Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Moderator: Moderators
Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
I’m continually surprised, at how many modules are produced, but few actually really fullfill my needs, it’s almost as if they always give with one hand, and take with the other.
Sometimes they get it right, but the market is still wide open for someone to come along with a few no compromise designs.
An LFO for instance, OK, it has to be voltage controlled, so many aren’t, it has to have a wide range, from minutes, to audio rate, it has to have a minimum of four "independent" outputs, and a wide range of waveforms, from sine to random, and it has to be reasonably priced, Batumi is a contender, but it’s still expensive.
Random modules? prime requirements, lots of VC inputs, of all parameters, cycle lengths from minutes to audio, multiple independent outputs.
Attenuators? should be automatically included on most modules,
I seem to have a lot of modules that aren’t voltage controllable, it’s frustrating, why would you "not want" an LFO to be VC? Oscillators with no modulation inputs? random sources with no VC
Behringer are in the position of being able to produce things really cheaply, if they focused on making new, innovative, feature packed modules of their own that addressed some of the things I mentioned instead of concentrating on reissues and copies, it would really be a breakthrough, and open up modular to those that regard it as too expensive.
Don’t copy limitations that have already been made, how about making new original modules that actually do more, and are more reasonably priced.
Sometimes they get it right, but the market is still wide open for someone to come along with a few no compromise designs.
An LFO for instance, OK, it has to be voltage controlled, so many aren’t, it has to have a wide range, from minutes, to audio rate, it has to have a minimum of four "independent" outputs, and a wide range of waveforms, from sine to random, and it has to be reasonably priced, Batumi is a contender, but it’s still expensive.
Random modules? prime requirements, lots of VC inputs, of all parameters, cycle lengths from minutes to audio, multiple independent outputs.
Attenuators? should be automatically included on most modules,
I seem to have a lot of modules that aren’t voltage controllable, it’s frustrating, why would you "not want" an LFO to be VC? Oscillators with no modulation inputs? random sources with no VC
Behringer are in the position of being able to produce things really cheaply, if they focused on making new, innovative, feature packed modules of their own that addressed some of the things I mentioned instead of concentrating on reissues and copies, it would really be a breakthrough, and open up modular to those that regard it as too expensive.
Don’t copy limitations that have already been made, how about making new original modules that actually do more, and are more reasonably priced.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
If you're talking about voltage control of LFO frequency that's going to be a tough one for stability - unless you have a number of steps to break up the range. Even the slightest drift would be instantly noticeable, far more than (say) a filter - unless the filter was resonant.
- Folderol
Jedi Poster -
Posts: 18184 Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 12:00 am
Location: The Mudway Towns, UK
Contact:
Yes. I am that Linux nut {apparently now an 'elderly'}
Onwards and... err... sideways!
Onwards and... err... sideways!
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
I think that's because your needs are extraordinarily comprehensive while your budget is minimal.
All the things you require are do-able, but it inherently costs a lot to include them all, and it's likely that the market demand for such a comprehensive device isn't large enough to justify its production.
The wider the oscillator's frequency range, the more complex the circuitry, the more expensive it will be. The more waveforms you want, the more expensive it will be to provide them. More outputs needed, the larger the panel needs to be and the more expensive it becomes.
The kind of flexibility you seek is just not basement budget territory, and it hardly seems fair to berate low-cost modules for not having all the bells and whistles.
And if voltage control is so important to you, it also doesn't seem justifiable to buy modules that aren't voltage controlled and then complain that they lack that feature!
- Hugh Robjohns
Moderator -
Posts: 38985 Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Contact:
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Hugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 3:44 pm
And if voltage control is so important to you, it also doesn't seem justifiable to buy modules that aren't voltage controlled and then complain that they lack that feature!
I’m a big Doepfer fan, their modules are easy to understand, clearly laid out, they’ve stopped adding VC to some of their modules, the basic ones, the LFO used to have a VC version, the lack of VC on the Noise Random was always an issue, but it was cheap, easy to understand, but now, they’ve added VC, thumbs up for that.
There are a lot of good cheap modules coming out, by Dreadbox, Behringer, the Berry System 100 is their best so far IMO, sounds very good, lots of features, VC, but it was a good design in the first place.
The ARP stuff is a big disappointment, if I’d have known I wouldn’t have bought into it so much as I did.
The System 100 I was expecting to be my least favourite, has turned out to be the most useful.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
To be fair, I can see the practical usefulness of being able to vary the speed of vibrato, for example, using a CV generated by say, aftertouch. Or to control a pseudo rotary speaker effect's tremolo speed via an external CV.
- Hugh Robjohns
Moderator -
Posts: 38985 Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Contact:
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
(But generally posting my own personal views and not necessarily those of SOS, the company or the magazine!)
In my world, things get less strange when I read the manual...
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Hugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:19 pm To be fair, I can see the practical usefulness of being able to vary the speed of vibrato, for example, using a CV generated by say, aftertouch. Or to control a pseudo rotary speaker effect's tremolo speed via an external CV.
You can easily do with with an attenuator, though. And those can be voltage controlled.
Edit: In fact, I think Arp has Maths, no? You should be able to do virtually anything in that case!
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Ben Asaro wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:22 pmHugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:19 pm To be fair, I can see the practical usefulness of being able to vary the speed of vibrato, for example, using a CV generated by say, aftertouch. Or to control a pseudo rotary speaker effect's tremolo speed via an external CV.
You can easily do with with an attenuator, though. And those can be voltage controlled.
Edit: In fact, I think Arp has Maths, no? You should be able to do virtually anything in that case!
In my music I can think of a ton of reasons why VC of an LFO is essential, when creating feedback patches, feeding an LFO's speed input with a random wave, modulating itself, changing waveforms via CV, endless variations, and uses.
I patch an LFO into an oscillator to modulate pitch, I want to randomise the LFO, no VC?
Random modules in themselves, like the Doepfer 118, or Make Noise Wogglebug are fine if you want fast modulations, quite a bit of variation on the WB too, but I don’t, I want as slow as possible, and the only way I can do that is to patch an external slow LFO into the random, so I tend to use really slow LFO's with S+H modules, instead of random modules, and to get LFO's to run at the right speed sometimes needs an input from an external source, a very slow cycle, into the CV input.
Maths will go down to 25 mins per cycle, which isn’t bad, I’ve potentially got two LFO's there, great, but once you’ve used up Maths on those duties, you can’t really use it for anything else, one of the downsides of multi-function modules.
I want a couple of Sloths, but they are DIY, and I’m not, and they are rare secondhand.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
The LFO on the Moog Mother 32 has VC control over the rate.
Maybe it could tick a box for you if you also need a few of the other things it has - sequencer, VCO, VCF, mixer, noise generator etc
Maybe it could tick a box for you if you also need a few of the other things it has - sequencer, VCO, VCF, mixer, noise generator etc
-
- Aled Hughes
Frequent Poster -
Posts: 1746 Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Pwllheli, Cymru
Contact:
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Aled Hughes wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 9:20 am The LFO on the Moog Mother 32 has VC control over the rate.
Maybe it could tick a box for you if you also need a few of the other things it has - sequencer, VCO, VCF, mixer, noise generator etc
M32 is nice, but a bit OTT in this case, what I need to do is stop moaning, stop being so mean, and start buying a Batumi.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Ben Asaro wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:22 pmHugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:19 pm To be fair, I can see the practical usefulness of being able to vary the speed of vibrato, for example, using a CV generated by say, aftertouch. Or to control a pseudo rotary speaker effect's tremolo speed via an external CV.
You can easily do with with an attenuator, though. And those can be voltage controlled.
Attenuating the LFO would only affect the depth, not the rate. VCLFO is a good thing, I enjoy a bit of envelope modulation of LFO rate for vibrato for example so it slows during release.
Arpangel: how about using a regular VCO but mixing a decent negative offset into the CV?
- nathanscribe
Frequent Poster -
Posts: 1483 Joined: Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Wakefield, for my sins.
Contact:
I have no idea what I'm doing.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
nathanscribe wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 10:58 amBen Asaro wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:22 pmHugh Robjohns wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:19 pm To be fair, I can see the practical usefulness of being able to vary the speed of vibrato, for example, using a CV generated by say, aftertouch. Or to control a pseudo rotary speaker effect's tremolo speed via an external CV.
You can easily do with with an attenuator, though. And those can be voltage controlled.
Attenuating the LFO would only affect the depth, not the rate. VCLFO is a good thing, I enjoy a bit of envelope modulation of LFO rate for vibrato for example so it slows during release.
Arpangel: how about using a regular VCO but mixing a decent negative offset into the CV?
Good thinking, that’s what’s great about modular, there’s always a load of workarounds, you just have to find them!
Yes, I could use a stackable and an attenuator to introduce a bit of random modulation from a sample and hold.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
The thing that annoys me the most is a lot of modules only have a single input or output, meaning the needs for mults. Just my twopence but:
VFC modules should have more than one audio inputs to mix VCO ins
VCOs should have more than one F/oct again to mix control inputs
ADSRs should have more than one out so its easy to send it to a VCF and a VCA
etc.....
VFC modules should have more than one audio inputs to mix VCO ins
VCOs should have more than one F/oct again to mix control inputs
ADSRs should have more than one out so its easy to send it to a VCF and a VCA
etc.....
- Andy Cobley
Regular -
Posts: 122 Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Andy Cobley wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 6:55 pm The thing that annoys me the most is a lot of modules only have a single input or output, meaning the needs for mults. Just my twopence but:
VFC modules should have more than one audio inputs to mix VCO ins
VCOs should have more than one F/oct again to mix control inputs
ADSRs should have more than one out so its easy to send it to a VCF and a VCA
etc.....
But surely that's missing the point of modular rather?! Mults are there for exactly some of these reasons and in addition to those modules that have limited numbers of outputs there are plenty that have more.
I'd rather buy a module with one output and mult it accordingly than have to pay a chunk more for the same module with two or more outputs, unless I'm actually looking for two or more outputs as a feature requirement in which case I'll go find one (or use mults if not)!
If you can't find a module with the outputs you need then there's always a workaround. The modular mindset isn't really about convenience it's about flexibility
There weren't that many conveniences on this thing but it was an absolute joy playing with it (and it's what subsequently got me to take the plunge into modular in euro-rack form)!
- Eddy Deegan
Moderator -
Posts: 8829 Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Brighton & Hove, UK
Contact:
Some of my works | The SOS Forum Album projects
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
As to the cost, it really doesn't add much. I design my own modules (for my own use) and the cost of an additional output is 1/4 opamp and a jack (about 40p). It's a bit more complicated for inputs, but only a few more resistors.
It does however add a bit more HP in some cases, which could be a problem for some.
It does however add a bit more HP in some cases, which could be a problem for some.
- Andy Cobley
Regular -
Posts: 122 Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact:
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
I have to admit, I'm confused ... you have a want, which can be solved by using Maths. You own a Maths but don't want to use the Maths, because then you will have less Maths?
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Andy Cobley wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 7:55 pm It does however add a bit more HP in some cases, which could be a problem for some.
Would that need to be an open source design Andy?
- Martin Walker
Moderator -
Posts: 20634 Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:44 am
Location: Cornwall, UK
Contact:
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Hang on, of course, I use Maths, all the time, but that doesn’t stop me moaning about it, now, I’m having a different tack, I don’t look at Maths as a multi-function utility, no way, if you do that, you’re in for big trouble, because to get the most out of Maths you have to go deep into self patching, which wipes out utilities.
Maths is a stand alone complex oscillator, in every way, and that’s what I use it for now, I make sure I’ve got utility bases covered elsewhere, that’s why you may get confused about how I write about it.
Re: Modular frustrations, wants, needs etc,
Would that need to be an open source design Andy?
I'm not sure what your asking Martin ? Most of my work is on github, but it's not really in a state others can reliably use.
- Andy Cobley
Regular -
Posts: 122 Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Fife, Scotland
Contact: