Purchased a Doepfer A-160-2 from @KaOsphere. fast shipping, solid packing and works great. Would recommend. thanKS!q
There's always stuff to learn in electronic music, and there's always going to be stuff to learn. I'm fond of telling people that the minute you're sure you know everything, then call an undertaker...because you're probably dead. But seriously, a DJ colleague of mine once pointed out that since music is now so dependent on technology, music has become harnessed to Moore's Law just like everything else technological. And I have no reason whatsoever to dispute that. Consider for a moment how much synth you get for, say, $1000. For that much, you can get a Waldorf Blofeld keyboard. Now, consider that that instrument is based, way back in its ancestry, on the PPG Wave 2.3, which was PPG's final iteration of their digital/analog hybrids. Oh, and throw in the PPG Waveterm B as well, because you'll need that to do any decent programming of wavetable data, etc.
Now, I distinctly recall that the Wave 2.3 itself, back in the mid-1980s, was somewhere between $4 or 5 thousand. Waveterm B, that was actually about the same. So, to get the whole basic PPG setup circa 1984, you'd have to drop $9k-ish, perhaps a bit more. And for that, you got a synth with a single digital wavetable engine, analog VCF/VCA signal chain, and analog modulation (EGs, LFOs) over both, a huge thing with a green-screen and 5 1/4" floppy drives that had serious cooling issues to get at the insides of the synth, and the whole mess weighed about as much as two boxes of hernias! Believe me, I know that last factoid first hand!
Waldorf Blofeld: TWO of the same sort of digital wavetable engines, similar (albeit modelled, and very well) modulation and signal chain, NO ginormous rackmounted computer (you use your own PC or Mac, the synth has USB), and I can easily tuck the keyboard under one arm and carry it around like...well, not much more than my old-skool Kawai K1. And that's all due to Moore's Law and its creep into music tech. Same goes for modular synths. I've programmed full-scale Moogs, most notably a 55 with the sequencer expansion, and with those, you're talking about a wall of control panel, and it's not...well, 'user-friendly' doesn't exactly describe a Moog modular. I found it very funny that Arturia's Modular V (their Moog replication) is just as much of a pain to work with as the actual article. But who gives a rat's about a monster-size Moog when you can slap the requisite modules in a Eurorack case...and yes, some of them being shrunk-down copies of the original Moog circuits...and carry it all around like a piece of luggage? I know what I would go for, for convenience's sake! Thanks, Gordon Moore!
Anyway, back on track...yeah, always make serious considerations about how pieces of equipment can work together when shopping for electronic music gear. You sometimes hear talk about the 'studio as instrument' concept; I prefer to think of my studio as AN instrument, not a collection of them, and that seems to be a great way to proceed. I recall visiting Syracuse U. about 25 years back, where I saw their original studio, which was designed for them by Bob Moog. And I noted with great consideration that Bob had set the whole thing up so that there were NO preconfigured signal paths. None. Instead, everything routed to a few rackmounted patchbays, and everything could interconnect in any desired configuration from those. Soooo...these days, I can look to my right, several feet away, and see a 17U jackfield where this entire room can be reconfigured on the fly, depending on what I might want to do. Everything patchable to everything. So, yeah...the studio here IS an instrument, not an imitation of one. And that's not a bad way to make considerations when equipping ones' self with electronic music gear. Certainly, you want to know what something does, but as important a question is "how does this work with everything else?" And always consider a factor I call 'abuse potential'; case in point: I have a string synth that has a CV input so that an external CV can be fed to the master oscillator (it's a divide-down polysynth) to transpose the overall pitch. You're not really supposed to feed an envelope into that patchpoint...but if you DO...suddenly you get pulsing, polyphonic acid-type twitters. The manufacturer never intended that usage, but if it can be done and it works musically, what the hell? Gimme a patchcord...
Like comparators, also. Now, that's a circuit with abuse potential. Everything we do in electronic music with those qualifies as 'abuse', actually...because these were originally cooked up for scientific instrumentation, not music. Their original use was to derive a logic pulse or gate when a metered signal crossed a certain voltage threshold, and you see loads of Nuclear Instrumentation Modules from the 1950s and 60s that are the same basic thing as our synth comparator modules, save for some differences in the voltages involved. But because there's some crossover between early electronic instrument builders and various scientific disciplines (with the most notable example being Don Buchla), a lot of circuit ideas crept from that end of the usage spectrum and into this one. In fact, I seem to recall that the first primitive voltage sequencers were originally developed at Los Alamos as an arming and firing device for the first atomic bomb test. We just use them...well, differently.
But as far as comparators go, there's two types. One is the basic comparator, where the module emits a digital '1' of some sort when a metered voltage either exceeds or drops below a set voltage threshold. And the other, which we're just starting to see in Eurorack (Joranalogue released one) is the 'window comparator'. These are neat as hell! How they work is that you have two threshold levels, and between them is the 'window'. So from one of these, you can actually get THREE '1' signals...above the upper threshold, below the lower one, and when the voltage is between the thresholds. To say the least, they're a kickass way to derive all sorts of trigger and gate pulses from all sorts of continuously variable voltage curves. Feed an audio waveform in, and the output becomes a variable pulse wave. Feed it velocity CVs, and it'll fire when your keyboard velocity is above or below the threshold, caused by harder or softer velocity attacks. And you can port that digital signal to anything else that can be fired by one...clock start/stops, envelope triggers, sample & hold clocking, the list goes on...
That's just ONE example. You can also do things like using an LFO to modulate another LFO, which then modulates a third LFO, and the result becomes a more or less nonrepeating CV waveform outputted by the third LFO. Put that thru a DC-coupled linear VCA, and use an envelope to control it, and you can increase and decrease that nonrepeating CV value every time the envelope gets triggered by...well, most anything that sends a gate and/or trigger. So, why not send that to something else...maybe a filter cutoff, so you get this strange, nonlinear tremolo that gets wider and narrower as you play.
So, yeah...it's much more than 'throw stuff in box, attach patchcables'. Modular gives you the ability to literally design an instrument...or several instruments at once, if the system's big enough to support several signal paths. And as I noted, you don't have to stop that designing process at the edge of the box; coloring outside the lines is how you come up with interesting results!
But yeah...if generative's your thing, listen to a lot of it, and keep looking closely at what you see on MG to try and sort out how what you hear works...or might work...or could be done better, what the hell? Same goes for pretty much any sort of music, to be honest. Also, explore the treasure trove of racks built on here by experienced synthesists, and see how they're doing what THEY do. MG is amazing like that; it's a virtual Alladin's Cave of electronic music ideas, concepts, and methods for those willing to take the plunge deep into it.
As for some of my generative stuff, see https://daccrowell.bandcamp.com/album/beneath-puget . Now, what's going on in there is a very complex patch between my Digisound and an ARP 2600, plus a little back-and-forth flow with an MS-20 and a shortwave radio fed into the modular system via audio and two 1/10th-octave passbands into envelope followers to derive CVs based on signal amplitude. It's not a set-n-forget sort of piece, as I'm 'guiding' the modular patch with eight attenuverters on the Digisound. But each time I change one of those settings, it takes the synth (processed through a sizable processor cascade) quite some time to come back to a new state of voltage equilibrium and settle into a new activity. The only 'normal' controller use occurs before and after three theremin solos, when I drop the modular's general pitch-class way down to nearly subsonic range and then bring it back upward after the solo's done. But much of what's there is that complex, non-repeating CV-controlled patch doing whatever it wants in between attenuverter 'nudges'. Kinda nifty! I actually concocted this piece as a test-run of a 'sublayer' for a longer piece intended for live performance, so what you hear there is a 'live' take, also, because I needed a replicable and performable result for the performance version. Make sure you have an hour or so to kill to hear the whole thing, btw...it ain't short!
Lastly, have a look at this: 
Now, what that is is a generative concept sketch I was playing around with some time back. Note that there's only four audio sources in there, the four Weather Drones. The entire top row and the rest of the second are ALL modulation, and the third row is the output chain which eventually ends in quadrophonic output. Someone was asking me about what I'd do for a sound installation piece, and I toyed around with that design for a hot minute. But this illustrates what I was talking about nicely: not much in the way of complex sound, but the sources for that sound as well as the filtering and processing are operating with a LOT of CV modulation of varying frequencies ranging from low audio down to periods of a couple of hours. It's not a bad example-piece for something you can set in motion for, say, maybe a month or two at low ambient levels.
-Luigia
I feel like I could read this comments for a few years and still find things to soak in.. I liked your example with 'Music for Airports. I love that album but I've never even considered how it was made, I'm excited to go and listen to it again now.
Sal Martirano sounds like he was a revolutionary guy and that Sal-Mar instrument looks nuts, the interface looks so clean it looks like something from 2018 not the early 70's..
Jeez this is a lot to take in.. I will try to learn by listening. That makes sense. I feel like I might need a better grasp of concepts before this would even be really possible though.
Comparator's sound interesting (and confusing). So they take in some sort of source, and when that source reaches a certain level set by the comparator it outputs a trigger or gate.. So you might send the Comparator a sound source with a frequency modulated by say a vco/vca, and when that frequency hits a certain point it would trigger the Comparator..? So in that way you could get like randomized infrequent sequences based off of a predetermined sequence....? Is that at all close to being on the right track?
I didn't really think about how my current gear could fit into all of this. That's interesting.. I will keep my Volca FM anyway, and then just slowly ease my way into Euro.
I did go and buy a rack a few hours ago off of craigslist and I have the O_C on the way. Talk about impulsive.. I will just keep it simple for now. Maybe an OSC, some LFO's and VCA's and just do simple droney things until I have a better grasp on basics.
That's crazy you've been learning about this stuff for 40 years.. Does it still feel like there's more to learn? I guess theirs probably an infinite amount to learn almost.. Out of curiousity I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing something you have recorded? I would love to have a listen, especially with some kind of description of the process. This is asking a lot though, feel free to tell me to bugger off.
If you have a line on a built O&C, then yes, get one. Moreso than the Pamela's, that will allow for more in the way of generative work. Pamela's, ultimately, is more of a timing source-type of device, and while it can do some of that, the access to those functions thru the UI on it is a little clunky. A lot of the point of modular is to have the controls...ALL the controls...right there to grab, hence the ginormous control panel on these things. Modular synths are literally a gigantic control surface, so the better you can control the process you've patched, the more expressive and complex and such you can be with them. If you've worked with VCV, you get a bit of this idea, but VCV without a touchscreen (which I have) doesn't exactly get the point across fully.
Generative music, basically, is a subset of a compositional school of thought known as 'process music'. The idea is to create a structure that approximates a certain algorithm, and let that run, sometimes while making adjustments. I've actually worked with the earliest algorithmic electronic instrument created, the Sal-Mar Construction, which was a built-from-scratch device created by one of my composition teachers, Sal Martirano, back in the early-mid 1970s. In the case of that device, Sal used analog computing hardware to control the behavior and interactivity of the control surface and the synthesizer subsystems, and that analog computer had to be hardwire-patched. So what happens when patching a generative algorithm is that the synth patches in a modular synthesizer are behaving much like an analog computer, generating and reacting to various voltage curve functions. But the synth(s) of the Sal-Mar are actually pretty simplistic sound generators; the real 'meat' in the instrument is the control surface interaction, manipulating the algorithmic structure as time in a performance passes.
So, ultimately, doing generative music requires an effective layer of modulation control sets, in which the 'control' layer is being manipulated by a 'modulation' layer, which in turn gets manipulated by a 'sub-modulation' layer, and so on, with the idea being that the generative process is non-repeating and controls a fairly restricted set of sound generation as the listenable 'foreground'.
Perhaps the best example of this is Brian Eno's "Music for Airports"; while this work doesn't use synths that play as part of the work's audible layer, the audible elements are on tape loops. These loops are 'modulated' by the decisions Eno made in terms of loop length, cutting them so that they have a great deal of mathematical difference with respect to the loop duration, so that once started, the loops will never 'line up' again. Then the 'submodulation' comes from random factors involved with the playback machines themselves, since very few tape machines are 100% precisely the same, a factor Eno also took into account. And while this sounds like it has the potential to be very chaotic, it's actually anything but that, because Eno's choices of material which was recorded on the loops was highly restrictive. Any one layer will always correspond to any other layer's tonality, degree of activity, and so forth.
Now, with a modular synthesizer set up for generative work, one way to do this is to have several very simple sequencers which are running at speeds that also avoid 'lining up', with the clocks for each of these also having some degree of nonrepetitive behavior, and another layer that modulates that slightly and/or reacts to control signals coming in from the layer 'above' it. However, once having devised this time scheme, then you have to be careful that the sound sources being controlled by this system are simple enough that a sizable coincident layer's sounds 'mesh', either melodically, harmonically, or texturally. Otherwise, it tends to sound like meandering crap.
That's the tricky part, one which takes loads of experimentation and experience with generating and manipulating generative systems to get results which sound really, really spot-on.
Now, what I would suggest is to listen to a lot of generative music first-off. Take careful note of what seems to be going on, and then try and analyze how that might be done with a system of control signals. Think about how the time in these works passes and how the composer arranged the generative system to cause the events, across time, to occur. Not easy once you start diving into it, but over time you start getting the idea of what the generative process behind these works might be.
Once you start getting a feel for that, you're going to notice that modulation sources are the key...not so much sound sources. So that, actually, is where you want to start. Look at CV modulation sources, how you can make them interact, interfere, and so on. Then, how do you get the actual sound controls out of that continually-shifting process? Lots of ways: multipling out control voltage curves, using comparators to trigger events, altering timing signals feeding sequencers, etc. Be inventive. And study for some time how to extract control signals from the generative function layer...there's loads of ways that the can be done. THEN worry about the sounds. And you're likely to find that the simpler you can make the sounds, the more effective a composition generated in this way can be, because they won't get in the way of each other and will interweave nicely. To see if it's right, let the result play for a long time...as in, all day, possibly. Hell, some of La Monte Young's pieces ran for many YEARS, as in his 'Dream House' drone installations.
Also note: never consider electronic instruments as being separate devices. If there's some conceivable way to connect them, then what you actually have is somewhat 'modular' already. For example, consider setting up a couple of MATHS in a way that you get non-repetition. Off of this, use a few comparators (devices that send a trigger or gate pulse when a set voltage threshold gets crossed) to 'read' some of the process's voltage curves. Then send triggers from those to...oh, let's say, the Volca clocks, all separately. Now you'll have non-coincident timing signals syncing each Volca, and if they're pitched in such a way that it all sounds 'right'...well, there's another way to do it, and proof that an 'instrument' in electronic or electroacoustic media is only bound by the limitations of your own imagination, not by which things are in what cases.
So...four days in, well, maybe you'll want to study the idea more closely. And longer. And don't just do that on MG, but actually take some real time to STUDY the idea by listening, looking into various algorithmic processes, examining how related concepts like analog computing and how chaotic mathematical processes govern 'organic' processes. I've been tinkering with these concepts for about...ah, 40 years?...so there's a lot of possibilities to mess with here, and the only limit is really imagination and how broad you can make that imagination. Definitely not solely a matter of what equipment to use.
Hey thanks for your in depth response, appreciate it.
1) ya I thought some envelopes could be helpful, I was planning on using the Pamela’s for this for the first while and mainly just experimenting with drones, but I can see your point about using Pamela’s for this as defeating the purpose of modular so maybe I'll rethink this.
2)this is included for cheap with the case I’m looking at so I figured why not.
3) I thought this would be a good first piece because of its many capabilities.. I figured it could wear many hats, Euclidian sequencer, Lfo, EG, many more things I don’t fully understand yet, it looks like it could be pretty essential in a small generative setup like this no? I have considered the Tempi as an alternative, which looks like it's a lot more immediate but a trade off for much less capabilities..
4) thanks for the heads up on the oC, maybe I am actually messaging a guy about getting one right now so we’ll see.
5) I wasn’t actually too sure of clouds function, I just saw it in a lot of people’s rigs whose music I like so I stuck in in there, was going to research more before getting though, but maybe I won't now :P
The morphogene I thought would be Fun for mainly processing external stuff (I have some Synths I will keep, Guitar, fm radio module etc)
I hear where you’re coming from though.. I definitely am rushing into this. It's a habit of mine to do this. I just can't contain my excitement.
It’s just I have found with my synths now my goal is more sonic exploration than building tracks, and it seems even from just my bit of playing with vcvrack that modular suits this purpose better for me, it feels like with modular just the process of creating can be so fun and rewarding, whereas with my setup now it just feels so oriented towards results.. I’m also not much of a keys player (not really my goal) so I always find myself just programming sequences, It feels like I'll dial in a few sequences, tweak some parameters, and then I've hit a dead end. This is what makes self generating modular patches look so appealing to me, there's just so many more options it seems.. Making these big evolving and changing patches where little tweaks can effect the whole structure and sound just seems so cool!
Thank you for your concern and input, but frankly I'm pretty set on learning, and I figure why not just dive in instead of watching youtube videos of it all day..
Oooooookay...further iterations of expanding the new Minibrutes. To the above, add four VCOs, four LFOs, two Steiner state-variables, four EGs, two sequencers...basically, all the stuff in the Arturias. I wouldn't consider the racks here to be 'complete' synths, so remember these are designed to tandem with the Minibrute 2 and 2s. Jettisoned the Moog subrack for the time being, also.
Have to say, this is looking more and more appealing as I tinker with it. Cost-wise, it's killer: about $8k with the Arturia gear + modules, and easily crosspatchable with my Digisound to push the rig out even further. Definitely cheaper in the long run than the 'in-one-box' ideas I've worked with for some time, and potentially more capable since the Arturias add way more to the combination for cheap than trying to replicate their functions in discrete module form. Pretty damn close to a final budgeting decision, I should think...definitely worth the long work toward a suitable goal.
Hm...well, first up, I'd discard the Erbe-verb in favor of using something outboard for reverb effects. This is a pretty small build, so keeping things as mission-critical as you can is a good idea. Chuck the scope and blind panel also. As for the Clouds, keep in mind that Mutable discontinued that module.
Next...and this would be a MAJOR sort of 'Oh, s**t!' moment if you did this as a physical build...how do you plan to get external audio in without an audio input module? You have to have that; line-level audio won't cut it, since all voltages (audio and CV) within most any synth environment are a lot hotter than either consumer or pro-level audio signals, and have to be preamped to get them to the proper level. Similarly, how do you intend on getting your audio back out? Yes, I see a output module...but no mixer. This is fine if you intend on cascading modules in series as an audio chain, but otherwise you'll have a problem separating the different processed signals without a lot of unnecessary knobtwisting. Your audio chain, to work well, needs to look like this:
[INPUT] -> [MULTIPLE (dividing audio to processing)] -> [PROCESSORS (in parallel)] -> [MIXER (summing paralleled audio)] -> [OUTPUT]
...and keep in mind that some of your devices are stereo and some aren't, so a mixer that has both stereo-ins and mono-ins with panning is a good idea.
Otherwise, yeah, this is a good idea...a lot of people don't think about using modular synthesizers as a sound processor, but the fact is that they've been useable like this since the start. In fact, one of the very first rock recording Moog usages was on The Doors' "Strange Days", on which Jim Morrison's vocal is being processed through Beaver and Krause's system which was used on those sessions. You maybe, possibly, might wanna consider a larger cab, though...
Hm...there's a lot of problems here. Let's dive in...
1) Envelopes. There's zero envelope generators in this build. And you really need those, since they create amplitude contours (via VCAs), timbral contours (applying envelopes to VCF cutoff, resonance), asymmetrical modulation (applying envelopes to VCO FM inputs), etc etc. This is going to be a serious stumbling block. Yes, you can apply LFO signals as a simple substitute for some of this, but you don't have the ability (as a rule) to specify the parameters of the modulation curve with them.
2) Buffered mult. You don't actually need that; a passive mult will do fine if there's only two oscillators in this. Buffered multiples are used to exactly replicate an inputted signal, often to avoid 'voltage droop' when controlling numerous devices with a single CV. There's not enough here to really justify it, so save some money.
3) Pamela's. Again, this doesn't seem necessary. The module is an eight-channel CV source under a single clock, with one of its main uses being to lock up behavior of/around a sequencer, and there's no sequencer here. Yes, it can output a lot of other things, but using it in that way means that you still won't have proper hands-on control over the parameters that it's outputting, and a big key in using a synth effectively is to have the actual controls at hand to manipulate, not hidden behind some sort of menu structure. If the idea is to use this for envelopes, etc...I wouldn't do that. It simply brings you back to the awful 1980s world of programming through a single data control (think DX7 here), and defeats the whole rationale for working with a modular.
4) Putting an O&C build on 'low priority'. Not a good idea. If you really want one of these, you have to act quickly when they pop up, because the people building these do so on pretty short build runs. The kit versions are not too difficult to come by, but an Ornament and Crime isn't a 'starter kit' build, so if you're not experienced with some complex electronics work, the kit option probably won't work out nicely.
5) Clouds. Doesn't exist anymore, so you'd have to either source a used module or find a third-party build. If the latter, refer to #4 above. Also, what Clouds does is somewhat similar to what the Morphagene does; are two devices of this sort necessary?
The best advice I can give is STOP. Sit back, take a few deep breaths, get the heady aroma of modular out of your head a bit. Modular synths are just as capable as the synths you mention in your post of being eventually uninspiring. Just because there's all these...THINGS...doesn't mean that that factor changes any, it just makes the fiscal outcome of being 'uninspired' way more expensive.
Now, first of all, I can tell you...from experience...that if you're getting bored by your synths, you're probably not spending enough time exploring their capabilities. Granted, Volcas are a bit limited, which is why they're mission-specific, but they still have a lot of abuse potential. Have you looked into any of the hardware hacks for them? Tried 'misapplying' what they do (which was key in the discovery of what the TB-303 could really do, c. 1987)? Also, those are relatively simple synths you're listing; have you considered a hardware synth that allows you to get further 'under the hood' first, something like a Waldorf Blofeld where you basically have a redone version of the PPG wavetable architecture, or something additive such as a Kawai K5000s? Neither are that expensive on the used market, certainly nowhere near the expense of a Eurorack system. Explore more. It's not a good idea at all to take a leap from a Toyota Corolla to a Koenigsegg for going from a first car to a second, and it's not a good idea to go from something very simple like a Minilogue to something that's totally complicated like a modular of any format. Best way you can see this point is if you have some way to access a modular synth for a little while, without assistance...which I recommend to anyone considering taking a flying leap into modular synthesis from an early point in working with electronic music in general. Modular synthesizers are A way of getting toward something new/different, but not THE way. Versteh'?
Thanks to arson for the STG .mix - my first purchase through MG! Smooth service and an excellent experience!
I'd like to know what y'all think of something like this for "recording" and looping outside samples.
I must be blind. I can’t find the rating function for any module. Where is it?
Good sellers :
@AVJR : Serge Triple+ Waveshaper
@haresbreath : TwinPeak
Good buyers :
@badsector : Richter Anti-Oscillator
@pdudal : A-135-1
@OttoL : A-149-1 / FM AID
Hi everyone :)
Now I'm kind of jumping into this.. 4 days ago I was pretty clueless about Eurorack (I still am), but I started watching Emily Sprague and Ann Annie's youtube videos and it's just gotten me so pumped to dive in(I've spent about 10 hours a day researching different modules!).
I do have some experience with Hardware synths (Minilogue, Volcas, boutiques etc) so I'm not a COMPLETE novice, but I've felt sort of uninspired by my gear for the last few months and I think it's high time for a radical change!
Would love to get your opinions on this build.
What could suit me better to begin with than what I have chosen.
What you might choose instead for ambient/generative stuff.
Or just any opinions, thoughts and discussions are totally welcome too!
here it is:
(EDIT: I don't know why but the photo below is showing Akemie's Castle and Sisters, click on the photo to see the actual rack)
So the top row is phase 1, I plan on getting all of these as soon as possible.
Bottom row will happen gradually as my wallet permits, I also plan on adding maybe a Malekko Voltage Block to the top row soon after phase 1, or maybe a Monome grid + Ansible, something for some more control anyway.
Thank you!
Solid as a rock! If you have 2 hp left there in that open bit, maybe a passive mult could go in...otherwise, button it up with a blank panel and have some inline mults handy. That's a serious piece of gear there...make sure to exploit the inserts on the A-106-1 and Chronoblob for even more mayhem.
Now you've even got me pondering what might work in a KB37...
I was pretty sure I used c/p (not sure about tabs/windows) before but now copying from one rack in one browser tab pasting to another rack in another tab doesn't seem to work for me...
Lugia, thank you very much for the excellent feedback. After some more research and consideration, I ended up dropping Maths for a Function, and adding a Chronoblob in that HP for some quality delay. I also added the Doepfer filter you suggested because it is pretty versatile.
The search for a mult replacement also resulted in my discovering the Plague Bearer, which I added to the effect cascade section.
I was excited about the Waldorf wavetable module, but the need for more HP to accommodate some of these additions caused me to look again into the E352 and I think Im sold on it.
Here’s where that left me:
https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_598632.jpg
Thanks for the feedback! really helpful :)
In all the time I've been using the wonderful ModularGrid I've never got copy / paste to work in different browser windows.
I press 'c' flip to the other browser tab, press 'p' - nothing. What's the secret?
Be nice to the cat...it's not its fault that it has OCD.
Must be sequencer season...we just got that new Golt! thing, too.
Well, first off, you really need a serious input module with a proper envelope follower. That'll allow you to take foley-type audio and run it thru the machine, deriving both audio and envelope CVs from the signal. Given that this is something you'll likely want to use with both a proper mic and/or line inputs, have a look at Cwejman's AP-1. This also contains some compression and basic eq, plus line and mic (with phantom power) inputs. At $685, yeah, it's expensive for a Eurorack module, but the price is actually pretty comparable to pro-grade mic preamps. As for the Ears and the Detect...nah, probably won't work like you think. Ears is a contact mic built into a Eurorack module and usually works more like a controller, and the Detect is a bit too simplistic to give you the envelope control that manipulating foley really needs, to say nothing of tinkering with highly-amplified microsound-type sources.
Clouds: not available anymore, unless you get lucky or unless you can get a third-party version of it. Otherwise, it's a good choice, but you might want something more delay-like as well for sound looping/manipulation. Check out Make Noise's Phonogene or Morphagene, as well as possibly 4ms's Dual Looping Delay.
Filters are really lacking here, and that'll be a problem for making major timbral alterations. In this case, you'll want two different kinds: 1) a pretty complex, crosspatchable VCF (or several in one module) and 2) something more fixed, such as a filterbank, to use like a complex equalizer for basic spectral alterations. Doepfer is a good source for both; their A-128 filterbank can be gotten with a separate break-out expander to directly tap the individual passbands, and the A-127 Multitype Morphing Filter (along with its companion A-144 Morphing Controller) in conjunction with the MATHS will allow you to do a lot of complex, unexplainable sonic transformations. As for the LPG...mm...it's OK for instrument-type work, but sound design has a lot to do with complicated timbral alterations, and so more complex filtering would probably work better for you.
The lack of VCAs here will be a problem, as you don't have either a way to control amplitude of audio signals or control signals via a modulation source, and both are really important in any form of synthesis environment. Consider several, and you might look at Intellijel's Quad VCA as a possibility, since you have quite a bit of flexibility of VCA behavior in those plus the module also is capable of functioning as a 4-1 mixer.
Overall, the biggest problem here is one of scale. If you're trying to set up a sound design for SFX/foley device, that's one thing...but an instrument-type synth is somewhat different from that. It IS possible to do both, by having your sound manipulation/alteration paths in the same cab as an instrument-type path...but you might need a bigger cab. Also, go have a closer look at a classic SFX synth: the ARP 2600, which Ben Burtt made ample use of for sound design for the first 'Star Wars' movies. While there's certainly been some improvements in the gear since that synth's day, the basic design principles in that synthesizer are sufficiently open-ended for both SFX design AND musical work, and it's a good point of reference to work from. Doing a bit of research into Suzanne Ciani's work in the 1970s in sound logo work (using a custom Buchla system) might prove useful as well.
And sophiajoseph is a spam pattern for dumping spam into the forums. But besides that, Mat...you might want to have a look at http://www.happynerding.com/category/fm-aid/ . This is Happy Nerding's module that consists solely of the phase modulation circuit that's the TZFM part of the Schippmann CS-8 VCO, and as such, it might make more sense to approach Schippmann's module after looking at the HN FM Aid's docs. I note, also, that the Schippmann manual is a bit...ah...well, it needs some proofreading, to be sure. Not as bad as yr.typ. 1978 Roland manual, but still...
Hope that helps.
Don't tell me how to live my life, unless you're trying to help, cat!
I make a good deal with @osclab, fast and friendly, anytime again!
Hey!
Im new to euro rack but really want to get into it for sound design /sound FX purposes. I make and edit SFX for a living for games and film and love the potential of the modules so my aim is to design a system that's focused on processing external sounds but also for creating speaker ripping effects I can record and use in my DAW.
I would really appreciate any feedback... this is a little on the expensive side at the moment so im looking to cut some modules. Any thoughts, tips, ideas on things that are missing or perhaps might not be ideal for the purpose I'm after would be much appreciated :)
Thanks!!
Bought a Doepfer A190-4 from @bruco23 and all was good :) Thank you.
Bought a Befaco Slew Limiter from @Koaxial and all was good :) Great coms, fast delivery, well packed etc. Thank you.
Yeah, it's another 'Swiss Army Knife', like the MATHS. Extremely useful bit of circuitry!
Some instructional listening. Well, the start of some of it. And where I'm going to start is back in the pre-synth era, since the first synthesizers were a technological answer to the difficulties of what are known as 'classical' electronic music and its limitations. For a very good look at the point of inception where this happened more or less simultaneously on both the east and west coasts, I point you to the very excellent book “Analog Days” by T.J. Pinch and Frank Trocco. Essential reading, truly; a must for anyone involved in electronic music, since everything we do and use now bases itself in these origination-points.
Pretty much everything on this list can be hunted down online, both in sound (sometimes even in filmed versions!) and text references. Those with a sense of both adventure and inquiry will likely find these examples pretty inspirational.
1) Paul Hindemith: “Concertino for Trautonium and Strings” (1931). A proper concerto-style work for string orchestra and the newly-invented Trautonium, an instrument created by Friedrich Trautwein which used a neon-tube relaxation oscillator and a continuous ribbon-type controller.
2) Edgard Varèse: “Ecuatorial” (1932-34). The original version of this work included two of the then-new theremins in its ensemble; later, Varèse rescored the work to use the more-controllable Ondes Martinot (see below).
3) Olivier Messiaen: “Fête des belles eaux” (1937). One of the very first purely-electronic works, scored for a sextet of Ondes Martinots, a fairly-complex and partly-keyboard electronic instrument created by Maurice Martenot in the mid-1930s. The work was intended for outdoor performance along the River Seine in Paris, so in a very real sense it also is an antecedent to ambient music and its development.
4) Pierre Schaeffer: “Cinq études de bruits” (Five Noise Studies) (1948). This series of five works of 'musique concrète', or music using existing sounds outside of those normally produced by instruments, is where much of the concept of tape music emerges. Although Schaeffer's initial works used disc lathes and turntables to composite and manipulate sounds, the emergence of commercially-available tape machines shortly after the time these works were created plus the concepts broached by Schaeffer and others in the French 'Club d'Essai' would combine to form the 'manipulation' side of 'classical' electronic music technique.
5) Pierre Henry & Pierre Schaeffer: “Symphonie pour un homme seul” (Symphony for one man alone) (1950-51/rev. 1966). This work could probably be considered the ultimate expression of the concrète techniques pioneered in Paris. However, it was nearly-impossible to perform in its original form, due to the limitations posed by the phonograph techniques still in use. Later revisions pared the work down considerably, followed by the restoration of one removed section in the 1966 version.
6) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Gesang der Jünglinge” (Song of the Youths) (1955-56). Stockhausen pioneered the use of purely electronic sounds in music a few years previous to this in his two 'Studien', but this work is perhaps the best example of those concepts, assembled together with 'concrète' manipulation techniques of childrens' voices, to create something which is pretty much the start-point for what we now know as 'electronic music'.
7) Edgard Varèse: “Poème électronique” (Electronic Poem) (1958). This work, which only now exists in a stereo version, was originally intended for the Philips pavilion at the 1958 Brussels World Fair. In that venue, it was spatially-distributed over some 300+ loudspeakers, through which the audience moved. The work varies from concrete to purely electronic media, and would later be the model for the Japan track “Ghosts”.
8) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Kontakte” (Contacts) (1958-60). Stockhausen's next step beyond the above work was to explore the continuum of sound that ranges from pitches, to rhythms, to periods of time. Using pulse generators as the primary sources for both sound generation and modulation, he created this work which aptly demonstrates the direct relationship of all time-based aspects in music.
9) Vladimir Ussachevsky: “Wireless Fantasy” (1960). This, one of Ussachevsky's early works at the newly-formed Columbia-Princeton Center for Electronic Music, more accurately belongs to the 'musique concrète' domain, but it too uses electronic sound sources, this time derived from shortwave radio.
10) Luciano Berio: “Visage” (1961) Created at RAI Milan's studio, Berio's piece subjects the word 'parole' ('words') to a mind-wrenching series of electronic and electroacoustic transformation processes. Cathy Berberian's voice in this work is made to go in directions that only electronic media would be capable of.
11) Milton Babbitt: “Philomel” (1964). Also created at the Columbia-Princeton Center, this work is perhaps one of the most famous compositions that makes use of the earliest instrument known as a 'synthesizer', the RCA Mark II, along with soprano voice.
12) Pauline Oliveros: “I of IV” (1966). Created during Oliveros' tenure at the University of Toronto, the work uses her methods of ultrasonic oscillator manipulation to synthesize elaborate sonic textures. She was also present at the birth of the Buchla synthesizer at the San Francisco Tape Music Center just before this, but hadn't yet made the leap to the new synthesizer technology when this work was composed. Nevertheless, those familiar with the sound of the early Buchlas will notice certain similarities between what she accomplishes here and the 'complex oscillator' behavior of those early synths.
13) Karlheinz Stockhausen: “Hymnen” (Anthems) (1966-68). This work is perhaps the crowning opus of pre-synthesizer electronic music. At two hours in length, “Hymnen” represents, in very real ways, the limit of the 'classical' studio techniques. During the composition and realization of this work, of course, the development of the Moog and Buchla systems was in full swing, and would soon become the focus of later electronic music development...but this four-movement work is, in a very real sense, the climactic creation of the pre-synthesizer era in electronic music.
FYI, while I point out the early instruments above, the later works also contain significant contributions. Schaeffer and his compatriot Pierre Henry worked on techniques that would go on to spawn sample-manipulation (in fact, the Make Noise 'Phonogene' and 'Morphagene' owe their existence to some of these methods, albeit translated into modern digital technology). And Ussachevsky was the first to establish the makeup of sonic dynamic envelopes as containing an Attack, a period of initial Decay, a level of Sustain, and an eventual Release. So while these pieces all seem distantly-located in comparison to what everyone here on MG is working with, they (as well as many others; these are really just 'cardinal examples') are in a very real sense antecedent to everything we're up to today. And because of that, they're very much works that anyone involved in electronic music should have at least a passing familiarity with.
Anyway, that's all for this pile of edumacationable material. Next list I post (after a while), I'll start looking at the early synth works, starting around the general time where this list leaves off.
Nice! Is the uScale mainly for the TM? Might be better to get a Disting then. Disting has a TM-algorithm with built in quantization and can do like 70 other things too.
I'm not sure what the Maths is for since you don't have much CV to mix in this rack? Envelopes and LFOs? If that's the case then there are other, less hp-consuming options.
-- sislte
Disting MK4 looks sick and not nearly as difficult to operate as I thought. I'll definitely be picking one up.
OK, so I got to thinking that while I often note that users should study up on some of the classic monosynths that have stood the test of time, I haven't really given a lot in the way of examples to specifically look at. So this post is designed to correct that omission. All of this fun stuff can be found on and referred to at Vintage Synth Explorer (http://www.vintagesynth.com/#synth-models), which is a pretty good reference site for prebuilt synths, including some of the preconfigured modular gear of bygone times. You could kill hours on this site easily...but I guarantee you'll come back to MG with a head full of ideas as a result. Let's hit the high points, though...
These synthesizers are ones which I'd like to point out as being classic instruments which also go quite a way to explaining both how a proper synthesis signal path should flow. Also, their configuration gives some very good suggestions as to how to lay out a modular cabinet in such a way as to get the result to have an 'instrument feel'. There are very good reasons why some of these command big money prices on the used market and, in fact, why a few are still in production to this day. None of these are modulars per se, but a number are patchable and can be inserted into a modular setup. But again, the point here isn't the modular aspect, but how you can look at classics such as these as a 'roadmap' for your own modular efforts. The ones to pay attention to are:
1) ARP 2600. This is actually halfway in between a modular and a prebuilt, since the patchable architecture was always intended as a 'convenience', with some submodules not patched into that but easily configured via patchpoints. Also, it's worth noting that other devices were created that act essentially as 'modules' that connect to the 2600, such as ARP's 1604 sequencer and Tom Oberheim's initial synth effort, the SEM.
2) ARP Odyssey. Technically still in production thanks to Korg, this was probably the best non-patchable monosynth that ARP came up with. It had duophonic architecture, and the panel layout was (along with the Minimoog) influential in the designs of many monosynths that followed.
3) EML 101 'ElectroComp'. In some ways similar to the ARP 2600, this and its separate modular expander, the EML 200, are still devices that turn up in educational studios to teach the fundamentals of synthesis. The panel shows the flowpath exactly like a road map, so it's hard to misunderstand how the various subsystems go together...which also makes it a good example for the flowpath for present-day modular design as well.
4) Korg MS-10 and MS-20. The latter, of course, is another reissue in its 'mini' form by Korg...and rightfully so, since it's probably one of the most capable small monosynths ever made. These two monosynths, with the 10 being a simplified 20, also make use of patchpanels to override the built-in patch architecture as well as to patch in a number of other MS-line devices. And again, the way that Korg laid these synths out provides a great example of how 'flow' should work. After all, the MS-20 dates from the late 1970s, and it still sells bigtime given how it can be used for both very basic duty and very extreme uses. I would even go so far as to call it the 'Japanese ARP 2600', because in some very real senses, it's that.
5) Moog Minimoog. The first of the 'lead synths', really, this was originally derived by Moog engineer Bill Hemseth from Moog's modular line in its prototype form. Bob Moog actually didn't like the idea of this machine, but came to see the potential that it had in the end. The layout was derived as something of an extremely scaled-down signal flow version of the Moog IIc, with a reduction in VCOs but still retaining Moog's classic 904A low-pass filter. Numerous Moog monosynths begin their lineage from this synth, including the Micromoog, Multimoog, and Prodigy, as well as the more recent Voyager. And of course, it's worth noting that Moog has brought this specific 50 year old synth design back more recently still...because, simply put, it works.
6) Roland SH-1 (and its offshoots, the SH-09, SH-2a, and the later SH-101). Another line that will not die, the SH monosynths were a basic working tool of many a synthpop player in the late 1970s and up through the development of techno and on into the rave scene of the 1990s. And yet again, it's because they make simple, straightforward sense. You would have to really try hard to make a mistake programming these. And yes, they still linger on, with a VCM model version of the SH-1 available for Roland's present-day System synths, and the SH-01 being a redux of the venerable 101 with a bit of the related MC-202 thrown in for good measure.
7) Sequential Circuits Pro-One. A monosynth based on the Prophet-5's CEM-based architecture, this powerful monosynth yet again boasts an excellent and intuitive flowpath on its front panel, plus the complexity of the modulation matrix. This is something that I think everyone wishes Dave Smith would reissue just as it was, because it remains a very sought-after monosynth...great sound, intuitive programming environment.
8) Yamaha CS-monosynths (CS-5, 10, 15). These bear some basic resemblance to the Korg MS-series in sound and appearance, but not in implementation. These probably have some of the best road-mapping of monophonic synth architecture, especially the CS-15 with its flowpath showing how to use it in either monophonic or duophonic modes via a bit of extra patching. I would go so far as to say that the CS-10 or CS-15 might be some of the best 'explainers' as to how an analog synth signal path gets put together.
OK...so there's a few there that I think are perhaps the best 'study pieces' for anyone stepping up to the task of designing a modular in any format (well, except maybe a Buchla or Serge). And better still, if any of you reading about these can find some of the actual devices to check out, hands-on. Any of these serve as an excellent template to build up a rackful of modules, because following these fixed-build synths will help you to cook up a modular rig that both has what you need AND has a layout that is intuitive and possesses some of the same characteristics of playability that keep them in the 'very desireable' column for many electronic musicians. So...class dismissed! Study well, o my droogies...
MATHS is fine...it's probably the best bang-for-buck complex modulation source out there. The only concern I have here is about that MS-20, since it uses a different CV scaling and inverted gate/triggers, and usually that means a standard-changer module needs to be in the system...but only if you're needing to fully link this cab and the MS-20. But sending voltage curves from the MATHS directly into the '20s patch panel...that won't need that. Plus, there are a few 'creative' ways to fudge the MS-20 into some neat behavior by using its external processor section to do a little 'mistranslation' of incoming signals. Try feeding it some electronic percussion signals, for example, and then spreading the results out to both the '20 and the modular. Depending on how much early Aphex Twin you've heard, the results might seem...familiar.
I'll second that! That's a killer MIDI interface for the price, and it brings up a good point: don't always try and put all of the modular's devices IN the rack...sometimes outboard is the right way to go. Like here, apparently!
Other than that, this looks good...but again, I don't think you're going to need a buffered mult. A regular one would be fine, since you're not likely to need to branch one CV out to, say, seven or eight sources and keep them all on-scale. Also, having the other two percussion voices of the 'holy trinity' of kick/hat/snare might be a good swap-out for the Yarns if you go with the outboard MIDI, and you'd still have a bit more space to play with besides if you use small-hp snare and hat modules.
I'd actually think the 'minus VAT' price makes more sense, since it's a tax issue and not a 'list price' issue. In Erica's case, if they were shipping direct to a EU client, that client would have to factor their VAT on an overall basis against all their EU-purchased devices, but not something from the US or Canada unless it was purchased thru an EU retailer. Likewise, if someone walks into a shop in the USA to make a purchase, local taxes will apply, so an Erica module here would have a lower initial price, but the addition of sales tax (state and local, as a rule) changes that price differently. And, of course, you have the whole issue of import duty, etc etc. Gets messy and confusional...so going with a manufacturer's 'base price' seems right to me, with the onus being on the customer in question to factor their taxation situation as per where they are and how things get purchased.
So if a manufacturer posts a 'with VAT' price, actually those who don't have to deal with VAT come out ahead. Again, it's a 'worst-case' price in which the 'surprise' is the lower cash outlay, instead of the 'best-case' price that isn't realistic for the majority of users who wind up with sticker-shock on ordering.
It's pretty close, actually...you could lose the buffered mult in favor of a regular one, since you don't have enough going on to justify a buffered mult to make exact copies of CVs, etc. They're great for keeping a dozen or so VCOs in tune off of the same CV, but in here it's sort of superfluous.
Soundscaping often tends to call for more in the way of filtering and processing, btw. Maybe a couple of VCFs instead of the single Erica would be better; better still would be a filter with an insert point such as Doepfer's A-106-1, which allows you to put something into its resonance feedback path. A delay would work nicely there, or any sort of time-domain effect. Overall processing is important as well, which I figure the Disting is for, but you might want to consider another processor to feed it into to set up a 'processor cascade', which also works nicely thru adjusting the wet/dry balances, etc as you 'play' them. As for the leads and drones, this is on the right track, though...I think you might want to tinker with the layout, though, putting sources in one area, modifiers in the next, modulators, etc. Since this is supposed to live in a KB37, do some research on existing monosynths over history, paying attention to why some are 'classics' and others just didn't make it.
Well, for starters, the Braids is off the menu unless you have a line on a used one or one on hand already. Not sure about the need for the tuner module, either, especially at $175. If you want/need a strobetuner, just get one of the lower-end Petersons and run it outboard. The Roland 500 ADSR could go, as there's plenty of those out there and adding a VCLFO is simple enough.
Ahhh, what else...? OK, the stereo out; this rig doesn't seem to do anything in stereo...so shifting to any of a number of mono output modules would save some cash and space. This system also has the 'missing VCAs' problem...only one actual one, plus an LPG that really gets wasted just using it as a VCA alone. I would actually chuck the Ladik faders and the MFB VCA and go with an Intellijel Quad VCA, since you can break those up for CV modulation or audio as necessary, plus they can do some of the mixing. A six-channel mixer doesn't make sense here anyway, as there's not really six sources in the first place.
Hmm...the Buchla Timbre is not bad, but it really works best (or more typically) when used on a regular VCO. Using it with the Braids (which you'll have to find as a third-party build there days) sort of falls under the old adage of 'gilding a lily'. It might make more sense to use something more straightforward as a waveshaper, such as Tiptop's Fold. Definitely cheaper, too.
Overall, I would suggest the sort of thing I suggest quite a bit: more research. Use MG's resources to look at other peoples' racks who appear to be working in a direction similar to yours. Also, to get the prices under control, select your module type then use the 'price' view option to look at things in ascending (or with a second click on 'price', descending) order of cost. Last, if cost is a major factor, remember this simple formula: price / hp = cost per hp. The lower you can make that resultant figure, the cheaper things become overall. You can use that calculation on single modules, whole rows, or a whole cab. It works very well to keep overall costs under control since you're getting direct feedback on the prospective overall cost as the build takes place instead of at the very end when everything gets tallied. And redo constantly; there's really never any such thing as a 'finished' build, not even when you've physically built it.
Thanks for the advice! I can't wrap my mind around the Disting at the moment. I am very new to Eurorack so i'd prefer to start with each module doing one thing (no menu diving) Maths is because everyone says that everyone needs it. I'll be running some offboard synths (Ms-20 etc) so Maths can have fun with those as well.
Nice! Is the uScale mainly for the TM? Might be better to get a Disting then. Disting has a TM-algorithm with built in quantization and can do like 70 other things too.
I'm not sure what the Maths is for since you don't have much CV to mix in this rack? Envelopes and LFOs? If that's the case then there are other, less hp-consuming options.
Wow, that midi module seems cool and super usefull, tnks for the suggestion :)
If a price is wrong and added by a normal user of this site it can be changed, so that's a good thing. But what should be done when the makers are adding modules with incorrect quotes? Example: Erica Synths post all of their modules excluding "21% VAT".
Some melodic sequencing and thick powerful drones. Thoughts?
https://cdn.modulargrid.net/img/racks/modulargrid_598632.jpg?1519264068
My goal with this rack is to insert it into a Waldorf KB37. I plan on making drones, ambient soundscapes, and leads more than rhythmic sequences. I would appreciate any feedback.
Seems good Tototun. u should be able to do what you want. 4 voice poly + drums and fx.
couple of things u might want to know: you have an output module which makes me think you want that as a final output but you might want to add a mixer so you can have more sources going in there .
also as for midi be aware that this exists too: https://www.tindie.com/products/hotchk155/cvocd-a-super-flexible-midi-to-cv-box/
so you can have poly midi AND trigger a lot of extra stuff for less money than the yarns.
theres about a thousand ways to design a case that does what you want so i wont give you any advise there its much more fun choosing your own modules i think :D
cheers S
So I'm just getting into modular and I have a "finished" rack. Can someone give me some tips or maybe point me to some less expensive modules that might serve the same function? Thanks for your help in advance!
Not really sure how to put a picture of the rig so here's the link. :)
Positive trades with the following good people. thanks! @Ashram @rees @Kaneda87 @jeanclaudevanlee @szebenyi @jadore88
I have rechecked and asked Mr Schreiber:
Synthesis Technology does not manufacture the MU modules and for that reason prefers not to be listet as a MU Manufacturer.
Beep, Bopp, Bleep: info@modulargrid.net
