Oh wow! I see @mt3 updated the panel. I hope this means this module is closer to production. Anyone have any info on it?
Hello, this is my small(ish) 7u case comprised of many modules from Industrial Music Electronics and supported by a few others. While the configuration may change a bit over time, I will always try to keep it at 6/7u because I think of this as a stand alone instrument. This is currently what it looks like
And this is a bit of what it sounds like, though, in this track I only use the Hertz Donut MKIII as a sound source. The Piston Honda was not used.
I already DELETED 30+ tags of some notorious modules ;)
-- modulargrid
Holy crap! LOL.
BTW, I meant to say Atlantis showed up before Batumi, not first. The ordering is working fine for me per the spec you mentioned.
Ok, this is interesting. A few thoughts. I think the penalty could work, but it may take some time. For example, I sorted by LFO. Batumi, which is clearly an LFO has 4 tags and shows up way, way down on the page (Atlantis showed up first until I removed all tags but Synth Voice). This could prompt manufacturers to use less tags so that placement is higher on the page. The solution implemented sort of works, but not for items that are tagged heavily.
I know what I had suggested previously may have been too complex, but this is why I suggested it. If there are two lists from which to tag. Where the first list is PRIMARY FUNCTION and users are only allowed to select a single primary function but as many SECONDARY FUNCTIONS as they like, then you could easily sort by PRIMARY FUNCTION.
In the ADD/EDIT portion of the site you could have a dropdown for primary function, so you would not have to have duplicative checklists.
The PRIMARY FUNCTION could be the new database field. It would mean that many modules would not have that particular field filled out for a while, but eventually we'd get there.
Side note: I am not pushing this agenda, I am just having a conversation. I work in a filed where we bounce ideas off each other all day long, so I am not married to any of my ideas, just trying to spur creative thinking.
Absolutely. I do this all the time, but it's a lot of stuff and my time is limited. Also, manufacturer lock :)
True, but so is everybody else's, including the people who mod the site. This is a community effort, we all pitch in somewhat.
Sorry if that came off dismissive, didn't mean it that way. Just meant that even with all the people doing this right now, it is a difficult and time consuming process.
[...] I wonder if a broader category like "Modulation" with sub feature filters that one could select multiple feature from would work? For example the user could select the FUNCTION Modulation and then select 1 or more multiple FEATURES like Attenuator, Envelope Generator, Mixer.
I am not sure adding a multifuntional tag would solve the problem. Though the idea is right in that broader categories to encapsulate modules main function might be beneficial. This is provided more detailed sub-tagging could be applied and the method for searches allowed one to select multiple features. It could mimc ecommerce product listing page filters. For example, if one is looking at a product listing page for the t-shirts category then could then select the colors black, red and blue from a filter list and not have to see white, yellow and orange.
I think you're simplifying the problem to a degree which is not realistic. Color is an attribute and can easily be defines as a subgroup of a product category. It is a rather obvious one and makes for an easy UX choice, whereas functionality VS features are interchangeable attributes. To extend your example, where does Mixing fit in terms of Utility? Is it a subcategory of Utility or a different function entirely? This is all subjective as we try to define usage in an area which by definition tries to avoid it. Modulation, right, what about all the oscillators that can go to LFO speeds? It's a can of worms.
You are correct, I am over-simplifying the problem. Mostly so that I can wrap my head around it abstractly without actually doing any real work. To really dig in to it someone would have to look at all that data and begin t structure it. I do this all the time for work and it can be a nightmare. I am actually running into an issue with this right now where products are both categories and attributes. Though in my case, there is a hell of lot less that what exists on MG. And yeah, maybe modulation is not a good idea, but trying to start somewhere.
Again, in my most humble opinion, the problem we're facing is having too many disparate modules on the grid. If we get the option to merge, categorize as one-off creations or manufactured (because not all manufacturers are properly listed) and then allow for a maximum of 3 tags per module, that could make things far more easier to navigate. What if a module can do more than those three things? Well, you know what, that's what manuals and demo videos are for. We also have a huge database of info on MW FB and MW forum and that's what the internet is here for.
Yeah, I can see how having multiples is a problem. Not including the micro-Braids, there are 9 distinct Braids modules on the grid. Merging those into one using the multiple panel feature would be a huge start towards cleaning things up.
And I totally agree on the manual/video/forum point about getting more detailed descriptions. Maybe you are on to something with limiting the tags.
Damn, I had a detailed and great response queued and clicked submit to be presented with a login. Ugh. I'll try to respond again, but it's gonna be much simpler.
Why not edit the modules you deem as tagged inappropriately with what you think is the correct tag and serve the community while helping yourself?
Absolutely. I do this all the time, but it's a lot of stuff and my time is limited. Also, manufacturer lock :)
For instance, I find that Maths is primarily an Envelope Generator and not a Utility module, so you can clearly see that our points of view on what the main Function of a module is might differ.
True that, I wonder if a broader category like "Modulation" with sub feature filters that one could select multiple feature from would work? For example the user could select the FUNCTION Modulation and then select 1 or more multiple FEATURES like Attenuator, Envelope Generator, Mixer.
That being said, as I replied on your FB post, the question that tagging needs to answer to is whether a module can be used as X or not. If the answer is yes, then the tag should/could be applied.
I would definitely not want to limit the amount of information or anyones ability to cross-list items. I just think there may be abetter solution. Totally agree with you that if a module can be used as X it should state that.
Do not forget that some manufacturers tend to overstate what their modules contain and might also overtag just for marketing purposes; I have no concrete examples of their MO but I have seen some examples of overtagging when a module cannot actually offer such functionality. I simple edit on my part solved that but it's not always possible, especially if a Manufacturer decides to lock the module's description, as is their prerogative.
I think this could be solved with the suggestion I am proposing.
One easy and immediate solution to this problem would be to limit the tag option down to 2-3 tags at maximum. No exceptions. That would force uploaders/manufacturers to really have to decide what type of Function each module serves and by which tag it is best described. Does that mean that some modules would be underserved or underrepresented in particular categories? By all means, yes, that would be the case, especially for modules that have a million functions (I'm thinking Maths or Sports Modulator as good examples of that), but in my opinion that is a small price to pay to make MG cleaner.
It would certainly help get the ball rolling on cleaning up the data. Then maybe creating a FUNCTION drop down and a FEATURE attribute based filter might be easier.
We could add a multifuntional tag as a representative of that particular category. A "well, it does more than that" type of thing.
I am not sure adding a multifuntional tag would solve the problem. Though the idea is right in that broader categories to encapsulate modules main function might be beneficial. This is provided more detailed sub-tagging could be applied and the method for searches allowed one to select multiple features. It could mimc ecommerce product listing page filters. For example, if one is looking at a product listing page for the t-shirts category then could then select the colors black, red and blue from a filter list and not have to see white, yellow and orange.
But then again, I prefer clarity. Someone might disagree. r
To me, this is all about clarity.
Hi MG folks,
I posted a mini-rant about this (i'm in no way upset or angry, just a little frustrated) on the Facebook MW group about module function tagging . There was a time when one could select a module function, such as "VCA", and be presented with list of modules that served that function. Now when a user selects "VCA" they get result that include modules like "Percussa Super Signal Processor " which kind of defeats the purpose of categorization.
I understand that many modules have multiple functions and there is a benefit to cross-listing. I question the usefulness when that modules extra functions do not really meet the criteria of the function filter. The example above is extreme, because it illustrates how a user looking for a VCA will be presented with something utterly ridiculous for that function. Other cases like a drum module being cross listed as an Envelope Generator, because it has an EG, but that EG is not accessible for use with other modules, begs the question of it's intended function.
I do not have a solution, I wish I did. It was mentioned on Facebook that maybe there should be a logical separation of Function and Feature. For example, MATHS is many things and should by all means be cross-listed. However, it is at it's core a Utility module. If I could select the Function of Utility then further refine my filter by Feature tags, that would solve both the need for users and people listing modules with many uses. So basically, all modules could have a single main function and then have an unlimited number of features. The Function categories could be a little more broad to encapsulate the wide range of features many modules have.
I understand that, if implemented, it would require a large amount of data normalization and refinement. I am not totally sure how to handle something like that as I have not given it any thought beyond this sentence :)
I hope this all makes sense and it's not coming off sounding like nonsense or a complaint. I care about this site and use it daily.
This is a session I did after the most recent re-org
Made this chunky bit for Signal Expo Berlin
Recent live show done with this case
How is it working with only two filters? Seems dangerous.
-- mt3
Yeah, it can be, but the LxD can double as a dual filter if need be. Also, Three Sisters can handle more than one input, if I am willing to have the same modulation on those sounds sources. I have been considering replacing the Zorlon Cannon with a filter and something else, but with creative patching I've been ok so far.
I really appreciate the feedback, all suggestions are welcome.
Tesseract is undergoing a transformation. I am switching from a 126hp case to a 12u portable for live shows. tesseract will be integrated into a new system called Antiprism.
=dysonant/sets/modular-experiments-unfinished
FYI, there is a way to hide your personal module submissions from the community.
This is such a cool looking rack. Looks really fun too.
It was in their rack at Messe. I would assume maybe late summer. They said "not happening in a month or two" in this video at 1:51
So I've totally changed my strategy realizing I want to not only process audio, but work from the modular as well. This is my current rack after the change 
Hi solitud, thanks for the reply and advice. I'll watch my bank account shrink a little for sure, but I'll keep tabs I bought Pittsburgh System 90 about 2 months ago which has a couple of oscillators and a LPF/LPG. I plan to often patch it with this EFX rack I am trying to build. Both of those should really keep me occupied for quite some time, but I plan to have future additions of a sound generation rack and a modulation/sequeciung rack somewhere down the road. Probably a couple of years or if I move to a bigger apartment someday.
I'm really looking for some odd and off beat things for this rack and to maximize its sound processing capabilities. I feel like the mults and mixes will really help me create some weird chains. However, I truly won;t know until I start getting some of the gear. I'm going to start with the ins and outs, phase, delay, reverb maths and mults. The rest will come later.
Here is the System 90 
Hi everyone. I am both new to modulargrid and modulars in general. Wanting to increase my sound palette, a couple of months ago I bought a Pittsburgh System 90. I also have been wanting to do efx processing on outboard gear to hopefully get a warmer, sometimes nastier more organic feel than what I can get from working in the box. After investigating multiple rack and pedal units I've come to the conclusion I could get a lot more diversity of sound and modulation from a modular. So, in summary, I am looking to build a multipurpose modular effects processor. I plan to run all sort of audio through this thing, like audio from my DAW, guitars, synths vocals, pots, pans, dogs barking, etc.
Some of the basic things I know I want are
* Phase Shifter
* Delay
* Reverb (would like really long reverbs and possibly spring)
* Distortion
* Compressor
* Filter
* Envelope follower & generator
* Ins/Outs
* Mults/Mixers
Here is the link to my Effects Processor
I plan to send clock and audio out from my DAW through the ES-3 and then audio back in to the DAW mainly through and ES-6 but sometimes directly patched into my soundcard.
I've done research, I've listened to tons of modules but I would like your opinions. Are the modules I am selecting something you like/hate/stupid/redundant/pointless etc.? Am I missing something entirely?
