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

Information
Attn anyone who is getting "invalid session" errors - please log out, clear your browser cache and then log in again. If the errors persist for you please make a post in the applicable thread in the "Forum Dicussion & Requests" subforum. Thanks. STILL working on the logged out and session timeout issue - have a couple new strategies I'll be trying over the weekend. We will get this fixed! Thanks for your patience and sorry for the hassle.

Mixolator and Sequantizer. Am I understanding correctly?
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Wiard  
Author Mixolator and Sequantizer. Am I understanding correctly?

thesnow

If having to choose between the Mixolator and Sequantizer module,

am I understanding correctly that the Sequantizer is a mixer module as well, so, if you're looking at the Mixolator as a mixer module, the Sequantizer also allows you to do this?

Of course they both have different and unique functions, the Mixolator is a ring modulator and vca and the Sequantizer is sequencer and quantizer, but are they both mixer modules?

Additionally, if you were going to fill your 6th space in your rack with either or, which would you suggest between the 2?

Thanks


chamomileshark

I may have missed it but I'd say that the sequantizer is not a mixer.

the envelator has a mix function at the bottom with inputs for two signals, a mix knob and a mix modulation knob and input. It's simple and effective.

The mixolator does mixing, panning, phase inversion, VCA functions and IIRC something like but not exactly ring mod (I think Grant mentioned that at one point, in the same way that the bandpass on the Borg is not exactly a bandpass unless you gang the two filters LP/HP).

The sequantiser does sequencing, quantising and can be used as a "graphic oscillator" when clocked at audio rates. I'm not too sure about the tuning if you want to use it to play tunes - you use the transpose function but if I remember it was a bit hit and miss - but I may be wrong. I made the most convincing theramin sound I've ever made with it - unfortunately not recorded.


thesnow

chamomileshark wrote:
I may have missed it but I'd say that the sequantizer is not a mixer.

the envelator has a mix function at the bottom with inputs for two signals, a mix knob and a mix modulation knob and input. It's simple and effective.

The mixolator does mixing, panning, phase inversion, VCA functions and IIRC something like but not exactly ring mod (I think Grant mentioned that at one point, in the same way that the bandpass on the Borg is not exactly a bandpass unless you gang the two filters LP/HP).

The sequantiser does sequencing, quantising and can be used as a "graphic oscillator" when clocked at audio rates. I'm not too sure about the tuning if you want to use it to play tunes - you use the transpose function but if I remember it was a bit hit and miss - but I may be wrong. I made the most convincing theramin sound I've ever made with it - unfortunately not recorded.


interesting... thanks.


beyourdog

The Sequantizer is not a mixer at ALL. It is a sequencer with a bunch of functionalities.

Therefore, I imagine, you maybe confound with the fact the Envelator, which is another module... has a mixing/fading capability between 2 inputs as well as being a double AR or AD envelop and can be used as an ADSR too, the Mixolator is a 2 channels mixer with 3-4 inputs for each channel...with pan/ring/vca capabilities, the sequantizer is a step sequencer...
Hope that helps...


drumsofd00m

Maybe the confusion was that the Mixolator and the Sequantizer have in common that each can do ringmodulation or something akin to it, according to older messages by Grant.
In the Sequantizer it's the result of feeding both the Step and Select inputs with audio signals, whereby the signals probably *are* sort of multiplied with each other, but in a (two to eight step) quantized way and also influenced by the transform function defined by the eight stages' pot settings... I know the effect quite well when used with CVs, but can't quite describe the theory behind it.
In the Mixolator you just flip the switch to "Ring" and set the ZMOD pot to "LIN" to be able to multiply the Z signal with the sum of the X and Y signals instead of having Z modulate the amplitude of the sum of the others. My own Mixolator has such loud Z bleedthrough however, in either mode, that there's not much difference between VCA and ringmod if Z is an audio rate signal (plus there's quite a thump when used as a classic VCA with an envelope). I have to discuss this with Cary. However Grant also used to imply that the Mixolator's ringmodulation mode wasn't as "linear" and precise as dedicated modules, and was more thrown in as a bonus because it was technically feasible (and fun for him to design, presumably), so maybe some of that behavior is normal/ design inherent. We'll see. I'd definetely recommend an Envelator or a Classic VCO as the first module to get when filling up any starter system though. Both provide for mixing two signals, creating an audio signal CV and processing a CV as just one possible configuration. Examples:

Dual Envelator used as standalone synth voice:
- envelope 1 used as audio signal (Cycle mode, pots far clockwise, pitch CV into AMOD and DMOD)
- crossfader used as VCA (MIX counterclockwise, MIXMOD clockwise, dummy patch cord into MIX2, envelope 2 into MIXMOD jack)
The MIX output is the left envelope (or function generator) amplitude modulated by the right envelope, presumably gated by your sequencer/ keyboard/ Woggle Bug/ whatever.
Of course if you're not after precise tonal control you can modulate AMOD and DMOD separately for simultaneous change of pitch and waveshape (=timbre).

The Classic VCO is already pre-patched for use as a simple synth voice, so just for fun, here's an example how to use it more like the Envelator:
- two external signals mixed at the VCA's IN1 and IN2
- VCO set to low range
- Pulse output into "Gate" (which is actually a slew limiter input), Attack set to short or zero, Release set to taste, AR/ slew output into the VCA's ENV input
Now your external signals get "chopped" by the VCO/ LFO, with hardness, depth and length of the chopping being modulated by the Attack, Release, VOL and Pulse/ PWM settings. Of course any other waveshape and especially the Random output are also good to use, but the ability to PWM the chopping seems the most fun to me.

The Sequantizer and Mixolator are great modules, but not nearly as versatile in the context of a starter system, and again, the Mixolator may have some bleedthrough by design and the Sequantizer's "ringmod" or whatever it is tends to sound harsh. I added both as the last modules in my system and think that order makes sense.


drumsofd00m

Made a little mistake in the Envelator patch description... let's see who finds it! ;)


thesnow

thanks all.

what I meant by which module to get I meant if you had 5 spaces filled with let's say a wc, cvco, bf, wg and dual envelator. which would you fill your space out with last, a dual mixolator or sequantizer and why?

thanks for the help


chamomileshark

I think it depends on what you already have - if you don't already have an analogue sequencer I'd go for the Sequantizer - most of the mixolator functions you possibly already have I would expect.


drumsofd00m

As always, it depends on what you want to do and what else you already have around.


The Sequantizer obviously doesn't get you very far musically as a lone sequencer for your entire system, but it can transform envelopes as well as audio and serve for some unforeseen fun stuff by combining gate outputs. Then again the Waveform City can do some of that as well, even more so if you burn EPROMs with your own transform functions. My Mixolator is my least favorite module due to the (at least current) Z bleedthrough issues, but with the density of signals in a five module Wiard you can almost... right, "never have enough VCAs" (and CV processors). I was quite relieved of some previous patching limitations when I got my Mixolator. Then again the question is if a couple of voltage processors is worth GBP 579 to you, i.e. how are you going to control them to really make use of their potential and not just have two expensive mixers sitting around mostly passively? Do you have a joystick & gate button module, a keyboard, a MIDI sequencer to connect to? Are you after dub-style live mixing for techno tracks that use the Wiard? And so on.


To provide another probably underwhelming answer, modular synths and especially weird ones like Wiard are about discovery, so you can just as well throw a coin. Seriously.


Personally I'd get a second VCO or Waveform City and outsource the mixing/ processing duties to a Hinton PinMix or SwitchMix to be saved up for in the next years. If it's good as Graham Hinton says, the PinMix will probably become the center of my system once I buy it.

MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Wiard  
Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group