, and others for...well, others.
Best suggestion I can make: don't freak out. Take your time, use MG's resources to get a better feel for what to do. This isn't a test, nor does the first build you do have to nail the idea you have. Building an instrument more or less from scratch (which is pretty much what modular synthesis is about) is not anything close to easy and at first glance, it's daunting as hell. Expect to refine and whittle away at design ideas for literally months until you hit something that feels right. And the best thing is that if you utterly and irredeemably fuck up your design here on MG, you just delete it and start over. No massive cash outlay and resulting buyer's remorse. Learn at a pace that works for you, and tweak away without worry.
The other suggestion is to start with something too big. If you think you need two rows of 104 hp, go with three, or three rows of 126 hp, even. Allow yourself space in which to screw up ably, then pare that result down, and you'll find that you actually get decent ideas from 'going too far' and then pulling back from that point. And study existing builds by experienced synthesists as well as classic modular systems that still inspire awe perhaps 50+ years on to get ideas of how to proceed. Just don't demand of yourself that this get done NOWNOWNOW...you'll just wind up banging your head against the display screen.
BTW, don't forget that in some cases, distortion can work in your favor. One of the reasons why the Moog CP3 mixer circuit is so highly-praised is because of what it does 'wrong', not for what it should do. If you were to treat it like a normal mixer...well, it would sort of suck at that, because the CP3 has a lot of interesting nonlinearities that just mess up routine audio, but when applied to the purer waveforms within a synthesizer, they act as something of a waveshaping component at high levels. And that 'bad engineering' is actually key to the Moog modular (and now the Grandmother, which supposedly uses a new variation on that original Moog circuit) sound just as much as their famous transistor-ladder VCF designs. If you applied the same principle to drum sounds, they'd likely get a bit more crunchy and hit a tad harder and edgier from the enharmonic distortion.
So 'totally clean' sometimes isn't the way to go. Best suggestion is to research audio clips or go to a dealership if one is within driving distance and see if 'pristine' or 'crunchy' (and for that matter, what kind of 'crunchy') is what works for you.
Right...that period of hyperinflation of analog synths started about 1992, was in full swing everywhere by 1994. Up until then, used synths could be bought for prices that made (and to my reckoning, still do make) sense. But watching things go full-on crazy where prices for a monosynth such as a Pro-One, one of which I bought used in mid-1993 for $80, suddenly and unwarrantedly exploded to something like $750 by the start of 1995...none of this made any sense whatsoever from a purely economic standpoint. But when you encountered a lot of the buzz on the Internet, in print media, and ESPECIALLY through Mark Vail's "Vintage Synthesizers" book where arguments were being pushed that these devices were essential...then it made sense. Or rather, more obvious, yet still utterly senseless.
Anyway, pointing the OP toward effects actually makes more sense. Consider: Brian Eno's "Thursday Afternoon", one of the landmark ambient albums of all time, really has very little going on as far as musical events. What carries the weight in there is actually some elaborately-crafted time-domain processing work. These also offer a wide variety of possible results within an ambient palette, since the real key to that is to craft the imaginary acoustical venue then introduce very basic material into it to 'ring' the 'space' that's been 'composed'. I would even suggest that the OP go with a couple of send/return modules and then inject some stompboxes into the system with those, and then spend less time making the synth noises and more on 'playing' the processing to re-envision what one actually 'performs on' for ambient work. It even works on Pringle's cans...nope, not joking there! A very light 'ping' with a pencil into a properly-filtered reverb at over 45 seconds of T60 will sound quite ambient, indeed!
So this is my current rack at the moment. I am thinking about getting a proper sequencer and add some drums.
My initial idea with the rack was basically to have something to jam with.
Halp.
I'm less than six months ahead of you. But have about 25 years in audio engineering. :)
-- Ronin1973
Experience you have accumulated I'd say ;)
Move the Power supply switch to the side or on the back of the case and free up that space .I put mine on the side no problems at all.
Nothing wrong with obsolete modules can be found cheaply.
I build my case out of just second hand modules.
I'm less than six months ahead of you. But have about 25 years in audio engineering. :)
Expert Sleepers offers many products. Some of their product line is pretty confusing as to its purpose and functionality. The Disting does not have ADAT lightpipe capabilities as far as I know. However, it has tons of functionality. I hate the interface as it's not intuitive as far as adjusting parameters of each program. But the difficulty in use is worth it due to the tons of features. It's basically a Swiss Army knife for Eurorack. If you keep it in reserve and give it no full-time duties, it can provide that one missing ingredient. "I need an extra LFO, ADSR, ring modulator, compressor, etc..." for this one patch.
If you can dual boot your Linux machine, I'd add a Windows partition. As Lugia explained, you're not going to get the most out of your computer running Linux. It's always going to be a compromise over what's available. Booting it into Windows gives you tons of inexpensive options. There's a DAW by the name of REAPER that's quite extensive, inexpensive and hosts VST plug-ins as well. There are TONS... TONS of free VSTs out there that compete with retail. As Eurorack is quite expensive, having a low cost DAW arsenal at your disposal goes a long way towards freeing up cash for your Eurorack addiction.
The easiest way to dual boot your Linux machine is to use two hard drives on a switch. Select drive A to cold boot into Linux and drive B to boot into Windows. Or you could use the software method on one drive with two partitions. No disrespect to Linux. It's just not popular enough to compete in the DAW niche.
I checked the website, there's no documentation that I can find.
http://www.bubblesound-instruments.com/MIX6.htmlYou may want to contact the manufacturer. There are mixers that are intentionally made with low headroom so that distortion can be used as an effect. I don't think this one does. I'd ask the manufacturer how many volts it can take at unity gain before distortion. In most mixers, you can intentionally overdrive the sound by starting with an already loud signal and making it louder.
I don't think you'd have an issue unless your drums are already slamming the inputs.
-- Ronin1973
Thanks Ronin for the tip I'm new in this fantastic modular world
Thanks. I didn't know the history on channel ten. Interesting!
It's true that Mac and Windows are very popular, and the points you make follow from that.
But for out-of-the-box thinking and doing, Linux is often nice, and individuals (not companies) sometimes respond to that. For example, Olivier Gillet of Mutable Instruments has Linux-based development kits on github to allow folks to customize the firmware on their modules. (He made it virtualized, so that people using Windows and Mac can run the Linux virtual machine he configured.)
https://github.com/pichenettes/mutable-dev-environment
I'm doing this in my free time the way I want to, and I don't want to use Mac or Windows, so it's part of the challenge figuring out how I can best accomplish my goals without those systems. I don't feel constrained at all today, in contrast to year 2000, when it was way harder to use Linux for digital audio in a full-experience kind of way.
