User Posts

Grrrrrrrr...had a much longer and more in-depth reply to this, but MG logged me out before I could hit 'Submit' and it got trashed.

Basically, tho...have a look at the following categories on here: "Clock Modulation", "CV Modulation", "Utilities", "Attenuators" and one I always go off on, "VCAs". None of these are particularly sexy areas, but it's through judicious inclusion and use of stuff in these categories of modules that a lot of subtilty and nuance in programming a modular comes to the fore. While exploring VCV Rack, also keep referring back to MG to see how the hardware implementations of the same concepts being modeled are done, especially when you run into an idea that you can't do in VCV. There's probably a hardware solution, and that'll help you sort out which of those you might need later on when tossing Big Money around.

Also, I'd again stress that getting and learning a patchable hardware synth is critical when moving from a software synth situation, because it's important to learn that hardware controls might not always react the same way in a given patch as software emulations would. Case in point: filter Q, especially setting it to just below resonant 'break-thru'. Fact is that even these days, analog devices may vary from one to another of the same device; back in the 1970s, it was a 'thing' to seek out certain Minimoogs that were perceived to be more 'musical' than other Minimoogs, because tiny variations in circuit components, calibration, control behavior, etc from unit to unit were rather unavoidable and it was felt that there was a certain 'sweet spot' where a Minimoog needed to be with respect to these tolerance variations to make it sound better. One hardware device I forgot to mention in the last reply, and which dovetails nicely into a future Eurorack setup, is the Soundmachines Modulor114, since its panel and power connection are compliant with the Eurorack standard and you can easily remove it from its own skiff and integrate it into a larger system in the future. More expensive than the MS-20 Mini...but it's a rather different creature, too and ultimately not as spendy as going full-in on a Eurorack system right off the bat.

EDITED Jan 28th 2018, 02:40

Well, yank the Clouds first, unless you've got a line on a used one, since Mutable discontinued it (grrrrr...) very recently. Thankfully, there's third-party builds of it turning up, and those are only 8 hp as a rule, so, more free space for the invariable M0AR!

Otherwise, mmmm...it's not too 'instrument-like'. A good rule of thumb is to group functions together, especially if you want to gig with the synth. Makes things a lot clearer, more intuitive and in the end, more playable. So I would do some shuffling if I were you, grouping all the controllers together, audio generators together, etc etc. It'll make for a panel that's a lot quicker to get around on, help disentangle patch cable snarls, and 'flow' better.

Not sure about having both a Ciao! and the 1U Output Mixer, unless you plan on having two different output sections. Also, while it's a DC device, I'd still find some way of getting that power input away from an audio output module just in case there's some unfiltered crud that comes in on your DC feed that might leak into the lower-level line output side of the Ciao! Might not be a problem, but at the same time keeping ANY power inputs or supplies away from devices that make use of lower voltage signals is a rule of thumb that's worth following, because even if induced hum, etc from AC line voltage isn't an issue, there can still be little bits of electrical 'uncleanliness' that can creep into your line-level outputs, inputs, and send/returns.

Good touch adding that Synthwerks USB supply, tho...self-contains things, no need to use (and eventually misplace at the most irritating time possible) an extra USB charger adapter for that BSP. It's also safe by audio signal stuff, since it's actually on the 'clean' side of your busboards (you ARE using filtered busboards, yes?).

Not too shabby! Now drop a 2 hp mult into that hole you've got left ('coz you need one!) and bust out the soldering iron!

Hmmm...well, from experience, this is sort of sparse for what you're intending. Yes, the Phonogene and Erbeverb fit well, the MATHS is pretty much a given, and the Morphing Terrarium is right. But in order to get into the "subtle, dark, and varied micro-movement" zone really well, plus have a lot of options for change-versus-time, you're going to need quite a bit more, especially in the way of control modifiers, to get that 'varied' thing and make it stick in listeners' heads.

I would suggest two ideas here before going too much further:

1) VCV Rack. Since you're apparently accustomed to software synths, but want to head into modular hardware, this is a good (and cheap, as it's free!) place to start, because it's actually BOTH. VCV Rack is a software version of Eurorack modular synth building, although unlike MG, it doesn't have the thousands on thousands of modules to screw around with. It does, however, have a huge base of built-in and third-party modules, some of which are models of some of the very same things you'll find here on MG. It works like you'd expect: you add virtual synth modules to a virtual cab, use virtual patchcabling to set up signal paths, and the whole thing behaves much as you'd expect a Eurorack system to work. I'm quite jazzed on this application and its community of module creators, because it gives you a very clear insight into how the MUCH more expensive hardware works before you drop buttloads of ca$h on it and then find out that, hey, this doesn't do what I need! It also allows you to learn the basics of all the different layers of programming, such as audio signals, CV signals, clock/gate/trig signals and the like, plus how to make a gain structure work in a modular, which is key to making sonically-effective patches.

2) A patchable synth. There's certainly reasons you see ARP 2600s and EML rigs in teaching labs, even to this day...and the biggest reason is that these synths, and others like them, let you get a feel for how signal flow works AND give you the option of working out your own patch architecture once you've figured out your way around and what (in general) sounds right to you. Now, those two synths there are spendy things; they're not made anymore, so examples are rather old AND very sought-after, so they command nosebleed-range prices. However, one synth from that early era still is around, is realtively cheap, and also makes for a good analog synthesis learning environment: the Korg MS-20, now in its 'mini' form. It, and its companion SQ-1 analog sequencer, can be had brand-new for cheap ($600-ish, max) and they offer an outstanding way to get used to synth hardware that both works in its factory configuration and which can be repatched to create different ones. The 'mini' also integrates really nicely into a computer-based environment since it offers both USB and MIDI interfacing.

Once you've dove headfirst into those, THEN start concocting modular ideas. And definitely keep looking at MG during all of this, studying other peoples' racks who're working in similar directions to glean some ideas about how you yourself can make use of the Eurorack environment when it's time to drop money.

Modular ain't cheap. And while these days its so much easier to get into (thanks, Dieter!!!), it's not necessarily a universal starting point, and can get you in way over your head at the start. But just as it was decades ago when I got sucked into this bizarre world of noisemaking, the best way to learn (with the excellent addition of VCV Rack) is the same ol' way I did. Get used to the world of patchcords and gearmadness the easier route FIRST...and then take that spendy flying leap! Good luck!

I swear, every few months it happens...I get this wild hair to cook up a 5U setup and rererereREconsider going with Eurorack yet again. This time, though, the results came out kinda interesting. Still fiddling with it a bit, but it's largely complete.

Kinda interesting how I managed to cram 18 VCOs in there. Normally, that gets prohibitively spendy, but these new, fairly cost-effective 1 and 2 unit VCOs from Grove actually sort of make this work. I started on this purely with Dotcom and then started in on trying to up either the module capability or function density and only kept a little bit of focus on the pricing, just to see where that strategy wound up. Interestingly, a lot of Dotcom remained in, especially Roger's newer modules like the EG++, LFO+, and so on. And as a new twist (since they seem to have some recent introductions), Grove Audio got a big foot in the door here as well. Prior attempts soared WAAAAAY out of a proper price range in the past, but this actually isn't that bad, considering.

Cabs are Dotcom: all portable series with single rows on top, duals for the next two below, and the bottom is a portable angle case with the panel at the flatter, shallow angle instead of the steeper one. PSU3s in the left and right, definitely making use of the multiple power taps on the backs of the angled cabs. For transport, the idea is to 'clamshell' the left and middle 2 row and top row cabs, lids for the other two.

As noted, this is usually something I wind up hemming and hawwing over until something else in the Euro realm gets me excited, but this time...I dunno. I kind of like this, plus with my near vision gradually going all to hell as aging does what it does, this might be a more sensible option...?

EDITED Jan 27th 2018, 05:01

Usually, large amusing does tend to increased knowledge. I'm also shocking, and of course, what would a guarantee be for if it wasn't to give in the first place? Time for try building some kit, I suppose.

Well, then if that's the actual concept, it succeeds up to a point. It does accomplish that hectic/monotony thing quite well, but at the same time, maybe...ah, too much so?

The problem is one I've dealt with at points over the past 40-ish years. It came up at the very beginning of my early 'garage-level' experiments in trying to concoct something that was both irritating AND listenable enough that the listener would experience the irritation...which is definitely a paradox! And it persists to this day; in fact, once I'm done here on MG this evening, I have to fire up Ableton and rework a track for my next album which doesn't quite walk that musical tightrope between polar reactions the way it ought to for the duration of the piece. Thought I had the project in the can, but noooooo...

Like I said, this is a whole weird area: trying to draw in the listener to fully experience and appreciate a 'negative aesthetic value'. These days, you don't find people trying to hit that rather tricky mark very much; you'd have to wind the clock waaaaay back, I think, to things such as the inceptive acts in industrial music to see some really good examples of this trick being pulled off with real mastery. Not a bad reference point to look at, either, given that the more electronic-based examples of that are definitely great-great-grandparents of the sort of direction here. While they might be a pain to find, I'd suggest a couple of Cabaret Voltaire's earlier albums: "Voice of America" and "Red Mecca" as useful points of reference. Also a few other tracks: Throbbing Gristle's "What a Day" and "AB7A", "Warm Leatherette" by Daniel Miller aka The Normal (in this case), and also maybe SPK's "Desire" from their "Leichenschrei" album...which is an amazing and very oppressive listen in of itself. And one piece that I think nails this paradox is actually out of the 1960s choral repertoire: Robert Ashley's "She was a Visitor", which is more in a creeped-out ambientish vein but pulls this off masterfully.

But yes, it would be different, and you have a good point there! Kudos to you for trying to hit a pretty difficult target!

Eurorack can be a daunting thing, true. If it weren't for MG, however, it would be a LOT worse. I can remember quite a few years back, working all of this crap out on quadrille paper, and even though at the time there were a lot less choices, it was brain-scrambling to sort out even a basic layout. MG's ability to sort by primary categories simplifies a lot; in fact, that one feature makes coming up with proper apportionments of necessary modules a snap! Plus, it keeps you thinking along the lines of 'ok, now I need x, y, & z devices' while you're working a few steps back from those stages where x, y, & z would come into play.

Looking at tried-and-true designs definitely helps prior to using MG, too. There are a lot of modular and patchable synths that have been made over the years, and while some designs don't work as well as they could, others are timeless and their design is part of the reason why they command the prices they do these days. Instruments like the ARP 2600, Moog IIIc, Korg MS-series, EML 101 and 200, Aries III, EMS VCS3 etc all possess qualities to their layout and signal flow that make them instruments, as opposed to designs that are more confusional and specialized. True, some of those command huge prices today too, but given the choice between a Steiner-Parker Synthacon and an ARP 2600, I'll take the latter...and DID, since that was a trade I made a couple of decades back. The Synthacon may be rarer, sure, but the ARP is just as sonically capable AND, as someone pointed out in Mark Vail's book, it's 'the only synth I can program while drunk'.

I tend to stick with a rule of thumb that goes: 'up-left; down-right'. Control signals go upward on the left side, through the section of modulation sources. They then get to the top rows where the audio generation happens, then flow back down through the right side through waveshaping, filtering, processors, and to the final mixer at the bottom right. This places the waveshaping and filtering contiguous to the modulation sources, processors are close at hand to the mixing, and to the left of this are the initial control signal manipulators for CVs, clocks, and so on. Stick a controller of your preferred flavor in front of the bottom row, and you're good to go! And this has the added plus of letting you see how each subsection is filling out and what preferable interactions you can have as each section fills up. About the only recent time I've violated this, in fact, is in the 'DAMN YOU, ARTURIA!' rack (see the forum under 'racks') where the primary 'heavy lifting' is done with a pair of Arturia Minibrute 2s and a pair of Moogs (Mother32 and DFAM) and this necessitated a strategy where the flow goes toward the center-bottom where the main mixer is located, allowing me to take advantage of the gaps between the Minibrute 2s and the Rackbrute cabs for cable routing. But even there, you still see a gathering of functions into 'blocks' so that there's a particular cohesiveness to the signal flow pattern.

So, really it only looks like rocket science. Kinda-sorta. Eventually, it gets pretty easy. Just takes practice and experience, and some judicious research and an eye for finding those atypical bits in modules that open possibilities up in interesting and unexpected directions. Take the Doepfer A-132-4. This is the most dishwater-dull-looking module, really. But when you look at the raw power hidden under that snoozefest of a panel, all sorts of ideas should be popping into your head. It's four exponential VCAs. Or it's a 4-1 audio mixer. Or you can screw around with the jumpers in the back and have a couple of free-floating VCAs and a 2-channel audio combiner. Use CV1 for level and CV2 for signal vibrato. And so on. Not bad for a boring-looking thing like that. Plus, it's pretty tiny (6 hp), so you get bang for your space-expenditure buck. These are the sort of things you should keep an eye out for. Even tiny little things can equal big crazy when paired with something else. Going back to the rack I mentioned above, you'll note a quad LFO next to a little Malekko DC-coupled mixer. The LFOs alone aren't quite so capable, since they have no CVs nor an onboard mix output. But by adding that little 3hp mixer, I can combine the outputs and then manually 'play' all sorts of variations in LFO curves which can then be fed...well, who knows where? At that point, the quad LFO and mixer stop being what they are alone and become something of a 'variable manual modulation controller' as a combination, hence why they're near the middle where the core of Moogs and the WMD Performance Mixer are. And while each on their own is sort of meh, combining them skyrockets their 'abuse potential'.

Again, it takes a while of exploring and practice to get to a point where ideas like this come naturally as you're doing a layout, but it's achievable with time and practice and, as noted, some research. You'll get there...

Timbrally, it kicks. However, it doesn't seem to 'breathe'; overall, it's kind of the same throughout and we don't get to hear anything like development and change in the texture created by the different elements. Maybe getting less happening at points, allowing certain parts to carry sections and doing some change-ups with those parts in their respective sections would work and then allow more overall length while providing internal variety that prevents the track from being so uniform.

Breakdown at the mixpoint is...eh. Could be longer, play with the listener's expectations more. Do unexpected things with it.

Careful with elements that 'jump out' and don't overuse them. Case in point: that speed-drop sound. It's all over the place and whenever it came up, it went right to the forefront and got distracting. I'm not sure if it was my imagination, also, but sometimes when that sound came up, there seemed to be a timing issue that lagged the overall pulse a tiny bit.

Last thing I would do would be to beef that bass up, but again, maybe just in certain sections. Doubling the line an octave down, either via a divider or running a parallel voice, would pump that up really nicely and make it pound harder. Going back to the 'contrast' idea, this might not be something to use everywhere, but I'd definitely put it thru the whole play-out after the break. Make 'em HURT!

Well, first up: if this is a rig that'll be spending a lot of its time processing external audio, I would reconsider that input stage in favor of getting something that has an envelope follower. That way, you can use dynamic levels from your incoming sounds as yet another modulation source, plus if the input also has a trigger/gate comparator with a settable threshold level on that incoming signal, that can have a number of uses for starting envelopes, sequencing, etc etc etc. While it's mono, still have a look at the venerable Doepfer A-119; Dieter got that thing right the first time, and that's why it's been around since around the beginnings of Eurorack.

Annoying that Mutable's chucking out some of their best and most prized module designs, yep...but like the Braids, look around for some of the open-source builds of the Clouds which have started popping up. What I've seen of these also give you some space-savings, so adding more functionality is possible if you go that route.

Also, this rack contains the typical 'if it's not sexy-looking, why do I need it?' issues...VCAs, mixers, panners, etc just aren't there. Again, if the task is processing, you definitely want things that can process dynamics in addition to timbre and so forth. Mults are missing, too; they're a must if you're going to branch process-control signals to several audio processing-type modules so that you can get some sort of parallel behavior going. Probably the best thing here is that, given this is MG, you don't have to drop the $$$ then have that 'oh, sh*t' moment when you realize you left things out that you needed. What I would suggest is that now that you have an initial idea of what might work for some of your tasks, toss this rack entirely while making note of these things (ie: print a spec sheet) then start over in a much bigger rack, perhaps twice this size or more. This tactic of 'build something bigger than _you think you need_' is important, because it lets you easily slip in all the 'unsexy' modules along with your previous specs...and then you start to realize that, hey presto, that _was_ what you needed!

Also, as processing goes, look for things that offer loads of modulation and strange routing possibilities. F'rinstance, have a look at the boring-appearing Doepfer A-106-1. Just looks like a filter, right? Ahhh...not so. There's a lot of weirdness there, such as an insert point into the resonance circuit, adjustments for tinkering with the paralleling of the two filters (yeaaaah!) there, a polarizing CV input. No, not a lot of flashy lights and zazzy graphics, but that module has lots of what I like to call 'abuse potential'. So it looks boring? That 'boredom' is only skin-deep. But this points out that stepping back and looking at other options, and by looking I mean not at what it looks like (the 'twistenknobs und blinkenlights' factor), but looking at the functionality indicated by the panel markings and control capabilities, is key to creating a system that clicks from the first power-up which'll avoid lots of module-swapping and the like. Might be a bit more tedious, but careful work where Eurorack's concerned yields definite results!

Lastly, module layout. Step back in time a bit, and look at some classic patchables that're still coveted to this day, and observe how their signal flows proceed across the patch panel. You tend to find designs which gather primary functions into specific areas...modulators in their area, oscillators all together, filters and then VCAs, etc. I still say the best example of how 'flow' works can be found on the ARP 2600; you always know where signals start and where they go to eventually, and when going outside the prepatched configuration and using the patchpoints, the resulting patches still tend to flow the way the prepatch does. Your above rack is going to be a pain in the ass to make decisions at a glance on, since patching is going to be all sorts of back-and-forth from and back to the audio interface, which will wind up with signals flowing both ways across the panel. Not fun!...and certainly not 'intuitive', which is what a good musical instrument should be.

So...step back, think bigger and more carefully. First attempts in an environment as possibility-rich as Eurorack NEVER come out right, but as I pointed out, careful work yields big gains and definite results. Good luck!

Yuppers...case in point: I've got my justified and ancient Korg X-911 sitting to my immediate right, and it uses circuitry from Korg's MS-03, designed to step up levels from varying sources. The input stage has three preset gain levels: -20 dB, -35 dB, and -50 dB. In each case, the gain levels are meant for different uses, and give a good rule-of-thumb for what's needed for many of the primary gain levels needed in a studio.

-20 dB is 'line' level, albeit what's used for unbalanced levels. Balanced line levels (also known as 'pro' level) are +4 dB and there's even a +8 dB found in broadcasting applications. If you're feeding a preamp with a synth, drum machine, effects processor, this is your baseline gain level.

-35 dB is instrument level. This is where the baseline gain level should be for guitars, many pickups, and the like. A lot of (but not all!) 'stompboxes' run in this range so that the levels across a guitar FX chain are what a guitar amp wants to see as if just a guitar was plugged into its input. Hotter-level microphones also wind up in this range, such as condensers.

-50 dB is what you would use for an average microphone or some sort of low-output pickup like a piezo. Passive, unamplified devices tend to run in this range, which is why if you plug a dynamic or ribbon microphone into a mic preamp set for a hotter, active device such as a condenser mic you wind up not hearing the same, hot levels without adjusting the preamp's gain trim.

Now, what all this numeric nonsense means is that if you plug a basic microphone like a Shure SM57 into an input that's expecting a line or instrument level signal, you'll get not a whole lot in the way of sound. Remember: decibel levels follow a law of logarithmic change, and increases of 10 dB aren't what you might figure they are if you just look at the numbers. So a 15 dB difference gets you bupkis if the preamp wants a hotter signal, but conversely that same difference will result in some hideous overloading (and potentially circuit damage) if the preamp wants the input at a 15 dB lower level.

So, the basic answer is: no. To use a microphone in a modular synth environment not only requires a boost to synth levels, it requires the correct boost, and that ADDAC module isn't going to do that. You would have to increase the gain, then feed it to the ADDAC 200PI, which is sort of redundant.

Go and have a look at the empty Moog 60 hp cabs and at stacking those in a triple configuration with the Mother32 at the bottom. This gives you 2 x 60 hp to play with for pretty cheap and by adding some small, interconnectible power modules (Koma's Strom series comes immediately to mind) you still wind up with 112 hp for synth modules. Ample power, more space, pretty cheap, and great ergonomics.

See my configuration in the DAMN YOU, ARTURIA! thread under Racks...this uses a triple-tier 60 hp Moog setup in the middle section in which I've specced a DFAM and a full-on performance mixer setup for the larger rig as a whole, which is actually based around major expansion of two of the new Arturia Minibrute 2 synths. You might get a few ideas out of that, especially given that sequencing (via a Minibrute 2S) is a major feature there. But thus far, you're on the right track in general (save that the Braids would have to be a third-party open-source build since Mutable discontinued their version some time back).

Hmmm...the ideas are there, things just need tuning-up. First of all, great sequencer...but where's the quantizing? Sure, the Chord has some quantizing capabilities, but after checking its docs, they relate to how it deals with harmonizing the incoming root values, not determining the actual incoming pitch CV for the root. So you'll still need something to quantize that root value in its own scalar context, THEN the Chord's quantizing-to-chords will have something to work with.

VCAs. Two really isn't enough. Yeah, I know they're not sexy and all, but several more are needed for both audio and CV processing. Maybe lose the Pico drum modules for those?

Can some of these modules be smaller? For example, the Modor Formant Filter and the Limaflo Motormouth are similar things (formant filters) but the Limaflo is 4 hp smaller and saves you about $150. Since you're doing a lot with Erica's Pico series, I don't think I need to go on much about jamming functionality into small spaces. There's not any way to sub out the biggest thing here (the Rainmaker) but I think a bit more digging around will turn up ways to regain some usable hp by switching in smaller variations on some of the chunkier devices in here. Also, I'm pretty sure that you can cram in a MIDI interface with more channels and/or functionality in the same 6 hp or less. So in all cases of everything, it might be an idea to go back and retune for space; even the Picos might be able to be supplanted in some way by larger modules that offer more of the same function in spaces not too larger than a few Picos take up.

This setup also brings up another point: if you're just starting out in modular configuration, always be prepared to make several initial sketches of the same basic idea, then distill those down into a case that's actually LARGER than what the configuration calls for. Blank panels are cheap, plus as you actually work with the physical device itself, you're going to be running into "I need it to do _______" situations, and at that point, you'll want empty space to jam more modules into. Even after some 40-ish years in electronic music, I'm always re-evaluating what happens in my layouts (which is what makes MG so useful!) and fine-tuning, especially because the Care and Feeding of a modular synth is spendy, and you need to make decisions you feel will work with the result feeling very 'instrumenty' from square one. It's definitely not a cheap commitment, so making mistakes and fine-tuning constantly (even down to trashing whole configurations in favor of something with better 'flow') is a MUST. Thankfully, we've got this resource!

Hey, no prob...building up modular systems these days offers so many possibilities that just simple tweaks can really open up some big doors. A panner and a mult are cheap...but look what they could do in this setup. And even with those, you'd still have space in that 104 hp setup. Given that we have I don't know how many thousands of possible additions, with a result of probably trillions of possible end-configurations...well, the best thing is just use your imagination to concoct a sound first, then figure out what you have to slap together to get at it. And, as that comes together, what does the in-progress configuration suggest? After a while, these things start to tell you how they want to be built...granted, in my case that 'a while' comes out to nearly 40 years of twiddling around with electronic and electroacoustic devices, which is a bit of a cheat, but anyone can get the hang of this and start whipping up some real wonders over time.

It all sort of reminds me of a sign you see in one scene in 'Mad Max': "SPEED is just a question of MONEY! How fast do you want to go?"

OK, enough of the Charlton Heston impersonation...

Still, this configuration IS their fault. For those not aware (and if not, why aren't you?), Arturia just kicked out three additions to the Brute line. They redid the Minibrute not just one way, but TWO...both sort of akin to a Minibrute take on the Moog Voyager XL, with loads of patchpoints to reconfigure and add in various functions. Version one is with the keyboard, sort of like the original...but the other? Ahhhh...lose the keyboard and drop in something rather BeatStep-ish, and that's the Minibrute 2S.

BUT WAIT! There's MORE...they also dropped two different Eurorack enclosures, 3U and 6U, both with 88 hp rows, and these things come with stand frames that mate with the new Microbrutes.

And apparently, Moog's opted to give us all beyond the scope of Moogfest the DFAM. So, all of this got me thinking (especially with Sweetwater bundling the DFAM, M32, and an extra 60 hp cab plus a 4ms RowPower 30 and the rack frame) as to, well, why not cobble up something that uses both Moogs and takes advantage of the new Minibrute versions and Arturia's pretty inexpensive powered cabs. So here's what I cooked up over the past 24 hours-ish. FYI, the Minibrutes fit into the blacked-out areas on the bottom row, keyboard on right, sequencer on left.

I LIKE this. The Arturia segments also can be ordered with a carry-bag that holds the Mini + the EuroBrute cab, and that triple-tier Moog rack is small enough to stick about anywhere for transport. And it's ultimately very cost-effective as a Eurorack solution, with the $699 Minis doing the basic scut-work while the Moogs allow for some sonic variation, then the module compliments go in all sorts of directions that neither things do. I also added a Ladik dual line-in by the mixer so that the Microbrute line-level outs can be brought back into the configuration so they can be screwed with in various ways up in the modules. I have to say: this configuration is a bigtime HELLZ YEAH in terms of cost, ergonomics, portability...all that! I think I've found my final configuration...at least, for the time being.

People in starting phases need to have a look at this new Arturia possibility. I don't know of any other way, at this price point, to get this level of configurability. As Eurorack goes, what they did is a major game-changer!

(One addendum: I think I'm going to put a two-in MIDI merger off behind this mess to merge the MIDI coming off of the Minibrutes to send that merged signal to the Mother32's MIDI in. That way, I can combine both the sequenced and keyboard parts for the Mother32 to do the conversion to CV/gate for the general modular rig in addition to the direct CV/gates coming out of the Minibrutes' patch panels. Cheap addition, easily changeable if/when needed.)

EDITED Jan 20th 2018, 00:21

Nice...I see an interesting and easily/cheaply done addition, tho...let's say you added a simple panner, drove it with the A-140's inverse-out, then fed the A-106-1 to that and used the outputs from the panner to feed the dual VCA, also adding a mult to feed the positive envelope to both VCAs. Now you'd have panning in the stereo field synced to the SQ-1's timing. Twisted, yes? The A-170 could also 'smear' the envelopes to the L and R VCAs which gives you some control over the 'hang time' of the audio signal in the center or edges while the inverted envelope tosses things back and forth.

Lots of possibilities...but then, that's why we also call it 'EuroCrack'.

The thing about Intellijel's 1U is that it's not exactly the same dimension as everyone else's. They determined their tile measurement purely in the Eurorack domain, but everyone else went with the rack definition of what 1U was and put the rail spacing as something that fits in that span. As a result, everything can theoretically fit in a 'normal' 1U tile spacing, but you'd have to possibly 'nibble' the Intellijel mounting holes, whereas if you use the Intellijel spacing (smaller) you simply can't mount the 'normal' tiles in that space. Ultimately, the best thing to do is to keep them separate as differing standards until/unless someone comes out with an Intellijel adapter for the 'normal' tile spacing, if that's even possible.

As far as pingable LFO/envelope type things in tile format, PulpLogic's Cyclic Skew sort of fits that bill. You can't determine envelope lengths by pings (like the 4ms PEG), but you can either set the Cyclic Skew to trigger as a one-shot function generator or you can flip a switch and the attack/release becomes your waveshaping and timing when using the tile as an LFO. Potentially, adding some of Synisi's CVable clock modulation tiles with a few of these would allow some pretty complex function generation if you tandemmed the whole mess with a DC-coupled mixer like the Mix-B. Brings up a point, too: don't just look at basic modules as a 'it does this and nothing else' proposition; quite often I look at basic modules such as tiles as also being able to configure a 'meta-module' in a given space to either do something that might take up more space (or $$$) or just simply doesn't exist in that form. Clocking modules are always this sort of proposition for me...they're usually fairly basic in what each one does, but if I treat several of them as a more complex subsystem in tandem with (in this case) something else like logic and/or comparators, then I know I can head for some very weird rhythmic possibilties by treating the entire grouping as a 'thing' and not separate modules.

Maybe...but let's say you used one of the VCAs to gate the VCO going into the Rings to...well, 'ring' it, then used another to control the amplitude envelope coming back out of the Rings and going on downstream. This still leaves one VCA free for CV modulation control or, alternately, to control amplitudes coming out of the ONE, and with what's there at present, that's just about right. A better idea would be something to 'stereoize' the signal, which is mono up to the Clouds...something that gives you a mono in, but stereo outs. Think about something like a chorus or stereo phaser that can either generate a stereo image in the time or timbral domain, or a reverb that can do a bit of both.

Now, if you could get the raccoon to chase the cat around... + =

Anyway, yeah...using an outboard mixer is an option IF said mixer can deal with the higher levels coming directly off the synth. I know my (1st version) Mackie 1202 can do that on channels 1-4 with the adjustable trims, but I'd be hesitant to use the two stereo strips at anything other than line-level because the gain structure might get sort of janky and hard to control. However, I've heard from many users that Allen & Heath's ZED series mixers are more than capable of handling synth-level signals...and then some. Their theoretical top-level very much exceeds what would come off of a 'raw' synth module, and then you also get EQ, FX sends and potentially channel inserts provided the levels get stepped down before the insert send. And yeah, using the ER-301 for just noise-type sounds is sort of like using a proverbial sledgehammer to swat a proverbial mosquito; you might be able to build up something space-saving with some 2hp modules + one or two dedicated drum modules like what's in place already.

In fact, check this nonsense out... Ignore the blanks on the left; had to put those in due to MG's bottom limit on hp per row. Should be 4U x 24hp.

That's looking way better...you might consider a little reshuffling to stick in something for weird processing, like a Mutable Warps. Useful, small, gives you lots of 'how the hell did you do that?' sonic possibilities.

As for how to get manual control signals into it, one cheap solution would be an Arturia Keystep (mine is hooked into my Digisound 80 as I type this)...$120 for mono CV/gate out and poly MIDI, plus an internal step sequencer. But another idea might start with this: http://syinsi.com/shop/tiles/1u-tile-skiff-case/ .

Lots of possibilities in tiles for controllers...Synthrotek and PulpLogic have ribbons, Synisi does a micro keyboard, and there'd still be room for CV offset sends, LFOs and other toys. Put together with a Keystep and some other outboard sequencer (or other mischief) as sort of an 'expression mega-controller', and that could get really interesting really quick!

EDITED Jan 17th 2018, 00:58

I'll give the plans to pare things down a double thumbs-up! I've been working on a...well, something secret...that involves putting all modules of a single maker in a rack, and I'm always running into situations where I see the same module posted with slight changes yet it's still the same thing. Sometimes there's a valid difference in appearance (different panel color...I know some builders get picky about their system's aesthetic, and I've no quarrel with that as looking snazzy is a thing, especially when performing), but there's also plenty of times where the same, exact module gets reposted, and that's definitely going to waste database space plus muddle up some of the stats on module usage, etc.

But as for wholesale purging...it strikes me as a little troublesome, as the potential for breaking racks would be significant. Merging of some sort would be better, but in the process would it be possible for the duplicates (which people may have used in builds) to be hidden and kept as 'placeholders' in the event they've been used, while still programming these database objects to point back at the actual, retained database entry? Yeah, that's a lot more programming and seems rather involved, but to my reckoning it could be done in such a way as to seem seamless for the vast majority of users. As far as simple appearance differences are concerned, though, I would very much advocate for some sort of statistical merge, since there shouldn't be any difference in the 'guts' behind a panel, ergo users with different color panels on the same module should have their use counted as being just that module for the purpose of usage stats. F'rinstance, there's several appearance-different versions of MakeNoise's MATHS, including one panel by Greyscale...I think that, irrespective of which panel is used by builders, it should all still count as usage of a single instance of MATHS for the purpose of the stats.

Again, more coding headaches, sure...but it's sorta what comes with having become 'authoritative', so it's definitely not a negative. Just what happens when you turn into the 'definitive reference'.

Actually, the results look more like you know what you're doing.

The Mother32 can do a lot of the basic nuts-n-bolts work, and all of the additions to it seem relatively well-chosen. For what you intend, I'm not seeing anything really problematic here. However, you might want to think twice about removing your 1U row. Tiles are a great, cost-effective and space-saving way to increase basic functionalities, and I'm pleased that some case builders are making room for them now; whenever I can put something of the sort into any of my build sketches, I definitely do when the case design allows for it. For example, one thing I note that's a bit absent here is some effect processing (assuming you don't use the Disting for it). With tiles, though, you can add a spring reverb easily enough via PulpLogic's tile for the interface + an internal tank. Extra LFOs, clock tinkering, basic logic, etc...all cheap and easy with tiles. Just keep in mind that Intellijel's tile format ISN'T the same as everyone else's and mixing theirs in with PulpLogic, Synisi, et al is something of a no-no.

Yeeeeeeeeah....gives me a headache in all the RIGHT ways!

Aber...Umschläge? Sie haben keine davon fuer Ihre LPG-Module. Sie können auch mit einem weniger komplexen MIDI-Interface arbeiten, da Sie nicht 4 Kanäle von CV / Gate benötigen, um nur ein DPO zu steuern. AD-Umschläge funktionieren am besten für die LPGs, und wenn Sie irgendeine Art von Funktionsgenerierung wünschen, können Sie sich Doepfers A-143-1 ansehen. Es würde einiges an Mischen erfordern, um es da rein zu bekommen, aber du hast immer noch Platz, denke ich.

(Entschuldigung für die ungeschickte deutsche Übersetzung ... es ist schon eine Weile her, seit ich da drüben war und ich habe einiges vergessen. Irgendwie gezwungen, Google zu benutzen, um die Dinge relativ richtig zu machen.)

Impressive...about the only thing I would want to substitute out would be to toss one of those triple VCA/mixers in favor of some sort of delay line in that 6hp space. Ambient really sort of needs some sort of sound-field depth manipulation in order to get that immersive quality, and delays seem to be better in restrictive spaces than the reverbs that one might fit in the same space. Plus, with the sequencer, you'd then have the ability to do very Berlin-school-ish 'delay canon' repetitions if the delay can sync to the sequencer clock. While it's spendy, still have a look at Audio Damage's ADM16 Dub Jr....does all of this, plus gives you the fun of an insert in its feedback path. But another way to do this and have even more flexibility would be to go with an effect send/return module such as Malekko's SND/RTN, which would allow you to insert a number of chained outboard devices AND give you another 2 hp to drop a VCF in from...who else?...2hp. You kinda might want a VCF in this, come to think of it.

Still working out ideas for the eventual system in here. This time, I tossed out the ADDAC cabs (transatlantic shipping - ugh) and went with a 2Egress/Eurorack Modular Cases 18U double 104hp setup. I feel better about designing the power distro setup myself, anyway; I like using HEAVY gauges on those lines, like 14ga stranded, which is heftier and less prone to 'surprises' over time.

Typical up-left/down-right design, like I prefer. Top two rows are voicing, modulation and VCAs on row three, then left side is modulation on 4 and filters on right. Left 5 is random/timing/CV manipulation and right is FX, then 6 left is sequential crap, 6 right is mixing with the Intellijels used for CVed channel submixers. Plan for controllers is the Keystep I've got now, plus a KOMA Komplex (which fits nicely with that new toy from Instruo at the bottom-center). Really, really open-ended usage architecture...this could wind up in most anything.

Of course, as noted before, I'm apt to come up with some other idea as new stuff appears, so mmmmmmaybe this one, or mmmmmmaybe not...?

Oh, hell yes! If this is going in that Dreadbox cab, really all that's left some way to get back down to line-level out of the Dreadbox's Mixer A, and there should be a 2hp solution for that. Or just use the System-1's outs. This is quite open-ended.

Normal synth, row 2, abnormal synth, row 1, and all the right bits. Nice...

EDITED Jan 15th 2018, 02:30

I kinda like this idea...keeps the A-106-1 and the MATHS, but tosses in four VCOs, a couple of VCSs, plenty utilities, three VCAs in the same form factor. If it's supposed to be a starter rig, having the ability to do modulation at both audio and low frequencies is pretty key to learning how to concoct a timbral palette. It also allows mixing for the VCO outs (left mixer, AC-coupled) and mixing/summing CVs (right mixer, DC-coupled). Disting for weird processing things, stereo mixer, stereo outs. In a way, it's got a good bit of what you'd find on a classic 'teaching synth' like an ARP 2600 but with some Euro twists and the ultra-power modulation voodoo of the MATHS to boot.

EDITED Jan 15th 2018, 02:12

Veils is more or less the same thing as the Intellijel minus the boost circuit and plus $10 more. Either would work for the same functions, though.

Hmmm...MakeNoise's Contour only really appears to give you CV over the attack and decay and not the sustain and release. Instead, I'd prefer having full CV control. Look at Tiptop's offering, though...all parameters under CV, plus onboard attenuverter and CV offset, only $25 more, same space.

Always get as much as possible under CV control when you can; even if it seems like you'd think 'when would I use that?'...sure enough, you'll find yourself in a situation where you'd like to have that functionality.

Power...see what you can make do with at present. But at the same time, if your total current load approaches 3/4ths of your power supply's presumed capacity, then take steps to increase your power capabilities. I don't advocate pushing a power supply right up to its limit as I've seen amateur radio switching supplies get flaky as the current draw would approach maximum, and those tend to be lots higher amperage on both capacity and draw (plus lots more variable in current fluctuation). It's best to assume that when your synth is up and running that the draw isn't going to be 100% level all the time, just like modulation peaks on some transmitters for ham radio can alter the draw of those components. Always overspec on power...always; there's nothing wrong with having too much amperage capability, but there sure as hell IS when you're suddenly discovering there's not enough! Not fun!

OK...let's beat on the other cab set now...

First up, more VCAs. Waaaaay more, especially linear since you've got some good modulation sources in there and it's nice to use those on VCAs to change not only audio level but to modulate CVs as well. The linears will mainly deal with the latter; as for the former, my take there would be to put something that both offers exponential VCAs and mixing near or at the output. Have a look at Qu-bit's Mixology. In the case of that module, you get a four-in, stereo-out performance mixer with CV control per strip on level, panning, and AUX send. That last bit would allow you to use the Erbeverb or Echophon in an effects loop on your stereo output and not just inline in a single signal path. Plus, adding something that can do stereo-in and out would let you put that (or the Clouds, which would let you manipulate the entire system's output at once) across your output, provided you had an output module to deal with your level/impedance changes for line-level to your mixer/line-in/whatever. And if you need more mixing, something to submix sources down per strip could be done, either a manual mixer or one with VCAs per input so that you can do some elaborate level controls but summing those to a single output level/pan position.

I can't be happier to see the new performance mixers that have come along over the past couple of years, also. They really are something I would've killed for way back when, instead of having to split signals off through some sort of kludge into separate mixing desk channels.

Next, lose the Vermona stuff. I think that what they're doing with those modules is better accomplished by other makers. The MIDI interface would better be done by Mutable's Yarns, which also gives you four CV and trig/gate outs, but also includes a 64-step sequencer in of itself plus a bunch more tricks. Only a bit more expensive, but it's smaller, more capable, and since you've already specced out a bunch of Mutable stuff, not a bad fit. As for the LFO, I think you could do a lot better with Doepfer's A-143-4...also quad, has much the same functionality as the Vermona, but it's smaller, cheaper, and it has a jumper setting on it that can change it from an LFO/VCO to an LFO/really slow LFO. That's quite fun stuff when paired with the MATHS and the PEG, gets you into some complex stuff especially if you add those linear VCAs I mentioned. Lots of very gradual changes + your sequencing setup means you can create longer, more nuanced work that heads more in a generative direction, or at the very least adds plenty of interesting shifting potentials over something more determinate.

Add a Brains along with the Pressure Points. Even if a Squarp, etc is doing the 'heavy lifting' on sequencing, having little subsequenced patterns within those primary sequence patterns get quite interesting. Have a look at 'I Dream of Wires' where Morton Subotnick's talking about how he dealt with the sequencer patterns on the second part of "Silver Apples of the Moon" by setting inequal lengths against each other (might just be in the Hardcore Edition). That piece kills; it's not simply avant-garde electronics, either, as I've heard a couple of DJs back in the day spinning it against some minimal stuff (think Maurizio, etc) and it made people CRAZY with all of the cross-rhythms and shifting pattern stuff on top of a hard beat! And while on this point, look into more clock modulation possibilities, like I mentioned with the percussion cab. The ability to constantly tinker with temporal values is great here, too, even if the Squarp is set to maintain a set tempo; this would open up even more polyrhythmic potential.

Last, the Braids problem. Unless you can find a used one, you'll either have to source an open-source build, or consider something else. If the latter, go with some sort of source that also is multi-mode capable, like MakeNoise's Telharmonium or some such so that you still get the variation of sound potential plus some very crazed sounds as a certainty.

Again, not a bad start...there's a lot of potential there already, it just needs the right 'helpers' to get it to really kick ass.

If you're just talking linear VCAs, it's one of the better space-saving choices. However, I would be more inclined to look at something which offers more flexibility even if this means taking up more space. Take the Intellijel Quad VCA, for example...in that case, you get four VCAs which can also sum down to allow the module to function as a mixer, adjustable behavior between linear and exponential (which tends to be better for audio signals, because of how we perceive loudness), a signal boost per VCA, and so on. Granted, the Intellijel is 8 hp instead of two and costs $100 more, but I feel that you get more functionalty that justifies the price difference and extra width use. Since your current layout is lacking in a multisource mixer and VCAs, better to kill two birds with one stone here...and then some, really.

Hmm...good thing I'm kinda bored on my day off...

VCAs, VCAs, VCAs. More of 'em. Remember, they're not just for audio; using DC-coupled linear VCAs gives you the ability to control/modulate CVs as well, and with the MATHS and Wogglebug, you've got some great control/modulation potentials. Plus, if you're going to establish two signal paths (which the Rosie implies) you need more AC-coupled exponentials to deal with the audio signals in those paths.

More straight-up envelopes to go with the more VCAs, too...ADSRs or ASRs for those audio path VCAs are a must.

Not sure about the Rosie, also...with the Clouds and RT60 being stereo units, I would tend to go with a stereo output and stereo mixer. Plus, you can then patch these between the mixer outs and the output module and use them more as global effects (or in the Clouds' case, global sound tinkerage).

Remember: Braids isn't being produced anymore by Mutable, so the options there are either a used one or one of the open-source builds. Also, maybe consider something with some twisty modulation possibilities, like an Intellijel Rubicon.

I'd lose the A-145 altogether. The A-143-3 gives you three more of more or less the same thing for less than $50 more in only 6 more hp and all you'd lose is the sync input and your reverse saw waveform. Not a bad tradeoff unless the sync is essential, then the A-147-2 would be better as you not only get that back, but CV capability, a gate delay, and an onboard VCA for CV manipulation for about the same cost as the 143-3. Only one LFO, sure, but it's got way more potential.

Otherwise, not a bad start...plenty more space to work with, too.

I'll second the call for the mult. Also, if you have the O-Coast, you might consider pulling the MIDI interface and substituting something that can get audio into the skiff so the Clouds can chew on it alongside the other sound generation path. The O-Coast can handle the skiff's MIDI just fine via its MIDI 2 outputs since you only have a single VCO, etc signal path in there. Also, don't forget you can crosspatch this with the O-Coast for other functions, such as clocking, etc and then you'd just treat it plus this as a single device...which, actually, would be a pretty beefy device.

One of Ladik's mixers that has panning and line-level stereo outs might be a better fit in that same space where the current Ladik sits now, too...could be useful to sum the O-Coast and skiff's signals together as a single stereo pair, plus you can also use the O-Coast's output for something else entirely.

One thing I was always taught early on was that if you can tandem two full systems together...as in this case...you're really not getting the result of one device plus one device. The possibilities are a bit more exponential, more like two squared. The more you can crosspatch, the more complex and outright interesting the situation gets!

EDITED Jan 14th 2018, 02:59

Grr...had a rather extensive reply on this, but MG logged me out while I was writing it and I lost the whole damned thing. Let's see if I can get the basics down from that again before it bongs me once more.

Drum rack: add some metallic/noise-based sources. The Mutant Machine and Plonk can do these basic functions, sure, but you want to use these for more complicated sound design, otherwise they're a bit of a waste. Look at some little Tiptop stuff for snares, cymbals, hats...the basics...then the other two beefier modules can do some weird variations on those.

The combo of the Field Kit FX and ER-301 is excellent...gets you way off into King Tubby-land or weirder. In fact, probably weirder...which is better!

Consider a dedicated trigger sequencer here to supplement the Squarp outboard one. Plus by using a more 'fixed' pattern sequencer against something more fluid like your outboards, you get lots of potential cross-rhythmic possibilities. I see there's a Grids, but those always stuck me more as a 'sequence manipulator' than just a sequencer, so it would also be a variation device.

Put in some things for making more old-school electronic percussion sounds...a few very basic AD generators + some resonant filters gives you loads of possibilities for sounds such as filter snaps, 'rung' filter sounds like in old beatboxes. Nothing too fancy; you would be just fine with a handful of 2hp stuff here for a space-saving solution.

Add the ability to modulate clocks and triggers...you want something for swing to get things a little more humanized, plus you can shuffle one sequence and not another, then use a trigger combiner (like Xaoc's Bytom) to get flams. Skippers can add a probabilistic dropped hit here and there, making more humanized variation. And then a few clock manipulators plus some logic that you can apply to rhythmic gates can create a lot of cross-rhythmic craziness. Both EMW and Ladik make plenty of space-conscious options that come in pretty cheaply.

Last, look at a mixer that's suitable for percussives, like Hex's Mutant Hot Glue. This thing also has some methods onboard for adding some 'grit' plus compression, and that last bit is important. I don't know how many times over the years I've found myself putting a bus compressor across my drum busses to 'punch' things, make them hit harder and get more in the listeners' faces. Percussion needs to HIT...and compression gets things 'hitty'.

Otherwise, not too shabby...I like the presence of the Elements and Rings for adding plenty odd sounds; it strikes me that the Plonk thru the Rings would have lots of 'abuse potential'.

Will get to the other rack later; don't want to have MG drop me and lose all of this typing a second time...

But conversely, if a used Akai S3000xl can be had for 120 UKP on eBay UK and a Doepfer A-100 LC1 48 hp cab alone costs 119 EUR, I'm not sure of why you'd go through with having just the ONE in a rack, even as a starter module. The Akai already has the signal level situation sorted, no issues with powering, deals with MIDI just fine, and does what the ONE does as well as quite a bit more. It sounds more to me like you'd be better off waiting until you can build up a system that's a lot more sonically open-ended in Eurorack, rather than just going with this single function which can be accomplished better and more self-contained in an easily-obtainable and inexpensive used rackmount sampler unit. Not saying 'don't' here, but just pointing out that there's other solutions outside of the modular synth box that you might find quite suitable.

Not bad! Yeah, there's a few things I'd do a little differently, but otherwise I can see what you seem to be aiming for here, and it looks good. The use of the 1U rows does a nice job of splitting up the cabs, but you could also side-by-side the first and second towers and fill with blanks where there's not anything. I'd go more into the architecture of the modules themselves, but that would be sort of OT for this topic.

Although...the Metropolis does have that easy to work ratcheting capability. It's not your average step sequencer...maybe work it and the BSP together...?

Love the Hexinverter drum modules...they're versatile, they can either behave themselves or not (and when 'not', they get fun). As for the sequencer, can't really say. That's a piece of gear that really has to be 'to taste', and not something that I think anyone can be 100% objective about recommending. You'll need to sort that one out on your own, depending on your final desired result, how comfortable you are with different sequencing environments, etc etc, and there's a LOT of excellent pattern sequencers out there. Also, with Hex's drums, you might also consider a sequencer that not only does gate/trig patterns, but CV as well so you can make use of the CV ins for pitching the drum sounds. Nice how his stuff gives you that option. Come to think of it...why just one sequencer? Consider: if you use something that's purely a trigger sequencer for your pattern (Acidlab's Robokop comes to mind; it programs pretty much like an old-skool TR-606) and then ALSO a couple of separate CV sequencers (EMW's comes to mind here; 8 steps of CV out, skip switching, and cheap) then you could mult the trigger to both fire the drum module AND step the sequencer, so that next 'hit' actually gets pitched differently. And when you get into that sort of complexity, you're starting to talk about an actual instrument to be played, rather than just a modular beatbox!

BTW, have you considered a suitable mixer for these, or some processing? Hex has a great drum sound-specific mixer (Mutant Hot Glue) with some nice dirt capabiities to beef the sound up. You might also consider a stereo compressor module after that and before your stereo outs to punch up the dynamics and get more presence.

Sounds like it's coming right along!

EDITED Jan 11th 2018, 03:10

Since you've got the Unicorn account, you could always set up all of the cases as a single 'mock-up' in a single case layout, and use the various blind panel 'dividers' in a proper case style to give you the right appearance. Of course, this gets limited if the cases, side by side, exceed the maximum row length, but you could still do this as two-over-two or something similar. Just make sure to do the math to allow for the extra 4hp or whatever to put in the dividers for the whole system mock-up. Done this a number of times, and it's worked well for me.

Right...the VCA has to be something which doesn't switch off when you get the negative-voltage parts of the AM cycle. Have a look at: http://electronicmusic.wikia.com/wiki/Four_quadrant where the VCA-as-ringmod thing is explained. My bet is that Nyle's output VCA on the Synthacon I had was capable of working in this four-quadrant mode with VCO3's output, allowing for the ring-like results. Anyway, even in two-quadrant modality, you're going to get this half-waved dirty sound, which in of itself could be useful.

AF = yes, audio frequency. Old habit from way too much radio experience.

You can get the same sort of result by feeding two AF signals into a VCA via AM. Route 'signal' to the input and 'carrier' to the CV. Works best if you have a couple of attenuators before this, though. Had a Steiner-Parker Synthacon many years ago, and the final VCA was set up with a switch to use VCO3 for eaxctly this purpose.

Another bit: you aren't necessarily stuck with the setting behind the patch panel when you opt to change a jumper. Have a look at the 'Switch' or 'Expander' modules @ 4hp and down, and you'll see that a number of modules exist as 'assignable' switches, meaning that they can be connected to the jumper point and then you actually have options as to whether you want the 'jumper on' or 'jumper off' (or 'jumper in X position' or 'Y position') and have this option switchable from one of these little auxiliary modules. It's a cheap and space-thrifty way to up the game on some modules where jumper setting changes are possible.

EDITED Jan 8th 2018, 00:54

Also, in some cases you can do the conversion/editing of the sample on a computer, then transfer this via means other than audio to something that can work with them. Several sample playback devices make use of SD (or micro) cards to store and transport samples, such as Tiptop's ONE, or you can move the sample via USB to some of these; Waldorf's NW1 is capable of this, as well as interconnection to edit/manipulate sampled wavetable data. It sort of bridges the divide between 'sampler' and 'oscillator', actually, being an outgrowth of the PPG wavetable engine.

Clearly, I've lost my frickin' mind...

No, actually, it does make sense. This is based on the 21U ADDAC System Monster cab with the addition of the 2U rack-top. The top row of 1U tiles mounts into the bottom of the two RU there, and up top are a pair of these: http://www.fullcompass.com/prod/101939-Middle-Atlantic-Products-LT-1R . Power link to the top is via the DIN jacks, of which the ES one is just a placeholder; the actual article will be a single 5-pin DIN on a 4hp panel, which will connect from the +/-12v/gnd rails in the main cab w/ some 18ga, pass that over an 18ga x 3 cable to the upper DIN, and from there it flows back to a smallish busboard in the top section. I explored using just a tile-tail to pass that to a Pulplogic interconnect, but got hinky about running the total load thru the 26ga conductors on those. The whole back section is easy to close off on that rack addition, too, and since the rack lighting bars are also DC...mmmmmmaybe those can be tapped off of the DC bus, since total load at this point is nowhere near the rating of the ADDAC supplies (10A per 12v rail).

Also, down at the bottom, yes, that looks odd. Don't count those as part of the ADDAC; they're really to show the placement of three of Synisi's 3U x 24hp tile-row cabs. Left is 'timing', middle is 'control' and the right is 'effects', all of which are really sort of auxiliaries to the in-cab functionality and/or my typical controller of choice (Arturia Keystep). Having three I/O tiles on the right side allows a lot of things to be easily inserted from outside the rack's architecture besides effects; these could also be used for channeling signals out to external filters (yep, got some of those), could be an I/O loop for another to utilize the onboard s, or whatever. Flexible.

Uhhhh...why? Makes it more versatile. I like to do music that has a lot of internal complexity which changes slowly, process-wise, over the duration of a work. By having a monstrosity like this, I can set up quite a few different processes in the same , and using the various VCAs in the mix section at the bottom-right, achieve that gradual shift across time behavior I dig. Note that there's four Intellijel quad VCAs next to the Qu-bit Mixology; the idea is that each Quad VCA feeds a channel on the Qu-bit, with that handling final dynamics, main effect bussing, and panning...but that doesn't mean four processes. Rather, I can run, technically, 16 (4 x 4) and the various mixed permutations of those (16!...do the math to get that hideous number). And this all fits into a space (not counting the Synisi minicabs) roughly 41" square and a hair over 18" deep. And ADDAC even thoughfully provided some cut-in handles on this sucker, so...portable-ish. Kinda. Sorta. Wellll...OK, only maybe a little. EVEN SO...!

Freakin' expensive thing, tho...however, might be doable at some point in the coming year. Maybe.

One change since original post: I swapped out one of the Sputnik quad LPGs for two Metasonix modules that have two channels of LPG themselves, plus a 2hp 4->1 mixer to handle the mixing capacity that the Metasonixes lack. Better...two flavors of LPG now, with one being more orthodox and the other being...well, the product of Eric's fevered brain. Seriously, tho...since I have a lot of tube devices here already in the studio, and since the ADDAC p/s can easily handle the upping of the current draw, why the hell not? That point in the signal chain, also, is the exact place I'd want such a device, with all of the characteristic nonlinearities, hysteresis effects, and other mojo coloring the sound.

EDITED Jan 8th 2018, 00:42

Not a bad idea, that...and it opens up another 6hp. For that hole, I'd be inclined to go for something the M32 doesn't exactly have. and if it were my money, and given the music choice here, I think you might find Intellijel's muMod an interesting candidate. Not yr avg ringmod, this thing (it's actually a quadrant multiplier)...capable of a few extra tricks, plus it gives you separate outputs for 'sum' and 'difference', normally used as logical functions but definitely has 'abuse potential' for frequency-shift-type behavior, weird VCA-ish activity, amplitude-modulation strangeness, and so on.

No prob...a couple of notes there, tho...

The key piece isn't going to be the sound-producing parts. Actually, the real key here is the sequencer. Make sure that, since you're going to vary the groove you want, that this module has an easy to work 'on the fly' interface, and that whatever you wind up with has settings (or some additional modules) that can suitably 'humanize' the results. I know that quite a few producers who made use of the Roland TR-909 really relied on its 'swing' settings to add some 'slippage' to an otherwise-metronomic pattern. Plus, when you locked it to something that didn't have that feature, you'd get some really excellent flam behavior as the two machines would be a tad out of sync on that particular beat. Adding something that can also add a random change-up to one or two channels of triggers (Ladik has an inexpensive 2-channel probabilistic skipper) will do a lot to add some humanization when you keep the probability settings kind of low so that the skips sound a bit like on the fly change-ups.

Sound-wise, while you'll definitely want some of the 'standards' (808 or 909 kicks, 909 or 606 hats, etc etc), keep in mind that a lot (like...all?) of the classic beatbox sounds and such are done with 'ringing filters' to a great extent. Basically, the sounds are produced with fixed-frequency filters that are set to just a touch under resonance, and then triggered with either an envelope that determines the overall duration of the sound (like a triggered decay or an AD envelope with a sharp attack) or a quick pulse of sound that pops the filter into resonance for an instant.

Since in a modular, though, you don't have to deal with fixed-frequency filters, it's possible to not only trigger the filter however you like, you can also send the same triggers to a CV sequencer, then get a 'melody' of sorts as the sequencer changes the cutoff of the filter. Very 'rototom-ish' sort of behavior (think: opening of Pink Floyd's "Time"). Also, mixing on this sort of a device should be pretty simple; look at MFB's Drum-99 mixer, which is a basic stereo mixer which you can chain to another one, etc, and build up a drum bus where you have relatively fixed levels and pans.

Another great, gnarlier (is that even a word?) sound can be done by sending various colored noise bands thru exponential VCAs and controlling their levels with, again, fast, snappy AD or decay envelopes. This is good for cymbals, snares, and the like. Plus, with noise-based sounds you then have this great ability to sum those and then do a little more filter-sweepy stuff, make 'em sound sort of dubby-trippy.

Loads of possibilities...that's just a few.

Ah, excellent...yeah, I'm a dinosaur, I admit it. I actually DO print hardcopy of various things from time to time, and when doing so I'd noticed that while the spec list prints horizontally (unless you like reading 7pt type) the shopping list is more compact, so docs printed as that format wind up being several pages shorter and easier to manage. The spec sheet always seemed to me to be more like a 'final build spec' instead of something to scribble up while making decisions when not online.

Also, the pricing info isn't that off. For a lot of the 'majors', it seems pretty reliable and for much of the rest, it does a credible job at 'ballpark' figures so that you can work on something of a close approximation of costs from it. Just need to keep poking at reminding users to keep module info updated when they've found new relevant data. That open-sourcing is, after all, what makes MG such an amazing, authoritative asset (and it IS!).

Hmmm...meh, I'd rather let this do the explaining: https://daccrowell.bandcamp.com/releases

Only part of the explanation, tho...there's a lot more going on, plus more stuff where that came from on the horizon. I just finished (as of 26 Jan 18) slapping together a new one for Magnatune (http://magnatune.com) entitled "West: Nocturnal Music in Five Movements" that oughta be out sometime (I presume) in the next month or so. No driving or operating heavy machinery while listening, I should note...

EDITED Jan 27th 2018, 04:59

Hmmm...where'd this go? Doesn't seem to be there in recent times, and I certainly found it useful as a checklist as well as a way to 'ponder offline' when Internet access wasn't necessarily workable. The spec sheet rundown is still there, but not this other list.