User Posts

Plenty of problems here...starting with the placement of that Row30. NEVER put a power device anywhere near an audio module. This is the easiest way for noise to get into your audio path. Also, consider getting a different power brick; inputting 19V into a module whose max is 20V is probably overtaxing the Row30.

EDIT: Got interrupted...also, you might want to add a ferrite to the DC line into the Row30 if it doesn't have one already. Cheap switching supplies such as ones found in OEM bricks often spew garbage down the DC line. In a lot of devices, this isn't an issue...but with a modular synth, you can have so many different analog and digital circuits crammed together in a tiny box that, once some RF or other such crud gets in, it'll interfere with loads of these and numerous noise generation points can emerge.

One other suggestion might be to get rid of the brick altogether. On my AE system, I use a Tektronix LINEAR supply. These aren't subject to generating anywhere near the amount of crud a cheap switching supply typically puts out. The unit I use is a PS282, which is more than capable of powering that 160-space mutha with ZERO need for ferrites, etc etc. And mine was even calibrated by the seller (Valuetronics, up in the Chicago burbs) prior to sale, so it's 100% in factory spec...for only $100-ish. Plus, unlike a lot of linear supplies, this TEK is portable...it's about the size of a lunchbox, and even has a carry handle for convenience! With this thing on the AE, all of the VCOs stand right at attention, there's little to nothing atypical as far as noise goes, and the stability is...well, the ripple scopes out at something ridiculously low, essentially negligible, so that modular runs rock-solid.

EDITED Jun 13th 2020, 22:29

Actually, my suggestion would be the Tiptop Forbidden Planet, cosmetic issues be damned. The price is excellent, it's very straightforward to use, plus hiding behind that panel is the craziness that IS a proper Steiner-Parker Synthacon VCF, but with the added fun of being able to input to more than one response curve at the same time. The original didn't let you do that, but it WOULD just about tear your ears off in extreme BP and HP settings...definitely a lead-voice screamer!

Worth noting:

Original Minimoog sales figures, 1970-1981: 12,000+ units.

Yup, I use Max (in its M4L incarnation) all the time...right alongside the Hewlett-Packard sine generators, the 1960s beatboxes, the wall of processors, the modular sandbox, the cool polysynths, etc etc etc etc...

A lot of the reason for WHY I have all of this stuff in one room is because, when I was still in academic study, I ran across two different professors who insisted that you had to keep all of these different electronic music media separate. And, frankly, I didn't see any rationale for that.

In one case, at the University of Tennessee, I got tasked to do a semester final project purely on the Synclavier. By that point, I knew how...well, ANAL...the prof in question was about the parameters of his assignments. But I also knew he was one of these guys that claimed he knew exactly what you were doing in a piece when, clearly, he didn't. The other thing he insisted on was that I had to use the "snazzy" new Yamaha automated mixer...piece...of...crap in full automation, synced with a set of visuals (slides, synced with a "buzz track").

Yeah, right. OK...first thing was, turn OFF the hideous moving fader nonsense. I'd been mixing without automation for about a decade at that point, and that was on big desks like MTSU's Harrison MR3. Then there was the Synclavier itself. First up, said prof made a BIG point of noting that Synclaviers have no noise generation capabilities...only pure sines and harmonics. Yeah, right. So, if I set the fundamentals for a patch at 1, 2, and 3 Hz, then start combining partials above the 16th harmonic at 100% level...oh, LOOK! NOISE! Sorta...but it needed a "touch", so I dragged the EML 200 out of the "analog" studio into the "digital" one and used it to nudge the FM pandemonium into the right "feel". I needed some delay as well...supposedly, I was to use resources in the Synclavier patch, but that noise-band thing really ate up the cycles. So...yet another no-no, I pressed the studio's PrimeTime II delay into service and futzed with the EQ to make it a tiny bit more "brittle".

In short, I broke pretty much EVERY parameter in the assignment. And what happened? Well...

I got a huge "A" on this, and the prof was utterly floored at my "command of the Synclavier". And at that point, I changed composition studios and kicked HIS sorry ass to the CURB.

It wouldn't have been possible to get that "A" had I followed his dicta. And I got it by doing these "forbidden" things, most notably dragging bits of one studio into another, where they presumably weren't supposed to be. Or at least, according to that clown, they weren't. That was Clue #1.

Clue #2 was when, upon arriving at Illinois, I discovered a situation where there were all of these "media separations" like that in the Experimental Music Studios, but to an even more fanatical degree. In fact, one night in the Moog studio I had to deal with some utter batshit insanity that went like this...

ME (talking to prof, who has just interrupted my session work for no good reason): Uh...about that pair of Symetrix gates. Where are the patchpoints for those?

PROF: Oh, you don't know how to use those.

ME: Excuse me? I've used things that're far more complex than them for years...

PROF: No...you DON'T know how to use those.

ME: [blank stare typically seen on my face when dealing with blithering idiots, followed by...] OK, right. Tell ya what...if I figure out where the patchpoints are, I'm going to use them ANYWAY, and I dare you to figure out where I did that.

PROF: [shocked look due to being unable to process dealing with person with real-world audio engineering experience]

Did I ever use them? Heh...but anyway, this nonsense was typical. It was SO typical, in fact, that Sal Martirano (who I was studying composition with while there, then later privately after I'd given up on academic composition) had found it necessary to set up a totally separate studio in the Comm West building about 1/4 mile away, and this was largely due to the fact that HIS explorations involved mixing the must-never-touch-each-other media to explore how primitive AI-type structures could be used for "directed improvisation". This was in early 1992, mind you; the only things like that were stuff like M, Max which was still really only on the NeXT as part of the ISPW rig, and things cobbled up by intrepid souls like...well, Sal. And it was Sal that encouraged me to combine as many working paradigms in one studio as possible. Even HE wondered what the results would be, and I'm glad I got to play him some of my very early efforts in that direction before he died in 1995.

So, for 25+ years now, my reasoning behind all of this gear is that there ARE things to be gained from combining all of these sonic vectors at will. OK, fine...this mid-60s Bruel & Kjaer filter isn't supposed to have a Roland TR-606 fed thru it...but what if you DO that? And of course, the results are very, very cool. Then whip that into Ableton, slap some Max-driven processing using a Lorenz attractor on it...yeah, baybee....filter it all through these Krohn-hite scientific-grade tube bandpass mo'fos and pump it into that cool new Neve-equipped Steinberg A-D to the 2-track (which isn't a 2-track because it's not even an effin' tape machine!).

THAT is how to do this. Careful combinations, like knowing when, how, and how much of a certain spice to use if you were a chef. But like I noted before, it really takes a lot of restraint to avoid wanting to slab every sonic generator and processor onto things. Some of that comes from knowing, simply, that doing so would be a hellacious amount of WORK. Yeah...uh, no. But also, from knowing that that's not a possible choice, and doing so more rapidly exhausts the possibilities inherent in tracking a few, specific, and well-crafted sounds because you're (futilely) trying to bring in ALL the possibilities AT ONCE. Not a good idea. But just like you don't play every string on a violin at the same time whenever the instrument makes a sound, you come to understand that there ARE limits inherent in a huge rig like this. It doesn't really want you to connect everything to everything else to generate...well, something dense and impenetrable that would probably suck on epic terms. Instead, you learn...or infer...what combinations TO use for just the right touch. And that's what makes this a lot like using a large-scale modular.

In fact, it sort of resembles that, when you take into account all of the routing patchbays in use in here. That's something from a different academic studio, though...specifically, the original one at Syracuse that was designed by some guy who knew that this was the way to make that open architecture work, the way to allow that interesting interconnectivity,...

...Bob Moog. I ain't gonna argue with that.

I still have that sort of a room. In fact, I've spent the past year updating and upgrading it.

The biggest problem with having a well-equipped studio doesn't come from the volume of equipment. After all, it just sits there until it gets used. Instead, it comes from indiscipline...the idea that because these things are there, then they MUST be used. This is the wrong approach, and fits into the category of "blaming the gear for the musician's failings". Just as having some certain device (back in the ACIEEED days, it was the TB-303) is NOT a key to stardom, it's not possible to assign musical capability to the devices at hand. That's 100% on the user.

I recall having some wonderful conversations many years ago with Holger Czukay (RIP) in which this came up. And he pointed out that while Can had many different disciplines in it, ample equipment for the day, and so on...the key to Can BEING Can was in how they restricted what they did. Sure, those restrictions would shift from track to track...but there were always some agreed-to limitations that kept everything working smoothly. Otherwise, the results would've been sheer chaos...which, in fact, they ALSO knew when to employ, such as on "Soup" (on "Ege Bamyasi"). And this is what allows one to have LOADS of gear...but just like how you wouldn't use several dozen colors in one painting just because you happen to have tubes of those colors on hand, you don't want to muddy up your sonic palette by making the same mistake with all of your synths, processors, etc.

Petitions do help...some. But to really get things done, you need to show companies that there's a potential PROFIT in making these things. My suggestion is that if you have a good working relationship with a music retailer that's sizable in its field (like Perfect Circuit or Schneider's for modular, or Thomann or Sweetwater in general), get THEM to bug the manufacturers. Signatures are signatures, and work if a company pays grassroots attention. But RETAILERS making noise = $$$$ in their mindset.

Frankly, I'd like to see Moog get the Spectravox flying in a retail version. It make sense; Moog was a pioneer here as well, with the assistance of Harald Bode, and having one of their vocoders in an AFFORDABLE (ie: not $5,000) version would be very cool.

The biggest problem isn't the holes. It's the presence of that Model D in the rack; it needs to be back in its own case, on its own power.

First up, as I've repeatedly noted, it's NOT cost-effective nor space-effective to mount these in Eurorack cabs. Those should be for things that DON'T have housings and power. Plus, you've managed to use 70 hp for a thing that's not even really a module, per se. That's a hellacious chunk of one entire row being taken up by that synth. And while I get the notion that it's supposedly "convenient" to be able to mount these in a Eurorack cab, that convenience is pretty illusory.

I'd suggest...just as an experiment...taking it out and setting it aside. Treat it like it doesn't exist. Then reconsolidate and reorder the actual modules while ignoring an entire row of the cab. I think you'll find that the workflow will make far more sense, plus you'll get a far better idea of the REAL space remaining in the cab that needs filling. And if you absolutely, positively CANNOT live without that Model D being in there (and costing you not only what it did initially, but also for everyone of those 70 hp worth of case space it occupies), put it in the open row (like, the top one).

Remember: just because a manufacturer says that one of their devices can be used in some way does NOT necessarily mean that you should do that. They're in the business of selling things...but not necessarily in the business of doing what WE do as end-users!

Color is at least a part of the modular landscape, though...that dates back to Don Buchla, and really takes off when Serge Tcherepnin comes up with his system at CalArts a few years later. You also see color-coded connections in devices such as analog computers to denote the various functions of patchpoints.

Definitely. And naturally, there's no reason to not try it. You might also try feeding an audio-frequency signal to the expression input and see what that does. You might find some twisted new AM method!

In the build above, I'm pretty sure the Atten-B are not compatible with a Palette case, and I have my doubts about the Unity Mixer as well.
-- toodee

That would be correct, actually. Intellijel tile rows CANNOT fit "original" format tiles, only Intellijel's version. Both Pulplogic tiles as well as the Unity Mixer won't work here.

Frankly, if you're doing a Palette case build, you should look into Plum Audio's Intellijel-format tile versions of devices like the Ornament & Crime, which fits very well into the scheme of things that Mutable's modules are part of. And while I'm shocked to be saying it, there may well be too many VCAs in here for the build's scale. A better choice would be Happy Nerding's 3xVCA, which gives you enough VCAs in a splittable configuration that also allows for some simple VCA-controlled mixing.

Sort...of. It would depend on how the Supro's circuit responds to a CV. The idea is sound, but the question would really be what sort of response curve the pedal is likely to have to linear and/or exponential CVs. Also, will 0V actually result in a full level shutdown, or does the audio level being controlled that way only go down to a certain threshold?

Noise Engineering stuff, although I should note that I'm not a fan of their obtuse/eye-wrecking panel marking scheme

:-) Agree. The NE Modules are one of the worst out there when it comes to Design. I really don't understand what People think when they make these "Designs"
-- Quantum_Eraser

Yep. Their panels look to me like a bottle of India ink threw up on a sheet of aluminum. And the ultra-tiny script that they use to fit into that mess is just horrible...if you're in any sort of low-light situation (such as a live gig), you're going to have a lot of trouble reading those. And while I'm sure the defense of "well...eventually you just know what those are" might be legit-ish, I still don't think there's any excuse for this. Sure, I get that there's a "design sensibility" there, as there is with a number of other makers who also like to do visually-obtuse panels...but it's worth noting that Greyscale does a decent business in making sensible panels for modules that look like crap.

My instinct would be to remove the drum parts, actually, and not the BitBox. You can use the BitBox to store textural loops very easily, which fits nicely with the soundscape aspect. But with the way drum machines are going at present, it might be a better move to go with a NON-modular solution.

This'll probably cause a big shock for some users, but I'm going to actually suggest getting some...yep...Behringer stuff. Namely, an RD-8. Yep, Uli actually managed to get this fairly right. Each track has an individual output for discrete processing of drum sounds, there are three trig-out tracks, and the sequencer works pretty much as one would expect for an 808, with some added conveniences. Now, in addition to this, I would ALSO suggest adding a Doepfer A-119 to the modular, as this is an external input preamp that also has an envelope follower and level comparator, meaning that you can feed individual outputs or even the entire machine through the modular to screw with them there. It also has a decent onboard filter on its own.

Then to that, I'd suggest adding Elektron's new Model: Cycles, which is an FM-based "groovebox". Ignore that stupid term, though...what it would be here is a source for metallics, percussive weirdness, etc. And yes, BOTH of these are easily locked to the modular's clock; the Elektron will want to see a MIDI clock which will require the PEXP-2 expander for the Pam's, but the RD-8 can take an analog sync directly, meaning you can mess with the RD-8's clocking via a direct connection to a Pam's channel. And by putting all of this under a DAW clock, everything locks up nicely, even if you're (ab)using the Pam's to mangle the timing.

Then, to put the cherry on the cake here, get some cheap (Rowin, Donner, Caline, Cuvave, Azor, Mugig, et al) effects pedals. Sprinkle liberally amongst the individual RD-8 outputs...fuzzes, overdrives, bitcrushers, delays, etc.

This is actually a better solution for drums, from my experience. What I use is definitely not identical to this, but there's very much aspects of this in my own studio that allow me to get really busy with percussives. But the fact is that electronic percussion is actually STILL something of a "weak link" in modular synths. Either you don't get enough functionality out of rather spendy modules, or they just don't sound all that hot in the first place. However, one manufacturer there stands out for creating a bunch of totally wrongheaded modules that are EXCELLENT for bangers 'n' clangers, and that would be Moffenzeef. And yep, you can fire those off of the RD-8's trigger channels. But again, I'd suggest putting these in something like a Palette skiff...keep your functions separate. This not only frees space in the main cab for synth-centric modules, but it gives you space for a bit of logic to mess with timings, as well as a small mixer and something "evil" for drum-specific processing, such as a Schlappi Interstellar Radio which is designed to make everything sound utterly, totally trashed, very early Aphex-ish.

And while it might sound like having all of these separate devices would get confusing, the opposite is usually the case...since you know that "X" noises are coming from this box, "Y" out of this other one, and so on. No need to chase down your mingled patchcord signal paths in a single cab. Having done live techno sets this way back in the 1990s, with NO laptop, NO software, and NO MIDI save for a TR-909 sequencer signal to a CZ-101 (yep...all CV/gate and onboard sequencers!), I can assure you that this methodology DOES WORK...and it's a lot more streamlined than you'd suspect!

Bit by bit here...

How does MI's Links compare to the 2hp mixer?

It doesn't. The unity-gain on the Links can mix...but you have zero control over the input levels unless they're attenuated from outside, which means yet another module would be needed. Part of the key to using a mixer is to make those little tweaks to the levels...either adding a little bit of a fast LFO to your pitch CV for a touch of vibrato, or backing down an audio level that's coming in too hot versus the other sources.

What are your experience with XAOC's Zadar as a quad EG - that would even double the number of available envelopes, wouldn't it?

Yes...BUT. The Zadar really works best with its expander, unlike the Batumi which can work well enough without its expander. If you can cram both in, though, that would make for a better solution. But the A-140-2 wound up in there because it physically fit; to get a Zadar and its expander in, you'd have to either expand the cab or lose something else.

Wavefolding: Is this a function that would be non-negotiable for my setup?

No, but it's worth noting that wavefolding and what the Zvex module does are similar processes. ANY sort of distortion affects the behavior of the incoming waveform. But this is key here: Zvex Lo-fi Junky= $299, Tiptop Fold = $135. The Zvex also doesn't allow mixing/crossfolding.

One other point: while the Zvex can do compression, there's not that much use for that in a modular unless you're either using it to...yep...waveshape via clipping OR you're using it like a typical compressor to control levels on an external signal. Unless you're talking about something brainshatteringly-expensive such as the Cwejman modular compressors, you're far better off using an EXTERNAL comp/limiter to control your modular's dynamics. You'll have more/better control that way...and, if you get a unit that has sidechain keying, you can send a modular trigger to that to "pump" the comp/limiter in rhythm with ease. You could even run that off of a trigger sequencer, making the entire modular work like a percussion instrument that way.

Also, did you come across Malekko's Quad VCA? If I'd get the Varigate-Voltage Block-Combo, it supposes to pair well with both

Sure. They're just large. You'd have to do some major reworking to fit those. However, I like the "variable curve" VCAs that Intellijel and Mutable both have, since you can alter the VCA's response on the fly to mess with dynamic range, CV/mod influence, etc.

Finally, I believe the 4ms Listen4 (Quarters) should work as both a stereo mixer AND Line Out. Am I right?
-- dance_a_little

Yes. However, the Listen Four offers no VCAs over any functions. It's purely manual. By using the Quad VCA as the primary mixer, though, you then can control the mixing via its VCAs, then use the Black Hole DSP as your "stereoizer" to widen the mono output from the Quad VCA. In fact, since you have CV over so many of the BHDSP's functions, you can actually make rather complex and constantly-shifting stereo imaging by sending modulation signals to its control inputs. This also saves space for expansion. Which gets me to...

This is not a large build. You have limited space here. It's not a good idea to do redundant modules in this sort of circumstance, because you'll quickly wind up in a situation where you have to leave something necessary out, or you'll need to go with a larger cab. And I see this problem all the time, where users are trying to cram ALL of their desired functions into a single small case. It doesn't work. Instead, you need to find function-dense modules that can cram lots of capability into a small footprint. But this ALSO has a diminishing return problem, as farkas notes above. Yeah, you could build the whole thing out of 6 hp and smaller modules...but it would totally SUCK to try and play an instrument that's laid out that tightly. Ultimately, there's a balance that has to be struck to make the build ergonomically suitable, otherwise you'll wind up with a boxful of uncontrollable and expensive nonsense.

mowse's "What is that thing behind you?" thread here in the forum gives a better solution. Instead of trying to smash an entire studio's functionality into a little case like this, you might want to think about their plan, which breaks up functions into different "zones" and even different cabs. This makes for a much easier work environment, because you know intuitively which part of the rig to turn to for the functionality you need. Yes, in the end this approach tends to cost more...but what you lose in $$$, you GAIN in usability, and that makes all the difference between a rig you'll work with for many years, and a pile of crap that's destined for eBay.

I think this might be a better option:

I made a major set of changes to this, starting with the workflow. Audio up, modulation down (for the most part). Kept the Noise Engineering stuff, although I should note that I'm not a fan of their obtuse/eye-wrecking panel marking scheme and cod-Latin nonsense. Now, following the BitBox, I added a 2 hp mixer to better integrate this with the Basimoid Sigismoid Colon whatever percussive thing. This sets up that end of the top row as your sequenced percussives/samples. Note that I dumped the other sample player; trust me, once you start digging into the Bit Box, you'll see that that was superfluous.

Kept the wavetable NE, added a Plaits clone. Reason here is that if you double your oscillator, you get a fatter, richer sound...and with digital oscillators, you might just want that. Now, next to this, I put in a Tiptop wavefolder, which also allows you to mix/crossfold both oscillators, with a much more controllable result. Mind you, I didn't get rid of the ability to use effects such as the Lo-Fi Junky...I just put in an effects loop module instead, which now gives you CV over your wet-dry balance.

After the wavefolder, there's a different VCF. Tiptop's Forbidden Planet is also a really aggro filter, like the Polivoks...but UNlike the Polivoks, this thing can screech and howl, making for really vicious leads. This VCF is based on the Steiner Synthacon VCF, actually...an INFAMOUSLY nasty filter, which in this case also gives you HPF capabilities that the Polivoks doesn't offer.

Modulation row: added a Happy Nerding 3xMIA, because you've got a lot of modulation sources, but you didn't have a good way to crossmix/manipulate these. Also, I added a dual ADSR because the original build was very envelope-starved, even with the Maths. Plus, you'll find the four-stage envelopes useful for your VCFs and final audio VCAs. Then, the cherry on the cake is a true stereo output after the Black DSP, with a ganged attenuator for stereo volume control.

There's still a few things here that bug me, most notably the absence of a couple more VCAs as well as a dedicated stereo audio mixer. But in this small a build, I think this might be a decent start.

AAAACK!!! Your first step needs to be to take those Yamahas out in the backyard and douse 'em with gas, then toss a match on them! Yamaha monitors are NOTORIOUS for being ear-fatigue monsters, plus they're not all that accurate. Studios DO use them...but they use them as "checks", not for the critical-listening functions. They're not at all neutral. Plus, since you only have a 5" woofer here, you're not hearing all of your low end, as it can't be accurately reproduced. Personally, I'm very much part of the "He-Man NS-10M Haters" club, and the HS5s are just an outgrowth of those.

I'm going to suggest spending some money here, but it's 100% worthwhile. First up, don't look at ANYTHING with a woofer smaller than 8". Electronic music can do massive bass...but if you can't hear what you're doing in that range, it's pointless. Second, you want biamplification and POWER; it might seem silly to have 100 watts of amplification sitting 4 feet in front of you, but you won't use all of those 100 watts. Instead, you want headroom...ample wattage so that, if there's a BIG transient, it can be reproduced accurately in the few milliseconds that the amps have to hit hard. Lastly, find a pro audio dealer, and take some time to audition monitors. If this requires travel, screw it and do it anyway. The monitors are your window on what you're doing, and if THEY suck, your own work will suck!

Now, holding a line at $600 apiece, here's some suggestions. I'm familiar with these to varying extents, and they should be more than adequate for your uses.

Focal Alpha 80
Presonus Eris E8XT or Scepter S8 (single-point source, like the older Tannoys!)
Adam T8V
KRK Rokit G8 or Rokit 10-3 G4 (this is a 3-way system, 10" woofer!)
Tannoy Gold 8

Use the Pioneers as your "checks", since they're weighted more for DJ work, which I'll bet is where you're aiming your music. But get those Yammys outta there. Yamaha makes some nice stuff...but their monitors ARE NOT part of that!

Very cool. You are probably going to want Lugia's take on this rack. I'm guessing he will likely tell you to leave the Moog semi-modulars in their factory cases and buy one of the three tier Moog stands for those.
-- farkas

You know me well. ;-) And yes, unless you like spending a pile of extra money on rehousing and repowering your Moogs, don't do this. Here's why...

OK...the rest of the build has some issues. You're lacking VCAs (two is NOT enough!), you're missing mixers, attenuverters, and other things that allow you to mix/manipulate the CV/mod signals. BUT...you don't have room to expand now. So, let's look at what those Moog spaces cost you.

Each 1 hp space in a Pittsburgh EP-420 costs roughly $2. Your Moogs eat up 180 hp. That's $360-ish JUST on housing the Moog components that already have cabs and power, so you'd need to add $120 to EACH Moog to see what they're really costing in this configuration.

Instead, if you remove each Moog, you now have 80 hp of Eurorack modules per row. So you can effectively cut this BACK to an EP-270 plus, yep, the three tier kit. EP-270 = $649, and that cuts $200 right there, while also giving you 10 more hp per row. And even tossing the $79 for the three tier kit back into the amount, you STILL save money. And that money can then be channeled back into the build to provide the modules I note above (in addition to some needed swaps in that part of the build). Also...with the Moogs, you really need something like Erica's MScale to get them to play 100% nicely with the other Eurorack devices, so space is needed for one or two of those, also.

Yeah, I do tend to bitch about this quite a bit. But that's because if you make sure and try and maximize your "bang for the buck" factors in Eurorack builds, you recognize that the only real reason for co-locating cased and powered patchables is portable convenience...and the EP-420 isn't a portable rack.

Another example of this: your VCAs. So, you have two VCAs, which take up 16 hp, and total out at $185. Averaging here, that's $92.50 per VCA. Now, if you just move to a pair of A-132-3s, you fill the same space with four VCAs for $280. Looks more expensive, right? But then, if you do the math, those VCAs now come in at $70 each. Twice the VCAs, but you save $12.50 on each one. And you can do even better than that by looking at other options outside of Doepfer's. Take Ladik's VCA selection, for example. Now, if you were to use the same 16 hp space for a pair each of A-011s and A-012s...OK, this costs $304. But now you have EIGHT VCAs in that space (four linear, four expo), each one of which costs $38. And you've not required any new space for this...it all fits into the space your two occupy right now.

This is how you have to think in Eurorack. Yeah, I get it...I started out on an ARP 2600 at around that same period of time. But times and tech have changed. You can go WAY denser on functionality and still come in with something cost-effective because you can double, triple, or more on what can occupy a typical module space. But RACKS are a different story. They've always been the spendy stumbling block to Eurorack, even if some more recent offerings do manage to pull the price down somewhat. The objective is really to maximize your minimum space, so that even if you spend more on denser modules, you're STILL coming out ahead.

About that mastering issue...that's not what the problem sounds like. Instead, your description sounds a lot more like the result of a mediocre monitoring chain. And in electronic music, that's not good, given the potential range and sonic complexity synths can put out.

My suggestion would be, if you're planning to stay in this for the long haul, to invest in something serious for monitoring purposes. In my studio, I actually use three different monitor setups for different situations, all routed and controlled by a Presonus Central Station +. The "mains" are a vintage pair of Altec 3841s driven by a Crown D150A, and this is what gets used during tracking. Then for "check", I use a pair of TADs + an Alesis RA100 -- this is for seeing how mixes will sound on a "typical case" end-user system.

But in between is the key setup, which is what I use for both mixing and mastering: a pair of KRK 9000Bs (San Francisco-era...NOT the recent Gibson versions!) driven by a Crest FA601 (actual Brit unit...NOT a Peavey build!). And this wasn't cheap...but it's proven essential, since the 9000Bs are brutally honest, and that "real" Crest amp has the over-the-top slewing rates that allow for precise high frequency reproduction. This is the "critical" chain, where the real voodoo takes place, and without it, things would not work as smoothly as they do. Having utterly flat response and precise waveform replication is KEY to eliminating issues like you're mentioning, as well as avoiding nasty issues like "ear fatigue" from several hours of trying to work on inadequate monitors.

This might not sound like something that requires that level of attention, but believe me, it makes a huge difference...both in your own workflow AND in the final results.

The other "screw-with-CVs" thing that's both highly useful AND cost-effective ($99!) that I'd recommend would be Tiptop's MISO. For modifying/manipulating CVs and modulation signals (and audio, too), the thing's pretty much a super-capable blank slate, with loads of different potential for different users. For small builds, I'd go as far as saying that it's an essential utility component.

Yeah, those little 6 hp wonders from Happy Nerding are pretty amazing...and function-dense, too. For mixing, attenuverting, all of that, they're an awesome solution.

Hmm...yeah, the Mutamix won't work here in the way you think. Plus, a system like this is VERY underserved by only a single VCA. You don't need the buffered mults, either, since you don't have enough CV destinations to cause voltage sag issues that would affect tuning and scaling. Also, farkas is VERY correct here about the layout/signal flow issues here; this will turn out to be a very unintuitive instrument to work with.

This is another example of "sexy module syndrome", really. You have nice things...but their purpose here isn't clear, nor do you have all of the "boring" utilities, such as attenuverters, mixers, etc that make this sort of thing function properly. You could probably rip half of this out and still get the basic, overall result you're aiming for, in the end. As for "beginner modular"...go look at perhaps the best example of that, the ARP 2600. These have been used for literally DECADES as teaching instruments, and probably the new ones still would be had Korg not lost its damn mind with their "limited reissue" BS. Now, I'm not saying to replicate the 2600...but pay attention to what it has, how it's laid out, and how you might update that to arrive at a good beginner result for yourself.

Yep, turned out pretty well, I have to say. About the only thing I'd change here would be the placement on those uZeuses, in order to get them away from the audio path/devices. But if you're not encountering any noise leakage from them, then yeah...this is solid.

I think they're actually talking about data sonification here, not working with EM audio. The OP probably should contact Paul Schreiber @ Synthesis Technology directly to get this answered, frankly.

I'll see if I can pre-order one... :-)

Must confess most of my music stuff has been in software for the last umpteen years. I'm thinking it would be nice to twiddle a few knobs as software is so hands off. So not up to speed with recent hardware developments.

M last remaining synth is a SY77 - if anyone's interested in buying it (needs new drive belt which I haven't got around to fixing.

...and speaking of recent hardware developments, you might want to have a peek at https://floppyusbemulator.com/product/n-drive-extreme-emulator-for-yamaha-sy77-sy99 No need to chuck that synth out because the FD is shot, and this sort of upgrade allows for MASSIVE storage of data that the FD could never pull off. My aim here is to eventually replace all floppy drives in my synths, samplers, etc with these; on something like my S6000, the ability to store multiple gigabytes of sample data on a thumb drive easily supercedes even the internal HD in speed and capacity.

i dunno they had a boatload of success from monotron up to the period you are talking about

-- euPothrou

Exactly my point. It doesn't matter if they kept hitting things out of the park with the Volcas, the Monotrons, the Mini and Monologues, the reissues of the MS-20 and Odyssey...all it takes is a string of really moronic moves, and gains even on THOSE levels can be negated. And the KARP 2600 FS is, as far as I'm concerned, one seriously rotten cherry on Korg's cake.

It's hard to believe that you could see a synth go from "most desired" to "most uncool" just by a massive marketing f**kup, but Korg managed it here. And I know of at least three retailers who, if they could wrap their fingers around the necks of whoever at Korg thought releasing only 500 units worldwide was a great idea, they'd squeeze until the "problem" got "dealt with", so to speak. Easily the greatest disappointment in synths since the Micor Coupland, and pretty much an invitation to Uli to come in and eat Korg's lunch.

It's not like you or 99% of the rest of the people waiting for a KARP 2600 were going to get one anyway. Without a doubt, the "reissue" of that synth is probably Korg's moment of ultimate, crowning stupidity amongst a series of gaffes, starting with the release of the NONsyncable KR-mini and KR-55 Pro drum machines. These could've been stock-in-trade machines for the electro and retro-disco crowd IF they'd had that...but someone at Korg seems to have lost their mind, and then continued losing it. There's the inherent defects with the Prologues, reissuing the FS MS-20 in ugly-ass colors for $1400 (the original wasn't even close to that!) when the market is already saturated with electronically-identical MS-20 minis, and so on. For me, the last "safe" Korg was probably the Minilogue; I won't drop good money on their new stuff now until I see some judicious and overdue firings in their marketing and artist relations departments (for starters!).

At this pace, those a-holes will probably next reissue the MS-50...in a limited run of 12 for $5,000 because...well, why break a moronic trend, right?

EDITED May 23rd 2020, 16:47

You'd also want a router to set up ventilation cuts in your cab's back, sort of like how 2Egress does with some of their huge Eurorack designs. And it's easy enough to put some fabric or foam covering on the inside there to keep random objects out of the cuts.

Cool circuits are HAPPY circuits, after all!

Take a look a HydraSynth...

Or not. I had a really icky and unpleasant experience with one of Ashun's N.Am reps, put me right off that synth. I went with a Modal Argon8 instead...rather similar, with an extra oscillator per voice, plus the company is a LOT easier to work and communicate with. And the Argon8 is cheaper. You do lose that polyaftertouch + ribbon controller...but given that I've got a CS-80, I ain't hurtin' for a workout with those.

There ARE Eurorack modules that can standard-shift from Korg's standard to Euro and vice-versa, though.

Fact is, this is a bit of a throwback to the "bad ol' days" where there WERE a lot of different interfacing standards. Korg and Yamaha both used the Hz/V and negative trigger/gate standard, EML had their 1/12V steps, Moog had the awful, rotten, ROT-TEN S-trigger system, and things like the Buchla 100 were off in wackyland, with no real scaling and two different signal paths for audio and control signals. When MIDI came along, some of this was still going on...and remained as an annoying "latency" for those using the older gear. That we have to deal with these NOW is due to either exact replication (Korg's redux of the MS-20, or EMW's rework of the EML 200/300) or outright copying with no foresight to correcting these shortcomings (Behringer's you-name-it).

Do yourself a favor though, and grab an MS-20 mini on the used market (where there's plenty). Be careful to NOT buy an MS-20ic, though, as those were just gimmicky controllers for a software analog emulation system Korg kicked out many years back, and some unscrupulous/ignorant sellers try and foist these off as MS-20 minis. Look for the BLACK nut around the phones jack; the ic has a silver one. Anyway, even with the voltage standard issues, the MS-20 (of any sort) is a real face-ripper! It's hard to say what's the most fun about it, too...the VCF pair? The input section (drum machine + that = instant Aphex Twin!)? The fubar patching routings? Really, it's a fun little box, not to be idly dismissed. But do get the real thing; a lot of the point of that synth DOES depend on its form factor, which still works at 81% size.

OK...attenuator/inverter/mixers are backbone stuff. There is a Shades in your build, but this only provides three channels of CV/mod manipulation. Better choices would be Happy Nerding's 3X MIA, Antumbra's ATN8, Frap's 321, Low-Gain's CVP1, Tiptop's MISO, etc. The key here is functional density...you have to cram as much as possible into as tight as space as you can where utilities and other "no-tweak" modules are concerned. This then frees up more space for the modules that require more "playing surface are", like VCFs, etc.

Mod sources...the Quadrax is quite good as far as complex function generator/envelope generators go. But while Tides is a great LFO-type source, you're better here if you find a smaller form-factor 3rd party version of it. Again, you need to cram function into tight space here. Better still: Tesseract has a dual Tides that fits into only four more hp than Mutable's original. Keep an eye out for things like this. And don't count Maths out; there are REASONS why that module sees so much use! Tony came up with a true classic there.

Keep the Sloths, also. If you're doing anything ambient, generative, etc...self-regulating systems, basically...having low-speed randomness is a must. However, it could be augmented with comparators, logic, and so on...things that can pick off specific voltage states, combine these with clock pulses, and develop entirely new behaviors as the system runs. I strongly suggest looking into both categories I've mentioned here, as they open up new control possibilities for your modulation sources to work with.

Now, VCAs...the red-headed stepchilds of Eurorack, seems like...there are technically two: linear and DC-coupled, and exponential and AC-coupled. The latter is purely for audio, because these manipulate signals in ways that our hearing recognizes as "changes in apparent loudness", plus they BLOCK DC...which is really effin' critical if you have an amp that's DC-coupled, because if you send enough DC to that amp by accident (like passing a DC offset to your output...oops!), you won't have speakers if you keep it on long enough at a high enough level! The ARP 2600 was infamous for this. But the linear VCAs are key to manipulating CV and especially modulation signals. Since they can pass DC, they can be used for audio (preferably if you can send them exponential envelopes) OR subaudio signals down to DC. This means that if you want...oh, say, a rising amount of vibrato on a single VCO after a hard-attack audio envelope opens...well, you can do that. Just trigger the EG for the audio VCA and another one for the linear modulation VCA, set the first with a hard attack and a medium tail, and the second with a slow attack and medium tail, and there you are! One key press does it all.

I've repeatedly said that YOU CANNOT HAVE ENOUGH VCAS. I ain't kidding! They have ridiculous amounts of uses, particularly if you're talking about VCAs such as in the MI Veils or Intellijel's Quad VCA, because those not only pass DC, you can tailor their response curves. And that opens up a whole other pile of interesting possibilities. But here again, cram these as tightly as you can! And make sure you also get mixer capabilities, because mixing/adding CV and mod signals...yup, more fun potential. MY big choice for a dedicated linear VCA bank, btw, is the Erogenous Tones VC8...8 VCAs in one, with two breakable/linkable mixer paths. But for variables, Intellijel seems to have that down. Also...when you get a chance, try using an audio signal as a CV for a linear VCA while feeding another audio signal through it. Like I said, ridiculous amounts of uses...

Now, downright missing stuff...first up, look into waveshapers. These allow you to do loads of timbral manipulation before you even get your oscillator signals to the VCF, and make for a cheap way to get a more complex sound. In a similar vein, suboctave dividers are a super easy and effective way to create doubling...particularly into sub-wrecking subbass frequencies. This one point was/is why the Roland SH-101 punches as hard as it does with just a single VCO. And another key thing: ring modulators. Hell, I have "raw" ringmods permanently patched into my routing bays here and feed 'em with sine generators so that I can "whang up" any signal I damn well please! They're a big key to getting strange, alien, metallic sounds, but you can also use them as tremolo circuits (with an LFO as "modulator") to vary amplitude...just like a VCA, kindasorta.

Now, stuff that's just downright wrong...for one example, let's start with that Roland/Malekko mixer there. Since this is a smaller build, you should consider using mixer level VCAs to control your final signal amplitudes...but the Roland 531 only has CV over panning. You could use those as level VCAs (kind of) but then you'd have to run the mixer in mono, which defeats the purpose of having a stereo performance mixer. Plus, if you're properly submixing within your patches, you probably won't need six input channels at your output stage in this small a build. But if you step up four more hp, then you find the Toppobrillo Stereomix2...which gives you CV over level, panning, AUX send, plus you get channel muting and an FX send/return path. And this at only $80 more than the Roland. True, you lose two channels and your 1/4" outputs, but what you gain here is immense. Plus, if you want a balanced output AND a second stereo AUX return, you can pair this with a Happy Nerding OUT...so you get transformer balancing, metering, your headphone amp, and...yep...that second parallel stereo input.

Which brings up a point: sometimes the solution to a single issue is NOT a single module. In fact, much of the strength to be found in modular synthesis in general is in module complementarity; sure, you could add a second VCO for timbral variation...but you could ALSO add a waveshaper along with it, and then you've got tons of that timbral variation with just 12 more hp (or less...) used. As you remove and replace the above, try and focus on what combinations of modules do. Then how do those combinations work together as subsystems? And so on...as this is the key difference between a pile of electronic crap in a box and a real INSTRUMENT that you can work and live with for potentially decades. This is why I'm saying "go back, strip out the junk, redo"...because no one wants to drop several grand on something that you'll have to keep dropping several grand on. Instead, proceed slowly, carefully, and after studying the hows and whys of this stuff, proceed precisely so that you can hit a result that needs nothing but which provides everything. And MG's no video game...you don't have to get this right inside a time limit or hit a specific score. You have the room and the tools here...but TAKE THE TIME, because that's the one thing you bring to this process. And there's no substitute for properly using that resource when you're dealing with building an instrument that should be on-hand for decades.

Way too much "sexy" going on here. You're missing a large amount of the boring stuff that serves to make all of that expensive, snazzy crap do what it should. Yes, there's definitely a lack of modulation sources, but without more VCAs, attenuators, mixers, and other stuff that has sleepy panel graphics and a lack of blinkenlichts und twistenknobs, you've got a MUCH bigger issue building here than simply dropping a few more EGs in will fix.

Starting with the above, and prior to adding anything, remove as much as you possibly can (and be brutal!) while maintaining the sort of base functionality you're aiming for. My bet is that about half of what's there will go away in this process. Then, go back in and double only certain modules when that doubling will contribute to the sound of a single patch. Doubling VCOs for detuning, for example. Next, if the idea here is to have a second voice-path, add that back in...but again, be as simplistic as you can, just like the above.

At this point, there should be a lot more open space. Now...start chucking in the "boring" stuff. The result won't look as dazzly as the above...but it will work far better than where your above build is heading.

But before doing ANY of that...go and check some tutorials on how synthesis methods work. Seriously...because you have 4 oscillators (but not...exactly), you don't have to have 3 VCFs. You'll get a LOT more punch out of taking all four and mixing them, then feeding that through ONE filter. This is one example; there are others present here, and one of the worst ideas I can think of is plunging into a $10k swimming pool without reading the manual to find out how to put the water in first. And modular synthesis can easily become that...OR WORSE.

One point about these presumably "Eurorack" synths: they already have cabs and power. So, if you remove them from those and put them in a larger Eurorack case, you then have to factor the cost of how much of that larger case is being taken up by the device into the actual price of the K2, Model D, etc. And this can get spendy; let's take an example from the Tiptop Mantis here...

The Mantis retails for $335 (using US pricing here, same principle applies in any currency) and has 208 hp of space. This means that each hp has a cost of approximately $1.61.

Now, the Behringer Neutron requires 80 hp if you opt to put it into a larger Eurorack case. 80 x $1.61 = about $128.85. The "base" cost of the unit is $289.99 (looking at Sweetwater right now), so the total for a Euroracked Neutron actually comes in at $418.84. Also, you lose 80 hp of cab space for modules that don't have power or housing by doing this, which means that if you want that 80 hp of space after all, you'll have to spring for another Mantis. Now we're looking at $753.84, and this is starting to get ridiculous.

So, recabbing an already-cabbed synth like a Neutron, Mother32, etc is actually a big fiscal mistake. Don't do it! If you go with this "patchable" route (not a bad idea, really), this is a surefire way of overrunning your costs.

Careful with the Rackbrutes if depth is critical, though. The maximum depth that Arturia lists is a "best-case"...the actual limitation over the power bus is more along the lines of 45mm.

Also, consider that you're not likely to be swapping out a case along the lines of that Structure (it's also not the only one in the line, as well). You won't exceed the power supply limits unless you chuck a pile of Metasonix modules into it, for one thing. It has the form factor you want, also.

When building a system, it's VERY advisable to work with a case that's "larger than you think is necessary"...because, invariably, it's NEVER larger than you think is necessary. And getting stuck with a smaller cab becomes a big pain when you outgrow it, because then you have to go with yet another case to gradually populate...but while that's happening, you've got a second big clunky (and spendy) box taking up space, for the most part. Starting at some point that seems too big, ultimately, results in a pretty comfy system to build and work with.

Interesting solution...but I wonder if it wouldn't have been a more direct solution to employ Silent Way/Volta/etc and a cheap, used multichannel audio interface (I use a MOTU 828 mkii for this...sort of obsolete, audio-wise, but great as a DC-coupled CV/gate/trig bidirectional interface) to just send clock pulses to one of the BSPs, then daisy-chain that one's 'clock out' to the second's 'clock in'? It seems more straightforward in practice, actually, plus it allows me to do trickery like using my Seeburg Select-a-rhythm as a master clock, with the intermediary of VERY tight bandpass filtering and a Truetone Time Bandit, sending the resulting pulses from that device to one of the 828's inputs. It's not 100% sample-accurate like the USAMO solution...but I've found over the years that when things become TOO precise, you're probably heading for the aural equivalent of the Uncanny Valley. The human hearing apparatus actually likes a little bit of "slop", as it makes things sound more like what we expect from live musicians.

GOOD ONYA for putting an HPF in your lineup right off the bat! These are so ridiculously neglected that it ceases to be funny. Fact is, though, if you want a lead sound that'll rip the top of your skull off, having a resonant HPF is Choice #1 toward getting that result. Plus you need it for dub filter sweeps, as a cursory listen to any number of King Tubby's dub mixes shows.

Why not this: https://pittsburghmodular.com/structure-344 ?

It's not 3 x 104...you lose 18 hp per row, but you wind up with MORE module space than a 3 x 104 in the end, plus built-in power (which eliminates that need to stick power access modules in with the "functional" ones) that is beyond ample. And you get a VERY useful utility tile-row in the bargain...and more than ample depth (101 mm max) to fit the most chunky modules. Not cheap, but you're getting what you pay for with one of these big wooden honkers.

Just remember: even if those Eurorack modules can handle the amplification level, you'll still need to extract your desired signal from what'll be a lot of noise. The two solutions for this are either very aggressive bandpass filtering after the preamp to localize the range in which the signals can be found (usually subaudio ranges) or the use of a lock-in amplifier which can "track" the signal as it fluctuates. I'd also suggest making use of several window comparators which can extract voltage level information and convert this into gates, which can then be used as needed.

And yeah, that Grass device I linked to is pretty chunky...but you have to admit that, as unwieldy as it is, that damn thing looks COOL in addition to being one (of several) of the right devices for the task. Not as technologically badass as MY lock-in analyzer (made by EG&G...the folks who also run Area 51!) that's on top of a rack right behind me as I type this, but those Grass things definitely have that "evil guvment lab" look DOWN. Test gear suuuUUUUUcks to haul around...but onstage, it definitely projects a "whoa..." factor!

Conceptually, this is interesting, but I'm not sure exactly what this cab is for. Is this a "voice", or is this where you intend to do the signal conversion?

One other point about biosignal work: it's not merely a matter of "connect ficus tree to input preamp". In order to amplify signals of this magnitude, you'll probably wind up needing far more gain than a typical Eurorack input can offer, plus a good bit of signal cleanup. For a decent older example, see l80AAOSwJU5drCq6" target="_blank">https://www.ebay.com/itm/EEG-POLYGRAPH-DATA-RECORDING-MACHINE-GRASS-MODEL-79D-PARTING-OUT/153691498905?hash=item23c8ba2999l80AAOSwJU5drCq6 What you choose for electrodes and leads will also be important; some work well for one application, but are utterly useless for others.

You'll mainly be looking at EEG gear for your signal pickup, since those systems have the necessary amplification factors to bring the biosignals up to a relatively usable level. They also tend to offer the HP/LPFs needed to remove noise and spurious signals on the input...and believe me, you WILL be wrestling with that noise/garbage issue, since it only takes a few feet of unshielded cable to pick up enough electronic crap at the required amplification levels to render all of your bioinput totally useless. However, if you're uncomfortable with electronics that go WAY outside typical synth gear...well, you're just plain screwed. This is very much one of these control methods that requires going outside of most synth users' comfort zones.

It's an interesting idea...one I've tinkered with on occasion. But at the same time, it's an infinite rabbit-hole...so be forewarned!

Now, wait a sec...if the Dyson runs on DC, then wouldn't it possible to DIRECTLY connect it to the modular? Sure, you'd have to add a CV In jack to the vacuum, but hey...something akin to a DC Servo module could pull this off...

Upgrade your account.

I'll second this. In fact, having an overall "not modules" section for modular hardware to cover things like cases, rails, power supplies, patchcables, etc would be a smart idea.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with how compression gets used in production. I'm also aware that, of all of the types of processing I've used over the years, compression is the one you shouldn't print to multitrack with. When doing your initial gainstaging, you need ALL of the tracks to have a similar dynamic going into the mixing/rendering stage so that it makes it easier to determine the general levels of elements within the mix. At that point is where you'd want to compress...on a strip insert, going into the mixbus. If you've compressed to the multitrack, you then have no dynamic leeway and the resultant track(s) won't "breathe".

About the only times I've ever compressed to multitrack were on randomly-peaky sources, mainly vocals. And invariably, I was pushed into that by the vocalist's incompetence with performing for a mic. Vocals that swing between -20 and blasto dB really don't make for fun mixing work.

If you're trying to do "loudness wars"-type tracks, then I could see the point of repetitively mashing, mashing, mashing the dynamic range. But keep in mind, also, that people are REALLY tired of that squashed sound. It might make radio happy, because they always shoot for having the "loudest signal" in any market, but it winds up sounding mashed and crummy...mainly because, like in the first paragraph, the music isn't "breathing".

Why all the compressors, though? That seems to make little sense. Yes, I can understand that you want a degree of dynamic control, but that's what VCAs are for in a modular environment. Mashing the dynamic range will just sound like crap, especially since you've got compressed signals being compressed even FURTHER by yet another compressor.

Electronically-generated sounds obtain much of their impact through having the massive dynamic range that they normally do. A bass hit that swings from -80 dB up to 0 and back with a hard attack will bang WAY harder than one that's been mashed down to a 20 dB window. Normally, compression is what you use to get peaky signals under control, so this implementation seems pretty pointless to me. Leave the compression for mixing.

Also, put the DFAM back in its powered skiff. I know this arrangement seems convenient, but it's very cost-ineffective to take a device that already has a rack and power and remove it from that...to put it into a different rack and on a different P/S. You're paying for that twice, and I'm betting that if the DFAM cost $700+ up front, you wouldn't have bought it. But that's exactly what this does to it. Leave Eurorack cabs for things that require Eurorack cabs. Same goes for the SV-1 if you still have its skiff.

Absolutely! That's what the Telharmonic's "FM" input is for. That'll take any modulation input ranging from long LFO curves up into audio-range signals. Running a sine from the STO to the Tel's FM will let you do basic FM against additive spectra. Even better: DON'T connect a CV to the STO, but DO connect one to the Tel. That way, every change in pitch becomes an equally-radical timbral change as well. LOTS of tricks can be done like that, so showing off a single patch is just scratching the surface. For example, you could send that STO sine through a linear VCA, and give the VCA the output of an EG with a slow attack. With that, you'd then have the FM component grow in complexity as the attack ramps up to the sustain level, then tail away on release.

Best suggestion here is this: Rule #1: don't patch an output to an output. Otherwise, go NUTS. See what YOU can come up with. A modular is basically a sandbox for sound...with this sort of a rig, you'll be pulling new sounds out of this box for years!

What I did there with the oscillators was to do a pairing very much like what I did on a rebuild last week. In this case, the "primary" oscillators are the Telharmonic and the Plaits, and the STOs are co-located so that they can be used as an AF modulation source or a doubling VCO on each. But yeah, the lack of envelopes was the key...VCAs and VCFs need 'em like we need water!

EDITED Apr 27th 2020, 20:05

Yep, and the problem is pretty obvious: not enough envelopes. There's lots of stuff here that needs them (VCAs, VCFs). I reworked this a bit:

I also reworked the layout considerably, putting most of the audio UP, mod/CV DOWN (except for the Milky Way and Rosie), and putting everything in a L->R flow. Now, I did remove the Make Noise Function...at just one EG in an 8 hp space, it was a waste of panel space in a small rig like this. Removing it and one of the Links allowed me to drop in a Malekko Quad Envelope instead, which also will play nice with the Stages, Tempi, etc. Plus, while the Links has some very useful functions, there's no need for two of them here; you should be using inline mults whenever possible in small rigs.

Thanks...yeah, part of the problems that arise with a lot of builds is that there's no real order to the layouts. And because of that, you see a lot of weird/inappropriate/downright wrong choices creeping in...or at least, that factor plays a huge part in that happening. Fact is, though, that when the early synth companies all landed on a similar left-to-right signal flow for their post-modular instruments, there wasn't an accident there. In the West, we typically look at processes as moving left-to-right, and that's how I try to make things function in the builds I work on.

Much of the problem also seems to come from users who've gotten their initial synth experience on software synths. When these are properly designed (or a replication of a proper design, like what Arturia does), they're great. But way too many software synth designers create things that, if their interfaces were implemented in the real world, would be a total bitch-and-a-half to use. And these are the things that some of these users on MG use as their design basis...and that's a big mistake. We don't interface and interact with hardware in the same ways as we do with software. And yes, everything on MG is "software"...but the objective is to create HARDWARE in the end, which contributes a bit to that design disconnect as well.

Banged on it a bit...see what you think:

You'll notice some changes, to be sure...but not anything huge. I got rid of the summing mixers because, frankly, these are intended more for summing CV and mod signals (they're more akin to adders, really) and if you're combining AUDIO signals, you need discrete level controls per input. Only one buffered mult remains...because you really only need one here. The biggest lineup change was to jettison the Polaris; frankly, you don't need a third VCF in this, and you'll do loads better with an effects unit...which is what that Stasis Leak is all about. Stereo output, too...hence the transformer-isolated stereo output next to it. Just run your audio mix from the Quad VCA (I suggest using VCAs 3 and 4 here for this, out of the Morgasmatron's dual outputs, leaving VCAs 1 and 2 for CV/mod work) right on into it and control your wet/dry mix for your final output result.

I added a nifty Seismic module in the lower row, since there wasn't anything to manipulate CV and mod signals with. This does that really well, manually OR under CV, plus it offers another linear VCA for CV/mod work. Then the lineup overall was altered to put all audio on the top row, all controls/CV/mod on the bottom, and the setup for the VCOs was changed to co-locate each of the DixieII+ modules next to a Rubicon2, which is then next to a 2hp Mix...making it more convenient to combine the two operationally for a more Buchla-ish operation situation, which'll make it easier for you to go WAY past basic detuning. Lastly, all of your audio signal paths now "read" in a proper left-right manner, with modulation, etc coming in at intervals from the bottom row.

Seems more solid. It did increase the cost a few hundred, but the results seem far more workable now.

EDITED Apr 25th 2020, 23:37

Yep...the MIDI is relatively basic-ish on the AE's MASTER, but it can still do lots of crazy things. To accomplish the really wacky stuff, though, I'll be relying on CV Tools. Even though we don't have any solution like the Expert Sleepers stuff (although, you CAN use their Silent Way software for this same voodoo, too) in the AE environment, it's still cheap and easy to get a used DC-coupled audio interface off of eBay or Reverb, hook that puppy up to the DAW, and make the magic happen that way.

In the AE environment, you MUST constrain signals to a 0 to +5V scale. It's just how the system works, probably due to part of its origins being in Stanley Lunetta's design work. Now, to get signals in and out, that's what the 4I/O modules are for...they do all of the voltage voodoo. But if you want proper scaling, that will require the MASTER and its MIDI interfacing, since the AE also isn't exactly 1V/8va.

There's also a second solution, especially for CV/gate/trig signals, and that's Soundmachines' Nanobridge. That was designed for their Nanosynth...again, some Lunetta ideas in there...and costs a whopping $40! w00t! This provides 14 channels of bidirectional I/O for control signals (primarily) and when you use the AE's +5 and GND as its references, it will autoconstrain things to the proper range.

I use all of these, btw...pitch CVs via the pair of MASTERs, audio I/O via a pair of 4I/Os, and a Nanobridge for all of the other stuff. I can also drive my AE system via Ableton's CV Tools thru a used/cheap MOTU 828FW mkii ($120 on Reverb), which is capable of dealing with the voltage scaling issue and can give me eight simultaneous channels of scaled CVs if I should need that.

EDIT: You (and others looking at the AE, of course) might find even more answers over at their forum, which you can access via their site at https://www.tangiblewaves.com/ Lots of knowledge flying around there, including some tasty DIY action (company-encouraged, even!).

EDITED Apr 22nd 2020, 00:48