Modules with more outs than ins

Hi all,

I realised my current rack has a lot more inputs than outputs available. I used to keep track of cv and audio signals too, but nowadays quite a few modules can handle both types of signals

Anyway, I was wondering which modules could help to balance the rate, I mean, if I could get some good module out there to do the trick, apart of the ones that just duplicate signals, in 6hp or less if possible.

I bet probably a few of the CV modulators on the database could do this (audio signals converge into stereo/mono outputs in any case) but I don't know if I am missing a good module which incidentally has more outputs that inputs.

Any suggestion?

there's no need to use every input or output...

it might be a good idea to share the url of your public rack so we can see what you have - it usually helps steer the recommendations a bit...

there's no need to use every input or output...

it might be a good idea to share the url of your public rack so we can see what you have - it usually helps steer the recommendations a bit...
-- JimHowell1970

there's no need to patch everything, but I would have more potential combinations available...

also, the question is about modules, not about racks

please feel free to mention any modules you know might do the trick, better if it's a small one, let's say 6hp max

EDITED Dec 22nd 2023, 05:19

and what goes in racks?? ah yes, modules - what you already have WILL influence recommendations!

it's entirely possible that you have at least one, or more, module that couold be temporarily sidelined in order to fit something bigger in... but unless you share your rack we won't know...

my recommendation would be for a matrix mixer, preferably doepfer, for ergonomics reasons... and some stack cables...

another possibility might be a sequential switch...

but as far as I know you already have these...

do yourself a favour - make your rack public and copy and paste the url into the thread!!!

I'm with Jim on this, lets see your rack so people can understand your question better. It reads quite abstract because of the lack of context.

If you are meaning something like the DivKid / Instruo OchD + Expander, you have loads of outs, most of those outs could be used with the following to get more out of them:
VCA's
Mixers
Passive attenuators
Attenuvertors
Half or Full Wave Rectifiers
Quantisers
Mults
Envelopes

i don't think knowing I have that particular module would be relevant to the question, signals are signals no matter where they come from.

the reasoning is quite straightforward, patch cables go from input to output hence an optimised system should ideally have the same number of these, no matter which modules are included.

I have checked my system and there are 90ish inputs and 60ish outputs, and as because the audio signals already converge into one stereo/mono output (more or less), what's left out is just unused cv inputs (plus maybe one or two triggers).

i think this is a situation many people can relate to, but I would like to explore solutions other than just stacking and duplicating modulations... for instance rectifiers seems quite a cheap and interesting solution

a note about the ochd: i love the idea behind this module, but i would rather have 4 only lfos but with a reset input and knobs to tweak the frequencies...

...patch cables go from input to output hence an optimised system should ideally have the same number of these, no matter which modules are included...
-- Dan_ogq

I disagree. for me an optimized system is defined by other aspects than than the relation of I/O's
- most important: can i achieve the audible results that i want?
- is it ergonomic or is there room to optimise by rearranging some modules?
- is it performable the way that i want?
- is it easy to get every module perfectly in sync without struggling with missing clock ticks?
- do i have enough headroom with my power supplies?
- is my lightning ok regardless where my rack is located?
- is there any audible result i want to achieve but not possible with modules i have?
- is it easy for me to find/grab the right patch cables?
- etc.

those are a few of my thoughts to optimize my personal rack...

@Dan_ogq's remark is both interesting and unexpected. I look at my setup and, indeed, the inputs are the majority.

The winner is the Loquelic Iteritas Percido: 21 inputs vs 2 outputs! That said, the possibilities for shaping sound are immense thanks to all these inputs. And I chose this module (and this version in particular) precisely for this reason.

Conversely, I notice that my Tetrapad has 8 outputs... and no inputs.
No inputs? Nightmare! I have become the module and my fingers are the cables...

Ahh, well its not the way I look at my own system, I've never had a reason to consider any of my inputs and outputs. The OCD is not strong in this one.

For me:
Variety is key.
Spare space is good to have, I will never ask "what should I put in my remaining 4hp" ;-)
I tend to cluster modules of things I want to use together.

...patch cables go from input to output hence an optimised system should ideally have the same number of these, no matter which modules are included...
-- Dan_ogq

I disagree. for me an optimized system is defined by other aspects than than the relation of I/O's
- most important: can i achieve the audible results that i want?
- is it ergonomic or is there room to optimise by rearranging some modules?
- is it performable the way that i want?
- is it easy to get every module perfectly in sync without struggling with missing clock ticks?
- do i have enough headroom with my power supplies?
- is my lightning ok regardless where my rack is located?
- is there any audible result i want to achieve but not possible with modules i have?
- is it easy for me to find/grab the right patch cables?
- etc.

those are a few of my thoughts to optimize my personal rack...

-- modular01

just one more point to tick, i don't see why one should exclude or be considered more important than the other, after all, my extra point is just about adding more automations.

Conversely, I notice that my Tetrapad has 8 outputs... and no inputs.
No inputs? Nightmare! I have become the module and my fingers are the cables...

-- Sweelinck

In my opinion the ratio of inputs to outputs is not significant except perhaps in extreme cases. This can be demonstrated mathematically. Once you have even a small number of inputs and outputs the potential number of connections quickly runs into a very, very, high number.
If you have only one output (A) and two inputs (X, Y) you have three possible patches:
A-X, A-Y, and A-X and Y.

If we have two outputs (A,B) and two inputs (X, Y), we have eight possible patches:
A-X only, A-Y only, A-X and Y, B-X, B-Y, B-X and Y, A-X and B-Y, A-Y and B-X

With two outputs and three inputs I can come up with at least 26 different patches. See how fast the number is growing? Let's say we have a small system with 20 inputs and 10 outputs. There are 200 ways to place the first patch cable. Once we place that first cable we now have 199 possible options for a second cable...and so on. That setup has so many patch possibilities I can't even type out the number. It's roughly 8 with 374 zeroes after it. Even such a small system with a heavy imbalance has a mind-bogglingly huge patch potential. Your numbers are 90 inputs and 60 outputs, roughly speaking? You have 5400 options for that first patch cable, and my scientific calculator gives me an overflow error trying to compute the total number of possibilities. You aren't "missing out" if the number of ins and outs don't match. It's not important in the slightest.

My personal advice is to not worry about trying to balance out the number of ins/outs and instead to ask yourself what you think the weakest part of your system is and address that. What's the one module that would add the most utility to your system?

i don't think knowing I have that particular module would be relevant to the question, signals are signals no matter where they come from.

it's not about particular modules - it's about balance

for all we know you may have mostly sound sources and sound modifiers and hardly any modulation sources or utilities, you may or you may have adequate modulation sources and not enough utilities... seeing your rack really helps in that regard - I've seen and helped hundreds of people with their racks, over years - but I kind of need to get an overview of what's in the rack in order to give advice... it's a massive aid to thought...

a balanced modular tends towards this:

sound sources < sound modifiers < modulation sources < utilities

& most people at least in the early stages of their modular (the first few years) tend to have very few utilities

the solution for you rack may be remove a couple of vcos and an effect and add more utilties - or add a row and fill it with utilities... but it's impossible to tell without actually seeing it - imo any advice you get without us seeing your rack will be spurious at best

the reasoning is quite straightforward, patch cables go from input to output hence an optimised system should ideally have the same number of these, no matter which modules are included.
I have checked my system and there are 90ish inputs and 60ish outputs, and as because the audio signals already converge into one stereo/mono output (more or less), what's left out is just unused cv inputs (plus maybe one or two triggers).

not all modules need to be used in any given patch and not all inputs and outputs need to be utilized...

i think this is a situation many people can relate to, but I would like to explore solutions other than just stacking and duplicating modulations... for instance rectifiers seems quite a cheap and interesting solution

most utiltities are (comparatively) inexpensive, especially if you go fo doepfer or ladik or similar manufacturers and not instruo!
attenuverters, offsets, switches and matrix mixers are more...

you may be putting undue pressure on yourself to use everything all the time - I have 4 guitars, a bass, 20+ effects pedals, 4 amplifiers, about 1500hp of modules (both audio and video), a few keyboards, some outboard etc etc and amazingly I don't use all of it all of the time - in fact I use very little of it at any one time, at least in some part because it's physically impossible - I just use what I need when I need it...

a note about the ochd: i love the idea behind this module, but i would rather have 4 only lfos but with a reset input and knobs to tweak the frequencies...
-- Dan_ogq

at last something we can agree on! at least to some extent - unsynced modulation sources are great for adding a little bit of movement to synced modulation - matrrix mixers are your friend in this...

a balanced modular tends towards this:

sound sources < sound modifiers < modulation sources < utilities
-- JimHowell1970

depending how you count these, I would say my planned rack is not too far from your proportion, depending on how you would count a PAM or a O&C or a Threshold/Edge or many other modules with multiple functions, maybe i should browse the utilities section again and see if i find inspiration there. maybe some crazy utility module at 4/6 hp with a reasonable amount of no-nonsense trig ins, cv outs and vcas, or potentially even bigger if it also brings a 2 channel audio mixer might do the trick of adding more potential automations

EDITED Dec 24th 2023, 08:08

May I make a suggestion?

If you don't want people to see your rack as it is, make a copy of it, edit out the things you want to be private then make this copy Public so we can all see.

All my racks are Public, they may not be perfect for everyone but I do enjoy playing with them. Currently I will run out of Patch cables before I use up all my inputs and outputs and most patches will only ever use a fraction of the total amount of modules. I tend to set up the basics then leave it for a while and slowly introduce movement and options from other utilities.

Cheers

If you don't want people to see your rack as it is, make a copy of it, edit out the things you want to be private then make this copy Public so we can all see.
-- wishbonebrewery

+1

We can only make useful suggestions by seeing things concretely.
This is one of the advantages of ModularGrid.
Everything else is literature...

a balanced modular tends towards this:

sound sources < sound modifiers < modulation sources < utilities
-- JimHowell1970

depending how you count these, I would say my planned rack is not too far from your proportion, depending on how you would count a PAM or a O&C or a Threshold/Edge or many other modules with multiple functions, maybe i should browse the utilities section again and see if i find inspiration there.

It's quite a fluid formula - and open to interpretation - is tides a sound source or a modulation siurce? is a self-oscillating resonant filter a sound source or a sound modifier? I'd usually group things by primary intent within the confines of the rack...

Not all modules are meant to fit in - it's not a comprehensive theory of everything, it's a suggestion of a way to think in order to get the most versatility in patching in a modular for the least expense (& it scales incredibly well - from the smallest rack to Vince Clark proportions) and particularly to steer people away from just buying sound sources and modifiers - there are newbies who don't want to buy mixers as they think they are a waste of money, until of course they work out that they need one or more to get the most out of the expensive shiny modules that don't interact without them...

Pams and O&C & distings - and similar modules don't really fit - at least until in some cases the user has settled on a primary intent for the module - say using O&C as a quad

I'm not a big fan of multi-function modules... I only really have one - a disting mk4 (ok 2, I have a pams as well) - and I only really use it for one thing - tape delay (although if I desperately needed something else that it can do I would use it for that) - I prefer, especially with utiltiies - single function modules or small collections of functions that are all available at once - kinks, samara etc

I really think the best use for modules such as disting and O&C is to determine which modules you really need - so if you always use the O&C as a quad quantizer, buy a quad quantizer and use O&C for something else, and repeat...

If this is a planned rack (as opposed to a physically owned rack), as you state above, SERIOUSLY, the best thing you can do is share it... it will massively help us help you... don't be embarrased that it might be a pile of unusable crap or that you are spending thousands on a monosynth or that it's too big/small or whatever... the single worst thing you can do is not to share it...
there are people here (myself included) who have years & years of experience helping newbies design workable modular synthesizers - taking into account many many factors and many different styles of music - and we do it for free!!!

A picture paints a thousand words, as they say!!! - and the url of your public rack paints a thousand pictures

maybe some crazy utility module at 4/6 hp with a reasonable amount of no-nonsense trig ins, cv outs and vcas, or potentially even bigger if it also brings a 2 channel audio mixer might do the trick of adding more potential automations

-- Dan_ogq

this really sounds like too much in too small a space to be ergonomically pleasing - ie playable, ie no fun...

PS no idea what you mean by "edge/threshold" - unless you mean a comapator or envelope follower!

May I make a suggestion?

If you don't want people to see your rack as it is, make a copy of it, edit out the things you want to be private then make this copy Public so we can all see.

Whilst I can't see what the hell anyone would actually want to hide in terms of the modules that are in their rack - I do kind of agree with this...

Here are my racks (not 100% up to date - but close enough)

honestly? i am not sharing my rack because i don't want to waste time discussing every single choice I have made so far.

PS no idea what you mean by "edge/threshold" - unless you mean a comapator or envelope follower!

-- JimHowell1970

you didn't even have the time to check on google what an edge/threshold module is, i can imagine how deeply a whole rack would be analysed.

Besides I have already shared half of my rack in a former thread where the answers all ended up being like "hey dude, everybody has his own vision, i can't suggest you any module for your rack since we have different opinions, tastes and workflows, what works for me could not work for you, and vice versa".

Seriously, wouldn't have been easier to answer the question on the first post? straight and easy.

I only needed a few modules to look at for inspiration, or a few suggestions i could use to narrow down my own researches on the modular grid database, but at this point, accounting all time I would need to type my replies (I am not even a native speaker) maybe I better check again the whole database by myself without any suggestion.

anyway, thanks everybody for the time you used to reply on this thread, have a merry christmas / winter break.

EDITED Dec 25th 2023, 01:06

honestly? i am not sharing my rack because i don't want to waste time discussing every single choice I have made so far.

PS no idea what you mean by "edge/threshold" - unless you mean a comapator or envelope follower!

-- JimHowell1970

you didn't even have the time to check on google what an edge/threshold module is, i can imagine how deeply a whole rack would be analysed.

given the amount of time I do spend on this and the other things I also have to do on xmas eve - no...

and you're wrong and obviously didn't understand or chose to ignore the rest of the post - as I said it's not about the individual modules it' sabout the balance... I really don't care what modules you have or don't have - but I do see that given that we've continually said post your rack - you don't take advice well - not our problem - it's yours!

my honest advice - get another row and fill it with a variety of simple utilities... and that's all I can really do without seeing your rack

happy xmas

Seriously, wouldn't have been easier to answer the question on the first post? straight and easy.

-- Dan_ogq

It wasn't a straight and easy question, maybe this makes me the stupid one... I usually am!

For me at least your question was too abstract, as I said before, and without seeing what modules you are working with it made it a really hard question to comment on. Like guessing what joke will fall out of your Christmas Cracker before you pull it.

There is a nice illustration by Norman Rockwell on this subject.
Merry Christmas (Xmas) to everyone!

given the amount of time I do spend on this and the other things I also have to do on xmas eve - no...

-- JimHowell1970

i would never ask for that time, again thanks for time and efforts you all, much appreciated, I don't want to bother you longer

happy xmas

EDITED Dec 25th 2023, 11:43

given the amount of time I do spend on this and the other things I also have to do on xmas eve - no...

-- JimHowell1970

i would never ask for that time, again thanks for time and efforts you all, much appreciated, I don't want to bother you longer


happy xmas

-- Dan_ogq

actually I did just google "edge threshold synth module" - if you'd used "edges" plural & not "edge" I'd have worked out it was a mutable clone - as I would if you'd posted your rack when asked....

happy xmas