User Posts

Possibly not with a modular setup? There's some very nice all-in-one-box machines out there right now that might fill the bill at a better cost and with more simplicity. I know that if someone sat down a modular drum setup and a TR-909 side by side in front of me (from experience) that I'd go with the 909 unless the situation required something atypical as far as electronic percussion sounds...and even then, I'd still probably use the 909's trigger-out to fire that particular sound on the modular. Did that a bunch, in fact, and that might be a bit more indicative of what you might consider here as I was always able to come up with solid results.

As far as standalone machines these days, I'm all-in on the DrumBrute, but I should also note that Cyclone Analogic's TT606 and TT78 have my attention because of their sound and feature sets. Going backwards in time, some of the 'less-desirable' Roland boxes come to mind, like the TR-707 and its more collectable sibling, the Latinized TR-727. Even the not-so-classic TR-505 saw some use that tends toward your 'thick, bold' criteria; the Chicago band Big Black (ie: Steve Albini & co) made loads of use of this box on their tracks. You could, in theory, go backwards all the way to 'primitive' beatboxes as long as you had a tight bandpass filter to isolate a single, metric sound and pass that to a click-sync box like Bastl's Klik or Truetone's Time Bandit to lock it up with other devices. Again, that's from experience.

If you do go with a box like the ones above, then a simpler and more capable modular is a pretty easy thing to cook up. Once you get a trigger and/or clock pulse out of a few boxes and have them driving some more 'exotic' synthesized sounds, then things can get nice and complicated, musically, in short order. One you have a pulse of ANY sort, then you can use it for anything one might input a pulse into...sequencer clocks, VCAs, LPGs, filters, what have you. And to me, that's a better use of the modular architecture, to create a more open-ended sound programming environment rather than something that just does a one-trick sort of sonic vocabulary.

Maybe they're frustrated music critics? I know that I certainly qualify a lot of the unimaginative (ab)use of electronics in mainstream pop these days as an 'abortion'...

Interesting how they put an actual phone number on these. Some inventively irresponsible people could get a couple minutes of lulz off of (ab)using that in varying ways.

Not that that's a hint, mind you. Oh, no. I would certainly never advocate such a thing. Don't even think it.

(btw, anyone know what's Bahasa Indonesia for "Is your refrigerator running?"...?)

EDITED Jan 2nd 2018, 03:55

A few things...

It's a bit redundant to have both the Intellijel Audio I/O and muJack in such a tight setup, since having two sets of stereo outs is perhaps a bit of a space-waster. Plus, given that the muJack is designed for direct-wiring to various Intellijel mixers, you might be able to pick up a couple of extra hp by going with a stereo output that's smaller and scrapping the I/O altogether, since the usual audio-in situation with a guitar/synth deals with a mono signal. As for the input stage as well...do you just want the audio, or do you want an envelope follower as well so that the dynamic envelopes from the inputted instrument can do things like control VCAs, filter cutoffs, etc etc etc? If the latter, the Doepfer A-119 is a pretty straighforward solution, and you also get a gate comparator that goes high when the level exceeds a set threshold.

As for effects...I've always thought that, in a modular environment, a straight-up-analog spring reverb is a 'do'. They have interesting nonlinearities (being a mechanical device) that FX algorithms just never quite nail, plus when you overdrive them with a hard attack, you get this great, dubby, metallic 'splat' that just can't be duplicated just right. Also, you might consider a pedal I/O module like Malekko's SND/RTN, as an example, for an easy way to tweeze a stompbox (or any other line-level thingummy) into the rig and add something that might not be quite so modular-able.

BTW, I'm assuming you're using a back-plane power inlet...? Don't see one on the patchpanel...

Hadn't known that point about the Synthrotek P/S flammability issue. Filed for reference. I've also been looking very recently at Koma's Strom and Strom+ setups, too...the ability to daisychain either above OR below the control surface has some appeal, and their busboard cabling assemblies are beefy things plus the tri-color LED rail load indication is extremely handy. More expensive, but I think they might prove to be a 'worth the expense' option.

As for the Dynamix, though...I'm a bit of a purist when it comes to getting that Buchla 'plook' from the LPG, and without the Vactrols, it's just not apt to have that behavior. If staying in the MakeNoise environment was a must, the Optomix makes more sense from an audio standpoint, but I think either are a bit spendy for just two LPGs + a few extra functions. Beyond that, though, the rest of that behavior is likely better done with a few small separate modules: DC-coupled linear VCAs for CV modulation, some added dynamics modules (especially with that opto audio envelope tail!) and distortion post or pre-LPG as needed, etc. Especially if that point about a 4U case with a tile row comes into play, as VCA and Vactrol tiles are quite cheap things, plus an overdrivable signal amp for nastiness in that format is easy, too.

Synthrotek seems like a best bet if you're going to DIY your skiff somehow. I think their current green/red/blue Super Power setups offer a nice, easy integrated solution, since they tandem with their Noise Filtering busboards. Or, you could just go with a small case that has the built-in power from them as well; a 4U portable case also offers a 1U row for utility tiles (not the Intellijel format, tho) that can increase functionality on basics for cheap.

Dynamix might be a bit pointless, since my take is to go with something denser/cheaper. MATHS, however, is NEVER pointless. It's nothing but sheer CV functionality in 20hp. Do consider an LPG of some kind for easy timbral/dynamic control in a tight hp situation, though.

As for cost, I've used the following rule-of-thumb for quite some time in figuring Eurorack (and other) format cost control:

PRICE / hp = cost-per-hp.

The lower you can make that resultant product from that equation and still get the bang-for-buck you want, the better. This also predisposes one toward more sizable panels, but this isn't always the case, and the end-result isn't generally so control-dense that it makes navigating a patch and working with it in realtime a hideous chore.

ARIA stuff kind of tends to be a power-suck on startup. Unless you need the user-programmable processes, I wouldn't do those. Look instead at the classic manglers: Elby's (Serge) Triple Waveshaper, Tiptop's FOLD, Intellijel's folder, the various Doepfer distortion/waveshaping modules, etc. Cheaper, better power-draws, very capable, and smaller. Gives you a bit more room for a mixer that allows you to move from wavefold to wavefold to morph timbres, too. Also look into some 'abusable' modules, such as comparators and the like where you can 'square-off' an incoming waveform into something delightfully ugly. Mix a bit of that gibberish in with the other, and you're in Industrial Heaven! :)

Why not both? Get a patchable for your basic functions, then build up a skiff or two (or three, four, etc) with more esoteric things. For eample, a Plankton ANTS! would be nice and cost-effective, but just dropping something like Happy Nerding's FM Aid in that mix to tamper with the ANTS!'s VCOs and allow TZFM makes that $599 box WAY scarier for just the cost of that one module! Add several more, and that simple little patchable can turn into a holy terror for not a pile of cash.

This is sort of my plan for my Digisound 80, actually...adding patchables to build it up, for cheap, into a (rather portable!) monster that cuts the mustard for both studio and live use. Other stuff, certainly, will come along later...but being able to add two of those boxes plus, say, a Modulor114 and a Keystep (on hand already) will turn the original 22-module Digi into something capable of some major sonic heavy lifting. Just an example...

If you want to head in a Buchla-type direction, toss the filters and go with LPGs to get the simultaneous dynamic/timbre control. Also, add some sort complex oscillator, and that also heads you that way by getting the FM-type thing going.

For Serge without Serge, having the MATHS is good, but adding a couple of VC Slopes of some sort just by themselves to serve their own multiple capabilities would be a good idea. Also, I would consider ARC's Serge-type mixers as being more sonically right plus a better use of 'real estate'.

In either case, hunting down some sort of colored noise source with variability would also be key. Also consider a sort of 'Source of Uncertainty'-type module as a way of adding some weird psuedorandomnesses.

By default, even if you went in a heavily 'Buchla' direction, also, you wouldn't have 'exactly that' in Euro since you have only one signal patching format, not Buchla's separate control and audio patching, so going back and forth between those paradigms would be very easy, where on Buchla (200...not necessarily the 100 Series) it's not that nicely-done.

More VCAs, also: linear and DC-coupled for processing CVs. This along with the Wogglebug would be entertaining...

Lastly, sequencer. A must-do for both modalities, but you have a lot more potential methods in Euro to fit your usage idea. Turing Machine's not bad here, but also consider something a bit more 'determinate' as well.

Good start; have a look at the Elby stuff for more things Serge-like, as well.

Left hand, right hand. Mix L and R, delay L and R. Power by Synthrotek via a 'blue' version P/S. Toss in some Folktek attenuators, and stir, then jam it all into three 104hp skiffs.

As nifty as the basic Mescaline is, this sort of thing could REALLY do some serious damage, I think! Makes it a bit annoying that Arius says the run of Mescaline's modules may be depleted soon. Ah, well...

An idea I'm tinkering around with, trying to concoct a very large-scale albeit semi-portable system. Cabs are ADDAC powered Monster cases: 901M 21U with a 901MS2 dual 19" rack header (2x 2U) populated with some framework for tiles, mainly to augment the oscillators. Bottom row is a separate 901M 3U 197hp skiff, pretty much entirely devoted to control surfaces/devices, including the output mixer stage.

Case dimensions aren't too godawful - the initial 901M 21U comes out to more or less 41" w x 33.5" h x 18" d, and onto this add another 3.5" for the rack extension on top. Not counting the 197hp skiff (skiff?) as it's not attached to the huge clunky cab. Not an 'I'm gonna pull the trigger on this'n'-type setup, but more of a slow evolver toward an eventual end-configuration (provided I don't suddenly decide 'fukkit' and start off on some other direction). Also have to get settled on the tile housing/power on top, as there's quite a few possible directions for power configs and closing up the backside in some manner.

Astute users who've read my long-ago prior post on design will note that, yep, this follows that 'up-left/down-right/source-top/control-bottom' canon. Definitely works. The only place this gets a bit subverted is in the tiles, although like I note above, much of that is intended as augmentation for the oscillators/sources, so it actually does fit, after a fashion.

Have to admit, I do like these ADDAC cab designs. Yeah, the odd-hp-count widths are a bit annoying, but what they're cooking up looks sturdy, has ample DC (10A on the +/- 12V rails! in the big cab), and even with the shipping is still not all too horrible as far as price goes. In fact, the cabs (minus the tile hardware/power; need to sort that cost later) would run about $2800 powered and shipped to the USA, which beats the Doepfer 168hp 'dual Monster' setup at around $3k and also allows the 4 x 84 hp tile arrangement which the Doepfers aren't capable of. Plus, the ergonomics look right - they even have handle cutouts on the sides of the big honker.

Looks interesting, I think. Now, let's see how long it takes before I get majorly distracted by some other probably-expensive idea.

Hello folks...I see a lot of questions on this topic, so I thought I would chime in. Having had about 35+ years of experience in electroacoustic music, as well as having designed a few devices, plus having used a plethora of modular setups over the years, I'd like to offer some how-to-get-going advice to people starting in this direction.

1) Don't start cold. Before designing a modular system to YOUR spec, see how others have been designed over the years by others. Especially note semi-modular patchable designs; the ARP 2600 comes to mind immediately, as many schools still use these as a primary tool for learning analog synth programming basics. After looking at (or better, using) a few of these, you'll notice that there are certain patterns to the layout of the panels, and this all relates to signal flow. Making this as efficiently directional as possible, instead of a patchcord hodgepodge, results in a more instrument-like...well...instrument. Which leads to...

2) Generators / modifiers / controllers / processors. These are the four basic 'food groups' of modules. Some modules can fit into a couple of these categories (or more), but it's how YOU define their uses that determines where in there these sorts wind up. So, let's look at these:
a) generators. Pretty straightforward. Things that create a waveform that is the 'raw meat' of your sound. Oscillators, certainly, but also signal inputs, noise sources, sample-based modules, and so on. If it MAKES noise, it fits here.
b) modifiers. Now these are things that ACT ON the waveform and modify how it behaves. Filters, ring modulators, VCAs if you use them for AM, waveshapers, and the like. If it changes the output of the generator(s), it's a modifier.
c) controllers. The obvious things here are controllers themselves: sequencers, keyboards, and the whole gamut of such widgets. But also various modules, especially modulation sources like LFOs, EGs, etc. If it makes something do something, it fits in this club.
d) processors. The 'summation'. When everything that's been through a-c above gets to the end of its journey, it arrives at d. Mixers go here, plus effects, output stages. But also, processors are scattered throughout any good synth design. A multiple is a sort of processor (passively splits something), as are submixer stages for various other subsets of modules, either AF or CV.

3) Why is that important? Well, it's because you, optimally, group things according to those categories...and when you do, you begin the basics of sensible signal flow. "But I want a VCO way the hell over here!", you say? Well, you could do that, sure. But at the same time, if you get adept at reading your patchcord jungle, you will come to notice 'unusual' patches that require a cord to go 'way the hell over' there, and therefore you'll pay attention to it, because, obviously, you set that special patch aspect up for a significant reason. The cord there becomes an 'arrow' that tells you 'hey...look at this a bit more carefully than the rest of the spaghetti'.

4) Flow directions. Once you get your groupings sussed out, then you need to decide how they fit together and play together. Again, study some existing, tried-and-true designs that had a lot of work go into them and which are considered 'classics'. And if you do, you notice something of a rule of thumb: up and left/right and down. Huh? Well...consider...
Your human input, as control signals, are probably best coming in at the 'bottom' of the layout. You want them at hand. Knobs to grab, wheels to turn, keys to tickle. Then from there, the control signals from those control other things to augment the control. And now, we're heading upward, building up the control signal structures. Some of these branch one way, and triggers, gates, etc go to other control things, stuff to modulate, while your CVs head on upward to (where I like to put them) the upper part of the layout, where your generators live. So now, we're all the way up and all the way left. Now we have to go rightward and downward.
The generator signals, influenced by modulators coming from that middle-leftward zone, and jiggered by processing to cook 'em down, arrive at the modifiers...where you find filters to tamper with timbre, VCAs for amplitudes, waveshapers to mangle stuff, etc. And with this stuff here, your controlling modulations are simply moving across the middle...left to right...to have at the CVs inputs herein. Once we're done here, then it's a simple move on down to the final modifiers, namely your effects processing and mixing, as well as other end-stage trickery...which, like the controllers at the beginning, are nicely at hand in the bottom-right quadrant where you can easily get at 'em. It feels right, it looks right, it's not QUITE so maddening to program...perhaps...and cables all seem to flow around the front panel's user interface in a way that doesn't seem look like some sort of connect-the-dots puzzle on mescaline.

Anyway, that's how I tend to work with these things, employing much the same sort of flow structure on an instrument as I might with a studio environment...which, after all, is what the innovators such as Don Buchla, Bob Moog, Peter Zinovieff, and the like had in mind: an 'in-one-box' solution to the electronic music studio setups of the 1960s and before. Not saying these are hard 'n' fast rules, but they work for me, and have for quite some time. Give it a try (which Modulargrid makes oh-so-easy) and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

L