Right side of a complex oscillator

[JES]

What Euro modules could replicate the functions on the right side (harmonics) of a Buchla-type complex oscillator like the Verbos Complex Oscillator or Endorphin.es Furthurrr Generator?

I am specifically looking to to replicate the functions of "timbre" "low/high" and "even/odd" on the Verbos; the "timbre" "symmetry" and "order" on the Buchla 259, and I'm guessing "order" "symmetry" and "furthrrrr" on the Furthrrr generator; and the "timbre" and "shape" control on Aalto; as well as the way they interact. I'm assuming they are the same functions but perhaps not.

From reading the Aalto, Buchla and Furthrrrr Generator manuals, it seems like what you need are two oscillators, one that can modulate the other, plus wave shaping and wave folding.

I have an Intellijel Atlantis and a Linix that would let me do linear or exponential FM with two unable oscillators, and through the Linix I could could dynamically mix the outputs of the two oscillators (I also have a Frames that could work that way).

The WMD Wave Fold looks interesting: https://www.wmdevices.com/collections/w ... /ultrafold

But what else would I need?

I might just break down and buy a Eurorack complex oscillator but I'm curious if I can do it with the Atlantis, since I've under-used its FM capabilities thus far and I love the module for other things..

--

I've recently fallen in love with Aalto and am interested in seeing if I can duplicate some of the functionality in Euro. I have modules that can do most of the things in the synth, except for the complex oscillator....

For reference:

https://www.buchla.com/guides/Music-Eas ... 2nd-Ed.pdf

https://www.endorphin.es/assets/endorph ... 170727.pdf

TIA!

[mritenburg]

Not all complex oscillators are the same in this regard, but oscillators that work similar to a Buchla 259 generally do this:

1. Sinewave folder (timbre)
2. Harmonics manipulation from folded sine to saw (harmonics)
3. Cross-fade from saw to square (symmetry)

The Verbos Complex Osc and Sputnik Dual Osc both have these features.

The wave folder is easy to get in a single module, the cross-fader is also easy, but I'm not sure of a module that replicates the harmonics section.

[hermbot]

So I had the Intellijel version of the complex oscillator for a while, which was the Rubicon / Dixie II / uFold II combo. It was amazing. I wish I could have kept that setup but I ended up going full DPO. I almost think I like the wavefolding of the uFold a bit better than that specific function on the DPO, but there are many other factors.

But getting a Dixie (or Rubicon, the mega-Dixie) and a uFold alongside the Atlantis (they all have the same oscillator cores) gets you a brilliant complex oscillator that I would put up against the DPO, Furrruththhrhr, and Verbos.

[natureclubcassettes]

go full intellijel if you already have atlantis!

also mandatory shapeshifter suggestion. you could just use the second osc and the wave folder and you're there.

[Xtheunknown]

But getting a Dixie (or Rubicon, the mega-Dixie) and a uFold alongside the Atlantis (they all have the same oscillator cores) gets you a brilliant complex oscillator that I would put up against the DPO, Furrruththhrhr, and Verbos.

I can only speak for the Dixie/uFold (which I pair with another oscillator for FM) and the DPO. A pre-built complex oscillator like the DPO puts functionality at your fingertips that would otherwise require a LOT of patching and external modules. I tried creating my own waveshaper from a filtered narrow pulse wave and a crossfader. It took a lot of patching, and I wasn’t quite able to get that refined shape transition that you get out of the box with the DPO. Add the built in FM and MOD buses, coupled with cross FM and synch, and you can do a whole lot very easily.

That said, I find the tonal characteristics of the uFold and the DPO’s wavefolder completely different. The DPO has this very distinct nasal, guttural kind of tone that is very difficult to replicate. The uFold, which I often use in conjunction with an A-136 or Warps, sounds more ‘acoustic’ and ‘close up’ to my ears. The synch and FM sound VERY different as well, with the Dixie giving a much cleaner FM across the spectrum, but the DPO’s synch has a lot of attitude. In short, you need to think about the kind of sound that you’re after and how much patching you’re willing to do.

If you’re starting with a complete voice already, you can add a uFold and VCA for much less than the cost of a complex oscillator and still get the heart and soul of the classic West Coast sound. I love both the Dixie/uFold and the DPO and wouldn’t trade either, as I find each exceedingly capable and their sound very complementary. You can’t go wrong either way.

[luketeaford]

The DPO is pretty different from other complex oscillators -- I think there is a lot of attention to the scaling so the different levels of modulation to the final waveshaper do interesting things (symmetry seems to cover a narrower range than tilt so it appears to cycle faster and the scale against each other in a pleasing way). The Strike input to the wave folder is useful too.

Being able to modulate the depth of the FM in both directions (osc a > b and osc b > a) and linear/exponential makes for a really expressive oscillator, and on top of that there's a soft sync option to tighten up the FM patch, and the following functionality can help for creating sync sweeps and FM transients.

I think adding a uFold would expand your timbral options significantly on the cheap. If you're looking for something a little beefier, the Random*Source Wave Multipliers would be my top pick. Tonally the middle section is similar to the DPO's fold. The top section can be used as a VCA or a "tube like" distortion (could be used to control the depth of the FM dynamically or for many other things). The third section is a really weird rectifier with two variations.

[JES]

Thanks everyone. Please keep the replies coming.

To clarify: musically, I love sequencing with Numerology, and when I move away from tonal music, I tend toward reverby granular washes (as in the record in my .sig), so I'm not looking to do Buchla Bongos or super-abrasive stuff. I'm a fan of the Alessandro Cortini records he did with the Music Easel and the MC-202.

This is all really because I picked up Aalto last week and have spent several hours with it (it's a core part of 2 new tracks already) and immediately see the potential for something similar in my Euro system.

What's missing from the FM in the Atlantis that would require a Rubicon or a Dixie? The Cyclonix looks cool but at that point, why not just get a Furthrrrr or Verbos?

It's interesting that the DPO comes up so much. It's not one of the modules I mentioned because it sounds different to my ears from the others. All the usual disclaimers apply.

Thanks again...and the demo of the Random Source Wave Multipliers is a GREAT demo. If only I was any good at DIY....

[The Junglechrist]

+ 1 for the all Intellojel aproach here.

If you buy youserlf a Dixie II + the µFold you will a lot of new timbre at your fingertips. One thing this setup miss from the classic complex oscillator design is the waveshaping but it can be achieved in other way.

[starthief]

I tried an Ultrafold and uFold side by side at Knobcon, and chose the uFold -- no contest really.

I have a Hertz Donut but still sometimes prefer the uFold over Donut's three "discontinuity" algorithms.

[Biom]

+1 on the VCM. Best you can find in euro, imo.
Schneiders sells them already built.

[JES]

I tried an Ultrafold and uFold side by side at Knobcon, and chose the uFold -- no contest really.

Could you say more about why you liked the uFold more? Just want to make sure we are looking for the same things.

One thing this setup miss from the classic complex oscillator design is the waveshaping but it can be achieved in other way.

In what ways would you recommend?

[starthief]

I tried an Ultrafold and uFold side by side at Knobcon, and chose the uFold -- no contest really.

Could you say more about why you liked the uFold more? Just want to make sure we are looking for the same things.

Just the sound, really. uFold immediately sounded good to me -- smooth but a bit gnarly, if that makes sense.

Ultrafold was rough, and more of a distortion than the sort of sound I associate with wavefolding. It's possible I could have coaxed nicer sounds out of it if I'd spent more time playing with it, but I didn't want to tie up SynthCity's demo rack for more than a few minutes.

[The Junglechrist]

In what ways would you recommend?

Any linear crossfader with control voltage i guess.

[JES]

Thanks guys!

[The Junglechrist]

But in the end if you want the "feel" of a complex oscillator you should go for one because having both the CO and the combo Dixie / Rubicon / µFold only the CO give the "feel" of being an instrument on its own.
I will do things with the CO I will never do with the three other modules combined and the same the other way.

[JES]

I fear that's where this will all end. We'll see....

[mateo]

2. Harmonics manipulation from folded sine to saw (harmonics)

Interesting: I assume this is something more than crossfading?