MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

I don't want any "deep" modules - but...
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Modular Synth General Discussion  
Author I don't want any "deep" modules - but...
Digital Larry
I do have a Braids, and some of my Erica Synths modules are a bit tough to figure out without referring to the cheat sheet - even though they don't have menus.

I looked at O+C, Terminal Tedium, etc. and realized that a big plus of modular for me is the reduction of complexity vs. making music on the computer - where I'd ground to almost a complete stop. The more modules start having menus and hidden functions, the less I like them, in general.

That said, the Braids is pretty flipping amazing overall. I've probably explored 1% of its capability, focussing mostly on the VOWL and VFOF presets. They remind me a lot of the Tuvan Throat Singers. So, I guess I can make an exception when enough of the functionality is up top and allows relative instant gratification.

I did get a Bela (audio oriented BeagleBone Black shield and low latency OS) when they did their Kickstarter. Supposedly they are coming out with Eurorack mounting for this doodad in a few months. I might get that or I might mount the Bela to the side of my rack, because I already had something in mind for my remaining 3U space.

Anybody out there have experience with getting modules that were "too deep" and found it affected your creative flow? sad banana
captjrab
Its all realative. O&C, for instance, is worth it for a small system for packing in the functionality. It would take a lot more rack space to get the same funtionality from 1 function per modules. Its not that hard to learn the basics either as well as always leaving you something to grow into when you are ready. It can take a while which is a good thing.
I get you tho. If you are planning on a 9U to say 15U system, you can afford the space. Its still not easy. Every module you get will set you back a little as you evolve it into your sound.
cptnal
I don't mind having a couple of really deep modules in my case (Shapeshifter, SMR...) because you know there will always be something new to discover. And every module is deep, especially once you get a few of them together.

What I would draw the line at is something that was so deep its learning curve prevented you doing anything with it until you'd pretty much mastered it. That's why Maths is so good - it works as an envelope and LFO without much effort and will happily do that until you're ready to go deeper.

On the other hand you have deep modules which do something great right out the box, but don't encourage digging deeper. O&C strikes me as one of these, although I'm prepared to admit I base that opinion on no evidence whatever. razz
starthief
To me it's less about how deep a module is (there are different kinds of deep!) but whether the UI is suited to the task, for the way that I like to work.

I always want to be able to "read" a module. Whether that means pots with pointers that never lie, or LEDs or a display that shows the state in a non-cryptic way, depends on what the module is doing. Sometimes (not always) I also want one knob per function for easy tweaking. It just depends.

I had an O_C for a while because I thought the Piqued app would be great for envelopes. It was definitely powerful, but ultimately I wasn't as happy using it as analog envelopes with dedicated knobs.

On the other hand: I have Stoicheia and Klasmata, and while they're quite cool, you can't "read" the panels to know how many steps or fills they're set to. And since I'm thinking about quantizers now as well, I may come full circle and get a µO_C Mr. Green
MarcelP
starthief wrote:
To me it's less about how deep a module is (there are different kinds of deep!) but whether the UI is suited to the task, for the way that I like to work.



Nail hit squarely on the head right there!

If the UI is well implemented it will encourage exploration rather than inhibit it. I find the limiting factor on my voyages through a modules performance space is my shallowness rather than the modules depth - which means I get the pleasure of “it does that?!” moments satisfyingly frequently. There is much joy to be had, for a bewildered idiot like me, in discovering hidden depths just below the surface.
josaka
does it make the sounds I want/need/love ?
...the rest is irrelevant I can make that work.
hinterlands303
starthief wrote:
I had an O_C for a while because I thought the Piqued app would be great for envelopes. It was definitely powerful, but ultimately I wasn't as happy using it as analog envelopes with dedicated knobs...

And since I'm thinking about quantizers now as well, I may come full circle and get a µO_C Mr. Green


O_C makes a great quantizer because quantizers just need to be set up per patch - they typically don't require adjustments during the patch. Plus, the display lets you easily select the scale, active notes, root, etc. I just keep it in the quantizer mode - it's not nearly as 'deep' of a module if you just look at it as one thing (basically a doepfer a-156 with 4 channels, way more scales and bi-polar quantizing).

I can't imagine using something like O_C for envelopes, that would take all of the fun out it for me.
lisa
I agree that a bit of menu diving can be ok for set and forget modules. Lots of menu diving during patching wouldn’t be ok for me, regardless of how well the menu system was designed.

Pamela’s New Workout is fine. I can set up a new channel to do what I want in seconds. Disting is also alright, since the algorithms are simple and I mostly use just a handful of them, that I know by heart, anyway.

The worst thing for me, and I’ve felt this way long before I got into eurorack, is assignable inputs/outputs. That kills the mood for me in a second. As a result I’ve never used the Pam’s assignable input. Never even checked what it can be used for. seriously, i just don't get it
Digital Larry
Hah, well maybe I'll look into the O+C again. I was thinking of getting an Erica dual LFO/EG (already have one) but maybe an O+C could cover that and some other things I was thinking about getting down the road (like a RND/Quant).
Digital Larry
Thanks for the discussion everyone, I think I am tilting towards a micro O+C instead of the Erica Dual EG/LFO - despite my love affair with Erica modules. This extra EG/LFO was not planned as my "main" voice EGs, but auxiliary/extra as I'm building out more control and filtering rather than another voice generator. So, having something that can cover EG/LFO and then even more is a bonus and it's even 2 HP smaller than the Erica. So now I can fit another Erica Pico, hmm what should it be, a drum or DSP? Hmmm

I've watched a number of O+C YouTube videos and am initially quite baffled by what is going on. I'll keep trying. It also doesn't look that hard to build.
lisa
Get a 10 hp one from Blue Lantern if you don’t want to build it yourself. $195. Not too expensive.
captjrab
Digital Larry wrote:
I've watched a number of O+C YouTube videos and am initially quite baffled by what is going on. I'll keep trying. It also doesn't look that hard to build.


I often dont understand alot of peoples Euro talk/posts. It either doesnt pertain to my music or is just a buncha verbosity for something that is very individual to someone elses’ music.
The O&C thread here on muffs is pretty mindboggling and watching vids without having the module in front of you gets pretty abstract, but...Its not that hard to figure out. In fact its kinda fun.
Happy patching!
needlz
I make cases and it's hard to design around deep modules.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Modular Synth General Discussion  
Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group